The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20152056.tiff RECEIVED JUL 0 9 2015 WELD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MINE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR LOLOFF PIT PERMIT NO. M-1985-112 PROPOSED PIT EXPANSION LOLOFF PIT WELD COUNTY, COLORADO PREPARED: DECEMBER 2014 REVISED:JULY 2015 PREPARED FOR: LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION, INC. 801 8TH STREET SUITE 130 GREELEY, CO 80632 (970) 301-4292 PREPARED BY: JOHN VAZQUEZ, P.E. 106 ROCK BRIDGE COURT WINDSOR, CO 80550 (970-217-9965 RlditiCk-C%,()(ju, (le R ,PIJ 7�92015-2056 INDEX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPLICATION FORM EXHIBIT A-LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT B-INDEX MAP EXHIBIT C-EXISTING MINE PLAN MAP EXHIBIT D-AMENDED MINE PLAN MAP EXHIBIT E-RECLAMATION PLAN EXHIBIT F-RECLAMATION PLAN MAP EXHIBIT G-WATER INFORMATION EXHIBIT H-WILDLIFE INFORMATION EXHIBIT I-SOILS INFORMATION EXHIBIT J-VEGETATION INFORMATION EXHIBIT K-CLIMATE INFORMATION EXHIBIT L-RECLAMATION COSTS EXHIBIT M-OTHER PERMITS AND LICENSES EXHIBIT N-SOURCE OF LEGAL RIGHT TO ENTER EXHIBIT 0-OWNERS OF RECORD OF AFFECTED LAND AND OWNER OF SUBSTANCE TO BE MINED EXHIBIT P-LIST OF MUNICIPALITITES WITHIN TWO MILES EXHIBIT Q-PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICES TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND SOILD CONSERVATION DISTRICT EXHIBIT R-PROOF OF FILING WITH COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER EXHIBIT S-PERMANENT MAN MADE STRUCTURES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Loloff Construction, Inc. is submitting a request for approval of the amendment to existing mine permit M-19585-112 for the Loloff Pit. The requested permit amendment is to include approximately 4.24 acres that was left out of the original mine boundary but is still within the Use by Special Review limits approved by the County Commissioners and the 112 Reclamation permitted area with the State. Loloff Construction, Inc. is proposing to mine the expansion area with the same techniques and proposed in the original mine permit application, as well as, defined within the Technical Revision No. 1 submitted to the DRMS in October of 2013. Reclamation techniques required by the DRMS as condition of approval of permit M-1985-112 and as required within the Technical Revision No. 1 shall be implemented with the modification of the Reclamation Plan. Within this document is a reclamation plan with a seed mix design for sandy material provided by the Greeley NRCS Field Office. The original permit application and the Technical Revision No. 1 have not proposed water storage as an end use. The owner of the property would like to have DRMS approval for water storage as an end use for the Loloff Pit, though they recognize there are other regulatory requirements that must occur prior to using the vessel for storage. This amendment proposes that a slurry wall be installed and bonding calculations for the slurry wall have been included in this application. STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St..Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 C O L O R A P O n r v r c l o N o f Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX:(303)832-8106 • MINING SAFETY CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS REGULAR(112)OPERATION RECLAMATION PERMIT APPLICATION FORM CHECK ON,:l l There is a File Number Already Assigned to this Operation Permit# M - - (Please reference the file number currently assigned to this operation) 7 New Application (Rule 1.4.51 Q Amendment Application(Rule 1.10) Tr— Conversion Application(Rule 1.11) Permit n M 1-985 112 (pro\idc for Amendments and Conversions of existing permits) The application for a Construction Materials Regular 112 Operation Reclamation Permit contains three major parts: (1)the application form: (2)Exhibits A-S.Addendum 1.any sections of Exhibit 6.5 (Geotechnical Stability Exhibit: and(3)the application fee. When you submit your application, be sure to include one (1 I complete signed acrd notarized ORIGINAL and one (1) copy of the completed application form.two(2)copies of Exhibits A.S.Addendum 1,appropriate sections of6.5(Geotechnical Stability Exhibit,and a check for the application fee described under Section (4)belov,. Exhibits should all be bound or in a 3-ring binder; maps should be folded to 8 1 2" X 1 1"or 8 1/2" X 14" size. To expedite processing. please pro\ide the information in the format and order described in this form. GENERAL OPERATION INFORMATION Type or print clearly.in the space provided.ALL information requested below. l. Applicant/operator or company name(name to be used on permit): Loloff Construction, Inc. 1.1 Type of organization(corporation.partnership. etc.): Corporation 2. Op ionerat name(pit.nine or site name): Loloff Pit 3. Permitted acreage(new or existing site): 55.17 existing permitted acres 3.1 Change in acreage(-r) 0 acres 3.2 Total acreage in Permit area 5,5.17 total acres 4. Fees: 4.1 Nevc Application 52.696.00 application fee 4.2 New Quarry Application S3,342.00 quarry application 4.4 Amendment Fee S_.229.00 amendment fee 4.5 Conversion to 112 operation (set by statute) S2.696.00 conversion fee 5. Primary commoditie(s)to be mined: Sand Gravel Soil 5.1 Incidental commoditie(s)to be mined: 1. lbs Tons yr Ibs-Tonsivr 3._.. lbs Tons yr 4. lbs Tons yr 5. il3s'Tons'yr 5.2 Anticipated end use of primary commoditie(s)to be mined: Construction Materials N/A 5.3 Anticipated end use of incidental commoditie(s)to be mined: 6. Name ef owner of subsurface ri;hts of affected land: See Exhibit 0 If 2 or more owners. "refer to Exhibit O". 7. Name ofowner of surface of affected land: Loloff Construction, Inc. 8. tic of mining ooeratjor1: ElII Surface E Underground 9. Location lnformatiou: The c,,uigi of the area where the majority of mining will occur: COUNTY: Weld PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN (check one): ❑ 6th(Colorado) E , 10th(New Mexico) ❑ Ute SECTION(write number): S 4 TOWNSHIP(write number and check direction): T 5 ❑✓ North a South RANGE(write number and check direction): R 65 Q East West QUARTER.SECTION(check one): —12: N' rnNW O D.SW QUAR`ER'QUARTER SECTION(check one): ❑ NE NW ❑SE SW GENERAL DESCRIPTION: (the number of miles and direction from the nearest town and the approximate elevation): Within one mile of Greeley with an approximate elevation of 4635' above sea level 10. primary Mint Entranc j,ocation(report in either Latitude Longitude Qg UTM): Latitude,Loneitude: Example: (N) 39° 44' 12.98" (W) 104: 59' ; 87" Latitude(N): deg min sec (2 decimal places) Longitude(W): deg mix, sec (2 decimal places) OR Example: (N) 39.73691' (W) -104.98449' Latitude(N) (5 decimal places) Longitude(W) (5 decimal places) OR Univ'ers_al TLanrerse Mercator(.VTM.) Example: 201336.3 E NAD27 Zone 13 4398351.2 N UTM Datum(specify NAD27. NADS3 or WGS 84) Nad 83 Zone 13 Fasting 3232314.31 Northing 1400944.20 11. correspondence Information: APPLICANT/OPERATOR, (name,address, and phone of name to be used on permit) Contact's Name: Robert A. Baker Title: Secretary/Treasurer Company Name: Loloff Construction, Inc, Street'P.0. Box: 801 8th Street Suite 130 P.O. Box: City: Greeley State: Colorado 80631 Zip Code:._ Telephone Number: (.970 , 301-4292 Fax Number: PERMIuINQ CONTACT (if different from applicant operator above) Contact's Name: John Vazquez Title: Owners Representative Company Name: Street'P.0. Box: 106 Rock Bridge Ct P.O. Box: City: Windsor State: Colorado Zip Code: 80550 Telephone Number: ( 970 ) - 217-9965 Fax Number: L - INSPECT(QNCONTACT Contact's Name: Darwin Derr Title: Operations Manager Con, an Name: Mill Iron Mining, LLC p y StreevP.0. Box: 610 Balsam P.O. Box: City: Greeley State: Colorado zip Code: 80631 -- Telephone Number: (970 )_ 301.4292 Fax Number: ( 1 Cc, FATE 0R FEDE116L LANDQ VNER if an Agency: Street: City: State: Zip Code: Telephone Number: ( 1 - CC STATE OR FEDERAL LANDO��^vER tifanv) Agency: Street: City: State: Zip Code: Telephone Number: ( )- -4- 12. Prima future(Post-mining) Ian use(check one): — Cropland(CR) Pastureland(PL) General Agriculture(GA) -! J Rangeland(RL) ji Forestry(FR) _ \\ildlife Habitat(WLI Residential(RS) E Recreation(RC) Industrial/Commercial(IC) -i ! Developed Water Resources(W R) _D Solid Waste Disposal(WD) 13. Primary present land use(check one (� r- -1 J- Cropland(CR) Pastureland(PL) _as General Agriculture(GA) O Rangeland(RL) _ Forestry(FR) Wildlife Habitat(WL) Residential(RS)Developed Water Resources \Recreation(RC) 1' I Industrial-Commercial(IC) R) 14. Method of Mining: Briefly explain mining method(e.g.truck%shovel): Open pit mine with loaders, trucks, excavators, and dozers. 15. On Site Processing: Crushing Screening 13.1 Briefly explain mining method(e.g.truckiishovel): Cone crusher fed by loaders and conveyors. List any designated chemicals or acid-producing materials to be used or stored within permit area: None 16. Description of Amendment or Conversion: If you are amending or converting an existing operation.provide a brief narrative describing the proposed change(s). The Loloff Pit is currently permitted for approximately 55.17 acres and we are proposing to increase the affected area to approximately 46.9 acres from the current 42.7 acres in the Reclamation Plan. The additional was a proposed shop and storage area that has never been used as such. Loloff Construction, Inc. would like to mine the additional area. R certincatioA: As an authorized representative of the applicant. I hereby certify that the operation described has met the minimum requirements of the following terms and conditions: 1. To the best of my knowledge,all significant.valuable and permanent man-made structure(s)in existence at the time this application is filed,and located within 200 feet of the proposed affected area have been identified in this application (Section 34-32.5-115(4)(e). C.R.S.). 2. No mining operation will be located on lands where such operations are prohibited by law (Section 34-32.5-115(4)(fl. C.R.S.: 3. As the applicant/operator. I do not have any extraction'exploration operations in the State of Colorado currently in violation of the provisions of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials (Section 34-32.5-120, C.R.S.) as determined through a Board finding. 4. I understand that statements in the application are being made under penalty of perjury and that false statements made herein are punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor pursuant to Section 18-8-503. C.R.S. This form has been approved by the Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to section 3J-32.5.112,C.R.S.. of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction.1(aterials. .anv alteration or modification of this form shall result in voiding any permit issued on the altered or modified form and subject the operator to cease and desist orders and civil penalties frrr eonrating without a permit pursuant to section 3d-32.5-123. C.R.S. •Signed and dated this day of ''! "7' "• ° " -I-I( ' ' y - —'1 ,on:-. re-c.:~' °' . 4 If Corporation Attest(Seal) Applicant/Operator or Company Name z Signed: —7''",`".'✓ "' . Signed: `-> r- � Corporate Secretary or Equivalent Title: -' = r', 4.'—' = Town/City/County Clerk State of ..,„. 4,,-'1,..- ) ) ss. County of P . , I, ,-_ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ` ' r' " " „ ,by _moor—, r 11,...6.-.•;_7,--- as .G;, - ,.s of _� : r;ry `ti MIC�NAE S HQ $ Notary Public * E NOTARY PUBLIC• rym A ►OALLENCOUNTY, . Gomm, - .. _ Nev. 1g, • 1 S My Commission expires: <: ,. T SIGNATURES MUST BE IN BLUE INK You must post sufficient Notices at the location of the proposed mine site to clearly identify the site as the location of a EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4&S1/2 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 4 Township 5 N Range 65 W of the 6th P.M.in the County of Weld in the State of Colorado. The physical address is 655 Balsam Drive, Greeley, Colorado. The site entrance is located at 40°25'47.84" N and 104°40'06.38"W EXHIBIT B INDEX MAP • �►. f 4'ra�:. k �1. _ .1 /to t �. p • ,.. Vrer I I er 1 .„,, .. . ( .. .. 111 4 ``- . hi~' • a ► 1'S•' !. . ..,_ .. -- I !� • • • ��.- - ,y ,• .t ' ti t 't I r '` ' i • :et •ismi . . • 1 1e 33 , •••• w t p :• ' k 64 r• i s ®'. , r ':4 j ti.... 4 *3 tit' ‘lik Alt ...... t 74li ; ,: .ri- :ta;4t i t • • , _ r Loloff Pit r t► f I. ir , Nf •i, J 5 1 • _• ta , i 1��12 k Vi e.+ c.otii;q.c;p.4 '2 . .,. Greeley • '' Color• ado ?�t t • 11 a • , . ; II' :.UUf : 5 "I ,i :; ' i• a t. . < . f , \ ...,. , . , �" , 16th• St .- -4' 53 388 1* •ir • vi ` , , _, l I , - ,•J I. A I' .,, !.. d�, y� �" "'. -. '...i . •.i i.? R t i i : 1 —1;4 . • Garden c, It.y -� - 4 �' ' • t..701[01# IN • toffs, . ' 1' t : hM i a .) as '� c , - - ' V '% ` tr- .. i - - j .. _. - _ ,, ,, I. - -� " I • ,{} ' I•'�r . a_e H` �� I-t sr� x'`5.01 '! 1rJ4'3�•+'�3.7•i -IL :, Not to Scale EXHIBIT C EXISTING MINE PLAN The following section contains the mine plan that has been approved with mine permit M-1985-112 and Loloff Pit Technical Revision No. 1 completed by J&T Consulting (2013). Attached is a supplemental map showing the planned mining and final grading for the Loloff Pit under the current permit conditions. The existing topography shown in the exhibits was surveyed in 2013. The existing permit requires a minimum of 50'feet offset from the property line to the mine permit limits and mining activities. The current pit configuration has been reviewed as part of TR-01, and an amended stability analysis was completed for the final re-graded side slopes of 3H:1V in the inclusion area. This site is an active mining operation and at the current production rate,the current reserves defined within the existing mine plan is approximately 1.5-3 years under the current market conditions. This is subject to change as market conditions change. N P.h V ",10.29. o DU 'uoI}one}suo3 }}olo; W I r t X ,_ ;- t1.—,1A-,a�t... w. �,l la a_ kc k ,f,-- - r L -k hr �� . .,. im - -rar ^sr,Je 'max'^ _� ...- _...� r— — ._ -,- i , ,, ( r _l_.... -.- --- ,, I i, .__ -. .7- - - ' i -"' 1y1 / I 'r I, N I I I ‘.4I, :li I i il 9x I it l l',I I I I 'a "I I I I I I I'I 1 ,' xx 1 .n yyyy F �� =s, �I l i a dl 1 s I -.$ 1111 t 1,, 1,1, it f l i, IA ! { I :JG.IT.I ' - `�\I {s d I EXHIBIT D MINE PLAN The Loloff Pit is an operational sand and gravel mine, with this application being for the expansion of the existing reclamation boundaries to include 4.24 acres of additional mining area. The site is approximately 55.17 acres with 42.7 acres of impacted area currently permitted under Permit M-1985- 112 on file with the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining&Safety. The permit area of 55.17 acres shall remain unchanged, however, the mine and reclamation limits are proposed to be increased with this amendment. Exhibit C shows the current permitted mining area and Exhibit D shows the proposed areas to be affected under the amendment to the reclamation permit. The affected areas include Area 1 in the northeast corner of the property that was identified as a shop and storage area in the original permit application. The property ownership changed hands over the two years and it is the new owners desire to mine this area as it contains approximately 450,000 tons of material with an average depth of 45 feet in the northeast corner. The other area where the modified mine boundaries are being requested is in the south west corner of the property identified on the map as Area 2. This area was disturbed by previous operators and this amendment includes this disturbance. This amendment shall accommodate the minimum offsets while maximizing the water storage volume for post reclamation use. This area is not a mining area as much as it is an amendment to the reclamation plan. The modifications proposed in Area 2 do not create any additional encroachment of existing structures. This area of impact is approximately 0.25 acres and there is not any significant depth of material. The current method of mining is a dry mining operation with de-watering occurring in the southeast corner of the property. De-watering trenches have been excavated and the sand and gravel is subsequently mined using an excavator to load haul trucks to haul material to a stockpile to feed the crusher plant. The crusher plant is loaded with front end loaders and the final product of road base will be loaded into trucks with front end loaders from a stockpile. The pit is currently mined in areas of 15- 20 acres at a time with 5-10 feet of depth of material. Stability analysis were performed with the Loloff Pit Permit M-1985-112 Technical Revision No. 1 and revised with this amendment to include the slurry wall. All mining techniques submitted with TR-01 will apply to the amended areas to be mined. The results of the stability analysis have been attached for your review. There is no use of explosives on this site and there are no explosives to be stored on site. The material being mined currently is sand and gravel that is crushed and screened to create various road base products or it is sold as pit run and used for construction materials. These construction materials are being utilized in the oil and gas fields for pad site construction and with the current market in new site development,the intended timeline for the completion of the reclamation of the pit is 2017/2018, but is subject to change as the market changes. It should be noted that the slopes are being graded to the final reclamation slopes as mining operations are on-going where possible. It is the owner's intent to have a slurry wall installed to mitigate infiltration of ground water as part of the final reclamation plan, so re-vegetation of the slopes has not begun, but shall be completed once the wall is installed. The timeline for installing the slurry wall is estimated to be 2016/2017, but could be sooner if the market conditions allow. I \ / ♦ r \ r ♦ --' /-, F-\ h J Ei 1N' o '3U 'uo!}ona{suo0 }}0°1 �I - OO _ 0 �r -�aac,„var-oef--„ q_9, --- r o • 'e '� i IIII' y i! lily 1,/1 1 I • �� .. T�'I 1`1�k\\\ : �"`.I I\ ( 4� E} �5 * Ir k _ ,I 1 Y� _c� I,I°I I' , } _`_r- _ �-- --'-' — - o +- J SLOPE STABILITY REPORT FOR THE LOLOFF PIT WELD COUNTY, COLORADO JULY 2013 REVISED: AUGUST 2013 REVISED: JULY 2015 PREPARED FOR: LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION, INC. PO Box 518 KERSEY, CO 80644 PREPARED BY: J&T Consulting, Inc. Id I 305 DENVER AVENUE-SUITE D FORT LUPTON, CO 80621 PHONE: 303-857-6222 FAX: 303-857-6224 CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify this slope stability analysis for Loloff Construction, Inc., the Loloff Pit, located in Weld County, Colorado was prepared by me or under my direct supervision. 0 Rc. EG�S�. * f." 36846 .. James C. York Registered Professional Engineer State of Colorado No. 36846 110 Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis id ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page i Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Overview III. Geotechnical Data IV. Design Analysis and Criteria V. Methodology VI. Slope Stability Results VII. Conclusions and Recommendations Appendices Appendix A Slope Stability Case Location Map Appendix B Slope Stability Case Cross-Sections Appendix C Slope Stability Case Xstabl Output Appendix D Geotechnical Investigation Report Appendix E USGS Map, Oct. 2002 revision — "Peak Acceleration (%g) with a 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 yrs" Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis Id ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page ii INTRODUCTION Loloff Construction, Inc. proposes to mine the property located in the Southeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 and the South '/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4, Section 4, Township 5 North, Range 65 West, Sixth P.M. in Weld County, Colorado. The property is bounded by Balsam Avenue on the east, and private property on the north, south, and west. State Highway 263 (8th Street) is less than a quarter of a mile south of the subject property. The proposed mining operation will extract gravel reserves from locations adjacent to man-made structures. The rules and regulations of the Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety (DRMS) require that any mining within a 200 foot setback of a man-made structure show thorough engineering analysis that the proposed mining will not cause damage. The accepted method of demonstrating this is through a slope stability analysis. This report contains an overview of the prior geotechnical investigation results by Empire Laboratories, Inc., and the methodology used in the analysis of the mining slopes and their estimated affects on all man-made structures. Recommendations regarding acceptable setbacks from man-made structures have also been included. OVERVIEW The DRMS mining plan proposes that the property will be mined in 2 phases. The reclamation plan, Exhibits E and F, propose the future use for this property to be wildlife habitat. The mining will occur at 3H:1V slopes. Concurrent reclamation is planned such that the reclamation embankment will be constructed as the mining progresses. The reservoir will cover an estimated 43 surface acres when full. Actual surface area will depend on the final configuration of the reservoir after reclamation is complete. GEOTECHNICAL DATA Preliminary geotechnical investigations have been performed by Empire Laboratories, Inc. J&T Consulting, Inc. (JT) estimated soil strength parameters based on the information from the geotechnical investigation, which was provided to JT by Loloff Construction, and other stability analyses that have been performed on gravel mining operations along the front range. Table 1, on the following page, represents a summary of the soil strength parameters that were used in this stability analysis. Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis id ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 1 Table 1 - Soil Properties Description Max dry Saturated Cohesion Internal density Density (psf) Friction (pcf) (pcf) Angle Overburden 110 131 150 22 Sand and Gravel 110 125 0 35 Weathered 125 141 100 18 Bedrock Stable Bedrock 125 141 2000 20 Slurry Wall 100 110 0 45 DESIGN ANALYSIS AND CRITERIA The proposed mining slopes were analyzed using the XSTABL v5.105a computer program. XSTABL was designed to analyze the slope stability of earth embankments subjected to several critical situations that may occur during the life of the embankment. For this project, four cases were identified as critical during the mining operation. Static and pseudo-static conditions were analyzed in each case. Pseudo-static peak acceleration factors were taken from USGS information for the western United States. The 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years (the most conservative) was used. Surface loading equivalent to an HS 20 highway load was applied adjacent to each area to simulate heavy equipment loading that could be present at that location for maintenance or construction activities. All mining side slopes will be 3H:1V. Case North — North Property Line (NORTH). The mining operation is adjacent to a private property with a permanent structure near the north property line of the site. The proposed setback for mining is 50 feet from the property line. The mining depth was assumed to be 59 feet in this area based on bore log information in the geotechnical report. Case South - South Property Line (SOUTH). The mining operation is adjacent to private property with several permanent structures near south property line of the site. The mining depth was assumed to be 44 feet in this area based on bore log information in the geotechnical report. The proposed mining setback was set 50 feet from the property line Case East — Existing Balsam Avenue ROW (EAST). The mining operation is bounded by Balsam Avenue on the east with a 60' ROW. The mining depth was assumed to be 59 feet in this area based on bore log information in the Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis IA ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 2 geotechnical report. The proposed mining setback was set 50 feet from the ROW. Case West — South Property Line (WEST). The mining operation is adjacent to private property with several permanent structures near west property line of the site. The mining depth was assumed to be 52.5 feet in this area based on bore log information in the geotechnical reports. The proposed mining setback was set 50 feet from the property line The cross-sections located in Appendix B show the estimated phreatic surface associated with each case as well as the geometry used in the mining. METHODOLOGY The mining embankment configuration shown in the computer analysis represents the estimated conditions for this site. If mining conditions differ from the estimated conditions, the slope stability will need to be re-evaluated on a case by case basis. The Bishop Method was used in the computer analysis for determining safety factors. The procedure searches for circular shear failures and automatically searches for the lowest safety factor. 2,000 separate failure surfaces were analyzed for each case. The required minimum safety factors are based on the current standards used by the Colorado State Engineer's Office (SEO) in evaluating embankment dams, and industry accepted standards for the evaluation of temporary structures during construction. SLOPE STABILITY RESULTS The SEO requires minimum safety factors of 1.3 for static condition analyses and 1.0 for pseudo-static (earthquake loading) condition analyses for Class I (high hazard) embankment dams. This design criteria was used to establish the desired minimum safety factors for this project and should be considered as highly conservative for evaluating alluvial mining slopes. The calculated factors of safety are within the design criteria specified for this project and can be considered indicators of the mining slope performance under the various conditions. The slopes were analyzed using full and empty reservoir conditions. The results of the static condition and pseudo-static condition slope stability analyses in Table 2 and Table 3. II . Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 3 Table 2 - Static Condition Slope Stability Analysis Results Description Calculated Required Factor Minimum Factor Of Safety Of Safety Case North — North Property Line 1.41 1.30 Case North — North Property Line 3.57 1.30 Full Reservoir Case North — North Property Line to Structure 1.52 1.30 Case South — Property Line 1.71 1.30 Case South — Property Line 5.93 1.30 Full Reservoir Case South — Property Line to Structure 1.95 1.30 Case East— Existing Balsam Avenue ROW 1.42 1.30 Case East— Existing Balsam Avenue ROW 3.60 1.30 Full Reservoir Case East — Existing Balsam Avenue ROW to 1.54 1.30 Structure Case West— West Property Line 1.50 1.30 Case West—West Property Line 4.17 1.30 Full Reservoir Case West—West Property Line to Structure 1.67 1.30 Table 3 - Pseudo-Static Condition Slope Stability Analysis Results Description Calculated Required Factor Minimum Factor Of Safety Of Safety Case North EQ — North Property Line 1.06 1.0 Case North EQ — North Property Line 1.99 1.0 Full Reservoir Case North EQ — North Property Line to 1.12 1.0 Structure Case South EQ — South Property Line 1.23 1.0 Case South EQ — South Property Line 2.61 1.0 Full Reservoir Case South EQ — South Property Line to 1.36 1.0 Structure Case East EQ — Existing Balsam Avenue ROW 1.06 1.0 Case East EQ — Existing Balsam Ave ROW. 2.00 1.0 Full Reservoir Case East EQ — East Property Line to Structure 1.13 1.0 Case West EQ —West Property Line 1.11 1.0 Case West EQ —West Property Line 2.19 1.0 Full Reservoir I Case West EQ — West Property Line to 1.21 1.0 Structure Pit 1 Loloff Construction, Inc. Loloff Slope Stability Analysis J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 4 ill CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Case North - The resulting safety factor of 1.41 exceeds the SEO minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.06 is above the SEO minimum requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 3.57 under static loading and 1.99 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the north property line is satisfactory. Case South - The resulting safety factor of 1.71 exceeds the SEO minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.23 is above the SEO minimum requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 5.93 under static loading and 2.61 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the south property line is satisfactory. Case East - The resulting safety factor of 1.42 exceeds the SEO minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.06 is above the SEO minimum requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 3.60 under static loading and 2.00 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the existing ROW is satisfactory. Case West - The resulting safety factor of 1.50 exceeds the SEO minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment during construction. The resulting safety factor of 1.11 is above the SEO minimum requirement of 1.0 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 4.17 under static loading and 2.19 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the west property line is satisfactory. Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis id ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 5 The following recommendations for monitoring of slope stability should be followed: 1. A visual inspection of the excavated slopes should be done on a weekly basis for the duration of mining. This inspection should consist of walking the existing ground and looking for any signs of stress cracks or other potential signs of slope failure. Some minor sloughing of slopes is expected on any mine site. The intent of this inspection is to locate potential major slope failures that could potentially extend back into a structure. 2. A visual inspection should be done after a major precipitation event that has saturated the ground using the same procedures. A major precipitation event would be defined as a storm that produces an intensity level reached once in 50 years on the average. 3. If a visual inspection detects signs of a potential slope failure, qualified personnel should be contacted to evaluate and recommend remediation work to stabilize the area. 4. If no visible signs of slope failure are detected during mining, then the inspection period could be reduced to once per 6 months after mining completion, or after every major precipitation event. Loloff Construction, Inc.-Loloff Pit Slope Stability Analysis id ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Page 6 EXHIBIT E RECLAMATION PLAN The Loloff Pit is an operational sand and gravel mine, with this application being for the expansion of the existing mine boundaries to include approximately 4.24 acres of additional mining area. The site is approximately 55.17 acres with 42.7 acres currently permitted under Permit M-1985-112 on file with the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining&Safety. Exhibit F shows the intended Reclamation Plan Map for the Loloff Pit. It is the operator's intent to apply all of the vegetation and re-grading requirements set forth in the original mine permit with some minor changes. The original permit does not call out water storage as an end use and did not account for a slurry wall to be constructed as part of the reclamation plan to allow for the water storage as an end use. With this amendment submittal,there are bonding calculations to include the estimated cost for constructing the slurry wall. Water storage is a consistent use for post mining operations and would be consistent with State and Local land use programs. The affected area in the amended mine area will be re-graded to the final reclamation grades with a GPS controlled D6 Caterpillar dozer. All reclaimed slopes to be re-vegetated, shall be re-seeded per the attached seed mix provided by the Greeley NRCS Field Office.All disturbed area slopes will be graded to a final slope no steeper than 3H:1V and all final slopes within the reservoir will have final slopes from the reservoir crest to the toe of slope of 3H:1V and the final reservoir bottom grade will vary from 2%to 0.5%to the sump. All reclaimed slopes from five (5) feet below the maximum water surface elevation of the reservoir and disturbed areas surrounding the reservoir shall be reseeded with the proposed mix design provided by the Greeley NRCS Field Office. The current reclamation plan requires 6 to 12 inches of topsoil placement within the 100-yr floodplain and 18-24 inches of topsoil placement outside of the floodplain. There is not a stockpile for topsoil currently, however,the area to be included in the amendment shall provide topsoil for the reclamation. No irrigation system proposed as a part of the reclamation plan. Reseeding shall occur during the recommended planting periods of November 1 to April 30. The additional area to be re-vegetated with the approval of this amendment is approximately 4.24 acres. The schedule for the completion of the Reclamation Plan is estimated to begin within the next 18 months as mining operations have been ongoing and if market conditions maintain the current pace, mining should be completed in the next 36 months. With the installation of the slurry wall,the slopes that have not been regraded to the final 3H:1V slope where mining has extended to the mine limits, will be final graded and then reseeded with native grasses.The south wall,the west wall, and a portion of the north wall, have been mined to the mine limits and could be graded and seeded if the slurry wall were in place; however, while de-watering is on-going,the trenches prevent the slopes from being graded to the final slopes. The installation of the slurry wall is the critical path item that drives the final grading and seeding timeline, along with the mining operations advancing towards the north and east slopes. Current operations estimates a 1.5 to 3 year mine plane. Based from the mix design provided by NRCS,and the input from staff,the applicant does not intend on using fertilization to establish vegetation. Attached in this section is a "Weed Watch List"that are the species that may need to be dealt with in Colorado. In the event any of the listed species are identified, appropriate action shall be taken to mitigate weed infestation. Annual site inspections shall be completed by inspectors and in the event they determine a noxious weed not on the watch list exists, then appropriate action to mitigate shall be taken and follow up inspections scheduled to verify effectiveness. Native Grass Seed Mix (sands) Weld County (Greeley NRCS Field Office) Mix based on Range Seeding(550)specifications for Sand or Loamy Sand soil textures PLS/ACRE @ %of Mixture PLS RATE PER VARIETY SPECIES 100% ACRE 1 Goshen Prairie Sandreed * 3.5 30 1.05 Woodward Sand Bluestem * 8.0 20 1.60 El Reno Sideoats Grama * 4.5 20 0.90 Arriba Western Wheatgrass 8.0 15 1.20 Blackwell Switchgrass * 2.5 ! 10 0.25 Cheyenne Yellow lndiangrass* 5.0 5 0.25 Total 100 I 4.20 - Seeding Dates: November 1 to April 30 *required grasses in mix 'Mix must be seeded with a Native Grass Drill Options for Variety if the specified variety is in short supply, etc. Niner Sideoats Grama Holt Yellow Indiangrass Nebraska 28 Switchgrass Barton Western Wheatgrass Recommend addition or substitution(up to 10%)of one of the following Forb or Legume Species: PLS RATE PERT Variety Species ACRE Ladak or Ranger Alfalfa Up to 0.5 Native Winterfat Native Fourwing Saltbush " Native Purple Prairieclover " Native 'American Vetch " COL►;ADO r tIlE l r �r 1 , DEPARTMENT OF IA MAIL AGRICULTURE Colorado Noxious Weed Management Program ;;It' ,f.7 '� = Asian mustard Baby's breath(Gypsophila paniculata) .., 1 r . / R • (Brassica tournefortii) _ -y • ' 5 •12-18 in.tall&up to 16 in.wide k •18-36 in.tall;basal •Blooms summer through fall - `,i;� '� (.. l � rosette up to 36 in.wide .Flowers clustered,delicate, / 'Plants set seed prior to April white or pink,5-parted x ,Y'* ' • Seed pods up to 2 1/2 in.long 'Leaves linear-lance-shaped .,,- 9 • " •Basal rosette leaves hairy; hairy,opposite;3/4 to 4 in.long 1,• F.!• pinnately lobed&with toothed margins •Seed capsules egg-shaped,less tt . •Seeds light reddish brown or black than 1/10 in.,very small&blackish Cogongrass s ,. " Common bugloss fm'°r /4.1P. (Imperata cylindnca) r, yis (Anchusa officinalis) ,, ` ` , •Up to 6 ft.tall +t •1-2 ft.tall by 1-2 ft.wide %CIof 7 ' •Colony-forming l' {C.• 'Blooms June to October F ' �� 'Flowers 2-8 in.;fuzzy ' '-• ,• • •Flowers 1/2 in.bright blue to y-- purple with white throats 1 'Leaves 1/2 to 3/4 in.wide with I , 'Stems&leaves fleshy&hairy off-center whitish midrib,finely serrated r 'f----•,.- \ 'Leaves narrow&slightly pointed; ''• • • margins&a sham,pointed apex - alternate&get smaller up stem •••., • t:t, 'Rhizomes whitish,scaly&sharp ;;,,,,,,:t 4 r� 7 *Fruit 4-chambered nutlet,1 seed each '" Common reed (Phragmites australis) • Flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus) •6-15 ft.tall;spreads by rhizomes •Up to 5 ft.tall;perennial aquatic 'Forms dense thickets in or near water 'Blooms late summer;flowers 1 in.wide 'Blooms July to October 'Leaves basal,sword-like& . 'Flowers feathery&drooping; I ., up to 3 ft.tall by 0.5 in.wide 'Thick,creaping rhizomes can appear silvery or purplish s l 'Stems triangular,not round 'Leaves blue-green,flat,smooth N .,u; I -Fruits brown,0.5 in.long 'Native species of Phragmites f 'Tolerant to a wide also exist in Colorado 4 �I temperature range Garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) Hairy willow-herb (Epilobium hirsutum) AletilikL.--qt •1-4 ft.tall;herbaceous biennial .3-6 ft.tall;perennial •Blooms early spring ; , 4, , -�" 'Blooms June to August 'Flowers small with four white petals , ,,; 'Rosette leaves 1-6 in.&heart-shaped `" ` *Flowers single, 1/2 to 1 in. •Mature seeds shiny black in erect, -'II 'Stems covered in soft hairs slender green pods that turn pale brown 'Seeds with white silky tuft in long seedpod •Garlic odor when plant parts crushed , ' ` "Leaves 1/2 in.wide,2-4 in.long,opposite, •Highly shade-tolerant;can lance-shaped with toothed edges;attached directly to stem invade high quality,mature woodlands 'Numerous native species have been found in CO wetlands Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) Meadow hawkweed \' •,ir/ Rr 43 (Hieracium caespitosum) • , 'Up to 15 ft.;thicket-forming shrub ,C, •0 'Blooms late spring to summer •1-3 ft.tall - s • ... 'Flowers 1 in.in groups of 3-20 'Blooms late May to June;flower heads in �. ,• 'Compound leaves dark green tight clusters;5-30 heads per stem :.< , \ above&pale to whitish below; 'Leaves mostly basal;lance shaped,up to six . '- ••f �--,-— ,, leaves on 1st year shoots have in.long&hairy;form dense mat at base •'. 5 leaflets&leaves on 2nd year •Stems,leaves&bracts have dense blackish ` Id f ;, , side shoots have 3 leaflets hairs&exude milky sap when broken Onionweed 'r t Purple Pampasgrass (Asphodelus fistulosus) . ,' _ (Cortaderia jubata) ': w kf •11/2-21/2 ft.tall tufted clumps ' t.t,,is.,=` *,. •6-23 ft.;large clumping grass 'Blooms July through August t. + "Blooms July to September 'Flowers 1/4 to 1/2 in.wide '•i * ,..- •1-3 ft.showy,purple-tinged 'Stems branched&hollow plumes on reed-like stem •Leaves 3-14 in.long by 1/4 in.wide ;:; •Up to 100,000 seeds per plume 'Doesn't smell like onion&doesn't form bulb 'Sheaths are densely hairy 'Seeds triangular in cross-section;sharp edges 'Leaves basal;3-5 ft.;sharply serrated Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius) Sericea lespedeza t (Lespedeza cuneata) f � •7 ft.tall by 3 1/2 ft.wide . 4"' `T, •Blooms late spring to early summer •3 to 6 ft.tall ₹' �^ "y� 'Flowers 1 in.&pea-like •Blooms summer to fall f •Trifoliate leaves dark green above; 'Flowers in clusters of 2-4 40'''t 0yg paler&fuzzy below;alternate& •Leaves thin,alternate,abundant �. pinately compound;1/2-1 in.wide &three-parted;leaflets 1/2-1 in. *j `" �.: � \• } it- •Grooved stems up to 2 in.wide with wedge-shaped bases;hairy * - •Flat seedpods with small black seeds •One to many slender stems Spiny cocklebur (Xanthium ?. - ti Swainsonpea (Sphaerophysa salsula) spinosum) 4.�' ;, 4,uf* a<nw,nu •1-4 ft.tall by 1-4 ft.wide 1 •'+ A •Up to 5 ft.tall ` V.? .• •Blooms May to June 'Blooms June to July ,� }4i •Flowers 1-11/2 in.;creamy green """j ?. w 'Flowers 1/4-1 in.long,pea- 'Stem straight&ridgid M► k+;-,4 *"':7'4I . shaped,&in groups of 4-8 "Leaves alternate,up to 3 in.long I , J ..*' ' "Leaves compound pinnate,alternate; &11/2 in.wide;3-lobed;shiny o';' ,```$ � °. 