The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20151505.tiff RESOLUTION RE: APPROVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR REPAIR TO BRIDGE 3/42A(FEMA)AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County,Colorado,and WHEREAS,the Board has been presented with a Community Development Block Grant Application for Repair to Bridge 3/42A(FEMA)from the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,to the Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, commencing upon full execution,with further terms and conditions being as stated in said application,and WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said application, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the Community Development Block Grant Application for Bridge Repair to Bridge 3/42A(FEMA)from the County of Weld,State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,to the Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management,be,and hereby is,approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be,and hereby is, authorized to sign said application. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 27th day of May,A.D.,2015. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY,COLORADO ATTEST:/ EXCUSED r.C Barbara Kirkmeyer,Chair Weld County Clerk to the Board n �/ Mike Freeman, Pro-Tem BY. 1 l,r • D y Clerk to the :oard Sean P. Conway ,,� APPROVED AS TO FOR B I$6 ~1 ) +=k'�Q "�l"o �. lie A.Cozad County Attorney �`( \/EXCUSED ♦ / Steve Moreno Date of signature: 2015-1505 CC'OCM;s it /ate EM0016 BC0045 r Colorado Division of Homeland Security Grant NOI / Application Emergency Management CDBG - DR Recover Colorado Infrastructure Program THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY DHSEM Identification Number: Colorado Point of Contact: CDBG-DR Program Manager Date NOI (Part A) Received: Colorado DHSEM 9195 East Mineral Avenue, Suite 200 Date Application (Part B) Received: Centennial, Colorado 80112 Office: 720.852.6713 Date Next Steps Letter Transmitted: Fax: 720.852.6750 cdps dhsem cdbg@state.co.us PART A - NOI : PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado 2. Applicant ✓ Local Government Private Non-Profit (Attach copy of 501c3, if applicable) Type: 3. Project Title: County Match FEMA Projects - WELCO24 (790) 4. Proposed Project Total Cost: 106. 193.00 CDBG-DR-I Request: 13.274. 13 5. Certifications: The undersigned assures fulfillment of all requirements of the CDBG-DR Recover Colorado Infrastructure Program as contained in the program guidelines and that all information contained herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The governing body of the applicant has duly authorized the document, commits to the non-Federal and State share identified in the Budget, and hereby applies for the assistance documented in this application. Also, the applicant understands that the project may proceed ONLY AFTER a GRANT AGREEEMENT is approved. Mike Freeman , Pro—Tem Weld County Commissioner (970) 356-4000 Typed Name of Authorized Applicant Agent Heir Telephone Number NAY 272015 Signature of Authorized Applicant Agent Date Signed 2015-1505 Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Nate I of 20 UD BG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI: APPLICANT INFORMATION 1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado 2. FIPS Code: 123 DUNS Number: 07575-7955 3. U.S. Congressional District: 4th Congressman Name: 4. State Senatorial District: 1 Senator Name: Mr. Cory Gardner 5. State Legislative District: 50 Representative Name: Mr. Ken Buck 6. Primary Point of Contact: The Primary Point of Contact is the person responsible for coordinating the implementation of this proposal, if approval is granted. Ms. \ Ir. 0 Mrs. .' First Name: Roy Last Name: Rudisill Title: Director Organization : Weld County Office of Emergency Managemc Street Address: 1150 O Street City: Greeley State: Colorado Zip Code: 80631 Telephone: ( yiU )iUd In : ( 9 / U ),5.5O- te Mobile: (9 ( U ) 381 -0 E-mail Address: rrudisill(a�co .weld . co 7. Alternate Point of Contact: The Alternate Point of Contact is the person that can address questions or concerns in the Primary Point of Contact's absence. Ms. V \l r. MI s.n First Name: Barb Last Name: Connolly Title: Controller Organization: Weld County Accounting Street Address: 1 150 O Street City: Greeley State: Colorado Lip Code: 80631 Telephone: (y 1 U )s I . v ly U)�.�n- Mobile: E-mail Address: bconnolly c(x co .weld . 8. Application Prepared h. : Ms. In Mr. ✓ Mrs Ill First Name: Kyle Last Name: Jones Title: Planner Organization: ARCADIS-US Street Address: City: TallahassE State: FL Zip Code: 32309 Telephone: (bDU) ud I \ : Mobile: (125 ) 2U2-3 E-mail Address: kyle.iones(a7arcadis- 9. Authorized Applicant Agent: Ms. 0 Nit . Mr s. III First Name: Barbara Last Name: Kirkmeyer Title: COMMiSSII Organization: Weld County Street Address: 1150 O Street, P .O . Box 758 City: Greeley State: Colorado Lip Code: 80631 Telephone: c / UNDfi l p ..: Mobile: E-mail Address: bkirkmeyer(C )co .welc The Authorized Applicant Agent MUST be the chief executive officer, mayor, etc. This person must be able to sign contracts, authorize funding allocations or payments, etc. Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 2 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI: PROJECT DESCRIPTION & NATIONAL OBJECTIVES MET 1. Project — Eligible Activity Description: Describe the proposed project. Explain how the proposed project will address recovery and/or resilience needs in your community either independently or as part of a larger project. Include a description of the desired outcome and the recovery objective(s) to be achieved. This narrative should describe the CDBG-DR Eligible Activity. In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways . bridges, culverts, removed hazardous roadway debris, made emergency repairs to paved and gravel roadways . addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period . FEMA Categories A, B , C , and E were addressed in the Weld County FEMA Match . CDBG funds are needed to be applied towards the Weld County FEMA Local Match for the emergency work that was identified on previously submitted Project Worksheets . All projects covered under the Weld County Project Worksheets were vital for Weld County to clear hazardous debris from roadways/creeks/streams and enhance their infrastructure, river embankments, equipment and roadways . This particular NOI/Application will discuss 1A/CI rno /7C1(1 \ The-, Drnirmr'+ 1A/rselenkr‘nt in ,++ ,r hr,rl -.r.rl 4r nr. ICO'nIlr,rl r•r.nnn rif ,r,rl, 2. Site / Physical Location: Describe the area(s) affected/protected by this project, including location by complete street address and longitude and latitude (coordinates in decimal degrees). The latitude is 40 .291990 and longitude is - 105 . 036740 . The attached spreadsheet shows the Lat/Long coordinates for all of the Project Worksheets and depicts the damage site locations as identified in the correlating Project Worksheets . 3. Population Served: Briefly describe the demographics of the population served or protected by this project. Include the percent of the overall community population benefiting from this project. Explain your response. An estimated 90% or more of the community benefited from the proactive work by Weld County and the removal of hazardous debris and the emergency work/repairs made to the roadways, bridges, equipment and culverts. The population benefiting from this Match Project will include an LMI level population percentage that will be directly or indirectly impacted through this project. This NOI and the associated PW impacted the entire County and demographic area . White : 67 . 6% , Hispanic: 28 . 3% , Other: 1 .6% . Asian : 1 . 3% , Black : 0 .8% , Native American : 0 .4% . Weld County consists of 99, 317 households with a median iouseio c income of S56 584 an _ t � majority o- W c County is owner-occuoler wits 4. Priority of this Project: If you are submitting more than one CDBG-DR Infrastructure NOI, what is the relative priority of this project? Please indicate the priority as: Priority # of## Projects Submitted. Priority 19 of 36 Projects Submitted . Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 3 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI : CDBG-DR FUNDING QUALIFICATIONS Community Development Block Grant — Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding can be approved for a project in which ALL of the following requirements are met The physical location of the activity must be within a county listed in Table 1 of the program Recover Colorado Infrastructure Grant Program Guidelines (Guidelines). 1. Connection to Disaster Recovery CDBG's Disaster Recovery funds must be used for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, restoration of infrastructure and housing, economic revitalization, and mitigation from future damages.. The activity must show a direct link to damages received during one or more of the events listed in Table 1 of the Guidelines. Please provide a brief explanation of how the proposed acquisition activity: ( 1) was a result of the disaster event; (2) will restore infrastructure or revitalize the economy: or will (3) mitigate future damages. During the incident period of September 11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks . streams and rivers which caused surface gravel removal and scour damage to numerous roads and bridges in Weld County. This NOI Application request addresses emergency work and the damages that were a ; �a ;r./`. mh .. �.�era-.I n4;.-.n nut/ #h ;,-, 2. Compliance with National Objectives State recipients receiving allocations under the CDBG-DR program must certify that their projected use of funds will ensure, and maintain evidence, that each of its activities assisted with CDBG-DR funds meets at least one of the three National Objectives. a) Which of the National Objectives are met by proposed project? */ Will benefit low and moderate income (LMI) persons; or Will aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or ✓ Is an Urgent Need in which meet community development needs having a particular urgency because existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where other financial resources are not available to meet such needs. b) How will the proposed project meet the above checked National Objective(s). See attached LMI data for the Project . In addition to the LMI data attached , the State of Colorado (according to ACS 2008-2012 5Y ) lists Weld County at a 41 .0% LMI . In reviewing the LMI data for this Project NOI , the PW associated LMI % was 25 . 18% . However, this percentage does not accurately capture the total number of service areas that are either directly or indirectly impacted by the FEMA Match Projects . The entire community benefited from the proactive emergency work by Weld County and the removal of hazardous debris and the work/repairs made to the roadways , bridges, equipment and culverts thus the County believes that a higher LMI % should be given for this FEMA match Projects. The general vicinity of FEMA Match Projects encompasses the entire County and greatly benefits the entire LMI population for this project. which is why the County believes that this project not only meets, but exceeds the 50% requirement for meeting the National Objective . The emergency work/repairs that were made under the WELCO PW's for the Local FEMA Match drastically reduced hazardous conditions for the general public and enabled Weld County to focus on resiliency efforts post storm . It is believed that the service area for Project Site Locations benefited multiple LMI tract sections and thus a higher weighted percentage of over 50% should be noted for this a Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 4 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 3. Compliance with the primary objective. As indicated in the Guidelines: "A proposed project's benefits to LMI persons will be an important factor in evaluating potential infrastructure projects. A total of 20% of the Recover Colorado Infrastructure project funding must benefit LMI persons. Due to the very low percentage of LMI projects submitted in the first round of infrastructure funding, it is estimated that approximately 25% to 30% of the funding available in this second allocation must meet the LMI requirement to make up for the deficit." This section does not need to be completed if the project does not meet this National Objective. The primary objective for using CDBG Disaster Recovery funds is benefitting, by at least 51 percent, persons of low and moderate income. The following section provides the information necessary to complete this requirement. a) Is the proposed activity: 1,/ jurisdiction wide ❑ . specified target area If you checked specified target area, which data source was used? (Note: select the smallest unit of Census data that encompasses your proposed target area.) b) Enter the number of households involved in the proposed project. 99 , 317 c) In the space below, describe how the applicant will comply with the requirement that at least 51 percent of CDBG-DR dollars will principally benefit low- and moderate-income households and persons. Weld County will comply with the 51 % requirement due to the fact that the PW associated under this NOI Project for the FEMA County Match is targeted to areas of the county that qualify as LMI . The justification behind this methodology is that multiple d) Enter the number of households within each income category expected to benefit from the proposed project. Incomes above 80% of the County Median 785 Incomes above 50% and up to 80% of the County Median 1265 Incomes at or below 50% of the County Median 2060 e) Which type of income was used to determine the above? (Check only one) As determined by the American Community Survey (Public Facilities projects) Annual income as defined for Public Housing and Section 8 Annual income as reported under the Census long form Adjusted gross income as defined for reporting under IRS Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 5 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI : COMPREHENSIVE RISK ANALYSIS INFORMATION 1. Community Hazards Review: Please list and briefly describe in rank order of importance the natural or man-made hazards in your (the Applicant's) service area. The hazards identified within this Project for the FEMA County Match for WELCO24 (790 ) would be ranked in the following manner: Flood , Erosion and Subsidence . The hazards caused significant damage and posed a severe risk to the community for the designated incident period . 