The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20174014.tiffUSDA United States "a Department of Agriculture ARCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Varra Companies, Inc. - Parcel 122 March 2, 2015 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA► Service Center (http:// offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www. nres. usd a.gov/wps/portal/nres/deta i I/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A► high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey►, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 2 for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made 5 Soil Map 7 Soil Map 8 Legend 9 Map Unit Legend 10 Map Unit Descriptions 10 Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 12 1 Altva n loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 12 4—Aquolls and Aquepts, flooded 13 27 Heldt silty clay, 1 to 3 percent slopes 14 35—Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes 16 69—Valent sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 17 70—Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes 19 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 20 73 —Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes 22 75 —Vona sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 23 76 —Vona sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes 24 References 26 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the 5 Custom Soil Resource Report individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil - landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may► include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 6 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 7 40° 11'30" N 0 S 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 S GO is - 0 S D 8 lc" 40° 10'48" N 1040 54' 20" W 104° 54'2p"W 508100 508200 1 508100 508200 508300 508400 508500 508600 508700 508800 508900 509000 508300 • Ole q •. R r moth •I n. • Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 508400 • • •.-ra _ •l � . r • • •• esamme.RM •. trobblYrirmarpfardir Yl •.i!elti.nont• •1•irtt eta •\ b turn •l4.litlf d6 lib its • 508500 508600 li 508700 LI 508800 508900 509000 A Map Scale: 1:6,400 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 300 600 1200 1800 Map projection : Web Mercator Corner coordinates: Wa584 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGSB4 1040 53' 38" W 8 S 0 0 8 0 0 0 S rtiI GO 0 0 - C▪ A 0 - N 104° 53'38"W 0 40° 11'30"N 40° 10'48"N 8 Custom Soil Resource Report MA►P LEGEND Area of Interest (AOl) Area of Interest (AO!) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Q ° °d C. Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot ew° Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation .f —f —E Rails ano Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography MA►P INFORMATION The soil surveys that comprise your Aal were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part Survey Area Data: Version 13, Sep 23, 2014 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 22, 2011 Apr 13, 2012 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part (CO618) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 1 Altvan slopes loam, 0 to 1 percent 10.9 6.5% 4 Aquolls and Aquepts, flooded 1.0 0.6% 27 Heldt slopes silty clay, 1 to 3 percent 37.8 22.3% 35 Loup-Boel percent loamy slopes sands, 0 to 3 11.6 6.9% 69 Talent slopes sand, 0 to 3 percent 17.0 10.1% 70 Valent slopes sand, 3 to 9 percent 19.2 11.3% 72 Vona slopes loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent 0.4 0.2% 73 Vona slopes loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent 25.5 15.0% 75 Vona slopes sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent 43.9 25.9% 76 Vona slopes sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent 2.0 1.2% Totals for Area of Interest 169.3 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A► map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties 10 Custom Soil Resource Report and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha - Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part 1--Altvan loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 361j Elevation: 4,500 to 4,900 feet Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 48 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 150 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Altvan and similar soils: 90 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Altvan Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Old alluvium Typical profile l - 0 to 10 inches: loam H2 - 10 to 25 inches: clay loam H3 - 25 to 60 inches: gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.90 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3s Land capability classification (non irrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Loamy plains (R067BY002CO) Minor Components Cascajo Percent of map unit: Aquic haplustolls Percent of map unit: 9 percent 1 percent 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform: Swales 4--Aquolls and Aquepts, flooded Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 3621 Elevation: 31600 to 4,700 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 100 to 165 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained and either protected from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season Map Unit Composition Aquolls and similar soils: 55 percent Aquepts, flooded, and similar soils: 25 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transacts of the mapunit. Description of Aquolls Setting Landform: Drainageways, nag eways, plains, depressions Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Recent alluvium Typical profile Hi - 0 to 8 inches: variable H2 - 8 to 60 inches: stratified sandy loam to clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): Moderately low to high (0.06 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhasl cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 5.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated).- 6w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: ID 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Ecological site: Salt meadow (R067BY035CO) Description of Aquepts, Flooded Setting Landforrn: Stream terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Recent alluvium Typical profile - 0 to 8 inches: variable H2 - 8 to 60 inches: stratified sandy loam to clay Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water 'Ksat,): Moderately low to high (0.06 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 6 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding: Frequent Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Slightly saline to moderately saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhost cm) sodium adsorption ratios maximum in profile: 5.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.7 inches) interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 6w Land capability classification ('nonrrrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Wet meadow (R067BY038CO) Minor Components Thedalund Percent of map unit: Haverson Percent of map unit: 10 percent 10 percent 27 Heldt silty clay, I to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 3624 Elevation: 4,950 to 5,050 50 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 17 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 59 degrees F 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Frost -free period: 110 to 150 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated and the product of I (soil erodibility) x C (climate factor) does not exceed 60 Map Unit Composition Heidi and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of HeIdt Setting Landform: Plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sediment alluvium derived from shale Typical profile HI - 0 to 7 inches: silty clay H2 7 to 60 inches: silty clay Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water ('sat): Moderately low to moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Gypsum, maximum in profile: 1 percent salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmho lcm) sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 10.0 Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4c Hydrologic Soil Group: Ecological site: Clayey plains (R067BY042CO) Minor Components Nunn Percent of map unit: 10 percent Haverson Percent of map unit: 5 percent Custom Soil Resource Report 35 Loup-Boel loamy sands, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 362f Elevation: 4,550 to 4,750 feet Mean annual precipitation: 11 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Loup and similar soils: 55 percent Boel and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Loup Setting Landform: Drainageways, sales, streams Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Sandy alluvium Typical profile h�1 - 0 to 16 inches: loamy sand 1-12 - 16 to 40 inches: loamy sand H3 - 40 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Poorly drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 18 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: AID Ecological site: Sandy meadow (R067BY029CO) Custom Soil Resource Report Description of Boel Setting Landform: Drainageways, streams, swales Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Stratified sandy alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: loamy sand H2 - 14 to 60 inches: loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (5.95 to 19.98 inlhr) Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches Frequency of flooding►: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.2 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy meadow (R067BY029CO) Minor Components Osgood Percent of map unit: Valent Percent of map unit: 5 percent 5 percent 69 —Val nt sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 2tczd Elevation: 3,850 to 5,210 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 52 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Composition Valent and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): 1=ootslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - O to 5 inches: sand AC - 5 to 12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Negligible Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (6.00 to 20.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 mmhoslcm) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 75 Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Deep sand (R0G7 BY015CO) Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Deep sand (R067BY015CO) Julesburg Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope 18 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -Mope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) 70 Valent sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 2tczf Elevation: 31050 to 5,150 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map UnitComposition Valent and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Valent Setting Landform: Hills, dunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder, footslope, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, crest Down -slope shape: Linear, convex Across -slope shape: Linear, convex Parent material: Noncalcareous eolian sands Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: sand AG - 5 to 12 inches: sand CI - 12 to 30 inches: sand C2 - 30 to 80 inches: sand Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 9 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Excessively drained Runoff class: Very low Custom Soil Resource Report Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High to very high (6.00 to 39.96 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Non saline (0.0 to 1.9 mm hoslcm ) Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 2.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sands (north) (pe 16-20) (R072XA021 S) Minor Components Dailey Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: concave Ecological site: Sandy (north) draft (april 2010) (pe 16-20) (R072XA022KS) Haxtun Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Interdunes Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Concave Ecological site: Sandy (pe 16-20) (south) (formerly sandy, ks - sandy plains, co) (R 72 Y022KS) Vona Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, head slope, nose slope, base slope Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) 72 Vona loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363r Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet 20 Custom Soil Resource Report Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile Hi - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: Valent Percent of map unit: 10 percent 5 percent High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Custom Soil Resource Report 73 --Vona loamy sand, 3 to 5 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363s Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landforrn: Terraces, plains Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile R1 - 0 to 6 inches: loamy sand H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 3 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (sat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification ('irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) Custom Soil Resource Report Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit 'talent Percent of map unit: 8 percent 7 percent 75 Vona sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363v Elevation: 4,650 to 4,950 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: sandy loam H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam properties andqualities Slope: 0 to 1 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water gKsatQ: High (1.98 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent salinity, maximum in profile: Non aline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmho lcm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e 23 Custom Soil Resource Report Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: Olney Percent of map unit: 11 percent 4 percent 76 Vona sandy loam, 'I to percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 363w Elevation: 4,600 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 15 inches Mean annual air temperature: 48 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period: 130 to 160 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Vona and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Vona Setting Landform: Plains, terraces Down -slope shape: Linear Across -slope shape: Linear Parent material.