4 ` ,.. '" 9-25 oval leaflets with silvery hairs 'Female flowers become burrs "1". 1:--- ,, i'! i " " -; • '. •Seeds form in inflated bladder-like pods which are the fruits;egg-shaped 7 '-, 1;.•'. •Woody taproot with spreading rhizomes Syrian beancaper Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) " .. p • ft (Zygophyllum fabago) 4 �" .Up to 3 ft.tall;dense floating aquatic " kip to 3 ft.tall by 3 ft.wide •Forms dense thickets in water __ •Blooms May to August •Blooms July to October CA •Flowers can be white,yellow or salmon •Flowers 2 in.wide in clusters Food &Ag color&have 10-12 orange stamens at the end of a 12-in.spike �i c, i D c, •Stems succulent&multi-branched •Leaves dark green,11/2 to �`� / *Leaves opposite,compound& 4 1/2 in.wide&6 in.long il•„ , 4 ,./ ` , with 2 thick,fleshy leaflets 'Feathery roots ! A 1 1 s, Water lettuce(Pistia stratiotes) ! ,' White bryony(eryonia alba)10. '61•2-3 ft.tall;dense floating aquatic ',--..- ( •12 ft.long or more;vigorous ' 'Blooms late summer to winter .. * , . ',I vine;can grow 6 in.per day 'Flowers inconspicuous;clustered 4 "`''''''' •Blooms mid-summer -ass :1� on small,fleshy stalk in leaf axils ` Y •Flower 1/2 in.wide&greenish-white air "'N.*. , - ` ream,. •Leaves velvety,hairy,spongy -, "' ! ' •Leaves dark green&palmately lobed; &in rosettes;6 in.long; each has a corkscrew tendril for climbing i,,a connected by short stolons .F 'Highly toxic seeds in round,black fruit 'Roots numerous j &feathery . *Forms dense mats&shades out vegetation Coll d s lanatus) t r Yellow flag iris y Woolly distaff thistle ,,, ' I q _ t ( / (Ins pseudacorus) J ti T.ttr •3-4 ft.tall wetland perennial • '. : " a •31/2 ft.tall ..,,. "f z, 'Blooms late spring to early summer -Blooms July to August 7- .: .7 'Flowers bright yellow with _,, 'Flowers 1-2 in.wide ° "..a 3 drooping sepals&3 smaller,upright with spiny bracts ---.„,:r"::,4,, petals,3 in.wide&in groups of 2-10 ''Pale green stems hairy,rigid,upper portion y ,',./ 'Leaves arise from base,flat with raised branched;plants persist after they have died ,k .F , mid-rib;rhisomes grow up to 20 ft. 'Flowers similar to yellow starthistle tiw i-7.`. •Fruit are 2 in.brown capsules The CDA Watch List consists of species that have been determined to pose a potential threat to the agricultural productivity and environmental values of Contact:Patty York, the lands of the state. Many species included on this list are not yet known EDRR Specialist to occur in the state but have been recognized as noxious or problematic by Colorado Department of another state or states in the region. For the included species that do occur Agriculture in Colorado, more information is needed about their distribution and effect on Conservation Services agricultural and natural lands in the state. Division Noxious Weed Program 700 Kipling St.Suite 4000 Report sitings to:weeds@state.co.us Lakewood,CO 80215 Please include a latitude&longitude or a detailed description of the site location with (303)239-5767 directions and a photograph. More info at:www.colorado.gov/ag/weeds Photos used in this brochure are from www.invasive.org 11/12 EXHIBIT F RECLAMATION PLAN MAP The attached exhibit shows the modified pit configuration to include the amendment areas with final grading of side slopes at 3H:1V. Exhibit F shows the limits of the areas to be reseeded across the entire site, as well as, access roads around the perimeter of the pit. ..I ♦ r r, e . i /-------1e � ,—\ { I l�lr%i Ir.C, :11nfl'ns. iI¢l"nV>lie,. o •DUI 'uoi}ana}su°3 OJOi , -I i,, , -'r-'. I = J I - u �, � E.ma i I LY Yf S.-','—` ''''''t_, t ' t f' ?=-,::'' ''.'-':-.:t" i 3 : n< h. _ i t7,'✓a ` fry — _.,_ �' r. _. L rrc'Y )://�r B'� ... "I1� If1l,� •�'�r \N�'5I,I \L1 I 0 • III II 7! PPPNNN ,,: - / VIII i ° r I�f-�,Qa. ' j I jlq 16 �-.� „IliI,1 Ir ,,1' �hif �� 7. f�i'� I �. �� t ��, r MF �j ,�,.! __ -- _,- II; ;i ,AEI / "_� - Iir,� dill , 1119. II IR �I �, Ill' I- rJ e ,1 ,'a1 t � 1 � "� �. x,, I ` _ kIII F. , a BFI _f �a 1 1 7 N\ ff� ^y� r. i1.•. rr •� •.7Li ��-rig'' + i'` __,, rr rrs R s, EXHIBIT G WATER INFORMATION The Loloff Pit mine permit amendment will increase the exposed groundwater during the mining operations. The operator has currently posted a financial warranty for the reclamation costs and has an agreement with the State to post a financial warranty for the amended mine permit with the proposed slurry wall construction. The groundwater impacts and the discharge capacities were evaluated for the Loloff Pit Permit M-1985-112 Technical Revision No. 1 (TR-01). There are no additional wells impacted other than those that have been addressed with the TR-01 and field evaluation has not located any new or undocumented structures. The groundwater is currently being collected by de-watering trenches and the increased area of mining will not increase the total volume of water reporting to the pit. This conclusion is made on the fact the slope area of the proposed mine plan is nearly the same as the slope area under the current approved mine plan. With this, it is anticipated that there will not be a significant change in the discharge rate required for the current mining operations. Other than the ground water, there are no other water sources that will be affected with this amendment and the ground water impacts are currently being mitigated with a substitute supply plan. Attached for your review is a copy of the Loloff Substitute Supply Plan (WDID 0302524). Loloff Construction, Inc. acknowledges the Department of Water Resources comments regarding the need for a current substitute supply plan and discharge permit, which are currently in place. De-watering of the pit currently occurs at the southeast corner of the pit and discharges into a drainage ditch that conveys the water to the river. Any potential increase in groundwater flow to this discharge point is not a significant amount relative to the amount of de-watering required currently. The discharge ditch was evaluated as part of the TR-01 for the Loloff Pit. There is currently an NPDES permit on file numbered COG-500375 and is permitted for an estimated average discharge rate of 3 million gallons per day (MGD). Attached you will find a draft copy of the requested shadow modeling for the effects of the slurry wall. of•C ._i•x DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES j *0i DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES * aF i John W.Hickenlooper /876 P Governor Mike King Executive Director February 25, 2015 Dick Wolfe,P.E. Director/State Engineer Paul Weiss, P.E. Williams and Weiss Consulting, LLC 5255 Ronald Reagan Boulevard, Ste. 220 Johnstown, CO 80534 Re: Loloff Substitute Water Supply Plan (WDID 0302524) Loloff Pit, DRMS Permit No. M-1985-112 (WDID 0303012) Section 4, T5N, R65W, 6th P.M. Water Division 1, Water District 3, Weld County Approval Period: January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 Contact Phone Number for Mr. Weiss: 970-221-5159 Dear Mr. Weiss: We have reviewed your letters dated December 17, 2014 and January 21, 2015 requesting approval of a substitute water supply plan ("SWSP") on behalf of Loloff Construction, Inc. ("Loloff" or "Applicant") to cover depletions caused by an existing gravel pit operation. This site was previously covered under the combined SWSP for Aggregate Industries ("Al"); however a separate SWSP was obtained by Loloff for the site in 2008. The required renewal fee of$257 (receipt no. 3667825) has been received. SWSP Operations The Loloff Pit is a gravel pit operation located in the SE%a of the NWIA of Section 4, Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., in Weld County. Well permit no. 77467-F has been issued for the site. This SWSP will make replacements to the Cache La Poudre River for depletions resulting from mining operations at the Loloff Pit during the 2015 plan year, and for lagged depletions from past operations at the site. During this plan period, consumptive uses at the Loloff Pit site will include evaporative losses from exposed ground water within the permit boundaries, and operational uses. The replacement sources proposed to be utilized in this SWSP are yield from one share of the Greeley Irrigation Company and a lease of wholly consumable supplies from the City of Greeley. Depletions Consumptive use at the Loloff Pit site will include evaporative and operational losses. Depletions are assumed to impact the Cache La Poudre River perpendicular to the Loloff Pit, just above the headgate of the Ogilvy Ditch (WDID 0300937). The pit is proposed to be continuously dewatered during this plan period to allow dry mining. Based on a November 21, 2014 survey, there are a total of 1.52 acres of ground water exposed in dewatering ditches at the site. Net evaporative depletions were calculated using a gross annual evaporation of 45 inches from the exposed water surface, with a credit of 9.97 inches for effective precipitation. No credit was claimed for ice cover periods. The net depletion of ground water due to Office of the State Engineer 1313 Sherman Street, Suite 818•Denver,CO 80203•Phone:303-866-3581 •Fax:303-866-3589 www.water.state.co.us Loloff Pit SWSP Page 2 of 7 February 25, 2015 evaporation of exposed ground water surface was calculated to be 4.43 acre-feet for this plan year. The estimated monthly depletions due to evaporation during 2015 are shown on the attached Table 1. Operational losses associated with mining activities will consist of water removed with the mined product and water used for dust control. Approximately 500,000 tons of material is projected to be mined in 2015. A 2%water loss is assessed as the material will be mined in a dewatered state and will not be washed. The quantity of water removed with the mined product is therefore estimated to be 7.36 acre-feet. A total of 4.10 acre-feet of water are estimated to be used for dust control purposes in 2015 based on a usage rate of 2,100 to 5,600 gallons per day. All water used for dust control purposes is assumed to be 100% consumed. The estimated monthly depletions due to operational losses during 2015 are shown on the attached Table 2. The IDS Alluvial Water Accounting System (AWAS) analytical stream depletion model was used to calculate the lagged depletions to the Cache la Poudre River. The model was executed in Effective SDF mode, using a stream depletion factor (SDF) of 60 days for the Loloff Pit site. The total lagged depletions were determined to be 17.67 acre-feet for this plan period, as shown in the attached Table 4. This amount includes lagged depletions resulting from past consumptive use at the site that are projected to impact the river during this plan period. Replacement Sources The replacement sources proposed for this operation include yield from one share of the Greeley Irrigation Company ("GIC") during the irrigation season, and leased water from the City of Greeley ("Greeley") during the non-irrigation season. Greeley Irrigation CompanyShare Loloff owns one share of the Greeley Irrigation Company, Certificate No. 3391. The share was historically used for the irrigation of approximately 8.5 acres of land which have been removed from production as part of the share acquisition. A portion of the Greeley Canal No. 3 (WDID 0300934) was changed in Division 1 Water Court in case no. 1996CW658 based on a ditch-wide analysis by the Poudre Prairie Mutual Reservoir and Irrigation Company. The use of the subject ditch share in this plan shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions decreed in case no. 1996CW658, including monthly and annual volumetric limits on water deliveries and monthly return flow requirements. The decree in case no. 1996CW658 found that 519.7 shares were used to irrigate 3,501 acres with an average historical consumptive use of 5,358 acre-feet per year, which yields an average consumptive use credit of 10.31 acre-feet per share (5,358 acre- feet/519.7 shares). In paragraph 6.7.4 of the decree in case no. 1996CW658, future farm headgate deliveries of the 67.75 shares were limited to 1,712 acre-feet per year (25.26 acre-feet per share) and 12,631 acre-feet (186.43 acre-feet per share) in any consecutive 10 year period. Deliveries of Loloff's share of GIC water under this plan must comply with these limits. The historical return flows shall be maintained in accordance with the return flow factors identified in case no. 1996CW658. The return flows associated with the delivery of Fossil Creek Reservoir water that is attributable to the subject GIC share shall also be maintained in accordance with the surface and subsurface factors decreed in case no. 1996CW658. For projections of 2015 deliveries, the Applicant used the historic irrigation delivery attributable to GIC direct flow diversions of 18.6 acre-feet per share and the historic irrigation delivery attributable to Fossil Creek Reservoir deliveries of 1 acre-foot per share as determined in case no. 1996CW658 for the study period of 1950-1979. As specified in case no. 1996CW658, all deliveries of GIC water incur an immediate surface return flow obligation of 23.7% for direct deliveries and 20.1% for Fossil Creek deliveries, which corresponds to surface return flow obligations of 4.41 acre-feet and 0.59 acre-feet, Loloff Pit SWSP Page 3 of 7 February 25, 2015 respectively, for this plan period. Pursuant to paragraph 6.7.6 of case no. 1996CW658, the subsurface component of the return flow obligation shall be calculated by multiplying the 5-year running average annual farm headgate deliveries of GIC water (direct flow water and Fossil Creek Reservoir water). Due to a lack of available of records, you have proposed to calculate the subsurface return flow obligations for the subject GIC share based on the respective projected delivery amounts. The estimated subsurface return flow obligations for the GIC direct deliveries and Fossil Creek Reservoir deliveries are 4.46 acre- feet and 0.21 acre-feet during this plan period, respectively (Table 3). Based on conversations the Applicant has had with the GIC, the Applicant can request delivery of the yield from the subject share at either the 16th Street or F Street augmentation stations. The 16th Street augmentation return (WDID 0302319) is located approximately 1.8 miles downstream of the point of depletions and downstream of the Ogilvy Ditch headgate, which is the first senior water right that could be injured by depletions from the Lotoff Pit. The F Street return (WDID 0302320) is located approximately 7.9 miles upstream of the point of depletions and upstream of the Ogilvy Ditch headgate. At times when the Ogilvy Ditch is calling, the Applicant must make replacements at or above the Ogilvy Ditch headgate. A transit loss may be assessed by the water commissioner for the delivery of such replacement water. Greeley Lease The applicant has entered into a rental agreement with the City of Greeley for 12.75 acre-feet of fully consumable water that has been changed for augmentation use. A copy of the agreement showing the monthly replacement schedule was provided with this SWSP request and is attached. Greeley anticipates delivering the replacement water to the Cache la Poudre River at Greeley's wastewater treatment plant (WDID 0302312), located approximately 0.42 mile upstream of the point of depletions and upstream of the Ogilvy Ditch headgate. A transit loss may be assessed by the water commissioner for the delivery of such replacement water. Any releases of replacement water at a location other than the Greeley wastewater treatment plant must be coordinated with the water commissioner to insure the proper transit losses are applied and that no intervening water rights are injured. A water balance showing projected depletions, return flow obligations, and replacements for this plan period is provided in the attached Table 4. Long Term Augmentation In accordance with the letter dated April 30, 2010 (copy attached) from the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety ("DRMS"), all sand and gravel mining operators must comply with the requirements of the Colorado Reclamation Act and the Mineral Rules and Regulations for the protection of water resources. The April 30, 2010 letter from DRMS requires that you provide information to DRMS to demonstrate you can replace long term injurious stream depletions that result from mining related exposure of ground water. The DRMS letter identifies four approaches to satisfy this requirement. Approach no. 4 requires documentation to identify what water rights or other permanent water source will be dedicated to the SWSP to assure that all permanent depletions from either an unforeseen abandonment of the site by the Applicant or as a result of long term ground water exposure after completion of mining and reclamation will be replaced so as to prevent injury to other water rights. In accordance with approach no. 4, you have provided an affidavit dated May 30, 2014 that dedicates the Applicant's one share of the Greeley Irrigation Company (certificate no. 3391) and one share of the New Cache La Poudre Irrigation Company (certificate no. 4635) as replacement water solely for this SWSP for as long as there are depletions at this gravel pit site or until such time as another replacement source is obtained. A copy of the affidavit is attached to this letter. For the purposes of this SWSP, this affidavit will be accepted for the dedication of the shares; however, if the State Engineer • Loloff Pit SWSP Page 4 of 7 February 25, 2015 determines that a different affidavit or dedication process is necessary to assure proper dedication of the shares, additional information may be required prior to future SWSP approvals. Conditions of Approval I approve the proposed substitute water supply plan in accordance with S 37-90-137(11), C.R.S., subject to the following conditions: 1. This SWSP shall be valid for the period of January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, unless otherwise revoked, modified, or superseded by decree. If this plan will not be made absolute by a water court action by the plan's expiration date, a renewal request must be submitted to this office with the statutory fee (currently $257) no later than November 1, 2015. 2. Well permit no. 77467-F, as amended, was obtained for the current use and exposed pond surface area of the gravel pit in accordance with § 37-90-137(2) and (11), C.R.S. 3. The total surface area of the groundwater exposed at the site during this plan period must not exceed 1.52 acres, resulting in 4.43 acre-feet of evaporative loss. 4. The annual amount of water used at the Loloff Pit for dust control shall not exceed 4.10 acre-feet and total product mined at the site shall not exceed 500,000 tons resulting in 7.36 acre-feet of water lost with the mined aggregate. 5. Total consumption at the Loloff Pit during this plan period must not exceed these aforementioned amounts unless an amendment is made to this plan. 6. Approval of this plan is for the purposes as stated herein. Any additional uses for which the water may be used will be allowed only if a new SWSP is approved for those additional uses. 7. All releases of replacement water must be sufficient to cover all out-of-priority depletions in time, place, and amount and must be made under the direction and/or the approval of the water commissioner. The release of replacement water may be aggregated to maximize beneficial use. The water commissioner and/or the division engineer shall determine the rate and timing of an aggregated release. The Applicant is required to coordinate with the water commissioner the delivery location of replacement water to ensure out-of-priority depletions are adequately replaced to prevent injury to other water rights. Conveyance loss for delivery of augmentation water is subject to assessment and modification as determined by the water commissioner or division engineer. 8. The replacement water that is the subject of this plan cannot be sold or leased to any other entity. As a condition of subsequent renewals of this substitute water supply plan, the replacement water must be appurtenant to this site until a plan for augmentation is obtained. A copy of this approval letter should be recorded with the county clerk and recorder. All replacement water must be concurrent with depletions in quantity, timing, and location. 9. Conveyance loss for delivery of augmentation water is subject to assessment and modification as determined by the division engineer. 