HomeMy WebLinkAbout20151496.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FOR
ROAD CULVERTS(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 Road Culverts (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 Road
Culverts (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: GG�� Ed f EXCUSED
! 6 • {+•+ Barbara Kirkmeyer,Chair
Weld County Clerk to the Board TOA4:1/1,2J2
Mike Freeman,Pro-Tem
BY. ► I_.I� ♦'
D:p�y Clerk •
to the B =rd 'fin
Sean P.Conway APPROVED AS TO FOR I = ice /l; r `'"dam
Iasi O 4SVJulie A.Cozad
County Attorney V ?" 4, ,EXCUSED
®U Steve Moreno
Date of signature:
2015-1496
c.cocriii;Acc,+ yaa EM0016
BC0045
nx Colorado Division of Homeland Security Grant NOI / Application
Emergency Management CDBG - DR Recover Colorado
Infrastructure Program
THIS SECTION FOR STATE USE ONLY
DHSEM Identification Number: Colorado Point of Contact:
CDBG-DR Program Manager
Date NOI (Part A) Received: Colorado DHSEM
9195 East Mineral Avenue, Suite 200
Date Application (Part B) Received: Centennial, Colorado 80112
Office: 720.852.6713
Date Next Steps Letter Transmitted: Fax: 720.852.6750
cdps dhsem cdbg@state.co.us
PART A - NOI:
PROJECT OVERVIEW
1 . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado
2. Applicant
Type: ✓ Local Government Private Non-Profit (Attach copy of 501c3, if applicable)
3. Project Title: County Match FEMA Projects - WELCO35 (897)
4. Proposed Project Total Cost: 323.975.53
CDBG-DR-I Request: 40.496.94
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:s' Telephone Number
lenja-• MAY 2 7 2015
Signature of Authorized Applicant Agent Date Signed
2015- 1496
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 1 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: APPLICANT INFORMATION
I . Applicant Legal Name: Weld County. Colorado
2. FIPS Code: 123 DUNS Number: 07575-7955
3. U.S. Congressional District: 4th Congressman Name:
4. State Senatorial District: 1 Senator Name: M r. 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. IM Mr. 51 Mrs. '" First Name: Roy Last Name: Rudisill
Title: Director organization: Weld County Office of Emergency Managem€
Street Address: 1 150 O Street
City: Greeley sink:: Colorado Zip Code: 80631
Telephone: (y I U) ilk Fax: (y f U).S.Sb- f e Mobile: 19 / U ) 381 -U E-mail Address: rrudisill(a�co .weld . co
7. Alternate Point of Contact:
The Alternate Point of Contact is the person that can address questions or concerns in the Primary Point of Contact's
absence.
Ms. 0 Mr III \TisjI First Name: Barb Last Name: Connolly
Title: Controllea Organization: Weld County Accounting
Street Address: 1 150 O Street
City: Greeley State: Colorado Lip Code: 80631
Telephone: (y / U ).52,5 I , s : (y f U )O.5O- / .6 Mobile: E-mail Address: bconnolly(C�co .weld .
8. Application Prepared by:
Ms. II Mr. IN Mrs Ill First Name: Kyle Last Name: Jones
Title: Planner Organization: ARCADIS-US
Street Address:
City: Tallahass( State: FL Lip Code: 32309
Telephone: (dDU)b4i F. v Mobile: ,21b) 2U1-3 E-mail Address: kyle . iones(a�arcadis-
9. Authorized Applicant Agent:
Ms. 0 Mr. Mr s. First Name: Barbara Last Name: Kirkmeyer
Title: COMMiSSii Organization: Weld County
Street Address: 1150 O Street, P .O . Box 758
City: Greeley State: Colorado Lip Code: 80631
Telephone: lye U)OO6 F, v Mobile: E-mail Address: bkirkmeyer(c�co .wel(
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 suhmival. Page 2 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: PROJECT DESCRIPTION & NATIONAL OBJECTIVES MET
1 . Project— Eligible Activity Description:
Describe the proposed project. Explain how the proposed project will address recovery and/or resilience needs in your
community either independently or as part of a larger project. Include a description of the desired outcome and the
recovery objective(s) to be achieved. This narrative should describe the CDBG-DR Eligible Activity.
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways, bridges, culverts,
removed hazardous roadway debris, made emergency repairs to paved and gravel
roadways , addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made
repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
FEMA Categories A, B , C , and E were addressed in the Weld County FEMA Match . CDBG
funds are needed to be applied towards the Weld County FEMA Local Match for the
emergency work that was identified on previously submitted Project Worksheets. All
projects covered under the Weld County Project Worksheets were vital for Weld County to
clear hazardous debris from roadways/creeks/streams and enhance their infrastructure .
river embankments, equipment and roadways . This particular NOI/Application will discuss
IA/CI / QCl7 \ Thr, OrrNinnf IA/nrIirhnnf in nffnnhrrr-t 'nN nnr .b-I;nr Ante-Nile-NA rnnnr. r,f Anew', 0
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 .446540 and longitude is - 104 . 701920 . The attached spreadsheet shows
the Lat/Long coordinates for all of the Project Worksheets and depicts the damage site
locations as identified in the correlating Project Worksheets .
3. Population Served: Briefly describe the demographics of the population served or protected by this project. Include
the percent of the overall community population benefiting from this project. Explain your response.
An estimated 90% or more of the community benefited from the proactive work by Weld
County and the removal of hazardous debris and the emergency work/repairs made to the
roadways , bridges, equipment and culverts. The population benefiting from this Match
Project will include an LMI level population percentage that will be directly or indirectly
impacted through this project. This NOI and the associated PW impacted the entire County
and demographic area . White : 67 . 6% , Hispanic: 28 . 3% , Other: 1 . 6% , Asian : 1 . 3% , Black :
0 . 8% , Native American : 0 .4 % . Weld County consists of 99, 317 households with a median
househo d income of $56. 589 and the maiori:v of We d County is owner-occupied with
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 12 of 36 Projects Submitted .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 3 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI : CDBG-DR FUNDING QUALIFICATIONS
Community Development Block Grant — Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funding can be approved for a project in which
ALL of the following requirements are met The physical location of the activity must be within a county listed in Table 1 of
the program Recover Colorado Infrastructure Grant Program Guidelines (Guidelines).
1. Connection to Dim 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
n A/
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?
f] 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 Projects.
The general vicinity of FEMA Match Projects encompasses the entire County and
greatly benefits the entire LMI population for this project, which is why the County
believes that this project not only meets, but exceeds the 50% requirement for meeting
the National Objective . The emergency work/repairs that were made under the WELCO
PW's for the Local FEMA Match drastically reduced hazardous conditions for the
general public and enabled Weld County to focus on resiliency efforts post storm . It is
believed that the service area for Project Site Locations benefited multiple LMI tract
sections and thus a higher weighted percentage of over 50% should be noted for this p
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 4 of 20
4 _»
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 L specified target area
If you checked specified target area, which data source was used? (Note: select the smallest unit of Census data that
encompasses your proposed target area.)
b) Enter the number of households involved in the proposed project. 99. 317
c) In the space below, describe how the applicant will comply with the requirement that at least 51 percent of CDBG-DR
dollars will principally benefit low- and moderate-income households and persons.
Weld County will comply with the 51 % requirement due to the fact that the PW
associated under this NOI Project for the FEMA County Match is targeted to areas of the
county that qualify as LMI . The justification behind this methodology is that multiple
d) Enter the number of households within each income category expected to benefit from the proposed project.
Incomes above 80% of the County Median 785
Incomes above 50% and up to 80% of the County Median 1265
Incomes at or below 50% of the County Median 2060
e) Which type of income was used to determine the above? (Check only one)
As determined by the American Community Survey (Public Facilities projects)
Annual income as defined for Public Housing and Section 8
Annual income as reported under the Census long form
Adjusted gross income as defined for reporting under IRS
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 5 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: COMPREHENSIVE RISK ANALYSIS INFORMATION
1. Community Hazards Review: Please list and briefly describe in rank order of importance the natural or man-made
hazards in your (the Applicant's) service area.
The hazards identified within this Project for the FEMA County Match for WELCO35 (897 )
would be ranked in the following manner: Flood , Erosion and Subsidence .
The hazards caused significant damage and posed a severe risk to the community for the
designated incident period .
2. High Risk Hazards Addressed by the Project:
Describe how, and the degree to which, the proposed project mitigates high risk hazards. Include damage history, source
and type of problem, frequency of event(s), and severity of damage information, if available.
Hazard 1
Flooding caused the most severe damage to Weld County during the designated incident
period and this Project addressed and mitigated against severe flood damage to local
roadways , bridges, culverts, removed hazardous debris along roadways . In addition .
County Officials ensured repairs were made to paved and gravel roadways for the safety of
the community and addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and
made repairs to emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident
Period . The repairs made brought the damaged infrastructure back to its pre-disaster
condition in accordance with regulations .
Hazard 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 .
kt tack and continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. l'agc 6 of 211
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 WELCO35 (897 ) 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
ieinr nn net if Fha, ('am gn�ti Inne1 in ant + I 4h ti thn1- fhn . rIir4 Q
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
i
J
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 WELCO35 (897 ) 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? I �I Yes N o
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 8 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
10. Community Plan Compliance: Does the proposed project comply with and/or address an issue recognized in key
community plans? Key plans include, but are not limited to: a Comprehensive Master Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan,
a Hazard Mitigation Plans, or key community codes. If so, please describe how the project integrates into the plan(s).
Yes; the Proposed Project complies with all local community plans and this Project
integrates into the Plans because the County addressed the damages to local roadways
and infrastructure and mitigated damages that posed a serious risk/hazard to the
community during the incident period . This FEMA PW was initiated by Weld County and via
this Proposed Project, the County requests that CDBG funds be applied towards the local
FEMA Match for this Project.
