HomeMy WebLinkAbout20151494.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR
GRAVEL ROADS(FEMA)AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN
WHEREAS,the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,Colorado,pursuant to
Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of
administering the affairs of Weld County,Colorado,and
WHEREAS,the Board has been presented with a Community Development Block Grant
Application for Gravel Roads (FEMA) from the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and
through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, to the Colorado Department of
Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, commencing upon
full execution,with further terms and conditions being as stated in said application,and
WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said application, a
copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Weld County, Colorado, that the Community Development Block Grant Application for Gravel
Roads(FEMA)from the County of Weld,State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, to the Colorado Department of Public Safety, Division of
Homeland Security and Emergency Management,be,and hereby is,approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chair be,and hereby is, authorized
to sign said application.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded,adopted
by the following vote on the 27th day of May,A.D.,2015.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY,COLORADO
ATTEST: / EXCUSED
�jdt/{ / o�� Barbara Kirkmeyer,Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Board
Mike Freeman, Pro-Tem
0410 n
D Lip Clerk to the oard
ELa`Sean P.Conway
APPROVED AS TO FORM (�J
, a1� �� tr
'
.lie A.Cozad
1861
Coun y Attorney CUSED
A ` !lJ j teve Moreno
Date of signature:
C.,C'•OEM;4Cc4- /2,Z 2015-1494
EM0016
BC0045
Colorado Division of Homeland Security Grant NOI / Application
gtoY
Emergency Management CDBG - DR
g y g C G R Recover Colorado
Infrastructure Program
THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY
DHSEM Identification Number: Colorado Point of Contact:
CDBG-DR Program Manager
Date NOI (Part A) Received: Colorado DHSEM
9195 East Mineral Avenue. Suite 200
Date Application (Part B) Received: Centennial, Colorado 80112
fr Office: 720.852.6713
Date Next Steps Letter Transmitted: Fax: 720.852.6750
cdps dhsem cdbg@state.co.us
PART A - NOI :
PROJECT OVERVIEW
1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado
2. Applicant
Type: ✓ Local Government Private Non-Profit (Attach copy of 501c3, if applicable)
3. Project Title: (6) - County Match FEMA Projects - WELCO05 (588)
4. Proposed Project Total Cost: 515.221 .69
CDBG-DR-I Request: 64.402.71
5. Certifications:
The undersigned assures fulfillment of all requirements of the CDBG-DR Recover Colorado Infrastructure Program as
contained in the program guidelines and that all information contained herein is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge. The governing body of the applicant has duly authorized the document, commits to the non-Federal and State
share identified in the Budget, and hereby applies for the assistance documented in this application. Also, the applicant
understands that the project may proceed ONLY AFTER a GRANT AGREEEMENT is approved.
Mike Freeman , Pro—Tem Weld County Commissioner (970) 356-4000
Typed Name of Authorized Applicant Agent 1 i1 Telephone Number
MAY 272015
Signature ul Authorized Applicant Agent Date Signed
2015-1494
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 1 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : APPLICANT INFORMATION
1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado
2. FIPSCode: 123 DUNS Number: 07575-7955
3. U.S. Congressional District: 4th Congressman Name:
4. State Senatorial District: 1 Senator Name: Mr. Cory Gardner
5. State Legislative District: 50 Representative Name: Mr. Ken Buck
6. Primary Point of Contact:
The Primary Point of Contact is the person responsible for coordinating the implementation of this proposal, if approval is
granted.
Ms. I tier. O Mrs. . First Name: Roy Last Name: Rudisill
Title: Director Organization: Weld County Office of Emergency Manageme
Street Address: 1 150 O Street
City: Greeley State: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: (y / U ) (y I U ) isb- /Kg Mobile: (9 / U ) JAS - -U E-mail Address: rrudisill(c�co.weld . co
7. Alternate Point of Contact:
The Alternate Point of Contact is the person that can address questions or concerns in the Primary Point of Contact's
absence.
Ms. O Mr. . Misr First Name: Barb Last Name: Connolly
Title: Controller Organization: Weld County Accounting
Street Address: 1150 O Street
Greeley state: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: y / U )iDt I ; v ( I U) oio- td \ lohile: E-mail Address: bconnollyco .weld .
8. Application Prepared by:
Ms. Mr. Q \li s First Name: Kyle Last Name: Jones
Title: Planner Organization : Arcadis-US
Street Address:
City: Tallahass( state: FL Lip Code: 32309
Telephone: (OOU) bti 1:, x: Mobile: ( 12b , 2U2-3 E-mail Address: kyle . lones a(�arcadis-
9. Authorized Applicant Agent:
\ 1.. ✓ \Ir. Mrs. First Name: Barbara Last Name: Kirkmeyer
Title: COMMiSSii Organization: Weld County
Street Address: 1150 O Street, P . O . Box 758
City: Greeley State: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: k t U ) ° 1 l x: Mobile: E-mail Address: bkirkmeyerco.welt
The Authorized Applicant Agent MUST be the chief executive officer, mayor, etc. This person must be able to sign
contracts, authorize funding allocations or payments, etc.
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 2 of 20
oiSr
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: PROJECT DESCRIPTION & NATIONAL OBJECTIVES MET
1. Project — Eligible Activity Description:
Describe the proposed project. Explain how the proposed project will address recovery and/or resilience needs in your
community either independently or as part of a larger project. Include a description of the desired outcome and the
recovery objective(s) to be achieved. This narrative should describe the CDBG-DR Eligible Activity.
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways, bridges. culverts,
removed hazardous roadway debris, made emergency repairs to paved and gravel
roadways, addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made
repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
FEMA Categories A, B , C , and E were addressed in the Weld County FEMA Match . CDBG
funds are needed to be applied towards the Weld County FEMA Local Match for the
emergency work that was identified on previously submitted Project Worksheets . All
projects covered under the Weld County Project Worksheets were vital for Weld County to
clear hazardous debris from roadways/creeks/streams and enhance their infrastructure,
river embankments, equipment and roadways . This particular NOI/Application will discuss
to/Cl r'nng /roo \ T4, .. Drni..r4 \ A /nrJtr nn+ in n++nnhnrI Fr-.. +kin nr.nIint-Wen , fnr rnfrnrnrnnn Thr-, O
2. Site / Physical Location: Describe the area(s) affected/protected by this project, including location by complete street
address and longitude and latitude (coordinates in decimal degrees).
The latitude is 40 .446330 and the longitude is - 104 . 701460 . The attached spreadsheet
shows the Lat/Long coordinates for all of the project worksheets and depict the damage site
locations as identified in the correlating Project Worksheets . However; the area affected
3. Population Served: Briefly describe the demographics of the population served or protected by this project. Include
the percent of the overall community population benefiting from this project. Explain your response.
An estimated 90% or more of the community benefited from the proactive work by Weld
County and the removal of hazardous debris and the emergency work/repairs made to the
roadways, bridges, equipment and culverts. The population benefiting from this Match
Project will include an LMI level population percentage that will be directly or indirectly
impacted through this project. This NOI and the associated PW impacted the entire County
and demographic area . White : 67 . 6% . Hispanic: 28 . 3% , Other: 1 .6% , Asian : 1 . 3% , Black :
0 . 8% , Native American : 0 .4% . Weld County consists of 99, 317 households with a median
houseio c income of S56 . 589 and : le majority of We c Coun:v is owner-occupied wi_ -i O
4. Priority of this Project: If you are submitting more than one CDBG-DR Infrastructure NOI, what is the relative
priority of this project? Please indicate the priority as: Priority # of## Projects Submitted.
Priority 10 of 36 Projects Submitted .
Attach an\ continuation~ or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 3 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: CDBG-DR FUNDING QUALIFICATIONS
Community Development Block Grant — Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding can be approved for a project in which
ALL of the following requirements are met The physical location of the activity must be within a county listed in Table 1 of
the program Recover Colorado Infrastructure Grant Program Guidelines (Guidelines).
1. Connection to Disaster Recovery
CDBG's Disaster Recovery funds must be used for necessary expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery,
restoration of infrastructure and housing, economic revitalization, and mitigation from future damages.. The activity
must show a direct link to damages received during one or more of the events listed in Table 1 of the Guidelines. Please
provide a brief explanation of how the proposed acquisition activity: (1) was a result of the disaster event; (2) will
restore infrastructure or revitalize the economy; or will (3) mitigate future damages.
During the incident period of September 11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County.
Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in the creeks , streams and rivers which caused
surface gravel removal and scour damage to numerous roads and bridges in Weld County .
This NOI Application request addresses emergency work and the damages that were a
r,F 41,r. r. n n Al 11, r. ;•-• .......... .. .. rJ . .;41., t.-. r, r r, r.. . r..-.+ C
2. Compliance with National Objectives
State recipients receiving allocations under the CDBG-DR program must certify that their projected use of funds
will ensure, and maintain evidence, that each of its activities assisted with CDBG-DR funds meets at least one of
the three National Objectives.
a) Which of the National Objectives are met by proposed project?
I Will benefit low and moderate income (LMI) persons; or
Will aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or
✓ Is an Urgent Need in which meet community development needs having a particular urgency because
existing conditions pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community where
other financial resources are not available to meet such needs.
b) How will the proposed project meet the above checked National Objective(s).
See attached LMI data for the Project.
In addition to the LMI data attached , the State of Colorado (according to ACS
2008-2012 5Y) lists Weld County at a 41 .0% LMI . In reviewing the LMI data for this
Project NOI , the PW associated LMI % was 89 .40% . However, this percentage does not
accurately capture the total number of service areas that are either directly or indirectly
impacted by the FEMA Match Projects . The entire community benefited from the
proactive emergency work by Weld County and the removal of hazardous debris and
the work/repairs made to the roadways , bridges, equipment and culverts thus the
County believes that a higher LMI % should be given for this FEMA match Project. The
general vicinity of FEMA Match Projects encompasses the entire County and greatly
benefits the entire LMI population for this project, which is why the County believes that
this project not only meets, but exceeds the 50% requirement for meeting the National
Objective . The emergency work/repairs that were made under the WELCO PW's for the
Local FEMA Match drastically reduced hazardous conditions for the general public and
enabled Weld County to focus on resiliency efforts post storm . It is believed that the
service area for Project Site Locations benefited multiple LMI tract sections and thus a
higher weighted percentage of over 50% should be noted for this match project due to a
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 4 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
3. Compliance with the primary objective. As indicated in the Guidelines: "A proposed project's benefits to LMI
persons will be an important factor in evaluating potential infrastructure projects. A total of 20% of the Recover
Colorado Infrastructure project funding must benefit LMI persons. Due to the very low percentage of LMI projects
submitted in the first round of infrastructure funding, it is estimated that approximately 25% to 30% of the funding
available in this second allocation must meet the LMI requirement to make up for the deficit."
This section does not need to be completed if the project does not meet this National Objective.
The primary objective for using CDBG Disaster Recovery funds is benefitting, by at least 51 percent, persons of low and
moderate income. The following section provides the information necessary to complete this requirement.
a) Is the proposed activity: jurisdiction wide specified target area
If you checked specified target area, which data source was used? (Note: select the smallest unit of Census data that
encompasses your proposed target area.)
b) Enter the number of households involved in the proposed project. 994317 .
c) In the space below, describe how the applicant will comply with the requirement that at least 51 percent of CDBG-DR
dollars will principally benefit low- and moderate-income households and persons.
Weld County will comply with the 51 % requirement due to the fact that the PW
associated under this NOI Project for the FEMA County Match is targeted to areas of the
county that qualify as LMI . The justification behind this methodology is that multiple
d) Enter the number of households within each income category expected to benefit from the proposed project.
Incomes above 80% of the County Median 785
Incomes above 50% and up to 80% of the County Median 1265
Incomes at or below 50% of the County Median 2060
e) Which type of income was used to determine the above? (Check only one)
As determined by the American Community Survey (Public Facilities projects)
Annual income as defined for Public Housing and Section 8
�/ Annual income as reported under the Census long form
Adjusted gross income as defined for reporting under IRS
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Pate 5 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : COMPREHENSIVE RISK ANALYSIS INFORMATION
1. Community Hazards Review: Please list and briefly describe in rank order of importance the natural or man-made
hazards in your (the Applicant's) service area.
The hazards identified within this Project for the FEMA County Match for WELCO05 (588 )
would be ranked in the following manner: Flood , Erosion and Subsidence .
The hazards caused significant damage and posed a severe risk to the community for the
designated incident period .
2. High Risk Hazards Addressed by the Project:
Describe how, and the degree to which, the proposed project mitigates high risk hazards. Include damage history, source
and type of problem, frequency of event(s), and severity of damage information, if available.
Hazard l
Flooding caused the most severe damage to Weld County during the designated incident
period and this Project addressed and mitigated against severe flood damage to local
roadways, bridges , culverts, removed hazardous debris along roadways . In addition ,
County Officials ensured repairs were made to paved and gravel roadways for the safety of
the community and addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and
made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident
Period . The repairs made brought the damaged infrastructure back to its pre-disaster
condition in accordance with regulations .
llatzard 2
Erosion also caused a severe issue for the County. This Project addressed and mitigated
against severe erosion damage to local roadways , shoulders , and embankments. The work
that was conducted by the County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the
damaged infrastructure and restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in
accordance with regulations .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 6 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Hazard 3
Subsidence was another critical hazard that caused dangerous conditions for the
community. This Project addressed and mitigated against severe subsidence damage to
local roadways , shoulders , bridges and embankments. The work that was conducted by the
County mitigated against any immediate threat/hazard to the damaged infrastructure and
restored the infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition in accordance with regulations .
Note: If your proposed project addresses more than three Hazards, please provide that information as an
attachment.
3. Elimination of Risk: Does the proposed project result in the elimination of a hazard from your (the Applicant's) service
area? If so, please describe. If not, please estimate the degree to which this project will mitigate the risk from the hazards
identified in Item #2.
The Proposed FEMA Local Match for WELCO05 (588 ) does not completely eliminate the
hazards identified from the service area . The Proposed FEMA Match Project does allow
Weld County to receive a percentage of funds back that the County expended during one of
the most costly disasters in Colorado history however. These types of hazards that
occurred in Weld County and throughout Colorado are truly an act of mother nature and the
County was as prepared as it could have been but the severity/duration of the incident was
of an unprecedented nature . Weld County cannot eliminate the risk of future flooding ,
erosion or land subsidence , but Local Officials can ensure that their community is prepared
for future incident, take the necessary precautions and that their infrastructure is restored
4. Environmental Quality Improvements: Does the proposed project result in an improvement in the quality of the natural
environment in your (the Applicant's) service area? If so, please describe.
Yes; the damages that attributed to the designated incident period and FEMA-DR 4145
were addressed via the previously submitted PW and the work conducted to restore the
infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition was implemented . The work done at this
site location (see previous attachment for lat/long coordinates ) addressed not only
improvements/repairs made to the infrastructure , but also improvements and repairs to the
river embankments and any potential erosion or subsidence issues that could have
tainrcnnnrl if +hn (` i in h, hurl n InI,nn fhn
5. Climate Change Improvements: Does the proposed project reduce or ameliorate a projected impact of climate change
in Colorado? If so, please briefly describe the benefit of the project.
This Proposed Project reduces a projected impact climate change due to the proactive
mitigation measures that were undertaken by Weld County during the designated incident
period . This was accomplished by ensuring that the damaged site location was addressed
as soon , but as safely, as possible, and not to sustain any further impacts to the site
locations or environment that would enable the damage to enhance the projected impact of
any potential climate changes .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 7 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
6. Community Process: Does the proposed project include a community planning or involvement process that increases
community resiliency? If so, please briefly describe the process.
This Proposed Project was initiated by County Officials in an effort to achieve resiliency
from the severe storms and also to minimize risk to the community, Weld County addressed
the severe flood damage to the roadways and infrastructure by ensuring that dangerous
conditions for the public were addressed and mitigated properly and efficiently.
7. Reduction in the Costs of Future Response or Recovery: Will the proposed project result in a reduction in the cost
of response or recovery from an incident occurring due to one or more of the hazards identified in Item #1 or #2? If so,
please briefly describe how response or recovery costs will be reduced.
For a small scale flooding incident, yes; however, the flooding that occurred during the
designated incident period was catastrophic and the PW associated with the NOI FEMA
Local Match Request were completed to address the damages .
8. Floodplain/Floodway/Substantially Damaged Properties: Does the proposed project include a property or
properties located in a floodway or floodplain; or not located in a regulatory floodplain but which were substantially
damaged or have a history of damage from at least two disaster events? If so, please identify those properties below.
No ; the Proposed Project is for the FEMA Local Match for WELCO05 ( 588 ) from CDBG-DR
in regards to expenses from CAT C Damage Categories for the designated incident period
for FEMA-DR 4145 .
9. Mitigation Planning:
Does your community have a current FEMA approved multi-hazard mitigation plan? Yes No
Location of proposed project in mitigation plan strategies: Page 139 Section/Part Mitigation Stra
ra
Is the community a member of good standing with the National Flood Insurance Program? l l Yes No
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 8 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
10. Community Plan Compliance: Does the proposed project comply with and/or address an issue recognized in key
community plans? Key plans include, but are not limited to: a Comprehensive Master Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan,
a Hazard Mitigation Plans, or key community codes. If so, please describe how the project integrates into the plan(s).
Yes; the Proposed Project complies with all local community plans and this Project
integrates into the Plans because the County addressed the damages to local roadways
and infrastructure and mitigated damages that posed a serious risk/hazard to the
community during the incident period . This FEMA PW was initiated by Weld County and via
this Proposed Project, the County requests that CDBG funds be applied towards the local
FEMA Match for this Project.
11. Environmental / Historic Preservation Issues: Please describe any significant environmental, historic, or cultural features
that may be affected by the project. Please also describe any features that may be improved by the project.
All environmental issues are addressed on the Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation (see attached ) . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the
Endangered Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions .
12. Permitting: Please list the local, state, and federal permits that will be required to complete this project.
Floodplain Permit
404 Nationwide Permit
Migratory Birds Permit ( if needed )
Threatened and Endangered Species Permit
Because this work was already completed for this site there permits have already been
obtained and will be provided upon request .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 9 of 20
I `
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
13. Community Resilience: Please describe how this project will increase the resilience of your community. As defined in the
Guidelines: "Resilience incorporates hazard mitigation and land use planning strategies; critical infrastructure, environmental
and cultural resource protection; and sustainability practices to reconstruct the built environment, and revitalize the economic,
social, and natural environments."
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public. Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways, bridges, culverts,
removed hazardous debris roadways, made repairs to paved and gravel roadways,
addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to
emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
This Proposed Project addresses proactive work initiated by Weld County during FEMA-DR
4145 enabled the community to recover in an expeditious manner and increased the
resilience of the community by incorporating nearly every aspect of sustainability and
revitalizing the community . The community was able to recover quicker due to the proactive
work done through this Proposed Project and the associated PW's.
14. Maps
Please attach the following maps with the project site and structures marked on the map. Use SAME ID number as in
the Individual Property Worksheets.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). If the FIRM for your area is not published, please attach a copy of the Flood
Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM).
City or county scale map (large enough to show the entire project area)
USGS 1 :24,000 topo map
Parcel Map (Tax Map, Property Identification Map, etc.)
Overview photographs. The photographs should be representative of the project area, including any relevant
streams, creeks, rivers, etc., and drainage areas which affect the project site of will be affected by the project.
15. Additional Comments (Optional): Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's ability to reduce
hazard risk and increase community resiliency.
This proposed project reduced the hazard risk to the community and increased resiliency by
the work conducted through the PW in correlation with FEMA-DR 4145 . CDBG funds are
being requested to be applied to the local FEMA Match ( 12 . 5% ) for the PW.
All maps are located in project files that were previously submitted and will be provided
upon request.
The entire rommi inity benefited from the nrnartive work by Weld County and the removal ra
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 10 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: DECISION MAKING PROCESS
1. Decision-Making Process:
Describe the process you used to decide that this project is the best solution to the problem. Explain why this project is
the best alternative you considered. Address questions such as:
• Are you focusing on the area in your community that has the greatest potential for losses?
• Have you considered the risks to critical facilities and structures and benefits to be obtained by mitigating this
vulnerability?
• Have you considered those areas or projects that present the greatest opportunities given the current situation(s)
of interest in your community?
• Are you addressing a symptom or the source of the problem? Addressing the source of the problem is a long-term
solution which provides the most mitigation benefits.
• If impacts to the environment, natural, cultural or historic resources have been identified, explain how your alternatives
and proposed project address, minimize, or avoid these impacts.
The Site locations within this WELCO PW in the Proposed Project were identified due to
the high dollar amount of funds that were expended by Weld County to ensure the safety of
the community and also restore county infrastructure back to its pre-disaster condition . This
Proposed Project has site locations across the entire community and service area and it
was determined that a large percentage of the LMI population was impacted by the severe
flooding incident and the proactive work by County Officials enabled the community to
recover quicker, thus allowing the community to sustain resiliency and return operations to
normal .
2. Acquisition Projects - Describe the community's methodology for selecting the properties to be acquired in this application
and how each is ranked (highest to lowest):
N/A
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 11 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : SCOPE OF WORK / BUDGET OVERVIEW / FINANICAL FACTORS
I . Project Scope: Please provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the scope of the proposed project.
Describe each of the project components and the steps necessary to complete that work. If the proposed project is a
funding match for another disaster recovery or infrastructure development program, please identify the
agency, program funds, and project reference number that CDBG-DR funding is intended to support. Also
describe any critical deadlines that must be met to accomplish this work.
This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO05 ( 588 ). These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris
in the creeks, streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets, and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This NOI Application
request addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe
flooding .
A Scope of Work is included within the PW and addresses the work that was completed and
is attached to this NOI Application .
2. Community Priority: Please describe why this project is a priority for your organization.
This Proposed Project is a priority for Weld County to utilize the CDBG funding as the Local
FEMA Match to offset the costs for the proactive work done by the County to reduce
hazardous conditions to the community .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page U of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
3. Project Cost Summary: Please summarize the major cost components of the project. Please round all values to the
nearest dollar.
a. Planning / Engineering / Design $
b. Environmental Compliance $ The value of general and/or
c. Real Property Acquisition / Demolition $ professional labor wages must
be tabulated in accordance
d. Closing Costs / Legal Fees $ with the Davis Bacon Act of
e. Housing Program Assistance $ 1931
f. Construction Costs $
g. Project Delivery Costs $
h. Other (specify below) $ 515.221 .69
See Project Worksheet Cost (attached ) i. Total of a-h $ 515.221 .69
j . Duplication of Benefits (if unknown at time of application enter zero). $ 0.00
k. Subtract j. from i. to determine Total Project Cost $ 515,221 .69
Notes: Housing Program Assistance costs include the cost of compliance with Uniform Relocation Assistance (URA) and
Comparable Housing Assistance (CHA) requirements. Project Delivery Costs include the costs of project delivery by the
sponsoring organization but do not include administrative overhead.
4. Total Project Cost Allocations
Proposed Project Total Cost: $ 515.221 69
Federal Cost Share: $ 386.416.27
State Cost Share: $ 64.402.71
$ 64,402.71
Local Cost Share
5. Basis of Cost Estimate: Briefly describe how the cost estimates listed in #3 above were developed (e.g. lump sum, unit cost,
quotation, etc.).
The Cost Estimates were developed above from actual work that was properly procured
and conducted . They come directly off of what was included on the FEMA approved PW
(attached ) .
6. Project Management: Describe how you will manage the costs and schedule, and how you will ensure successful
performance.
The work for this Proposed Project has been completed or is pending completion . The
12 . 5% CDBG Local Match will be applied towards the Weld County Match for FEMA PW's
and the costs that were previously incurred during the disaster.
Note: The applicant must agree to furnish quarterly reports during the entire time the project is in active status. Quarters end
on March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. Reports are due to the State within 15 days after the end of
each quarter.)
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 13 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
7. Project Maintenance Requirements: The following questions are to give assurance on the project's maintenance over
its useful life. Please answer each question and give a brief explanation.
a. If the project involves the acquisition of real property, what is the proposed land use after acquisition? (i.e., Agriculture,
Recreation, Vacant Land, Park, Wetlands, etc.)
N/A
b. Will the project require periodic maintenance?
No
c. If yes, who will provide the maintenance?
N/A
d. What is the estimated cost of maintenance on an annual basis?
0
Note: Cost of maintenance is considered an application prioritization weighting factor. Projects with high maintenance
costs have a greater risk of future failure due to deferred maintenance. Therefore, the responses provided above should be
as complete and verifiable as possible in order to minimize the likelihood of ranking point reductions due to maintenance
concerns.
S. -additional Comments: Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's funding, if desired .
CDBG funds are needed for the 12 . 5% Local FEMA Match and the associated PW's that
are included in the NOI-Application .
9. Financial / Fiscal Health Factors: Please indicate the total budget (all funds) of your organization. Please describe the
impact of disaster recovery efforts to date on this budget. In addition, if this objective is selected based on the local
governments inability to finance the activity, the municipality must also include in the application package a resolution stating
this fact and supporting documentation such as budgetary information, a description of TABOR restrictions, and the most
recent audit report or approved exemption from audit.
Weld County's total 2015 budget is $307 , 031 . 089 . 00 . The impact of the September, 2013
flooding has primary been on the damage to the county's road and bridge system . The
damage has resulted in Weld County having to transfer $5 million from the Contingency
Fund to the Public Works Fund in 2013 and in 2014 for a total of $ 10 million dollars . Without
assistance from FEMA, FWHA, and CDBG the amount would have several million more .
The impact has also forced the county to shift local resources from projects unrelated to
flooding to deal with the emergency situations created by the flood in both the 2013 and
2014 fiscal years . Even in 2015 the county is still using local resources to recover from the
flooding . Fortunately, Weld County has always been fiscally conservative and budgeted
responsibly . Had the county not taken the responsible approach to its finances county
service would have had to have been cut to cope with the flood recovery.
�nIoirl Cni int , nnnrotoc inrlr` f nn mnc,t rcctrir'ti ,p nrr.r, r+ t Iirnit„tinn in Ih.. tptp
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 14 of 20
aMIS
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART B - APPLICATION : PROJECT MILESTONES / TIMELINES / TASKS
Timeline / Tasks
Insert the proposed work schedule as tasks to accomplish the overall goal of the proposed activity (i.e., appraisals, title
search, closing, etc.), and provide a description of the task's purpose. This timeline will be used as a measurement tool
for progress in the project's implementation and is included in the required Quarterly Reports. Also, FEMA uses the
timeline for determining the approved period of performance. It will be the basis used to justify delays or extensions, if
necessary, and should be estimated carefully. The first and last entries are state requirements and have already been
entered.
Task 1 :
Grant Process and Environmental Review Timeframe: 3 Months
Task Emergency Repairs- The initial emergency repairs were made directly I Completed
9 Y p 9 Y PTimeframe:
Task 3: Permanent Repairs - Becuase the emergency repairs were quick re ail Completed
p 9 Y p p Timeframe:
Task 4:
Timeframe:
Task 5:
Timeframe:
Task 6:
Timeframe:
Task 7:
Timeframe:
Task 8:
Timeframe:
I
Task 9:
Timeframe:
Final Inspection Report and Project Closeout
Task 10:
The Final Inspection Report is a review of the activity's paper documentation.
showing the project was implemented as required. Once the review is completed. the 3 Months
report and findings will be provided to the grantee for review and concurrence. The Timeframe:
State submits the concurrence to FEMA as part of a closeout package to formally
Total Project Timeframe: 6 Months
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 15 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
2. Start Date & Pre-Award Costs: The start date for any project begins upon GRANT AGREEMENT approval by the
State Controller. If a different start date or timeframe is needed, provide an explanation below. Also indicate if any pm-
award activities or costs have been incurred or authorized.
The proposed project is for local FEMA match dollars and the work has already been
completed . The repairs for this site began as soon as the flood waters receded and the
county crews were able to access the site . The initial phase of repairs were emergency in
nature and began in September of 2013 and concluded during November of that same year.
Permanent repairs for this site commenced the following year at the beginning of
construction season and concluded in October of 2014 . Additionally, cost have been
incurred through the preparation of this NOI Application .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 16 of 20
a a
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Please note that Part B is required for the final Application submittal. Part B sections
may optionally be completed and submitted with the NOI. Please update any Part A
section information when submitting you full Application.
PART B — APPLICATION : ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
1. Environmental Review Background Information & Environmental Review Worksheet:
In accordance with 24 CFR Part 58.22 (see below), all federally funded projects must accomplish an environmental review
prior to beginning any work on a project. These HUD regulations are in place for two purposes:
1 . To ensure federal funds are used to place people of low and moderate income in environmentally safe
conditions; and
2. To ensure federal funds are NOT used to negatively impact environmental conditions that exist near a
project site.
Please note the following limitations on CDBG-DR grant activities pending environmental clearance per 24 CFR Part 58.22.
(a) Neither a recipient nor any participant in the development process, including public or private nonprofit or for-profit
entities, or any of their contractors, may commit HUD assistance under a program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) on an activity or
project until HUD or the state has approved the recipient's RROF and the related certification from the responsible
entity. In addition, until the RROF and the related certification have been approved, neither a recipient nor any
participant in the development process may commit non-HUD funds on or undertake an activity or project under a
program listed in Sec. 58. 1 (b) if the activity or project would have an adverse environmental impact or limit the choice
of reasonable alternatives.
(b) N/A for DOLA/CDPS projects.
(c) If a recipient is considering an application from a prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary and is aware that the
prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary is about to take an action within the jurisdiction of the recipient that is
prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section, then the recipient will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives
and procedures of NEPA are achieved.
(d) An option agreement on a proposed site or property is allowable prior to the completion of the environmental review
if the option agreement is subject to a determination by the recipient on the desirability of the property for the project as
a result of the completion of the environmental review in accordance with this part and the cost of the option is a
nominal portion of the purchase price. There is no constraint on the purchase of an option by third parties that have not
been selected for HUD funding, have no responsibility for the environmental review and have no say in the approval or
disapproval of the project.
(e) Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP). In accordance with section 11(d)(2)(A) of the Housing
Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note), an organization, consortium, or affiliate receiving
assistance under the SHOP program may advance non-grant funds to acquire land prior to completion of an
environmental review and approval of a Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and certification, notwithstanding
paragraph (a) of this section. Any advances to acquire land prior to approval of the RROF and certification are made at
the risk of the organization, consortium, or affiliate and reimbursement for such advances may depend on the result of
the environmental review. This authorization is limited to the SHOP program only and all other forms of HUD
assistance are subject to the limitations in paragraph (a) of this section.
(0 Relocation. Funds may be committed for relocation assistance before the approval of the RROF and related
certification for the project provided that the relocation assistance is required by 24 CFR part 42.
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 17 of 20
1
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Environmental Review Worksheet
Check ALL of the activities listed below that will be included as part of the project,
REGARDLESS OF THE FUNDING SOURCE:
Information and financial services
0 Administrative and management activities
✓ Environmental and other studies, resource identification, and the development of plans and strategies
i ✓ Most engineering and design costs associated with eligible projects
Inspections and testing of properties for hazards or defects
Project planning
Q ❑ Purchase of insurance
> ca ❑ Purchase of tools
W E ❑ Technical assistance and training
X .E ❑ Interim assistance to arrest the effects of an imminent threat or physical deterioration in which the assistance
w does not alter environmental conditions.
• Public services that will not have a physical impact or result in any physical changes (e.g., employment, child
care, health, education, counseling, welfare)
O Assistance for temporary or permanent improvements that do not alter environmental conditions and are limited
to protection, repair, or restoration activities necessary only to control or arrest the effects from disasters or
imminent threats to public safety including those resulting from physical deterioration
(Must also complete the Regulatory Checklist at the end of Exhibit IV-A)
m
≥ p Operating costs (e.g., maintenance, security, operation, utilities, furnishings, equipment, supplies, staff training
Z = and recruitment, other incidental
U D
costs)
Relocation costs
SI Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
place and will be retained in the same use without change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent
= ❑ Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of and
r accessibility to elderly and handicapped persons
Z. 0 Acquisition (including leasing) or disposition of, or equity loans on, an existing structure
-- ❑ Acquisition (including leasing) of vacant land provided the structure or land acquired, financed, or disposed of
will be retained for the same use
'M Q Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
place, but will change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent
≥ ❑ Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
;Q place, but will involve a change in land use, such as from non-residential to residential, commercial to
4 industrial, or from one industrial use to another
SI Demolition
O New construction
This checklist must be included with the CDBG application.
Please direct questions to the appropriate contact person below:
DOLA/DLG DHSEM
1"amra Norton, Environmental Compliance Officer Steven Boand, State Disaster Recovery Manager
Department of Local Affairs Department of Public Safety
1313 Sherman Street, Room 521, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Denver, CO 80203 9195 E Mineral Ave, Suite 200
303-866-6398 Centennial, CO 80112
tamra.nortont?a,state.co.us 720.852.6713
steven.boand@state.co.us
DPS/DOLA USE ONLY:
Required level of environmental review: O Exempt O CENST O CESTO EA
Reviewed by:
Date of Review:
Attach any continuations or additional items as an kttachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 18 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
2. Supplemental Environmental Review Information
Enter any additional comments related to environmental concerns for the proposed project if desired. Please list and attach any
documents or studies that have been prepared that support the Environmental Review Worksheet responses.
All environmental issues are addressed on the previously submitted Project Worksheet as
supporting documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered
Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions. All items were addressed and supporting
backup documentation can be provided , in addition to the PW, upon request. Please see
below for environmental permits that were obtained .
Floodplain Permit
404 Nationwide Permit
Migratory Birds Permit (if needed )
Threatened and Endangered Species Permit
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 19 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART B - APPLICATION : DETAILED PROJECT BUDGET
1 . Detailed Project Budget: Please enter or attach a detailed and comprehensive final proposed budget for the project.
Please note that CDBG-DR funds may be limited to the amount submitted with the NOI pending the availability of
additional funding
This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO05 (588 ). These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 . 2013 , Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in
the creeks, streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets, and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This Application request
addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe flooding .