- Alluvium and/or eolian deposits Typical profile HI - 0 to 6 inches: sandy loam H2 - 6 to 28 inches: fine sandy loam H3 - 28 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 1 to 3 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 6.00 inlhr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/+gym) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 6.8 inches) Custom Soil Resource Report Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (non irrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Sandy plains (R067BY024CO) Minor Components Remmit Percent of map unit: Olney Percent of map unit: Julesburg Percent of map unit: 9 percent 3 percent 3 percent References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. N ational Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142 p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U .S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_05577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_058580 liner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres 142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. N ational range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 26 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430 -VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.goviwpsiportali nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nresl 42p2_05►4242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http:llw w.nres.usda.gov/pups/portal/tares/detail/national/soils!? cid =nres 142 p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nres.usda.gov!InternetIFSE_DOCU MENTSfnres 142p2_052290.pdf 27 AMERICAN WATER ENGINEERING SERVICES, LLC SOIL STABILITY ANALYSES OMLR 112 PERMIT APPLICATION VARRA PIT 122 AWES PROJECT # 1520-05-VARRA July 27, 2015 Problem: Varra Pit 122 45' Slope Failure Analysis - FS Min- Bishop = 1.539 130- 125- 120 115 110 105 100- 95- 85 80 75 • 70 - r 05 60 6 55 ----r 0 -5 Soils Cohesion Friction Angle GP-SM 0.0 37.0 S nd & Gvl 0.0 37.0 Prly Grd Snd 0.0 31.0 Top Soil 50.0 28.0 Bedrock 500.0 28.0 Water Table Critical Surface r r r r F -i - T I J - I- - - N J J. - T 1. J r 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I- 1 -------I----- 1 I. I r -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 50 70 BO 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 1701 180 (Scale in Feet) Prepared for: Varra Companies, Inc. 8120 Gage Street Frederick, CO 80516 Prepared by: AWES, LLC 4809 Four Star Ct. Fort Collins, CO 80524 spats 48CA Four Star Court, Fat CcIlins, CO SCS24 Introduction The following report presents the results of a slope stability analysis for a proposed open cut gravel extraction operations at the Varra Pitt 122 operations near Platteville, Colorado. This analysis was performed at the request of Varra Companies, Inc., (Varra). This report is being submitted in partial fulfillment of an OMLR 112 Mine Permit Application. Background Information The proposed gravel quarry is located in the Nw1./4,. S33, T3N, R67W of the 6th Principal Meridian. The surrounding land use consists of agricultural, rural residential, commercial and open -cut gravel quarry operations. The proposed mine area occupies an estimated 102 acres. The water table at the site is located in unconsolidated alluvial deposits with an averaage depth to water of approximately six feet below ground surface. Soil conditions generally consist of varying thicknesses of top soil underlain by sand and gravel deposits, which in turn are underlain by sandy and argil'laceous siltstones. Over the entire area the average saturated thickness of the sand and gravel deposits (prior to mining) is estimated at about 35 feet. It is our understanding that the sand and gravel will be dewatered during aggregate extraction. The site location is presented Figure 1. on Previous Investigations Terracon Consultants, Inc., (Terracon) conducted a sand and gravel study in September 2008. The study consisted of drilling 22 soil borings from ground surface to bedrock to determine the potential aggregate mass within the proposed mine boundary. Selected sand and gravel samples were obtained for grain size distribution determinations. The depth to bedrock over the site varied between 13 and 55 feet below ground surface. The majority of the study area consists of three to five feet of clayey sand underlain by sand and gravel with occasional clayey sand, silty sand and sand lenses. Bedrock consists of sandstone, siltstone and claystone. The Terracon report is provided as Attachment A. Slope Stability Analysis Pit 122— Varra 112 Permit Application Weld County, Colorado Page 2 Overview of Stability Analyses The depth to bedrock varies between 13 and 55 feet across the study area with the bedrock surface dipping steeply to the northwest. Soil strength testing was not performed as part of the Terracon study and in the absence of strength test data the following soil strength parameters were used in the stability analysis. Table 1 —Soil Strength Properties Material Wet (lbs/cu Unit Weight ft.) Saturated (Ibsf Unit cu Weight ft.) Intercept Cohesive (PSF) Friction Angle Soil 114 126 50 28 Top Poorly Graded Sand 117 130 0 31 Sand & Gravel 130 137 0 37 Weathered Bedrock 125 142 0 14 Bedrock 125 143 50 28 The assumptions used in the bank stability analysis include the following: • The static depth to groundwater at the distance to no pumping influence is 6 feet below ground surface and the water table will intersect the pit bank just above the mine floor (seepage face) during steady state dewatering. • The pit depth will vary between 25 and 45 feet below grade. • Load surcharges of 2,500 pounds per square foot were simulated. During extraction activities the pit bank slope will vary between 3H:1V and 1.25H:1V. The software package PC-STABL was used to evaluate slope stability. Simulations using Spencer, Modified Bishop and Modified Janbu methods were run to determine the most conservative Slope Stability Analysis Pit 122-Varra 112 Permit Application Weld County, Colorado Page 3 safety factor. The soil strength properties used in the analysis are presented on computer generated data sheets which are presented in Attachment B. Stability analyses were ran for three scenarios — a 25 foot mine depth, a 35 foot mine depth and a 45 foot mine depth. A series of trial and error simulations were ran to determine the mine wall slopes that would meet a safety factor of 1.3 or greater. A review of Attachment B shows proposed bank profiles are stable with a calculated safety factors that vary between 1.3 and 1.6. Discussion Slope failure analyses for proposed open cut gravel operations at the Varra Pitt 122 site indicate proposed slope cuts will be stable for dewatered or static water table conditions. As the depth to bedrock varies greatly it is recommended that the lower half (modeled at 45%) of the mine slope be maintained at 3H:1V and the remaining mine wall sloped at 1.25H:1V. This allows for maximum material extraction while maintaining an adequate safety factor. If any significant modifications to proposed pit wail slopes occur this analysis may not be representative of site conditions and additional simulations are recommended. Comments The discussions and recommendations in this report represent our professional opinions. Our conclusions, opinions and recommendations are based from information available at this time and we do not guarantee that undiscovered conditions will not become evident in the future. AWES' report was prepared in accordance with currently accepted engineering practices at this time and location and no other warranties, representations or certifications are implied or intended. Slope Stability Analysis Pit 122— Varra 112 Permit Application Weld County, Colorado Page 4 This report was prepared by AWES, LLC. Joby L. Adams, P.G. Principal/Hydrogeologist Date: July 27, 2015 REFERENCES Terracon Consultants, Inc., 2008. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study, Weld County, Colorado. Prepared for EDAW/AECOM, 1111 Fort Collins, CO, September 26, 2008. FIGURE Figure 1 - Pit 122 Location Map TN 1010 FEET 500 1CCO METEFIS Map m ted ixith TOF O I E ©2O02 National Geographic (www nat o lgeogiap c _ conitt o) ATTACHMENT A Geotechnical Study Results PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT AND SAND/GRAVEL STUDY PROPOSED SAND/GRAVEL MINE LAFARGE BEARSON PARCEL SE CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 17 AND COUNTY ROAD 28 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Terracon Project No. 20085065 September 26, 2008 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Prepared for: EDAW/AECOM 240 East Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Attn: Mr. John Ko Prepared by: Terracon Consultants, Inc. 301 North Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone: 970-484-0359 Fax: 970-484-0454 lie rraron lierracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists September 26, 2008 EDAW/AECOM E C C M 240 East Mountain Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Attn: Mr. John Ko 301 N Howes Street Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 Phone (970) 484-0359 Fax (970) 484-0454 www.terracon.com Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine Southeast Corner of County Road 17 and County Road 28 Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 Terracon has completed geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed project to be located at the southwest corner of County Road 17 and County Road 28 in Weld County, Colorado. This study was performed in general accordance with the proposal prepared by EDAW (Project #08030062.01) dated September 4, 2008. The results of our engineering study are attached. These results include the Boring Location Map, laboratory test results, Logs of Boring, and the geotechnical recommendations needed to aid in the design and construction of foundations and other earth connected phases of this project. Other design and construction recommendations, based upon geotechnical conditions, are presented in the report. Supplementary geotechnical engineering exploration should be performed at the site when final design plans become available and preliminary design studies are complete. Supplemental geotechnical explorations will be used to confirm or modify the recommendations contained in this preliminary report. Delivering Success for Clients and Employees Since 1965 More than 9.Cffices Nationwide I l Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- WeldCounty, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon We appreciate being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services. Sincerely, TERRACON CONSULTANTS, INC. Raymond L. Denton, II, P.E. Geotechnical Department Manager Copies to: Addressee (5) iii Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Letter of Transmittal ii INTRODUCTION 1 SITEEXPLORATION Field Exploration I Laboratory Testing 2 SITE CONDITIONS 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 Economic Mineral Potential 3 Soil and Bedrock Conditions 4 Field and Laboratory Test Results 4 Groundwater Conditions 6 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS Sand/Gravel Mining and Geotechnical Considerations 6 Other Geotechnical Considerations 7 GENERAL COMMENTS 7 Figure No. BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM I APPENDIX A: LOGS OF BORING APPENDIX B: LABORATORY TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C: GENERAL NOTES Terracon PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT AND SAND/GRAVEL STUDY PROPOSED SAND/GRAVEL MINE SE CORNER OF CR 17 AND D R 28 WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Terracon Project No. 20085065 September 26, 2008 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our preliminary geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed project to be located at referenced site. The site is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Weld County Road 17 and Weld County Road 28 in Weld County, Colorado. The purpose of these services is to provide information and preliminary geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: • subsurface soil and bedrock conditions. • groundwater conditions. • feasibility for use of site as a gravel mining pit The recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, our experience with similar soil conditions and structures, and our understanding of the proposed project. PROJECT INFORMATION Based on preliminary information provided by LaFarge, the proposed project will include the development of an approximate 168 -acre parcel. Currently the site is being considered to be utilized as a sand and gravel mining operation pit. SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES The scope of the services performed for this project to date have included site reconnaissance by an geotechnical engineer, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and preliminary engineering analysis. Field Exploration: A total of 22 test borings were drilled between September 3, 2008 to September 15, 2008 to depths of about 20 to 63 feet below existing site grade at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Diagram, Figure 1. The borings were drilled across the site at approximate 500 foot grid spacings in order to asses the general subsurface conditions. Portions of the site were inaccessible at this time due to current 1 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon agricultural operations. Borings in these locations will be drilled at a later date. The borings were advanced with a truck -mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4 -1/4 -inch inside diameter (approx 8 - inch outside diameter) hollow -stem, auger. The borings were located in the field by a hand held GPS. Elevations were estimated at each boring location by interpolation from contours indicated on topographic mapping provided by Northern Engineering. The accuracy of boring locations and elevations should only be assumed to the level implied by the methods used. Lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by an engineering geologist during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by driving split -spoon and ring barrel samplers. Representative bulk samples of subsurface materials were also obtained at approximate 5 to 10 -foot intervals. Penetration resistance measurements were obtained by driving the split -spoon or ring barrel into the subsurface materials with a 140 -pound hammer falling 30 inches. The penetration resistance value is a useful index to the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. Groundwater measurements were made in each boring at the time of site exploration. A majority of the borings were backfilled after drilling operations due to safetyconsiderations; therefore subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained in these borings. Laboratory Testing: Samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for observation by the project geotechnical engineer, and were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Samples of bedrock were classified in accordance with the general notes for Rock Classification. At that time, an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine gradation characteristics of the subsurface materials. Following the completion of the laboratory► testing, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and Logs of Borings were prepared. These logs are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. These results were used for assessing the feasibility of utilizing the site as a sand/gravel pit and for the preliminary geotechnical engineering analyses. Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable local or other accepted standards. 2 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL SITE CONDITIONS Terracon The site was vacant and to our knowledge had not been previously developed and was used for agricultural purposes. The site was bounded on the north by County Road 28 and agricultural land beyond, and on the east, south and west by agricultural property. The ground surface was rowed/tilled and generally soft and moist due to the on -going agriculture and irrigation practices. Vegetation consisted of crops of corn. An existing single family residence and associated outbuildings was located at the approximate center of the site with access to the north to County Road 28. Site drainage was generally poor and in the form of surface sheet flow. Several areas of standing water were noted, particularly at the northeast corner of the site. Additionally, several underground petroleum lines and a tank installation is present on the site. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Geology: Surficial geologic conditions at the site, as mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1Colton, 1978), consist of the Piney Creek Alluvium of Quaternary Age. This material generally consists of sandy to gravely alluvium. These materials, as mapped in this area, are generally on the order of about 10 to 20 feet in thickness. Bedrock underlying the surface units consists of the Fox Hills Sandstone of Upper Cretaceous Age. This formation is generally comprised of silty siltstone interbedded with gray fissile shale. The thickness of this unit has been reported to be on the order of 300 to 500 feet. Economic Mineral Potential: Mapping performed by the USGS (2Schwochow, Shroba, and Wicklein, 1974) indicates that the site lies in an area of flood -plain and valley fill deposits along present stream courses with stream deposits consisting of relatively clean and sound gravel. This is consistent with the materials encountered in our borings. Mapping performed by the USGS (3Rodger B. Colton, 1974) indicates that the site contains a gravel deposit underlying flood plains and terraces. The materials are described as pebbles and clasts generally well rounded, unweathered, and contain little deleterious "lime" (CaCO3). Colton, Roger B., 1978, Geologic Map of the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Colorado, United States Geological Survey, Map l -855-G. 2Schwochow, S.D., Shroba, R.R., and Wicklein, P.C., 1974, Sand, Gravel, and Quarry Aggregate Resources of the Colorado Front Range Counties, Colorado Geological Survey, Special Publication 5-A, Plate 1. 3Rodger B. Colton., and Fitch, Harold R., 1974, Map Showing Potential Sources of Gravel and Crushed Rock Aggregate in the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States Geological Survey, Map l -855-D. 3 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon Clasts are composed chiefly of quartzite, granite, gneiss, and pegmatite. Grain size distribution by weight is mapped near the area as 3% clay and silt, 44% sand, 9% granular gravel, and 44% pebbles. The material contains few or no reactive constituents and is a source of quality gravel for the Longmont area. Gravel thicknesses of these deposits mapped in the area range from approximately 15 to 28 feet in thickness. Based on the materials encountered in our borings, it is likely that commercially extractable mineral deposits will be encountered on the project site. Due to the relatively flat nature of the site, geologic hazards at the site are anticipated to be low. Seismic activity in the area is anticipated to be low, and the property should be relatively stable from a structural standpoint. With proper site grading around the proposed mine, erosional problems at the site should be reduced. Soil and Bedrock Conditions: As presented on the Logs of Borings, surface soils to depths of about 13 to 55 feet consist predominantly of overburden sands with gravels. Claystone, siltstone, and/or sandstone bedrock was encountered below the overburden sands and extended to the total depths of exploration of about 20 to 63 feet below existing site grade. A bedrock contour map has been generated based on preliminary information and is provided in Figure 2. Field and Laboratory Test Results: Field test results indicate the sand soils vary from loose to very dense in relative density. The bedrock varies from medium hard to hard in hardness. Gradations performed on the bulk samples obtained from the test borings indicate that the overburden materials generally classify as sands with the following characteristics: BoringSample No. p depth p Depth Bedrock to (ft) %gravel %sand °/Qsilticla Y B1 9-14 ft 53.5 0.4 84.1 15.5 B1 19-24 ft 53.5 10.2 81.2 8.6 B1 29-34 ft 53.5 12.4 75.6 12.0 B2 10-20 ft 55 21.8 70.8 7.4 B2 40-50 ft 55 34.1 54.6 11.3 B3 20-50 ft 50 32.3 59.1 8.6 B3 9-20 ft 50 25.9 55.8 18.3 B4 10-20 ft 47 3.9 66.4 29.7 B4 20-30 ft 47 8.7 58.1 33.2 B4 40-47 ft 47 5.8 74.6 19.6 B5 0-10 ft 47 33.5 49.5 17.0 B5 10-20 ft 47 43.7 46.9 9.4 B5 20-30 ft 47 16.9 57.0 26.1 B5 30-40 ft 47 17.0 73.8 9.2 B5 40-47 ft 47 9.4 80.7 9.9 4 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- WeldCounty, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL B6 20-30 ft 52 62.2 24.9 12.9 B6 30-52 ft 52 30.6 59.1 10.3 B8 0-10 ft 45 39.6 48.0 12.4 B8 10-30 ft 45 47.8 44.7 7.5 B10 10-30 ft 47 20.0 69.2 10.8 B10 40-47 ft 47 20.0 69.5 10.5 B11 20-30 ft 45 48.4 39.2 12.4 B11 30-45 ft 45 26.0 64.0 10.0 B13 0-10 ft 44 _ 51.2 43.5 5.3 B13 10-20 ft 44 26.8 69.4 3.8 B13 20-30 ft 44 20.7 75.3 4.0 B13 30-40 ft 44 27.3 68.0 4.7 B16 10-20 ft 33 24.3 66.2 9.5 B16 20-30 ft 33 26.4 67.2 6.4 B17 9-20 ft 38 27.4 61.8 10.8 B17 20-30 ft 38 53.4 36.1 10.5 B17 30-38 ft 38 40.1 49.9 10.0 B19 0-10 ft 39 10.3 70.1 19.6 B19 20-30 ft 39 20.6 67.5 11.9 B21 0-10 ft 22 0.7 68.6 30.7 B21 20-30 ft 22 34.8 53.5 11.7 B22 0-10 ft 37 0.2 40.1 59.7 B22 10-20 ft 37 4.1 77.4 18.5 B22 20-30 ft 37 4.2 64.9 30.9 B23 0-9 ft 45 0.9 68.0 31.1 B23 19-29 ft 45 17.7 53.4 28.9 B23 29-39 ft 45 2.6 59.8 37.6 B23 39-44 ft 45 0.0 51.4 48.6 B24 10-20 ft 22 5.5 73.7 20.8 B25 10-14 ft 15 1.7 76.8 21.5 B26 0-10 ft 23 0.1 63.8 36.1 B26 10-20 ft 23 0.1 75.4 24.5 B27 10-20 ft 35 39.3 50.8 9.9 B27 20-30 ft 35 42.5 50.6 6.9 B27 30-35 ft 35 38.4 53.9 7.7 B28 9-19 ft 43 0.0 78.7 21.3 B28 19-29 ft 43 1.3 85.4 13.3 B28 29-39 ft 43 0.5 72.7 26.8 B29 0-9 ft 13 3.1 73.8 23.1 Average 20.3 62.5 17.2 Terracon It should be noted that the gradations were performed primarily on bulk samples obtained from auger cuttings. Efforts were made to obtain a representative sampling of the subsurface materials at the depths indicated, however the depths of the samples and gradations presented 5 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon should be considered approximate only. The gradation analysis curves are presented at the conclusion of the report. Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was generally encountered at depths of about 3 to 10 feet (average of about 6 feet) below existing site grade in the test borings at the time of field exploration. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 40 at the southeast corner of the site. A groundwater contour map has been generated based on preliminary information and has been provided in Figure 3. A majority of the borings were backfilled after drilling due to cave-in conditions and safety considerations, therefore subsequent groundwater measurements were not obtained in these borings. These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may not be indicative of other times or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions. Based upon review of U.S. Geological Survey Maps, (4Hillier, et al, 1979), regional groundwater beneath the project area is expected to be encountered in unconsolidated alluvial deposits on the site at depths ranging from 10 to 20 and greater than 20 feet below present ground surface. Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater - monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater -monitoring wells and periodic measurement of groundwater levels over a sufficient period of time. The possibility of groundwater fluctuations should be considered when developing design and construction plans for the project. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS The preliminary recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that the subsurface conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered in the borings. Supplementary geotechnical engineering exploration should be performed at the site upon completion of initial design studies. Supplemental geotechnical explorations will be used to confirm or modify the recommendations contained in this preliminary report. Sand/Gravel Mining and Geotechnical Considerations: Based upon the materials encountered during the preliminary geotechnical exploration of the site and the results of the laboratory testing, the site appears to be feasible for the purpose of mining various quantities of 'Hillier, Donald E.; and Schneider, Paul A., Jr., 1979, Depth to Water Table (1976-1977) in the Boulder -Fort Collins - Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, United States Geological Survey, Map I -855-I. 6 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and Sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon sand and gravel sized aggregate. However, the majority of the gravels are smaller than % - inches in diameter. The depth of the sand and gravel overburden is approximately 13 to 55 feet with the average depth about 39 feet below existing site grade. Relatively shallow bedrock was encountered at the site in Boring Nos. 25, 26, and 29 at depths of 15 to 23 feet. We recommend that LaFarge analyze the gradations provided herein carefully to determine the economic and physical viability of developing the site for mining. If the preliminary assessments look favorable for mining the site, we recommend that further exploration be performed with a reverse air circulation drill rig in order to collect additional sand and gravel samples since large samples of the subsurface materials are not practical with conventional hollow stem auger methods due to heaving sands and groundwater conditions. As previously outlined, groundwater was encountered across the site at depths ranging from about 3 to 10 feet below existing site grade. If deeper mining operations are being considered, dewatering of the site will likely be required and an experienced contractor should be consulted to assist with determining the feasibility of dewatering in such conditions. It has been our experience that slurry cut-off walls are effective for dewatering when the depth to bedrock is less than about 40 to 60 feet due to the practical installation depths of these systems. Slurry walls must typically be keyed -in to bedrock or other relatively impervious stratum in order to be effective. Therefore, the use of very large equipment may be required for slurry wall installations, based on the depth to bedrock at the site. Other dewatering alternatives for the purpose of mining would consist of installing well -points in specific areas that are being excavated. Other Geotechnical Considerations: Protection of the existing single family residence will require particular care during excavation and dewatering activities. Significant dewatering of the site will likely cause some settlement of the structure and associated outbuildings. Additional analysis will be required to determine the approximate magnitude of this settlement. Slope stability analyses will be required to determine the required slope inclinations required to maintain stability of the structure during mining operations. Other options for stabilizing the structure could include shoring systems. A thorough evaluation and documentation of the existing structure conditions is recommended prior to beginning any construction activities. GENERAL COMMENTS Supplemental exploration and analyses should be undertaken in order to develop final design parameters and to confirm and/or modify the preliminary recommendations and conclusions contained in this report. This report should not be relied upon for final design, and should only be used for planning and budget purposes. 7 Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Report and sand/Gravel Study Proposed Sand/Gravel Mine- Weld County, Colorado Terracon Project No. 20085065 PRELIMINARY DRAFT SUBMITTAL Terracon Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon should also be retained to provide testing and observation during the excavation, grading, foundation and construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this preliminary report are based upon the data obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include, either specifically or by implication, any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken. This preliminary report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes are planned in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes, and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. 