11. Environmental / Historic Preservation Issues: Please describe any significant environmental, historic, or cultural features
that may be affected by the project. Please also describe any features that may be improved by the project.
All environmental issues are addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act
( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any additional
supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request.
12. Permitting: Please list the local, state, and federal permits that will be required to complete this project.
All permitting was addressed on the attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant permitting issues were in regards to the Endangered
Species Act ( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions. All items were addressed and any
additional supporting backup documentation can be provided upon request. Please see
below for environmental permits that were obtained .
Floodplain Permit
AnA A� ����r • �� � ��rmi�
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 9 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
13. Community Resilience: Please describe how this project will increase the resilience of your community. As defined in the
Guidelines: "Resilience incorporates hazard mitigation and land use planning strategies; critical infrastructure, environmental
and cultural resource protection; and sustainability practices to reconstruct the built environment, and revitalize the economic,
social, and natural environments."
In an effort to achieve resiliency from the severe storms and minimize risk to the general
public, Weld County addressed severe damage to local roadways , bridges, culverts,
removed hazardous debris roadways , made repairs to paved and gravel roadways,
addressed river embankments/dangerous conditions to the public and made repairs to
emergency response vehicles that were damaged during the Incident Period .
This Proposed Project addresses proactive work initiated by Weld County during FEMA-DR
4145 enabled the community to recover in an expeditious manner and increased the
resilience of the community by incorporating nearly every aspect of sustainability and
revitalizing the community . The community was able to recover quicker due to the proactive
work done through this Proposed Project and the associated PW's.
14. Maps
Please attach the following maps with the project site and structures marked on the map. Use SAME ID number as in
the Individual Property Worksheets.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). If the FIRM for your area is not published, please attach a copy of the Flood
Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM).
City or county scale map (large enough to show the entire project area)
USGS 1 :24,000 topo map
Parcel Map (Tax Map, Property Identification Map, etc.)
Overview photographs. The photographs should be representative of the project area, including any relevant
streams, creeks, rivers, etc., and drainage areas which affect the project site of will be affected by the project.
15. Additional Comments (Optional): Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's ability to reduce
hazard risk and increase community resiliency.
This proposed project reduced the hazard risk to the community and increased resiliency by
the work conducted through the PW in correlation with FEMA-DR 4145 . CDBG funds are
being requested to be applied to the local FEMA Match ( 12 . 5% ) for the PW .
All maps are located in project files that were previously submitted and will be provided
upon request.
The entire r.nmmi inity benefited from the nrnar:tive wnrk by Weld Col inty and the removal
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page I Il of ?II
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 item as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 11 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART A - NOI: SCOPE OF WORK / BUDGET OVERVIEW / FINANICAL FACTORS
1. Project Scope: Please provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the scope of the proposed project.
Describe each of the project components and the steps necessary to complete that work. If the proposed project is a
funding match for another disaster recovery or infrastructure development program, please identify the
agency, program funds, and project reference number that CDBG-DR funding is intended to support. Also
describe any critical deadlines that must be met to accomplish this work.
This Proposed Project is for the Local FEMA Match for costs for WELCO35 (897 ) . These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145 . During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013, Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris
in the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets , and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This NOI Application
request addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe
flooding .
A Scope of Work is included within the PW and addresses the work that was completed .
2. Community Priority: Please describe why this project is a priority for your organization.
This Proposed Project is a priority for Weld County to utilize the CDBG funding as the Local
FEMA Match to offset the costs for the proactive work done by the County to reduce
hazardous conditions to the community .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachnx•nt to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 12 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) $ 323,975.53
See Protect Worksheet Cost (attached, i. Total ofa-h $ 323.975.53
j. Duplication of Benefits (if unknown at time of application enter zero). $ 0.00
k. Subtract j. from i. to determine Total Project Cost $ 323.975.53
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: $ 323.975.53
Federal Cost Share: $ 242,981 .64
State Cost Share: $ 40.496.94
$ 40.496.94
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
and the costs are broken down by type of work and site .
6. Project Management: Describe how you will manage the costs and schedule, and how you will ensure successful
performance.
The work for this Proposed Project has been completed or is pending completion . The
12 . 5% CDBG Local Match will be applied towards the Weld County Match for FEMA PW's
and the costs that were previously incurred during the disaster.
Note: The applicant must agree to furnish quarterly reports during the entire time the project is in active status. Quarters end
on March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. Reports are due to the State within 15 days after the end of
each quarter.)
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 13 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
7. Project Maintenance Requirements: The following questions are to give assurance on the project's maintenance over
its useful life. Please answer each question and give a brief explanation.
a. If the project involves the acquisition of real property, what is the proposed land use after acquisition? (i.e., Agriculture,
Recreation, Vacant Land, Park, Wetlands, etc.)
N/A
b. Will the project require periodic maintenance?
No
c. Ifyes, who will provide the maintenance?
N/A
d. What is the estimated cost of maintenance on an annual basis?
0
Note: Cost of maintenance is considered an application prioritization weighting factor. Projects with high maintenance
costs have a greater risk of future failure due to deferred maintenance. Therefore, the responses provided above should be
as complete and verifiable as possible in order to minimize the likelihood of ranking point reductions due to maintenance
concerns.
8. Additional Comments: Enter any additional comments related to the proposed project's funding, if desired .
CDBG funds are needed for the 12 . 5% Local FEMA Match and the associated PW that is
included in the NOI -Application .
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.
A/olrl Cni int�i nnnrntnp i indor tho mn t roctrintiup nr.,. nrt + I ' it t' t
Rocir-Ind�
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail uihmittal. Page 14 of 20
('UBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
PART B - APPLICATION : PROJECT MILESTONES / TIMELINES / TASKS
1 . 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 I :
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 pl in�cli-aine .
Task 3: Permanent Repairs - Becuase the emergency repairs were quick repair Completed
Timeframe.
Task 4:
Timeframe:
Task 5:
Timeframe:
Task 6:
Timeframe:
Task 7:
Timeframe:
Task 8:
Timeframe:
Task 9:
Timeframe:
Final Inspection Report and Project Closeout
Task 10:
The Final Inspection Report is a review of the activity's paper documentation.
showing the project was implemented as required. Once the review is completed. the 3 Months
report and findings will be provided to the grantee for review and concurrence. The Timeframe:
State submits the concurrence to FEMA as part of a closeout package to formally
Total Project Timeframe: 6 Months
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail submittal. Page 15 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
2. Start Date & Pre-Award Costs: The start date for any project begins upon GRANT AGREEMENT approval by the
State Controller. If a different start date or timeframe is needed, provide an explanation below. Also indicate if any pre-
award activities or costs have been incurred or authorized.
The proposed project is for local FEMA match dollars and the 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
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Please note that Part B is required for the final Application submittal. Part B sections
may optionally be completed and submitted with the NOI. Please update any Part A
section information when submitting you full Application.
PART B — APPLICATION : ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
1. Environmental Review Background Information & Environmental Review Worksheet:
In accordance with 24 CFR Part 58.22 (see below), all federally funded projects must accomplish an environmental review
prior to beginning any work on a project. These HUD regulations are in place for two purposes:
1 . To ensure federal funds are used to place people of low and moderate income in environmentally safe
conditions; and
2. To ensure federal funds are NOT used to negatively impact environmental conditions that exist near a
project site.
Please note the following limitations on CDBG-DR grant activities pending environmental clearance per 24 CFR Part 58.22.
(a) Neither a recipient nor any participant in the development process, including public or private nonprofit or for-profit
entities, or any of their contractors, may commit HUD assistance under a program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) on an activity or
project until HUD or the state has approved the recipient's RROF and the related certification from the responsible
entity. In addition, until the RROF and the related certification have been approved, neither a recipient nor any
participant in the development process may commit non-HUD funds on or undertake an activity or project under a
program listed in Sec. 58. 1(b) if the activity or project would have an adverse environmental impact or limit the choice
of reasonable alternatives.
(b) N/A for DOLA/CDPS projects.
(c) If a recipient is considering an application from a prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary and is aware that the
prospective sub-recipient or beneficiary is about to take an action within the jurisdiction of the recipient that is
prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section, then the recipient will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives
and procedures of NEPA are achieved.
(d) An option agreement on a proposed site or property is allowable prior to the completion of the environmental review
if the option agreement is subject to a determination by the recipient on the desirability of the property for the project as
a result of the completion of the environmental review in accordance with this part and the cost of the option is a
nominal portion of the purchase price. There is no constraint on the purchase of an option by third parties that have not
been selected for HUD funding, have no responsibility for the environmental review and have no say in the approval or
disapproval of the project.
(e) Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP). In accordance with section 11(d)(2)(A) of the Housing
Opportunity Program Extension Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 12805 note), an organization, consortium, or affiliate receiving
assistance under the SHOP program may advance non-grant funds to acquire land prior to completion of an
environmental review and approval of a Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and certification, notwithstanding
paragraph (a) of this section. Any advances to acquire land prior to approval of the RROF and certification are made at
the risk of the organization, consortium, or affiliate and reimbursement for such advances may depend on the result of
the environmental review. This authorization is limited to the SHOP program only and all other forms of HUD
assistance are subject to the limitations in paragraph (a) of this section.
(f) Relocation. Funds may be committed for relocation assistance before the approval of the RROF and related
certification for the project provided that the relocation assistance is required by 24 CFR part 42.