10.The name, address, and phone number of the contact person who will be responsible for the operation and accounting of this plan must be provided on the accounting forms submitted to the division engineer and the water commissioner. 11. Adequate accounting of depletions and replacements must be provided to the division engineer in Greeley (Div1Accountinq@state.co.us) and the water commissioner (Mark.Simpson@state.co.us) on a monthly basis. Submitted accounting shall conform to the Administration Protocol "Augmentation Plan Accounting, Division One - South Platte River" (attached). Loloff Pit SWSP Page 5 of 7 February 25, 2015 In addition, the Applicant shall verify that entity providing replacement water for this plan, in this case the City of Greeley, has included such use on their accounting submitted to the Division Engineer. 12. Alt pumping for dust control purposes shall be measured in a manner acceptable to the division engineer. Permanent records of all diversions must be maintained by the well owner (recorded at least monthly) and submitted to the division engineer on submitted accounting forms. 13. The Applicant shall perform an inspection and provide verification for all parcels of dried up land used to generate augmentation credits during the term of this SWSP. The final verification of dry up will be in the form of an affidavit signed by an individual having personal knowledge of the dry up for the entire irrigation season for each parcel of land used in this SWSP. In accordance with the attached protocol for dry-up of irrigated land, the Applicant shalt provide a written notification to the water commissioner and division engineer by April 1, 2015 identifying the lands to be dried up for the 2015 irrigation season. By October 31, 2015 the Applicant shall provide an affidavit to the water commissioner and division engineer that identifies and confirms the lands that were dried up during the 2015 irrigation season in order that the final determination of augmentation credits for the irrigation season can be made along with mapping showing any revisions to the dried-up acreage. A GIS shapefile must be emailed to Div1Accounting@state.co.us for each dry-up notification and affidavit. The shapefile shall include the WDID of the plan, the acreage of dry-up, and any accompanying metadata. In addition, the datum must be NAD83 and the UTM projection must be Zone 13 North. The historical consumptive use calculated for the ditch shares to be changed by this SWSP shall not include any credit resulting from the consumption of ground water. In order to ensure the required dry-up conditions exist during the approval period of this SWSP, and to ensure no credit is given for the consumption of ground water, the Applicant shall provide records of monthly monitoring of depth to ground water for all fields required to be dried-up under this SWSP. Information regarding depth to ground water may be provided using existing irrigation welts, existing or new monitoring wells, or piezometers located on the dried-up fields. Applicant may utilize wells or piezometers located within �/a mite of each field provided the Applicant can demonstrate the depth to ground water information available off-site is representative of the depth to ground water on the dried-up field. The Applicant shall modify accounting to reflect that the credit from any dried- up fields containing alfalfa or native grass was reduced according to the following table. Measurements taken at the start of each month will determine the necessary reduction in credit to be applied during the following month. The Applicant may use another methodology upon review and prior approval by the State Engineer and Division Engineer. Depth to Ground Water Percent Reduction in CU Credit' (Feet) Native Grass Alfalfa 1 85% 100% 2 50% 90% 3 30% 75% 4 20% 50% 5 15% 35% 6 10% 20% 7 5% 15% 8 0% 10% 1. Adapted from EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND AGRONOMIC RESPONSES IN FORMERLY IRRIGATED MOUNTAIN MEADOWS, South Park, Colorado, March 1, 1990; Revised September 1, 1991 Loloff Pit SWSP Page 6 of 7 February 25, 2015 14. The Applicant is in the process of amending permit no. M-1985-112 to change the final reclamation to lined storage. If reclamation of the mine site produces a permanent water surface exposing groundwater to evaporation, an application for a plan for augmentation must be filed with the Division 1 Water Court at least three (3) years prior to the completion of mining to include, but not be limited to, long-term evaporation losses. If a lined pond results after reclamation, replacement of lagged depletions shall continue until there is no longer an effect on stream flow. Granting of this plan does not imply approval by this office of any such court application(s). 15. Dewatering at this site will produce delayed depletions to the stream system. As long as the pit is continuously dewatered, the water returned to the stream system should be adequate to offset the depletions, thus dewatering is required to continue during the term of this plan. Once dewatering at this site ceases, the river will experience a net depletion as the pit gradually fills. At least three years prior to completion of dewatering, a plan must be submitted that specifies how the post pumping dewatering depletions (including refilling the pit) will be replaced, in time, place and amount. Should dewatering cease, this SWSP will automatically become void until an amendment covering such action is sought and approved. 16. The monthly volume of water pumped for dewatering operations must be recorded through a totalizing flow meter and shown on the submitted accounting sheets. 17. If dewatering of the site is discontinued, the pit would fill creating additional depletions to the stream system due to increased evaporation. To assure that depletions from ground water evaporation do not occur in the unforeseen event, or events, that would lead to the abandonment of the pit, the Applicant has dedicated one share of the Greeley Irrigation Company (certificate no. 3391) and one share of the New Cache La Poudre Irrigation Company (certificate no. 4635) as replacement water solely for this SWSP for as long as there are depletions at this gravel pit site or until such time as another replacement source is obtained. A copy of the affidavit dated May 30, 2014 is attached to this letter. For the purposes of this SWSP, this affidavit will be accepted for the dedication of the shares; however, if the State Engineer determines that a different affidavit or dedication process is necessary to assure proper dedication of the shares, additional information may be required prior to future SWSP approvals. 18.This SWSP may be revoked or modified at any time should it be determined that injury to other vested water rights has or will occur as a result of this SWSP. Should this SWSP expire without renewal or be revoked prior to adjudication of a permanent plan for augmentation, all use of ground water must cease immediately. 19. In accordance with amendments to S 25-8-202(7), C.R.S., and "Senate Bill 89-181 Rules and Regulations" adopted on February 4, 1992, the State Engineer shall determine whether the substitute supply is of a quality to meet requirements of use to senior appropriators. As such, water quality data or analysis may be requested at any time to determine if the water quality is appropriate for downstream water users. 20. The decision of the state engineer shall have no precedential or evidentiary force, shall not create any presumptions, shift the burden of proof, or serve as a defense in any pending water court case or any other legal action that may be initiated concerning this plan. This decision shall not bind the state engineer to act in a similar manner in any other applications involving other plans, or in any proposed renewal of this plan, and shall not imply concurrence with any findings of fact or conclusions of taw contained herein, or with the engineering methodologies used by the Applicant. Loloff Pit SWSP Page 7 of 7 February 25, 2015 If you have any questions concerning this approval, please contact Sarah Brucker in Denver at (303) 866-3581 or Michael Hein in Greeley at (970) 352-8712. Sincerely, L)N VLJeff De age, P.E. Chief of Water Supply Attachments: Tables 1-4 City of Greeley Augmentation Water Rental Agreement Share Dedication Affidavit DRMS April 30, 2010 letter Augmentation Plan Accounting, Division One - South Platte River Dry-up of Irrigated Land, Division One - South Platte River cc: Michael Hein, Assistant Division Engineer, Mike.Hein@state.co.us 810 9th Street, Suite 200, Greeley, CO 80631; (970) 352-8712 Mark Simpson, Water Commissioner District 3, Mark.Simpson@state.co.us Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety JD/TLK/srb: Loloff Pit 2015 SWSP.docx J 8 0 0 O 01 a M N Lo N r0 .a c p Q n •.e• .�.,i « a+ J�j� V N p 6! ��pp m 8 I O d O = E O WI N U a>i � C C C > N a O C 0 3 O $ N m I E .o N N , E M N in 4. M 0 > o o C .� ui y 8 > N 0 0 0 I .> O. c� uz S aayvz 1 N d - c a d v — c QQQQ V VICO 03 1f�� C C G C - in C Z''j �D G O O N C. IA O C .0 OJ MINI 'c O m O 6. N a eft -Oi d N co A0 N pQ pp p E 8• �1 N ea E O 00 C CO c o O 0 $, a $ 0 0 .a v N C ,CU C m CI V) U VI Q c o o Q o 0 0 .-1 m J. fY • 0 o0 'x a 0 o o n c a 2 O in en A Q 25 C • e+ a s c °oS N 8 ao .. d L N Sry N C C�0 OQp ` O• m c; a. C O .-i N e0 a ec v7 3 '0 m O L L 'G Q ru m W f0 a 25 `N 01 § 'c < o o 0 d c 3 > 'a m ? omi ;; ,o z d < m c o oro a d eu u 6 S 4 • d ar C a ,p p N `C C co C q - v fY o o « .N. g mCI .a .C C N 0 0 0 ` N 3 r t` r-. ea ,A fV 0y1� Xs Z, O C Z > H m ra 3 V) ` G C O X ; 0 a+ 2 ea O m N L U LL d N z d 0 N 0 0 0 tou .O c 0 in C - E " aL 3 p4 O iv a °i ei C • O C yl � 88 u1 m C G O 0.7 id d Y 7 O M N ef�1 7 io « on ^ N 0 0 0 +io U u O C ". C C v > A �° C U '° a o a O Q c ,� c '6 O T. O L N• W .O O 0 O a, 10 �' C N a .a+ .. a -' a @ > > o O � a) to 3 c eu c c o>i o 0 o a N o ; d 0 � 7. v O O > >' O 7 0 N o c 'C 0 O 4) C a a t N `o .o .0 ! 1 N O. '`' A '° y « c y v a d `J w a « ey 0 3 y d c S N % 10 N 2 C C cc ` O E C o 3 4 2 a 2 • S E z 0g .0 I l ... Xo « a; ►- �o UI 'C J N CC O V N N• « z o v07i GS o Q O QCli V- 0 CO 3 W F- z - s O. I.. Z .. Loloff Pit GIC Yields and Return Flow Obligations Wawa and Weiss Cp+t ,LLC Table 3 Submitted by: Paul Weiss,P.E. 5255 Ronald Reagan Boulevard,Suite 220 Johnstown,CO 80534 Direct Flow portion return flows Fossil Creek portion return flows Net diversion c.u. surf sub balance diversion c.u. surf sub balance Balance JAN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 -0,33, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 :=0.0.2. . 035,_ FEB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 =0;32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 -0 02 • 0'337 MAR 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 -0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 .-0.02 =0:31L APR 1.12 ass 0.26 0.28 , 0.57 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 `0 03• '' •0{61-.' MAY 2.98 1.55 0.71 0.33 1.94 0.16 0.09 0.03 0.01 _Au.-. 2:0S., JUN 3.16 1.65 0.75 0.39 2.02 0.17 0.10 0.03 0.01 ail_ ' 2.15 JUL 4.09 2.14 0.97 0.43 2:69 0.22 0.13 0.04 0.02 0.16 2,86::_ AUG 3.53 1.84 0.84 0.45 2.25 0.19 0.11 0.04 0.02 :0:13:. 2.38 SEP 2.23 1.17 0.53 0.45 1.26 0.12 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.07 1.33 OCT 1.49 0.78 0.35 0.43 0.71 0.08 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.75. NOV 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 -0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 -0.02 -0.41 DEC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.37 -0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 -0.02 -0,39.. TOTAL 18.60 9.71 4.41 4.46 9.73 1.00 0.59 0.20 0.21 .0.59 10.32 1)historical consumptive use on direct flow component of GIC share is 52.2% 2)historical consumptive use on Fossil Creek component of GIC share is 59.0% 3)monthly GIC return flows calculated using Appendix A-2 of 96-CW658 from Appendix A-2 of Poudre Prairie Decree RETURN FLOW OBUGATION Factors DIRECT FLOW WATER FOSSIL CREEK WATER surface sub surface sub JAN 0.237 0.018 0.201 0.017 FEB 0.237 0.017 0.201 0.016 MAR 0.237 0.016 0.201 0.015 APR 0.237 0.015 0.201 0.014 MAY 0.237 0.018 0.201 0.013 JUN 0.237 0.021 0.201 0.012 JUL 0.237 0.023 0.201 0.015 AUG 0.237 0.024 0.201 0.024 SEP 0.237 0.024 0.201 0.025 OCT 0.237 0.023 0.201 0.021 NOV 0.237 0.021 0.201 0.02 DEC 0.237 0.02 0.201 0.018 WWC Water Resource Engineering A = u :LirM '• M41A `�' IZ'i84Priq 0 3 ,r..- odoocc .-i0000cln ao , ' In d arr = nnn5� 88888888P Nco 2 = 0 ----. .-1 «i .-S el 0 O O O «i .-I N N O �p pp y� v M C V yO' 5 Y A PM�1 A' to '8 'a as a PM.f tQ g,' Al > � co'co° WzuV -- 0o0oNNNN .: ooco A r a v v v c E o p n c dJ 0 O w 3 N ~m M /A Inn 8 A `V Mill O S'o v M N E3 ,n � u ,� -�'-' ooco .-i .-i .i .i .-i0000l 0 N E a, •v r 0 8 8 O Me 4 3l 0' M (,) .`i O O a cu 0 N C pop 13 a 4, ..... N al "1 N I~D, n cc! al t0 rti r.4 92 g N • �7 0 Q V. Pfd t ap m 1p « . a b n 8 m Do 01 .~I VP r. 1: as FU ° — o0 -i00 P 'O N N R g g g S S g 2 N N 2 V 3a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O v 0 v A ar t :, ppp ppp Ve{t pp 0�p �: c w `✓ IN el. m m in co .p C. C m in m m P71 3 y g A �- 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t` CC c tin t. gQ gg gg gQ gQ gQ gg gg QQ,, Q oo c o p O O 6 t§�p p Op o ao O 8aa p 8o § b § E s 6 .�-- N N N a 8 8 3 IO 8 a N N ,§ OC .c D. a C 0. 3 ≥ a) a"1�.p+ ry(P11 1n� (� pppp M1Y1 d L v, V rl A N N ZS IO 1D M ea .-1 Q cc v V 3 act ,"o — odo0d000od00d Vt `o L N 7 O W 00 A c O Q 2 ?— N Z IC ✓ y e nor a! Tu v LL.. N N •N U a! u1 V1 VI IA to N H u1 in u1 1!1 1!1 m N ig V + . 'i 0 ` 11 L V. coc U' Ia%C 3 ; v — ri .i .i ri .-i .r ri ri .-i ri .-i .-i x a o V ; as _� c o ✓F. ' .c 0 a N 3 '�^ c ar ° c a✓' w vv.. E c aa,13 D a• d O 0 1`0 0 0 2 0 8 ;a E ° O .c a Q1 O l0 ID u1 N O CT O� O fV p1 N 2 j t$ C 6. > c • O =i N R 8 2 4 N M V PAR .-/ 8 01 v. J « O yy v, '✓ d ?� ' zit a 0 0 0 o 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 01'3 g. M a Q y a 'Q 8 g 0U A o > a > a c 3 = o. t7 3 u E tt '� T .... a a! d y c C dal a. d ✓ a a�i � � � I° .o � c > � E I a)ra 4 Ia `.'� 'a `.r� "4 `,a `.`� `.'1 `.'� "� `.`� Q c p c Eli; E �a E E ` « J , O R L d �.+p V �>1 c. ! m a > qgu7� Io-- N So XaX N m , Q y�/�1 d 0' w z • I C A IL Q 2 = ^ Q 1 O z O F aJ W Z W W F '3 I'L at Z W N 1" - z :Ti m U SET IL iiS - L 2 J M cinof� t3a[ Greeh5'ey Great.ittom the Ground Up. November 24,2014 Loloff Construction,Inc. 801 8th Street,Suite 130 Cheeky.CO 80631 RE: Augmentation Water Rental for Loloff Construction.Inc.(January 2015-December 2015) Dear Loloff Construction Inc., The city of Greeley ("Greeley") accepts Loloff Construction, Inc.'s ("Lolofr) augmentation water rental request for January 2015 through December 2015. Greeley will make available to Lolof wholly consumable water that has been changed for augmentation use at one of the following locations: 1)in the Cache In Poudre River immediately below Greeley's existing wastewater treatment plant outfall;2)at the outlet of the Flatiron Reservoir Nos. 1-5 (aka Poudre Ponds at Greeley); 3)at delivery stations from the Greeley Canal No.3;or 4)at such other point or points Greeley chooses by giving written notice to Loloff OR in the Cache la Poudre River at delivery stations or release structures owned and operated by Greeley or available for Greeley's use where Greeley has augmentation water legally and physically available. Greeley anticipates making releases from its wastewater treatment plant outfall located on the Cache la Poudre River. If Greeley changes the point of delivery,it will provide written notice to Loloff. The request totals 12.75 acre-feet and replacements will he made per the schedule provided by Williams and Weiss Consulting: Loloff Augmentation Requirement(acre-tem), Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 AQr15 ' stay-15 tun-15 lul-i5 Aug 1S Sep-IS Oct-IS Nov-15 Dec-15 Total 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 12.75 The current rate for augmentation water is $1,000/aere-foot, for a total of S12,750. Please follow the directions on the attached invoice. The payment is due by January 1,2015. Please be aware that it is Loloft's responsibility to receive necessary approval to use the rented augmentation supplies provided by Greeley. Any transmission losses charged by State water officials will he the sole responsibility of Loloff. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call me at(970)350.9240. Water and Sewer Department • 1100 10th Street,Grath);CO 80631 • (9170)350-9011 Fax(970)350-9805 We promise re presewe and Improve the quality of li&e for Greeley through timely,courteous and coat-effective service. WW(._ Water Kesource Lngineenng Cityof GreeleyRomthe Qiound IIp. Sincerely, n • Danteile Perrot Water Resources Analyst,Water and Sewer Department,City of Greeley Cc:Pad Weiss,Williams and Weiss Consulting WWC Water Kesource Engineering Dedication Of Water Rights to the Loloff Pit Permanent Water Supply Plan I Don LololT President of Lolofl'Construction Inc. which owns I share of the Greeley Irrigation Company evidenced by Certificate No 3391 one share of the New Cache La Pourde Irrigation Company evidenced by Certificate No 4635, hereby affirm that the two shares will be dedicated solely to the Loloff Pit Permanent Water Supply Plan for as long as there are depletion's at this gravel pit or until such time as another replacement source is obtained. The 2 shares will not be sold or traded to others during the term of this dedication. Signed cf4C/c1.