2. High Risk Hazards Addressed by the Project: Describe how, and the degree to which, the proposed project mitigates high risk hazards. Include damage history, source and type of problem, frequency of event(s), and severity of damage information, if available. Hazard 1 Flooding caused the most severe damage to Weld County during the designated incident period and this Project addressed and mitigated against severe flood damage to local roadways . bridges, culverts, removed hazardous debris along roadways . In addition , County Officials ensured repairs were made to paved and gravel roadways for the safety of the community and addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period . The repairs made brought the damaged infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in accordance with regulations . I azard 2 Erosion also caused a severe issue for the County . This Project addressed and mitigated against severe erosion damage to local roadways , shoulders, and embankments. The work that was conducted by the County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the damaged infrastructure and restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in accordance with regulations . Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail suhmittal. Page 6 of 20 4 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Ilarard 3 Subsidence was another critical hazard that caused dangerous conditions for the community . This Project addressed and mitigated against severe subsidence damage to local roadways , shoulders , bridges and embankments . The work that was conducted by the County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the damaged infrastructure and restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in accordance with regulations . Note: If your proposed project addresses more than three Hazards, please provide that information as an attachment. 3. Elimination of Risk: Does the proposed project result in the elimination of a hazard from your (the Applicant's) service area? If so, please describe. If not, please estimate the degree to which this project will mitigate the risk from the hazards identified in Item #2. The Proposed FEMA Local Match for WELCO23 (790 ) does not completely eliminate the hazards identified from the service area . The Proposed FEMA Match Project does allow Weld County to receive a percentage of funds back that the County expended during one of the most costly disasters in Colorado history however. These types of hazards that occurred in Weld County and throughout Colorado are truly an act of mother nature and the County was as prepared as it could have been but the severity/duration of the incident was of an unprecedented nature . Weld County cannot eliminate the risk of future flooding , erosion or land subsidence. but Local Officials can ensure that their community is prepared for future incident, take the necessary precautions and that their infrastructure is restored p 4. Environmental Quality Improvements: Does the proposed project result in an improvement in the quality of the natural environment in your (the Applicant's) service area? If so, please describe. Yes; the damages that attributed to the designated incident period and FEMA-DR 4145 were addressed via the previously submitted PW and the work conducted to restore the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition was implemented . The work done at this site location (see previous attachment for lat/long coordinates ) addressed not only improvements/repairs made to the infrastructure, but also improvements and repairs to the river embankments and any potential erosion or subsidence issues that could have xn,r rcnnnr4 if thin (`r\i 'rd.,/ hind not tnLnn thin nrnnr +ivn mnnci irnc thnt thew dirt 5. Climate Change Improvements: Does the proposed project reduce or ameliorate a projected impact of climate change in Colorado? If so, please briefly describe the benefit of the project. This Proposed Project reduces a projected impact climate change due to the proactive mitigation measures that were undertaken by Weld County during the designated incident period . This was accomplished by ensuring that the damaged site location was addressed as soon , but as safely , as possible , and not to sustain any further impacts to the site locations or environment that would enable the damage to enhance the projected impact of any potential climate changes . Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail mibmittal. Page 7 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 6. Community Process: Does the proposed project include a community planning or involvement process that increases community resiliency? If so, please briefly describe the process. This Proposed Project was initiated by County Officials in an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and also to minimize risk to the community, Weld County addressed the severe flood damage to the roadways and infrastructure by ensuring that dangerous conditions for the public were addressed and mitigated properly and efficiently. 7. Reduction in the Costs of Future Response or Recovery: Will the proposed project result in a reduction in the cost of response or recovery from an incident occurring due to one or more of the hazards identified in Item #1 or #2? If so, please briefly describe how response or recovery costs will be reduced. For a small scale flooding incident, yes; however, the flooding that occurred during the designated incident period was catastrophic and the PW associated with the NOI FEMA Local Match Request were completed to address the damages . 8. Floodplain/Floodway/Substantially Damaged Properties: Does the proposed project include a property or properties located in a floodway or floodplain; or not located in a regulatory floodplain but which were substantially damaged or have a history of damage from at least two disaster events? If so, please identify those properties below. No ; the Proposed Project is for the FEMA Local Match for WELCO24 (790) from CDBG-DR in regards to expenses from CAT C Damage Categories for the designated incident period for FEMA-DR 4145 . 9. Mitigation Planning: Does your community have a current FEMA approved multi-hazard mitigation plan? ✓ Yes No Location of proposed project in mitigation plan strategies: Page 139 Section/Part Mitigation Stra ra Is the community a member of good standing with the National Flood Insurance Program? ✓ Yes No Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 8 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 10. Community Plan Compliance: Does the proposed project comply with and/or address an issue recognized in key community plans? Key plans include, but are not limited to: a Comprehensive Master Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan, a Hazard Mitigation Plans, or key community codes. If so, please describe how the project integrates into the plan(s). Yes; the Proposed Project complies with all local community plans and this Project integrates into the Plans because the County addressed the damages to local roadways and infrastructure and mitigated damages that posed a serious risk/hazard to the community during the incident period . This FEMA PW was initiated by Weld County and via this Proposed Project, the County requests that CDBG funds be applied towards the local FEMA Match for this Project. 11. Environmental / Historic Preservation Issues: Please describe any significant environmental, historic, or cultural features that may be affected by the project. Please also describe any features that may be improved by the project. All environmental issues are addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any additional supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request. 12. Permitting: Please list the local, state, and federal permits that will be required to complete this project. All permitting was addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting documentation . The significant permitting issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions. All items were addressed and any additional supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request. Please see below for environmental permits that were obtained . Floodplain Permit AnA Ilnrrrd4 Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 9 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 13. Community Resilience: Please describe how this project will increase the resilience of your community. As defined in the Guidelines: "Resilience incorporates hazard mitigation and land use planning strategies; critical infrastructure, environmental and cultural resource protection; and sustainability practices to reconstruct the built environment, and revitalize the economic, social, and natural environments." In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways , bridges, culverts, removed hazardous debris roadways , made repairs to paved and gravel roadways , addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period . This Proposed Project addresses proactive work initiated by Weld County during FEMA-DR 4145 enabled the community to recover in an expeditious manner and increased the resilience of the community by incorporating nearly every aspect of sustainability and revitalizing the community . The community was able to recover quicker due to the proactive work done through this Proposed Project and the associated PW's. 14. Maps Please attach the following maps with the project site and structures marked on the map. Use SAME ID number as in the Individual Property Worksheets. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). If the FIRM for your area is not published, please attach a copy of the Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM). City or county scale map (large enough to show the entire project area) USGS 1 :24,000 topo map Parcel Map (Tax Map, Property Identification Map, etc.) Overview photographs. The photographs should be representative of the project area, including any relevant streams, creeks, rivers, etc., and drainage areas which affect the project site of will be affected by the project. 15. Additional Comments (Optional): Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's ability to reduce hazard risk and increase community resiliency. This proposed project reduced the hazard risk to the community and increased resiliency by the work conducted through the PW in correlation with FEMA-DR 4145 . CDBG funds are being requested to be applied to the local FEMA Match ( 12 . 5% ) for the PW. All maps are located in project files that were previously submitted and will be provided upon request. Thn PntirP rnmmt lnity henpfitPri from the nrnar..tivP work by WPid C'nl inty and the rRmnvnl Ca Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 10 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI : DECISION MAKING PROCESS 1. Decision-Making Process: Describe the process you used to decide that this project is the best solution to the problem. Explain why this project is the best alternative you considered. Address questions such as: • Are you focusing on the area in your community that has the greatest potential for losses? • Have you considered the risks to critical facilities and structures and benefits to be obtained by mitigating this vulnerability? • Have you considered those areas or projects that present the greatest opportunities given the current situation(s) of interest in your community? • Are you addressing a symptom or the source of the problem? Addressing the source of the problem is a long-term solution which provides the most mitigation benefits. • If impacts to the environment, natural, cultural or historic resources have been identified, explain how your alternatives and proposed project address, minimize, or avoid these impacts. The Site locations within this WELCO PW in the Proposed Project were identified due to the high dollar amount of funds that were expended by Weld County to ensure the safety of the community and also restore county infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition . This Proposed Project has site locations across the entire community and service area and it was determined that a large percentage of the LMI population was impacted by the severe flooding incident and the proactive work by County Officials enabled the community to recover quicker, thus allowing the community to sustain resiliency and return operations to normal . 2. Acquisition Projects - Describe the community's methodology for selecting the properties to be acquired in this application and how each is ranked (highest to lowest): N/A Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 11 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART A - NOI: SCOPE OF WORK / BUDGET OVERVIEW / FINANICAL FACTORS 1 . Project Scope: Please provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the scope of the proposed project. Describe each of the project components and the steps necessary to complete that work. If the proposed project is a funding match for another disaster recovery or infrastructure development program, please identify the agency, program funds, and project reference number that CDBG-DR funding is intended to support. Also describe any critical deadlines that must be met to accomplish this work. This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO24 (790 ). These costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September 11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and surface streets , and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This NOI Application request addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe flooding . A Scope of Work is included within the PW and addresses the work that was completed . 2. Community Priority: Please describe why this project is a priority for your organization. This Proposed Project is a priority for Weld County to utilize the CDBG funding as the Local FEMA Match to offset the costs for the proactive work done by the County to reduce hazardous conditions to the community. Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 12 of 20 CDBC-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 3. Project Cost Summary: Please summarize the major cost components of the project. Please round all values to the nearest dollar. a. Planning / Engineering / Design $ b. Environmental Compliance $ The value of general and/or c. Real Property Acquisition / Demolition $ professional labor wages must be tabulated in accordance d. Closing Costs / Legal Fees $ with the Davis Bacon Act of e. Housing Program Assistance $ 1931 f. Construction Costs $ g. Project Delivery Costs $ h. Other (specify below) $ 106. 193.00 See Pro'ect Worksheet Cost (attached) i. Total ofa-h $ 106.193.00 j. Duplication of Benefits (if unknown at time of application enter zero). $ 0.00 k. Subtract j. from i. to determine Total Project Cost $ 106, 193 00 Notes: Housing Program Assistance costs include the cost of compliance with Uniform Relocation Assistance (URA) and Comparable Housing Assistance (CHA) requirements. Project Delivery Costs include the costs of project delivery by the sponsoring organization but do not include administrative overhead. 4. Total Project Cost Allocations Proposed Project Total Cost: $ 106. 193.00 Federal Cost Share: $ 79,644 75 State Cost Share: $ 13,274. 13 $ 13.274. 