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 17 of 20
CDBG-DR Infrastructure Application Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Environmental Review Worksheet
Check ALL of the activities listed below that will be included as part of the project,
REGARDLESS OF THE FUNDING SOURCE:
❑ Information and financial services
✓❑ Administrative and management activities
0 Environmental and other studies, resource identification, and the development of plans and strategies
0 Most engineering and design costs associated with eligible projects
• Inspections and testing of properties for hazards or defects
0 Project planning
❑ Purchase of insurance
> Ct ❑ Purchase of tools
W .5 ❑ Technical assistance and training
yC E .^ ❑ Interim assistance to arrest the effects of an imminent threat or physical deterioration in which the assistance
W cit does not alter environmental conditions.
p Public services that will not have a physical impact or result in any physical changes (e.g., employment, child
care, health, education, counseling, welfare)
0 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)
co
E ≥ p Operating costs (e.g., maintenance, security, operation, utilities, furnishings, equipment, supplies, staff training
z and recruitment, other incidental costs)
❑ Relocation costs
p Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
place and will be retained in the same use without change in size or capacity of more than 20 percent
≥ ❑ Special projects directed to the removal of material and architectural barriers that restrict the mobility of and
s accessibility to elderly and handicapped persons
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
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
' . 0
Acquisition, repair, improvement, reconstruction, or rehabilitation when the facilities and improvements are in
rat ;E
place, but will involve a change in land use, such as from non-residential to residential, commercial to
lett industrial, or from one industrial use to another
Demolition
✓ New construction
This checklist must he included with the CUBG application.
Please direct questions to the appropriate contact person below:
DOLA/DLG DHSEM
Tamra 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 9195E Mineral Ave, Suite 200
303-866-6398 Centennial, CO 80112
720.852.6713
tamra.norton@state.co.us
steven.boand@state.co.us
DPS/DOLA USE ONLY:
Required level of environmental review: O Exempt O CENST O CESTO EA
Reviewed by:
Date of Review:
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and c-mail uihmittaI. Page 18 of 20
rIS-
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 attached Project Worksheet as supporting
documentation . The significant EHP issues were in regards to the Endangered Species Act
( ESA) and EHP Standard Conditions . All items were addressed and any additional supporting
backup documentation can be provided upon request . Please see below for environmental
permits that were obtained .
Floodplain Permit
404 Nationwide Permit
Migratory Birds Permit ( if needed )
Threatened and Endangered Species Permit
O
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 19 of 20
a
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 WELCO35 (897). These
costs were incurred as a result of FEMA-DR 4145. During the incident period of September
11 , 2013 to September 30 , 2013 , Weld County, Colorado received heavy rainfall and debris in
the creeks , streams and rivers which caused severe flooding to and along roadways and
surface streets . and also severely damaged local infrastructure . This Application request
addresses the emergency work / damages that were a direct result of the severe flooding .
A Scope of Work and detailed project budget is included within the PW and addresses the
work that was completed .
Attach any continuations or additional items as an Attachment to the electronic application and e-mail submittal. Page 20 of 20
N
111
N
0)
E
0
u
C
E
3
-D
0)
F_
c
la
w
la
m
C N O
° E
0
N
c 01 3
a 0 0
N a) N
o c E m
o E a
5 0
a) E
a E v 2 0
v 0 m c
E J
o as
cij E
0
c U) C "I- 2 -D
a m , o
E
a v y CO
a 13 l_a al J a
E C
" 0 3 'a
a 0
0 13 0 a) J 03
c f E _—
O
3 3
O 0 0 3 .
0 O ° N N N
c c c
c c c 0 E u
• J O
o O O 0 al 01 N
U U U 0L -0 a.
J
ILZ
2
002 0 0
J J J J
o e0 0 0 0 e oe ae ae o a e ae 0 0 0 0 e o oe ae 0 0 0 O O e o 0
oN c o O 3e o 0 o de 0 o 0 ore
o rJ to ID to re o N N o o 0 D to to m to o NI o Cr Cr N 00 N rJ d Cr CO Cr m d N N o m o N
H Cr N . e .-1 r-1 r-1 N Cr N N N N N .� re Vl N N N N ✓1 V1 N rJ r-1 N CO In in .--� ut --i d d el Cr in d N
m 00 00 00 00 00 0O 01 N N N N m 00 COCO O ai enIX) 00 00 N N N 00 O L11N N M N N ul N Ul Nl m co m 00 m NO3 N M M m m m 00 Ill 1/1 m M03 M M m m M d N m m M IN V N N N N N d CO en 00 in
O
0
O
J
Ul '
to VI to V/ Vl Vl Ul O 0 in to Ill In to Ul 0 Ill 0 N m In U1 Ul O 0 0 0 U1 Ul O In O O O Vl to In Ul o
in m .-1 re re rl .--I in 03 CO N N to .--I el Vl .-1 N m N to to r-1 01 LO CO N in Ul LL) Vl tD ID tD N ✓1 O m 00
> N 00 Cr) (n m rn n1 N m m .-+ rl N m M M V1 M N 00 N 0 0 01 N N m d o 0 N O N 0 0 N N N N m
m m m en nl ri .-i N nJ m Men N M N N N m .--I nJ '-I N NJ N N N .--I .-1 +-1 r1 .--i
z
O
CO
3
0
J
to In 0 0 0 0 0 V) v, In 0 0 In 0 0 0 0 0 to In 0 0 0 0 vl o In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u1 in In In In
- M lD ID t0 tD O to en 0 0 0 0 In tD tO tO 0 t0 W 0 0 Ul M LO O m 0 0 in m m tll m — rl d m O In 0
N N 0 0 0 0 0 N d d d d N 0 0 0 m O d N d tD t. 0 .-I 0 d N tD 10 0 tD 0 d 0 0 N 00 N d
C N N N n1 N re .--I .--I .-i N N N .--I NJ ri N .-1
J
In 0 in In to In In in in to 0 0 tf) In in to 0 in tfl 0 0 to In In 0 In In 0 In In In in in 0 0 in Vl ✓1 in to
▪ N 0 tO tD ID tD tO N m m N N N O tD t0 CO l0 N 0 N to to to d m en O In to m In m N N U1 N tD N en
C0 'D N N N N N N tD 00 CO 00 4.0 N N N N N t'n N 00 r-1 .--I N Ul tD O — rl -I VD re ill N N CO W d tD O
rl ry .-I rl rl r-I r1 rl .-I rl re .-I rl r�
3
0
J
Ul Ul to t!1 Vl it) U) U) 0 0 Ul Ul Vl Ul to ✓1 to In 0 Ul U1 ill In In O to 0 0 in Ill in in to 0 0 0 In 0 Ul 0
3 mre CO CO 03 CO CO Ill U1 Ul tll VI Vl 00 00 00 m 00 00 in N N 00 ID 00 UI N N 00 N CO m m N Vl 0 to in
0 In M N N N N N UI LO 10 l0 ID to N N N d N m ID N m ID N N N Ul N to• tD
re
r'I N rl ri r+ r1 .--I ri rl r1 N N .--I r-I r1 .-I N r+ .-I N N re re rl M N •-i rl rl rl N .-1 N re r+ .-i rl rl r. re
O ell re rl 0 0 0 re rl 0 re r1 rl N r i U1 ut r+ 0 0 rl N m O ID 00 n1 0 m CO 03 0 0 m 0 0
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-1 r-1 0 000000 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 'i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rl 0 r1
tD N to to to N to l0 0 o In to t0 t l vl 111 In to N N to 00 00 to (N N 0 0 CO 00 N 00 r• m m to tO o l0 0
00 N N N N N O N N N N O N N N NNO O N 0 ClN N N N N o o N rl N .-1 0 rl 0 N ON
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O 0 O O O O O O co O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O 000000000 0000000000000000000000000000
M m m re) m m m m m m m m M M M M M m M M M M m M M M M M M M M M m M M M M M M m
N N N N N N N N N N NI NN N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
r1 p .1 •y r-1 r-i rl rl N ri q-1 .y .y rl rl .y ry ey re re rl ri rl r-1 ri re re rl rl re re re re r1 re rl re rl re •ti ri
0 CO CO W CO 00 00 d0 00 W 00 00 00 00 00 00 co a0 00 00 00 00 W 00 00 to W co o0 03 CO CO CO CO CO CO 00 CO 00 00
t, 0 0 00 00 00 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0000 O O 0 0 O 0 00 0 00 0
O N in in tin to VI In V) in vt M VI in m in in to V) U1 Vl In N N in Ul N N N VI In in N N M to VI N VI to to
DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDODDDDDDDDDDDDDDDODDD
0000000000
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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O O 0
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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
QJ V1 in U1 Ul to to Vl Ul Ul U1 in it in VI V1 VI in in in in In U1 Vl in in in in U1 Ul Ul to in in m in U1 m to to tfl
t„) e-I ri r--I N N rl re .-I el N r1 rl rl r-I r-I rl re N N r-1 N re el rl N rl N N rti r--I r'-I rl el r-1 r-I .--1 N N r-I r-I
r+ rr .--1 nJ m d In •--I .--I ri .-I ri ri ti Ni m r-I rN c-I N rl .--I N .-1 r-I nl M d .--I N m d --1 r1 .H r-i ri .-i
O
e0
e0
--1 in o d rr `T o In ID N CO 0) 0 rl .H r. i-.1 N In to In 03 CO m - r. rl --1 m en m m d ti m o UI In N 03
3 '-I r-I rl rl r. .--I --1 ti r1 re N N N N N N N N N m m m m m m m
O.
c• < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
a 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Ui 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Ui 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 LU 2 2 2 2
W LU W LU W W W W W LU W W W W W W W W LU W LU W W W W W W LU W W W W LU W W W W W W W W W
Q LL U- U- U- LL LL LL LL LL L.L. LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL U- LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL
CO 000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000N0000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 00
00 U1 d m N N m m N M N N d m 0 ri in N m M N to r-I M to re t0 0 Ill m en 0 m m 00 m d m CO rI
r-1 to r-J N d d in m 03 ID d d Ul m N N Ul LO In O d 0 00 m m el 0 N d ut .-i N m m N N Ul N el ID W ri 01 m N m m 00 tO 03 co m m tD N d M Ni m 03 0 M M N N CO en m tO N t0 03 N rti d CO rl tO to ri d
'3 Li" O el re 0 0 0 d m m 00 CO Cr 00 CO 00 Cr d O rl 00 M M O N m O .-• u1 to ul V1 m m N O Cr N Ul
d d en en en en en d rl rl N N Cr n1 en en en en d d N N N m M N rl 0 N N N N N 0 Oct Cr .-i Cr 0
der) OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO v d -a v c a v v od v v v a v v a v v V ct
J
Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 dCO
CO CO CO 00 m m r-- d d d m Li) 0 W CO CO O CO CO N to O O CO N m m CO N to m N N 00 re tO m O CO N
N 0 d d d d d r-I 0 0 rl ti re 00 00 CO V1 M M O r-1 03 re Cr m N tD d 0) m 0 03 tD 03 tD in el m N N.D m to d d d d d 0 0 N 0 0 0 00 CO 00 rl rr .r N O m m d CO r I M O N N 00 N M d CO ID O N m to
LO W N N N N N N O O CO 00 N d d d d d tD ID 00 00 00 N CO O O m CO CO CO 00 O 00 00 ✓1 N m t0
Cr 0 d 0 0 d 0 4 In m 0 0 0 0 4 d d 0 0 d d d 0 0 d 0l Li)0 0 0 d d d ut O 0 O 0 d d to
m O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0
(; rl .-1 N .ti rl N N rl H rl rti r/ el re rl N rl el rti N rl rd r--I rl N rl r--1 re el re rl .--1 N rl re N rl .--1
J
�
I. ,•.040.,•.040. J I ' ' .i4• ,. �XlN t ms I
t tr
AO
•
gg a . .
w w w f 2 z 1 L.
LL LL LL w IL w v: •
u. . 1148
•
ill i
AtIA-
,�ti _
': eft ••• \ , .
- • ` y • �� '..1 Ir- eV
it
•
•S. 3 < < •± ti1 � �A f
• a a •
wu. W oiluftiw
r.• w le o y •
a•
lj, 3'.. • II `� 'D
�. Fvy 1,4•1%•
:niff
°3 ..":-.4-• dr
a !. ,
,, r
•1
st -
ei •
..,..y. ) , W If itstit
4 W W S e'
LL ( I
d
a a
4 � . !
• � . LL f fi •v • � c0
• , .
Fv
rLerl -.44•
ii:
N
r
i ti-iiik.‘
iii i. il- — -‘"Aki .
p O r :I• LL
rt
- i
I.
Eis)
J ( \L R
' .141 td . %•.t_ i11, 'p + . � ' 1J
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 1 of 22
R.7.-08T-CGj 145-1 N-00897(0)
Applicant Name: Application Title:
WELD (COUNTY) VVELCO35 - Weld County Road Culverts
Period of Performance Start: Period of Performance End:
09-14-2013 03-14-2015
I
Subgrant Application - Entire Application
M
Application Title: WELCO35 - Weld County Road Culverts
Application Number: PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00897(0)
Application Type: Subgrant Application (PW)
Preparer Information
Prefix Mr.
First Name STEPHEN
Middle Initial A
Last Name MORENO
Title Project Specialist
Agency/Organization Name FEMA
Address 1 9200 E Mineral Aved
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
Phone 970-304-6540
Fax
https://connect l .dhs.gov/emmie/,Dana[nfo=isource. fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
-t aa _
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 of 22
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
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: WELCO35
Standard Project Number/Title: 399 - Road System Damage
Please Indicate the Project Type: Neither Alternate nor Improved
Application Title: WELCO35 - Weld County Road Culverts
Category: C.ROADS & BRIDGES
Percentage Work Completed? 95.0 %
As of Date: 02-12-2014
Comments
The applicant must notify the state if there are any changes in the scope of work prior to starting the repairs. Failure to
notify the State Division of Emergency Management may jeopardize receipt of federal funds 02/12/14 Pursuant to
DAP9525.9 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 cost rates. 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. Per Regional Guidance. EHP review is required. The
applicant and/or their contractors must obtain and comply with the appropriate federal. state and local permits.
including those issued by US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under Sec. 404 of the Clean Water Act. and are
responsible for contacting the USACE Denver Regulatory Office at (303) 979-4120 to determine if flood-related activity
lies within the Corps' regulatory jurisdiction.
Attachments
Damage Facilities (Part 1 of 2)
https://connect l .dhs.gov/emm ie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net.SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
-
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 3 of 22
Facility Site
Number Facility Name Address County City State ZIP Previously Action
Damaged?
1 Weld County Road Culverts 1150 O Street Weld Greeley CO 80632 No
Comments
Attachments
Document Hard Copy
User Date Type Description File File Name Action
Reference
_ Photos of culvert
STEPHEN 02 locations set up on a PW WELCO35 CULVERTS
05- Photos View
MORENO side to side, before PHOTOS.pdf(2.69 Mb)
2014 and after views
STEPHEN 02- Google maps of 12
12- Map locations contained in PW WELCO35 CULVERTS View
MORENO 2014 PW. maps .pdf(2.81 Mb)
ARCH PIPE VS ROUND PIPE
STEPHEN 04- Additional Pipe equivalency VOLUMES View
MORENO 2014 Information round vs arch 2014_04_02_10_53_32.pdf(293.80
kb)
Facility Name: Weld County Road Culverts
Address 1 : 1150 O 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-00897(0):
There were a series of 8 culverts.located on the Weld County road network.
that were damaged by flood waters. These culverts were distributed across
Location: the county.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00897(0):
During the incident period of September 11 and 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. This flooding
resulted in widespread damages to the Weld County road system. Damages
included erosion of the roadway. shoulders . culvert washouts. culvert
separations and loss of the gravel riding surfaces. At paved locations there
was minor damage to the pavement surface. Originally there were 12 damage
locations inspected by the project specialist. Those original 12 locations have
been reduced to 8 because it was found that 4 sites were being reported by
other project specialists and included in their PWs. The disposition of the 4
sites is shown in this pw. however the costs for those locations are not
https://connect l .dhs.gov/em m is . Dana[nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do7... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 4 of 22
included in this document. This document is limited to the 8 locations. The
damage to the 8 locations amounted to erosion losses of 5,867.5 tons of
embankment and 2076.4 tons of gravel surfacing for a total replacement
volume of 7.943.9 tons. At most locations the damage was less than 100 feet
long. however. there was one location where the embankment loss was
longer than 1000 feet and another where the surface gravel loss exceeded
2500 feet. Minor damage to asphalt pavement occurred at 3 sites; the longest
of these sites was 81 feet. Together these 3 paved sites accounted for a loss
of 59.4 tons of pavement. One location featured a ditch cleaning/shaping
operation of approximately 760LF. The specifics regarding the individual
locations are documented in the following pages. The GPS coordinate,
( 40.44643.- 104.70146) is for the Weld County Public Works office.
Location Description
Location #1 EM-cul 120-25.3
GPS 40.85554.-104.82422 to 40.85577,-104.81496
The 60" dia.CMP X 49' L pipe had to be reset. The roadway embankment
loss at this site was 30'W x 24' L X 7' D x 1 /27 = 186 cy. In addition there was
a continuous 24'W x 2539' loss of gravel surfacing L X .25' D x 1 /27 = 564.2
cy
Location #2 EM -cu123-100. 1
GPS 40.71532,-104.84987
The 30" dia CMP X 50' L pipe was undamaged . Approximately 20' had to be
reset. There was a loss of embankment of approximately 2' D x 20'W x 20' L
x 1 /27= 29.6 cy. There was a loss of gravel surfacing approximately .25' D x
25' w x 30' long x 1 /27= 6.95 cy.
Location #3 EM- cul 45-54.5-.5
GPS 40.39227,-104.63988
The 60" CMP arch pipe x 60' L was scoured at the end but did not require
Damage Description and Dimensions: reseting . Embankment loss was approximately 25' W x 30'L x 4' D x 1 /27=
111 . 1 cy. Asphalt pavement loss was 81 'L x 22' W x 0.25 ' D x1 /27= 16.5 cy.
The ditch required cleanout and reshaping for a length of 760LF.
Location #4 EM-cul 394-35-0.0
GPS 40.34852,-104.73439
The original 60- dia concrete pipe was separated from a 4.5' D x 8'-w x 15' L
concrete box it was attached to. The concrete pipe collapsed and the
concrete box was cracked . The embankment loss was 5'D x 18' W x 20'W x
1 /27 = 66.7 cy. Asphalt pavement loss was 26' L x 23'W x 0.25' Dx1 /27= 5.5
cy.
Location #5 EM- cul — 23-8-1 .4
GPS 40.06412,-104.84849
The 48" L CMP arch x 50' was washed away. The embankment loss was 15'
W x 12' L x 6' D x 1 /27 =40 cy. The loss of asphalt pavement was 19' L x
23'W x 0.5' D x 1 /27= 8. 1 cy.
Location #6 EM-cul-396-trp-0.9
GPS 40.34167,-104.78908
The 36" dia CMP x 100' was forced apart by flood waters. It was undamaged
but needed to be partially reset. The embankment loss was estimated to be
40'L x 40'W x 6'D x 1 /27= 355.6 cy. The loss of gravel surfacing was
estimated at 150' L x 24' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27= 66.7 cy.
Location #7 EM-cul-396-trp-1 .3
GPs 40.34179.-104. 78378
The 30" arch CMP x 40' was washed away. The loss of embankment was 30'
L x 26' W x 4' dx 1 /27= 115.6 cy.