- / Date /161 30, 020/</ y State of Colorado County of Weld The foregoing i trttment was acknowledged before me this ,3v day of2014 By Aa,p) etc y and My commission expires; /d/�,?O/, Witness my hand and official seal: Notary Public s - April 30,2010 Permittee Address RE: MiningOperations Exposed with Ex osed Ground water To Whom It May Concern: The Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety is responsible for ensuring that Sand and Gravel mining operators comply with the requirements of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials(Act)and the Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for the Extraction of Construction Materials(Rules). Among these requirements are provisions for the protection of water resources. The Act requires that reclamation plans must ensure minimization of disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance,including disturbances to the quantity of water in the area affected by mining and in the surrounding areas. §34-32.5-116(4)(h). Rule 3.1.6(1)(a)requires compliance with Colorado water laws and regulations governing injury to existing water rights both during and after mining. Permits must specify how the permittee will comply with applicable Colorado water laws and regulations governing injury to existing water right rights.Rule 6.3.3(j);Rule 6.4.5(2)(c). After an extensive review,the Division determined that several operators may not have appropriate permit conditions to address certain reclamation liabilities arising from impacts to water resources. In September 2009 the Division of Water Resources(DWR)updated its Guidelines for Sand and Gravel Pits. These guidelines provide guidance on achieving compliance with state law regarding replacement of depletions from sand and gravel mining,thus the guidelines provide a benchmark for the protection of hydrologic balance required under the Act and Rules. As noted in the Guidelines,sand and gravel operations which expose groundwater without complying with state law create a reclamation liability by impacting available groundwater. State law requires that any person exposing ground water must obtain a well permit from the SEO pursuant to§37-90-137(11). Because exposed groundwater results in out-of-priority water depletions,operations which expose ground water must also eventually obtain a water-court approved augmentation plan. Currently,several operators do not have either an augmentation plan or bonding to provide an alternative method to mitigate injurious stream depletions that result from mining-related exposure of ground water. The Division has a statutory duty to ensure that lands affected by mining are reclaimed in a manner that complies with state law and to ensure that operators have sufficient bonding to achieve reclamation. In order to assist operators in achieving compliance with these requirements,the Division proposes that,by April 30,2011,operators should contact the Division and agree upon a plan for achieving compliance. The Division has identified four approaches for operators: 1. File a financial warranty that will ensure backfilling of the pit to cover the exposed ground water to a depth of two feet above the static ground water level or, 2. Obtain a court approved augmentation plan prior to exposing ground water or, 3. File a financial warranty to cover the cost of installing a clay liner or slurry wall that meets the Division of Water Resources requirements for preventing ground water exposure or, 4. Obtain approval from the Division of Water Resources that acknowledges compliance with the SEO's requirements pursuant to§37-90-137(11). The Division will work with operators on an individual basis as they move to implement one of these plans. It is likely that options 1 and 3 will require the submittal of a technical revision or an amendment to the existing permit depending on the nature of the current mining and reclamation plan and the proposed changes. Increased financial warranties,as a result of these modifications,may be posted in a phased manner not to exceed three years. Amendments or revisions currently under review will be required to be approved by April 30,2011 and may use the phased financial warranty approach described above. New applications going forward or presently under review by the Division will be required to meet the requirements of one of the options 1-4 at the time of application approval. Failure of affected operators to initiate contact with the Division and gain compliance as described above could result in an enforcement action being issued by the Division. If you have any questions, please contact Tony Waldron at 303-866-3567,extension 8150. cc: Permit Id Site Name ADMINISTRATION PROTOCOL Augmentation Plan Accounting Division One - South Platte River This protocol establishes the accounting and reporting process required to enable the division engineer's office to confirm that depletions from all out-of-priority diversions are being replaced so as to prevent injury to vested water rights. The accounting must comport with established"cradle to grave"accounting standards,which allow an audit of the information to track exactly how the data is manipulated as it is translated from raw input data to the resultant impact on the river. While this protocol is subordinate to any decreed language addressing specific accounting requirements, it generally addresses the minimum requirements of such accounting. The accounting must use the standard convention where a depletion is"negative"and an accretion or other replacement source is"positive". The sum of the impacts will then result in either a"negative" or"positive"impact on the stream. Wells in plans that have a negative stream impact must provide additional replacement water, curtail pumping or both until the impact is no longer negative. Plans with a negative stream impact that fail to curtail pumping will be ordered to stop pumping until such time as the projected impact of the wells is no longer negative. 1. Accounting must be submitted electronically to the water commissioner(call 970- 352-8712 to obtain email address)and division engineer at Div1Accounting@state.co.us within 30 days of the end of the month for which the accounting is being submitted. 2. The accounting must provide the contact information including name and address for: a. the owner(s)of each well b. the person responsible for submitting the accounting c. the plan administrator and/or the plan attorney. 3. All input data must be in one location, such as an "Input"worksheet, etc. The accounting must show all pumping. Input data includes the information listed below. a. The required input data for each well is: i. the monthly meter reading for wells that use a presumptive depletion factor(PDF)to determine the associated consumptive use (CU); or ii. the monthly CU in acre-feet(AF)for wells that have a decree or approved SWSP that allows the wells to use a water balance methodology to determine the CU of the well. The analysis used to determine the CU must be included with the accounting. iii. Wells that are decreed as an alternate point of diversion (APOD)to a surface water right must report pumping on a daily basis if any of the diversion during the month is claimed as being "in priority". (See Administration Protocol—APOD Wells for more details.) Administration Protocol-Augmentation Plan Accounting Revised March 19, 2009 iv. The well meter serial readings for each meter shall be included if there is more than one meter on a well. b. Each recharge site must comply with the Administration Protocol- Recharge and must report the: i. daily volume in AF diverted into the site; ii. monthly volume in AF released from the site; iii. monthly net evaporative loss in AF; iv. volume of water in AF remaining at the end of the month. c. The accounting must identify each source of fully consumable replacement water actually delivered to the location impacted by the depletions. To demonstrate the water was actually delivered to the required location will require the following information: i. the originating source of the water, date released and volume of water released; ii. transportation losses to point of diversion or use, if any, using stream loss factors approved by the water commissioner; iii. the volume of water actually delivered on a daily basis past any surface water diversion that was sweeping the river as corroborated by the water commissioner. (See Administration Protocol—Delivery of Water for more details on delivering water.) d. For each source of replacement water that has been "changed"for use as a source of augmentation,such as changed reservoir shares, ditch bypass credits or credits from dry-up, etc.,the following input information must be reported: i. the basis and volume of the return flow obligation; ii. the location the changed water was historically used;this will be the location used to determine the timing of the return flow impact on the river. 4. The accounting must include a monthly projection of the plan's operation at least through March 31 of the next calendar year. 5. The accounting must include all input and output files associated with modeling the delayed impact of diversions. The output from the modeling must report to a summary table that shows, by month,the ongoing depletions associated with pumping, return flow obligations, etc. and accretions from recharge operations. 6. A net impact summary must show the out-of-priority depletions, accretions from each recharge site, volume of replacement water actually delivered to the location of the depletions and the resultant net impact on a daily basis. If necessary, the net impact must be done by river reach. While modeling may use a monthly step function to determine the depletions from pumping and accretions from recharge, the monthly result must then be divided by the number of days In the month in order to simulate a daily impact, as water rights are administered on a daily and not monthly basis. Administration Protocol-Augmentation Plan Accounting Revised March 19, 2009 Replacement water must be provided such that the daily net impact(using the simulated daily numbers from the modeling) is not negative. If a well is out-of- priority for 15 days during a month, replacement must be made only for the 15 days the well is out-of-priority. The replacement must be made, however, on a daily basis as opposed to, for instance, making an aggregated release equal to the volume of the out-of-priority depletions. Likewise, the simulated daily accretion will only count toward replacing the depletion on the days the well is out-of-priority. The accretions that report to the river when the well is in priority cannot be used to replace the out-of-priority depletions. The accretions that impact the river when the well is in priority are not considered "excess"unless the cumulative net impact of the well is not negative for the entire irrigation year to date. (The irrigation year for this purpose is April 1 thru the following March 31.) Until such time as the cumulative net impact is not negative, the accretions must simply be released to the river and cannot be leased to other plans or recaptured. Plans that show a positive cumulative net impact are still required to make replacements on a daily basis; the cumulative analysis only effects whether or not accretions reporting to the river when the well is in priority are considered"excess"and are, therefore, able to be recaptured. 7. The basis for determining that the depletions are out-of-priority must be clearly established and all steps in the calculation included in the accounting. The analysis may be done, unless otherwise limited by decree,for each well or groups of wells, provided the most junior water right associated with the group of wells is used as the reference water right for the group's out-of-priority status. 8. Accounting must include actual information for the irrigation year through the month for which the accounting is being submitted AND projections of the plan operation through March 31 of the next calendar year. 9. The following naming convention must be used for all files submitted pursuant to item 1: "PIanWDID_YYMMDD" where: PIanWDID is the WDID assigned by the division engineer's office YYMMDD corresponds to the date the accounting is submitted. As an example, the assigned WDID for the former GASP plan was 0103333. If accounting using Excel®was submitted for that plan on May 15, 2004,the file name would be: "0103333_040515.x1s" The name of the file must be in the subject line of the email. 10.All accounting must be reported using the WDID for the structure, at a minimum. Other information such as well name, permit number, etc. may also be included as desired. All wells must be decreed by the water court, permitted by the state engineer or included in a decreed plan for augmentation. Unregistered and undecreed wells cannot, in the opinion of the division engineer, be effectively administered because of the need to know the location, allowable diversion rate and use of the well -information that is only available from the decree or permitting process. Administration Protocol -Augmentation Plan Accounting Revised March 19, 2009 11. If a well is covered in multiple SWSP's or augmentation plans, the monthly meter readings must be the same in the accounting for each plan covering the subject well. The accounting for every plan covering the well shall state the proportionate pumping amount covered by each plan to assure all out-of-priority depletions are replaced. 12.The following additional accounting is required for sources of replacement water used for more than one plan. The water right owner of the replacement water is responsible for accounting for the total replacement amount and how much each plan is using of that total amount. The accounting for portions of the replacement water by other users must match the accounting of the water right owner. The amount of replacement water used by the water right owner and other users together shall not exceed the total replacement amount available. (See Administration Protocol— Use Of Unnamed Sources For Replacement for additional requirements concerning required notice and approval of sources of replacement not specifically described in a SWSP or augmentation plan) Administration Protocol -Augmentation Plan Accounting Revised March 19, 2009 ADMINISTRATION PROTOCOL Dry-Up of Irrigated Land Division One—South Platte River As required by either a decreed change of water rights or a substitute water supply plan,a source of irrigation water may be either permanently or temporarily removed from a parcel of land in order to make the historical consumptive use portion of that water supply available for other uses,typically augmentation. This protocol addresses the documentation required to administer the effective"dry-up". To the extent that one or more of the following directives are in direct contradiction with a decree of the court,the terms of the decree must be followed. Permanent Dry-up Covenant 1. Must be decreed by the court. 2. Must be filed with clerk and recorder's office for the county wherein the land is located. 3. Must email a GIS shapefile to DivlAccounting@state.co.us that includes case number,WDID,and total acreage permanently dried-up,along with any accompanying metadata. The shapefile must be in NAD83 datum,UTM projection,Zone 13North. 4. Must address the issue of noxious weeds as required by§37-92-305(4.5)(a),C.R.S.and/or other county or local ordinances. (DWR is not authorized to administer the issue of noxious weeds;this statement is, therefore,simply informational). Temporary Dry-up Agreement 1. May be made for a term that is not less than one irrigation season. 2. Unless otherwise stated in the approved SWSP,a written notification,reporting land of intended dry-up, must be submitted prior to April 1 of each irrigation season to the division engineer,water commissioner and DivlAccountingastate.co.us.state.co.us. Along with the written notification,a GIS shapefile reflecting the land of intended dry-up must be submitted. The shapefile must be emailed to DivlAccounting@state.co.us. The shapefile shall include case number,WDID,and acreage of dry-up,along with any accompanying metadata. The shapefile must be in NAD83 datum,UTM projection,Zone 13North. 3. Unless otherwise stated in the approved SWSP,a written affidavit,affirming land actually dried up,must be submitted prior to October 31 of each irrigation season to the division engineer,water commissioner and DivlAccountingPstate.co.us. Along with the written affidavit,a GIS shapefile,reflecting the dried up acreage proclaimed in the affidavit,must be submitted. If the submitted affidavit indicates that the intended and actual dry-up acreages are identical,then no GIS shapefile is required. The shapefile must be emailed to DivlAccounting@state.co.us. The shapefile shall include case number,WDID,and acreage of dry-up,along with any accompanying metadata. The shapefile must be in NAD83 datum,UTM projection,Zone 13North. 4. Once written notice has been made to the division engineer and/or water commissioner,the dry-up requirement is irrevocable during the current irrigation season regardless of whether or not the water associated with the historical consumptive use is actually used. Administration Protocol—Dry-up of Irrigation Land February 2,2012 McGrane Water Engineering, LLC 4475 Driftwood Place•Boulder.CO 80301 • Phone:(303)917-1247 i allk E-Mail:dennis;cimcgranewater.com McGrane Water Engineering July 3, 2015 Mr. JC York J&T Consulting, Inc. 305 Denver Avenue, Suite D Via email at: jcyoru/j-tconsulting.com Ft. Lupton, CO 80621 RE: DRAFT Loloff Modeling Report Dear Mr. York: The Loloff gravel pit mine is located approximately 1 mile east of Greeley, Colorado in Section 4, Township 5 North, Range 67 West of the 6t" principal meridian. The site is located approximately Y2 mile north of the Poudre River, approximately 5 miles upstream of the confluence with the South Platte River. The pit is currently being mined under permit M-1985- 112 by Loloff Construction Company. J&T Consulting, Inc. (JT) requested that McGrane Water Engineers, LLC. (MWE) determine the hydrologic impacts of installing a slurry wall around the Loloff pit during reclamation. Anticipated impacts include a rise in the water table on the up gradient side of the slurry wall compared to predevelopment conditions and a decline in the water table on the down gradient side. Water level increases to within 10 feet of the surface on the up gradient side of the pit could flood existing structures such as basements or cause water logging and phreatophyte growth. A decline in water levels on the down gradient side could reduce the aquifer saturated thickness and well yields if pumping rates are already maximized. Results Using a MODFLOW model with reasonable boundary conditions and aquifer properties, MWE determined that the maximum increase in water levels up gradient from the mine will be approximately 2 feet, and the maximum decrease in water levels down gradient from the pit will be approximately 2 feet. The average depth to groundwater for 79 wells with reported water levels located within the model area (approximately a mile from the pit in all directions) is 16 feet. However, there are several wells located within the up gradient area of influence (greater than 0.5 feet increase) that have reported water levels of less than 10 feet. Table 1 shows the impacted wells located within the area of influence. Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 2 Table 1 —Wells within area of Influence of Proposed Slurry Wall Well Data from Wells Within Area of Influence Model Results Reported Saturated Max.Change Future Depth Future %Change Well Name Pemit Rate(gpm) Depth to Thickness in Water Saturated in Sat. Depth Water(ft) (ft) Levels(ft) t0 Water(ft) Thickness(ft) Thick(ft) DOWNGRADIENT WELLS VARRA 75865 F ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND DAVIS FARMS 14960 R 101 1150 31 70 -1 32 69 -1% BAAB A C 620 W 45 800 9 36 -1 10 35 -3% TAYLOR JAMES 223885 44 10 11 33 -1 ND ND ND UPGRADIENT WELLS TRUJILLO 23312 25 10 5 20 1 4 21 5% ORONA 28174 19 20 8 11 1 7 12 9% PALMA 297435 ND ND ND ND 1 Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain HARRELL ELDON 226878 50 15 16 34 2 14 36 6% ROTHE 259513 27 20 2 25 1 1 26 4% TRUYELLO 2947 F 21 400 6 15 1 5 16 7% HARRELL BRIAN 287278 30 50 ND ND 2 Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain DILKA 44539 34 25 3 31 1 2 32 3% VANBEBER 25941 25 50 2 23 1 1 24 4% WADSWORTH 19472 F ND 105 ND ND 1 Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain VANBEBER 16038 25 24 4 21 1 3 22 5% Three down gradient wells can be expected to experience a decline in water levels of approximately 1 foot. Since well yield is proportional to the saturated thickness, we would expect less than a 5% decrease in the maximum theoretical pumping rate of those wells. We do not believe this is a significant impact. Based on our modeling, eleven up gradient wells can be expected to have 0.5 to 2 foot increases in water levels. Only one of those wells (Harrell Eldon) has a reported pre-mining water level depth exceeding 10 feet. The rest of the wells either have reported depths to water of less than 10 feet or no recorded level so the depth remains "uncertain." If the recorded well locations and depth to water are correct relative to the pit and if the wells are located near vulnerable structures (homes with basements or excavations), those structures could be vulnerable to rising groundwater resulting from the slurry wall. Uncertainty Whether future flooding or water logging will occur depend on numerous factors including: 1) well location relative to the pit and slurry wall; 2) the location and depth of vulnerable structures such as homes with basements; 3) the location, magnitude and timing of well pumping and recharge from precipitation, agriculture, and canal seepage that could also affect water levels; and 4) the location of existing drainage or canals that may intercept rising groundwater. Therefore, there is considerable uncertainty whether there is a real and quantifiable risk of significant impact. Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 3 Mitigation Potential mitigation includes: I) installing a drain around the slurry wall to minimize any mounding or shadow effect to keep the aquifer at equilibrium 2) or moving or abandoning structures with basements. JT has indicated that the installation of the drain around the slurry wall at other similar gravel pit locations has been successful in mitigating the mounding and shadow effects. The depth, location, and size of a drain will depend on the timing and location of rising water and hydrologic properties of the aquifer. Recommendations We recommend: 1. Canvasing the area within the area of influence to confirm well locations and determine whether any basements or structures could potentially be impacted; 2. Evaluating whether the existing monitoring well network is adequate to monitor recovery after the slurry wall is installed, and installing additional wells if necessary; 3. If actual recovery appears to be excessive, utilize the model to evaluate drain locations and designs (depths and size) to mitigate the situation. Intercepted groundwater could be piped down gradient and recharged to prevent impacts to senior water rights. Hydrologic Setting Up to approximately 100 feet of saturated sand and gravel make up the alluvial aquifer located within 2 miles of the Poudre River. The stratigraphy of the valley fill and particle size distributions beneath the Poudre River observed in gravel pits was examined in detail by Langer and Lindsey, 1999. The aquifer consists primarily of sand and gravel with minor fine-grained interbeds. The aquifer was evaluated and modeled in detail by CDM-Smith, 2013 to support the Colorado Water Conservation Board's (CWCB) South Platte Decision Support System (SPDSS). Model Construction MWE constructed a groundwater model of the alluvial aquifer north centered on the Loloff pit, extending approximately one mile on either side. The model domain is 10,000 feet square on each side, consisting of 100 rows and 100 columns with model 100 foot square model cells. The model includes all of Sections 4 and 5 in Township 5 North, 65 West (6th PM), and the northern half's of Sections 8 and 9. The model also includes the southern half's of Sections 31 and 32 in Township 6 North, 65 West (6th PM). Approximately 15,000 feet of the Poudre River crosses the model from west to east. The river is hydraulically connected to the alluvial aquifer at all times, and the groundwater gradient is from west to east. This is consistent with Figures 4-3 and 4-4 of the South Platte Alluvial groundwater model (CDM-Smith, 2013). Appendix A includes well data from 104 wells located within the model area. The database consists of only active well permits with the exception of a few abandoned wells with usable well data, none of which are included in Table 1. We removed shallow monitoring wells that did not penetrate the alluvium, wells in excess of 119 feet deep thought to be completed in Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 4 bedrock, and all duplicate well permits. The depth of wells range from 21 to 119 feet and averages 45 feet. The depth to water ranges from 2 to 46 feet and averages 16 feet. The reported well yields range from 10 to 1500 gpm and averages 244 gpm. The calculated saturated alluvial thicknesses ranges from 7 to 82 feet and averages 31 feet. We used the 31 foot average thickness to define the aquifer bottom and gradient (21 feet west to east) across the model. The average aquifer thickness is consistent with the 37 foot thickness reported for the Loloff pit (Well permit no. 77467 F) which was used in the radius of influence calculation (JT Construction, August 27, 2007). Aquifer Permeability The aquifer hydraulic conductivity (K) is a measure of its permeability. Contoured K's obtained from pumping tests reported for the State's South Platte Decision Support System (SPDSS Task 43.3, Figure 5C) groundwater modeling project (CDM-Smith, 2006) range from less than 250 ft/day to over 680 ft/day. Once the model was calibrated, the model area K averaged 600 to 650 ft/day (CDM-Smith, 2013, Figure 4-2). We modeled potential impacts using an average model K of 625 ft/day. The aquifer transmissivity is the product of the hydraulic conductivity multiplied by the saturated thickness (average 31 feet). The calculated average T of the model area was approximately 145,000 gpd/ft (625 ft/day x 31 feet x 7.48 gal/ft^3). This is consistent with published transmissivities for the Loloff pit model area by CDM-Smith (2006, Figure 7a) and Hurr and Schneider, 1972. Model Boundary Conditions Model boundary conditions includes the Poudre River, aquifer subflow, and aquifer bottom. We assigned the elevation of the Poudre River as 1 foot above the interpolated ground elevations which are 4647 feet (msl) on the west end and 4626 feet(msl) on the east end of the model. The river stage was assigned a foot above where the topographic elevation contour cross the Poudre River and interpolated in between. We calculated model cell conductance (COND) as the product of the streambed unit conductance (Ksb/m) times the wetted river area (length x width). The average unit conductance obtained from SPDSS vertical permeability tests on the South Platte tests is approximately 37 ft/day/ft. We assume that the average width of the Poudre River is 50 feet. Therefore, model cell conductance is 185,000 ft^2/day (37 ft/day/ft * 50 ft * 100 ft). Aquifer subflow in and out of the model were simulated using constant heads on the west and east ends of the model set at the ground elevation contours at the Poudre river (4647 ft (msl) on the west and 4626 ft (msl) on the east side. Constant head cells were spaced every 1000 feet in the column 1 and every 100 feet in the last model column. Model Mass Balance Aquifer subflow in and out of the model was solved determined for the pre-pit steady state run. Table 2 shows that river and aquifer inflows and outflows total 7.8 cfs and there is a net gain in streamflow of 1.4 cfs within the model domain. Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 5 Table 2-Steady State Mass Balance Prior to Loloff Pit Outflows In Out Parameter Inflows (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) River 2.2 3.6 -1.4 Aquifer Subflow 5.6 4.2 1.4 Total 7.8 7.8 0.0 The net river gain of approximately 0.7 cfs per mile appears reasonable. We do not believe that the pit slurry wall would significantly change the overall timing and location of historical river gains. Model Runs We conducted two model runs to evaluate the hydrologic effects of installing a slurry wall around the Loloff Pit. Run Lol SS6 was meant to simulate the water table before the water table was disturbed by pit excavation. Figure 1 shows the resulting water table gradient where it crosses the Poudre River and through the outline of the future pit area and slurry wall. In run Lol SS7, the model cells within the pit area are turned off to not allow aquifer flow through the pit which simulates the effect of proposed slurry wall. Figure 2 is the contoured difference between the Post-Pit Run (Lol_SS7) —the Pre-Pit Run (Lol SS6). Positive values on the left side of the pit reflect mounding and negative values on the right side reflect lower water levels in the"shadow"of the pit. The maximum change in water levels is+/- 2 feet. Model Sensitivity The model results are insensitive to differences in hydraulic conductivities (K) since mound height is inversely proportional to K and aquifer inflow is directly proportional to K. Therefore, since the aquifer gradient and thickness are constant, an increase in K will cause a proportional increase in model inflows which would increase mound height proportionally, but this does not occur because the higher K causes a proportional decline in mound build-up. We also do not believe other model parameters such as streambed conductance are insensitive to the model results since water freely moves in and out of the river even if the streambed conductance is much lower than observed. Therefore, the model is generally insensitive to input parameters. We believe the model results shown in Table 1 are most sensitive to the location of wells and vulnerable structures, pre-pit water levels, and recharge as discussed above. Model Results, Uncertainty, Mitigation, and Recommendations Results, uncertainty, mitigation, and recommendations are discussed earlier in the report. Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 6 Sources CDM-Smith, April, 2013. South Platte Decision Support System Alluvial Groundwater Model Report. Hurr, R.T and Schneider, , P. 1972a. Hydrogeologic Characteristics of the Valley Fill Aquifer in the Greeley Reach of the South Platte River Valley, Colorado. USGS Open File Report 73-124. J&T Consulting, Inc., August 27, 2013. Letter to Peter Hays (Colorado DRMS); Re: Loloff Pit, Technical Revision NO. 1 Request (TR-01) File No. M-1985-112, Response to Adequacy Review Comments - Radius of Influence Calculation. Langer, W. H., and Lindsey, D. A., 1999, Preliminary deposit models for sand and gravel in the Cache la Poudre River valley: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99- 587, 27 p. Lindsay, D.A., Langer, W.H., and Knepper, D.H., 2005. Stratigraphy, Lithology, and Sedimentary Features of Quaternary Alluvial Deposits of the South Platte River and Some of its Tributaries East of the Front Range, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1705. Lindsey, D. A., Langer, W. H., and Shary, J. F., 1998, Gravel deposits of the South Platte River valley north of Denver, Colorado, Part B - Quality of gravel deposits for aggregate: U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 98-148-B, 24 p. If you have any questions please give us a call. Very truly yours, MCGRANE WATER ENGINEERS,LLC ..A-4-f Dennis McGrane, P.E., C.P.G. Mr. J .C . York July 3 , 2015 Page 7 Figure 1 — Pre-Loloff Pit Steady State Run (Run : Lol_SS6) , I te i 1, t ' t , 4 i s 1 -1:TTt/ s i1 . . i , . a 1\ , . _ ___ ._ iX it ..' .II \ d; _ 1 S` `.` w i r i I � \ W , t . $ 1 , 0 i ... "---- ' i I , . ir , . ' 3 , 1/4 iTM S 1 o t - I ;ritai, 'z I ` = t' , ,. 4. I ` \ 8711S ` 6 i ! i - db / . Nor_ ____. 1 / - il firt, km I t t e lii I . \i- $ •• •\ 1 ' ,4TH ST p tp. sr ' i; 1 5 W r'. : I i i 1 1 4 P-- 1 It A , .., id., .6, siii I .. .I Mr. J .C . York July 3 , 2015 Page 8 Figure 2 — Change in Water Levels at Loloff Pit (Lol_SS7. hds — Lo1_SS6. hds) ti " I aSCHWEEPS pa- '� j U p gradient Down gradient Mound "shadow" $HLNLLY PULfiNO 0 . . # pTRu I( Lill pULANO $HERLEY JRONfi I-tISH [ KO S FARMS ai9RNOL.0 I i ,,, .��' §-rr ALMA •-•% - 0 .5 ft _ + O .5 ft RRELL ELOON ; + 1 .O ft , .OLOFF - 1 .011 J9PTIOLD \i, + 1 .5 J-IfiPRELL 8R [ AN 2- ` XI - 1 .5 ft f ,TRuYELL LOLOFF p [ LKA PIT �AA6 fi C 85 lANBEeE J4OR TN 0 SWOP T f"RANC[ S op BEeER r et q vt.EGLEP CI o ,_ (7-41 g1 : JAL�R "JAMES , is LHOFF La i FRANC [ sERANC [ S. " ' E [ S [ NGER pu IN RfiMER � aTHufiPSON ATE4iART � ALL ;11 cstad S pas TM, "Alan ..Af1a 1Af17 A..Y1 ,YY1 mina MY1 4,4 Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 9 Appendix A—Loloff Pit Vicinity Wells and Model Data Well Depth to Sat. Rate Name Permit No. Twn Reg Sec Qtr Qtr UTM x(ft) UTM y(ft) Depth Water Thick. (ft) (Pm) (ft) (ft) VARRA 75865 F 5 N 65 W 4 - - 1732812 14682738 - - - DAVIS FARMS 14960 R 5 N 65 W 4 NE NW 1733414 14684685 101 1150 31 70 NOFFSINGER 246784 5 N 65 W 4 NE SE 1734930 14682796 80 15 44 36 NORTH FRONT 19089 5 N 65 W 4 NE SE 1734752 14683343 39 - 32 7 BAAB A C 620 5 N 65 W 4 NE SW 1733416 14683388 45 800 9 36 LOLOFF 77467 F 5 N 65 W 4 NW - 1731464 14684108 - - - - RULAN D 421 5 N 65 W 4 NW NE 1732111 14684746 87 10 40 47 RULAN D 44673 5 N 65 W 4 NW NE 1732429 14684953 72 25 40 32 HOSHIKO 12332 R 5 N 65 W 4 NW NE 1732110 14684746 103 1400 35 68 TRUJILLO 23312 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1730777 14684838 25 10 5 20 ORONA 28174 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1730777 14684738 19 20 8 11 SHERLEY 296356 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1730379 14685218 18 15 - - PALMA 297435 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1730148 14684377 - - - - HARRELL ELDON 226878 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1731195 14684210 50 15 16 34 SHERLEY 205113 5 N 65 W 4 NW NW 1730209 14684789 45 15 6 39 ROTHE 259513 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730220 14683703 27 20 2 25 TRUYELLO 2947 F 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730745 14683476 21 400 6 15 HARRELL BRIAN 287278 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1731364 14683824 30 50 - - DILKA 44539 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730745 14683476 34 25 3 31 VANBEBER 25941 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730745 14683376 25 50 2 23 WADSWORTH 19472 F 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730745 14683276 - 105 - - VANBEBER 16038 5 N 65 W 4 NW SW 1730745 14683176 25 24 4 21 SUMMIT 2020 F 5 N 65 W 4 SE NE 1735103 14682023 25 - 6 19 MEISINGER 12713 R 5 N 65 W 4 SE NW 1733402 14682148 - - - - SALL 13065 R 5 N 65 W 4 SE NW 1733402 14682048 39 500 6 33 R&S 11092 R 5 N 65 W 4 SE NW 1733402 14681948 45 800 9 36 ELLSWORTH 12335 R 5 N 65 W 4 SE SE 1734727 14680702 28 400 6 22 DUGGAN 285446 5 N 65 W 4 SE SE 1734556 14681221 56 15 - - DUGGAN 68387 F 5 N 65 W 4 SE SW 1733778 14680399 - - - - TAYLOR JAMES 223885 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1732680 14682674 44 10 11 33 GREELEY MEAT CO. 2368 R 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1732446 14681436 30 30 4 26 KOHLHOFF 223887 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1732420 14682587 20 8* - - FRANCIS 26555 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1731724 14683265 44 20 7 37 MIDEXCO 134824 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1731752 14681834 35 15 7 28 _FRANCIS. 30562 F 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1731798 14682394 39 250 5 34 STEWART 26555 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1732066 14682074 36 40 4 32 FRANCIS 135883 5 N 65 W 4 SW NE 1731458 14682333 32 40 - - THOMPSON 44981 5 N 65 W 4 SW NW 1730729 14682098 33 10 7 26 GREELEY CITY OF 291755 5 N 65 W 4 SW SW 1730550 14680953 40 - - - ARNOLD1 130671 5 N 65 W 5 NE NE 1729287 14684580 19 15 2 17 DYER 72586 5 N 65 W 5 NE NE 1728791 14684561 46 15 4 42 REED 465 5 N 65 W 5 NE NE 1729436 14684923 25 - - - LEGLER 265613 5 N 65 W 5 NE SE 1729464 14683004 - - - - ARNOLD 269691 5 N 65 W 5 NE SE 1729290 14684005 42 - 7 35 PETERSON 2420 F 5 N 65 W 5 NW SE 1726774 14683624 28 55 9 19 QUINTANA 40006 5 N 65 W 5 SE NE 1729398 14682126 29 15 6 23 KRAMER 40088 5 N 65 W 5 SE NE 1729398 14682026 32 12 7 25 TYE JAY 82310 5 N 65 W 5 SE NW 1727835 14681664 - 20 - - NOFFSINGER 20193 F 5 N 65 W 5 SE NW 1727552 14682602 41 200 15 26 NOFFSINGER 20194 F 5 N 65 W 5 SE NW 1727551 14682502 41 - 13 28 MARTIN 10924 F 5 N 65 W 5 SE NW 1728073 14682154 46 350 18 28 GOODFELLOW 8324 5 N 65 W 5 SE SE 1729379 14680727 35 60 11 24 WILLIAMS 20307 5 N 65 W 5 SE SE 1729379 14680627 23 50 6 17 UNITOG RENTAL 43687 F 5 N 65 W 5 SE SW 1728038 14680704 - 3* - TRIPLETT/WOOLF 39173 F 5 N 65 W 5 SE SW 1727718 14680663 42 - - - MARTIN 25866 F 5 N 65 W 5 SW NE 1727061 14682471 30 350 14 16 DYER 19156 5 N 65 W 5 SW NE 1726749 14682182 29 75 12 17 BRAWNER 21555 5 N 65 W 5 SW NE 1726749 14682082 20 10 5 15 GEHRING 14802 R 5 N 65 W 5 SW NW 1725424 14682312 8' 1500 5 3" COMMERCIAL 7715 F 5 N 65 W 5 SW NW 1725424 14682212 31 20 - - GREELEY CITY OF 29743 5 N 65 W 5 SW NW 1725424 14682112 31 10 - - SMITH 835 5 N 65 W 5 SW SE 1726340 14680919 36 10 - - 1O-ED C 539 5 N 65 W 5 SW SW 1725669 14680853 24 500 - - GREELEY 9687 F 5 N 65 W 5 SW SW 1725396 14680848 42 200 12 30 FIRST NATIONAL 10957 R 5 N 65 W 5 SW SW 1725396 14680748 24 300 4 20 GREELEY ICE 9687 F 5 N 65 W 5 SW SW 1725396 14680648 35 - - - Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 10 Appendix A—Loloff Pit Vicinity Wells and Model Data (continued) Well Depth to Sat. Rate Name Permit No. Twn Rng Sec Qtr Qtr UTM x(ft) UTM y(ft) Depth (gpm) Water Thick. (ft) (ft) (ft) SCHUMACHER 3204 5 N 65 W 8 NE NE 1729367 14679369 50 30 14 36 CUMMINS 90572 5 N 65 W 8 NE NE 1729777 14679428 48 15 19 29 EISENMAN 30128 5 N 65 W 8 NE SE 1729373 14678051 37 20 20 17 HIBLER 5205 5 N 65 W 8 NE SE 1729373 14677951 36 30 17 19 ARAGON 189173 5 N 65 W 8 NE SW 1727639 14677723 40 15 11 29 WELD CTY DIST 194351 5 N 65 W 8 NE SW 1728342 14678629 37 10 15 22 FNR INC 31872 F 5 N 65 W 8 NE SW 1728026 14678453 41 15 19 22 ALLNUTT 39156 F 5 N 65 W 8 NW NE 1726812 14678941 38 15 14 24 HULEN 16542 5 N 65 W 8 NW SE 1726710 14678043 30 20 12 18 MOORE 29378 S N 65 W 8 NW SE 1726710 14677943 37 25 13 24 WELD 553 5 N 65 W 8 NW SW 1725379 14678038 73 500 - - WALLER 192932 5 N 65 W 8 NW SW 1724838 14678012 50 - 42 8 WALLER 192933 5 N 65 W 8 NW SW 1724838 14677932 55 - 43 12 PHAM 137543 5 N 65 W 9 NE NE 1735335 14678744 40 36 6 34 GODDARD 239629 5 N 65 W 9 NE NE 1734642 14678855 - - - - BROUGHTON 5099 5 N 65 W 9 NE NE 1734713 14679382 54 10 20 34 SLAVENSKI 9844 5 N 65 W 9 NE NE 1734713 14679282 36 10 9 27 LANG 88796 5 N 65 W 9 NE NW 1733884 14679840 40 50 - - KENNISON 27104 5 N 65 W 9 NE SW 1733375 14678061 41 20 23 18 FARR 833 5 N 65 W 9 NW NW 1730701 14679472 15 - - GREAT 10152 R 5 N 65 W 9 NW NW 1730701 14679372 32 800 20 12 GREAT 13441 R 5 N 65 W 9 NW NW 1730701 14679272 20 700 5 15 HONSTEIN 15936 R 5 N 65 W 9 NW SE 1732040 14678058 45 350 16 29 ROSENBERG 23701 5 N 65 W 9 NW SE 1732040 14678058 36 30 18 18 ROSENBERG 12200 R 5 N 65 W 9 NW SE 1732040 14677958 33 500 21 12 ZABKA 12724 R 6 N 65 W 32 SE NE 1730021 14688210 80 1" 35 45 HUNGENBERG 12605 R 6 N 65 W 32 SE NE 1729419 14687686 119 500 46 73 PARKER A 45785 6 N 65 W 32 SE NE 1729419 14687586 80 15 40 40 GREAT WESTERN 10153 R 6 N 65 W 32 SE NE 1729419 14687486 64 750 20 44 BLACKWELL 12725 R 6 N 65 W 32 SE SE 1729435 14686276 75 300 33 42 ZULLO 12728 R 6 N 65 W 32 SE SW 1728118 14686362 30 300 6 24 MONFORT(Swells) 16885 F 6 N 65 W 32 SW NE 1726449 14687805 69 1320 14 55 GREELEY 2707 F 6 N 65 W 32 SW NW 1725473 14687871 75 900 5 70 ACTION 155941 6 N_65 W 32 SW SW 1725401 14686396 55 15 10 45 KOEHLER 11564 R 6 N 65 W 33 SE NE 1734734 14687302 110 1200 35 75 HUNGENBERG 14658 6 N 65 W 33 SE NW 1733402 14687469 79 16 36 43 BLISS 12334 R 6 N 65 W 33 SE NW 1733402 14687369 87 1000 40 47 HUNGENBERG 14508 R 6 N 65 W 33 SW NE 1732070 14687436 105 900 30 75 SCHWEERS 115380 6 N 65 W 33 SW SW 1731190 14685691 116 15 34 82 Min 15 10 2 7 Max 119 1500 46 82 Average 45 244 16 31 Mr. J.C. York July 3, 2015 Page 11 Appendix B—Plotted Well Data V Ct 7 , Ct I V) ' r 4-.3 MI ct Ct 1-4 E 1_4r it y a ° to a . . ct a� a cu v - 4 •. v; a! C v 0 #- C4 in Cri 11- _______ _i cn kyr* 4I5 lc ii. ant° I et.? ifs- :4,2 isi ..._ C4 ili -melt. / Cr! Cl cmi I ,43 —b cri cri N. gl r .: CO cri it- et ISI Ur cli ISO in\ 4 ., cr. (..,.... , 1g Alrill ill: 4- C4 ..-4 I.S1 Cel 4i . , LP et T- r,%. �deet L - eill C4 C13 n —a —,-� Or► OW CO OM CI IS1 10 inn g Li, A) .1, -1, el ts, 4 . cr 0 it- LP )541 . AN 'la ins ,Lli i art et et Cla _,..a -a- -..-.0 II-0 VIP.- ^•••••-4.c.......4......r;. el gli 0413;) it A 3 i 41 I III 400 . C4 se- 4-1 St 0 O. Ms .Plk el *Li + � fin.. . �i _ - MI CU Is i a # CM • r Q Cie":—.. all 4 4 i tio ci3 00 • •M ass e f.; c - , I, 0 gni 44 , ._,. _; . : 1 . rt.Ar - ,.,�•a.__ y - _ . .0.�,:...-<.+�,q.,i._ - -3„•_ "�1----• •' - -- --w- ...as.. - _. . e--:_.cin 4004 Owl 4009 COX a l ig Q ' rn 1 Y• —{ C.) cti c� V ct U u z a a a W 0 a 4 J _ Z is. z 3 �1 a ', C� a •a c 0 W2 s alit Z a t CD W 4-r C U a c .. ,_ E cr. r0 CD t c c12 a 2.J C O WC C Z S r-4 al .. Li = KAI r aa a . .. W ti W Z J `. 62 Z O Q �°V W U 3 0 arm l 1. J Z 8i Al a a a rg a t W W W a arJ �e .r = J � t _WI � O U _ w 4J Vn } U a. W w IMZ J �T-ti-� aUJ 1 � �ry ti+ b-�vtr'o ~v a '-'31 -J W c--1 I- ICJ j {=� a c I V4`1 � lJA - O D J spa cl --_.. i W J W Z Z' .ers- a ' W 3 �I V C] s- W 3- a _ U Cla ga CI a .. Z ,, a Z iii _I CID W6-1 Nis (ma: r.3 * g 4 Lo Z Mlli Mr IVI a 210 a " .- -cr ct: taz eel ea.-es z UJ . i an i- x�' Q V rT p �i C' -as % $ W Z GM Cal Gill 0440 Il s WA c V al Ci (t1 en cam, 4) . r. v. ^ a c � a y 0 l a► « -7t Q v et - et . Un-go Ms - a 4-q _ .' . a -I 0 V 4,40 MS to Sm. + amp r O et is C13 WI vQ en i te it- Iss It- els O4 ell le a a c13 iia Mir -d 01 ___._ i . TI3 -Pits is" cn e t 0 LITC AVIS W 41 3a► tai M _.._ oet � 3'. ► lSx _ _l 1% 0115 " . 9 etrt S . .vim+ _ IA 1,_._.,.......- - 4,„„, ...........tr4.a.-.ass ir w , els Ito to - DC ' .. tfre • 9 __ I a. t. ill el �� f ,..1 .- Mil b419 4: 's ---Ar `X I till: 4 al - _ - Itir' Ali t 'A At r 4e et CI }451 11 Ce 0:1 +-D 0 taind v; ta U Z <1.) CZ Q CA 6-4 cx 4-ii /Kis Mr UMW N a . 4-+ •.. if D-4 tile SI -I t . . • — hs - , et a r F \ us Aver, rs• eilli /0 Act . t M ..M-__ o. 0922 3.M' 1S1 e m Y 1 --"1/4,....._, �IAI•� 41133 i el „ , qtr;. ._- _ -�, . 44 _..� e frint, vs _ - wrionwm it. -‘•• •••••••••- dr 1 1 4-1; 418 SS M3 X Ur Allitalle .0.......--.46. I r —CH All 4 at- Z lv".., Ilit ....--..." 0 OH Ala r- . ,V.. � I C �t.. - rirr - r . - .. - '.�.. .sN:..a'J►'X� �."...._w..� ...t'1•t'''.'' .. r - i� . N �.. f S Mat% en i .C 1i� 4000 4 e� . 0 er.. - ___ _ _ — c.--..re"... -T_= - _ __ r I �� v It hr Ct . O a; „ in plzi• V a z cis cz 0 Q et +•� • , ct i o c bA el., = urii owl • ,...4 u C ‘4 et ,4 I_ ••al a U g4 a - - .... _ - - f s lia '0 rt O 4 • 9 It Ne ,16 ) _ . 