8 lierracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 301 N. Howes Street Fart Collins; Colorado 80521 PH. (970) 484-0359 FAX, (970) 484-0454 LEGEND - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TEST BORINGS INSTALLED FROM 9/3/08 TO 9/15/08 - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FUTURE TEST BORINGS FIGURE 1: BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM BEARSON GRAVEL STUDY SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WCR 17 & WCR 28 LONGMONT, CO 22085092-1 DESIGNED BY:PDG DRAWN BY: DJS APPVD_ BY: RLD SCALE: DATE: 09/19/08 JOB NO. 22085092 ACA❑ NO. 001 SHEET NO.: 1 OF 1 lierracon Consulting Engineers and Scientists 301 N. Howes Street Fart Collins; Colorado 80521 PH. (970) 484-0359 FAX, (970) 484-0454 ESTIMATED BEDROCK ELEVATION IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL NOTES: BEDROCK CONTOURS WERE ESTIMATED USING THE "SURFER" PROGRAM FROM GOLDEN SOFTWARE BASED ON DATA COLLECTED ON SEPT., 2008 ACTUAL CONDITIONS MAY VARY. FIGURE 2: SITE BEDROCK CONTOUR DIAGRAM BEARSON GRAVEL STUDY SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WCR 17 & WCR 28 WELD COUNTY, CO 22085092-2 DESIGNED BY:PDG DRAWN BY: DJS APPVD_ BY: RLD SCALE: DATE: 09/25108 JOB NO. 22085092 ACAD NO. 002 SHEET NO.: 2 OF 3 APPENDIX A lierracon to to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 1 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO RECOVERY, in. 4- (1) :R 'ENT, % T 'II 2 D 0 CO 7 SANDY LEAN CLAY 2 BS Medium stiff, brown, gray Y -- ;.' .. ..... :. .. �.. - . .- - -. ...... .. .. .. .. - ..•. .. . -.• . .. . .• . . -.• .-. ... �.. . -. . .. . .. --" • : -:•::-: . . . •.."se. . • ;+.-. •• . • ' . •;.. .. .•- .. - - . , . . ..... . , - .. • . , -. •.. S. . • ;.. •.•.-: . . • ;... -. . . . •; • ;... -. ..- . . •;.. . . • .- .. , --- .. -. . . . - .. .- • .- .-: • . . • .- -- - . . .- .. .- - - . ... . - .. .- - . - SILTY SAND 12 6 5 4BS Loose 53.5 to medium dense, brown, tan 2 1-4— 10 5BS 7BS $BS 9BS 10 11 BS ., BS 15 20 2. 25 35 40 45 5O -54- CLAYSTONE 6-50 10,5 Gray, very hard BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j WL W 0 V !'L W 4 WD 2.6 AB ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-3-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-3-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN CMG � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 N H O C) DC co LOG OF BORING NO. 2 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w > I- RECOVERY, in. (3 -J CO R ENT, % T =11 �++ •+ + • + SANDY LEAN CLAY Soft, dark brown E:::: 0 ° R° ° O 1/0 O O 4 O O O O 0 0 O O O Oz°O°O O O O °0** O 4 O ° O O OO 0 0 0 0 O O OGO O + O O O 3 O O O O O JO O O OS0 O O O 0 0 0 0 O O + O O $°00 O O O O O O O O O °° Oo O 0 4 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O <AO p O O 000 0 © 0 0 O O O O p+ O O 30 0°0% OOO 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 045 0 $ 000°O O O O O O 90 O a O O 4 O O O O 0 0 O O O O�OO OO O O O p O :EP E O O °co° 0 0 0 0 O O OGO p + 000000 04?:: O O O O O O O O O + O O O O O RRO O O O i70 JJJ O O 4 O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 4 O p O00 c� O O 0000 O O :::e OOO i OO O O O O ° 0,° SAND WITH GRAVEL - Medium dense, 55 tan R 2-30— 10 4 5 7 BS BS BS BS BS 15 20 25 30 35 406 �/y 45 50 55 x x ' x x > x X x x > x x > x x > x x > x x › " >, SILTSTONE Hard, blue/greyish 6a SS-4-5WW0-3 60 4-50/03 BOTTOM OF BORING 15 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. I WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft V !'L w O' WL m 5.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-10-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-10-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 3 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. li- (1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II el° SANDY LEAN CLAY Medium stiff, dark brown R 5 iii Mil • 4444 4 4 4 4)4° 8 8 ,4 4 4 8 8 8 .4 4 8 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 8 4,c›,>, 4 4 4 4 4 4 c'41 4 8 4 4 4 P•' 44448 444) 4 4'(<?:: 4 4 4 • •4 4 4.4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 ,4 4 4 4 4 4 .4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 %* 4 4 4 4 4°b° 000 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0000 4 4 4 •4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 8 4 4 8 4 4 ,4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 . 4 8 44 4 4,>`>„ 4 4 4 4 4 4 041 4 8 4 4 C;>÷ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4• •4 4 4.4 4 4 4 Q4 4 4 4V44 SAND WITH GRAVEL 2-R 1 10 4 5 6 7 BS BS BS BS BS Medium dense, 50 tan 15 0 25 30 35 40 45 5 x x x x x x x x x x x x SILTSTONE Hard, blue/greyish 55 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 9.0 WD BACKFILLED Er llerracon BORING STARTED 9-10-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-10-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB � WL nitial Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 4 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. 4- (1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II ':" • - . -- . . . . . ::::-: . ," - . - . . SILTY SAND 1 2 3 4 BS BS BS BS Brown, wet 9.5 at 5 _ — -- • . • "• '•'•" . -. : .+ + . - .• .S- . : + -• • . ••.-. '. :• --- - -•. • • . . S . .:• - • •..: --.• CLAYEY SAND 10 - _ Dark brown• 47 — - _ 25 — _ _ 40 =_ ::::: qqqqq SANDSTONE — 50.5 Very hard, light brown/reddish 5qq 0 _ S� BOTTOM OF BORING . 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 5.0 WD 2.2 AB ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-15-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-15-08 RIG HP Buggy FOREMAN PG � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 to 0 to csi I- C z n( O CO LOG OF BORING NO. 5 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z in > I— RECOVERY, in. 4- (1) -J CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II t',±J a a 44a4 a a a a <i0 a�,a a a a a a9a a a a a 4°44° a a a a ♦• a • a a a a a a a a a a a aa a a a a a aaa a a a a a aaa a aa a a as— • a a a a aka a a a !a aaa aaa a a� a a a a a0a a a a a a a a a a a a a :4 f• a 440 44 a a a a a a a� a a a a a a a4 a a a a a a a a a a a a a •a a a a a a a a a a a a � a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aa a a a a a a a a a a a •a a a a a a a a a a a a a a - SAND WITH GRAVEL 1 2 3 4 5 BS BS BS BS BS — Light brown = _L 47 - — — — - — — — — 1 — 20a — — — — 25 — — 35a — = — A5 c} SANDSTONE = 50.5 Very hard, light brown/reddish 50 — • SS 2 51 / 1.2 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j W 0 V"VL cc 4.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-5-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-5-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN PG APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 to 0 to csi C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 6 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w > I— RECOVERY, in. c1) -J CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II .. + .. ' SANDY CLAY Medium stiff, dark brown Y I 1 ii Mil $ v 444 44444 44 444 X444 444 44 44 4 4 �,4 ° 4 4 444 4444 44 4�4 4 44 444 X444 ° ::° SAND WITH GRAVEL Medium dense, brown 20 10 3 4 5 BS BS BS = — — 15 _ = 20 ""' iv • :I 117• Ili GRAVEL WITH SAND _ Tan 30 _ 30 40 0 4 O O O 4&4 ° O O O O O 00 o0 O O O o O O O O, O :ii: O O O O O O O O O 4h0 � �g' O + 0: + O O O 000 O //,: 8 O O OOOO O O O 07 O + O O O O O O O y O O O O O `■ O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 00:4 . ' O O O O O O O J Q 4hfig' � �\O) O SAND WITH GRAVEL _ Brown 52 _ 35 _ 40_ — 4 _ - 50 - x x x x x x x x x x x x x x X Y SILTSTONE Hard, blue/greyish 60 SS 5010.25 55= — _- 8 SS 3 *0/0.2 60 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 8.0 WD 2/ AB Er llerracon BORING STARTED 9-10-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-10-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB � WL nitial Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C 0 z O co LOG OF BORING NO. 8 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z in >- I- RECOVERY, in. li— (1) 2 CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II •-'`.'-' POORLY GRADED GRAVEL WITH SAND ;. aka a 4a4? %.:<› a i:;>;><, <'(,:c>:<'a a aaa1•a •,20 a a '�a a a a a a a.aa a a a a a a a a as i• a • a a a a as aka a , a a aa <);):<› a a a a a a ''C):`>:<' a s a1•a '''>`>"1:<' • a • a a a a a a a a a a IQ4Q4 a a a a -10 <> a . a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \Brown / SAND WITH GRAVEL _ . 5 Loose 45 to medium dense, brown, IN �' ` _a.a 15 i.N 6 iN 25taaaaaa I 30 mil !12N 35 112 ale 4 IA 1 45 x x > x x > x x > x x > x x >50 SILTSTONE 11.. Hard, blue/greyish a. 50 BOTTOM OF BORING _ 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 5.0 WD BACKFILLED ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-11-g8 BORING COMPLETED 9-11-68 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB � WL nitial Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 10 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 z W >- I- RECOVERY, in. c1) 2 o0 :R 'ENT, % T 'II " :..;..: ..-_. - • •� � ,. --- �• - CLAYEY SAND Very loose, dark brown $ = R2 5 �— _ 444 4°44..44 °.'44 444 X444 444 44 4 44 4 4 4�,4 4 4 444 4444 44 4�4 4 44 444 X444 444 4°4 4 4 444 44 444 4 4 44 1 44. 444 X 444 44 44 4 4�,4 4.4 444 4444 44 44 444 X444 444 4e4 44 4 4 4 4 4.4 +44 .444 444 44435 44 44 444 ,444 444 44 44 4 4 i, 4 ° 444 4444 44 4�4 4 44 444 X444 4444 � 4 44 44 4 4 4 SAND WITH GRAVEL — ZR 27 Medium dense, brown 47 10 5 6 7 BS BS BS BS BS — — 15 _ _ = _ 25 — — — _ — — _ 40 = — _ 45 - = x x › xx> x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > SILTSTONE - - Hard, greyish/blue 55 50 - - — 8 —SS -4 50/0.3 55 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 6.0 WD BACKFILLED ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-10-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-10-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 11 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' CO RECOVERY, in. c1) :R 'ENT, % T 'II 2 D z 0 0 a r SANDY CLAY Medium stiff, brown4.5 - 5_ C 2 ' :.:t ' ` .. :,,,..• ••- SILTY SAND Orangeish brown Q b 4 4 4b 4 Y::4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 8 4 4 c'44 4 8 4 8 �4 4 4°4°4 4 4 b::,:: 4 4 4 8 4 4 4^ 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 000 08 4 4 8 4 4 4°444-44 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 b::,:: 4 4 4 8- :,::+41‘ 4 84 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4c'44 444444 :4 b 4 4 4 8 8 4 8 8 8 8 4 8 8 4 4 8 4 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 � 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 4 8 4 4 4 SAND WITH GRAVEL — SW 2 RS 12-22— 10 3 4 5 BS BS BS Brown 4 15 - 20 — - _ •5 _ - 30 - 35 - 404 - _ 45 x x › x x › x x> x x > x x >50 SILTSTONE —_ Hard, greyish blue 6--s8-4-5043- - 7-SS-5-5C�10:4- 50 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j W 0 WL cc 9.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-11-g8 BORING COMPLETED 9-11-68 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 13 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT 1 ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w °° 3 Z in > I— RECOVERY, in. c1) -J CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II .,.:' < 41). GRAVEL WITH SAND 5 BS444 BS BS BS BS Well sorted, brown = 5 °4°w°4 444 4s4 4 444 44 � 444 444 4 444 4444 44 444 44 444 4 444 44 444 4 4-.-4 44 444 444 44 4 44 4 444 44 444 4�44 444 19)� ¢¢44 a a 44 4 444-4 4 - 4 4.4 444 444 4 ° 44 4 444 444 444 4,4 444 444 4444 44 444 444 444 I 4 4 44 4 4 4430 44 4 4 44 4 :0: 44 SAND WITH GRAVEL Reddish brown 44 10 — 15 = — 25 — — — — — — 35 — — — 40 • • , , , :::: . . . . . . ::: ; : SANDSTONE — 45 Very hard, light 50.5 brown/olive = - 50 - 6— NR 50 O,2 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j W 0 WL cc 4.0 WD BACKFILLED Er nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-5-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-5-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN PG APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 16 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w °° 3 z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. c1) 2 o0 :R 'ENT, % T 'II - ' CLAYEY SAND _ 444:4 4a4�? ° °°° a a a bb c 44 44 b :0> bbb 4 :c::: bbb 444 bbb 4 4 bb 44 :%1+!1: 4 444 bbb :. 44 :;>‹,, 4 4 Brown SAND WITH GRAVEL — 1 RS -1-2---2 5 Very loose 19 to loose, brown = — 2 —RS -1-2-1.1 10 3 BS BS _ — — 15- x x> xx> x x > x x > xx> xx> x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x > x x › x x > xx> x x > x x > x x >40 SILTSTONE 20 - Hard, grey = - 25 -_ 30 - - _ 35 — —5 SS -3 5O/ -0r25 40 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 0 WL cc 4.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-9-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-9-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 17 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT 1 ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z in >- I— RECOVERY, in. c1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II :-'. �.': -. • ; - ..- . =• •: •:.: . .. . CLAYEY SAND Brown - — Sc RS 12 5 - 4444444 • 484848 4 i . 4Loose,. 4444♦ - 8 8 ,4 4 4 8 8 8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44i 8 8 8 4 4I 4441 4 4 4 n 4 4 4 SAND WITH GRAVEL 2 RS 12 16 10 8 6 BS BS BS BS - brown 20 — = - 15 - 20 1/21 . Ss :I S. Ili GRAVEL WITH SAND — (0.5" to 1.5" gravels) _ 4444444 4 4 4 444 44 4 4 4 4 4 . 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44* 4 4 4 4 4 c 4 4 4n4 � 5�4 SAND WITH GRAVEL 34 — 38 tan - 35 - x x x X x x x x x x x x x x SILTSTONE — Medium hard to hard, blueish/grey 45 40 — - — 8 SS 4 5010.8 45 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 8.0 WD BACKFILLED Er llerracon BORING STARTED 9-11-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-11-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 19 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT l ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z in > I— RECOVERY, in. c1) -J CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II - ' CLAYEY SAND — • -: ...q-• .4 ' '-' Dark brown POORLY GRADED SAND WITH TRACE 4• 4 4 4 4°4°4 444 4 ° ° ° 44 � O<Y<' ':ii: 444 4444 ;::t 444 X444 444 4 4— 44 44 4 4 44 x-444 444 444 4 44 °4°4°4 44 ‹ 4 4 4 .4 4.4 X444 4444 4444 444 �444 444 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 444 44 444 + 4 X444 444 444 44 4 4 4 4 4 44.4 4 4.4 44 X4 4444 44 4;44t 44 444 444 444 4 4 44 44 4 4 44 ��444 444 ti n m n —SCE RS 12 6 GRAVEL — — Brown SAND WITH GRAVEL 2 —RS 2-33- Medium dense, 44 trace silt and clay at 14 ft. 3 4 6 BS BS BS BS — — 15 — 20 = 25 — — — = 305 — 35 — — 40 = x x x x x x x x x x x x xx SILTSTONE 7 SS 0103 45 Hard, g reyishlol ive 50 = - — 8 SS 4 50/0.3 50 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j WL W 0 WL W 0 WL cc 4.