A Scope of Work and detailed project budget is included within the PW that is attached .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 20 of 20
N
A
a)
N
E
a
(.4
C_
E
J
-o
0)
E
-o
C
a)
to
0)
C 0
0 D E
I-
a) •
3 c
a 0
N a) N
o c E a
0 ° E
m - v — E
• E v 2 0
0) J m
E J ,-
o val U E a o M
N C o O t_
c w - 2 as
0 m mTv 3 0
CU v c 0
E
o
J
v
C W
EE -Daoc°
O -o 0 y J o
c c E L 2
o ..-
3 3 3 x 0
O 0 0 3 o m
w w w t
0 0 o c c
c c 0 E
J J a) o
U• U U a v n
> t5
00
o O 0
ro
ar 0 0 0
S 2 — 2 2
2
CO t C O
-J J J -4
o v e e 0 0 e o e e o o a e o 0 0 0 e a o �Oe o 0 0 o a e e e o e e o 0 0 e e o oe
O -I to LO tD tD ID O N N O O O tD ID tD Ql lb O .-I O Q V 0 N 00 N eI V V o0 V 00 N N N O Ol O
l~.J V N N V N N .-1 in (NJ N V1 to .M N CO U1 ul eI ul N V 'et e'-I V to V N
a Ol 0o co co 00 CO 03Ot N N N N 01 CO CO CO O CO CO CO N N N 0o O Ul N M N N to N V1 Vl V1 co 01 00 al N
00 N en M M en M 03 to Ui m M 03 en n1 en en en V N M M en N VI N N N N N V CO en 00 to
O
O
3
0
J
vl ul Ul to in in in in O O to in Vl Ul v1 in 0 M 0 Lei V1 ul to to 0 C) 0 o U1 M 0 in O 0 0 in VI in in 0
N Ot .--1 .--1 Ul CO CO N N Vt e-1 e-I .-t Ul .--1 N 0) N Ul Ul rI 01 ID Co N in In tD ul to tD tD N tit O to 00
> N 00 m M 0) en M N 01 01 .--I eI N m m M Ul m N 00 .-I o o M N N O) V O o N ON O 0 N N NI N 01
en n1 m en m r-I r. N N miner) N m fV N N m .-I N el N N N N
2
0
0
0
J
'XI V1 O OO O O to M tD O O t!1 0 00 0 0 to tf1 0 0 0 0 v1 O U1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to tI t/1 Ul ul
m 10 1/4.0to ID to ID m o 0 0 O M tD 00o to ID tO o to to ID o M o o u, ul m to m .-. .-4 rS nl o en o
N N 0 0 0 0 O N Q Q Q V N O O O M O Q N Q to 1D O e-I O Q N tD ID o ID o V V o N W N V
2 N N N N eI .-I ei .--I N N N eI .-I
J
1n O in to in in V) ill to Vl 0 0 Ul Vl to to O al V1 0 O I.fl U1 V7 0 u/1 al O Jl M U7 Ul U1 O C) 1/1 Ul in in Ul
O N 0 ID tD lD 1.13 LID N en M N N N lD LO tD 00 tD N O NI ul 10 ID Q 01 M O L/1 un 01 to C) N N. V1 N t0 N m
1D N N N N N N tD 0 0 00 CO LO N N N N N M N O0 --I ti N tO ID O .-I .-I .-I tD -I tD N N CO ID V 1D O
0 N el el .--I .-1 N -1 - .--I eI eti e-1 eJ -1
O
J
ut Ul U1 to ul J1 Vl V) 0 0 U1 in to Ul to Ul UI in O U1 U1 tit u1 UI 0 U1 O O ul J1 J1 ul to 0 O 0 to O to O
3 m .--I 00 00 00 00 CO ul V ul ul u V1 00 00 01 01 CO 00 eI to N N 00 tD 03 Ul N N 00 N co at 01 N to O to to
Ul M N N N N N ul ID LO 113 tD ul N N N. Q N M Lb N M NI O N N N ul r4 ul LD
J
.--I N .--I .-I .-I .-I el . l el el NI NI el -I -4 N el .--t N Ni .-I el el m N el .-I .r .-J N el N .--I r-I el el el el el
O V) .-I r-I .-I - .-I O 0 0 .-I -I O - el el N rI to Ut -I 0 0 -I (N en 0 LO 0 0 M 0 en 00 CO 0 0 01 0 0
00000000 .-1 .--( 00000000000000100 .-40000000000 .-60 .-1
ID N to u1 VI Ul ul ID 0 0 to to to Ul to UI U1 to N N ul m Co uo -I -I O O 00 CO rI m eI 01 01 tD tD O to 0
0 0 rJ N N NI N O N N N N O N N N N N O 0 N r-1 -I N N N N N r-I .-I N .-I N .-I -I -I O N O N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m m M m m en Mtn en m M m m m M m Ill M m m M M m m m m m (01 M M m m m m m m m m en M
N N N N N N N N Ni N N N N NI N N N N N NI N N N N N N N NI NI N N N N N N NI N N N
--I ..-I .--I .--I H eI .-I r-I .--I .--1 r-I .--I .,f r-I .--I .I .-I .-I -I .-I -1 .-I .-I el .-I -I -I -1 .'-1 .-I el el rd .-d .--I el .--I elifld
00 CO CO 00 CO CO 00 00 CO 00 CO 00 CO CO CO 00 00 00 Co 00 CO CO CO 00 CO CO 00 CO CO 00 CO CO CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00 CO
u0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O VI VI V) V) VI V) N VI VI VI in N V) VI 1/1 V1 V) VI N N N V N I./1inV1 VI V1 VI I l VI Vl in in to in Vl In to in N
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000
H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
in• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000
C 00 0 0 0 0 0000C3 0 0 O O O O 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0000000C3 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 00 O
CU ul ul to Ul V1 U1 Ul Ul U) Ul V) V1 U1 U1 V) V) 10 V1 M Ul to U1 M to ul Ul U1 Ul U1 U1 ul ill Vl U) U1 U) Ul Ul M V1
U ri -I e-I rI .-I .-I rI eY -I -I el el -I el el el - .y . . . . . r-I el el el .H .-I -I .-I -1 .-I -I -I -I — el -I el
N m 'Cr J1 el .-I .-. -1 el -1 el rJ M .--1 N r-I el el .-I N el el N M Q e1 N m Q --I ._+ -I . . . . .
C
0
A
0
J
.-r M n Q *Jr V Q to to N. co Cr, 0 -I e-1 -I N N t.o Ul LID 00 CO 01 -i eti eeI -I M M M m V .-I m V Ul tD N 00
3 .-+ .--I -I vI .--I rI N N N N N N N N N en m en m en en en
0
• a a a a < < < a < < < < < a a < a < a < < a a < < < < < a a < a < ¢ < a < a a a
CU 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
mow W W tL U. W W W W W W LU LU W UJ W W W W tL W W W lL UJ UJ LU ui U- W IL W W W W W W W W W
Q LL LL LL LL U. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U- LL U- U- LL U- U- U- LL U- U- U.. U- LL U- U- U- LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U-
000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 Oo V
gni
• Ul e+ N V V ul m CO 1D V V Ulu IN NI u ID M 0 ,70 CO 01 al rI 0 NN V in .-I ul en 0- Ol u0i N. N ul N Ln W tD
a) -I C) en N O) 0l COW 03 00 en M tD N Q en N 01 CO O M M N N 00 M 0t t0 N ID CO N -I Q 00 -I ID Ul eI Q
U to o rI rI 0 0 0 V M M CO CO V 00 CO CO V Q O .-I CO M M 0 N 01 O .-I U1 10 U1 U1 O1 01 N O Q N Ut 01
7 V V en m m ni M V el el N N V rn m m rn M V Q N N N m m •N .-I O N N N N N o o V V eI Q o
co• v es ov v d a v a a v a 0V a v V0 a v a a v Q c a c v 0000000000000
J
✓ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q Q
00 03 CO 01 01 N V V V Ul VI at co co co O 00 CO N U1 0 0 CO N al 01 CO N U1 m N N 00 eI lD O1 O co N
y N O Q Q Q Q Q —I O O '--I rI .-I 00 CO CO in m M 0 -I 03 el Q al N. tD V O) 01 0 03 tD 00 tD m e-I 01 N N
U at to V Q V Q Q 0 O N 0 0 0 co co co rI -I .-I N O al 01 Q CO —1 en o N N 00 N M V CO 1D O N 01 Ul
3 to t0 N N N N N N O O 00 CO N Q Q V V V ID 1O 00 00 CO N 03 O O 01 CO CO 00 CO O 00 cO u1 n m tD O
!' V V V V V V V V u1 Ut V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V Ul U1 V V Q Q Q U1 V V V V V Q M
00 O O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
C r-I .-J rI el el el -1 el rI el eI el el el el eI el v-4 .-i eI - .-1 .-I el -I .--I .-I el el el -1 el rI .-1 -I .-I el el el el
o
J
r
7 ' f
lit, e
a ` L r.r� • a
L •..•
I
V) F
'ói ' 1 '
.4 it M 4
~
('
•
a , .v-i eve
- -
4 ill .0601,1 . . . •
.; ,444
sal
a iflHfl # f .fir. L ••'
ti 3 "au. i lie ,
•;It
IL r
C I. - i i ' • r, i a .. ,�„ •.' r. •--r- s. r"-44-4-r— _A
% "
• ... rf fL , ' flu MI �I •t NI .-I .•'
•' : , �r z .
•
.I: _ f '• 1 IWl IL tal. IWL IWL ILI IL IwL s i
v
_ LL o .
i t -. ,
iii' %,,s
i , 4
e.
.. 4 a3 _�S
. . d
1 'ii•
t • �y,/ �f v h • • , I `
r. r'
.ni usCD y r 1ñA
a. d J .. , -
_ e .,;. w
10 = w � : -
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 1 of 46
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 )
Applicant Name: Application Title:
WELD (COUNTY) WELCO05 - Weld County Gravel Roads
Period of Performance Start: Period of Performance End:
09-14-2013
Subgrant Application - Entire Application
Application Title: WELCO05 - Weld County Gravel Roads
Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 )
Application Type: Subgrant Application (PW)
Preparer Information
Prefix Mr.
First Name David
Middle Initial
Last Name Daboll
Title Project Specialist
Agency/Organization Name FEMA
Address 1 9200 MINERAL AVE
Address 2
City CENTENNIAL
State CO
Zip 80112
Email Deanna. Butterbaugh@state.co.us
Is the application preparer the Point of Contact? , No
Point of Contact Information
Prefix Mr.
First Name Roy
Middle Initial
Last Name Rudisill
Title Director - OEM
Agency/Organization Weld County Office of Emergency Management
Address 1 1150 O Street
Address 2
City Greeley
State CO
ZIP 80632
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
I
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 of 46
Phone 970-304-6540
Fax
Email rrudisill@weldgov.com
Alternate Point of Contact Information
Prefix Mr.
First Name Trevor
Middle Initial
Last Name Jinicek
Title
Agency/Organization
Address 1 1150 O Street
Address 2 Weld County Office of Emergency Management
City Greeley
State CO
ZIP 80632
Phone 970-356-4000
Fax
Email tjinicek@weldgov.com
Project Description
Disaster Number: 4145
Pre-Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-RPA-0088
Applicant ID: 123-99123-00
Applicant Name: WELD (COUNTY)
Subdivision:
Project Number: WELCO05
Standard Project Number/Title: 399 - Road System Damage
Please Indicate the Project Type: Neither Alternate nor Improved
Application Title: WELCO05 - Weld County Gravel Roads
Category: C. ROADS & BRIDGES
Percentage Work Completed? 95.0 %
As of Date: 02-18-2014
Comments
4
The applicant must notify the state if there are any changes in the scope of work prior to starting the repairs.
Failure to notify the State Division of Emergency Management may jeopardize receipt of federal funds.
Attachments
Damage Facilities (Part 1 of 2)
Facility Site
Number Facility Name Address County City State ZIP Previously Action
Damaged?
Weld County Gravel Roads - 1111 H
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do9menul i le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
a
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 3 of 46
1 locations #1 -20 Street Weld Greeley CO 80632 No
2 Weld County Gravel Roads- 1111 H Weld Greeely CO 80632 No
locations #21 -42 Street
Comments
This is the documentation of the flood damage to the gravel road system in the southern portion of Weld County;
the damages are for that portion of the county south of highway US 34. They extend east to west across the full
width of the county.
Attachments
Document Hard Copy
User Date Type Description File File Name Action
Reference
An email from the gravel road DELETION REQUEST
STEPHEN o3- Miscellaneous county's consultant 22.5-US85
MORENO asking to remove a 2014_02 12 08 24 08.pdf(47.82 View
2014 location site kb)
STEPHEN 02- Photos Post event & post PW WELCO05 GRAVEL ROADS View
MORENO 2014 repair photos photos B .pdf(2.64 Mb)
STEPHEN02-
20- Map Google maps of PW WELCO05 GRAVEL ROADS View
MORENO 2014 locations maps B .pdf(2.74 Mb)
Facility Name: Weld County Gravel Roads - locations #1 -20
Address 1 : 1111 H Street
Address 2:
County: Weld
City: Greeley
State: CO
ZIP: 80632
Was this site previously damaged? No
Percentage Work Completed? 95.00 %
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This document serves to report on the countywide damages to the Weld
county gravel roads system. ln particular these locations are south of US
34 and range east-west across the county. The locations were split into
two pieces in order to avoid the 32,000 character liomit in the Scope OF
Location: Work. This first piece covers locations #1 -20 and the second covers #21 -
42.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588( 1 ):
***** Version 1 *****
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
During the incident period of September 11 to September 30, 2013,
torrential rains resulted in raging torrents across Weld County, spilling
flood water from the South Platte River and nearby streams, creeks and
reservoirs, inundating the roads and bridges throughout the County. The
https://isource. fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
ass is- a amila a
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 4 of 46
flooding resulted in erosion damage to the road embankments. The
typical scenario was the longitudinal erosion of the sideslopes and the
road embankment. The sideslope is that portion of the embankment from
the top of the road surface to the bottom of the drainage ditch. These
damaged locations were characterized by narrow, I-3' wide, and shallow,
1 '-2' deep. gullies cut into the road prism. Damaged lengths of roadway
ranged from less than 50'L to more than a mile. Ditch cleanout was
observed and measured at 3 sites, together totaling approximately 3644
LF. A series of 4 - 18" arch CMPs driveway culverts required replacement
for a total length of 140 LF
There were locations at which transverse water flow widened the
damaged areas as erosion advanced toward the centerline of the road
embankment. Culvert damages are reported in a separate PW
WELCO35. This PW was created to document damages to the Weld
County gravel road system. The sites documented in this PW are located
south of US 34 and range east - west across the full width of the county.
In order to facilitate inspections, the County provided a listing of damage
sites. County personnel accompanied the project specialist on every
inspection. As inspections were carried out, some of these roads turned
out to be paved with asphalt. At these paved locations there was minor
cracking of the asphalt pavement but no obvious erosion damage to the
roadway embankment. There are a total of 42 individual locations
reported on this PW. Some sites were incorporated into other PWs and
are so identified. Upon inspection there were locations with no damage
beyond ditch cleanout. The total of 42 was retained to maintain
consistency with the project specialists field notes. The net number of
locations that actually contributed costs to this PW is 34.
Based on the site inspection dimensions, the total embankment loss is
estimated to be 9,501 .4 tons(tn). In addition, there was an estimated loss
of the gravel riding surface amounting to 4943.2 tons. All cubic yard
measurements were converted to tonnages in order to be consistent with
the Weld County practice of measurement in tons. The cubic yard
volumes were multiplied by 1 .82 tons/cy. A detailed explanation of the
rationale for using this factor is provided in the Project Notes.The details
regarding the individual damage locations are documented in the
following pages. The GPS coordinate, (40.44633,- 104.70146) is for the
Weld County Public Works office.
Location # R1 4-91 -0.3
GPS: 40.01505,-104.21279
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment including the surface gravel for approximately 74' L x 23' W
x 1 ' D x 1 /27 = 63 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 63
cy yields a volume of 114. 7 tn. The gravel surfacing was washed away for
a distance of approximately 74'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27= 15.8cy.
Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 15.8= 28.7 tn.
Location #R2 4-81 -0
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.28265 to 40.01522.-104.28704
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment including the surface gravel for approximately 1216' L x 8
W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 720.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd
x 720.6 cy yields a volume of 1311 .5 tn. The gravel surfacing was washed
away for a distance of approximately 1216L x 8'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27=
90. 1 cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 90. 1 = 163.9 tn.
Location #R3 81 -8-0
GPS: 40.04424,-104.30098
The damage at this location was the erosion of the gravel road
Damage Description and embankment measuring approximately 112' L x 4' W x 4' D x 1 /27 = 66.4
https://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
pera- - d �
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 5 of 46
Dimensions: cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 66.4 cy yields a
volume of 120.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions
include the use of 0. 5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R4 73-4-0.4
GPS: 40.00929,-104.37671 to 40.00723,-104.37672
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 752' L x 3' W x 2' D x 1 /27 =
167. 1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 167. 1 cy yields
a volume of 304. 1 tn. The gravel surfacing was washed away for a
distance of approximately 752'L x 22'W x 0.33'D x 1 /27= 153.2cy.
Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 153.2= 278.8 tn.
Location #R5 4-73-0.9
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.35782 to 40.01523.-104.35437
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment which measured approximately 968' L x 1 ' W x 1 .5' D x
1 /27 = 53.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.8 cy
yields a volume of 97.9 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the
cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Location #R6 10-75-2
GPS: 40.05868,-104.36416 to 40.05869,-104.35969
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment, measuring approximately 1233' L x 1 .5' W x 2' D x 1 /27
= 137 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 137 cy yields a
volume of 249.3 tn. Both sides of the road were eroded. . Damage was
confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of
gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a
multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R7 8-71 -0.2
GPS: 40.04426,-104.39166
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 2112' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 =
58.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58. 7 cy yields a
volume of 106.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions
include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R8 67-SH52-0.5
GPS: 40.07964,-104.43292
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel
surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25. D x 1 /27 = 72.2 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 72.2 cy yields a volume of
131 .4tn. This location was deleted by the county.
Location #R9 10-65-0.2
GPS: 40.05880.-104.43712
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 100' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27
=2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8 cy yields a
volume of 5. 1 tn. . Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions
include the use of 0. 5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location # R10 63-2-0. 1
GPS: 40.00186,-104.47099
https://isource.fema.net%emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menitTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 6 of 46
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 200' L x 1 .5' W x 0.75' D x 1 /27 =8.3 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 8.3 cy yields a volume of 15.2tn.
Gravel surfacing loss was measured 460'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27=98cy.
Applying the 1 .82 conversion factor x 98 cy = 178. 3tn.
Location #R11 6-63-0.3
GPS: 40.02969.-104.46294
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 70'L x 3' W x 1 ' D x 1 /27 = 7.8 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.8 cy yields a volume of
14.2 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so
there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the
use of 0. 5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R12 8-63-0.2
GPS: 40.04413,-104.46472
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 30' L x 2' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 4.4
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.4 cy yields a volume
of 8. 1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so
there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the
use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R 13/R26 6-61 -0. 1
GPS: 40.02957,-104.49187
The damage at this location is reported under Location #R26/R 13.