Location #8 EM -378-396-0. 1 and 0.2
GPS 40.35335.-104.77502 to 40.35390.-104.77078
The 18" arch CMP x 60' culverts at mile 0. 1 and 0.2 were washed away.
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do?... 5/7/20 14
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 5 of 22
The embankment loss was 23'W x 2D x 1 , 181 ' L x1 /27 = 2012. 1 cy. There
was an additional hole in the road embankment estimated to be 9'D x 23' W x
40'L x 1 /27= 306.7 cy. The gravel surfacing was washed away and was
estimated to be 23' W x 1181 ' L x 0.5' D x 1 /27= 503 cy.
Summarizing the scope of repair volumes for the 8 locations results in the
following table showing values in cu yds and their conversion to tons :
EMBANK SURF GRVL ASPHALT
volume volume pavement
cu yds cu yds Cu yds
186.7 564.2
29.6 6.9
111 . 1 16.5 32.5
66.7 5.5 10.9
40.0 8. 1 15.9
355.6 66.7
115.6 0.0
2012. 1 503.0
306.7 0.0
3223.9 1171 .0 59.4
X 1 .82 X 1 .82 X1 .97
5867.5 TN 2076.4 TN 59.4 TN
The following 4 locations were damaged and they are being reported under
other project worksheets. They are listed here for informational purposes
only.
Location #9 EM — cul 394-31 -.25 Damage at this site was within the City of
Evans but was repaired by Weld County forces. The details are reported in
PW EVANS 09
GPS 40.33815,-104.76958
Location #10 EM-cul-21 -14-0. 1 Damage at this site reported under
WELCO03
GPS 40.08921 .-104.86766
Location #11 EM —cul-28-17-0.6 Damage at this site reported under
WELCO03
GPs 40. 18953,-10489123 to 40. 18953.-104.89043
Location # 12 19.5-36-0.9 23 Damage at this site reported under WELCO23
GPS 40.25666,-104.87939 to 40.25256.-104.87827
PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00897(0):
The county used force account labor. materials and equipment to conduct
repairs to the damaged sites. These repairs consisted of hauling and placing
embankment material at the damaged sites, reseting corrugated metal pipe
(CMP) , installing replacement culverts as needed. and replacing the surface
gravel . At 3 locations the county forces replaced sections of pavement
damaged by the flood. At the time of the inspections all repairs had been
Scope of Work: completed.
Cost estimates for location repairs to embankments and gravel surfacing are
based upon the use of Colorado DOT unit bid prices for the period Jan 1 thru
March 31 . 2013. The project specialist used the CDOT figures as an
estimating factor for validating the Weld County cost estimates. The project
specialist computed the repair quantities to be 5,867.5 tons of embankment
and 2076.4 tons of gravel surfacing for a combined tonnage of 7349.4tons
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource. fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 6 of 22
and a cost of $238,292.70. The cost of replacing 59.4 tons of asphalt paving
was estimated at $4.852.98. See the Project Notes for details regarding unit
conversion factors from cubic yards(cy) to tons (tn).The project specialist
obtained the cost per foot for culverts directly from the county: 48" arch-
$48. 19: 30" arch- $25.01 : 18" arch- $14.95. The total loss of culvert pipe was
220Lf and was comprised of the three mentioned sizes. The county reported a
ditch cleanout operation of approximately 760Lf for an estimated cost of
$2.584. . The total estimated cost of repairs is $251 ,933.58.
The specific details regarding the repairs. quantities and costs for each site
are shown on the following pages
COMPLETED WORK
Location #1 EM-cul 120-25.3
GPS 40.85554.-104.82422 to 40.85577,-104.81496
The county used their forces to reset the 60" dia. CMP X 49' L pipe. In
addition they replaced embankment estimated at 30'W x 24' L X 7' D x 1 /27
= 186.7cy. County forces will be replacing the lost surfacing estimated at a
continuous 24'W x 2539' loss of surfacing L X .25' D x 1 /27 = 564.2 cy
Applying the conversion factor of 1 .62, the 186.67 cu yds becomes 302.4 tons
of embankment fill and and the 564.7 cy becomes 914 tons of surfacing.
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 914tn=$30.803. 15
Embankment @ $33.70/cy x302..4= $10, 190.88
Total=30,803. 15 +10, 190.88= $40.944.03
Location #2 EM-cu123-100. 1
GPS 40.71532,-104.84987
Although the 30" dia CMP X 50' L pipe was undamaged. the inlet side
required approximately 20' to be reset. County forces hauled fill to repair the
lost embankment estimated to be 2' D x 20'W x 20' L x 1 /27= 29.6 cy.
Converting to tons yields 1 .82 x 29.6 = 53.9 tn. County forces replaced the
lost surface gravel estimated to be 0.25' D x 25' w x 30' long x 1 /27= 6.95 cy.
Converting to tons, 6.95 cy x 1 .82= 12.6TN
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 12.6tn=$425.93
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 53.9= $1817.30
Total=425.93 + 1817.30= $2243.23
Location #3 EM- cul 45-54.5-.5
GPS 40.39227,-104.63988
The 60" arch CMP pipe x 60' L was scoured at the end but did not require
reseting . County forces hauled replacement fill to repair the embankment
loss of approximately 25' W x 30'L x 4' D x 1 /27= 111 . 1 cy. Converting to tons
yields 1 .82 x 111 =202.2 tn. County paving crews were used to patch the
asphalt surface of 81 'L x 22' W x 0.25 • D x1 /27= 16.5 cy. Based upon an
asphalt value of 146 #/cu ft yields an asphalt conversion factor of( 146 #/cy x
27 cu ft /cu yd) / 2000 #/ton =1 .97 T/cu yd. Converting yards to tons yields
16.25 cy x 1 .97= 32.5 tn. The county forces and equipment were used to
clean out and reshape the ditch for a distance of 760 Lf. FEMA cost code of
$3.40 / Lf was used to estimate the repair cost.
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 202.2=$6.814.89
Asphalt @$81 .70/tn x 32.5 = $2.655.66
Ditch cleanout /reshape @$3.40 x 760 = $2,584
Total=6,814.89+ $2.655.66 + $2.584 = $12,054.55
Location #4 EM-cul 394-35-0.0
GPS 40.34852,-104.73439
As an immediate remedy to the flood damage, county forces removed the
collapsed 60" dia concrete pipe . They grouted a 60" dia x 601f CMP to the
damaged concrete box. County forces were used to replace the embankment
loss of 5'D x 18' W x 20W x 1 /27 = 66.7 cy. Converting from cy to ton yields
66.7cy x 1 .82 = 121 .3 tn. County paving crews replaced the lost pavement in
an area of 26' L x 23W x 0.25' Dx1 /27= 5.5 cy. Converting yds to tons yields
5.5 cy x 1 .97= 10.9 tn County forces placed riprap on the inlet face of the
https://connect 1 .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do ?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 7 of 22
repair. The county regards this repair as a temporary measure to open the
road.
Asphalt@ $81 .70 x 10.9 tn=$891 . 18
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3= $4.088.93
Temp 60- dia. X 60If x $135/If = $8, 100
Immediate repair Total=$891 . 18 + $4.088.93 + $8. 100= $13.080. 11
Permanent Repair: The county reported that the immediate repairs to this
location did not fully restore the site. They reported that the area near the
grouted connection was undermined, resulting in subsequent settlement. In
turn this led to a depression in the flow line. To correct this situation the
county must reopen the original excavation, remove the pipe and the box
culvert , re-establish the flowline. install a replacement pipe. backfill . pave, re-
seed and mulch. The county opted to install a concrete arch pipe measuring
64' L — 48" H x 76" W.. The attached table from the Heidelberg Cement Group
shows that the arch pipe is equivalent to the 60" dia CMP.
As a mitigation effort the county elected to rip rap both faces of the culvert, 2
@18' Wx7L 'x1 .5'D= 14cy and install geo fabric. 2@10x10 = 200sgft/9
sq ft= 22.2 sy. They will reseed two areas, 10' x 100'= 1000 sq ft and 20 x 42
= 849 sq ft. totaling 1849 sq ft. They repaved an area of 24'W x 37' L x
0.25'D/27 = 8.22 cy x 1 .97 = 16.2 tn. The county hauled the asphalt
pavement to their East Davis yard for recycling and the removed concrete
was sent to their Hwy 14 county landfill. The 60" dia CMP was removed and
is salvageable. The project specialist put a value of 50% ( S67.50 x 60=
$4050) on the pipe for a salvage price of $4050. The county coordinated their
repair with the local ditch company.
Permanent Repair
Mobilization $1 , 100
Remove embankment to access old pipes (unclassified CDOT item 212-
00010) = 121 .3cy x $14. 18 = $1 ,720
Restore embankment per the immediate original repair @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3=
$4.088.93
Asphalt@ $81 .70 x 16.2tn=$1 ,323.54
Concrete arch = 64LF x $206.90/lf= $13.241 .60
Rip rap 14cy x $116/cy= $1 .624
Geo fabric 22.2 sy x $3.07= $68. 15
Reseed 1849 sq ft /43,560 ( sq ft/acre) = 0.042 acre x $270/acre =$11 .34
Soil blanket $1 .53/sy x 22.2 sy = $33.97
Mulching 0.042 ac x $270/ac = $11 .34
Total full repair = immediate + permanent - salvaged pipe =
$13.080. 11 +$23,222.87- $4050= $ 32.252.98
Location #5 EM- cul — 23-8-1 .4
GPS 40.06412,-104.84849
County forces replaced the 48" CMP arch x 50' L which had been washed
away. The county repaired the damaged embankment loss of 15' W x 12' L x
6' D x 1 /27 =40 cy. Converting to tons yields 1 .82 x 40 = 72.8 tn. The county
repaired damage to the pavement amounting to 19' L x 23W x 0.5' D x
1 /27= 8. 1 cy. Converting cy to tons yields 1 .97 x 8. 1 = 15.9 tn.