13 Local Cost Sham 5. Basis of Cost Estimate: Briefly describe how the cost estimates listed in #3 above were developed (e.g. lump sum, unit cost, quotation, etc.). The Cost Estimates were developed above from actual work that was properly procured and conducted . They come directly off of what was included on the FEMA approved PW and the costs are broken down by type of work and site . 6. Project Management: Describe how you will manage the costs and schedule, and how you will ensure successful performance. The work for this Proposed Project has been completed or is pending completion . The 12 . 5% CDBG Local Match will be applied towards the Weld County Match for FEMA PW's and the costs that were previously incurred during the disaster. Note: The applicant must agree to furnish quarterly reports during the entire time the project is in active status. Quarters end on March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. Reports are due to the State within 15 days after the end of each quarter.) Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 13 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 7. Project Maintenance Requirements: The following questions are to give assurance on the project's maintenance over its useful life. Please answer each question and give a brief explanation. a. If the project involves the acquisition of real property, what is the proposed land use after acquisition? (i.e., Agriculture, Recreation, Vacant Land, Park, Wetlands, etc.) N/A b. Will the project require periodic maintenance? No c. If yes, who will provide the maintenance? N/A d. What is the estimated cost of maintenance on an annual basis? 0 Note: Cost of maintenance is considered an application prioritization weighting factor. Projects with high maintenance costs have a greater risk of future failure due to deferred maintenance. Therefore, the responses provided above should be as complete and verifiable as possible in order to minimize the likelihood of ranking point reductions due to maintenance concerns. 8. Additional Comments: Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's funding, if desired. CDBG funds are needed for the 12 . 5% Local FEMA Match and the associated PW that is included in the NOI-Application . It should be noted that a version request was submitted for this project for work that has yet to be completed . The total obligated amount could change which would change the 12 . 5% Local FEMA Match . 9. Financial / Fiscal Health Factors: Please indicate the total budget (all funds) of your organization. Please describe the impact of disaster recovery efforts to date on this budget. In addition, if this objective is selected based on the local governments inability to finance the activity, the municipality must also include in the application package a resolution stating this fact and supporting documentation such as budgetary information, a description of TABOR restrictions, and the most recent audit report or approved exemption from audit. Weld County's total 2015 budget is $307 ,031 .089 . 00 . The impact of the September, 2013 flooding has primary been on the damage to the county's road and bridge system . The damage has resulted in Weld County having to transfer $5 million from the Contingency Fund to the Public Works Fund in 2013 and in 2014 for a total of $ 10 million dollars . Without assistance from FEMA, FWHA, and CDBG the amount would have several million more . The impact has also forced the county to shift local resources from projects unrelated to flooding to deal with the emergency situations created by the flood in both the 2013 and 2014 fiscal years . Even in 2015 the county is still using local resources to recover from the flooding . Fortunately , Weld County has always been fiscally conservative and budgeted responsibly . Had the county not taken the responsible approach to its finances county service would have had to have been cut to cope with the flood recovery. lA/olrl flni Int\! nnorntr.c i ir��nr tho rnnct rcictrirti. ,r, r, rf E I ' it �' ♦L L L Rn Irlafl Attach any continuations or additional item as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 14 of 211 ('I)B(:-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART B - APPLICATION : PROJECT MILESTONES / TIMELINES / TASKS 1 . Ti meline / Tasks Insert the proposed work schedule as tasks to accomplish the overall goal of the proposed activity (i.e., appraisals, title search, closing, etc.), and provide a description of the task's purpose. This timeline will be used as a measurement tool for progress in the project's implementation and is included in the required Quarterly Reports. Also, FEMA uses the timeline for determining the approved period of performance. It will be the basis used to justify delays or extensions, if necessary, and should be estimated carefully. The first and last entries are state requirements and have already been entered. Task 1 : Grant Process and Environmental Review Timeframe: 3 Months Task 2: Emergency Repairs- The initial emergency repairs were made directly 1 Completed 9 Y p 9 Y p Timeframe: Task 3: Permanent Re airs - Becuase the emer enc re airs were uick re aii Completed p 9 y p a p Timeframe: Task 4: Additional Permanent Repairs - All the necessary repairs were not corn 6 Months Timeframe: Task 5: Timeframe: Task 6: Timeframe: Task 7: Timeframe: Task 8: Timeframe: Task 9: Timeframe: Final Inspection Report and Project Closeout Task 10: The Final Inspection Report is a review of the activity's paper documentation. showing the project was implemented as required. Once the review is completed. the 3 Months report and findings will be provided to the grantee for review and concurrence. The Timeframe: State submits the concurrence to FEMA as part of a closeout package to formally Total Project Timeframe: 12 Months Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 15 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 2. Start Date & Pre-Award Costs: The start date for any project begins upon GRANT AGREEMENT approval by the State Controller. If a different start date or timeframe is needed, provide an explanation below. Also indicate if any pre- award activities or costs have been incurred or authorized. The proposed project is for local FEMA match dollars and the majority of the work is completed ; however, another round of construction will be performed this summer. The repairs for this site began as soon as the flood waters receded and the county crews were able to access the site . The initial phase of repairs were emergency in nature and began in September of 2013 and concluded during November of that same year. Permanent repairs for this site commenced the following year at the beginning of construction season and concluded in October of 2014 because of weather constraints . The final repairs will be completed in October of 2015 . Additionally, cost have been incurred through the preparation of this NOI Appliation . Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 16 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Please note that Part B is required for the final Application submittal. Part B sections may optionally be completed and submitted with the NOI. Please update any Part A section information when submitting you full Application. PART B — APPLICATION : ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 1. Environmental Review Background Information & Environmental Review Worksheet: In accordance with 24 CFR Part 58.22 (see below), all federally funded projects must accomplish an environmental review prior to beginning any work on a project. These HUD regulations are in place for two purposes: 1 . To ensure federal funds are used to place people of low and moderate income in environmentally safe conditions; and 2. To ensure federal funds are NOT used to negatively impact environmental conditions that exist near a project site. Please note the following limitations on CDBG-DR grant activities pending environmental clearance per 24 CFR Part 58.22. (a) Neither a recipient nor any participant in the development process, including public or private nonprofit or for-profit entities, or any of their contractors, may commit HUD assistance under a program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) on an activity or project until HUD or the state has approved the recipient's RROF and the related certification from the responsible entity. In addition, until the RROF and the related certification have been approved, neither a recipient nor any participant in the development process may commit non-HUD funds on or undertake an activity or project under a program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) if the activity or project would have an adverse environmental impact or limit the choice of reasonable alternatives. (b) N/A for DOLA/CDPS projects. (c) If a recipient is considering an application from a prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary and is aware that the prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary is about to take an action within the jurisdiction of the recipient that is prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section, then the recipient will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives and procedures of NEPA are achieved. (d) An option agreement on a proposed site or property is allowable prior to the completion of the environmental review if the option agreement is subject to a determination by the recipient on the desirability of the property for the project as a result of the completion of the environmental review in accordance with this part and the cost of the option is a nominal portion of the purchase price. There is no constraint on the purchase of an option by third parties that have not been selected for HUD funding, have no responsibility for the environmental review and have no say in the approval or disapproval of the project. (e) Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP). In accordance with section 11(d)(2)(A) of the Housing Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note), an organization, consortium, or affiliate receiving assistance under the SHOP program may advance non-grant funds to acquire land prior to completion of an environmental review and approval of a Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and certification, notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section. Any advances to acquire land prior to approval of the RROF and certification are made at the risk of the organization, consortium, or affiliate and reimbursement for such advances may depend on the result of the environmental review. This authorization is limited to the SHOP program only and all other forms of HUD assistance are subject to the limitations in paragraph (a) of this section. (f) Relocation. Funds may be committed for relocation assistance before the approval of the RROF and related certification for the project provided that the relocation assistance is required by 24 CFR part 42. Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 17 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Environmental Review Worksheet Check ALL of the activities listed below that will be included as part of the project, REGARDLESS OF THE FUNDING SOURCE: ❑ Information and financial services 0 Administrative and management activities ✓ Environmental and other studies, resource identification, and the development of plans and strategies w ✓ Most engineering and design costs associated with eligible projects tu Inspections and testing of properties for hazards or defects Project planning E,, ¢ ❑ Purchase of insurance > ❑ Purchase of tools 25 5 ❑ Technical assistance and training E ❑ Interim assistance to arrest the effects of an imminent threat or physical deterioration in which the assistance w does not alter environmental conditions. • : SI Public services that will not have a physical impact or result in any physical changes (e.g., employment, child ,a care, health, education, counseling, welfare) Fl Assistance for temporary or permanent improvements that do not alter environmental conditions and are limited to protection, repair, or restoration activities necessary only to control or arrest the effects from disasters or imminent threats to public safety including those resulting from physical deterioration (Must also complete the Regulatory Checklist at the end of Exhibit IV A) m p Operating costs e. , maintenance, security, operation, utilities, furnishings, equipment, su lies, staff training � � P g ( g PgPP Z and recruitment, other incidental costs) E ❑ Relocation costs p Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in place and will be retained in the same use without change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent f ❑ Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of and _ accessibility to elderly and handicapped persons a Acquisition (including leasing) or disposition of, or equity loans on, an existing structure ❑ Acquisition (including leasing) of vacant land provided the structure or land acquired, financed, or disposed of will be retained for the same use Q Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in place, but will change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent n Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in place, but will involve a change in land use, such as from non-residential to residential, commercial to industrial, or from one industrial use to another Demolition TI New construction This checklist must be included with the CDBG application. Please direct questions to the appropriate contact person below: DOLA/DLG DHSEM Officer Steven Boand, State Disaster Recovery Manager Tamra Norton, Environmental Compliance O Department of Local Affairs Department of Public Safety 1313 Sherman Street, Room 521, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Denver, CO 80203 9195 E Mineral Ave, Suite 200 303-866-6398 Centennial, CO 80112 tamra.norton@state.co.us 720.852.6713 steven.boand@state.co.us DPS/DOLA USE ONLY: Required level of environmental review: O Exempt O CENST O CESTO EA Reviewed by: Date of Review: Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 18 of 20 ( 'DBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 2. Supplemental Environmental Review Information Enter any additional comments related to environmental concerns for the proposed project if desired. Please list and attach any documents or studies that have been prepared that support the Environmental Review Worksheet responses. All environmental issues are addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions. AM items were addressed and any additional supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request. Please see below for environmental permits that were obtained . Floodplain Permit 404 Nationwide Permit Migratory Birds Permit (if needed ) Threatened and Endangered Species Permit Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 19 of 20 CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management PART B - APPLICATION : DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET 1. Detailed Project Budget: Please enter or attach a detailed and comprehensive final proposed budget for the project. Please note that CDBG-DR funds may be limited to the amount submitted with the NOI pending the availability of additional funding This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO24 (790 ). These costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September 11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County . Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and surface streets, and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This Application request addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe flooding . A Scope of Work and detailed project budget is included within the PW and addresses the work that was completed . It is important to note that a version request has been made for this Project Worksheet and the attached Project Worksheet may not reflect FINAL costs. Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail suhmittal. Page 1) of 21) r N 0) N 0) E O U C E -a C) -o C A 01 IC t_ v C 0 O $0 O E a m c a o o 0JN O p O E a u v v E E v 2 N ] m U 'W J E W o E o O• W C o a y y (1) c 0 E a m o L. m ao O O o C tJ C E c L — O w 3 3 3 « ` O e o o o Ooi il _ .4- Le- C RI C O 0 C C C C E C o E V o U U U a -0 a.. a � OiU y Ox g 2 � 0o 2 O O J J J J J a e e oe oe o 0 oe o 0 o de o 0 0 0 0 oe o oe o * * o o ae ae o * o 4e o t ae o e * 0 0 r r-I LC) tO l0 1D 1D O N. N.- O O O lD l0 1D 01 ID O r. O Q .0 IO I. m N. r-I t7 to. co gra 00 N. N. ,0 Qt O 1�N .--I r. r. N .-1 d N N N. N. d .--1 .--I r-1 V1 .-i I. N IN V) el r. r. .l N 00 1/1 al V1 N nr V .'. V Ln V N t..1 al 00 03 co co CO CO a1 N N 0 o N I. v ul al m CO 00 O CO 00 CO n f\ CO O t 01 1� n to l Vl CO 0) 03 Ch N N. M M m Ci CO M M m m c0 to to M M O M M M M M 7 CO M M M N VI N N N N N O CO M CO VI O O O in U1 al Ill V) in to ul 0 O to ✓1 al ✓t LIl to O ✓) 0 to Ina a V10 00 O ✓) ul O to 0 0 0 in a al a 0 to al rl rl .-1 .-1 r. In CO CO N- n ./1 .--I .-1 r-1 Ul N n a) N in Ul r+ 01 O CO N Ul 111 tD ul CO tO tD n a O Ul 03 > I� CO m M In M M N al 01 -. ri N. m f.l M VI M IN 00 '-I 0 0 M 149. N a) 7 0 O N O N O O IN n N N 01 M M MI rn M el .--1 N nJ m m M N M N N N M .--1 N --1 N N N N N --1 el ,-4 .-J - 2 0 0 2 0 -4 U1 Ul 0 0 0 0 0 to Ul 1n O O Ul 0 0 0 0 0 to Vl 0 0 0 0 Vt O 111 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 Ul LI1 t l Vl M t0 tD ID t0 tD to m O O O O m tD lD lD O tD CO O to 411 ID O M0 O v1 VI m to m r. re Q M O M O N. N. 0 0 0 0 0 N 7 7 a a I. O CO 0 M 0 O 7 I. a l0 0 O re 0 V N tD ID O L.0 O -0 7 O N Oo I\ n. C N N N N N .-+ e-. .-. .+ N N N ^• N ♦-I N el ti .. CJ to O Lc, to Vl 1I1 Ln Jl to vt 0 p al in Ul ul 0 Vl to O 0 Vl 1l1 In O to VI 0 al, Ul to ef1 Ul O O to m al VI a n O to ID 1D 10 tD I- M M N N N. 1D tO ID co tD N- O N to U1 tD 7 01 m O LO Ul 0) Vl 01 N. N. VI N. ID N. CO OtD N. N N N N N 1,13 0 0 03 03 ID N N N N- N CO N 03 r. .-1 N al tO 0 .-1 e1 -. LO .-J tO N N CO tO 7 10 0 el .-a --I el .-1 .-J el .-J e1 e1 O J 3 J V VI al Vl Vt to 1n O O In ul Lfl Vt ul to Vt Vl O to a to 1n V1 o V) O o to Vl In VI Ul O O O n O to O Vl r. CO 00 CO 00 03 V1 1n V) Ill Ul Ill 00 00 W CO CO 00 .-1 Ul I. N CO tO co Vl N N CO N- W T a1 N V1 o V1 V1 0 tr1 M IN IN I. N N V1 lD tD ID ID to N t\ IN 7 n m tO N M N to N N N N N ul tO J el .--1 rl r4 el el N N el .-1 rl .--1 N r. .-1 N N 1"l el .-1 M N el .-i e1 .-I N .-1 N N .--1 .-1 el 0 in .-1 .-i el e1 -. O O O --1 re O .-i --i .-1 N -. V) to .--1 0 0 .-1 N CO O tD 0 O M 0 M 00 CO O 0 01 O 0 O O O O O o 0 O .-1 .-1 0 0 00000000000000 .-40000000C) 0 O el O el LO N. Vl 1n ul Vt Vl tD 0 0 to Ul tD Vt Ul Ul to V1 N N- to OC CO at .-1 .-1 O O 00 03 r. Co ri QI OI to lD O tD O 0 o N N N N N O N N N N O N N N N N O O N r. el N N N N N .-1 --1 N .-1 N .-1 r. el O N O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 00000000000000000000000 m M M M m M M M M CO M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M m M M M M M M .NN NJ IN fN-1 eli el el el el •N-I .NrN-1 el !N-1 •N-i el el •N-I .Ni .N-1 el .N-. N .N-I .N-+ .N-1 el rN-I H .N-1 N .Nr N el IN elell .N-1 c-I .NJ N-1 el el.N-1 N .N-1 c-I IN ti Y LO CO m Co CO Co m CO 00 CO CO CO m Co 00 Co CO CO CO CO CO CO oo CO CO CO 00 m CO m oa 03 03 m CO CO CO m CO u0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O n V1 Vl N N V) to V1 a V) V1 Vl V1 V1 a a V) V) V) VI a N a VI a VI a VI a VI N VI N a V1 a VI VI a al a 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 m O O O O O O O O O o O O 0 O O o O O O O 0 o O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 0 O O O N O 0 0 C 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C0 000000000000000000000000000000000000000 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O 0I al in to Vl V1 in V1 tfl to to Vl a VI a to V1 al al In In V1 to Ul V1 to a a Vl VI ul Vl VI V1 to ul a to a in U r. re .-1 el .-I .r .-1 el .-1 el el el r-1 .-1 .-I N el .-I .-I re .-1 r1 .-J .-1 .-1 .-1 el .-I .r .-1 .-I el .-1 .-I .-1 .-1 .-J .-1 .-I el el .-J .-I N M V V1 .-i el -1 -4 .-1 .-) .-J N en .--I N .-I N re ti r.J r4 .-4 N M *Cr- •--1 NJ m V ^I .--I — .-1 ri — C O u O J M 7 -1 7 O 7 to to N. CO 01 O .--1 r. --1 N N to In tD oo CO a1 r. r-1 .-+ .. M m M M V -. M 7 In lD t` Co .-i --1 .-1 we ^i el -. .-I .r --1 .-1 .-I n1 NJ N NJ N N N N IN en M M M ..l M rvl 0. c a a a a a a a a < < < a a a < < a a a a a a a < < a < a a a < Q a < a < < 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 i 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 m w W w W to to w LU W w w w LL w W w W 4J W lD w w LU LU w w w w w w CU LU w W w W LU L.11 W LU Q LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U- LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U. LL LL LL LL LL U. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 O 0 O O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 I, 0 0 00 7 to r. N Q .P M M co l0 7 7 Ul to ON N V) tD M 0 Q 0 CO ON a1 r. 0 N. 7 Ulin C71 O O Ol CO a1 el" to rl el al VI oo n t0 N r. 7 Y r. 0 M N 0 0 0 tO 00 co CO M tD N. CO CO N a1 co co M CO N N.0 CO CO 0 lD N tO CO N 01 01 OO 0 tD V1 .-1 C tit O r. r. O rn O V m M 00 CO C 0O CO CO 7 c7 O el CO m M O N 01 O 0 V1 In ul V1 01 0 N O a el VI 0 7 7 M m M M M 7 N ^I n t\ o M m M M m t7 � 1� N N M M N .-1 p N N N N N p p e} a .-. et p ' o 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IC 7 <7 v v 7 7 7 rf 7 7 7 7 0 .7 7 V 7 a e v a v rt 4 c 7 o 7 a 7 V 7 7 7 7 ct 7 7 7 7 J V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- V CO co O U1 O O O ID f0 M al a) N N M N M 1.0 00 ON 01 N O N .-1 O In N M VI In N. Q 7 M Ol N C CO 0-1 03 el 00 CO 01 01 N- V we Q ul in 01 CO CO CO O CO CO N 0-1 O 0 03 N 01 al 00 I. Ul M co r. tp Ol O CO N y N 0 et Q O O V r-1 0 O --I r-1 r. CO 03 CO 0-1 CO M 0 el 0) el et CT I- ID V 01 01 0 03 tD 00 tO M .-1 a1 N. N 01 0-1 CC 7 V 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0 00 00 CO el r. .-1 N O al 01 et CO el M O N N co N M O Co tD O N Ol to t0 tO N N N N N O co co CO n V 7 Q 7 Q le) 1D CO CO 00 N W O O a1 00 00 00 CO O CO Co VI f� a1 t0 O a a a a a a a a V) VI a o a o o o o o o o o R 7 a a to in a a a 7 vs-0 Lelo rs-0 7 a a 7 C Ul 00 o .i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000C) 000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 .-1 . l el rl r. el .-1 el . .-i el el rl el e-1 el r. el 9-1 r. el el rl el r-1 el el r. -1 r. -1 re r. el ... r. N c el el p 9 - 9 I'-' e. _t .-1 NI All O UI .� M • d4 V QI QI 1 4.• L •1 .!f get d • 1 r- - o 411_ y _ U. LL Iwi w w '? LL LL I. J r `•Al III I. .o. y - ,a a. il r � r t r akil , 41 © ø4tIo. h . / - - - . r,I rilL * '\' LL 4 3. t t a3 M !f)!"),2, R• I Z , - < I I ri I . . , ,I) , 1' tO'O 1 ° -- e a I I i•-• el ..- • Ilk x � t i I Lf kL • it pelf- .r.«a, 3f, � - rIt• r ' -�Y - _ ' t' Q' _;r O r v LL i i - at- - C u_ , , . _ . . l + . It f3 Or , tn cs)(3.) 1 O , ' 8C I , ,I ` a Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 1 of 28 PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ) Applicant Name: Application Title: WELD (COUNTY ) WELCO24 - Bridge Repair (CR 3-42A) Period of Performance Start: Period of Performance End: 09-14-2013 03-14-2015 Subgrant Application - Entire Application Application Title: WELCO24 - Bridge Repair (CR 3-42A) Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ) Application Type: Subgrant Application (PW) Preparer Information Prefix First Name Ken Middle Initial Last Name Beebe Title TAC Project Specialist Agency/Organization Name FEMA - DHS Address 1 9200 East Mineral Ave Address 2 City Centennial State CO Zip 80112 Email deanna.butterbaugh@state.co.us Is the application preparer the Point of Contact? No Point of Contact Information Prefix First Name Roy Middle Initial Last Name Rudisill Title Director - OEM Agency/Organization Weld County Address 1 1150 0 Street Address 2 rrudisill@weldgov.com City Greeley State CO ZIP 80632 Phone 970-304-6540 https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?mentiTi Ie=&topTi le=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 I alimmlitt Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 of 28 Fax I Email rrudisill@weldgov.com Alternate Point of Contact Information Prefix First Name Trevor Middle Initial Last Name Jinicek Title Director Agency/Organization Weld County Address 1 1150 O Street Address 2 City Greeley State CO ZIP 80632 Phone 970-356-4000 Fax Email tjinicek@weldgov.com Project Description Disaster Number: 4145 Pre-Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-RPA-0088 Applicant ID: 123-99123-00 Applicant Name: WELD (COUNTY) Subdivision: Project Number: WELCO24 Standard Project Number/Title: 399 - Road System Damage Please Indicate the Project Type: Neither Alternate nor Improved Application Title: WELCO24 - Bridge Repair (CR 3-42A) Category: C.ROADS & BRIDGES Percentage Work Completed? 70.0 As of Date: 01 -24-2014 Comments The applicant must notify the state if there are any changes in the scope of work prior to starting the repairs. Failure to notify the State Division of Emergency Management may jeopardize receipt of federal funds. Attachments Damage Facilities (Part 1 of 2) Facility Site Number Facility Name Address County City State ZIP Previously Action Damaged? 1 CR 3-42A Bridge CR 3 at Little Thompson River Weld Greeley CO 80632 No Comments https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 3 of 28 Project Note #1 should be deleted per JFO guidance. Project Note #2 now becomes Project Note #1 and so on throughout the Project Notes Attachments User Date Document Description Hard Copy File File Name Action Type Reference PAUL 02-28- Location PW #WELCO24 Location HESSE 2014 Map Map Map.pdf(275.62 kb) View PAUL 02-28- Photos Photos PW #WELCO24 Photo Sheet.pdf View HESSE 2014 (808.38 kb) Facility Name: CR 3-42A Bridge Address 1 : CR 3 at Little Thompson River Address 2: County: Weld City: Greeley State: CO ZIP: 80632 Was this site previously damaged? No Percentage Work Completed? 70.00 % PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(0): County Road 3 at Little Thompson River PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ): Location: ***** Version 1 ****i` PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(0): During the incident period of September 11 . 2013 through September 30, 2013, the declared severe storms caused flooding. landslides and mudslides throughout Weld County in Colorado. The CR3 Bridge [Bridge #WEL003.0-42.0A] over the Little Thompson River sustained damages from floodwaters eroding the embankments [southern embankment] and erosion of the southern bridge approach and the supporting material behind south abutment along with excessive velocity causing scour and displacement of rip rap that was in place to protect the abutments. There is no apparent damage to the bridge structure due to the event. Total damages include aggregate and material 529CY, concrete 133CY. asphalt 42CY, and sediment deposits under bridge 500CY. Damage Description and Dimensions: GPS: 40.29199. -105.03674 Floodmap #0802660725C dated 9/28/82 [in floodplain] The following damages occurred due to the declared event : 1 . Eroded gravel material north of the bridge east edge of north bound lane. Dimension: 100LF x 8FT wide x 2FT deep/27 = 59CY 2. Eroded material behind south abutment. Dimension : 15LF x 35FT wide x 10FT deep/27 = 194CY 3. Eroded material beyond southern end of wingwall [west side]. Dimension: 10LF x 15FT x 3.5FT/27 = 19CY 4. Eroded concrete approach slab. Dimension: 20LF x 35FT wide x 3.5FT deep/27 = 91CY 5. Eroded concrete deck approach. Dimension: 35LF x 35FT wide x https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 4 of 28 0.5FT deep/27 = 23CY 6. Eroded asphalt approach. Dimension: 105LF x 31 FT wide x 0.35FT deep/27 = 42CY 7. Eroded shoulder gravel material south of bridge east side of north bound lane. Dimension: 105LF x 2FT wide x 0.5FT deep/27 = 4CY 8. Eroded embankment at east wingwall. Dimension: 20FT x 12FT x 12FT/2/27 = 53CY 9. Eroded embankment at west wingwall. Dimension: 20FT x 12FT x 12FT/2/27 = 53CY 10. Ditches along CR3 were silted in. Dimension: 300LF 11 . Eroded rip rap material at north abutment. Dimension: 50LF x 15FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 83CY 12. Eroded rip rap material at south abutment. Dimension: 50LF x 15FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 83CY 13. Muck/sediment deposited under bridge that is restricting flow of river. Dimension: 75LF x 60FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 500CY Note: There was no apparent damage to the bridge structure. PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ): ***** Version 1 ***** PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(0): WORK COMPLETED: The Applicant used Force Account Labor, Equipment and Materials. along with Force Account assistance from the Douglas County Public Works Department [DCPW] , which is south of Denver. The work was performed by DCPW on 9/25-9/27/13. There is a Mutual Aid Agreement [copy attached] between Weld County and Douglas County. The Scope of Work for this project is shown below to repair the site to pre-disaster condition. The costs for Labor and Equipment could not be validated, therefore the costs shown for the Work Completed are based on CDOT Bid Tab Cost Data information from 2013 and these costs are used for estimating the Work to be Completed as well. Work Completed : Note: Rounding errors may exist. The quantities shown are rounded to the nearest whole number, however the cost is correctly calculated using the unrounded number. Refer to the attached excel spreadsheet for all calculations and the numbers shown below. 1 . Replaced gravel material north of bridge east edge: 59CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $3,634.61 Scope of Work: 2. Replaced material behind south abutment: 194CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $11 .926.06 2a. Replaced material behind south abutment where a construction access ramp was cut into the south-bound lane of CR 3 to complete the repair: 20LF x 15FT wide x 10FT deep/2 slope = 56CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $3,407.44 3. Poured concrete extension: 19CY x $150/CY [206-00065 adjusted to $150/CY due to small job] = $2,916.67 4. Replaced concrete approach slab: 91CY x $150/CY [206-00065 shown above] = $ 13,611 . 