Location # R14 61 -6-0.5
GPS: 40.03526.-104.48954
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 50' L x 1 ' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 3.7
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 3.7 cy yields a volume
of 6.7 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so
there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the
use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R15 61 -8-0.5
GPS: 40.04998,-104.48952
The damage at this location was limited to erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 20' Lx 2 W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 = 0.7
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 0.7cy yields a volume
of 1 .3 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so
there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the
use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R16 59-2-0.75
GPS: 40.01104,-104.50864 to 40.01257,-104.50659
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel
surface for approximately 821 ' L x 24' W x 0.25' D x 1 /27 = 182.4 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 182.4 cy yields a volume
of 332.0 tn.
Location #R17 59-6-0.3
GPS: 40.03765.-104.50831
The damage at this location was limited to erosion of the gravel road
embankment measuring approximately 150' L x 2' W x 0. 5' D x 1 /27 =
5.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 5.6cy yields a
volume of 10. 1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination .do?menuTile=&topTi le=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 7 of 46
include the use of 0. 5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R18 10-55-0.5
GPS: 40.05822,-104.54220
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1 /27 = 2.8 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of 5. 1 tn . The
gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27
= 10.6cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 10.6cy = 19.3tn.
Location #R19 10-59-0.3
GPS: 40.05854, -104.49600
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 40. L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1 /27 = 2.2 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.2cy yields a volume of 4.0 tn. The
gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 24W x 0.25'D x 1 /27
= 11 . 1cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 11 . 1cy =20.2tn.
Location #R20 55- 10-0.5
GPS: 40.06064,-104.54609
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 700' L x 2.0. W x 1 .0. D x 1 /27 = 51 .9 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 51 .9cy yields a volume of 94.5 tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1000'L x 27W x 0.25'D
x 1 /27 = 250cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 250cy
d
=455.0tn.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
*x*w* Version 1 *****
Location 67-SH52-0. 5 (R8)
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel
surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x 1 /27 = 72.2 cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tons /cu yd x 72.2 cu yd yields a volume of
131 .4tn.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
Weld County used their equipment. materials and staff to effect repairs to
the damaged sites. Most of these efforts were directed toward backfilling
the longitudinally eroded gullies. There were occasional sites where
transverse flows had eaten into the embankment and washed away the
gravel riding surface. Damages were typically limited to longitudinal
erosion of the sideslope with minor losses of the traveled way. The length
of damaged locations ranged from less than 50. to more than a mile. More
than half of the sites were in excess of 100' long. Evidence of ditch
Scope of Work: cleanout was observed and measured for a reported ditch cleanout total
of approximately 3644 LF x $3.40/Lf = $ 12,389.60. A series of 4-18" arch
CMPs were replaced, with a total length of 140LF and an estimated cost
of $2,093.
Replacement of the embankment materials is estimated to be 9,501 .4
tons at an estimated cost of $320. 197.55. The gravel riding surface losses
were estimated to be 4.943.2 tons, with an estimated cost of
$ 166.586.65. The specifics of each location are presented on the
https://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 8 of 46
following pages. The total tonnage for the PW is 14,435.6 with an
estimated value of $486/84.20. The combined total estimate of
embankment, surfacing. ditch cleanout and replacement culverts is
$501 ,266.81
All cubic yard quantities were converted to tonnages to reflect Weld
County practice; see the Project Notes for details regarding the
conversion methodology. The project specialist used Colorado DOT
figures as an estimating tool . Cost data for replacement and resurfacing
gravel materials was drawn from the Colorado DOT unit bid prices for the
period Jan 1 thru March 31 , 2013: see the Project Notes for additional
information. Ditch cleanout costs were taken from FEMA cost codes and
the culvert materials costs were supplied by the applicant.
SCOPE OF WORK
COMPLETED WORK
Location # R1 4-91 -0.3
GPS: 40.01505,-104.21279
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to replace the lost
embankment and gravel surfacing. They repaired the damaged area of
the embankment amounting to approximately 74' L x 23' W x 1 ' D x 1 /27
= 63 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 63 cy yields a
volume of 114. 7 tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced for a distance of
approximately 74'L x 23W x 0.25'D x 1 /27= 15.8cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82
conversion factor x 15.8= 28. 7 tn.
Embankment $33. 70 x 114.7= $3,865.39
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 28.7 = $967. 19
Total $4,832.58
Location #R2 4-81 -0
GPS: 40.01521 .-104.28265 to 40.01522,-104.28704
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to replace the lost
embankment and gravel surfacing. They repaired the damage to the
embankment
of approximately 1216 L x 8' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 720.6 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 720.6 cy yields a volume of 1311 .5
tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced for a distance of approximately
1216'L x 8'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27= 90. 1cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion
factor x 90. 1 = 163.9 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1311 .5= $44, 197.55
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 163.9 = $5,523.43
Total $49, 720.98
Location #R3 81 -8-0
GPS: 40.04424,-104.30098
The county used their forces. materials and equipment to replace the lost
embankment measuring approximately 112' L x 4 W x 4' D x 1 /27 = 66.4
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 66.4 cy yields a
volume of 120.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions
include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33. 70 x 120.8= $4070.96
Total $4,070.96
Location #R4 73-4-0.4
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
�.� AlIt -
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants
g g y Page 9 of 46
GPS: 40.00929,-104.37671 to 40.00723,-104.37672
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location . The repair measured approximately 752' L x 3' W
x 2' D x 1 /27 = 167. 1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
167. 1 cy yields a volume of 304. 1 tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced
for a distance of approximately 752'L x 22W x 0.25'D x 1 /27= 202.2cy.
Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 202.2= 368.0 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 304. 1 = $ 10,248. 17
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 278.8 =$9,395.56
Total $ 19,643.73
Location #R5 4-73-0.9
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.35782 to 40.01523.-104.35437
The county used their forces. materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The repair was limited to the erosion of the gravel
road embankment which measured approximately 968' L x 1 ' W x 1 .5' D
x 1 /27 = 53.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.8 cy
yields a volume of 97.9 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the
cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 97.9= $3,299.23
Total $3,299.23
Location #R6 10-75-2
GPS: 40.05868.-104.36416 to 40.05869,-104.35969
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment, measuring approximately 1233' L
x 1 .5' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 137 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu
yd x 137 cy yields a volume of 249.3 tn. Both sides of the road were
eroded. . Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so
there was no loss of gravel surfacing . The stated dimensions include the
use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 249.3 = $8,401 .41
Total $8,401 .41
Location #R7 8-71 -0.2
GPS: 40.04426,-104.39166
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 2112' L
x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 = 58.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 58.7 cy yields a volume of 106.8 tn. Damage was confined to
the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to
compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33. 70 x 106.8 = $3,599. 16
Total $3,599. 16
Location #R8 67-SH52-0.5
GPS: 40.07964.-104.43292
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
https://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 10 of 46
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x
1 /27 = 72.2 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 72.2 cy
yields a volume of 131 .4tn.
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 131 .4 =$4,428. 18
Total $4,428. 18
Location #R9 10-65-0.2
GPS: 40.05880,-104.43712
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 100' L
x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 =2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 2.8 cy yields a volume of 5. 1 tn . . Damage was confined to
the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to
compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 5. 1 = $ 171 .87
Total $ 171 .87
Location # R10 63-2-0. 1
GPS: 40.00186,-104.47099
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 200' L x 1 .5. W x 0.75' D x 1 /27 =8.3 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 8.3 cy yields a volume of
15.2tn. Gravel surfacing loss was measured 460'L x 23W x 0.25'D x
1 /27=98cy. Applying the 1 .82 conversion factor x 98 cy = 178.3tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 15.2 = $512.24
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 178.3=$6.008.71
Total $6,520.95
Location #R11 6-63-0.3
GPS: 40.02969.-104.46294
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 70'L x
3 W x 1 ' D x 1 /27 = 7.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd
x 7.8 cy yields a volume of 14.2 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope
of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 14.2 = $478.54
Total $478.54
Location #R12 8-63-0.2
GPS: 40.04413,-104.46472
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 30' L x
2' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 4.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd
x 4.4 cy yields a volume of 8. 1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope
of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 11 of 46
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 8. 1 = $272.97
•
Total $272.97
Location #R13/R26 6-61 -0. 1
GPS: 40.02957,-104.49187
The damage at this location is reported under Location #R26/R 13.
Location # R14 61 -6-0.5
GPS: 40.03526,-104.48954
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 50' L x
1 ' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 3.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd
x 3.7 cy yields a volume of 6. 7 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope
of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 6.7 = $225.79
Total $225.79
Location #R15 61 -8-0.5
GPS: 40.04998,-104.48952
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 20' L x
Z W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 = 0.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu
yd x 0.7cy yields a volume of 1 .3 tn. Damage was confined to the
sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing.
The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute
triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 1 .3 = $43.81
Total $43.81
Location #R16 59-2-0. 75
GPS: 40.01104,-104.50864 to 40.01257,-104.50659
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 821 ' L x 24' W x 0.25' D x
1 /27 = 182.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 182.4 cy
yields a volume of 332.0 tn.
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 332.0=$11 , 188.40
Total $11 , 188.40
Location #R17 59-6-0.3
GPS: 40.03765,-104.50831
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location . The damage at this location was limited to
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 150' L
x 2' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27 = 5.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu
yd x 5.6cy yields a volume of 10. 1 tn. Damage was confined to the
sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing.
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 12 of 46
The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute
triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 10. 1 = $340.37
Total $340.37
Location #R18 10-55-0.5
GPS: 40.05822 ,-104.54220
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1 /27 = 2.8 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of
5. 1 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 23'W x
0.25'0 x 1 /27 = 10.6cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
10.6cy = 19.4tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 5. 1 = $171 .87
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 19.4 =$653.78
Total $825.65
Location #R19 10-59-0.3
GPS: 40.05854, -104.49600
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 40' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1 /27 = 2.2 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.2cy yields a volume of
4.0 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 24W x
0.25'D x 1 /27 = 11 . 1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
11 . 1 cy =20.2tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 4.0 = $134.80
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x20.2 =$680.74
Total $815.54
Location #R20 55-10-0.5
GPS: 40.06064,-104.54609
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 700' L x 2.0. W x 1 .0' D x 1 /27 = 51 .9 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 51 .9cy yields a volume of
94.5 tn . The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1000'L x 27W x
0.25D x 1 /27 = 250cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
250cy =455.0tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 94.5 = $3, 184.65
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x455.0 =$ 15,333.50
Total $ 18,518. 15
The project notes are contained on the next segment with locations #21 -
42
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588( 1 ):
**' Version 1 *****
R
Ihttps://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 13 of 46
This version is written to add costs to three road repair-related items not
included in the original version. The road repair-related items include
additional surface gravel at Site 1 Location R8. and the
cleaning/replacement of culverts at Site 2 Locations R35 and R36.
Location 67-SH52-0.5 (R8)
This will be for an additional 3 inches of surface gravel. The damage at
this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel surface for
approximately 300' L x 26. W x 0.25' D x 1 /27 = 72.2 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tons /cu yd x 72.2 cy yields a volume of 131 .4tn.
Costs:
FAL (Force Account Labor): $213.85
FAE (Force Account Equipment): $ 168.00
Material: $1118.01
Contractor: $1088. 10
Total: $2587.96 (see attached spreadsheet)
Hazard Mitigation Proposal
Is effective mitigation feasible on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required
Please provide the Scope of Work for the
estimate:
(maximum 4000 characters)
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
GIS Coordinates
Project Location Latitude Longitude
Location # R1 4-91 -0.3 40.01505 - 104.2127
Location #R2 4-81 -0 40.01522 -104.287
40.01521 104.28265
Location #R3 81 -8-0 40.04424 -104.3009
Location #R4 73-4-0.4 40.00723 - 104.3767
40.00929 -104.3767
Location #R5 4-73-0.9 40.01523 -104.3543
40.01521 -104.3578
Location #R6 10-75-2 40.05868 - 104.3641
40.05869 - 104.3596
Location #R7 8-71 -0.2 40.04426 -104.3916
Location #R8 67-SH52-0.5 40.07964 -104.43292
Location #R9 10-65-0.2 40.0588 -104.43712
Location # R10 63-2-0. 1 40.00186 -104.47099
https://isource. fema.netiemnlie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 14 of 46
Location #R11 6-63-0.3 40.02969 -104.46294
Location #R12 8-63-0.2 40.04413 - 104.46472
Location #R 13/R26 6-61 -0. 1 40.02957 - 104.4918
Location # R14 61 -6-0.5 40.03526 -104.48954
Location #R15 61 -8-0.5 40.04998 -104.4895
Location #R16 59-2-0. 75 40.01257 -104.50659
40.01104 - 104.50864
Location #R17 59-6-0.3 40.03765 -104.50831
Location #R18 10-55-0.5 40.05822 - 104.5422
Location #R19 10-59-0.3 40.05854 - 104.496
Location #R20 55- 10-0.5 40.06064 -104.54609
Location # R21 6-55-1 .75 40.02948 -104.5126
Location #R22 4-53-0.3 40.01502 -104.55932
Location #R23 53-4-0.3 40.0067 - 104.54642
Location #R24 47-SH 52-0.3 40.05912 -104.62156
40.07288 - 104.6216
Location #R 25 47-8-0.5 40.05176 -104.6216
Location #R26/R 13 6-61 -0. 1 40.02955 -104.48974
40.02957 -104.49187
Location #R27 20-53-0.5 40. 13131 -104.56048
Location #R28 20-51 -0. 5 40. 13124 -104.57369
Location #R29 COL -HAR 40. 10462 -104.76903
Location #R30 20-31 -0. 3 40. 1309 -104. 76696
Location #R31 22.5-US85-0.5 40. 15225 -104.82329
DELETED
Location #R32 22-19-23 40. 14531 -104.85108
40. 14536 - 104.86544
Location #R33 21 -8-1 . 1 40.06184 -104.86739
Location #R34 15-2-0.9 40.00023 -104.90798
Location #R 35 14.5-21 -0.2 40.09471 -104.86568
40.09475 -104.86378
Location #R 36 5-10-0.8 40.03727 -104.01784
Location #R37 21 -6-0.5 40.03727 -104.8671
Location #R38 5-42-0 40.29135 -104.01752
Location #R 39 50- 13-0 DETOUR 40.34893 104.94349
ROAD
Location #R40 396-tr-cl 40.33403 -104.79954
40.34173 -104. 784
Location #R 41 44- 17-0 DETOUR 40.30571 -104.90558
ROAD 40.3054 -104.88685
Location #R42 38-9-0.0 DETOUR 40.26284 -104.94169
ROAD 40.26266 -104.97774
Facility Name: Weld County Gravel Roads- locations #21 -42
Address 1 : 1111 H Street
I
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 15 of 46
Address 2:
County: Weld
City: Greeely
State: CO
ZIP: 80632
Was this site previously damaged? No
Percentage Work Completed? 95.00
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This description is for locations 21 -42. These locations were separated
from Locations #1 -20 in order to overcome the EMMIE restriction of
32000 characters in the Scope of Work reporting block.
Location: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588( 1 ):
**'t'' Version 1 *****
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This is a continuation of the previous section of Locations 1 -20
Location # R21 6-55-1 .75
GPS:40.02948,-104.51260
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 250' L x 2.5. ' W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 46.3 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 46.3cy yields a volume of 84.3 tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 250'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x
1 /27 = 53.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.2cy
=96.9tn.
Location #R22 4-53-0.3
GPS: 40.01502,-104.559324
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 1056' L x 2' W x 1 .5' D x 1 /27 = 117.3 cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 117.3.2cy yields a volume of 213.5
tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1056'L x 24'W x
0.25D x 1 /27 = 234.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
234.7cy =427. 1 tn.
Location #R23 53-4-0.3
GPS: 40.00670, -104.54642
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment damage was confined
to the sideslope of the cross section. The stated dimensions include the
use of 0. 5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas. The embankment
loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 D x 1 /27 = 2.8 cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of 5. 1 tn .
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 27'W x 0.25'D x
1 /27 = 12.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 12.5cy
=22.8tn.
Location #R24 47-SH 52-0.3
GPS: 40.07288, -104.62160 to 40.05912, -104.62156
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 4918'L x 1 .5'W x 1 ' D x 1 /27= 273.2cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 273.2cy =497.3tn.
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 16 of 46
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4918'L x 1 'W x 0.25'D x
1 /27 = 45.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 45.5cy
=82.9tn.
Location #R 25 47-8-0.5
GPS: 40.05176. -104.62160
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 150'L x 3.5'W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 38.9cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 38.9 =70.8tn.The gravel surface was eroded for
approximately 150'L x 2W x 0.25D x 1 /27 = 2.8cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy =5. 1 tn.
Location #R26/R 13 6-61 -0. 1
GPS: 40.02957, -104.49187 to 40.02955. - 104.48974
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 520'L x2W x 2.5' D x 1 /27 = 96.3cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 96.3= 175.3 tn. The gravel surface was eroded
for approximately 520'L x 1 'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 4.8cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.8cy =8.8tn. This location is
reported under identifiers #13 and #26. This occurred because the
location was visited on two occasions. Data were not readily available on
the initial visit. In order to maintain the project specialist's numbering
convention the location has dual numbering. The estimated quantities and
costs are shown only once.
Location #R27 20-53-0.5
GPS: 40. 13131 , -10456048
i1 Damage Description and The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
Dimensions: embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 400'L x5'W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 148. 1cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 148. 1 =269.6tn.The gravel surface was eroded
for approximately 400'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 7.4cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.4cy = 13.5tn .
Location #R28 20-51 -0.5
GPS 40. 13124, -104.57369
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 1056'L x4'W x3' D x 1 /27 =469.3cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 469.3=854.2tn.The gravel surface was eroded
for approximately 1056L x 6'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 58. 7cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7cy = 106.8tn.