Asphalt@ $81 . 70 x 16. 1 tn=$1 ,302.49
Embankment @ $33.70/cy x 64.8tn =$2.453.36
Culvert 48"- $48. 19 x 50LF = $2409.50
Total= 1302.49 +2453.36 + $2409.50= $6165.32
Location #6 EM-cul-396-trp-0.9
GPS 40.34167,-104.78908
County forces were used to reconnect the bands joining the various lengths of
the 36" dia CMP x 100' that were forced apart by flood waters. No new
sections of culvert were required and the culvert was reset to the proper flow
line. County forces replaced the damaged embankment that was estimated to
be 40'L x 40'W x 6'D x 1 /27= 355.6 cy. Converting to ton yields 1 .82 x 355.56
cy =647. 1 tn. County forces replaced the gravel surfacing that was estimated
at 150' L x 24' W x 0.5' D x 1 /27= 66.7 cy. Converting to tons yields 66.7 x
1 .82= 121 .3 tn.
https://connectl .dhs.gov/em m ie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination .do'?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 8 of 22
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 647. 1 cy= $21 ,807.64
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3 tn= $4088.93
Total =$21 .807.64+4088.93= $25.896.58
Location #7 EM-cul-396-trp-1 .3
GPs 40.34179.-104.78378
The 30" arch CMP x 40' was washed away and county forces installed a
replacement. County forces were used to replace the damaged
embankment of 30' L x 26' W x 4' dx 1 /27= 115.6 cy. Converting to tons
yields 115.6cy x 1 .82 = 210.3 tn
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x210.3 tn= $7,087. 11
Culvert -30" arch @ $25.01 x 4OLF= $1000.40
Total = $7,087. 11 + $1 .000.40 = $8.087.51
Location #8 EM -378-396-0. 1 and 0.2
GPS 40.35335.-104.77502 to 40.35390,-104.77078
The 18" arch CMP x 60' culverts at mile 0. 1 and 0.2 were replaced by the
county forces .County forces replaced the embankment loss of 23'W x 2'D x
1 , 181 ' L x1 /27 = 2012. 1 cy and the additional hole in the road embankment
estimated to be 9'D x 23' W x 40'L x 1 /27= 306.7 cy. The combined loss was
2012. 1 +306.7 = 2318.8 cy. Converting to tons yields 2318.8 x 1 .82 = 4220.2
tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced and estimated to be 23' W x 1181 ' L x
0.5' D x 1 /27= 503 cy. ' Converting to tons yield 1 .82 x 503 =915.5 tn. The
riprap was incorporated into the fill.
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 4220.2= $142.220.74
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x915.5 =$30.852. 14
Culverts 18" @ $14.95/ LF x 2 x GOLF pipe = $1 .794
Total = $142,220.74 + 30,852. 14 + $1 ,794= $ 174,866.88
The following 4 locations were damaged and they are being reported under
other project worksheets. They are listed here for informational purposes
only.
Location #9 EM — cul 394-31 -.25 Repairs for this site were performed by
Weld County within the City of Evans. The details are documented in the City
of Evans. PW EVANS09.
GPS 40.33815,-104.76958
Location #10 EM-cul-21 -14-0. 1 Repairs for this site are documented under
PW WELCO03
GPS 40.08921 ,-104.86766
Location # 11 EM —cul-28-17-0.6 Repairs for this site are documented under
PW WELCO03
GPs 40. 18953.-10489123 to 40. 18953.-104.89043
Location #12 19.5-36-0.9 Repairs to this location are documented under PW
WELCO23
GPS 40.25666.-104.87939 to 40.25256.-104.87827
END OF SCOPE OF WORK
Weld County Project Notes
1 . During repair or reconstruction. applicant may incur additional costs related
to clearing and grubbing. placement of topsoil. erosion and sedimentation
control. sanitary facilities. dewatering, mobilization and flagging/traffic control.
Such costs are generally addressed in the "in-place- unit costs of repair or
reconstruction items. and not specifically addressed in the Scope of Work.
However. if a project requires an extraordinary use of any such item. to where
a specific reference in the PW should be considered, applicant is advised to
contact Colorado Department of Emergency Management requesting a
revision to the PW's Scope of Work.
2. As described in 44 CFR Section 13.42, applicant must maintain all work-
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net. SSL+dispatchDestination.do?.. . 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 9 of 22
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.
3. The applicant must obtain all required federal. state. and local permits prior
to the commencement of work.
4. 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.
5. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation and a copy of 406 HMP
proposal is attached with this project.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. All calculated quantities have been rounded to the nearest tenth of the
applicable unit. i.e. , tons, cubic yards. Minor discrepancies in quantities are
the result of rounding.
9. The Weld County employee pay policy and the Weld County procurement
policy are on file in EMMIE.
10. 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.
11 . 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.
12. 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.
Attached is the CDOT average in-place cost for materials.
13. The applicant hauled damaged asphalt pavement to their county facility
for crushing and reuse.
14. There are sites that lie within or very near the '/2 mile radius limit of a Bald
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Dana[nfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
a - F
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 10 of 22
Eagle nest. The applicant should contact the Colorado Division of Wildlife to
determine if the nests are active. The contact person is:
Mr David Klute
Bird Conservation Coordinator
Colorado Division of Wildlife
6060 Broadway
Denver. CO 80216
Phone 303 291 7320
E mail: david.klute@state.co.us
END PROJECT NOTES
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 Proposal? No
0 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 1 40.85554 -104.82422
40.85577 -104.81496
Location 2 40.71532 -104.84987
Location 3 40.39227 -104.63988
Location 4 40.34852 -104.73439
Location 5 40.06412 -104.84849
Location 6 40.34167 -104.78908
Location 7 40.34179 -104.78378
Location 8 40.35335 -104.77502
40.3539 -104.77078
Location 9 40.33815 -104.76958
Location 10 40.08921 -104.86766
Location 11 40. 18953 -104.89043
40. 18953 -104.89123
Location 12 40.25256 -104.87827
40.25666 -104.87939
Special Considerations
1 . Does the damaged facility or item of work have insurance coverage and/or is it an insurable risk No
(e.g., buildings. equipment. vehicles, etc)?
2. Is the damaged facility located within a floodplain or coastal high hazard area and/or does it have No
an impact on a floodplain or wetland?
3. Is the damaged facility or item of work located within or adjacent to a Coastal Barrier Resource
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danaln fo=isourcefema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?. .. 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page II of 22
System Unit or an Otherwise Protected Area? No
4. Will the proposed facility repairs/reconstruction change the pre-disaster conditions (e.g. . footprint. No
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? Is it No
older than 50 years? Are there more. similar buildings near the site?
7. Are there any pristine or undisturbed areas on.. or near, the project site? Are there large tracts of No
forestland?
8. Are there any hazardous materials at or adjacent to the damaged facility and/or item of work? No
9. Are there any other environmental or controversial issues associated with the damaged facility No
and/or item of work?
Attachments
User Date Document Description Hard Copy File File Name Action
Type Reference
STEPHEN 02-12- Flood plain maps showing PW WELCO35
Floodplain CULVERTS firmette .pdf View
MORENO 2014 county was NOT mapped (320.62 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 Yes
project?
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next question is required
Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation Proposal? Yes
If you answered Yes to the above question. the next two questions are required
The plan is to add two items as mitigation strategies: rip rap 116
Please provide the Scope of Work sy @ $83. 17/ sy = $9.647.72: Geo tech fabric 236 sy @
for the estimate: $3.07sy= $724.52 to 8 location. The total cost is estimated at
$10.372.24. $10,372.24/$197,738.98 = 5.25%
Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation Yes
Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?
Hazard Mitigation Proposal - 0909
# Code Material and/or Description Unit Unit of Unit Price Subgrant Type Cost Estimate Action
Quantity Measure Budget Class
*** Version 0 **'t
1 9999 Geo Tech Fabric 236 SY $ 3.07 $ 724.52
2 9999 Rip-rap 116 CY $ 83. 17
$ 9.647.72
Total Cost: $ 10,372.24
Comments
The sites were repaired prior to the field inspections.