11 5. Replaced concrete deck approach slab: 23CY x $150/CY [206-00065 shown above] = $3.402.78 6. Replaced asphalt approach: 42CY x 1 .97T/CY x $81 .70/T [403-33741 ] = $6,791 . 15 7. Replaced shoulder gravel material south of bridge east side: 4CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $238.52 8. Replaced rip rap on slope at east wingwall [HMP accomplished with good construction practice — replace eroded embankment material with rip rap]: 53CY x $83. 17/CY = $4,435.73 9. Replaced rip rap on slope at west wingwall [HMP accomplished with https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 5 of 28 good construction practice — replace eroded embankment material with rip rap]: 53CY x $83. 17/CY = $4,435.73 10. Cleaned ditches: 300LF x $3.40/LF = $1 ,020 Work Completed Total: $55,819.80 Work to be Completed: 11 . Replace rip rap material north abutment: 83CY x $83. 17/CY [506- 00218] = $6,930.83 12. Replace rip rap material south abutment: 83CY x $83. 17/CY [506- 00218] = $6.930.83 13. Remove sediment under bridge: 500CY x $19.58/CY [CDOT 203- 00100] = $9,790 Work to be Completed Total: $23,651 .67 PROJECT NOTES: 1 . During repair or reconstruction, applicant may incur additional costs related to clearing and grubbing. placement of topsoil. erosion and sedimentation control. sanitary facilities. dewatering. mobilization and flagging/traffic control. Such costs are generally addressed in the -in-place- unit costs of repair or reconstruction items, and not specifically addressed in the Scope of Work. However, if a project requires an extraordinary use of any such items. to where a specific reference in the PW should be considered, applicant is advised to contract Colorado Department of Emergency Management requesting a revision to the PW's Scope of Work. 2. The applicant must obtain all required federal , state, and local permits prior to the commencement of work. 3. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect costs. 4. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation. As a least cost alternative, the Applicant chose to install broken concrete in lieu of unclassified fill on the east and west side of the southern bridge abutment. therefore mitigation is achieved through good construction practice. 5. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance review as stated in 44 C.F.R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If applicable, an insurance determination will be made either as anticipated proceeds or actual proceeds in accordance with the applicant's insurance policy that may affect the total amount of the project. 6. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to support the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and contracting services for projects approved under the Public Assistance program, as stated in 44 CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they have followed their normal procurement procedures. PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ): ***** Version 1 ***** This version of the PW is being written in regard to a letter from the applicant dated 07/18/2014 requesting additional funds because of pavement settlement behind North abutment. The repair work has been completed and the applicant is requesting approximately S24,304.00 for the repair. The PW was written to identify all of the damages at a site where Bridge #WEL003.0-42.0A is located. Most of the damage was loss of material (embankment and approach road material on the south side of the bridge and some loss of riprap on the north side of bridge). Approximately 70% of the work had been completed when the PW was written and the total cost of the PW is $81 .889.00. https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 6 of 28 "The applicant states that when they did damage assessments towards the end of January. 2014, settlement was discovered behind the north abutment wall at bridge 3/42A. The settlement (asphalt) gradually got worse during the subsequent months. The repair of the road at north abutment was added to the bridge abutment stabilization work that was done by Walsh construction early in April 2014." The cost for this additional work is $24,304.00. The work to repair the settlement of asphalt was included a larger project which included other items of work which the applicant is not asking for FEMA assistance. The project was bid out with two contractors responding and the applicant awarded the contract to the low bidder. FEMA has reviewed the submitted documentation and found that the applicant is requesting payment on large quantities of work for the repair than what was bid. The applicant has submitted a document dated 09/18/2014 explaining why they had to do more work than what was first anticipated. They basically encountered more voids and saturated sub grade under the asphalt which extended the repairs and greater quantities of work. After talking to the applicant and reviewing the submitted documentation. FEMA has determined that the $24,304.00 is eligible for funding. See the eligible items of work and costs below. NOTE: Flow Fill is an additional item of work because of having to get fill back under the existing concrete approach slab. Two different contractors placed the flow fill and that is why there is a difference in unit price. Item Quantity Unit Price Total Unclassified Excavation 199.0 c.y. $20.00 $3,980.00 Aggregate Base Course 31 .3 Ton 100.00 3, 130.00 Hot Mix Asphalt 35.3 Ton 300.00 10.590.00 Flow Fill 50.0 c.y. 73.50 3,675.00 Flow Fill 99.8 c.y. 29.35 2,929.00 TOTAL $24.304.00 Comments and Attachments Additional Cost for 3-42A Explanation of Damage 3-42A Memo with Attachments 9_18_2014 Asphalt Failure Photo Asphalt Repair Photo North Abutment Hole Photo North Abutment Photo Hazard Mitigation Proposal Is effective mitigation feasible on this site? Yes If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required Will mitigation be performed on this site? Yes If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 7 of 28 Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No Proposal? If you answered Yes to the above question. the next two questions are required As a least cost alternative, the Applicant chose to install Please provide the Scope of Work for the estimate: broken concrete in lieu of unclassified fill on the east and west (maximum 4000 characters) side of the southern bridge abutment, therefore mitigation is achieved through good construction practice. Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost? GIS Coordinates Project Location Latitude Longitude CR 3-42A Bridge 40.29199 -105.03674 Special Considerations 1 . Does the damaged facility or item of work have insurance coverage and/or is it an insurable No risk (e.g. . buildings. equipment, vehicles, etc)? If you would like to make any comments, please enter them below. (maximum 4000 characters) Insurance Policy on file at JFO. 2. Is the damaged facility located within a floodplain or coastal high hazard area and/or does it Yes have an impact on a floodplain or wetland? If you would like to make any comments. please enter them below. maximum 4000 characters) Floodmap #0802660725C dated 9/28/82 in floodplain 3. Is the damaged facility or item of work located within or adjacent to a Coastal Barrier Resource No System Unit or an Otherwise Protected Area? 4. Will the proposed facility repairs/reconstruction change the pre-disaster conditions (e.g. . No footprint, material, location, capacity. use of function)? 5. Does the applicant have a hazard mitigation proposal or would the applicant like technical No assistance for a hazard mitigation proposal? If you would like to make any comments. please enter them below. (maximum 4000 characters) As a least cost alternative, the Applicant chose to install broken concrete in lieu of unclassified fill on the east and west side of the southern bridge abutment, therefore mitigation is achieved through good construction practice. 6. Is the damaged facility on the National Register of Historic Places or the state historic listing? Is No it older than 50 years? Are there more. similar buildings near the site? 7. Are there any pristine or undisturbed areas on. or near. the project site? Are there large tracts No of forestland? 8. Are there any hazardous materials at or adjacent to the damaged facility and/or item of work? No 9. Are there any other environmental or controversial issues associated with the damaged facility No and/or item of work? Attachments Hard Copy User Date Document Type Description File File Name Action Reference PAUL 02-28- PW #WELCO24 Firmette HESSE 2014 Floodplain Firmette FM0802660725C.pdf(314.85 View kb) PAUL 02-28- Bridge CR 3-42A Bridge CR 3-42A Bridge Inspection View HESSE 2014 Survey/Document Inspection Reports Reports 2010 2012.pdf(4.60 https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 8 of 28 2010 & 2012 Mb) For Category C, D, E, F, and G Projects only Is effective mitigation feasible on this project? Yes If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required Will mitigation be performed on any sites in this Yes project? If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No Proposal? If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required As a least cost alternative. the Applicant chose to install Please provide the Scope of Work broken concrete in lieu of unclassified fill on the east and west for the estimate: side of the southern bridge abutment, therefore mitigation is achieved through good construction practice. Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost? Comments Attachments Cost Estimate Is this Project Worksheet for Cost Estimate Format (Preferred) Repair Material Unit Unit of Subgrant Cost Sequence Code and/or Unit Price Type Estimate Action Quantity Measure Budget Class Description *** Version 0 *** Work Completed CEF Cost 1 9000 Estimate (See 1 LS $ CONSTRUCTION Work $ 55.819.00 Attached 55,819.00 Completed Spreadsheet) Work To Be Completed CEF Cost Work To 2 9000 Estimate (See 1 LS $ CONSTRUCTION Be $ 25.070.00 Attached 25.070.00 Completed Spreadsheet) Other Direct 3 9901 Administrative 1 LS $ INDIRECT Other $ 1 .000.00 Costs 1 .000.00 CHARGES (Subgrantee) *** Version 1 *** Other Change in $ https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 9 - - Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 9 of 28 4 9999 SOW 1 LS 24.304.00 Other $ 24.304.00 Total Cost : $ 106,193.00 Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles, Proceeds and Settlements) - 5900/5901 Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost Sequence Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action Class Total Cost : $ 0.00 Total Cost Estimate: $ 106,193.00 (Preferred Estimate Type + Insurance Adjustments) Comments Cost calculations are shown in the scope of work for each area. Be advised there are some rounding errors. All cost information is shown on the attached WELCO24 CEF and Cost Spreadsheet pdf file. Attachments User Date Document Description Hard Copy File File Name Action Type Reference PAUL 02-28- Applicant FA Sheets PW #WELCO24 Applicant FA HESSE 2014 Force Account CR 3-42A Bridge Sheets CR 3-42A Bridge.pdf View (3.52 Mb) PAUL 02-28- Applicant FA Sheets PW #WELCO24 Applicant FA HESSE 2014 Force Account CR 3 40.5/44 Sheets CR 3-40.5-44.pdf(831 .59 View kb) PAUL 02-28- Additional Douglas County PW #WELCO24 Douglas Co HESSE 2014 Information Mutual Aid Mutual Aid.pdf(721 .37 kb) View information PAUL 03-18- Calculation CEF rev 2 and Cost PW #WELCO24 CEF rev 2 and View HESSE 2014 Sheet Spreadsheet Cost Spreadsheet.pdf(2.22 Mb) PAUL 03-18- HESSE 2014 Force Account Estimated DAC PW WELCO24 DAC.pdf(7.88 kb) View Existing Insurance Information Insurance Type Policy No. Bldg/Property Content Insurance Deductible Years Amount Amount Amount Amount Required Comments Attachments Comments and Attachments Name of Section Comment Attachment The applicant must notify the state if there are any Project Description changes in the scope of work prior to starting the repairs. Failure to notify the State Division of Emergency Management may jeopardize receipt of federal funds. PW #WELCO24 Location Damage Facilities Project Note #1 should be deleted per JFO guidance. Map.pdf Project Note #2 now becomes Project Note #1 and so on PW #WELCO24 Photo https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 10 of 28 throughout the Project Notes Sheet.pdf PW #WELCO24 Firmette Special Considerations FM0802660725C.pdf CR 3-42A Bridge Inspection Reports 2010 2012.pdf PW #WELCO24 Applicant FA Sheets CR 3-42A Bridge.pdf Cost calculations are shown in the scope of work for PW #WELCO24 Applicant FA each area. Be advised there are some rounding errors. Sheets CR 3 40.5-44.pdf Cost Estimate All cost information is shown on the attached WELCO24 PW #WELCO24 Douglas Co CEF and Cost Spreadsheet pdf file. Mutual Aid.pdf PW #WELCO24 CEF rev 2 and Cost Spreadsheet.pdf PW WELCO24 DAC.pdf WELCO24 - Signed Project Worksheet.pdf PW 790 - Entire Application.pdf VER. 1 PW 00790 Cover Sheet.docx Version 1 Additional-Cost-for-3- 42A---SCOPE-CHANGE-30489- 35605.pdf Version 1 Asphalt repair during construction.bmp Version 1 Explanation-of- Damage-3-42A-31939- 12986.pdf Form 90-91 Version 1 Memo with attachments 9 18 2014.pdf Version 1 north abutment hole.bmp Version 1 north abutment.bmp Version 1 PW 790 scope change request.PNG Version 1 PW 689 Addendum 1 .pdf Version 1 PW 689 Addendum 2.docx Version 1 PW 689 Bid Tabulation for Construction.pdf Version 1 PW 689 BRIDGES-3- 42A---54-13A-6 TOTAL-84.pdf Bundle Reference # (Amendment #) Date Awarded PA-08-CO-4145-State-0084(82) 10-10-2014 Subgrant Application - FEMA Form 90-91 Note: The Effective Cost Share for this application is 75% FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY PROJECT WORKSHEET DISASTER PROJECT NO PA ID NO. DATE CATEGORY WELCO24 123-99123- 09-26-2014 C FEMA 4145 - DR -CO 00 APPLICANT: WELD (COUNTY) WORK COMPLETE AS OF: 01-24-2014 : 70 https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 11 of 28 Site 1of1 DAMAGED FACILITY: COUNTY: Weld CR 3-42A Bridge LOCATION: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE: 40.29199 -105.03674 PA-08-CO-4145-P W-00790(0): County Road 3 at Little Thompson River PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1): ***** Version 1 ***** DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(0): During the incident period of September 11, 2013 through September 30, 2013, the declared severe storms caused flooding, landslides and mudslides throughout Weld County in Colorado. The CR3 Bridge [Bridge #WEL003.0-42.0A] over the Little Thompson River sustained damages from floodwaters eroding the embankments [southern embankment] and erosion of the southern bridge approach and the supporting material behind south abutment along with excessive velocity causing scour and displacement of rip rap that was in place to protect the abutments. There is no apparent damage to the bridge structure due to the event. Total damages include aggregate and material 