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-9-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-9-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 21 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z in >- I— RECOVERY, in. 4- c1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II :-•- •. • Medium stiff to very stiff, brown 484848 4 4 4 4 4 8 4�4 4 4 4 • - 4 8 8 4''' 4 44 8 8 4 4 8 8 8 4 4 c'41 4 8 4 4 4 8 4 4 • 4 4 4 4�8 8 4 4 4 44 4 n4nt nl n SAND WITH GRAVEL R 10 4 BS BS Brown 22 20 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x u SILTSTONE Hard, grey 30 25 S � CCU 30 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 0 WL cc 4.0 WD BACKFILLED Er nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-9-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-9-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 22 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. c1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II ' • • • • • •. SANDY CLAY 1 2 BS BS BS Dark brown M 13 10 -CL . � -# ...-. . • .::. -. - ..-... . m -4 ...-. ..-... ... • -4 , 1 ++. -;. . .:::4* : - ..' •. . -94 ..- et -;. . .;. -.. 4 -..+ -. . em. 94.4?. + . 4 . .. • . . . . 4 . •. . .. -. 4 . . 4• .. . SILTY SAND light brown, trace gravel 15 _ Y — 25 - 30 - 35 ..... ..... SANDSTONE +0.5 Hard, light brown 40 — 4 —SS --7-506 BOTTOM OF BORING P.5 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 6.0 WD 3.2 AB ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-15-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-15-08 RIG HP Buggy FOREMAN PG � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 23 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z in >- I— RECOVERY, in. c1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II .:.,4-. • ...... •... '• .. • . . . .. ... .... .. .. • . • .-. ., SILTY SAND 1 4 5 BS BS BS BS BS Brown, tan - _ — - 1 0 _ 1 SANDY LEAN CLAY . a • ... .-. ' .-..�. ' :.... . .a • .• + . , .. . -.: . . • =• . • - . Brown = SILTY SAND 15 — Brown , tan _ 20 ...w. off° oa©O O O © © O O O O O O O © O 0 O O O O Oho y� OL1 O O% o o O O O O O o O O O O O O O SAND WITH GRAVEL _ Tan, brown 30 _ - _ 30 .•5 .. -.• ..� ...... •.••. ... +...+-5:+-51. . •:•'�5+ . -. ..• •..•. .r.. . ' • . .S. . •, . •.. - . .. • . •.. SILTY SAND llC Brown, tan _ 35 — _ 40 - 45 CLAYSTONE _ Very hard, grey 49.5 _ - — 6--SS-1-5G/0A BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j WL W 0 V !'L W 10 WD BACKFILLED ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-3-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-3-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN CMG oix WL nitial Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 24 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w >- I— RECOVERY, in. (3 O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II se- "•• • -.. -:'�. ... .. . .... ..- . ..,.. .. ... . .... ..-., .• , .• '�g• • . . . . POORLY GRADED SAND WITH SILT Very loose to loose, brown = — SP 1 R 2 6 SM - •- . - •• - - : CLAYEY SAND — SC R 12 1-4— 10 8 4 BS BS BS Brown = :'-:�•' • -.• • -. .. •. ..•:: • • .-•4 •-, • :..-• .-_.. • -• •-:'' - . • •• • • , .• •. . :- • -• • -. • . • -• • -. • SILTY SAND 15_ Brown, with trace gravel from 16 ft. to 22 ft. 20 — — 25 X x x x x x x x SILTSTONE Hard, grey/olive 30 — - 6 SS -5 -5C1/114 - 30 BO OM OF BORING Pi The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 0 WL cc 8.0 WD BACKFILLED Er nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-9-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-9-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 25 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w C0 3 Z in >- I- RECOVERY, in. (3 O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II ' � ':-; : I SILTY SAND : :-•: Trace gravel CLAYEY SAND : :=. . : :- .... -- .. :.�-: .. ... � �;... -,•.:: ..... S . , -. ... . , . �. . - SC RS 12 5 Trace gravel, brown SILTY SAND — Very loose to medium dense, brown —SM R 12-4'1 10 CLAYSTONE Hard, grey 20 — -5 SS -5010,4 - 20 -5 BO OM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j W 0 V"VL cc 10.0 WD BACKFILLED ST nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-9-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-9-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN EB APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 26 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w C0 3 Z in >- I- RECOVERY, in. (3 O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II :-'.. c• •••� • - .- .�. ... .. . -.- . . -- -'- ' •. . . .. . • .•.-. • • CLAYEY SAND Fine grained, brown a 22 — — 15 20 2 BS- // 23 CLAY _— 25.5 \Dark brown 25 - 3 SS -1A-5-0/,14 CLAYSTONE Hard, grey/blackish BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 3.0 WD BACKFILLED Er llerracon BORING STARTED 9-5-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-5-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN PG � WL nitial I Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 to csi I- C z c( O co LOG OF BORING NO. 27 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w > I- RECOVERY, in. (3 -J CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II .. , -.. • : - '; -.• S - • ... - -.. SILTY SAND WITH TRACE FINE /J� i 4 BS LJ B S BS BS GRAVEL Brown - 44)'44 4 4 4 as44 4 4 4 4 4 4:4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 444 6 4 4 4 4 4 O�4 4 4 4 4 • 4 4 ¢¢4 4 4 V 4 4 4 4 4 4 4i:: 4 444 4 4 4 6 4 4 444 6 4 4 4 4 4 O�4 4 4 4 ::*I: 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 rj4�� 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 4 •4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ♦4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 SAND WITH GRAVEL - Brown 35 10 - _ 1 5 "I 20 — _ 254 - 30 — 35 .... ..... ..,,, SANDSTONE � Hard, light brown —5—SS-7-5(4/04 40 BO OM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines Qbetween soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. RI WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j 0 V !'L W 7.0 WD DC I @ 5.1 AB ST llerracon BORING STARTED 9-16-g8 BORING COMPLETED 9-15-08 RIG HP Buggy FOREMAN PG � WL nitial Water Level Reading APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 co 0 -63 H O C) DC co LOG OF BORING NO. 28 Page 1 of '1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS w CO 3 Z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. l (1) O CO R ENT, % T =11 . . . • . Ow Ow.. Ow Ow.. Ow . . . . Ow.. Ow Ow.. Ow Ow.. Ow . . . Ow Ow.. Ow Ow.. Ow Ow.. Ow Ow.. . . . l O. . . i l . . . O l . . . 1 le . AS en . . I is . . I le . Al es . AO en . . I i . . . lli . . . 1 le . . • en . *el. '"" ...c. . ' •" .. : •-I. ." ' ."' .... ... ='� . ....: ..-. .. -='..= .:../.. .,.. --it---25 . . .... - :•.,.. ...,. . ::-.. • : • , .- ...•. Y.: I. . . . � = " . . . . .. I. "- . _ . . ." _: SILTY SAND SM BS _ Brown, tan, 43 medium dense _ - _ S- S12 1- SS 2-13- BS - SS- 12 10 -- 15 SSA 2 11 20 BS - 552- -1 1 SSI2 1.8- 30 BS•. - - SS 12 20- 35 SSI2 14 — 40 BS CLAYSTONE Very hard, grey 54,3 45 _ 50 SS 3 50/0T2-5 BOTTOM OF BORING (I The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. I WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft V !'L w O' V"VL m 40 WD DRY AB ST nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-3-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-3-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN CMG APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 to 0 to 0' I- C z O 03 LOG OF BORING NO. 29 Page 1 of 1 Lafarge ARCHITECT / ENGINEER SITE SEC OF Weld WELD County, CO. ROADS Colorado 17 & 28 PROJECT Bearson Gravel Study GRAPHIC LOG DESCRIPTION ft. USGS SYMBOL SAMPLES TESTS Li.' °° 3 Z w >- I- RECOVERY, in. c1) O CO :R 'ENT, % T 'II :- ". .-: . - •.- ... --...-1--.-:: ' ;. '• . ' " • .. . -: .- . • . . SILTY SAND Still 2 BS — — Brown, tan _ SIVI S 12 1 a— .:-.•.. -' '-' ' •' SILTY SAND WITH GRAVEL — IS?OOL 4 BS \Tan, brown, very dense / _ .... -' :::: :::: ' • ... ..... . . . SILTY SAND - \Brown,tan 5--SS-7--501076 15 SANDSTONE _ Very hard, grey, Fe Ox 6 S 2 5010.2 20 SS 50100 BOTTOM OF BORING 16 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines sq.; between soil and rock types: in -situ, the transition may begradual. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft j W 0 V"VL cc 10 WD DRY AB ST nitial I Water Level Reading llerracon BORING STARTED 9-3-08 BORING COMPLETED 9-3-08 RIG CME 75 FOREMAN CMG APPROVED RLD JOB # 20085065 APPENDIX B llerrarDn U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 42 1.5 1 1/2 3 4 6 810 14161 20 30 40 50 60 1001 � 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 04 C) I- a O z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 w 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 W a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 '1I • • • • • • T I �I• • • • • • • • • • • • \IC: • • • • • • : \ . • i g 4 • • • • 11 • • \EP • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • A \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • • • ‘7.0 • • • • • h N. j • • • • • • • • • \ :: • • • • • • • • • • • \ \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ i • • • • • • • \lidgi • • \\I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I.:: • • • • • • \i. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I \ • • • • • • • • • • • • I I \lig, • • • • • • • I I I ` N. • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • h • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I il I ll i • • 9 9 IP • 9 *IIINIIC‘"-.-Th. 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 1 9.Oft (9 to 14 feet) NP NP NP 1 19.Oft (19 to 24 feet) NP NP NP 1.35 7.34 H A 1 29.Oft (29 to 34 feet) NP NP NP 2.09 14.58 * 2 10.Oft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 1.14 10.46 O 2 40.Oft (40 to 50 feet) NP NP NP 1.15 50.38 Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • I 9.Oft 9.5 4.467 0.204 0.4 84.1 15.5 1 19.0ft 19 0.701 0.301 0.095 10.2 81.2 8.7 H A 1 29.Oft 19 0.774 0.293 12.4 75.6 12.0 * 2 10.Oft 25.4 1.364 0.45 0.13 21.8 70.8 7.4 O 2 40.Oft 76.2 3.123 0.472 34.1 54.6 11.2 1 Fe � ECO GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #. 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 2 1.5 13/4 1/2 3!8 4 6 810 14161 20 30 40 50 60 1001 � 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 04 C) I- a z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 w a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 WSJ • • • • • trigNik, H...... _., . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • n .-.." - "-".% - "N"'"‘:‘%Z: - " - % - "." - . 6 " - I." - N - N.)11111111 • • • • • • • • • • • 4 \\\:.\\N\\\,11:11::: \ • • • • • • • . • • • II \\\il ;pc \I \ • ••• • • •• : • • • • • • • • • \ ••• \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • it\ tis • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ i i \\IL IN • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ t : • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 : Ali N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . \ • • • • • • • • • • \\lig: • • • • • •: . • I I i • • • • • I • • t1/4...,..4 • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Ce Cu • 3 9.0ft (9 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 3 20.0ft (20 to 50 feet) NP NP NP 0.93 24.13 H A 4 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP * 4 30.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0 4 47.0ft (40 to 47 feet) NP NP NP Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • 3 9.0ft 254 1.377 0.276 25.9 55.8 18.2 3 20.0ft 76.2 2.588 0.507 0.107 32.3 59.1 8.5 H A 4 20.0ft 12.5 0.357 0.077 3.9 66.4 29.7 * 4 30.0ft 19 0.419 8.7 58.1 33.1 0 4 47.0ft 12.5 1.202 0.258 5.8 74.6 19.6 eaco GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #: 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 4 3 2 ,L 4 1 !2 3/8 3 4 6 81 } 1416 20 30 40 5° 60 001 2t] HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a 0 z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 w a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 • • • • • • IIII\ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • g • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • . \ : • • • • • • i\ ti • • • O 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Ce Cu • 5 0.0ft (0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP 5 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 0.78 76.88 H A 5 30.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP * 5 40.0ft (3 0 to 40 feet) NP NP NP 1.50 17.39 0 5 47.0ft. (40 to 47 feet) 1.66 16.45 Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 5 0.0ft 37.5 2.16 0.332 33.5 49.5 17.0 5 20.0ft 37.5 6.68 0.674 0.087 43.7 46.9 9.4 ►a a 5 30.0ft 25 2.055 0.366 16.9 57.0 14.2 * 5 40.0ft 19 1.5O1 0.441 0.086 17.0 73.8 9.3 ® 5 47.0ft 19 1.261 0.401 0.077 9.4 80.7 9.9 eaco GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #: 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 2 1.5 314 1/2 3/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 60 1001 � 200 HYDROMETER 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 W00 55 co 50 U- z5 W • V W a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 \ • • • II • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \\:44H\ • • • I • • . • \Nu::: . \ • •4": • • • • • • :::::. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • \ • I • • • • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • • • . • • NIIII*\ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • kt 1 I I I I il I I I ii% 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 6 20.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 6 30.0ft (30 to 52 feet) NP NP NP 1.89 42.44 H A 8 0.0ft (0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP 0.33 79.51 * 8 10.0ft (10 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.45 62.08 O 10 10.0ft (10 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 1.75 18.05 Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 6 20.0ft 76.2 15.148 1.038 62.2 24.9 12.8 6 30.0ft 76.2 2.982 0.629 30.6 59.1 10.3 H A 8 0.0ft 76.2 4.564 0.295 39.6 48.0 12.3 * 8 10.0ft 76.2 7.87 0.672 0.127 47.8 44.7 7.4 O 10 10.0ft 76.2 1.185 0.369 20.0 69.2 10.7 1 Fe � ECO GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #. 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado CO 0 04 C) I- a z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z CD 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 cio 50 U- z 45 W 40 w a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 2 115 13/4 1 !2 3/8 3 4 6 810 1416 20 30 4050 60 1001 � 200 HYDROMETER \ •iiii \ • • • • \\\\\ I : I i\ii. I I • • • • • • • • • • • \ I io, \.. • \ . • • • • . • . • I • • • • it • • �o • • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 10 40.0ft (4 0 to 47 feet) NP NP NP 1.60 22.39 11 20.