6 a O art insista_ . Min If ea' lc als 0 et wis ma 1-4 q VR Cri II in nig il le n % i ,q -4•-.4....4 II 7 ad+ X ` 511 1 we 012 az, r sit4 et ce 3r amtnesesselatta 0132....... 1. 414 -sac Aleill OS a •••• M .0. a 1.." ..., ra an in s `_ _- M 4. j e tilialtatCtraill +"1616 �• ' 1 r' E MI • so. II 4 erel OR sal t *Jiltni- ` t'" a + ..y, ;,...._;� �_..._._.r �i 'a.-+a. ,.....164•0....,. Le• 1 _ I f` it `{ -� - •• ; w, 4 f 1 n 40 Tjj Illq -in- 'fi r--1616+ 1616. 7 "Oa vs •Ill ME ' d S '' • � � ' t • 1616.« 1616. 1616 - yr ...........,y, .. __ F """""`-,..,, M, • :. _ ....t_._4- .:...>�.. - '-1� -'--. _ -- - .0 i4049 [ *8 0009Ott q 000 0 EXHIBIT H WILDLIFE INFORMATION The Loloff Pit is an operational mine, there is no wildlife affected by this expansion. There currently are no trees or vegetation that would provide nesting areas for migratory birds,there are no signs of burrowing animals, as well as, no sign of migratory land animals. EXHIBIT I SOILS INFORMATION Based on information verified in the field with drilling and lab testing,the site has an average depth of 6 inches of topsoil with an underlying layer of overburden material that is approximately 10-20 feet thick with sand and gravel beneath the overburden. The thickness of the sand and gravel is approximately 35-45 feet thick and has a weathered claystone material beneath. The particle size distributions for the test samples showed there was minimal fines content in the overburden with the vast majority being classified as sand with gravel. Under the Unified Soil Classification System,the overburden is classified as an SM-SC or a silty/clayey sand and the reserve under the overburden is classified as an SP-GP or a poorly graded sand with poorly graded gravel. Drilling for this site was completed in 1985 for the original mine permit and reserves verified in 2014 with the drilling of three additional holes. EXHIBIT J VEGETATION INFORMATION Based on information verified in the field, the active mining operations have cleared and grubbed the existing vegetation. There are isolated areas of native grasses and small low profile shrubs outside of the mine permit boundary being proposed with this amendment. There are a couple of cottonwood trees with an estimated height of 20-30 feet outside of the permit boundaries from the original mine permit issued along the west property line. Other than some native grass that exists on the north slope of the amended area, there is not any vegetation that will be impacted with this amendment. Based on current observations, the native grasses appear to establish themselves very well in arid soils with minimal topsoil or fines;therefore, it is intended to use similar native grasses in the reclamation of the disturbed areas. EXHIBIT K CLIMATE INFORMATION The Loloff Pit is located in Weld County just east of the City of Greeley. The climate for this area is an arid climate with an annual precipitation of 13.3 inches. The average snowfall for this area is 30.9 inches. There are an average of 240 sunny days per year with an average July high temperature of 89.6 °F and an average January low temperature of 13.5°F. Attached is a copy of historic data and trends from the Colorado Climate Center of Colorado State University. Data Access • Colorado Climate Trends Page 1 of 1 r'JJJ- rirl J la . � j �ILnass "r;r.a;rl�:u�l �ultrr;.r-t r r. r � irrs_i�r ( r•� r�rl �t • � i.I P..EI:. �;fl::f 1 i.r'.1!�1��'J'�i'i i..'llUr•JJl;rii iii:a.. - •- .Climate Trenq@*Data:.Crest Lit=by Goo9le i Fort Collins Climate Trerus = . . : I = - - 2ata:.ccce _ •;-=-_ - Station and Time Range Plot Current Station Total Annual Precipitation• 1889.2014 Fort Collins -- -- Fort Collins•Station 53005 Station 53005 I Data from 1889 to 2014;Get Station Info ,$ee on Mao 20n— Oata Type and Time Range Select Data ype -_ 2•`in [Total Monthly Precipitation v Starting Year 1889 l Ending Year 2014 zcn Plot Options 1.5 in Select Data Frequency 'Yearly Average(Jan-Dec) v l�Update Plot leo Show months with up to 9 days missing?, Debug Mode View this with the Old Plotter 1559 1899 1909 1919 1929 1929 19.9 1959 1989 1979 1989 1999 2009 Raw Data Options Select Data Format image Options Show Formatted List&Summary v,[ Get Raw Data I = - - -- ci.mate',enu a Data:.teas, girt_ Copyright 0 CCC 2007.2014•Al.ngnts marvel•No portion of this sits may be cooled or reproduces without express written permission t nhrnin Site last updated.Dezember 19 2009•Contact the Colorado Cbmata Center• - http://climatetrends.colostate.edu/ct access?plot=l&station=53005&elem=TPCP&yrbeg=... 12/4/2014 Data Access • Colorado Climate Trends Page 1 of 1 rri:ii-r-d .1_! ri( 1 '" " r . tialts(Ji:rS.,I ;;tl�;,iJll[1"tl (,11 J•,•iJJlll:J iJJ J(:.S." 1•li C1;1:� 1 J 1'r17JJ;;"J:1;sf1 i' - _2= »Climate Trend**Data Act eet Search by Google Fort Collins Climate Trends _ :3: I era•., -•- I Data Access I _- - = I Station and Time Range Plot Current Station Average Minimum Annual Temperature• 1889.2014 Fort Collins : :-.a : Fort Collins•Station 53005 Station 53005 I Data from 1889 to 2014 I Get Station Info I,;fee on Mao 40'F- Data Type and Time Range 28,F_ 1 Select Data Type N, til Monthly Mean Minimum Temperature v 4 Starting Year 1889 I Ending Year 2014 " , _ c: = : o•,F t , � i Plot Options l r ' Select Data Frequency F '^ t t • Yearly Average(Jan-Dec) v Update Plot , v L t :C'F J ®Show months with up to 9 days missing? Debug Mode View this with the Old Plotter 28`F 1589 1903 1917 1931 194: 1999 197: 1987 2001 Raw Data Options Select Data Format Image Options Show Formatted List&Summary v Get Raw Data »= _,:-I-_--� r,y- »Climate Trends»pate Access • • • .co wade)C,:mate enter^ c_. _ ._ :2225.•_ _.__5c__._,-�_:_—__. __.__,.__.. • °[a_�a.._,.i::=•3,� -,o•<. . IJ i I Copyright a CCC 2007.2014•All r.ghts reserved•No portion of this site may be copied or reproduced without express written permission. Ste last updated December 19 2009•Contact tn.Colorado Climate Center• ; . __.• _ - _ I nhrr5ip' http://climatetrends.colostate.edu/ct access?plot=l&station=53005&elem=MMNT&yrbeg... 12/4/2014 Data Access • Colorado Climate Trends Page 1 of 1 iJLJiiD• rl � I i r r is I f P r i t('P r I r_,,-'�liiriutb :'r.rtd;ilWrr;I r:ulrutw:,y Wirr:a:'s U:::1 ;:r I rJ;J'�,I'r1'rl'',I.arnr� :Itl, ;I:ur,s —a'z. -r;-a Climate Trend'pate Access r Search by Google j Fort Collins Climate Trends >.9a: I s•3: - I pate Access I _ -- =S I Station and Time Range Plot Current Station Average Maximum Annual Temperature• 1889-2014 Fort Collins;- :_ :-.-: Fort Collins•Station 53005 Station 53005 I Data from 1889 to 2014 I Get Station Info I See on Mao 70;F, Data Type and Time Range pt'F ;elect Data Type I Monthly Mean Maximum Temperature vi ea'F; 1 I Starting Year 1889 I Ending Year 2014 == �rF 1 i I 11 I V• Plot Options 0 , 1. -- t I I 11` A tr M T A Select Data Frequency r1 t r ( ! a 1 1 ti'/ I r'; v� WI k 1 Yearly Average(Jan-Dec) v I Update Plot j €0:F. I i I r ®Show months with up to 9 days missing?f Debug Mode ; 1 r View this with the Old Plotter I 58.F 1889 1902 1917 1921 19+5 1959 1973 1987 2001 Raw Data Options Select Data Format Image Options I Show Formatted List&Summary v ( Get Raw Data a _,_--;----:ar-,---.r 3, ==7', •:3;.-I --S'a'..r - 'a':- •?--_-a Climate Trends a Data AccesO �o!eraooC;mat.Cenrw•-_. _ '--- - - --:r--.-• c,-_--. ._.— ---"_ •'- c,i,_ _ _ ` r- Copyright m CCC 2007.2014•All nghts reserved•No portion of this site may be copied or reproduced without express written permission. nnrniq Site last updated,December 19.2009•Contact the Colorado Climate Center• .5 , -, -_•.:-‘... ,-— - http://climatetrends.colostate.edu/ct access?plot=1&station�53005&elem=MMXT&yrbeg... 12/4/2014 EXHIBIT L RECLAMATION COSTS The reclamation costs for the Loloff pit are broken down to a final grading cost, a re-seeding cost and a slurry wall construction cost. Attached is a breakdown of the cost for the entire site as was presented in the Loloff Pit Permit M-1985-112 Technical Revision No. 1. The re-seeded and regraded areas for the amended areas is negligibly smaller than the area used for the bonding calculations in Loloff Pit TR-01 for Phase 3 of the mine plan and does not impact the bonding calculations for reclamation in Phases 1 and 2. The revised bonding calculations for the slurry wall have been revised to include the amended areas and a total wall length decrease of approximately 40 feet. The attached bonding calculations show a reduction of$7,115 in the total financial warranty required. Loloff Construction ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Loloff Mine 12/22/2014 Reclamation Bond Quantities and Costs Bond Calc with 1 GIC Share and 1 New Cache Share ©2014 AT Consnitlna Inc. Summary of Unit Costs Direct costs Scarifying Ground $ 200 /acre Re-applying topsoil 12"thick $ 2,000 /acre Revegetating/Seeding disturbed area $ 1,000 /acre Mobilization $ 2,500 lump sum Slurry Wall Cost Breakdown(0-50 ft Coil$3/ft-51-70 ft na $4/ft) Slurry Wall Cost(45 to 50 foot average depth) $ 135 /linear foot Overhead and Profit Costs Liability insurance 1.55% of direct cost Performance bond 1.05% of direct cost Profit 10.00% of direct cost Total Overhead Cost 12.60% of direct cost Proiect Management Engineering and bidding 4.25% of direct cost Management and administration 5.00% of direct cost Total Additional Cost 9.25% of direct cost Phase 1 (5.8 acres)(Area that has 1 GIC share and 1 New Cache share to cover permanent augmentation) Reclamation Operation Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost Active Mining Area(Part of Existing Exposed Ground Water Area) Scarifying Ground in Disturbed Area - ac $ 200 $ Topsoil Placement in Disturbed Area - ac $ 2,000 $ Revegetate Disturbed Area - ac $ 1,000 $ Mobilization - Is $ 2,500 $ Total Direct Cost $ Overhead and Profit Cost(12.60%) $ Contract Cost $ Project Management(9.25%) $ Total Required Financial Warranty For Phase 1 $ 1 of 2 Loloff Construction ' J&T Consulting, Inc. Loloff Mine 12/22/2014 Reclamation Bond Quantities and Costs Bond Calc with 1 GIC Share and 1 New Cache Share ©2014 J&T Coasultlna.Inc. Phase 2(15.4 acres)(Area that is exposed that would be sealed by slurry wall) Reclamation Operation Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost Active Mining Area(Part of Existing Exposed Groundwater Area) Scarifying Ground in Disturbed Area-From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 4.7 ac $ 200 $ 933 Topsoil Placement in Disturbed Area -From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 4.7 ac $ 2,000 $ 9,400 Revegetate Disturbed Area -From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 4.7 ac $ 1,000 $ 4,700 Slurry Wall Slurry Wall 4,062.0 LF $ 135 $ 548,370 Mobilization 1.00 Is $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Total Direct Cost $ 565,903 Overhead and Profit Cost(12.60%) $ 71,304 Contract Cost $ 637,206 Project Management(9.25%) $ 52,346 Total Required Financial Warranty For Phase 2 $ 689,552 Phase 3(35.62 acres)(Area that is exposed that would be sealed by Slurry Wall) Reclamation Operation Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost Active Mining Area Scarifying Ground in Disturbed Area-From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 6.8 ac $ 200 $ 1,350 Topsoil Placement in Disturbed Area -From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 6.8 ac $ 2,000 $ 13,503 Revegetate Disturbed Area -From Top of Slope to Outside of Slurry Wall 6.8 ac $ 1,000 $ 6,752 Slurry Wall Slurry Wall 5,882.0 LF $ 150 $ 882,300 Mobilization 1.00 Is $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Total Direct Cost $ 906,405 Overhead and Profit Cost(12.60%) $ 114,207 Contract Cost $ 1,020,612 Project Management(9.25%) $ 83,842 Additional Financial Warranty Required for Phase 3 $ 414,902 Total Financial Warranty Required For Phase 3 $ 1,104,455 2 of 2 EXHIBIT M OTHER PERMITS AND LICENSES There are not any additional permits or licenses being sought as this amendment will not go outside the limits of the Use by Special Review approved by the Weld County Commissioners for the mining operations. The inclusion area to be mined with this amendment does not impact any environmentally sensitive areas and will not create any adverse conditions to the existing permits, namely air permits and water quality discharge permits. This amendment will not increase traffic flows or change traffic patterns. A copy of the Loloff Pit Technical Revision Number 1 has been attached for your review as a supporting document to the entire amendment application. STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION.MINING AND SAFETY Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 COLORADO DIVISION OF Denver,Colorado 80203 RECLAMATION Phone:(303)866-3567 MINING FAX:(303)832-8106 - SAFETY John April 1, 2014 Governor Mike King Don Loloff Executive Director Loloff Construction, Inc. Loretta Pineda P.O. Box 518 Director 206 Hill St. Kersey, CO 80644 Re: Loloff Mine,Technical Revision Approval, Permit No. M-1985-112, Revision No.TR-01 Dear Mr. Loloff: On April 1, 2014 the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety(Division/DRMS) approved the Technical Revision application submitted to the Division on July 2, 2013, addressing the following: Mining and Reclamation Plan revision to dry mine(dewater)site. The terms of the Technical Revision No. 1 approved by the Division are hereby incorporated into Permit No. M-1985-112. The revised financial warranty amount of$689,552.00 exceeds the$58,200.00 surety performance bond currently held by the Division. Please submit a rider or a new financial warranty per Rule 4.2 in the amount of$631,352.00 within 60-days(June 2, 2014)from the date of this letter. The revision will not be final until the bond is approved by the Division. The commitment and conditions of the Division approval are noted below. Please note that all other provisions of Permit No. M-1985-112 remain in full force and effect. Commitment No. 1 Loloff Construction, Inc.will provide monthly groundwater elevation data for the surrounding groundwater wells and western Derr Pit piezometers in future annual reports. A trigger point of 2 feet change from historic groundwater levels was established as part of TR-01. The trigger point elevation must be included in future annual reports. Stipulation No. 1 Loloff Construction, Inc.will purchase and decree to the Office of State Engineer(SEO)adequate water rights to cover the remaining 15.4 acres of exposed water in Phase 2 within 120 days from the approval date of TR-01. The 15.4 acres of exposed water surface in Phase 2 will require an additional 45 acre-ft(2.92 acre-ft per acre of exposed water surface). Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver•Grand Junction•Durango Active and Inactive Mines Stipulation No. 2 Loloff Construction, Inc.will purchase and decree to the Office of State Engineer(SEO)adequate water rights to cover the remaining 15.3 acres of exposed water in Phase 3 within 1 year from the approval date of TR-01 or post an additional financial warranty in the amount of$422,018.00 to cover the costs associated with installing a slurry wall for Phase 3. If you have any questions, please contact me at(303)866-3567 Ext.8124. Sincerely, Peter S. Hays Environmental Protection Specialist Cc: Tom Kaldenbach, DRMS Barbara Coria, DRMS J.C. York, J&T Consulting, Inc. Certified Mail Return Receipt 7011 3500 0002 9607 6421 ' � _ c _ is 'bay IP cs s� C is -` t -al -e $ 5 a.c`s al•.c 1 "lilt = ag'aa - 'A a. si sgigzaa i e ^-:y-; s_;lti7` s E4!}a` s "sg -- z es3a iA EfEe. al ccQ .;3L 34. k I m ,.as $ az r=a`$'zz eigr 0 8 -aY9g? € ei xse=? ."se cep czK k e=3's`si =�2:" ass"s ii Y c1'^ai 5_.i! payff y `c S :rte I..^ 3: 4 lC o•, w:�.v.. I m 3 i Dssi --. s.'f�7•.6VN p`i \ ttif/ -- iii l U � / A. \ aiz z=i z o / \ _ �• Q / ./..--- � f 0 W / °' y c.4 W / `yyy, I t•V •sy . / /' < T 3 v J zz6 as (//, / ., O$— 4 .. _;' kQc 1. o I • •/ Z h / '' �.8 3 �„s, =•1a / gz1 y�y.� o ,, \ �� fi �0� f^ N. 431 t4i h "k� yI ,,..,� / y - / �, ,, :! - \ \ \N • ..» I tee. N. .�' �.�, I ,' tr+q�e dC0 ter/ Rio w^fr3 .moo\ Y t by4N�m Jl J,&GO/r'^B Cv' O � \ • 3 : �:a ¢ a. 1 Ed - .ri4�7 BSI as 1 _ 3` rEtgipa I! �Ja Or ter..--=tiAls ., aisr.urai�u�� i OTOO/Z00012] DUI 1SUOD JJOTO1 £Z818L£OL6 XVd SO:£T ZTOZ/LT/OT !713[ 1*ti;l :!i i i3',i'c e ! si t —f 1 it '-i' 1131E c . yf se � s v .a3=`4r 'i' .. !.ii_ 1Fio.3:= 3-s 4.3 is s •3 i ' i 'i gisi •i`1 i s °• - . .s--3sii ice 3;':- ,.771 _1 'e3 -i-"i: - c[ = 3£ 3i !. . i.1: t : . N I! .c _: -:{ .� 4ii "is' s3•' "! i .513I „i it > o_ a '; Li 3 :, 1.} i_'z f li _ • .1' 1st.;,! _t= '1= " 1,!1:ii8� 3a: ;=!�`i _ c" i i s-1 :<s iz i 5 i 4'):. s;. e.$: :itjli I Q• 1 ”t:, !' 1:a:�lf;i iii ej.;%.sti i; 1 i! I 2 i! 3 iia : : :f _ l_ l: =ir s:: 3;i1 f4: y• MiMil f3 tE =s 3.iae.E,: i "cY:i1sF 11 lk:! ? -1•s ai i if{ti �_ i _s S osl:1•,iil-u si i O l s ;: 'i! �4F7 ° f-[i !•f ;i :t i'?i t s :3 :i .iirr till n _ _ i - 's n`i6_cisF -- " rig - ___ !f. ii> !:a .-s.. _ E ii tits s : if ;' . .-i c n; g - _ Ill 17 —�6 z_ a 9 '3a =s 3i}=_ - - : - _ ��c�34e '-E iii.r 1 - i ,zzEe` �1 a Ail' ;is "c . isi i [ i . -1;7 ,- s 'iSi i - ' 13.11sV1. ;i a N F 4t 's.sl� ! s' i• c i !_ -- . ti:? --; 3n i '-:: t4-3._4.:7 4 i''^�''g F 35i• ti wait CFyy:3 _1 scs j4: ! :f: ?: '1. ilia 15: s3 ;'; ;i 1_i;_.: t!titi _-: Ch <y1 i w •o::!iil f:2�? ��. t'. I: .'. _ tC i. i-M.11 t� �_ -SF-SYcy i3o i3 lira ie.i !g Es' P .! II ]"f f' -. _ f ili'i ? is f. i;s ses f__; F i °.' e:c'� Zi 9' ":S Is !-.i !IS t! ' °i s1 !r ;s. • .' `'i:',.i.= -1111 3 i Mill ii, `i.sz35ci :3 e`3s!ii'.'i Ss 'i.. g II 11: '`s is -:7_€ 1yy.3.! i f_ Rai l§s 5a 1;s -'la 1,-, Q Z --fill r. i2iei2,;: .iii islii4i=3i al Ili I Lis i:i :3 : a ; ii al., c>< r.ii `-`f' --= 4=rt I S u L14 0 --..i.—......,\ i\„.,, -�• �� \ W= I • 1 ! I W II ae 17 Ii , Lgg \ I z 61 sa v 4 4 4" ;:;;;'-'.393 f a� ; )11 h.4a� r�4 \\\ �� II 11 !/r \6 L. j 'II !j ;„ I a '¢ + --I 1w.x I i: N'''- . i I 'l N,! I „,..,�� \ �,I • I I :1.'4.: , I r \ -- \ :\<1._' I N Qz`..i - I i , \' ..1:it t. \ — - —:,`III I.t...„,,,......,:aot÷.,/,:7,..".r... ....C.,..4 i ;'i v' I! F a1 \ A o a o A? 6 ? c -y W 3 a. a 'a d{ � ; .,= 4 � Al c I 2F , 1a :pp it . cc• pp C'kt` p o ,. ` as ad !' W 2 It"!' o 1 : g h 34 • ef'1i : y 1 it d at` � 2 QQ8 aitar �i s N Fl Z �E t� to is f la,l,N..,l`, v _. a,ay q.•y 3 i .. 4 1; N Cd 6 i , : 3: e n p H I F i 1. a n. .a OT00/E000E DUI aSUOD JJOTO1 EZ87 LEOL6 XVd 20:ET ZTOZ/LT/OT w 3 v -12 1 i ___..4, 0„) .4 � 8 i R $ S e 7 v.v.M —ar, aet • Cr i o O I aq Q o ( W: a , Ei s a I:sittsx€an 3 I 68 a $ ?..., ... 4=1'. 22 4 e '.4 .7°, 1, . f \ ci — @'\ \ \ \ �-__ _ —tit % 3 1 \ \ mom. \ a... ,.is -------_,,,,....1______:. , .a E p • S $ 3 4': Eu •nn a s f. a -N K...,.. \ �� e5 W o��J a g �Q 4,/,:,,4, I Ufa y $C 4 la S to tA 12a 1 � o$ H IIit, 2 „ 7f 1. ll 1 0100/V0002 Dui Isuo3 JJoTo'T EZ868LEOL6 XVd 90:ET ZTOZ/LT/OT 10/17/2012 13:06 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc 20005/0010 RESOLUTION RE: APP ROVE SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AMENDED SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT FOR AN OPEN CUT SAND AND GRAVEL OPERATION TO INCLUDE STOCKPILING, RECYCLING AND PROCESSING OF DEMOLITION MATERIAL (ASPHALT AND CONCRETE) IN THE A (AGRICULTURAL) ZONE DISTRICT - LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. INC., C/O ED LOLOFF 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 of County Commissioners held a public hearing on the 8th day of July, 1992, at the hour of 10:00 a.m. in the Chambers of the Board for the purpose of hearing the application of Loloff Construction Company, Inc., c/o Ed Loloff. P.O. Box 518, Kersey, Colorado 80644, for a Site Specific Development Plan and Amended Special Review Permit for an open cut sand and gravel operation to include stockpiling, recycling and processing of demolition material (asphalt and concrete) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District on the following described real estate, to-wit: Part of the SEI NW} and the Si NE} NW} of Section 4, Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th P.M., Wald County, Colorado WHEREAS, said applicant was represented by Bob Ruyle, Attorney, and WHEREAS, Section 24.4.2 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance provides standards for review of said Special Review Permit, and WHEREAS. the Board of County Commissioners heard all of the testimony and statements of those present, has studied the request of the applicant and the recommendations of the Weld County Planning Commission and all of the exhibits and evidence presented in this matter and, having been fully informed. finds that this request shall be approved for the following reasons: 1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 24.7 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. 