529CY, concrete 133CY, asphalt 42CY, and sediment deposits under bridge 500CY. GPS: 40.29199, -105.03674 Floodmap #0802660725C dated 9/28/82 [in floodplain] The following damages occurred due to the declared event : 1 . Eroded gravel material north of the bridge east edge of north bound lane. Dimension: 100LF x 8FT wide x 2FT deep/27 = 59CY 2. Eroded material behind south abutment. Dimension: 15LF x 35FT wide x 10FT deep/27 = 194CY 3. Eroded material beyond southern end of wingwall [west side]. Dimension: 10LF x 15FT x 3.5FT/27 = 19CY 4. Eroded concrete approach slab. Dimension: 20LF x 35FT wide x 3.5FT deep/27 = 91CY 5. Eroded concrete deck approach. Dimension: 35LF x 35FT wide x 0.5FT deep/27 = 23CY 6. Eroded asphalt approach. Dimension: 105LF x 31 FT wide x 0.35FT deep/27 = 42CY 7. Eroded shoulder gravel material south of bridge east side of north bound lane. Dimension: 105LF x 2FT wide x 0.5FT deep/27 = 4CY 8. Eroded embankment at east wingwall. Dimension: 20FT x 12FT x 12FT/2/27 = 53CY 9. Eroded embankment at west wingwall. Dimension: 20FT x 12FT x 12FT/2/27 = 53CY 10. Ditches along CR3 were silted in. Dimension: 300LF 11 . Eroded rip rap material at north abutment. Dimension: 50LF x 15FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 83CY 12. Eroded rip rap material at south abutment. Dimension: 50LF x 15FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 83CY 13. Muck/sediment deposited under bridge that is restricting flow of river. Dimension: 75LF x 60FT wide x 3FT deep/27 = 500CY Note: There was no apparent damage to the bridge structure. PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ): Version 1 ***** SCOPE OF WORK: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(0): WORK COMPLETED: The Applicant used Force Account Labor, Equipment and Materials, along with Force Account assistance from the Douglas County Public Works Department [DCPW], which is south of Denver. The work was performed by DCPW on 9/25-9/27/13. There is a Mutual Aid Agreement [copy attached] between Weld County and Douglas County. The Scope of Work for this project is shown below to repair the site to pre-disaster condition. The costs for Labor and Equipment could not be validated, therefore the costs shown for the Work Completed are based on CDOT Bid Tab Cost Data information from 2013 and these costs are used for estimating the Work to be Completed as well. Work Completed: Note: Rounding errors may exist. The quantities shown are rounded to the nearest whole number, however the cost is correctly calculated using the unrounded number. Refer to the attached excel spreadsheet for all calculations and the numbers shown below. 1 . Replaced gravel material north of bridge east edge: 59CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $3,634.61 2. Replaced material behind south abutment: 194CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $11,926.06 2a. Replaced material behind south abutment where a construction access ramp was cut into the south-bound lane of CR 3 to complete the repair: 20LF x 15FT wide x 10FT deep/2 slope = 56CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $3,407.44 3. Poured concrete extension: 19CY x $150/CY [206-00065 adjusted to $150/CY due to small job] = $2,916.67 4. Replaced concrete approach slab: 91CY x $150/CY [206-00065 shown above] = $13,611 .11 https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 12 of 28 5. Replaced concrete deck approach slab: 23CY x $150/CY [206-00065 shown above] = $3,402.78 6. Replaced asphalt approach: 42CY x 1 .97T/CY x $81 .70/T [403-33741] _ $6,791 .15 7. Replaced shoulder gravel material south of bridge east side: 4CY x 1 .82T/CY x $33.70/T [304-06000x2] = $238.52 8. Replaced rip rap on slope at east wingwall [HMP accomplished with good construction practice — replace eroded embankment material with rip rap]: 53CY x $83.17/CY = $4,435.73 9. Replaced rip rap on slope at west wingwall [HMP accomplished with good construction practice — replace eroded embankment material with rip rap]: 53CY x $83.17/CY = $4,435.73 10. Cleaned ditches: 300LF x $3.40/LF = $1 ,020 Work Completed Total: $55,819.80 Work to be Completed: 11 . Replace rip rap material north abutment: 83CY x $83.17/CY [506-00218] = $6,930.83 12. Replace rip rap material south abutment: 83CY x $83.17/CY [506-00218] = $6,930.83 13. Remove sediment under bridge: 500CY x $19.58/CY [CDOT 203-00100] = $9,790 Work to be Completed Total: $23,651 .67 PROJECT NOTES: 1 . During repair or reconstruction, applicant may incur additional costs related to clearing and grubbing, placement of topsoil, erosion and sedimentation control, sanitary facilities, dewatering, mobilization and flagging/traffic control. Such costs are generally addressed in the "in- place" unit costs of repair or reconstruction items, and not specifically addressed in the Scope of Work. However, if a project requires an extraordinary use of any such items, to where a specific reference in the PW should be considered, applicant is advised to contract Colorado Department of Emergency Management requesting a revision to the PW's Scope of Work. 2. The applicant must obtain all required federal, state, and local permits prior to the commencement of work. 3. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect costs. 4. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation. As a least cost alternative, the Applicant chose to install broken concrete in lieu of unclassified fill on the east and west side of the southern bridge abutment, therefore mitigation is achieved through good construction practice. 5. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance review as stated in 44 C.F.R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If applicable, an insurance determination will be made either as anticipated proceeds or actual proceeds in accordance with the applicant's insurance policy that may affect the total amount of the project. 6. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to support the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and contracting services for projects approved under the Public Assistance program, as stated in 44 CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they have followed their normal procurement procedures. PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790(1 ): Version 1 This version of the PW is being written in regard to a letter from the applicant dated 07/18/2014 requesting additional funds because of pavement settlement behind North abutment. The repair work has been completed and the applicant is requesting approximately $24,304.00 for the repair. The PW was written to identify all of the damages at a site where Bridge #WEL003.0-42.0A is located. Most of the damage was loss of material (embankment and approach road material on the south side of the bridge and some loss of riprap on the north side of bridge). Approximately 70% of the work had been completed when the PW was written and the total cost of the PW is $81 ,889.00. "The applicant states that when they did damage assessments towards the end of January, 2014, settlement was discovered behind the north abutment wall at bridge 3/42A. The settlement (asphalt) gradually got worse during the subsequent months. The repair of the road at north abutment was added to the bridge abutment stabilization work that was done by Walsh construction early in April 2014." The cost for this additional work is $24,304.00. The work to repair the settlement of asphalt was included a larger project which included other items of work which the applicant is not asking for FEMA assistance. The project was bid out with two contractors responding and the applicant awarded the contract to the low bidder. FEMA has reviewed the submitted documentation and found that the applicant is requesting payment on large quantities of work for the repair than what was bid. The applicant has submitted a document dated 09/18/2014 explaining why they had to do more work than what was first anticipated. They basically encountered more voids and saturated sub grade under the asphalt which extended the repairs and greater quantities of work. After talking to the applicant and reviewing the submitted documentation, FEMA has determined that the $24,304.00 is eligible for funding. See the eligible items of work and costs below. NOTE: Flow Fill is an additional item of work because of having to get fill back under the existing concrete approach slab. Two different contractors placed the flow fill and that is why there is a difference in unit price. Item Quantity Unit Price Total Unclassified Excavation 199.0 c.y. $20.00 $3,980.00 Aggregate Base Course 31 .3 Ton 100.00 3,130.00 Hot Mix Asphalt 35.3 Ton 300.00 10,590.00 Flow Fill 50.0 c.y. 73.50 3,675.00 Flow Fill 99.8 c.y. 29.35 2,929.00 TOTAL $24,304.00 https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do:'menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 13 of 28 Comments and Attachments Additional Cost for 3-42A Explanation of Damage 3-42A Memo with Attachments 9_18_2014 Asphalt Failure Photo Asphalt Repair Photo North Abutment Hole Photo North Abutment Photo Does the Scope of Work change the pre-disaster conditions at the site? Yes No Special Considerations included? 7 Yes No Hazard Mitigation proposal included? Yes No Is there insurance coverage on this facility? Yes No PROJECT COST ITEM CODE NARRATIVE QUANTITY/UNIT UNIT PRICE COST ' Version 0 **k Work Completed 1 9000 CEF Cost Estimate (See Attached 1 /LS Spreadsheet) $ 55.819.00 $ 55.819.00 Work To Be Completed 2 9000 CEF Cost Estimate (See Attached 1 /LS $ 25,070.00 $ 25,070.00 Spreadsheet) Other 3 9901 Direct Administrative Costs 1 /LS $ 1 ,000.00 $ 1 .000.00 (Subgrantee) *** Version 1 *** Other 4 9999 Change in SOW 1 /LS $ 24,304.00 $ 24,304.00 TOTAL COST $ 106, 193.00 PREPARED BY Ken Beebe TITLE TAC Project Specialist SIGNATURE APPLICANT REP. Roy Rudisill TITLE Director - OEM SIGNATURE WELD (COUNTY) : PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00790 Conditions Information Review Name Condition Type Condition Name Description Monitored Status State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately Final Review Other ( EHP) Materials and separated and disposed of in an No Approved Solid Waste approved disposal site or landfill. Laws This review does not address all federal, state and local requirements. Acceptance of federal funding requires recipient Final Review Other (EHP) Standard to comply with all federal, state No Approved Condition #2 and local laws. Failure to obtain all pp appropriate federal . state and local environmental permits and clearances may jeopardize federal funding. https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 14 of 28 Any change to the approved Standard scope of work will require re- Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Approved NEPA and other Laws and Executive Orders. Gravel/borrow materials for work to be completed must be obtained National Historic from one of the following pre- Final Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act approved sources: (SHPO No Approved (NHPA) approved source. CO Licensed Pit, commercial source. contractor or county Stockpiles). Applicant is responsible for Executive Order coordinating with the local Final Review Other (EHP) 11988 - floodplain manager. All required No Approved Floodplains permits should be maintained as part of the permanent record. Asphalt must be recycled as a blended base material or State Hazardous appropriately separated and Final Review Other (EHP) Materials and disposed of in an approved No Approved Solid Waste disposal site or landfill in pp Laws accordance with the CDPHE authorized waste management regulations. State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately Final Review Other (EHP) Materials and separated and disposed of in an No Approved Solid Waste approved disposal site or landfill. Laws 17. Upon project completion, revegetate all disturbed areas with native shrubs, trees, and grasses. a . Rip compacted access routes prior to replanting with native vegetation. b. Fill and reseed with weed free material and native seed mixtures. c. Consult the Service before finalizing a seed Endangered and plant list. 18. Bury riprap. then Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act plant with native riparian No Approved (ESA) vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate adjacent habitats impacted by floodwaters to restore connectivity and prevent future impacts from erosion or sedimentation. 20. Consider monitoring the revegetated areas for success. The Service can help establish success criteria during the consultation process. 1 . Design the project to avoid and minimize the permanent and temporary impacts to riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a. Before construction, identify and prioritize riparian and adjacent upland habitats within the project area. Design the project so that it avoids these habitats whenever https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 15 of 28 possible. b. Minimize the amount of concrete. riprap. bridge footings. and other "hard." impermeable engineering features within the stream channel and riparian or adjacent upland habitats. c. Use bioengineering techniques to stabilize stream banks. d. Minimize the number and footprint of access routes. staging areas, and work areas. e. Locate access routes, staging areas, and work areas within previously disturbed or modified non-habitat areas. f. Maintain habitat connectivity under bridges or through culverts by installing ledges or dry culverts adjacent to the culverts with water flow. g. Avoid fragmenting linear riparian corridors. 2. Install limits of work fencing (e.g. . orange barrier netting or silt fencing), signage, or other visible markers to delineate Endangered access routes and the project area Final Review Other Species Act from habitats. Use this fencing to (EHP)) p enforce no-entry zones. 3. Hold a No Approved (ESA) preconstruction briefing for onsite personnel to explain the limits of work and other conservation measures. 4. Follow regional stormwater guidelines and design best management practices (BMPs) to control contamination, erosion, and sedimentation, such as silt fences, silt basins, gravel bags. and other controls needed to stabilize soils in denuded or graded areas. during and after construction. 5. Locate utilities along existing road corridors, and if possible. within the roadway or road shoulder. a. Bury overhead utilities whenever possible. b. Directionally bore utilities and pipes underneath habitats. 6. Develop and implement a habitat restoration plan that addresses site preparation, planting techniques. control of non-native weeds. native seed mixtures. and post-construction monitoring. 