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.73 155.9 J� H A 11 30.0ft (30 to 45 feet) NP NP NP 1.43 33.55 * 13 10.0ft (0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP 0.33 44.86 0 13 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 0.84 9.49 Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • 10 40.0ft 254 1.532 0.409 20.0 69.5 10.5 11 20.0ft 76.2 8.172 0.559 48.4 39.2 12.3 H s 11 30.0ft 19 2.508 0.518 26.0 64.0 10.0 * 13 10.0ft 37.5 10.324 0.887 0.23 51.2 43.5 5.4 ® 13 20.0ft 25 2.376 0.706 0.25 26.8 69.4 3.7 eacci GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #: 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 4 2 2 1.5 41 !2 3/83 6 810 �' 30 50 X 140 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a z 0 cc ii O C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co w 50 U- z 45 W 40 a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 • • • • • llik"-..-"Nli\ • • • • • I I I I • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • 1 • • • • • V \ • . • • • • \ iiiii1/4 \ •• . . • • IIII:l\e • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • • • :\ii\° • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . i I i I h ... • • • I: • • I \ I\i • • • I • • • I • • • • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I • • • I • • • I • • • I • • 11 ..: • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I \\ • • • • • • • I I • • • • • I 1 libi • • • • I • • • • I • • • • • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I 4• \ • • • I • • • I • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I I 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 13 30.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.98 8.23 13 40.0ft (3 0 to 40 feet) NP NP NP 0.90 10.21 H A 16 10.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 1.14 15.28 * 16 20.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.79 12.47 0 17 9.0ft (9 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 1.96 26.03 Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 13 30.0ft 19 1.965 0.677 0.239 20.7 75.3 4.0 13 40.0ft 25 2.329 0.69 0.228 27.3 68.0 4.7 H A 16 10.0ft 254 1.242 0.339 0.081 24.3 66.2 9.5 * 16 20.0ft 76.2 2.16 0.545 0.173 26.4 67.2 6.4 ® 17 9.0ft 76.2 1.652 0.453 27.4 61.8 10.7 eaco GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #: 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 4 2 1.5 1 3f 4 1/2 3 4 6 810 14161 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a O z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 w a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • I • • • • • I • • • • • I • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • . • • • \ : • • • • • • m• • • • • • • • \ • • • • • hillik • • I • • li °I ill:).. • • • • • \\ill\ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 17 20.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.47 198.5 -! 17 30.0ft (30 to 38 feet) NP NP NP 0.60 63.03 H A 19 0.0ft (0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP * 19 20.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 3.49 39.68 0 21 0.0ft (0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 17 20.0ft 76.2 13.597 0.664 53.4 36.1 10.4 17 30.0ft 76.2 4.836 0.473 0.077 40.1 49.9 9.9 H A 19 0.0ft 19 0.529 0.186 10.3 70.1 19.6 * 19 20.0ft 25.4 1.806 0.536 20.6 67.5 11.9 O 21 0.0ft 9.5 0.234 0.7 68.6 30.7 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Fe � Project: ECO::D:;ELD Date: Bearson Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 42 2 1.5 314 1/2 3 6 810 14161 20 30 40 50 60 1001 � 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 00 55 co I..L 50 U- z 45 W 40 W a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 .• • • r• •--. •r� -�+r Ipil• • • • • • ti L 4• •I • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • . • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • L� • •\ • 'ry1'• • . \4 • . • • • • • 15• • . • 1 • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • . • I' •• .•• • • • • • try• • • • .` . • • • • • I • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \\\\\\ • • • • .• • • • • • • • .• • • • ••• • • • •• • •• • • • • •• •• • • • • • • • • • • •I • • • • • • •• • • • • •• •• • • • • • ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ••• • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NIII:1/4::-N • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .� • • • • • • • • • ••• • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 21 10.0ft (10 to 22 feet) NP NP NP 0.64 42.20 22 10.0ft (0.d to 10 feet) NP NP NP H A 22 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP * 22 30.0ft (20 to 30 feet) NP NP NP 0 23 9.0ft (0.d to 9 feet) NP NP NP Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 21 10.0ft 76.2 2.604 0.32 34.8 53.5 11.6 22 10.0ft 9.5 0.077 0.2 40.1 59.7 H A 22 20.0ft 12.5 0.512 0.21 4.1 77.4 18.5 * 22 30.0ft 12.5 0.472 4.2 64.9 30.8 O 23 9.0ft 9.5 0.494 0.9 68.0 31.1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 1 Fe � Project: ECO::D:;ELD Date: Bearson Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 4 3 2 13/4 1 l2 3 6 81 } 141 ' 20 30 40 50 60 1001 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 w a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 • . • • • • .._ • . . • . • • • • • • • • • v• • • • \\\\\\\\\ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • NNAH • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • C\i • • • • • • I • I • • • • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 23 19.Oft (19 to 29 feet) NP NP NP 23 29.Oft (29 to 39 feet) NP NP NP ►l A 23 44.Oft (39 to 44 feet) NP NP NP * 24 10.Oft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 0 25 10.Oft (10 to 14 feet) NP NP NP Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 23 19.Oft 37.5 0.822 0.089 17.7 53.4 29.0 23 29.Oft 9.5 0.538 2.6 59.8 37.6 H A 23 44.Oft 9.5 0.24 0.0 51.4 48.6 * 24 10.Oft 19 0.421 0.147 5.5 73.7 20.8 O 25 10.Oft 12.7 0.391 0.132 1.7 76.8 21.5 1 Fe � ECO GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #. 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 6 43 1,5 314 1/2 3 6 810 14161 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 CD 04 C) I- a 0 z 0 cc ii ca C 0 cJ N z 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 X65 2 W 80 55 co 50 U- z 45 W 40 Lu 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 b I T \*\ n n \ n • \ m 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 26 10.0ft (0.0 to 10 feet) NP NP NP 26 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP H A 27 20.0ft (10 to 20 feet) NP NP NP 0.72 57.93 * 27 30.0ft (2 0 t0 30 feet) NP NP NP 0.66 34.17 0 27 35.0ft (30 to 35 feet) NP NP NP 0.92 33.93 Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay • 26 10.0ft 9.5 0.246 0.1 63.8 36.1 26 20.0ft 9.5 0.29 0.097 0.1 75.4 24.5 H A 27 20.0ft 37.5 4.45 0.497 0.077 39.3 50.8 9.9 * 27 30.0ft 37.5 5.437 0.757 0.159 42.5 50.6 7.0 0 27 35.0ft 50 4.341 0.714 0.128 38.4 53.9 7.7 eaco GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #: 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES 6 43 2 1.5 314 1!23!.8 U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS 81 } 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100140 200 HYDROMETER CO 0 04 C) I- a z 0 co ii O C 0 cJ N czt 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 2 W 60 55 co Cti 50 U- z 45 W 40 W a 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 • • • • ry .• `�' I� I• •I • • •• • • • • • I • • • • • • • I I • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I I I I I I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • N • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • 4 • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 . •• • •• • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • . •• • • • • . • 1 •• • •• • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • •• • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • • •••• • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . \iip • • • • • • • • • • \ • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 I • • •• • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • • 100 10 I GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS 0.1 0.01 0.001 COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu • 28 9.Oft (9 to 19 feet) NP NP NP 28 19.Oft (19 to 29 feet) NP NP NP H A 28 29.Oft (29 to 39 feet) NP NP NP * 29 9.Oft (0 to 9 feet) NP NP NP Specimen Identification D10Q D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay • 28 9.Oft 4.75 0.264 0.11 0.0 78.7 21.3 28 19.Oft 12.5 0.391 0.178 1.3 85.4 13.3 H A 28 29.Oft 9.5 0.266 0.088 0.5 72.7 26.8 * 29 9.Oft 12.5 0.285 0.106 3.1 73.8 23.0 1 � e � ECO GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: Site: Job Date: SEC #. 20085065 Bearson OF WELD Gravel CO. Study ROADS 17 & 28 Weld County, Colorado APPENDIX C i lierraron GENERAL NOTES DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon - 1-3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted ST: Thin -Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted RS: Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample HS: PA: HA: RB: WB: Hollow Stem Auger Power Auger Hand Auger Rock Bit Wash Boring or Mud Rotary The number of blows required to advance a standard 2 -inch O.D. split -spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18 -inch penetration with a 140 -pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N -value". For 3" O.D. ring samplers (RS) the penetration value is reported as the number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140 - pound hammer falling 30 inches, reported as "blows per foot," and is not considered equivalent to the "Standard Penetration" or "N - value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: WCI: DCI: AB: Water Level Wet Cave in Dry Cave in After Boring WS: WD: BCR: ACR: While Sampling While Drilling Before Casing Removal After Casing Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the basis of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. FINE-GRAINED SOILS (RS) (SS) Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. < 3 0-2 3-4 3-4 5-9 5-8 10-18 9-15 19-42 16-30 > 42 > 30 Consistenc Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard COARSE -GRAINED SOILS (RS) Blows/Ft. 0-6 7-18 19-58 59-98 > 98 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL Descriptive Terms of Other Constituents Trace With Modifier Percent of Dry Weight <15 15 - 29 > 30 RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES Descriptive Terms of Other Constituents Trace With Modifiers Percent of Dry Weight <5 5-12 >12 (SS) Blows/Ft. <3 4-9 10-29 30-50 > 50 Relative Density Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense (RS) Blows/Ft. < 30 30-49 50-89 90-119 >119 BEDROCK (SS) Blows/Ft. < 20 20-29 30-49 50-79 > 79 GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Consistenc Weathered Firm Medium Hard Hard Very Hard Major Component of Sample Particle Size Boulders Cobbles Gravel Sand Silt or Clay Over 12 in. (300mm) 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm) #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm) Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm) PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Term Non -plastic Low Medium High Plasticity Index 0 1-10 11-30 30+ lierracon UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soil Classification Group Symbol Group Name Coarse Grained Soils More than 50% retained on No. 200 sieve Gravels More than 50% of coarse fraction retained on No. 4 sieve Clean Gravels Less than 5% fines° Cu ≥ 4 and 1 ≤ Cc ≤ 3E GW Well graded gravel Cu <4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravel' Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH than 12% fines° GM Silty gravel'••" Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravels." Sands 50% or more of coarse fraction passes No. 4 sieve Clean Sands Less than 5% fines° Cu 76 and 1 ≤Cc≤3E SW Well graded sand' Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sand' Sands with Fines More than 12% fines° Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand° "•' Fines classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sandy ".I Fine -Grained Soils Silts and Clays 50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 No. 200 sieve inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" lined CL Lean clayK" PI < 4 or plots below "A" lined ML organic Liquid limit oven dried Liquid limit - not dried <0.75 OL Organic clayK,`tM." Organic silt'cl-mi° Silts and Clays inorganic Liquid limit 50 or more PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay" `-M PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic silt"' organic Liquid limit - oven dried Liquid limit - not dried < 0.75 OH Organic clayKtMP Organic siltK.` "" ° Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat A Based on the material passing the 3 -in. (75 -mm) sieve B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles or boulders, or both" to group name. c Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well graded gravel with silt, GW-GC well graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly graded gravel with silt, GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay. DSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well graded sand with silt, SW -SC well graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt, SP -SC poorly graded sand with clay (D30)2 ECU = D60 1d /a Cc = Dio X D60 F If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. ° If fines classify as CL -ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or SC-SM. 60 0 X 40 O 30 CO 20 10 7 4 c "If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name. If soil contains ≥ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name. If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL -ML, silty clay. K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "with gravel," whichever is predominant. L If soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to group name. MIf soil contains ≥ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add "gravelly" to group name. N PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above "A" line. °Pl < 4 or plots below "A" line. P PI plots on or above "A" line. °PI plots below "A" line. For classification soils of coarse of fine-grained and fine-grained fraction -grained sails �:` , et Equation Horizontal then PI=0. of "A" - line at P1=4 3 (LL. to LL= 5.5. -20) , .et ; r ter N9 #' d � 5 L e , ,'' Equation Vertical of r`U" at LL=18 - line to Pi=7, iee . /f then PI=0.9 (LL -8) f r e do Or t f1. e I MH or off -- L ML. or OL 0 10 16 20 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (LLB lierracon_ ROCK CLASSIFICATION (Based on ASTM C-294) Sedimentary Rocks Sedimentary rocks are stratified materials laid down by water or wind. The sediments may be composed of particles or pre-existing rocks derived by mechanical weathering, evaporation or by chemical or organic origin. The sediments are usually indurated by cementation or compaction. C h e rt Very fine-grained siliceous rock composed of micro -crystalline or cyrptocrystalline quartz, chalcedony or opal. Chert is various colored, porous to dense, hard and has a conchoidal to splintery fracture. Claystone Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Soft massive and may contain carbonate minerals. Conglomerate Rock consisting of a considerable amount of rounded gravel, sand and cobbles with or without interstitial or cementing material. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other materials. Dolomite A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral dolomite [CaMg(CO3)2]. May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Limestone A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral calcite (CaCO3). May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Sandstone Rock consisting of particles of sand with or without interstitial and cementing materials. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other material. Shale Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Shale is hard, platy, of fissile may be gray, black, reddish or green and may contain some carbonate minerals (calcareous shale). Siltstone Fine grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts or rock containing silt. Siltstones consist predominantly of silt sized particles (0.0626 to 0.002 mm in diameter) and are intermediate rocks between claystones and sandstones and may contain carbonate minerals. lierracon LABORATORY TEST SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE TEST California Ratio Bearing Used subbase, materials to evaluate and for use the base in course road potential and material, airfield strength pavements. of including subgrade recycled soil, Pavement Design Thickness Consolidation Used both to develop differential an estimate and total settlement of both of the rate and amount of a structure. Foundation Design Direct Shear Used of soil to determine or rock. the consolidated drained shear strength Bearing Foundation and Slope Capacity, Stability Design, Dry Density Used fine-grained to determine soils. the in -place density of natural, inorganic, Index Property Behavior Soil Expansion Used soil and to measure to provide the a expansive basis for swell potential potential of classification. fine-grained Foundation Design and Slab Gradation Used particle for sizes the quantitative in soil. determination of the distribution of Soil Classification Liquid Plasticity & Plastic Index Limit, Used systems and materials. to as specify an to characterize integral the fine-grained part the of fine-grained engineering fraction fraction of classification construction of soils, Soil Classification Permeability Used liquid to determine or gas. the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a Groundwater Analysis Flow pH Used to determine soil. the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a Corrosion Potential Resistivity Used electrical to indicate currents. the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Corrosion Potential R -Value Used subbase, materials to evaluate and for use the base in course road potential and material, airfield strength pavements. of including subgrade recycled soil, Pavement Design Thickness Soluble Sulphate Used sulfates to within determine the a soil mass. quantitative amount of soluble Corrosion Potential Compression Unconfined obtain possess the state. approximate sufficient cohesion compressive strength to permit testing of soils in the Bearing Analysis Foundations Capacity for To that unconfined Water Content Used mass. to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil Index Property Behavior Soil lierracon REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM 0653) Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity Alluvium Aggregate Base Course Backfill Bedrock. Bench Caisson (Drilled Pier or Shaft) Coefficient of Friction COlluviurn Compaction Concrete Slab -on - Grade Differential Movement Earth Pressure ESAL Engineered Fill Equivalent Fluid Existing Fill (or Man -Made Fill) Existing Grade The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the foundation element and the supporting material. Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and subsequently deposited by sedimentation. A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath slabs or pavements. A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for excavation. A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an enlarged base. Sometimes referred to as a cast -in -place pier or drilled shaft. A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding shear stress at which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Soil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a slope or cliff. The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and typically used as a floor system. Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of structure. The pressure exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall. Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000 pound axle loads). Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer. A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the actual soil. This simplified approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected. Materials deposited throughout the action of man prior to exploration of the site. The ground surface at the time of field exploration. lierracon REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM 0653) Expansive Potential Finished Grade Footing Foundation Frost Depth Grade Beam Groundwater Heave Lithologic Native Grade Native Soil Optimum Moisture Content Perched Water Scarify Settlement Skin Friction (Side Shear) Soil (Earth) Strain Stress Strip Subbase Subgrade The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture. The final grade created as a part of the project. A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil. The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock. The depth at which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between other foundation elements such as drilled piers. Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils or within fractures in bedrock. Upward movement. The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by observation. The naturally occurring ground surface. Naturally occurring on -site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil. The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit weight by a given compactive effort. Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuous stratum. To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure. Downward movement. The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of the structure such as a drilled pier. Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic matter. The change in length per unit of length in a given direction. The force per unit area acting within a soil mass. To remove from present location. A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course. The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system. lierracon ATTACHMENT B PC-STABL Results i0O 90 85 • 80- 7D 65- U • . . 60- . • • • • 415- . 40- • 30. • 25- 20 • • 15- • . 10 Proble rn: Pit 122 Shallow Bedrock Analysis - FS Mine Bishop = 1.345 Soils Cohesion Weathered Be Silty Sand P graded sad Siltst.o•ne Water Table Critical Surface o_a 0.0 10.0 500M Friction Angle 14_D 37.0 25.0 28.0 1 1 I J 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 T I I I i I I I I I I I L I I I r I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 r I I I i I I I I I I I L I I I r I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I -J 1 I I I 1 1 1 - J 1 1 1 I 14 . . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 J 1 I I J 1 I I 1 I I I J I I I I I 1 I J I I I I I 1 1 1 1 L 1 r 1 I 1 1 1 r I I I L I I I I I I I L I I I I 1 1 1 1 L 1 r I I 1 1 1 1 r I I I 1 1 1 1 J 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I • I • ■ • I • '0 ■ ' 1 • ,30I ■ • 1 • 40 I . ■ I 50' 60' (Scale in Feet) . • I 70 . ' I • . • I I 9 0 1'00 ■ . 1 10 . 1 1 L r - I I L I I I L I I I I I 1 I I I I I r I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r' 1 1 1 1 1 r' ■ L I 1 '0 . ■ Problem: Pit 122 35 Bedrock Analysis - FS Min- Bi S hop = 1.4 1 r 1D5- 100 95- 90- 85 so 7s - Gb 60 ss 60 4 J 40 .ja I j i _ 1 1 allow 1 1 I- I 1 I 1 ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I Soils Cohesion Vveathered E e UU 0 Sand Grave P qr8de'i shed 10L-0 Siltstone 50U.0 Water Table Critical Surface. — — — T t 1 T 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I - - — — a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I A at — 0.1 1 1 1 1 1 Friction Angle 14.0 3TO 25 0 28.0 — a I t t 1 1 I 1 1 — —1— - 1 1 1 r 1 r r r I I I L I I I 1 I t I A — 1— — — — I— — — — L I I I I t t 1 1 - a a I I I 1 1 1 1 I L I I I T 1 T T 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I - ON - a a — a I I 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I - - - - - t - 1 I 1 1 — r 1 I - � I 1 — '— 1 1 I I I 1 I r I I I- I I i I I - _ — — I 1 I I r I 1 I milks I I 1 _� I I I I I I I r I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I — — I I I I I I I III — 1 I 1 1 I - I I I I r I I I` r 1 I 1 1 1 I - se MS I I I I I I I I I - { - I I I - ORM - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I el. UM - - — — T 4. L - I I I I T - T — 4 T NO I I I I , I I 4 I I 1 I I I I I I I -� - — — -1 I I I I I I -I - -1 I I I I t 1 I I I I I I t I I I 1 I I — — — I I I t I 1 I 1 - — — — ! ... -- ... -- ! .... — —' .... --- '— ... —— 1- — — — t — I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 4 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I al a a I I I I 1 I I 1 1 -AI 1 I t t t I 1 1 I t I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 r I I 1 - - - -I — — — —1- - - - F I I I I I r t 1 t t t t 1 r I I I I r I I I- I I L I I I I I I I I I I T I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 I a I 1 I 1 , I I 4 - I I t t I I 1 t t t I t 1 - - - I 1 1 t I 1 1 I t 1 t I t 1 ..... ---, ... -- n .... - -, .... --- i ... -- ; ... -- r I I 1 t I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 7 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I - a a a 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 - - -I 1 1 t t t r I I 1 t I - - - -I.... I- r 1 t 1 L 1 1 r 1 1 1 L 1 1 r r t t t L I 1 1 I I I I 1 — A..1 — — —' .... 1— ... —'— ... L.—. L I t I I I 1 a I 1 1 -i — 1 1 t t 1 — —1— - 1 t t 1 t t I I t T 1 I 1 1 Ai I 1 T I 1 I 1 I I t 1 1 1 I t I t 1 t — ai ..... --—, .... — —, .... — —, .... --— seas —— — i I 1 I i I I t 1 t 1 1 1 I 1 INN 1 I 1 J I I INNII 1 - — -I 1 I 1 1 r t t 1 1 1 t ... -I- - - -1- ... 1 I I I I I I 1 1 t I I — —' ... —1— — — —'— ... I"' I I I I I t I t 1 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 rid AO 65 70 80 85 90 1 1 — —1— — I 1 1 I I r 1 t 1 ION IMO I I I I 1 1 1 1 I r 1 t I 1 t t I 1 t - al= a ins 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 - I I 1 I ala I I 1 1 1 1 1 — — I I I - — I IMII 1001651'4;0 115 120125 130 135 140145 150155 160165 I III (ScaIR in Feet, 130 125 120 115 110 165 goo 95- 9D- 85 - soy 75 70= 55 IOU • . 5.5 5D- -05- 40H . 3:5 30; 25- 20H • ic.1 5- 0 -5 Problem: Varra Pit 122 45' Slope Failure Analysis - FS Min- Bishop = 1.539 Soils Cohesion Friction Angle GP-SM 0.0 37.0 Snd & Gori 0.0 37_D Prly Grd Snd 0.0 31.0 Top Soil 5D.0 28.0 Bedrock 500.0 28.D Water Table Critical Surface 1 1 r I I r I I L I I I L 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 r 1 L 1 1 1 T I I T I 1 I I 1 1 T 1 1 T I 1 I I I I I I L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r T I I I I I I I T 1 I I I 1 1 r I I I I L I— I I r I I L I- r 1 1 1 I I 1 I J I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I J I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 r I I r I I L 1 r 1 1 ✓ I I L I 1 r T I I T I 1 I I 1 1 1 T 1 1 T I 1 I I 1 1 r I I I r I r I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I L 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I r I I 1 I I I 1 I I L 1 I I— I r I I 1 I I 1 I J I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I J I I J I I I I I I 1 1 7 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 r I I I L I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I I L 1 1 r I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I L 1 1 r I I 1 r I L —L 1 r 1 1 ✓ 1 I I I L 1 1 r I I I SI Mae MOM I I I I I L 1 1 r I I ONO SON S I I I I I I r I I S ISM IOW MI* I I I I I— r • -10 0 10 2 • I ' 0 30' 1 . 40' ■ . I I . 60 1 1 I �o so so 100 110 120 130 140 X 50 160 170 180 (Scale in Feet) o 92 SOIL SURVEY TABLE 1. --TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION DATA Month Temperature 1 I I I I I I ' :2 years in 10 Precipitation) 1 4 I I I I I 2 years in 10 will have-- Average:Average; Average: t daily ; daily daily 'I Maximum I Minimum ; growing 1 rnax.mum1minimum; 1temperature1temperature, degree i 1 higher � lower ; days2 1 C 1 C I I than-- ; than-- I o I o I of I '�E 1 I I I I 39.9 : 10.5 1 25.3 1 65 I I 1 I I I X15. I 16.4 i 30.9 ' I I 1 I 1 1 1 I 51.2 f 22.5 w 36.8 I I I I I I I 61.8 ; 32.7 : 47.3 1 i i I I 1 72.6 I 43.3 i 58.0 i I I I I I I I I I I 82.8 i 52.0 1 67.4 ' i I I I I I I I I 89.3 I 57.3 i 73.4 1 I 86.9 54.9 i 70.9 I I 77.8 44.6 61.3 1 I 1 I I a I 1 I 66.8 i 33.8 i 50.3 I I t 1 I I I I 1 I 50.8 i 21.7 i 36.3 I j I I I I I 42.0 4 13.9 28.0 I I I I 1 I I January---, February --- March April May --- June July August SeptemberOctoberNovemberDecember Year i 63.9 I 1 1 L I I I 33.6 ; 48.8 I i I I I I I I I I a I I 71 78 84 92 100 100 99 94 85 74 67 101 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I i 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I a I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I i I I cE -19 -11 -4 12 27 39 47 43 29 16 -1 -13 -21 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I 100 248 558 822 1,035 -958 639 333 65 8 4,860 I Average ; I will have-- ; Average 1 number of r Average; I :number of ;Average I Less : More ;days with; snowfall than -s- ; than --1 0.10 inch ; I I I or more g i I 1 In 1 I I I I a I I I a I 1 1 I i a 1 I I I 1 I I I i 1 I 1 1 I I I I 1 I a I I I a I I I I 37 .35 1 1 57 .29 . 