Location #R29 COL -HAR
GPS: 40. 10462. -104 .76903
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 165L x 10'W x 2' D x 1 /27 =122.2cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 122.2=222.4tn.The gravel surface was eroded
for approximately 165'L x 10'W x 0.25D x 1 /27 = 15.3cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 15.3cy =27.8tn.
Location #R30 20-31 -0.3
GPS: 40. 13090, -104.76696
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 2.5. D x 1 /27 =823.5cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 823.5= 1498.8tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 0.25D x 1 /27 = 82.4cy.
https://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 17 of 46
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 82.4cy = 149.9tn.
Location #R31 22.5-US85-0.5 DELETE
GPS: 40. 15225. -104.82329
The damage at this location included the washout of the entire road
embankment including a culvert. Embankment losses were approximately
120'L x 18W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 160cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 160=291 .2tn.The gravel surface was washed away for
approximately 120'L x 18W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 20.0cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 20cy =36.4tn.
Location #R32 22-19-23
GPS: 40. 14531 , -104.85108 to 40. 14536, -104.86544
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 40321 x 2W x 1 .5' D x 1 /27 =448.0cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 448.0=815.4tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 4032'L x 2W x 0.25D x 1 /27 = 74.7cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 74.7cy = 135.9tn.
Location #R33 21 -8-1 . 1
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 500L x 7'W x 2' D x 1 /27 =259.3cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 259.3=471 .9tn.The gravel surface was eroded
for approximately 500'L x 4W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 18.5cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 18.5
=33.7tn
Location #R34 15-2-0.9
GPS: 40.00023, -104.90798
The damage at this site was limited to sedimentation of the roadway ditch
for a length of approximately 500 LF.
Location #R 35 14.5-21 -0.2
GPS: 40.09471 , -104.86568 to 40.09475, -104.86378
The embankment appeared undamaged. This is a ditch cleanout
operation at the site of a 401. x 18" CMP. The inspection team observed
that the ditches had been cleaned out on both sides of the road for a
distance of approximately 530 LF x 2 = 1060LF.
Location #R 36 5-10-0.8
GPS: 40.03727, -104.01784
This location is an asphalt paved road. The asphalt surface was
undamaged and there was no apparent damage to the road embankment.
The ditch required cleanout for approximately 1584 LF and replacement
of 4- 18" arch CMPs that were serving as driveway culverts.
Location #R37 21 -6-0.5
GPS: 40.03727, -104.86710
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road . This site is
included in PW WELCO28.
Location #R38 5-42-0
GPS: 40.29135. -104.01752
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This location is
included in PW WELCO22.
Location #R 39 50-13-0 detour route
GPS: 40.34893, -104.94349
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 18 of 46
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
Location #R40 396-tr-cl
GPS: 40.33403. -104.79954 to 40.34173, - 104. 78400
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road
embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 5500'L x 2'W x 2.5' D x 1 /27 = 1018.5cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1018.5= 1853.7tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 5500'L x 24'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 1222.2cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1222.2cy =2224.4tn.
Location #R41 44-17-0 detour route
GPS: 40.30540, - 104 .88685 to 40.30571 , -104.90558
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
Location #R42 38-9-0.0 detour route
GPS: 40.26266. -104.97774 to 40.26284. -104.94169
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
PA-08-CO-4145-PVV-00588( 1 ):
***** Version 1 *****
Location 14.5-21 -0.2 (#R35)
A 15-inch culvert and ditch were damaged by flood water. Approximately
40 If of ditch was damaged.
Location 5-10-0.8 (R36)
Four 18-inch culverts were damaged by flood water. In addition. 140 If of
ditch was damaged .
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This isa continuation of the previous section of Locations 1 -20
COMPLETED WORK
Location # R21 6-55-1 .75
G PS:40.02948,-104.51260
The county used their forces. materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 250' L x 2.5. . W x Z D x 1 /27 = 46.3 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 46.3cy yields a volume of
84.3 tn . The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 250'L x 23W x
Scope of Work: 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 53.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
53.2cy =96.9tn.
Embankment $33. 70 x 84.3 = $2,840.91
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 96.9 =$3,265.53
Total $6, 106.44
Location #R22 4-53-0.3
GPS: 40.01502,-104.559324
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location.The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment
loss measured approximately 1056' L x 2' W x 1 .5' D x 1 /27 = 117.3 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 117.3.2cy yields a volume
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 19 of 46
of 213.5 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1056'L x
24'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 234.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 234.7cy =427. 1 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 213.5 = $7, 194.95
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x427. 1 =$14,393.27
Total $21 ,588.22
Location #R23 53-4-0.3
GPS: 40.00670. -104.54642
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas. The embankment loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1
D x 1 /27 = 2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy
yields a volume of 5. 1 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for
approximately 50'L x 27W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 12.5cy. Using the conversion
factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 12.5cy =22.8tn .
Embankment $33.70 x 5. 1 = $171 .87
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 22.8 =$768.36
Total $940.23
Location #R24 47-SH 52-0.3
GPS: 40.07288. -104.62160 to 40.05912, -104.62156
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 4918'L x 1 .5'W x 1 ' D x 1 /27= 273.2cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 273.2cy =497.3tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4918'L x 1W x 0.25D x
1 /27 = 45.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 45.5cy
=82.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 497.3 = $16,759.01
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 82.9 =$2,793.73
Total $19,552.74
Location #R 25 47-8-0.5
GPS: 40.05176, -104.62160
The county used their forces. materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 150'L x 3.5W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 38.9cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 38.9 =70.8tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 150'L x 2W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 2.8cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy =5. 1 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 70.8 = $2,385.96
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 5. 1 = $ 170.87
Total $2,557.83
Location #R26/R13 6-61 -0. 1
GPS: 40.02957. -104.49187 to 40.02955, -104.48974
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 20 of 46
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 5201 x2'W x 2.5' D x 1 /27 = 96.3cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 96.3= 175.3 tn. The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 520'L x 1 'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 4.8cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.8cy =8.8tn. This location is
reported under identifiers #13 and #26. This occurred because the
location was visited on two occasions. Data were not readily available on
the initial visit. In order to maintain the project specialist's numbering
convention the location has dual numbering. The estimated quantities and
costs are shown only once.
Embankment $33.70 x 175.3 = $5,907.61
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 8.8 =$296.56
Total $6,204. 17
Location #R27 20-53-0.5
GPS: 40. 13131 . -10456048
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 400'L x5'W x 2' D x 1 /27 = 148. 1cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 148. 1 =269.6tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 400' L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 7.4cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.4cy = 13.5tn.
Embankment $33. 70 x 269.6 = $9,085.52
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 13.5 =$454.95
Total $9,540.47
Location #R28 20-51 -0.5
GPS 40. 13124, - 104.57369
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 1056'L x4'W x3' D x 1 /27 =469.3cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 469.3=854.2tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 1056'L x 6'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 58.7cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7cy = 106.8tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 854.2 = $28,786.54
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 106.8 =$3,599. 16
Total $32,385.70
Location #R29 COL-HAR
GPS: 40. 10462, -104.76903
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 165'L x 10'W x 2' D x 1 /27 =122.2cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 122.2=222.4tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 165'L x 10'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 15.3cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 15.3cy =27.8tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 222.4 = $7,494.88
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
J - _
J
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 21 of 46
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 27.8 =$936.86
Total $8,431 . 74
Location #R30 20-31 -0.3
GPS: 40. 13090, -104.76696
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 4447'L x 2W x 2.5' D x 1 /27 =823.5cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 823.5= 1498.8tn .The gravel
surface was eroded for approximately 4447'L x 2W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 =
82.4cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 82.4cy = 149.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1498.8 = $50,509.56
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 149.9 =S5,051 .63
Total $55. 561 . 19
Location #R31 22.5-US85-0.5 DELETE
GPS: 40. 15225, -104.82329
An oil company repaired this location because they were eager to gain
access to their equipment. The county will not be billed for the repair.
Weld county has requested this location be removed from their claim. See
attached E mail.
Location #R32 22- 19-23
GPS: 40. 14531 , -104.85108 to 40. 14536, - 104.86544
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 4032'L x 2'W x 1 .5' D x 1 /27 =448.0cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 448.0=815.4tn.The gravel
surface was eroded for approximately 4032'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 =
74.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 74.7cy =135.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 815.4 = $27,478.98
Gravel Surfacing $33. 70 x 135.9 =$4,579.83
Total $32.058.81
Location #R33 21 -8-1 . 1
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The county used their forces. materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 500'L x 7W x 2' D x 1 /27 =259.3cy. Using the
conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 259.3=471 .9tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 500'L x 4'W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 = 18.5cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 18.5
=33.7tn
Embankment $33.70 x 471 .9 = $ 15,903.03
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 33.7 =$ 1 . 135.69
Total $17,038.72
Location #R34 15-2-0.9
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The county forces and equipment were used to cleanout the ditch and
restore the flowline. The extent of the cleanout was about 500LF . The
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 22 of 46
project specialist used the FEMA unit price. $3.40/ LF cost code (3070).
to estimate the cost for ditch cleaning/shaping operation.
Cleanout/ditch shaping $3.40 x 500Lf = $1 ,700
Location #R 35 14.5-21 -0.2
GPS: 40.09471 , -104.86568 to 40.09475, -104.86378
This was a ditch cleanout operation at the site of a 40'L x 18" CMP.
County forces were used to cleanout and reestablish the flow line for the
ditches on each side of the road. The combined length of the cleaning
operation was 2x 530LF = 1060 LF. The project specialist used the FEMA
unit price, $3.40/ LF cost code (3070), to estimate the cost for ditch
cleaning/shaping operation .
Cleanout/shaping $3.40/If x 10601f = $3,604
Location #R 36 5-10-0.8
GPS: 40.03727, - 104.01784
This location is an asphalt paved road. The inspection team could not
identify any obvious repairs to the asphalt surface such as recent asphalt
patches. The county replaced 4 — 18" arch CMPs driveway culverts
totaling 140 LF. The project specialist used the county unit price of
$14.95 /Lf to estimate the cost. County forces and equipment were used
to cleanout and reshape the ditch for a length of
1584LF. The project specialist used the FEMA unit price, $3.40/ LF cost
code (3070), to estimate the cost for ditch cleaning/shaping operation.
18"- arch CMP @ $ 14.95 x 140 LF = $2,093
Cleanout/shaping $3.40/If x 1584LF = $5.385.60
TOTAL = $7,478.60
Location #R37 21 -6-0.5
GPS: 40.03727, -104.86710
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road . This site is
included in PW WELCO28.
Location #R38 5-42-0
GPS: 40.29135, -104.01752
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This location is
included in PW WELCO22.
Location #R39 50-13-0
GPS: 40.34893. -104.94349
This location was a detour route and is included as part of WELCO37.
Location #R40 396-tr-cl
GPS: 40.33403. -104. 79954 to 40.34173. - 104.78400
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the
damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment
losses were approximately 5500'L x 2W x 2.5' D x 1 /27 = 1018.5cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1018.5= 1853. 7tn.The gravel
surface was eroded for approximately 5500'L x 24W x 0.25'D x 1 /27 =
1222.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1222.2cy
=2224.4tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1 ,853.7 = $62,469.69
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 2,224.4 =$74.962.28
Total $ 137,431 .97
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 23 of 46
Location #R 41 44-17-0 DETOUR ROUTE
GPS: 40.30540. - 104.88685 to 40.30571 , -104.90558
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a category B project.
Location #R42 38-9-0.0 DETOUR ROUTE
GPS: 40.26266. -104.97774 to 40.26284, - 104.94169
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a category B project.
END OF SCOPE OF WORK
Weld County Project Notes these notes apply to all 42 Locations.
1 . Following the September 2013 flooding, applicant used contract
services and/or force account resources to re-open roads/bridges and
repair damage as soon as possible. At several damage sites, repairs
appear to have returned the facility to its pre-disaster design, function and
capacity with no known remaining work to be completed. However at
other sites due to the onset of winter conditions. applicant was unable to
complete the restoration, thus leaving work to be completed. Finally, at
some sites, applicant has expressed concern that unanticipated work may
be still be required as a result of conditions beyond their control, such as
possible subsequent settlement resulting from saturated soil conditions
following the flood or where high water levels or erosion/deposition
prevented a complete damage assessment.
2. This PW addresses all validated flood related damages at the specified
site(s). including completed work and work to be completed (which
damages were known to the applicant and reported to FEMA by the
effective date of this PW). In the event that applicant identifies
subsequent, currently unknown flood related damage at such site(s).
applicant is advised to contact the State of Colorado Office of Emergency
Management to report the damage and request an inspection prior to its
repair. In the event that the State validates the damage as a direct result
of the September 2013 flooding, the State will request FEMA prepare a
version of this PW to address the eligible cost of repair.
3. As described in 44 CFR Section 13.42, applicant must maintain all
work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant closure
(final payment). All records relative to this project worksheet are subject
to examination and audit by the State, FEMA. and the Comptroller
General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster
specific costs.
4. The applicant must obtain all required federal, state, and local permits
prior to the commencement of work.
5. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are
directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is
related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44
CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct
costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not
included in any approved indirect costs.
6. Project inspection team included the 406 Hazard Mitigation staff
members. Repairs had been completed at the time of the inspections and
no opportunities were identified.
7. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance
review as stated in 44 C. F. R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If
applicable, an insurance determination will be made either as anticipated
proceeds or actual proceeds in accordance with the applicant's insurance
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 24 of 46
policy that may affect the total amount of the project.
8. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government
Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to
support the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and
contracting services for projects approved under the Public Assistance
program, as stated in 44 CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they
have/will follow their normal procurement procedures.
9. All calculated quantities have been rounded to the nearest tenth of the
applicable unit, i.e. , tons, cubic yards. Minor discrepancies in quantities or
costs are the result of rounding .
10. The Weld County employee pay policy and the Weld County
procurement policy are on file in EMMIE.
11 . The county measures its quantities in terms of tons. Field measured
quantities were computed in cubic yards. The Weld County Engineering
and Construction Criteria document specifies materials densities of
1461bs/cu ft for Hot Mix Asphalt and 1351b/cu ft for embankment . The
project specialist used these densities to compute conversion factors to
apply to the cubic yard computations. For the Hot Mix Asphalt the factor is
1461b/cu ft x 27 cu ft/cu yd x 1 /2000 lb/ton= 1 .97 tn/cy. For the
embankment fill material the calculation is 1351b/ct x 27 cu ft/cu yd x
1 /2000 lb/tn= 1 .82 to /cu yd. The field measured quantities were multiplied
by their respective conversion factors to yield quantities in tons. A
Colorado DOT (CDOT) unit cost of $33.70/tn was used for estimating the
in- place repair costs. This is twice the CDOT Item Number 304-06000
Aggregate Base Course Class 6. This cost was used because of
expected economies of scale as compared to the CDOT figures.
12. The applicant expects to claim Direct Administrative Costs for this
PW. The DAC charges were not available at the time of PW preparation .
The project specialist added an estimate as a temporary measure to
preserve the opportunity to claim DAC when the final figures become
available.
13 Applicant has completed a substantial percentage of the work but will
not have cost data available within the fourteen day Pocket Guide rule.
Per Field Operations Pocket Guide, Section 7, Cost Estimates, Page 26,
"If the applicant has not produced cost data within two weeks of the site
inspection, the Project Specialist will prepare the PW on the basis of an
estimate for the work accomplished". Applicant, CO State representative
and FEMA personnel jointly conducted all inspections and agreed to use
CDOT costs for in-place costs to derive estimates on this project
worksheet. Applicant understands that all actual support documentation,
invoices, FA records, contract and proof of payment will be required for
final reconciliation and/ or closeout process.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588( 1 ):
**t** Version 1 *****
This version is written to add costs to three road repair-related items not
included in the original version. The road repair-related items include
additional surface gravel at Site 1 Location R8, and the
cleaning/replacement of culverts at Site 2 Locations R35 and R36.
Location 14.5-21 -0.2 (#R35)
Culvert materials and labor cost need to be added for site 14.5-21 -0.2
(#R35). This will be for cleaning/replacement of a 15-inch culvert (totaling
40 If), and ditch cleaning.
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 25 of 46
Costs:
FAL: $3711 .55
FAE: $3425.00
Material: $295.90
Contractor: $0.00
Total: $7432.45
Location 5-10-0.8 (R36)
Culvert materials and labor cost need to be added for site 5- 10-0.8 (R36).
This will be for cleaning/replacement of 4 ea. 18-inch culvert (totaling 140
If of culvert), and ditch cleaning.
Costs:
FAL: $2443.40
FAE: $958.00
Material: $1234.26
Contractor: $0.00
Total: $4635.66
Comments and Attachments
Detailed cost estimates are presented on each of the 3 pdf files for the
items.
• Version 1 . PW 00588, Notes
• Version 1 . PW 00588. Email on HMP Issue
• Version 1 . PW 00588. 67-SH52-0-5-31518-47207
• Version 1 , PW 00588, 14-5-21 -23
• Version 1 . PW 00588, 5-10-0-8
Hazard Mitigation Proposal
Is effective mitigation feasible on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on this site? No
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required
Please provide the Scope of Work for the
estimate:
(maximum 4000 characters)
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
GIS Coordinates
Project Location Latitude Longitude
Special Considerations
1 . Does the damaged facility or item of work have insurance coverage and/or is it an insurable No
risk (e.g. , buildings, equipment, vehicles, etc)?
2. Is the damaged facility located within a floodplain or coastal high hazard area and/or does it No
have an impact on a floodplain or wetland?
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 26 of 46
3. Is the damaged facility or item of work located within or adjacent to a Coastal Barrier No
Resource System Unit or an Otherwise Protected Area?
4. Will the proposed facility repairs/reconstruction change the pre-disaster conditions (e.g. . No
footprint, material , location , capacity, use of function )?
5. Does the applicant have a hazard mitigation proposal or would the applicant like technical No
assistance for a hazard mitigation proposal?