7. Contact the Service immediately by telephone at (303) 236-4773 if a Preble's is found alive. dead. injured . or hibernating within the project area. Please also contact the Service if any other listed species are found within the project area. 8. To the maximum extent practicable, limit disturbing (e.g. , crushing. https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 16 of 28 trampling) or removing (e.g. , cutting, clearing) all vegetation , such as willows. trees. shrubs. and grasses within riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a. Restrict the temporary or permanent removal of vegetation to the footprint of the project area. b. Minimize the use of heavy machinery and use smaller equipment when possible. c. Soil compaction: Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials. especially in wet. unstable soils to protect roots and the seed bank. 9. Use the attached table to track the acres or square feet of riparian and upland habitats temporarily or permanently affected by the response activities, a. Temporary Impacts: Native vegetation and habitats will reestablish following rehabilitation (e.g., access route that is rehabilitated with native. weed-free seeds and plants). b. Permanent Impacts: Riparian or upland habitats will not return as a result of project activities (e.g. . Endangered road surface. concrete footings) Final Review Other Species Act 10. Track the volumes of any (EHP)) p water from onsite sources stored No Approved (ESA) or used for dust abatement, soil compaction, concrete mixing. or other activities. 11 . Locate. store. stage. operate. and refuel equipment outside of riparian or adjacent upland habitats. a. Operate equipment from previously disturbed or modified roadbeds or road shoulders above the riparian habitats. b. Limit the number of entrance and exit points leading into the project area. c. Stockpile topsoil and debris outside the riparian corridor and protect from stream flows or runoff. 12. During the Preble's active season (May 1 through November 1 ), work only during daylight hours to avoid disrupting Preble's nocturnal activities. 13. Promptly remove waste to minimize site disturbance and avoid attracting predators. 14. Cover exposed holes or piles of loose dirt with boards. tarps. or other materials to prevent entrapment. 15. Use best management practices (BMPs) to limit construction-related disturbance, such as soil https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 17 of 28 compaction. erosion, and sedimentation, and to prevent the spread of invasive weeds: a. Soil compaction: Establish one access route for workers, vehicles, and machinery. preferably along a previously disturbed surface or route. b. Soil compaction: Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials, especially in wet, unstable soils. c. Weed control: Wash and inspect vehicles and equipment before entering or leaving the project area so that they are free of noxious weed seeds and plant parts. d . Weed control: Use only weed free certified materials, including gravel, sand, top soil. seed. and mulch. 16. Complete construction before beginning restoration or enhancement activities. The applicant should implement appropriate FWS conservation measures identified in the Emergency Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September 24. 2013. to the extent Endangered possible: including a post- Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act construction estimate of the No Approved (ESA) amount of habitat affected by the emergency response. an evaluation of how conservation recommendations were implemented. and the results of implementation in minimizing adverse effects. The applicant is responsible for verifying and compliance with all permit requirements. including permit conditions, pre-construction notification requirements and regional conditions as provided by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant is responsible for implementing. Final Review Other ( EHP) Clean Water Act monitoring, and maintaining all No Approved (CWA) Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Pre-Construction Notification (PCN ) conditions of applicable Nation Wide Permits (NWP). This is to include any requirements per the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 401 Water Quality Certification for Clean Water Act permits. The applicant is responsible for verifying and compliance with all permit requirements. including https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 18 of 28 permit conditions, pre-construction notification requirements and regional conditions as provided by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE ). The applicant is responsible for implementing. monitoring, and maintaining all Clean Water Act Best Management Practices Final Review Other (EHP) (CWA) (BMP's) and Pre-Construction No Approved Notification (PCN ) conditions of applicable Nation Wide Permits (NWP). This is to include any requirements per the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 401 Water Quality Certification for Clean Water Act permits. The applicant should implement appropriate FWS conservation measures identified in the Emergency Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September 24, 2013. to the extent Endangered possible; including a post- Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act construction estimate of the No Approved (ESA) amount of habitat affected by the emergency response. an evaluation of how conservation recommendations were implemented, and the results of implementation in minimizing adverse effects. 7. Contact the Service immediately by telephone at (303) 236-4773 if a Preble's is found alive. dead, injured , or hibernating within the project area. Please also contact the Service if any other listed species are found within the project area. 8. To the maximum extent practicable, limit disturbing (e.g. , crushing, trampling) or removing (e.g. , cutting. clearing) all vegetation. such as willows, trees, shrubs. and grasses within riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a. Restrict the temporary or permanent removal of vegetation to the footprint of the project area. b. Minimize the use of heavy machinery and use smaller equipment when possible. c. Soil compaction: Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials, especially in wet, unstable soils to protect roots and the seed bank. 9. Use the attached table to track the acres or square feet of riparian and upland habitats temporarily or https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 19 of 28 permanently affected by the response activities. a. Temporary Impacts: Native vegetation and habitats will reestablish following rehabilitation (e.g. . access route that is rehabilitated with native, weed-free seeds and plants). b. Permanent Impacts: Riparian or upland habitats will not return as a result of project activities (e.g. , road surface, concrete footings) 10. Track the volumes of any water from onsite sources stored or used for dust abatement, soil compaction, concrete mixing, or other activities. 11 . Locate, store. stage, operate, and refuel equipment outside of riparian or adjacent upland habitats. a. Operate equipment from previously disturbed or modified roadbeds or road shoulders above the riparian habitats. b. Limit the number of entrance and exit points leading into the project area. c. Stockpile topsoil and debris outside the riparian corridor and protect from stream flows or runoff. 12. During the Preble's Endangered active season (May 1 through Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act November 1 ). work only during No Approved (ESA) daylight hours to avoid disrupting Preble's nocturnal activities. 13. Promptly remove waste to minimize site disturbance and avoid attracting predators. 14. Cover exposed holes or piles of loose dirt with boards, tarps, or other materials to prevent entrapment. 15. Use best management practices (BMPs) to limit construction-related disturbance, such as soil compaction, erosion, and sedimentation, and to prevent the spread of invasive weeds: a. Soil compaction: Establish one access route for workers, vehicles. and machinery, preferably along a previously disturbed surface or route. b. Soil compaction: Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials, especially in wet, unstable soils. c. Weed control: Wash and inspect vehicles and equipment before entering or leaving the project area so that they are free of noxious weed seeds and plant parts. d. Weed control: Use only weed free certified materials, including gravel, sand. top soil, https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 20 of 28 seed . and mulch. 16. Complete construction before beginning restoration or enhancement activities. 1 . Design the project to avoid and minimize the permanent and temporary impacts to riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a. Before construction, identify and prioritize riparian and adjacent upland habitats within the project area. Design the project so that it avoids these habitats whenever possible. b. Minimize the amount of concrete, riprap, bridge footings. and other "hard ." impermeable engineering features within the stream channel and riparian or adjacent upland habitats. c. Use bioengineering techniques to stabilize stream banks. d. Minimize the number and footprint of access routes. staging areas. and work areas. e. Locate access routes, staging areas, and work areas within previously disturbed or modified non-habitat areas. f. Maintain habitat connectivity under bridges or through culverts by installing ledges or dry culverts adjacent to Endangered the culverts with water flow. g. Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act Avoid fragmenting linear riparian No Approved (ESA) corridors. 2. Install limits of work fencing (e.g. . orange barrier netting or silt fencing), signage. or other visible markers to delineate access routes and the project area from habitats. Use this fencing to enforce no-entry zones. 3. Hold a preconstruction briefing for onsite personnel to explain the limits of work and other conservation measures. 4. Follow regional stormwater guidelines and design best management practices (BMPs) to control contamination, erosion, and sedimentation, such as silt fences. silt basins, gravel bags, and other controls needed to stabilize soils in denuded or graded areas, during and after construction. 5. Locate utilities along existing road corridors. and if possible, within the roadway or road shoulder. a. Bury overhead utilities whenever possible. b. Directionally bore utilities and pipes underneath habitats. 6. Develop and implement a habitat restoration plan that addresses site preparation. planting https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 I of 28 techniques. control of non-native weeds, native seed mixtures, and post-construction monitoring. 17. Upon project completion, revegetate all disturbed areas with native shrubs, trees, and grasses. a. Rip compacted access routes prior to replanting with native vegetation. b. Fill and reseed with weed free material and native seed mixtures. c. Consult the Service before finalizing a seed Endangered and plant list. 18. Bury riprap, then Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act plant with native riparian No Approved (ESA) vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate adjacent habitats impacted by floodwaters to restore connectivity and prevent future impacts from erosion or sedimentation. 20. Consider monitoring the revegetated areas for success. The Service can help establish success criteria during the consultation process. If ground disturbing activities occur during construction. applicant will monitor ground Final Review Other (EHP) Standard disturbance and if any potential No Approved Condition #3 archeological resources are pp discovered , will immediately cease construction in that area and notify the State and FEMA. Asphalt must be recycled as a blended base material or State Hazardous appropriately separated and Final Review Other (EHP) Materials and disposed of in an approved No Approved Solid Waste disposal site or landfill in pp Laws accordance with the CDPHE authorized waste management regulations. Applicant is responsible for Executive Order coordinating with the local Final Review Other ( EHP) 11988 - floodplain manager. All required No Approved Floodplains permits should be maintained as part of the permanent record . Gravel/borrow materials for work to be completed must be obtained National Historic from one of the following pre- Final Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act approved sources: (SHPO No Approved (NHPA) approved source, CO Licensed Pit, commercial source, contractor or county Stockpiles). Any change to the approved Standard scope of work will require re- Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Approved NEPA and other Laws and Executive Orders. This review does not address all federal, state and local https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014 w Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 22 of 28 requirements. Acceptance of federal funding requires recipient to comply with all federal, state Final Review Other (EHP) Standard and local laws. Failure to obtain all No Approved Condition #2 appropriate federal. state and local environmental permits and clearances may jeopardize federal funding. If ground disturbing activities occur during construction, applicant will monitor ground Final Review Other (EHP) Standard disturbance and if any potential No Approved Condition #3 archeological resources are discovered. will immediately cease construction in that area and notify the State and FEMA. If ground disturbing activities occur during construction , applicant will monitor ground EHP Review Other (EHP) Standard disturbance and if any potential No Recommended Condition #3 archeological resources are discovered, will immediately cease construction in that area and notify the State and FEMA. This review does not address all federal, state and local requirements. Acceptance of federal funding requires recipient EHP Review Other (EHP) Standard to comply with all federal, state No Recommended Condition #2 and local laws. Failure to obtain all appropriate federal , state and local environmental permits and clearances may jeopardize federal funding. Any change to the approved Standard scope of work will require re- EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Recommended NEPA and other Laws and Executive Orders. Gravel/borrow materials for work to be completed must be obtained National Historic from one of the following pre- EHP Review Other ( EHP) Preservation Act approved sources: (SHPO No Recommended (NHPA) approved source, CO Licensed Pit, commercial source. contractor or county Stockpiles). Applicant is responsible for Executive Order coordinating with the local EHP Review Other (EHP) 11988 - floodplain manager. All required No Recommended Floodplains permits should be maintained as part of the permanent record. The applicant is responsible for verifying and compliance with all permit requirements, including permit conditions. pre-construction notification requirements and regional conditions as provided by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The applicant is https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 23 of 28 responsible for implementing, monitoring, and maintaining all Best Management Practices (BMP's) and Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) conditions of EHP Review Other (EHP) Clean Water Act applicable Nation Wide Permits No Recommended (CWA) (NWP). This is to include any requirements per the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 401 Water Quality Certification for Clean Water Act permits. State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately EHP Review Other (EHP) Materials and separated and disposed of in an No Recommended Solid Waste approved disposal site or landfill. Laws 17. Upon project completion, revegetate all disturbed areas with native shrubs. trees. and grasses. a. Rip compacted access routes prior to replanting with native vegetation. b. Fill and reseed with weed free material and native seed mixtures. c. Consult the Service before finalizing a seed Endangered and plant list. 18. Bury riprap. then EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act plant with native riparian No Recommended (ESA) vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate adjacent habitats impacted by floodwaters to restore connectivity and prevent future impacts from erosion or sedimentation. 