76 1.36 2.16 1.81 1.24 1.22 1.33 .91 .53 . 31 12.27 . 30 . 46 .87 . 74 . 47 . 42 . 36 .22 . 14 .08 i I I I I I . 15 I I 1 I I I 1 I i I I 1 1 I I I I i I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 In . 55 . 41 1.12 2.07 3.20 2.67 1.85 1.85 2.10 1.46 .84 . 04 1 .52 I I 1 1 9.55 :14.84 I 1 I I 1 1 i I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I i I p I I I I i 1 I a l I I I I I I i I I I I I I L I 1 I I I 1 1 3 3 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 i 31 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 In 5.3 4.6 8.1 4.3 . 3 . 0 . 0 . 6 3.0 5.4 4.1 35+7 1Recorded in the period 1951-74 at Greeley, CO. 2A growing degree day is an index of the amount of heat available for plant growth. It can be calculated by adding the maximum and minimum daily temperatures, dividing the sum by 2, and subtracting the temperature below which growth is minimal for the principal crops in the area (400 F) . WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART 93 . Probability i 240 F : 280 F or lower 1 or lower 1 I I I I Last freezing : : : temperature I I I in spring: I i I I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I : April 28 I May 11 I : I 1 2 years in 10 1 : : later than-- : April 22 : May 5 : I I 1 I I i n 10 5 years 1n 1 I later than-- : April 11 April 25 I : : : I : First freezing I : i temperature I : in fall: i : : 1 1 1 1 I : I I I 1 I 1 : October 4 :September 25 September 16 I I 2 years in 10 : 1 earlier than-- : October 10 : October 1 :September 21 : : : 5 years in 10 : a earlier than-- ; October 21 1 October 11 :September 30 I •1 1 I 1 I TABLE 2, --FREEZE DATES IN SPRING AND FALL Minimum temperature' 32° F or lower 1 year in 10 later than -- 1 year in 10 earlier than-- : I I 1Recorded in the period 1951-74 at Greeley, CO, TABLE 3. --GROWING SEASON LENGTH Daily minimum temperature during growing season 1 Probability Higher than 24° F 9 years in 10 8 years in 10 5 years in 1O 2 years in 10 1 year in 10 Days 166 175 192 209 218 S I I I 1 I I : I I I 1 I 1 Higher than 28° F Days : Higher than 32° F Days w 1117 ; 122 I I 155 : 129 I I 168 : 143 I I 182 : 156 I I 189 : 163 I 1 1Recorded in the period 1951-71 at Greeley, C0_ May 24 May 19 May 1O 6.4.9 EXHIBIT I - Soils Information (1) In consultation with the Soil Conservation Service or other qualified person, the Operator/Applicant shall indicate on a map (in Exhibit C) or by a statement, the general type, thickness and distribution of soil over the affected land. Such description will address suitability of topsoil (or other material) for establishment and maintenance ofplant growth. The above information shall satisfy "completeness" requirements for purposes of determination of date of filing. (2) If necessary, at its discretion, the Board may require additional information on soils or other growth media to be stockpiled and used in revegetation to be submitted subsequent to the filing and notification of "completeness" of the application. 6.4.10 EXHIBIT J - Vegetation Information (1) The Operator/Applicant shall include in this Exhibit a narrative of the following items: (a) descriptions of present vegetation types, which include quantitative estimates of cover and height for the principal species in each life -form represented (i.e., trees, tall shrubs, low shrubs, grasses, forbs); (b) the relationship of present vegetation types to soil types, or alternatively, the information may be presented on a map; and (c) estimates of average annual production for hay meadows and croplands, and carrying capacity for range lands on or in the vicinity of the affected land, if the choice of reclamation is for range or agriculture. (2) The Operator/Applicant shall show the relation of the types of vegetation to existing topography on a map in Exhibit C. In providing such information, the Operator/Applicant may want to contact the local Soil Conservation District. Exhibit I & J — Soils & Vegetation Map, identifies the type and extent of soils over the project site relative to the areas designated for resource recovery. The potential volume of soil to be removed for sale or retention for final reclamation is identified under Table I-1: Soil Volumes. While the native vegetation has been replaced by agricultural practices to irrigated crops (recently, corn), range site descriptions for each soil type are included at the back of this exhibit. The range site descriptions indicate what species of vegetation could grow on the identified soil under native conditions. This information was utilized to create the seed mixtures proposed under Exhibit E - Table E-1: Primary/Preferred Re -vegetation Seed Mixture and Exhibit E - Table E-2: Optional/Default Revegetation Seed Mixture. For clarity, topsoil is generally regarded as the plow layer (upper six inches) on agricultural soils, or the A-1 soil profile horizon otherwise. The solum, or soil Varra Companies, Inc. OMLR 112 Permit Application Parcel 122 — Resource Development Project 1 July 2015 includes the topsoil plus all other material above the regolith of the parent rock and generally no deeper than the depth of rooting of perennial plants or which otherwise meets the definition of soil. One soil differs from another soil by its unique properties and characteristics (such as profile horizon development, structure, texture, color, percent organic matter, chemical composition, etc.) and is identified as such by soil scientists, and described in NRCS Soil Survey documents. Soil salvage will commence with the removal of the surface layer of soil to a minimum depth of 6.0± inches. Where the A-1 or Ap (plow layer) is absent, any portion of the A and or B horizon of the solum suitable for plant regrowth will be utilized to meet the minimum depth of soil replacement for reclamation, with the excess made commercially available for export from the property. Where a C profile exists, it will be considered part of the regolith or deposit and extracted for processing. All excess soil will be subject to processing or stockpiling for commercial sale. Regardless, topsoil, or suitable volumes of the A and/or B profile where topsoil is absent, will be retained in sufficient volume to reclaim all lands remaining above the anticipated water level at any given point in time during resource recovery operations. To minimize the undesirable effects of soil blowing and loss, and to avoid damage to the soil resource via compaction, soil will be stripped wherever possible when soil is moist, and not dry or wet. Since the soils of the upper terrace of this location have been irrigated, salvage of soil below one foot in depth will not be used as a soil resource over the affected lands without first testing for the accumulation of salts that may affect the regrowth potential on those soils. Salt laden layers of the solum may be used as fill on -site and will be placed deeper than the primary root zone of grasses, trees, and shrubs, or generally, deeper than 4.0± feet in depth. Once removed from its native location, soil retained for reclamation will be windrowed along the perimeter of the area of extraction and seeded with the reclamation seed mixture specified under Exhibit E - Table E-1: Primary/Preferred Re -vegetation Seed Mixture. This will provide an opportunity to gage the performance of the seed mixture while attempting to provide a stabilizing cover of vegetation over the stockpiles soil until it is ready for replacement on finished slopes and affected lands remaining above the anticipated final water level of the completed reservoir basins. Varra Companies, Inc. OMLR 112 Permit Application Parcel 122 — Resource Development Project 1 July 2015 Windrowed salvage soil stockpiles will be graded such that the side slopes are 3H:1 V or flatter. This will aid seeding and vegetation efforts while reducing the profile exposure of the stockpile to wind and water erosion, keeping the material stable until used for reclamation. Direct precipitation from short duration, high intensity rainstorm events, and wind, are the major threats to soil stability at this location. Although the location is nearly a table, and although the extraction will result in basins that cause water from direct precipitation to drain internally, additional measures will be taken to assure site stability and protection of off -site areas. The measures taken to stabilize the soil stockpiles, as described above, should be adequate for controlling erosion from wind and direct precipitation. Due to the flat topography of the upper terrace of Tracts A and B, and the interception of upland overland flows by the seep ditch and irrigation ditch that intersects these tracts, there is little upland watershed that would impact these locations. The greater threat of erosion will be to resoiled slopes pending establishment of vegetation during reclamation. While some filling can be anticipated on unprotected areas following seed bed preparation and seeding, the conservation measures provided below should help to limit erosion potential that would threaten the revegetation efforts. Prior to resoiling, the foundation material that will underlie the soil will be sculpted to establish initial soil stabilization features, and left rough to aid in resoil adherence. Soil will be placed over an 18± inch minimum friable, or otherwise unconsolidated, subsoil. An 18± inch swale with slopes of 3H:1V or flatter will be placed above finished slopes where necessary to direct any upland surface flows around the finished slopes to an established stable drainage corridor. Resoiled areas will be allowed a minimum of three months to settle prior to seeding. Seeding will follow in the fall or spring as detailed under Exhibit E — Reclamation Plan. Resoiling will occur when soil moisture is adequate to prevent blowing, yet dry enough to prevent compaction. Part of the soil rebuilding process on the reconstituted soils will be in establishing structure to the soils to facilitate plant -soil -water relationships. Overly compacted soils will tend to limit soil structure development and create a poor seedbed for later establishment. Once applied to the surface, the new soils will be exposed to the raw forces of erosion until adequate vegetative cover and root mass develops. Erosion requires both detachment and transportation in order to occur. Running water, wind, and Varra Companies, Inc. OMLR 112 Permit Application Parcel 122 — Resource Development Project 1 July 2015 raindrop impact are the main forces of erosion acting upon the soil. The use of a sterile hybrid live cover crop will aid in the stabilization of the soil by allowing a quick vegetative cover to become established in advance of the native grasses. The hybrid will also serve as an aid to reduce competition resulting from the establishment and growth of unwanted pioneer species (weeds) on disturbed ground. The attending reclamation seed mixture has a provision for the use of a sterile hybrid in lieu of mulch. Mulch, even when crimped with specialized equipment, is subject to being blown off the property, or reduced to ineffective stubble. Often, it has been observed to intercept rainfall where it quickly evaporates from the stubble surface, limiting the benefits of light precipitation by preventing infiltration and percolation of moisture to the root zone. The hybrid on the other hand will establish quickly but since it is sterile will not continue to compete with the emerging native grasses. After two to three years it will begin to die out just as the native grasses emerge and improve their dominance over the revegetated areas. Generally, the percent organic matter content (approximately 1 to 3 percent for native soils) of stockpiled soils will fall over time. If soil organic matter content falls below 1 percent, a minimum or the equivalent of two tenths of one percent (0.2%) of organic matter will be added to the soil at a rate of four (4) tons of manure per acre to the location in question. This should prove adequate to assure initial germination, establishment, and survival of the applied seed mixture, all other conditions (field available moisture, etc.) being satisfactory. The applied organics will aid in the restructuring of the new soils by increasing the moisture and fertility holding capacity of the upper profile while simultaneously facilitating root development of the emerging grasses. As the roots of the emerging grasses develop and mature over time, the resulting root mass will serve to add to the base percent organic matter content of the new soils over time, thereby increasing the potential for long term survival and spread of the established grasses. The addition of fertilizer will also aid in the establishment, growth and survival of the emerging grasses. Rates indicated under this submittal are for purposes of establishing a reasonable warranty for the operation (refer to Exhibit L Reclamation Costs). WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN: Varra Companies, Inc. OMLR 112 Permit Application Parcel 122 — Resource Development Project 1 July 2015 Weed control at the site will utilize non -chemical means, unless, due to weed morphology, or other factors, circumstance require application of an approved herbicide. If chemical weed control is utilized, it will be conducted in compliance with manufacturer's recommendations and in conformance with applicable federal, state, or local laws. Where possible, pre -emergent weed control chemicals will be utilized. Chemical application will be conducted or supervised by a qualified operator. Weed control will focus upon prevention, principally through the establishment of a diverse stabilizing cover of grasses, as described earlier. Regardless of control methodology, the intent of mechanical and chemical methods will be to prevent weed species from reproducing vegetatively, or by seed. In general, the idea is to aid the grasses in out competing weed species for plant available water and nutrients in the new soils, until such a time that the grasses are fully established over the applied areas, are dominant over the weeds, and capable of self regeneration. It should be understood that some weeds will remain. Total eradication of weeds is unlikely under the best circumstances, and is not a reasonable expectation or likely outcome. Varra Companies, Inc. OMLR 112 Permit Application Parcel 122 — Resource Development Project 1 July 2015 Hello