6. Is the damaged facility on the National Register of Historic Places or the state historic listing? No
Is it older than 50 years? Are there more, similar buildings near the site?
7. Are there any pristine or undisturbed areas on, or near. the project site? Are there large No
tracts of forestland?
8. Are there any hazardous materials at or adjacent to the damaged facility and/or item of work? No
9. Are there any other environmental or controversial issues associated with the damaged No
facility and/or item of work?
If you would like to make any comments. please enter them below.
(maximum 4000 characters)
Per Regional Guidance, an EHP review is required.
Attachments
User Date Document Description Hard Copy File Name Action
Type File Reference
STEPHEN 02-20- These two attachments PW WELCO05 GRAVEL
MORENO 2014 Floodplain show the county has not ROADS firmette B .pdf View
been mapped (250.94 kb)
For Category C, D, E, F, and G Projects only
Is effective mitigation feasible on this project? Yes
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required
Will mitigation be performed on any sites in this No
project?
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal?
If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required
Please provide the Scope of Work
for the estimate:
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation No
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
Comments
Attachments
Cost Estimate
Is this Project Worksheet for
(Preferred) Repair
Material Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 27 of 46
Sequence Code and/or Quantity Measure Price Budget Class Type Estimate Action
Description
't't* Version 0 *'
Work Completed
1 9999 class 6 14444.6 TON $ 3370 CONSTRUCTION Work $ 486.783.02
Completed
2 9999 18" CMP 140 LF $ 14.95 SUPPLIES Work $ 2,093.00
arch Completed
Ditch Work
3 3070 Cleaning & 3144 LF $ 3.40 CONSTRUCTION $ 10,689.60
Completed
Shaping
*** Version 1 ***
Other
4 0000 Work Completed Other $ 0.00
Site 1
Location
(R8)
5 9999 additional 1 LS 2 587.96 Other $ 2,587.96
surface
gravel
Site 2
Location
(R35)
6 9999 Culvert 1 LS 7,432.45 Other $ 7.432.45
materials
and labor
Site 2
Location
7 9999 Culbert 1 LS 4,635.66 Other $ 4,635.66
materials
and labor
Total Cost : $ 514,221 .69
Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles, Proceeds and Settlements) - 5900/5901
Material and/or Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
*** Version 0 ***
1 9999 Direct Administrative 1 LS $
Costs-estimated 1 .000.00 $ 1 ,000.00
Total Cost : $ 1 ,000.00
Total Cost Estimate:
(Preferred Estimate Type + Insurance Adjustments) $ 515,221 .69
Comments
Attachments
User Date Document Description Hard Copy File File Name Action
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTi1e=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 28 of 46
Type Reference
HOWARD 02-20- Miscellaneous Site Summary Site Summary WELCO05 Summary.xlsx View
BURD 2014 Sheet Sheet (21 . 12 kb)
Existing Insurance Information
Insurance Type Policy No. Bldg/Property Content Insurance Deductible Years
Amount Amount Amount Amount Required
Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles, Proceeds and Settlements) - 5900/5901
Unit Unit of Subgrant Cost
# Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Unit Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
*** Version 0 ***
1 9999 Direct Administrative Costs-
1 LS $ 1 ,000.00
estimated 1 ,000.00
Total Cost: $ 1 ,000.00
Comments
Attachments
Comments and Attachments
Name of Section Comment Attachment
The applicant must notify the state if there are any
changes in the scope of work prior to starting the
Project Description repairs. Failure to notify the State Division of
Emergency Management may jeopardize receipt of
federal funds.
gravel road DELETION REQUEST
This is the documentation of the flood damage to 22.5-US85
the gravel road system in the southern portion of 2014 02 12 08 24 08.pdf
Damage Facilities Weld County; the damages are for that portion of PW WELCO05 GRAVEL ROADS
the county south of highway US 34. They extend photos B .pdf
east to west across the full width of the county. PW WELCO05 GRAVEL ROADS
maps B .pdf
Special Considerations The county has not been mapped PW WELCO05 GRAVEL ROADS
firmette B .pdf
Cost Estimate WELCO05 Summary.xlsx
PW 588 - Entire Application.pdf
Version 1 , PW 00588, 67-SH52-0-
5-31518-47207.pdf
Version 1 , PW 00588, 14-5-21 -
23.pdf
Form 90-91 Version 1 , PW 00588, 5-10-0-8.pdf
Version 1 , PW 00588, Notes.pdf
Version 1 , PW 00588, Email on
HMP Issue.pdf
VERSION Cover Sheet 0588( 1 )
edited.docx
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 29 of 46
Bundle Reference # (Amendment #) Date Awarded
PA-08-CO-4145-State-0084(82) 10-10-2014
Subgrant Application - FEMA Form 90-91
Note: The Effective Cost Share for this application is 75%
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
PROJECT WORKSHEET
DISASTER PROJECT NO. PA ID NO. DATE CATEGORY
FEMA 4145 DR CO WELCO05 123-99123-00 09-26-2014 C
APPLICANT: WELD (COUNTY) WORK COMPLETE AS OF:
02-18-2014 : 95 %
Site 1 of 2
DAMAGED FACILITY
COUNTY: Weld
Weld County Gravel Roads - locations #1 -20
LOCATION: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
40.03526 -104.48954
40.0588 -104.43712
40.30571 -104.90558
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0): 40.3054 -104.88685
40.34173 -104.784
This document serves to report on the countywide damages to the Weld county gravel roads system.ln 40.33403 -104.79954
particular these locations are south of US 34 and range east-west across the county. The locations were split 40.34893 -104.94349
into two pieces in order to avoid the 32.000 character liomit in the Scope OF Work. This first piece covers 40. 1309 -104.76696
locations #1 -20 and the second covers #21 -42. 40. 13131 -104.56048
40.04998 -104.4895
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588( 1 ): 40.04426 -104.3916
40.01505 -104.2127
***** Version 1 ***** 40.05176 -104.6216
40.07288 -104.6216
40.05912 -104.62156
40.02948 -104.5126
40.03727 -104.8671
40. 10462 -104.76903
40.01522 -104.287
40.01521 104.28265
40.06184 -104.86739
40. 14536 -104.86544
40. 14531 -104.85108
40. 15225 -104.82329
40.02957 -104.4918
40.01523 -104.3543
40.01521 -104.3578
40.00929 -104.3767
40.00723 -104.3767
40.05869 -104.3596
40.05868 -104.3641
40.09475 -104.86378
40.09471 -104.86568
40.00023 -104.90798
40.06064 -104.54609
40.05854 -104.496
40.03727 -104.01784
40.05822 -104.5422
40.01257 -104.50659
40.01104 -104.50864
40.07964 -104.43292
40.02957 -104.49187
40.02955 -104.48974
40.02969 -104.46294
40.29135 -104.01752
40.0067 -104.54642
40.00186 -104.47099
40.26284 -104.94169
40.26266 -104.97774
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&top Tile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 30 of 46
40.13124 -104.57369
40.03765 -104.50831
40.04424 -104.3009
40.01502 -104.55932
40.04413 -104.46472
DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
During the incident period of September 11 to September 30, 2013, torrential rains resulted in raging torrents across Weld County, spilling
flood water from the South Platte River and nearby streams, creeks and reservoirs, inundating the roads and bridges throughout the County.
The flooding resulted in erosion damage to the road embankments. The typical scenario was the longitudinal erosion of the sideslopes and
the road embankment. The sideslope is that portion of the embankment from the top of the road surface to the bottom of the drainage ditch.
These damaged locations were characterized by narrow, 1 '-3' wide, and shallow, 1 '-2' deep, gullies cut into the road prism. Damaged lengths
of roadway ranged from less than 50'L to more than a mile. Ditch cleanout was observed and measured at 3 sites, together totaling
approximately 3644 LF. A series of 4 -18" arch CMPs driveway culverts required replacement for a total length of 140 LF
There were locations at which transverse water flow widened the damaged areas as erosion advanced toward the centerline of the road
embankment. Culvert damages are reported in a separate PW WELCO35. This PW was created to document damages to the Weld County
gravel road system. The sites documented in this PW are located south of US 34 and range east - west across the full width of the county. In
order to facilitate inspections, the County provided a listing of damage sites. County personnel accompanied the project specialist on every
inspection. As inspections were carried out, some of these roads turned out to be paved with asphalt. At these paved locations there was
minor cracking of the asphalt pavement but no obvious erosion damage to the roadway embankment. There are a total of 42 individual
locations reported on this PW. Some sites were incorporated into other PWs and are so identified. Upon inspection there were locations with
no damage beyond ditch cleanout. The total of 42 was retained to maintain consistency with the project specialist's field notes. The net
number of locations that actually contributed costs to this PW is 34.
Based on the site inspection dimensions, the total embankment loss is estimated to be 9,501 .4 tons(tn). In addition, there was an estimated
loss of the gravel riding surface amounting to 4943.2 tons. All cubic yard measurements were converted to tonnages in order to be consistent
with the Weld County practice of measurement in tons. The cubic yard volumes were multiplied by 1 .82 tons/cy. A detailed explanation of the
rationale for using this factor is provided in the Project Notes.The details regarding the individual damage locations are documented in the
following pages. The GPS coordinate, (40.44633,-104.70146) is for the Weld County Public Works office.
Location # R1 4-91-0.3
GPS: 40.01505,-104.21279
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment including the surface gravel for approximately 74' L x 23' W
x 1 ' D x 1/27 = 63 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 63 cy yields a volume of 114.7 tn. The gravel surfacing was washed
away for a distance of approximately 74'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27=15.8cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 15.8= 28.7 tn.
Location #R2 4-81-0
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.28265 to 40.01522,-104.28704
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment including the surface gravel for approximately 1216' L x 8'
W x 2' D x 1/27 = 720.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 720.6 cy yields a volume of 1311 .5 tn. The gravel surfacing was
washed away for a distance of approximately 1216'L x 8'W x 0.25'D x 1/27= 90.1cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 90.1 = 163.9
tn.
Location #R3 81-8-0
GPS: 40.04424,-104.30098
The damage at this location was the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 112' L x 4' W x 4' D x 1/27 = 66.4 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 66.4 cy yields a volume of 120.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R4 73-4-0.4
GPS: 40.00929,-104.37671 to 40.00723,-104.37672
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 752' L x 3' W x 2' D x 1/27 =
167.1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 167.1 cy yields a volume of 304.1 tn. The gravel surfacing was washed away for a
distance of approximately 752'L x 22'W x 0.33'D x 1/27= 153.2cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 153.2= 278.8 tn.
Location #R5 4-73-0.9
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.35782 to 40.01523,-104.35437
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment which measured approximately 968' L x 1 ' W x 1 .5' D
x 1/27 = 53.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.8 cy yields a volume of 97.9 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of
the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Location #R6 10-75-2
GPS: 40.05868,-104.36416 to 40.05869,-104.35969
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment, measuring approximately 1233' L x 1 .5' W x 2' D x
1/27 =137 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 137 cy yields a volume of 249.3 tn. Both sides of the road were eroded. .
Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use
of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R7 8-71-0.2
GPS: 40.04426,-104.39166
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 31 of 46
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 2112' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x
1/27 = 58.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7 cy yields a volume of 106.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of
the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Location #R8 67-SH52-0.5
GPS: 40.07964,-104.43292
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 72.2 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 72.2 cy yields a volume of 131 .4tn. This location was deleted by the county.
Location #R9 10-65-0.2
GPS: 40.05880,-104.43712
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 100' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x
1/27 =2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8 cy yields a volume of 5. 1 tn. . Damage was confined to the sideslope of the
cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Location # R10 63-2-0.1
GPS: 40.00186,-104.47099
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 200' L x 1 .5' W x 0.75' D x 1/27 =8.3 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 8.3 cy yields a volume of 15.2tn.
Gravel surfacing loss was measured 460'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27=98cy. Applying the 1 .82 conversion factor x 98 cy = 178.3tn.
Location #R11 6-63-0.3
GPS: 40.02969,-104.46294
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 70'L x 3' W x 1 ' D x 1/27 =
7.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.8 cy yields a volume of 14.2 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R12 8-63-0.2
GPS: 40.04413,-104.46472
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 30' L x 2' W x 2' D x 1/27 =
4.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.4 cy yields a volume of 8.1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R13/R26 6-61-0.1
GPS: 40.02957,-104.49187
The damage at this location is reported under Location #R26/R 13.
Location # R14 61-6-0.5
GPS: 40.03526,-104.48954
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 50' L x 1 ' W x 2' D x 1/27 =
3.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 3.7 cy yields a volume of 6.7 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R15 61-8-0.5
GPS: 40.04998,-104.48952
The damage at this location was limited to erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 20' L x 2' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 =
0.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 0.7cy yields a volume of 1 .3 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R16 59-2-0.75
GPS: 40.01104,-104.50864 to 40.01257,-104.50659
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 821 ' L x 24' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 182.4 cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 182.4 cy yields a volume of 332.0 tn.
Location #R17 59-6-0.3
GPS: 40.03765,-104.50831
The damage at this location was limited to erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 150' L x 2' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 =
5.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 5.6cy yields a volume of 10.1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Location #R18 10-55-0.5
GPS: 40.05822,-104.54220
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 = 2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of 5.1 tn. The
gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 10.6cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 10.6cy
=19.3tn.
Location #R19 10-59-0.3
GPS: 40.05854, -104.49600
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 40' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 = 2.2 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.2cy yields a volume of 4.0 tn. The
gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 24'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 11 .1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 11 .1 cy
=20.2tn.
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 32 of 46
Location #R20 55-10-0.5
GPS: 40.06064,-104.54609
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 700' L x 2.0.' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 = 51 .9 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 51 .9cy yields a volume of 94.5 tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1000'L x 27'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 250cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
250cy =455.0tn.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
Version 1 ***"
Location 67-SH52-0.5 (R8)
The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 72.2 cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tons /cu yd x 72.2 cu yd yields a volume of 131 .4tn.
SCOPE OF WORK:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
Weld County used their equipment, materials and staff to effect repairs to the damaged sites. Most of these efforts were directed toward
backfilling the longitudinally eroded gullies. There were occasional sites where transverse flows had eaten into the embankment and washed
away the gravel riding surface. Damages were typically limited to longitudinal erosion of the sideslope with minor losses of the traveled way.
The length of damaged locations ranged from less than 50' to more than a mile. More than half of the sites were in excess of 100' long.
Evidence of ditch cleanout was observed and measured for a reported ditch cleanout total of approximately 3644 LF x $3.40/Lf = $12,389.60.
A series of 4-18" arch CMPs were replaced, with a total length of 140LF and an estimated cost of $2,093.
Replacement of the embankment materials is estimated to be 9,501 .4 tons at an estimated cost of $320,197.55. The gravel riding surface
losses were estimated to be 4,943.2 tons, with an estimated cost of $166,586.65. The specifics of each location are presented on the
following pages. The total tonnage for the PW is 14,435.6 with an estimated value of $486,784.20. The combined total estimate of
embankment, surfacing, ditch cleanout and replacement culverts is $501 ,266.81
All cubic yard quantities were converted to tonnages to reflect Weld County practice; see the Project Notes for details regarding the
conversion methodology. The project specialist used Colorado DOT figures as an estimating tool. Cost data for replacement and resurfacing
gravel materials was drawn from the Colorado DOT unit bid prices for the period Jan 1 thru March 31 , 2013; see the Project Notes for
additional information. Ditch cleanout costs were taken from FEMA cost codes and the culvert materials costs were supplied by the applicant.
SCOPE OF WORK
COMPLETED WORK
Location # R1 4-91-0.3
GPS: 40.01505,-104.21279
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to replace the lost embankment and gravel surfacing. They repaired the damaged
area of the embankment amounting to approximately 74' L x 23' W x 1 ' D x 1/27 = 63 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 63
cy yields a volume of 114.7 tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced for a distance of approximately 74'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27=15.8cy.
Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 15.8= 28.7 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 114.7= $3,865.39
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 28.7 = $967.19
Total $4,832.58
Location #R2 4-81-0
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.28265 to 40.01522,-104.28704
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to replace the lost embankment and gravel surfacing. They repaired the damage to
the embankment
of approximately 1216' L x 8' W x 2' D x 1/27 = 720.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 720.6 cy yields a volume of 1311 .5
tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced for a distance of approximately 1216'L x 8'W x 0.25'D x 1/27= 90.1cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82
conversion factor x 90.1 = 163.9 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1311 .5= $44,197.55
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 163.9 = $5,523.43
Total $49,720.98
Location #R3 81-8-0
GPS: 40.04424,-104.30098
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to replace the lost embankment measuring approximately 112' L x 4' W x 4' D x 1/27
= 66.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 66.4 cy yields a volume of 120.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the
cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular
areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 120.8= $4070.96
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 33 of 46
Total $4,070.96
Location #R4 73-4-0.4
GPS: 40.00929,-104.37671 to 40.00723,-104.37672
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The repair measured approximately 752' L x 3'
W x 2' D x 1/27 = 167.1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 167.1 cy yields a volume of 304.1 tn. The gravel surfacing was
replaced for a distance of approximately 752'L x 22'W x 0.25'D x 1/27= 202.2cy. Multiplying by the 1 .82 conversion factor x 202.2= 368.0 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 304.1 = $10,248.17
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 278.8 =$9,395.56
Total $19,643.73
Location #R5 4-73-0.9
GPS: 40.01521 ,-104.35782 to 40.01523,-104.35437
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The repair was limited to the erosion of the
gravel road embankment which measured approximately 968' L x 1 ' W x 1 .5' D x 1/27 = 53.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu
yd x 53.8 cy yields a volume of 97.9 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing.