20. Consider monitoring the revegetated areas for success. The Service can help establish success criteria during the consultation process. 1 . Design the project to avoid and minimize the permanent and temporary impacts to riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a. Before construction, identify and prioritize riparian and adjacent upland habitats within the project area. Design the project so that it avoids these habitats whenever possible. b. Minimize the amount of concrete. riprap, bridge footings, and other "hard ," impermeable engineering features within the stream channel and riparian or adjacent upland habitats. c. Use bioengineering techniques to stabilize stream banks. d. Minimize the number and footprint of access routes, staging areas, and work areas. e. Locate access routes, staging areas, and work areas within previously disturbed or modified non-habitat areas. f. Maintain https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do`?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 24 of 28 habitat connectivity under bridges or through culverts by installing ledges or dry culverts adjacent to the culverts with water flow. g. Avoid fragmenting linear riparian corridors. 2. Install limits of work fencing (e.g. , orange barrier netting or silt fencing). signage, or other visible markers to delineate access routes and the project area from habitats. Use this fencing to enforce no-entry zones. 3. Hold a preconstruction briefing for onsite personnel to explain the limits of work and other conservation measures. 4. Follow regional stormwater guidelines and design Endangered best management practices EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act (BMPs) to control contamination , No Recommended (ESA) erosion, and sedimentation, such as silt fences, silt basins, gravel bags, and other controls needed to stabilize soils in denuded or graded areas. during and after construction. 5. Locate utilities along existing road corridors, and if possible, within the roadway or road shoulder. a. Bury overhead utilities whenever possible. b. Directionally bore utilities and pipes underneath habitats. 6. Develop and implement a habitat restoration plan that addresses site preparation, planting techniques, control of non-native weeds, native seed mixtures, and post-construction monitoring. 7. Contact the Service immediately by telephone at (303) 236-4773 if a Preble's is found alive. dead, injured. or hibernating within the project area. Please also contact the Service if any other listed species are found within the project area. 8. To the maximum extent practicable. limit disturbing (e.g. , crushing. trampling) or removing (e.g. , cutting, clearing) all vegetation, such as willows, trees, shrubs, and grasses within riparian and adjacent upland habitats. a . Restrict the temporary or permanent removal of vegetation to the footprint of the project area. b. Minimize the use of heavy machinery and use smaller equipment when possible. c. Soil compaction: Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials. especially in wet. unstable soils to protect roots and https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do'?menuTile=&topTi le=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 25 of 28 the seed bank. 9. Use the attached table to track the acres or square feet of riparian and upland habitats temporarily or permanently affected by the response activities. a. Temporary Impacts: Native vegetation and habitats will reestablish following rehabilitation (e.g. . access route that is rehabilitated with native, weed-free seeds and plants). b. Permanent Impacts: Riparian or upland habitats will not return as a result of project activities (e.g. , road surface, concrete footings) 10. Track the volumes of any water from onsite sources stored or used for dust abatement. soil compaction, concrete mixing, or other activities. 11 . Locate, store. stage, operate. and refuel equipment outside of riparian or adjacent upland habitats. a. Operate equipment from previously disturbed or modified roadbeds or road shoulders above the riparian habitats. b. Limit the number of entrance and exit points leading into the project Endangered area. c. Stockpile topsoil and EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act debris outside the riparian corridor No Recommended (ESA) and protect from stream flows or runoff. 12. During the Preble's active season (May 1 through November 1 ), work only during daylight hours to avoid disrupting Preble's nocturnal activities. 13. Promptly remove waste to minimize site disturbance and avoid attracting predators. 14. Cover exposed holes or piles of loose dirt with boards, tarps. or other materials to prevent entrapment. 15. Use best management practices (BMPs) to limit construction-related disturbance, such as soil compaction. erosion, and sedimentation, and to prevent the spread of invasive weeds: a. Soil compaction: Establish one access route for workers, vehicles. and machinery, preferably along a previously disturbed surface or route. b. Soil compaction : Temporarily line access routes with geotextiles or other materials. especially in wet. unstable soils. c. Weed control: Wash and inspect vehicles and equipment before entering or leaving the project area so that they are free of https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 26 of 28 noxious weed seeds and plant parts. d. Weed control: Use only weed free certified materials, including gravel, sand . top soil, seed. and mulch. 16. Complete construction before beginning restoration or enhancement activities. The applicant should implement appropriate FWS conservation measures identified in the Emergency Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September 24, 2013, to the extent Endangered possible; including a post- EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act construction estimate of the No Recommended (ESA) amount of habitat affected by the emergency response. an evaluation of how conservation recommendations were implemented , and the results of implementation in minimizing adverse effects. Asphalt must be recycled as a blended base material or State Hazardous appropriately separated and EHP Review Other (EHP Materials and disposed of in an approved ) Solid Waste disposal site or landfill in No Recommended Laws accordance with the CDPHE authorized waste management regulations. Internal Comments No. Queue User Date/Time Reviewer Comments In responce to the Grantee note this version is not a large Final PEVAN 10-08-2014 project version and thus no CEF is required . This project is 13 Review RONALD 03:27 PM found eligible in final review. GMT Ron Pevan DI BD Grantee LAWSON 10-02-2014 10/2/14 - The version 0 PW had a CEF applied . Please include 12 03:56 PM the SOW re-alignment eligible cost for version 1 in the CEF. Review LESTER GMT Please add an estimated amount for DAC. LJL Category: C. 70% Complete. Weld County. Weld County. Applicant used force labor and equipment to replace fill. gravel, concrete. rip rap, asphalt around and on bridge. Applicant cleaned about ditches. Applicant will replace rip rap by abutments and remove sediment under bridge. Mitigation- None - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:49:41 GMT ***VERSION 1 `**: This PW was reviewed by EHP staff on March 19th, 2014. It was submitted to EHP after rework to add costs for additional damages discovered by the applicant to the adjacent road and its subsequent repair. These changes do not affect the original scope of work and no additional EHP review is required. - dsharon - 09/29/2014 15:09:47 GMT Project activities have the potential to impact Waters of the United States or wetlands. Project involves dredge, fill, excavation and/or modification. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 17:05:20 GMT Project site work is not in a mapped wetland. - bsherma1 - https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&h. .. 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 27 of 28 03/19/2014 16:56:43 GMT The entire community will benefit from the completion of this project. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:57:05 GMT Action is addressed under the attached Emergency Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September 24, 2013. The consultation includes conservation measures intended to minimize impacts to the federally listed Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse, Ute's Lady's Tress and Colorado Butterfly Bush, and Designated Critical Habitat protected under the ESA. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 17:03:07 GMT EHP PATTERSON 09-29-2014 Work involves removal. staging, transporting, and/or disposal 11 Review MOLLY 04:07 PM of debris. (Includes culverts) - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 GMT 17:07: 15 GMT Project is located in Zone A. FIRM panel 0802660725, dated 09/28/1982. Per 44 CFR Part 9.5 (g) Step 1 : Project repairs are determined to have no effect on floodplain or wetlands provided that the repairs remain in the existing footprint and do not impact previously undisturbed areas. No further floodplains review is required. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:55:49 GMT The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of the 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement. Item III : Section B,A,E ,H agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:59:00 GMT Insurance JOHNSON 09-29-2014 VERSION 1 - The additional pavement repairs will not alter 10 02:55 PM the prior insurance policy coverage comments or the insurance Review KENNETH GMT requirement comments. 09-29-2014 This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation 9 Mitigation PETITT MARK 02:38 PM opportunities: some mitigation has been archived by the Review GMT method of repair (Good Construction Practice). Mark W. Petitt. 406 Specialist 09-29-2014 This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation Mitigation opportunities: some mitigation has been archived by the 8 Review PETITT MARK 02:29 Gf� PM method of repair (Good Construction Practice). Mark W. Petitt, T 406 Specialist 09-29-2014 Applicant's property insurance through the CAPP risk pool Insurance JOHNSON affords no coverage for bridges. roadways or embankments. 7 Review KENNETH GMT PM Insurance proceeds are not anticipated . and there is no insurance purchase requirement. 09-29-2014 Initial TREZONA 9-29-2014:Completed Initial review, no issues were identified: 6 Review SCOTT 02: 16 PM work appears eligible. Award 04-14-2014 5 Review SYSTEM 05:45 PM ACCEPTED GMT Final Reviewer finds eligible the application and approves the funding of this project worksheet based on the applicant Final PALACIO 04-03-2014 having performed all required procurement procedures. 4 08:23 PM perform all required special considerations recommendations Review JOSE GMT such as permits to address EHP considerations and securing all actual cost documentation for the financial reconciliation of this project. Task Force Leader- J. Palacio 04/03/2014 Category: C. 70% Complete. Weld County. Weld County. Applicant used force labor and equipment to replace fill. gravel, concrete. rip rap. asphalt around and on bridge. Applicant cleaned about ditches. Applicant will replace rip rap by abutments and remove sediment under bridge. Mitigation- None - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:49:41 GMT Project activities have the potential to impact Waters of the https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 28 of 28 United States or wetlands. Project involves dredge, fill, excavation and/or modification. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 17:05:20 GMT Project site work is not in a mapped wetland . - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:56:43 GMT The entire community will benefit from the completion of this project. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:57:05 GMT Action is addressed under the attached Emergency Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September 24. 2013. The consultation includes conservation measures intended to minimize impacts to the federally listed Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse, Ute's Lady's Tress and Colorado EHP DELAUNE 03- 19-2014 Butterfly Bush. and Designated Critical Habitat protected under 3 Review JONATHAN 05: 12 PM the ESA. - bshermal - 03/19/2014 17:03:07 GMT GMT Work involves removal , staging. transporting, and/or disposal of debris. (Includes culverts) - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 17:07: 15 GMT Project is located in Zone A. FIRM panel 0802660725, dated 09/28/1982. Per 44 CFR Part 9.5 (g) Step 1 : Project repairs are determined to have no effect on floodplain or wetlands provided that the repairs remain in the existing footprint and do not impact previously undisturbed areas. No further floodplains review is required . - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:55:49 GMT The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of the 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement, Item III : Section B,A, E.H agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. - bsherma1 - 03/19/2014 16:59:00 GMT 03-19-2014 Applicant's property insurance through the CAPP risk pool Insurance GILLIAM affords no coverage for bridges, roadways or embankments. 2 Review ROBERT GMT PM Insurance proceeds are not anticipated, and there is no insurance purchase requirement. 03-19-2014 This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation Mitigation opportunities: some mitigation has been archived by the 1 PETITT MARK 04:27 PM Review GMT method of repair (Good Construction Practice). Mark W. Petitt, 406 Specialist https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do`.'menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014 Hello