Attachments
User Date Document Description Hard Copy File
Type p Reference File Name Action
STEPHEN 03-17- Mitigation This is a proposal to add rip HMP WELCO35 View
MORENO 2014 Proposal rap and geo tech fabric (3).xlsm(156.41 kb)
https://connect l .dhs.gov/emmie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?. . . 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 12 of 22
Cost Estimate
Is this Project Worksheet for
(Preferred) Repair
Se uence Code Material and/or Unit Unit of Subgrant Cost
q Description Quantity Measure Unit Price Budget Class Type Estimate Action
' Version 0 **'
Work Completed
1 9999 Class 6 gravel fill 7943.9 TON $ 33.70 CONSTRUCTION Work $ 267 709.43
material Completed
2 9999 Asphalt 59.4 TON $ 81 .70 CONSTRUCTION Work $ 4.852.98
Pavement Completed
Direct
$ Work
3 9999 Administrative 1 LS PERSONNEL $ 1 ,000.00
1 .000.00 Completed
Cost-estimated
4 9999 48" arch CMP 50 LF $ 48. 19 SUPPLIES Work $ 2,409.50
Completed
5 9999 30" arch CMP 40 LF $ 25.01 SUPPLIES Work $ 1 ,000.40
Completed
6 9999 18" arch CMP 120 LF $ 14.95 SUPPLIES Work $ 1 .794.00
Completed
7 9999 ditch 760 LF $ 3.40 CONSTRUCTION Work $ 2,584.00
cleanout/shaping Completed
Modification to
8 9999 Location #4 - 1 LS $ CONSTRUCTION Work $ 32,252.98
using Total full 32,252.98 Completed
repair solution
Total Cost : $ 313,603.29
Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles. Proceeds and Settlements) - 5900/5901
Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
Total Cost : $ 0.00
Hazard Mitigation Proposal - 0909
Unit Unit of Unit Subgrant Cost
Sequence Code Material and/or Description Quantity Measure Price Budget Type Estimate Action
Class
' Version 0 '
1 9999 Geo Tech Fabric 236 SY $ 3.07 $ 724.52
2 9999 Rip-rap 116 CY $ 83. 17 $ 9,647/2
Total Cost : $ 10,372.24
Total Cost Estimate: $ 323,975.53
(Preferred Estimate Type + Insurance Adjustments + Hazard Mitigation Proposal)
Comments
Attachments
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource. fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 13 of 22
Existing Insurance Information
Insurance Type Policy No. Bldg/Property Content Insurance Deductible Years
Amount Amount Amount Amount Required
Comments
Attachments
Comments and Attachments
Name of Section Comment Attachment
The applicant must notify the state if there are any 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 02/12/14 Pursuant to DAP9525.9
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 cost rates. As described in 44 CFR Section
Project Description 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. Per Regional Guidance. EHP review is
required. The applicant and/or their contractors must obtain and
comply with the appropriate federal. state and local permits.
including those issued by US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) under Sec. 404 of the Clean Water Act, and are
responsible for contacting the USAGE Denver Regulatory Office
at (303) 979-4120 to determine if flood-related activity lies within
the Corps' regulatory jurisdiction.
PW WELCO35 CULVERTS
PHOTOS.pdf
PW WELCO35 CULVERTS
Damage Facilities maps .pdf
ARCH PIPE VS ROUND
PIPE VOLUMES
2014 04 02 10 53 32.pdf
Special Considerations PW WELCO35 CULVERTS
firmette .pdf
Mitigation The sites were repaired prior to the field inspections. HMP WELCO35 '3' .xlsm
Bundle Reference # (Amendment #) Date Awarded
PA-08-CO-4145-State-005" 50) 05-01 -2014
Subgrant Application - FEMA Form 90-91
Note: The Effective Cost Share for this application is 75%
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
PROJECT WORKSHEET
https://connect l .dhs.gov/emmie/,DanaInfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination .do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 14 of 22
DISASTER PROJECT NO. PA ID NO. DATE CATEGORY
W
FEMA 4145 - DR -CO ELCO35 123-99123-00 04-15-2014 C
APPLICANT: WELD (COUNTY) WORK COMPLETE AS OF:
02-12-2014 : 95
Site 1 of 1
DAMAGED FACILITY:
COUNTY: Weld
Weld County Road Culverts
LOCATION: LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
40.39227 -104.63988
40.33815 -104.76958
40.85554 -104.82422
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00897(0): 40.85577 -104.81496
40.18953 -104.89123
There were a series of 8 culverts,located on the Weld County road network, that were damaged by flood 40. 18953 -104.89043
waters. These culverts were distributed across the county. 40.25256 -104.87827
40.25666 -104.87939
40.34852 -104.73439
40.35335 -104.77502
40.3539 -104.77078
40.71532 -104.84987
40.34179 -104.78378
40.08921 -104.86766
40.06412 -104.84849
40.34167 -104.78908
DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:
PA-08-CO-414 5-PW-00897(0):
During the incident period of September 11 and 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. This flooding
resulted in widespread damages to the Weld County road system. Damages included erosion of the roadway, shoulders , culvert washouts, culvert
separations and loss of the gravel riding surfaces. At paved locations there was minor damage to the pavement surface. Originally there were 12
damage locations inspected by the project specialist. Those original 12 locations have been reduced to 8 because it was found that 4 sites were
being reported by other project specialists and included in their PWs. The disposition of the 4 sites is shown in this pw, however the costs for those
locations are not included in this document. This document is limited to the 8 locations. The damage to the 8 locations amounted to erosion losses of
5.867.5 tons of embankment and 2076.4 tons of gravel surfacing for a total replacement volume of 7,943.9 tons. At most locations the damage was
less than 100 feet long, however, there was one location where the embankment loss was longer than 1000 feet and another where the surface
gravel loss exceeded 2500 feet. Minor damage to asphalt pavement occurred at 3 sites; the longest of these sites was 81 feet. Together these 3
paved sites accounted for a loss of 59.4 tons of pavement. One location featured a ditch cleaning/shaping operation of approximately 760LF. The
specifics regarding the individual locations are documented in the following pages. The GPS coordinate, ( 40.44643,-104.70146) is for the Weld
County Public Works office.
Location Description
Location #1 EM-cul 120-25.3
GPS 40.85554,-104.82422 to 40.85577,-104.81496
The 60" dia.CMP X 49' L pipe had to be reset. The roadway embankment loss at this site was 30'W x 24' L X 7' D x 1/27 = 186 cy. In addition there
was a continuous 24'W x 2539' loss of gravel surfacing L X .25' D x 1/27 = 564.2 cy
Location #2 EM -cu123-100.1
GPS 40.71532,-104.84987
The 30" dia CMP X 50' L pipe was undamaged . Approximately 20' had to be reset. There was a loss of embankment of approximately 2' D x 20'W
x 20' L x 1/27= 29.6 cy. There was a loss of gravel surfacing approximately .25' D x 25' w x 30' long x1/27= 6.95 cy.
Location #3 EM- cul 45-54.5-.5
GPS 40.39227,-104.63988
The 60" CMP arch pipe x 60' L was scoured at the end but did not require reseting . Embankment loss was approximately 25' W x 30'L x 4' D x
1/27= 111.1 cy. Asphalt pavement loss was 81 'L x 22' W x 0.25 ' D x1/27= 16.5 cy. The ditch required cleanout and reshaping for a length of 760LF.
Location #4 EM-cul 394-35-0.0
GPS 40.34852,-104.73439
The original 60" dia concrete pipe was separated from a 4.5' D x 8'-w x 15' L concrete box it was attached to. The concrete pipe collapsed and the
concrete box was cracked . The embankment loss was 5'D x 18' W x 20W x 1/27 = 66.7 cy. Asphalt pavement loss was 26' L x 23'W x 0.25'
Dx1/27= 5.5 cy.
Location #5 EM- cul — 23-8-1 .4
GPS 40.06412,-104.84849
The 48" L CMP arch x 50' was washed away. The embankment loss was 15' W x 12' L x 6' D x 1/27 =40 cy. The loss of asphalt pavement was 19'
Lx23'W x 0.5' D x 1/27= 8. 1 cy.
Location #6 EM-cul-396-trp-0.9
GPS 40.34167.-104.78908
The 36" dia CMP x 100' was forced apart by flood waters. It was undamaged but needed to be partially reset. The embankment loss was estimated
to be 40'L x 40'W x 6'D x 1/27= 355.6 cy. The loss of gravel surfacing was estimated at 150' L x 24' W x 0.5' D x 1/27= 66.7 cy.
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 15 of 22
Location #7 EM-cul-396-trp-1 .3
GPs 40.34179,-104.78378
The 30" arch CMP x 40' was washed away. The loss of embankment was 30' L x 26' W x 4' dx 1/27= 115.6 cy.
Location #8 EM -378-396-0.1 and 0.2
GPS 40.35335,-104.77502 to 40.35390,-104.77078
The 18" arch CMP x 60' culverts at mile 0.1 and 0.2 were washed away. The embankment loss was 23'W x 2'D x 1 , 181 ' L x1/27 = 2012.1 cy.
There was an additional hole in the road embankment estimated to be 9'D x 23' W x 40'L x 1/27= 306.7 cy. The gravel surfacing was washed away
and was estimated to be 23' W x 1181 ' L x 0.5' D x 1/27= 503 cy. '
Summarizing the scope of repair volumes for the 8 locations results in the following table showing values in cu yds and their conversion to tons :
EMBANK SURF GRVL ASPHALT
volume volume pavement
cu yds cu yds Cu yds
186.7 564.2
29.6 6.9
111 .1 16.5 32.5
66.7 5.5 10.9
40.0 8.1 15.9
355.6 66.7
115.6 0.0
2012.1 503.0
306.7 0.0
3223.9 1171 .0 59.4
X 1 .82 X 1.82 X1.97
5867.5 TN 2076.4 TN 59.4 TN
The following 4 locations were damaged and they are being reported under other project worksheets. They are listed here for informational purposes
only.
Location #9 EM - cul 394-31-.25 Damage at this site was within the City of Evans but was repaired by Weld County forces. The details are reported
in PW EVANS 09
GPS 40.33815.-104.76958
Location #10 EM-cul-21-14-0.1 Damage at this site reported under WELCO03
GPS 40.08921 ,-104.86766
Location #11 EM —cul-28-17-0.6 Damage at this site reported under WELCO03
GPs 40.18953,-10489123 to 40.18953.-104.89043
Location # 12 19.5-36-0.9 23 Damage at this site reported under WELCO23
GPS 40.25666,-104.87939 to 40.25256,-104.87827
SCOPE OF WORK.
PA-08-CO-4145-PW 00897(0):
The county used force account labor, materials and equipment to conduct repairs to the damaged sites. These repairs consisted of hauling and
placing embankment material at the damaged sites, reseting corrugated metal pipe (CMP), installing replacement culverts as needed, and replacing
the surface gravel . At 3 locations the county forces replaced sections of pavement damaged by the flood. At the time of the inspections all repairs
had been completed.