2. It is the opinion of the Board of County Commissioners that the applicant has shown compliance with Section 24.4.2 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance as follows: a. This proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan's Mineral Resource Goals and Policies, the Urban Growth Boundary Area Goals and Policies, and the Transportation Goals and Policies. The Comprehensive Plin encourages the extraction of mineral resources when the mining plan promotes reasonable and orderly development of the mineral resources. 920610 (1/, f2t r-„. f• I. 10/17/2012 13:07 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc Z0006/0010 SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT - LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. PAGE 2 The Comprehensive Plan also encourages land-use development proposals within an urban growth boundary area as long as they conform to the desires of the local land-use decision making body. The City of Greeley Planning Commission reviewed this request on May 26, 1992. and found that the request does comply with the City of Greeley's Comprehensive Plan. The Conditions of Approval and Development Standards will ensure that these goals and policies are met. b. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Agricultural Zone District and is provided for as a use by special review. c. Conditions of Approval and Development Standards will ensure compatibility with the existing surrounding land uses which include agricultural production, rural residential. oil and gas production, and commercial development. The use can be made compatible with the future development of the surrounding area as permitted by the C-i (Commercial) and R-1 (Residential) Zone Districts. d. The Special Review Permit site is located in the 100-year floodplain and the airport overlay districts. Special Review Permit Development Standards address the overlay district requirements. No other overlay districts affect this site. e. Special Review Permit Development Standards will provide adequate protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood and County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County. Colorado, that the application for a Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for an open cut sand and gravel operation to include stockpiling, recycling and processing of demolition material (asphalt and concrete) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District on the hereinabove described parcel of land be, and hereby is, granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The attached Development Standards for the Special Review Permit shall be adopted and placed on the Special Review plat prior to recording the plat. The plat shall be delivered to the Department of Planning Services and be ready for recording in the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 15 days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 2. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. 920610 10/17/2012 13:07 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc 20007/0010 SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT - LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. PAGE 3 3. The following note shall be placed on the Special Review Permit plat prior to recording: NOTE: The Mined Land Reclamation Board has the authority to issue permits for mining and reclamation activities. Activities related to mining and reclamation are, therefore, under the jurisdiction of the Mined Land Reclamation Board; however, Weld County has jurisdiction of those matters outlined in the Development Standards. 4. Within 30 days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners: a. The applicant shall amend the existing road maintenance agreement with the Weld County Commissioners and the City of Greeley Public Works Department. The agreements shall mitigate impacts of truck traffic generated on Balsam Avenue by the stockpiling, recycling, and processing of demolition materials and the gravel mining operation. b. Any required emissions permit shall be obtained from the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health for fugitive dust and odors. c. Adequate toilet facilities served by an individual sewage disposal system, shall be installed. The toilet facilities shall be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. d. Any required NPDES permit shall be obtained from the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Health and/or amended, if appropriate for the proposed operations. e. A dust abatement plan shall be submitted to the Weld County Health Department for approval. The facility shall have sufficient equipment available to implement the dust control as required by the Health Department. This plan shall address the expected traffic volume, and set standards for control. 5. The applicant shall submit evidence of compliance with Section 44.4.10 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance regarding Insurance to the Department of Planning Services prior to the start of the sand and gravel operation. 6. The applicant and/or operator of the sand and gravel operation shall notify the Department of Planning Services, in writing, when starting the sand and gravel operation on site. 920610 10/17/2012 13:08 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc C j0008/0010 SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT - LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. PAGE 4 The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 8th day of July, A.D., 1992. 4044/Ma4eL BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Weld County Clerk to the Board /- GGee,5ge Keeiedy, Chairman BY: (f[272.1_ 1.0 C � Deputy lerk to the Board r Constance L. Harbe t. Pro-Tem APPROVED AS TO FORM: C. W. K C ty Attorney Gor . Lacy pa W. H. ebster 920610 10/17/2012 13:08 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc [20009/0010 SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC., CIO ED LOLOFF AMENDED USR-690 1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit is for an open cut sand and gravel operation to include stockpiling, recycling and processing of demolition materials (asphalt and concrete) as submitted in the amended application materials on file in the Department of Planning Services and subject to the Development Standards stated herein. 2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 90 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. 3. Petroleum products and compressed flammable gases are hazardous substances per C.R.S. 29-22-107 (2) (a). Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a list of the maximum quantities of hazardous substances expected at the site and emergency phone numbers to the State Health Department, Division of Waste Management, the Weld County Emergency Response Coordinator, and the Western Hills Fire Protection District. Evidence of this listing and emergency phone numbers shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. Vehicular traffic shall ingress and egress onto Weld County Road 41.5 as shown herein on the submitted Special Review plat. The haul route shall be from the point of ingress and egress south to Colorado Highway 263. 5. The property owner(s) and/or operator shall apply for a well permit with the Division of Water Resources to comply with C.R.S. 37-90-137. Prior to extraction of sand and gravel, a copy of the approved well permit application shall be forwarded to the Department of Planning Services. 6. The Special Review area shall be enclosed by a six foot chain-link fence with a three-strand barbed wire top. The fence shall be erected prior to beginning the sand and gravel operation. 7. Signs stating "No Trespassing' shall be posted and maintained on the chain link fence at intervals of two-hundred feet (200'). 8. The owner/operator shall maintain a fifty-foot (50') setback from Balsam Avenue in the mining operation. 9. Structures on the site shall not exceed one-hundred-fifty feet (150') in height, in accordance with Airport Zone Height Limitations, Section 51.3 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. 920610 10/17/2012 13:08 FAX 9703784823 Loloff Const Inc L ]0010/0010 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. PAGE 2 10. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. 11. Fugitive dust shall be controlled on this site. 12. The maximum permissible noise level shall not exceed the industrial limit of 80 dB(A). as measured according to C.R.S. 25-12-102. 13. The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile overburden soil, sand, and gravel from the facility area in a manner that will prevent nuisance conditions. 14. All operations on said described parcel shall be in conformance with the Weld County Flood Hazard Regulations including: a. No fill. berms, or stockpiles shall be placed in the 100-year floodplain of the Cache la Poudre River which would obstruct passage of flood flows; and b. All fuel tanks, septic tanks, temporary buildings, and any other hazardous items that might wash away during flooding shall be securely anchored and adequately flood-proofed to avoid creation of a health hazard. Following completion of operations, all temporary buildings shall be removed. 15. The owner/operator shall plant a greenbelt along the entire south boundary of the Special Review site within one year of beginning the sand and gravel excavation. The greenbelt shall be planted and maintained in accordance with Soil Conservation Service recommendations. 16. The open cut gravel operation shall comply with Section 44.4, Operation Policies. 17. All construction on the property shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Weld County Building Code Ordinance. 18. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of Section 24.5 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. 19. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of Section 24.6 of the Weld County Zoning Ordinance. 20. Personnel from the weld County Health Department and Weld County Department of Planning Services shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County Regulations. 920610 EXHIBIT N SOURCE OF LEGAL RIGHT TO ENTER Loloff Construction, Inc. is the Owner of the property as listed with the Weld County Clerk and Recorders Office and therefore has the right to enter and mine. EXHIBIT 0 OWNERS OF RECORD OF AFFECTED LAND AND OWNER OF SUBSTANCE TO BE MINED The Owner of Record is as listed with the Weld County Assessor's Office is Loloff Construction, Inc. for both the affected land and the substance to be mined. Attached is the record of ownership as Recorded with the Weld County Clerk and Recorders office. Property Report Page 1 of 1 Weld County .r! 'a - ! Property Report cO-% Account: R2763786 July 8, 2015 Account Information Account Tax Tax Buildings Actual Assessed Account Parcel Space Type Year Area Value Value R2763786 096104200013 Agricultural 2015 0684 0 1,784 520 Legal 12129 SE4NW4&S2NE4NW4 4 5 65 EXC COMM N4 COR SEC S652.95' S150.81' M/L TO EXIST FENCE LN &TRUE FOB N85D40'W 1326.86'TOW LN NE4NW4 TH SELY TOW LN NW4 17.18'N OF POB S17.18'TO FOB (1R) Subdivision Block Lot Land Economic Area NA NA NA 6207 GREELEY Property Address Property City Zip Section Township Range NA NA 04 05 65 Owner(s) Account Owner Name Address R2763786 LOLOFF CONSTRUCTION INC PO BOX 518 KERSEY, CO 806440518 https://propertyreport.co.weld.co.us/?account=R2763786 7/8/2015 EXHIBIT P LIST OF MUNICIPALITIES WITHIN TWO MILES The City of Greeley is the only municipality that is within two miles of the mine site. The address for the City is as follows: City of Greeley c/o Community Development 1000 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 EXHIBIT Q PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICES TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT EXHIBIT R PROOF OF FILING WITH COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER Amendment has been filed with the Clerk to the County Commissioners and shall be made available to the public through the Commissioner's office, per the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners. A copy of the filing has been posted with the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. NOTICE OF FILING APPLICATION FOR COLORADO MINED LAND RECLAMATION PERMIT FOR REGLLAR (I 12)CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS EXTRACTION OPERATION NOTICE TO THE BOARD OF SL PERVISORS OF THE LOCAL CONSERVATION DISTRICT :. s:3reea,ccrs_tia_ - DISTRICT Co^rruct,or.Inc (the Applicant Operator")has applied for a Regular(1 12)reclamation permit from the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board(the"Board")to conduct the e.traction of construction materials operations in wait Count. The attached information is being provided to notil you of the location and nature of the proposed operation. The entire:application is on rile with:he Division of Reclamation.Mining.and Safet) (the "Division")and the local count; clerk and recorder. the applicant operator proposes to reclaim the affected :and to 1Va:e:5:cage use. Pursuant to Section 34-32.5-I 16(4)(m). C.R.S.. the Board ma confer with the local Conser.ation Districts before approving of the post-mining land use. .Accordingly.the Board w ouid appreciate our comments on the proposed operation. Please note that. in order to reser\e>our right to a hearin<_before the Board on this application. >ou must submi: v ritten comments on the p _ application within twenty (20) d3)5 of the date of last publication of notice pursuant to Section 34-32.5-112(10).C.R.S. it;ou would like to discuss the proposed post-mining land use.or tar other issue regardir-,_this application.please contact the Division of Reclamation. Mining.and Safen. 1313 Sherman Street.Room 215. De:i\er. Colorado 80203.(303)866.3567. ss.O77 TO APPLICANT OPERATOR: You must attach a copy cf:;e appl:ca:io :; If this is..notice or.2 Li13'.i_r to pre\ious)> tiled application >ou rams: either attach a copy C: ..`ian '_. :..tarn .. complete and accurate the �han_e. - WEST GREELEY. CONSERVATION DISTRICT • / • V� EXHIBIT S PERMANENT MAN-MADE STRUCTURES The only structure within 200 feet of the additional area to be mined with this proposed amendment is that of Sylvia and Vern Parker. There is currently is agreement in place to allow mining and reclamation activities within 200 feet of their structure executed on September 5, 2013 and this agreement is attached as part of this application. Additional structures that have required notification are Noble Energy, who owns oil separators east of Balsam Drive, Duke Energy, who owns a pipeline within the Balsam right of way, and Excel Energy, who has an overhead powerline within the Balsam right of way. The amended stability analysis shows that mining activity within 200 feet and not less than 50 feet of these permanent structures. August 26, 2013 Ms. Sylvia Parker 211 North Balsam Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Agreement for Compensation for Damage to Structures within 200 feet of mining activities Ms. Parker: Loloff Construction, Inc. has a Weld County (County) Use by Special Review Permit AMUSR- 690, and a State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety (DRMS) Reclamation Permit M1985-112 to allow sand and gravel mining on property within 200 feet of structures located on your property. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act provides protection for your property, and specific protection for your structures located within 200 feet of the mining activities. DRMS Permit requires a notarized agreement between the permit holder and owners of structures within 200 feet, providing compensation for any damage to the structure; or preparation of an engineering evaluation acceptable to the DRMS, demonstrating that such structures shall not be damaged by the mining activities if an agreement cannot be reached. Loloff Construction, Inc. has had an engineering evaluation performed to determine acceptable setbacks from their proposed mining permit boundary and mining limit to structures adjacent to the mining. The proposed mining slopes and setbacks were analyzed using the XSTABL v5.105a computer program. XSTABL was designed to analyze the slope stability of earth embankments subjected to several critical situations that may occur during the life of the embankment. The procedure searches for circular shear failures and automatically searches for the lowest safety factor. 2,000 separate failure surfaces were analyzed for each case. The required minimum safety factors are based on the current standards used by the Colorado State Engineer's Office (SEO) for high hazard embankment dams, and industry accepted standards for the evaluation of embankments during construction. The safety factors attained using the setbacks shown on the attached Mining Plan are greater than the required safety factors specified by the SEO for an earth embankment during construction, and an earth embankment subjected to earthquake loading, based on the United States Geological Survey earthquake peak acceleration factors for the area. This evaluation indicates that damage to structures adjacent to the mining should not occur, even during earthquake conditions, which are very unlikely to be present. Loloff Construction, Inc. P.O.Box 518 Kersey, Colorado 80644 Sylvia Parker RE Agreement for Compensation for Damage to Structures within 200 feet of mining activities -2- With this letter, Loloff Construction. Inc. requests your authorization to conduct mining and reclamation activities within 200 feet of the structures located on your property. In return for this authorization, Loloff Construction, Inc. agrees to provide fair compensation for any damage to your structure(s) resulting from its mining and reclamation activities. Your notarized signature below grants permission for Loloff Construction, Inc.to conduct mining and reclamation activities within 200 feet of your structure(s), and acknowledges Loloff Construction, Inc.'s commitment to provide compensation for any damages to said structure(s) caused by Loloff Construction, Inc.'s mining and reclamation activities. Sincerely,• • Don Loloff, Manager Date Loloff Construction, Inc. Sylvia Parker Date The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 65 day of�' MbC./ .gaj by. ¶ 1VI& Pc.Ir( _ as61G47�""' G' (/�� Notary PublitJ BRANDON 8 GUERRERO NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires ,j Cans 22 14.20,1 STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20134&4017 MY COMMISSION E)(PIRES AN.24,2017 Loloff Construction,Inc. P.O.Box 518 Kersey,Colorado 80644 Sylvia Parker 211 North Balsam Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 July 3, 2013 RE: Well Protection/Water Level Monitoring Agreement Ms. Parker: Loloff Construction lnc.(Loloft) has a Weld County (County) Use by Special Review Permit, and a State of Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety (DRMS) Reclamation Permit to allow sand and gravel mining on a property that is near the following shallow well(s) located on your property: Permit # Use 44673 Domestic/Stock Loloil acknowledges your concern for maintaining the capacity of your well(s), and hereby offers to monitor the water depth and capacity of your well(s) at Loloff expense, to determine if the well(s) is (are) adversely affected by mining and reclamation operations. l.,oloff agrees to begin monthly monitoring of water depth in your well(s) and to continue monitoring until reclamation is completed. By your signature below,your acknowledge 1_oloffs commitment to monitor and mitigate any adverse impacts to your well(s) attributed to Lolofts mining and reclamation activities, and grant permission for Loloff to commence said monitoring. Sincerely. 7- 30-2D13 Loloff Constru ion Inc Date • -3p -,eQ/ 3 Pro rty Owner Date � t _ , 'F '* ems„,,.. , -•.„,„, .,.,,,r4 r' 1,. ,,, . . ... ii s 1, r 47.-44(...:. - '.'\ '•y.; 1 . t� r, a. w 1 z _ ,f1, , 471'1 1-i • ,4_,',,,. 1 r s• fir'1 1 4 3 1 •..•i;.,1,440.., =` Go:sle earth feet 2000 meters 700 1 �. _ P(—O(3' ,,,i-4-2/ C,V-1-41' 0,4 l S v I ‘(� 1 O. 1�(� ijll *...._.1--- Dovk s-i-is S focJ5 11 73 Hello