The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 97.9= $3,299.23
Total $3,299.23
Location #R6 10-75-2
GPS: 40.05868,-104.36416 to 40.05869,-104.35969
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment, measuring approximately 1233' L x 1 .5' W x 2' D x 1/27 =137 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 137 cy yields a volume of 249.3 tn. Both sides of the road were eroded. . Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross
section so there was no loss of gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 249.3 = $8,401 .41
Total $8,401 .41
Location #R7 8-71-0.2
GPS: 40.04426,-104.39166
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 2112' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 = 58.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of
1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7 cy yields a volume of 106.8 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of
gravel surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 106.8 = $3,599.16
Total $3,599.16
Location #R8 67-SH52-0.5
GPS: 40.07964,-104.43292
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 72.2 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
72.2 cy yields a volume of 131 .4tn.
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 131 .4 =$4,428. 18
Total $4,428.18
Location #R9 10-65-0.2
GPS: 40.05880,-104.43712
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 100' L x 1 .5' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 =2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of
1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8 cy yields a volume of 5.1 tn. . Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 5.1 = $171 .87
Total $171 .87
Location # R10 63-2-0. 1
GPS: 40.00186,-104.47099
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 200' L x 1 .5' W x 0.75' D x 1/27 =8.3
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 8.3 cy yields a volume of 15.2tn. Gravel surfacing loss was measured 460'L x 23'W x
0.25'D x 1/27=98cy. Applying the 1 .82 conversion factor x 98 cy = 178.3tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 15.2 = $512.24
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 178.3=$6,008.71
Total $6,520.95
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 34 of 46
Location #R11 6-63-0.3
GPS: 40.02969,-104.46294
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 70'L x 3' W x 1 ' D x 1/27 = 7.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 7.8 cy yields a volume of 14.2 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 14.2 = $478.54
Total $478.54
Location #R12 8-63-0.2
GPS: 40.04413,-104.46472
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 30' L x 2' W x 2' D x 1/27 = 4.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 4.4 cy yields a volume of 8.1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 8.1 = $272.97
Total $272.97
Location #R13/R26 6-61-0.1
GPS: 40.02957,-104.49187
The damage at this location is reported under Location #R26/R 13.
Location # R14 61-6-0.5
GPS: 40.03526,-104.48954
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 50' L x 1 ' W x 2' D x 1/27 = 3.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 3.7 cy yields a volume of 6.7 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 6.7 = $225.79
Total $225.79
Location #R15 61-8-0.5
GPS: 40.04998,-104.48952
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 20' L x 2' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 = 0.7 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 0.7cy yields a volume of 1 .3 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 1 .3 = $43.81
Total $43.81
Location #R16 59-2-0.75
GPS: 40.01104,-104.50864 to 40.01257,-104.50659
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to the
erosion of the gravel surface for approximately 821 ' L x 24' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 182.4 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
182.4 cy yields a volume of 332.0 tn.
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 332.0=$11 ,188.40
Total $11 ,188.40
Location #R17 59-6-0.3
GPS: 40.03765,-104.50831
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location was limited to
erosion of the gravel road embankment measuring approximately 150' L x 2' W x 0.5' D x 1/27 = 5.6 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82
tns /cu yd x 5.6cy yields a volume of 10.1 tn. Damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section so there was no loss of gravel
surfacing. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas.
Embankment $33.70 x 10.1 = $340.37
Total $340.37
Location #R18 10-55-0.5
GPS: 40.05822,-104.54220
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 = 2.8
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of 5. 1 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x
23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 10.6cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 10.6cy =19.4tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 5.1 = $171 .87
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 35 of 46
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 19.4 =$653.78
Total $825.65
Location #R19 10-59-0.3
GPS: 40.05854, -104.49600
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 40' L x 1 .5' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 = 2.2
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.2cy yields a volume of 4.0 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x
24W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 11 .1 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 11 .1 cy =20.2tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 4.0 = $134.80
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x20.2 =$680.74
Total $815.54
Location #R20 55-10-0.5
GPS: 40.06064,-104.54609
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 700' L x 2.0.' W x 1 .0' D x 1/27 =
51 .9 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 51 .9cy yields a volume of 94.5 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately
1000'L x 27'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 250cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 250cy =455.0tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 94.5 = $3,184.65
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x455.0 =$15,333.50
Total $18,518.15
The project notes are contained on the next segment with locations #21-42
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
Version 1
This version is written to add costs to three road repair-related items not included in the original version. The road repair-related items include
additional surface gravel at Site 1 Location R8, and the cleaning/replacement of culverts at Site 2 Locations R35 and R36.
Location 67-SH52-0.5 (R8)
This will be for an additional 3 inches of surface gravel. The damage at this location was limited to the erosion of the gravel surface for
approximately 300' L x 26' W x 0.25' D x 1/27 = 72.2 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tons /cu yd x 72.2 cy yields a volume of
131 .4tn.
Costs:
FAL (Force Account Labor): $213.85
FAE (Force Account Equipment): $168.00
Material: $1118.01
Contractor: $1088.10
Total: $2587.96 (see attached spreadsheet)
Site 2 of 2
DAMAGED FACILITY:
COUNTY: Weld
Weld County Gravel Roads- locations #21-42
LOCATION: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This description is for locations 21-42. These locations were separated from Locations #1-20 in order to
overcome the EMMIE restriction of 32000 characters in the Scope of Work reporting block.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
***** Version 1 *****
DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This is a continuation of the previous section of Locations 1-20
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do:'menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 36 of 46
Location # R21 6-55-1 .75
GPS:40.02948,-104.51260
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 250' L x 2.5.' W x 2' D x 1/27 = 46.3 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 46.3cy yields a volume of 84.3 tn. The
gravel surface was eroded for approximately 250'L x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 53.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.2cy
=96.9tn.
Location #R22 4-53-0.3
GPS: 40.01502,-104.559324
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured
approximately 1056' L x 2' W x 1 .5' D x 1/27 = 117.3 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 117.3.2cy yields a volume of 213.5
tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1056'L x 24'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 234.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd
x 234.7cy =427.1 tn.
Location #R23 53-4-0.3
GPS: 40.00670, -104.54642
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment damage was confined
to the sideslope of the cross section. The stated dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas. The
embankment loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x 1 ' D x 1/27 = 2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields
a volume of 5.1 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 50'L x 27'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 12.5cy. Using the conversion factor of
1 .82 tns /cu yd x 12.5cy =22.8tn.
Location #R24 47-SH 52-0.3
GPS: 40.07288, -104.62160 to 40.05912, -104.62156
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 4918'L x 1 .5'W x 1 ' D x 1/27= 273.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 273.2cy =497.3tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4918'L x 1W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 45.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
45.5cy =82.9tn.
Location #R 25 47-8-0.5
GPS: 40.05176, -104.62160
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 150'L x 3.5W x 2' D x 1/27 = 38.9cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 38.9 =70.8tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 150'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 2.8cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy =5.1tn.
Location #R26/R13 6-61-0.1
GPS: 40.02957, -104.49187 to 40.02955, -104.48974
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 520'L x2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 = 96.3cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 96.3=175.3 tn. The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 520'L x 1W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 4.8cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.8cy =8.8tn. This location is
reported under identifiers #13 and #26. This occurred because the location was visited on two occasions. Data were not readily available on
the initial visit. In order to maintain the project specialist's numbering convention the location has dual numbering. The estimated quantities
and costs are shown only once.
Location #R27 20-53-0.5
GPS: 40.13131 , -10456048
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 400'L x5'W x 2' D x 1/27 =148.1cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 148.1=269.6tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 400'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 7.4cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.4cy =13.5tn.
Location #R28 20-51 -0.5
GPS 40.13124, -104.57369
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 1056'L x4'W x3' D x 1/27 =469.3cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 469.3=854.2tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 1056'L x 6'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 58.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7cy =106.8tn.
Location #R29 COL -HAR
GPS: 40.10462, -104.76903
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 165'L x 10'W x 2' D x 1/27 =122.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 122.2=222.4tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 165'L x 10'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 15.3cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 15.3cy =27.8tn.
Location #R30 20-31 -0.3
GPS: 40.13090, -104.76696
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 =823.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 823.5=1498.8tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 82.4cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 82.4cy =149.9tn.
Location #R31 22.5-US85-0.5 DELETE
GPS: 40.15225, -104.82329
The damage at this location included the washout of the entire road embankment including a culvert. Embankment losses were
approximately 120'L x 18'W x 2' D x 1/27 =160cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 160=291 .2tn.The gravel surface was
washed away for approximately 120'L x 18'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 20.0cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 20cy =36.4tn.
Location #R32 22-19-23
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 37 of 46
GPS: 40.14531 , -104.85108 to 40.14536, -104.86544
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 4032'L x 2'W x 1 .5' D x 1/27 =448.0cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 448.0=815.4tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 4032'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 74.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 74.7cy =135.9tn.
Location #R33 21-8-1 .1
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 500'L x 7'W x 2' D x 1/27 =259.3cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 259.3=471 .9tn.The gravel surface was
eroded for approximately 500'L x 4'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 18.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 18.5
=33.7tn
Location #R34 15-2-0.9
GPS: 40.00023, -104.90798
The damage at this site was limited to sedimentation of the roadway ditch for a length of approximately 500 LF.
Location #R 35 14.5-21-0.2
GPS: 40.09471 , -104.86568 to 40.09475, -104.86378
The embankment appeared undamaged. This is a ditch cleanout operation at the site of a 40'L x 18" CMP. The inspection team observed
that the ditches had been cleaned out on both sides of the road for a distance of approximately 530 LF x 2 = 1060LF.
Location #R 36 5-10-0.8
GPS: 40.03727, -104.01784
This location is an asphalt paved road. The asphalt surface was undamaged and there was no apparent damage to the road embankment.
The ditch required cleanout for approximately 1584 LF and replacement of 4-18" arch CMPs that were serving as driveway culverts.
Location #R37 21-6-0.5
GPS: 40.03727, -104.86710
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This site is included in PW WELCO28.
Location #R38 5-42-0
GPS: 40.29135, -104.01752
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This location is included in PW WELCO22.
Location #R 39 50-13-0 detour route
GPS: 40.34893, -104.94349
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
Location #R40 396-tr-cl
GPS: 40.33403, -104.79954 to 40.34173, -104.78400
The damage at this location included the erosion of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were
approximately 5500'L x 2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 =1018.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1018.5=1853.7tn.The gravel surface
was eroded for approximately 5500'L x 24W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 1222.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1222.2cy
=2224.4tn.
Location #R41 44-17-0 detour route
GPS: 40.30540, -104.88685 to 40.30571 , -104.90558
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
Location #R42 38-9-0.0 detour route
GPS: 40.26266, -104.97774 to 40.26284, -104.94169
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a Category B project.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
Version 1
Location 14.5-21-0 2 (#R35)
A 15-inch culvert and ditch were damaged by flood water. Approximately 40 If of ditch was damaged.
Location 5-10-0.8 (R36)
Four 18-inch culverts were damaged by flood water. In addition, 140 If of ditch was damaged.
SCOPE OF WORK:
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(0):
This isa continuation of the previous section of Locations 1-20
COMPLETED WORK
Location # R21 6-55-1 .75
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. .. 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 38 of 46
GPS:40.02948,-104.51260
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 250' L x 2.5.' W x 2' D x 1/27 = 46.3
cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 46.3cy yields a volume of 84.3 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 250'L
x 23'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 53.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 53.2cy =96.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 84.3 = $2,840.91
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 96.9 =$3,265.53
Total $6,106.44
Location #R22 4-53-0.3
GPS: 40.01502,-104.559324
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location.The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. The embankment loss measured approximately 1056' L x 2' W x 1 .5' D x 1/27 =
117.3 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 117.3.2cy yields a volume of 213.5 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for
approximately 1056'L x 24'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 234.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 234.7cy =427.1tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 213.5 = $7,194.95
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x427.1 =$14,393.27
Total $21 ,588.22
Location #R23 53-4-0.3
GPS: 40.00670, -104.54642
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment damage was confined to the sideslope of the cross section. The stated
dimensions include the use of 0.5 as a multiplier to compute triangular areas. The embankment loss measured approximately 50' L x 1 .5' W x
1 ' D x 1/27 = 2.8 cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy yields a volume of 5.1 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for
approximately 50'L x 27W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 12.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 12.5cy =22.8tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 5.1 = $171 .87
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 22.8 =$768.36
Total $940.23
Location #R24 47-SH 52-0.3
GPS: 40.07288, -104.62160 to 40.05912, -104.62156
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 4918'L x 1 .5'W x 1 ' D x 1/27= 273.2cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 273.2cy =497.3tn.
The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4918'L x 1 'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 45.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x
45.5cy =82.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 497.3 = $16,759.01
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 82.9 =$2,793.73
Total $19,552.74
Location #R 25 47-8-0.5
GPS: 40.05176, -104.62160
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 150'L x 3.5'W x 2' D x 1/27 = 38.9cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 38.9 =70.8tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 150'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 = 2.8cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 2.8cy =5.1 tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 70.8 = $2,385.96
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 5.1 = $170.87
Total $2,557.83
Location #R26/R13 6-61-0.1
GPS: 40.02957, -104.49187 to 40.02955, -104.48974
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 520'L x2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 = 96.3cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1.82 tns /cu yd x 96.3=175.3 tn. The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 520'L x 1 'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 =
4.8cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 4.8cy =8.8tn. This location is reported under identifiers #13 and #26. This occurred
because the location was visited on two occasions. Data were not readily available on the initial visit. In order to maintain the project
specialist's numbering convention the location has dual numbering. The estimated quantities and costs are shown only once.
Embankment $33.70 x 175.3 = $5,907.61
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 8.8 =$296.56
Total $6,204.17
Location #R27 20-53-0.5
GPS: 40.13131 , -10456048
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 400'L x5'W x 2' D x 1/27 =148.1cy. Using
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 39 of 46
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 148.1 =269.6tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 400'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 =
7.4cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 7.4cy =13.5tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 269.6 = $9,085.52
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 13.5 =$454.95
Total $9,540.47
Location #R28 20-51 -0.5
GPS 40.13124, -104.57369
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 1056'L x4'W x3' D x 1/27 =469.3cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 469.3=854.2tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 1056'L x 6'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 =
58.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 58.7cy =106.8tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 854.2 = $28,786.54
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 106.8 43,599.16
Total $32,385.70
Location #R29 COL-HAR
GPS: 40.10462, -104.76903
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 165'L x 10'W x 2' D x 1/27 =122.2cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 122.2=222.4tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 165'L x 10'W x 0.25'D x 1/27 =
15.3cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 15.3cy =27.8tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 222.4 = $7,494.88
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 27.8 =$936.86
Total $8,431 .74
Location #R30 20-31 -0.3
GPS: 40.13090, -104.76696
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 =823.5cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 823.5=1498.8tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4447'L x 2'W x 0.25'D x
1/27 = 82.4cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 82.4cy =149.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1498.8 = $50,509.56
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 149.9 =$5,051 .63
Total $55,561 .19
Location #R31 22.5-US85-0.5 DELETE
GPS: 40.15225, -104.82329
An oil company repaired this location because they were eager to gain access to their equipment. The county will not be billed for the repair.
Weld county has requested this location be removed from their claim. See attached E mail.
Location #R32 22-19-23
GPS: 40.14531 , -104.85108 to 40.14536, -104.86544
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 4032'L x 2W x 1 .5' D x 1/27 =448.0cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 448.0=815.4tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 4032'L x 2W x 0.25'D x 1/27
= 74.7cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 74.7cy =135.9tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 815.4 = $27,478.98
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 135.9 =$4,579.83
Total $32,058.81
Location #R33 21 -8-1 . 1
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 500'L x 7'W x 2' D x 1/27 =259.3cy. Using
the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 259.3=471 .9tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 500'L x 4W x 0.25'D x 1/27 =
18.5cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 18.5
=33.7tn
Embankment $33.70 x 471 .9 = $15,903.03
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 33.7 =$1 ,135.69
Total $17,038.72
Location #R34 15-2-0.9
GPS: 40.06184, -104.86739
The county forces and equipment were used to cleanout the ditch and restore the flowline. The extent of the cleanout was about 500LF. The
project specialist used the FEMA unit price, $3.40/ LF cost code (3070), to estimate the cost for ditch cleaning/shaping operation.
Cleanout/ditch shaping $3.40 x 500Lf = $1 ,700
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 40 of 46
Location #R 35 14.5-21-0.2
GPS: 40.09471 , -104.86568 to 40.09475, -104.86378
This was a ditch cleanout operation at the site of a 40'L x 18" CMP. County forces were used to cleanout and reestablish the flow line for the
ditches on each side of the road. The combined length of the cleaning operation was 2x 530LF = 1060 LF. The project specialist used the
FEMA unit price, $3.40/ LF cost code (3070), to estimate the cost for ditch cleaning/shaping operation.
CleanouUshaping $3.40/If x 10601f = $3,604
Location #R 36 5-10-0.8
GPS: 40.03727, -104.01784
This location is an asphalt paved road. The inspection team could not identify any obvious repairs to the asphalt surface such as recent
asphalt patches. The county replaced 4 — 18" arch CMPs driveway culverts totaling 140 LF. The project specialist used the county unit price
of $14.95 /Lf to estimate the cost. County forces and equipment were used to cleanout and reshape the ditch for a length of
1584LF. The project specialist used the FEMA unit price, $3.40/ LF cost code (3070), to estimate the cost for ditch cleaning/shaping
operation.
18"- arch CMP @ $14.95 x 140 LF = $2,093
CleanouUshaping $3.40/If x 1584LF = $5,385.60
TOTAL = $7,478.60
Location #R37 21 -6-0.5
GPS: 40.03727, -104.86710
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This site is included in PW WELCO28.
Location #R38 5-42-0
GPS: 40.29135, -104.01752
This is the location of a bridge on an asphalt paved road. This location is included in PW WELCO22.
Location #R39 50-13-0
GPS: 40.34893, -104.94349
This location was a detour route and is included as part of WELCO37.
Location #R40 396-tr-cl
GPS: 40.33403, -104.79954 to 40.34173, -104.78400
The county used their forces, materials and equipment to repair the damage at this location. The damage at this location included the erosion
of the gravel road embankment and the surface gravel. Embankment losses were approximately 5500'L x 2'W x 2.5' D x 1/27 =1018.5cy.
Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1018.5=1853.7tn.The gravel surface was eroded for approximately 5500'L x 24'W x 0.25'D x
1/27 = 1222.2cy. Using the conversion factor of 1 .82 tns /cu yd x 1222.2cy =2224.4tn.
Embankment $33.70 x 1 ,853.7 = $62,469.69
Gravel Surfacing $33.70 x 2,224.4 =$74,962.28
Total $137,431 .97
Location #R 41 44-17-0 DETOUR ROUTE
GPS: 40.30540, -104.88685 to 40.30571 , -104.90558
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a category B project.
Location #R42 38-9-0.0 DETOUR ROUTE
GPS: 40.26266, -104.97774 to 40.26284, -104.94169
This location is being reported in PW WELCO37 as a category B project.
END OF SCOPE OF WORK
Weld County Project Notes these notes apply to all 42 Locations.
1 . Following the September 2013 flooding, applicant used contract services and/or force account resources to re-open roads/bridges and
repair damage as soon as possible. At several damage sites, repairs appear to have returned the facility to its pre-disaster design, function
and capacity with no known remaining work to be completed. However at other sites due to the onset of winter conditions, applicant was
unable to complete the restoration, thus leaving work to be completed. Finally, at some sites, applicant has expressed concern that
unanticipated work may be still be required as a result of conditions beyond their control, such as possible subsequent settlement resulting
from saturated soil conditions following the flood or where high water levels or erosion/deposition prevented a complete damage assessment.
2. This PW addresses all validated flood related damages at the specified site(s), including completed work and work to be completed (which
damages were known to the applicant and reported to FEMA by the effective date of this PW). In the event that applicant identifies
subsequent, currently unknown flood related damage at such site(s), applicant is advised to contact the State of Colorado Office of
Emergency Management to report the damage and request an inspection prior to its repair. In the event that the State validates the damage
as a direct result of the September 2013 flooding, the State will request FEMA prepare a version of this PW to address the eligible cost of
repair.
3. As described in 44 CFR Section 13.42, applicant must maintain all work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant
closure (final payment). All records relative to this project worksheet are subject to examination and audit by the State, FEMA, and the
Comptroller General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster specific costs.
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 41 of 46
4. The applicant must obtain all required federal, state, and local permits prior to the commencement of work.
5. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is
related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as
direct costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect costs.
6. Project inspection team included the 406 Hazard Mitigation staff members. Repairs had been completed at the time of the inspections and
no opportunities were identified.
7. The applicant is aware that all projects are subject to an insurance review as stated in 44 C.F.R. Sections 206.252 and 206.253. If
applicable, an insurance determination will be made either as anticipated proceeds or actual proceeds in accordance with the applicant's
insurance policy that may affect the total amount of the project.
8. The applicant is required to adhere to State and Federal Government Procurement rules and regulations and maintain adequate records to
support the basis for all purchasing of goods and materials and contracting services for projects approved under the Public Assistance
program, as stated in 44 CFR 13.36. The applicant has advised they have/will follow their normal procurement procedures.
9. All calculated quantities have been rounded to the nearest tenth of the applicable unit, i.e., tons, cubic yards. Minor discrepancies in
quantities or costs are the result of rounding.
10. The Weld County employee pay policy and the Weld County procurement policy are on file in EMMIE.
11 . The county measures its quantities in terms of tons. Field measured quantities were computed in cubic yards. The Weld County
Engineering and Construction Criteria document specifies materials densities of 1461bs/cu ft for Hot Mix Asphalt and 1351b/cu ft for
embankment . The project specialist used these densities to compute conversion factors to apply to the cubic yard computations. For the Hot
Mix Asphalt the factor is 1461b/cu ft x 27 cu ft/cu yd x 1/2000 lb/ton= 1 .97 tn/cy. For the embankment fill material the calculation is 1351b/ct x
27 cu ft/cu yd x 1/2000 lb/tn= 1 .82 to /cu yd. The field measured quantities were multiplied by their respective conversion factors to yield
quantities in tons. A Colorado DOT (CDOT) unit cost of $33.70/tn was used for estimating the in- place repair costs. This is twice the CDOT
Item Number 304-06000 Aggregate Base Course Class 6. This cost was used because of expected economies of scale as compared to the
CDOT figures.
12. The applicant expects to claim Direct Administrative Costs for this PW. The DAC charges were not available at the time of PW
preparation. The project specialist added an estimate as a temporary measure to preserve the opportunity to claim DAC when the final
figures become available.
13 Applicant has completed a substantial percentage of the work but will not have cost data available within the fourteen day Pocket Guide
rule. Per Field Operations Pocket Guide, Section 7, Cost Estimates, Page 26, "If the applicant has not produced cost data within two weeks
of the site inspection, the Project Specialist will prepare the PW on the basis of an estimate for the work accomplished". Applicant, CO State
representative and FEMA personnel jointly conducted all inspections and agreed to use CDOT costs for in-place costs to derive estimates on
this project worksheet. Applicant understands that all actual support documentation, invoices, FA records, contract and proof of payment will
be required for final reconciliation and/ or closeout process.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588(1 ):
***** Version 1 *****
This version is written to add costs to three road repair-related items not included in the original version. The road repair-related items include
additional surface gravel at Site 1 Location R8, and the cleaning/replacement of culverts at Site 2 Locations R35 and R36.
Location 14.5-21-0.2 (#R35)
Culvert materials and labor cost need to be added for site 14.5-21-0.2 (#R35). This will be for cleaning/replacement of a 15-inch culvert
(totaling 40 If), and ditch cleaning.
Costs:
FAL: $3711 .55
FAE: $3425.00
Material: $295.90
Contractor: $0.00
Total: $7432.45
Location 5-10-0.8 (R36)
Culvert materials and labor cost need to be added for site 5-10-0.8 (R36). This will be for cleaning/replacement of 4 ea. 18-inch culvert
(totaling 140 If of culvert), and ditch cleaning.
Costs:
FAL: $2443.40
FAE: $958.00
Material: $1234.26
Contractor: $0.00
Total: $4635.66
Comments and Attachments
Detailed cost estimates are presented on each of the 3 pdf files for the items.
• Version 1 , PW 00588, Notes
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 42 of 46
• Version 1 , PW 00588, Email on HMP Issue
• Version 1 , PW 00588, 67-SH52-0-5-31518-47207
• Version 1 , PW 00588. 14-5-21 -23
• Version 1 , PW 00588, 5-10-0-8
Does the Scope of Work change the pre-disaster conditions
at the site? Yes No Special Considerations included? P Yes [✓] No
Hazard Mitigation proposal included? Yes No Is there insurance coverage on this facility? lYes No
PROJECT COST
ITEM CODE NARRATIVE QUANTITY/UNIT UNIT COST
PRICE
*** Version 0 ***
Work Completed
1 9999 class 6 gravel fill 14444.6/TON $ 33.70 $
486, 783.02
2 9999 18" CMP arch 140/LF $ 14.95 $ 2,093.00
3 3070 Ditch Cleaning & Shaping 3144/LF $ 3.40 $ 10.689.60
*** Version 1 ***
Other
4 0000 Work Completed 0/LS $ 0.00 $ 0.00
5 9999 Site 1 Location (R8) additional surface 1 /LS $ $ 2,587.96
gravel 2,587.96
6 9999 Site 2 Location (R35) Culvert materials $
1 /LS
and labor 7,432.45 $ 7,432.45
7 9899 Site 2 Location (R36) Culvert materials 1 /LS $ $ 4.635.66
and labor 4,635.66
8 0000 Insurance Adjustments - 5900/5901 0/LS $ 0.00 $ 0.00
*** Version 0 ***
9 9999 Direct Administrative Costs-estimated 1 /LS $ 1 ,000.00
1 ,000.00
TOTAL $
COST 515,221 .69
PREPARED BY David Daboll TITLE Project Specialist SIGNATURE
APPLICANT REP Roy Rudisill TITLE Director - OEM SIGNATURE
WELD (COUNTY) : PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00588
Conditions Information
Review Name Condition Type Condition Name Description Monitored Status
National Historic
Final Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act No Approved
(NHPA)
This review does not address
all federal, state and local
requirements. Acceptance of
federal funding requires
recipient to comply with all
https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 43 of 46
federal, state and local laws.
Failure to obtain all
Final Review Other (EHP) Standard appropriate federal, state and No Approved
Condition #2 local environmental permits pp
and clearances may
jeopardize federal funding.
Any change to the approved
Standard scope of work will require re-
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Approved
NEPA and other Laws and
Executive Orders.
National Historic
Final Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act No Approved
(NHPA)
Applicant is responsible for
Executive Order coordinating with the local
Final Review Other (EHP) 11988 - floodplain manager. All No Approved
Floodplains required permits should be
maintained as part of the
permanent record .
State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately
Final Review Other (EHP) Materials and Solid separated and disposed of in No Approved
Waste Laws an approved disposal site or
landfill .
State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately
Final Review Other (EHP) Materials and Solid separated and disposed of in No Approved
Waste Laws an approved disposal site or
landfill.
Applicant is responsible for
Executive Order coordinating with the local
Final Review Other (EHP) 11988 - floodplain manager. All No Approved
required permits should be pp
Floodplains maintained as part of the
permanent record .
If ground disturbing activities
occur during construction,
applicant will monitor ground
Standard disturbance and if any
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #3 potential archeological No Approved
resources are discovered, will
immediately cease
construction in that area and
notify the State and FEMA.
Any change to the approved
Standard scope of work will require re-
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Approved
NEPA and other Laws and
Executive Orders.
This review does not address
all federal , state and local
requirements. Acceptance of
Standard federal funding requires
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 recipient to comply with all No Approved
federal , state and local laws.
Failure to obtain all
appropriate federal, state and
local environmental permits
hops://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi le=&topTile=dsHeader&b.. . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 44 of 46
and clearances may
jeopardize federal funding.
If ground disturbing activities
occur during construction,
applicant will monitor ground
Standard disturbance and if any
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #3 potential archeological No Approved
resources are discovered. will
immediately cease
construction in that area and
notify the State and FEMA.
If ground disturbing activities
occur during construction.
applicant will monitor ground
Standard disturbance and if any
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #3 potential archeological No Recommended
resources are discovered, will
immediately cease
construction in that area and
notify the State and FEMA.
This review does not address
all federal , state and local
requirements. Acceptance of
federal funding requires
Standard recipient to comply with all
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 federal, state and local laws. No Recommended
Failure to obtain all
appropriate federal, state and
local environmental permits
and clearances may
jeopardize federal funding.
Any change to the approved
Standard scope of work will require re-
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 evaluation for compliance with No Recommended
NEPA and other Laws and
Executive Orders.
National Historic
EHP Review Other (EHP) Preservation Act No Recommended
(NHPA)
Applicant is responsible for
Executive Order coordinating with the local
floodplain manager. All
EHP Review Other (EHP) 11988 - required permits should be No Recommended
Floodplains maintained as part of the
permanent record.
State Hazardous Debris must be appropriately
EHP Review Other (EHP) Materials and Solid separated and disposed of in No Recommended
Waste Laws an approved disposal site or
landfill .
Internal Comments
No. Queue User Date/Time Reviewer Comments
Final PEVAN 10-08-2014 This project is found eligible in final review.
13 02:53 PM
Review RONALD GMT Ron Pevan DIBD
09-29-2014
Ilttps://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTi (e=&topTile=dsHeader&b... 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 45 of 46
12 Grantee LAWSON 06:40 PM 9/29/14 - No issues. Eligible as written . LJL
Review LESTER GMT
Category: C, 95% Complete, Weld County. Weld County.
Applicant used force labor and equipment to repair roads using
gravel at sites 1 , 2, 4, 8, 10, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25,
26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 40. Applicant repaired embankment
at sites 1 . 2. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11 , 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18. 19,
20, 21 , 22, 23, 24. 25. 26. 27, 28, 29, 30 32, 33, 40. Applicant
clean out and shaped ditch at sites 34, 35, 36. Applicant
replaced and repair culvert at site 36. Applicant must get an
approved landfill permit or must be disposed of in an approved
disposal site. Mitigation-None - bsherma 1 - 02/24/2014
15: 13:07 GMT
***VERSION 1 ***: This PW was reviewed by EHP staff on
February 24th, 2014. It was submitted to EHP after rework to
increase costs and material quantities used in repairs for Site
1 , Location R8 and Site 2, Locations R35 and R36. These
changes do not affect the original scope of work and no
additional EHP review is required. - dsharon - 09/26/2014
18:57:37 GMT
EHP PATTERSON 09-29-2014 Project site work is not in a mapped wetland. - bsherma1 -
11 Review MOLLY 02: 10 PM 02/24/2014 15:01 :06 GMT
GMT Entire community will benefit from the project. - bsherma1 -
02/24/2014 15:01 :42 GMT
Threatened and Endangered Species occur in this county but
the type of activity proposed on this Project Worksheet has
been determined to have "no effect" on any T&E species. This
Project occurs 500 ft or more away from a wetland , river,
stream, lake, canal or drainage. (or This Project falls within a
block clearance zone for the Preble's Meadow Jumping
Mouse) - bsherma 1 - 02/24/2014 15:09:30 GMT
Work involves removal, staging, transporting. and/or disposal
of debris. (Includes culverts) - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014
15: 13:39 GMT
Project is located on a non-printed panel number
0802661050C. Project is located on a non-printed panel
number 0802661075C. - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014 14:54:49 GMT
The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of
the 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement. Item III ; Section B,
C, E agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. - bsherma1 -
02/24/2014 15:04:08 GMT
Insurance JOHNSON 09-26-2014 VERSION 1 — The additional surface gravel and culvert repairs
10 Review KENNETH 05: 12 PM will not alter the prior insurance policy coverage comments or
GMT the insurance requirement comments.
09-26-2014 Applicant is insinured through the CCCPP risk pool. That
Insurance JOHNSON policy specifically excludes roadways from coverage.
9 Review KENNETH GMT PM Insurance proceeds are not anticipated, and there is no
insurance O&M for roads.
09-26-2014 Version 1 - additional work that was not included in Version 0.
Mitigation This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation
8 Review PETITT MARK GMT PM opportunities and there is no opportunity. because repair work
has been completed. Mark W. Petitt, 406 Specialist
Mitigation 09-26-2014 This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation
7 PETITT MARK 04:27 PM opportunities but there is no opportunity because work has
Review GMT been completed - Brian W. Drost, 406 Specialist
609-2 -201
Initial TREZONA 04:26
PM 4 9-25-2014:Completed Initial review, no issues were identified;
Review SCOTT GMT work appears eligible.
https://isource.fema.netiemmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 46 of 46
Award 03-03-2014
5 Review SYSTEM 11 :45 PM ACCEPTED
GMT
Note: Applicant, CO State representative and FEMA personnel
jointly conducted all inspections and agreed to use CDOT
costs for in-place costs to derive estimates on this project
worksheet. Final Reviewer finds eligible the application and
Final PALACIO 02-28-2014 approves the funding of this CAT-C project worksheet based
4 05:29 PM on the applicant having performed all required procurement
Review JOSE GMT procedures, perform all required special considerations
recommendations such as permits to address EHP
considerations and securing all actual cost documentation for
the financial reconciliation of this project. Task Force Leader-
J. Palacio 02/28/2014
Category: C, 95% Complete, Weld County, Weld County.
Applicant used force labor and equipment to repair roads using
gravel at sites 1 . 2, 4. 8, 10, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23, 24, 25,
26. 27, 28, 29. 30, 32, 33. 40. Applicant repaired embankment
at sites 1 , 2, 3. 4, 5, 6, 7. 9, 10, 11 , 12. 13, 14, 15, 17, 18. 19,
20, 21 , 22, 23. 24. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 32, 33, 40. Applicant
clean out and shaped ditch at sites 34, 35, 36. Applicant
replaced and repair culvert at site 36. Applicant must get an
approved landfill permit or must be disposed of in an approved
disposal site. Mitigation-None - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014
15: 13:07 GMT
Project site work is not in a mapped wetland. - bsherma1 -
02/24/2014 15:01 :06 GMT
Entire community will benefit from the project. - bsherma1 -
02-25-2014 02/24/2014 15:01 :42 GMT
3 EHP PATTERSON 09:59 PM Threatened and Endangered Species occur in this county but
Review MOLLY GMT the type of activity proposed on this Project Worksheet has
been determined to have "no effect" on any T&E species. This
Project occurs 500 ft or more away from a wetland , river,
stream, lake, canal or drainage. (or This Project falls within a
block clearance zone for the Preble's Meadow Jumping
Mouse) - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014 15:09:30 GMT
Work involves removal, staging, transporting, and/or disposal
of debris. (Includes culverts) - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014
15: 13:39 GMT
Project is located on a non-printed panel number
0802661050C. Project is located on a non-printed panel
number 0802661075C. - bsherma1 - 02/24/2014 14:54:49 GMT
The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of
the 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement, Item III ; Section B,
C, E agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. - bsherma1 -
02/24/2014 15:04:08 G M T
Mitigation DROST 02-21 -2014 This repair/restoration project has been reviewed for mitigation
2 Review BRIAN 09:26 PM opportunities but there is no opportunity because work has
GMT been completed - Brian W. Drost, 406 Specialist
02-21 -2014 Applicant is insinured through the CCCPP risk pool. That
Insurance GILLIAM policy specifically excludes roadways from coverage.
1 Review ROBERT GMT PM Insurance proceeds are not anticipated, and there is no
insurance O&M for roads.
haps://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatch Destination.do?menuTi le=&topTi le=dsHeader&b. . . 10/ 10/2014
Hello