Cost estimates for location repairs to embankments and gravel surfacing are based upon the use of Colorado DOT unit bid prices for the period Jan
1 thru March 31, 2013. The project specialist used the COOT figures as an estimating factor for validating the Weld County cost estimates. The
project specialist computed the repair quantities to be 5,867.5 tons of embankment and 2076.4 tons of gravel surfacing for a combined tonnage of
7349.4tons and a cost of $238,292.70. The cost of replacing 59.4 tons of asphalt paving was estimated at $4,852.98. See the Project Notes for
details regarding unit conversion factors from cubic yards(cy) to tons (tn).The project specialist obtained the cost per foot for culverts directly from the
county: 48" arch-$48.19; 30" arch- $25.01 : 18" arch- $14.95. The total loss of culvert pipe was 220Lf and was comprised of the three mentioned
sizes. The county reported a ditch cleanout operation of approximately 760Lf for an estimated cost of $2.584. . The total estimated cost of repairs is
$251 ,933.58.
The specific details regarding the repairs, quantities and costs for each site are shown on the following pages
COMPLETED WORK
Location #1 EM-cul 120-25.3
GPS 40.85554,-104.82422 to 40.85577,-104.81496
The county used their forces to reset the 60" dia. CMP X 49' L pipe. In addition they replaced embankment estimated at 30'W x 24' L X 7' D x
1/27 = 186.7cy. County forces will be replacing the lost surfacing estimated at a continuous 24'W x 2539' loss of surfacing L X .25' D x 1/27 = 564.2
cy .
Applying the conversion factor of 1 .62, the 186.67 cu yds becomes 302.4 tons of embankment fill and and the 564.7 cy becomes 914 tons of
surfacing.
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 914tn=$30,803.15
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danaln for-isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?.. . 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 16 of 22
Embankment @ $33.70/cy x302..4= $10,190.88
Total=30,803.15 +10,190.88= $40,944.03
Location #2 EM-cu123-100.1
GPS 40.71532.-104.84987
Although the 30" dia CMP X 50' L pipe was undamaged, the inlet side required approximately 20' to be reset. County forces hauled fill to repair the
lost embankment estimated to be 2' D x 20'W x 20' L x 1/27= 29.6 cy. Converting to tons yields 1.82 x 29.6 = 53.9 tn. County forces replaced the
lost surface gravel estimated to be 0.25' D x 25' w x 30' long x 1/27= 6.95 cy. Converting to tons. 6.95 cy x 1 .82= 12.6TN
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 12.6tn=$425.93
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 53.9= $1817.30
Total=425.93 +1817.30= $2243.23
Location #3 EM- cul 45-54.5-.5
GPS 40.39227.-104.63988
The 60" arch CMP pipe x 60' L was scoured at the end but did not require reseting . County forces hauled replacement fill to repair the
embankment loss of approximately 25' W x 30'L x 4' D x 1/27= 111.1 cy. Converting to tons yields 1 .82 x 111 =202.2 tn. County paving crews were
used to patch the asphalt surface of 81 'L x 22' W x 0.25 ' D x1/27= 16.5 cy. Based upon an asphalt value of 146 #/cu ft yields an asphalt conversion
factor of( 146 #/cy x 27 cu ft /cu yd) / 2000 #/ton =1.97 T/cu yd. Converting yards to tons yields 16.25 cy x 1 .97= 32.5 tn. The county forces and
equipment were used to clean out and reshape the ditch for a distance of 760 Lf. FEMA cost code of $3.40 / Lf was used to estimate the repair
cost.
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 202.2=$6,814.89
Asphalt @$81.70/tn x 32.5 = $2,655.66
Ditch cleanout /reshape @$3.40 x 760 = $2,584
Total=6,814.89+ $2,655.66 + $2,584 = $12,054.55
Location #4 EM-cul 394-35-0.0
GPS 40.34852,-104.73439
As an immediate remedy to the flood damage, county forces removed the collapsed 60" dia concrete pipe . They grouted a 60" dia x 601f CMP to the
damaged concrete box. County forces were used to replace the embankment loss of 5'D x 18' W x 20'W x 1/27 = 66.7 cy. Converting from cy to ton
yields 66.7cy x 1.82 = 121.3 tn. County paving crews replaced the lost pavement in an area of 26' L x 23'W x 0.25' Dx1/27= 5.5 cy. Converting yds
to tons yields 5.5 cy x 1.97= 10.9 tn County forces placed riprap on the inlet face of the repair. The county regards this repair as a temporary
measure to open the road.
Asphalt@ $81.70 x 10.9 tn=$891.18
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3= $4,088.93
Temp 60" dia. X 601f x $135/If = $8,100
Immediate repair Total=$891 .18 + $4,088.93 + $8. 100= $13,080.11
Permanent Repair: The county reported that the immediate repairs to this location did not fully restore the site. They reported that the area near the
grouted connection was undermined, resulting in subsequent settlement. In turn this led to a depression in the flow line. To correct this situation the
county must reopen the original excavation, remove the pipe and the box culvert , re-establish the flowline, install a replacement pipe, backfill , pave,
re-seed and mulch. The county opted to install a concrete arch pipe measuring 64' L — 48" H x 76" W.. The attached table from the Heidelberg
Cement Group shows that the arch pipe is equivalent to the 60" dia CMP.
As a mitigation effort the county elected to rip rap both faces of the culvert, 2 @ 18' W x 7 L 'x 1 .5'D= 14 cy and install geo fabric, 2 @ 10 x 10 = 200
sq ft/9 sq ft= 22.2 sy. They will reseed two areas. 10' x 100'= 1000 sq ft and 20 x 42 = 849 sq ft. totaling 1849 sq ft. They repaved an area of 24'W x
37' L x 0.25'D/27 = 8.22 cy x 1.97 = 16.2 tn. The county hauled the asphalt pavement to their East Davis yard for recycling and the removed
concrete was sent to their Hwy 14 county landfill. The 60" dia CMP was removed and is salvageable. The project specialist put a value of 50%
( $67.50 x 60= $4050) on the pipe for a salvage price of $4050. The county coordinated their repair with the local ditch company.
Permanent Repair
Mobilization $1 ,100
Remove embankment to access old pipes (unclassified CDOT item 212-00010) = 121 .3cy x $14.18 = $1 ,720
Restore embankment per the immediate original repair @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3= $4,088.93
Asphalt@ $81 .70 x 162tn=$1 ,323.54
Concrete arch = 64LF x $206.90/If= $13,241.60
Rip rap 14cy x $116/cy= $1 ,624
Geo fabric 22.2 sy x $3.07= $68. 15
Reseed 1849 sq ft /43,560 ( sq ft/acre) = 0.042 acre x $270/acre =$11.34
Soil blanket $1.53/sy x 22.2 sy = $33.97
Mulching 0.042 ac x $270/ac = $11.34
Total full repair = immediate + permanent - salvaged pipe = $13,080.11+$23,222.87- $4050= $ 32,252.98
Location #5 EM- cul — 23-8-1.4
GPS 40.06412.-104.84849
County forces replaced the 48" CMP arch x 50' L which had been washed away. The county repaired the damaged embankment loss of 15' W x
12' L x 6' D x 1/27 =40 cy. Converting to tons yields 1 .82 x 40 = 72.8 tn. The county repaired damage to the pavement amounting to 19' L x 23'W x
0.5' D x 1/27= 8.1 cy. Converting cy to tons yields 1 .97 x 8.1 = 15.9 tn.
Asphalt@ $81.70 x 16. 1 tn=$1 ,302.49
Embankment @ $33.70/cy x 64.8tn =$2,453.36
Culvert 48"- $48. 19 x 50LF = $2409.50
Total=1302.49 +2453.36 + $2409.50= $6165.32
Location #6 EM-cul-396-trp-0.9
GPS 40.34167,-104.78908
County forces were used to reconnect the bands joining the various lengths of the 36" dia CMP x 100' that were forced apart by flood waters. No new
sections of culvert were required and the culvert was reset to the proper flow line. County forces replaced the damaged embankment that was
estimated to be 40'L x 40'W x 6'D x 1/27= 355.6 cy. Converting to ton yields 1 .82 x 355.56 cy =647.1 tn. County forces replaced the gravel
surfacing that was estimated at 150' L x 24' W x 0.5' D x 1/27= 66.7 cy. Converting to tons yields 66.7 x 1.82= 121 .3 tn.
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 647.1 cy= $21 ,807.64
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x 121 .3 tn= $4088.93
Total =$21 ,807.64+4088.93= $25,896.58
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 17 of 22
Location #7 EM-cul-396-trp-1 .3
GPs 40.34179,-104.78378
The 30" arch CMP x 40' was washed away and county forces installed a replacement. County forces were used to replace the damaged
embankment of 30' L x 26' W x 4' dx 1/27= 115.6 cy. Converting to tons yields 115.6cy x 1.82 = 210.3 tn
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x210.3 tn= $7,087.11
Culvert -30" arch @ $25.01 x 40LF= $1000.40
Total = $7,087.11 + $1 ,000.40 = $8,087.51
Location #8 EM -378-396-0.1 and 0.2
GPS 40.35335,-104.77502 to 40.35390.-104.77078
The 18" arch CMP x 60' culverts at mile 0.1 and 0.2 were replaced by the county forces .County forces replaced the embankment loss of 23W x
2'D x 1 ,181' L x1/27 = 2012.1 cy and the additional hole in the road embankment estimated to be 9'D x 23' W x 40'L x 1/27= 306.7 cy. The
combined loss was 2012. 1+306.7 = 2318.8 cy. Converting to tons yields 2318.8 x 1 .82 = 4220.2 tn. The gravel surfacing was replaced and
estimated to be 23' W x 1181' L x 0.5' D x 1/27= 503 cy. 'Converting to tons yield 1 .82 x 503 =915.5 tn. The riprap was incorporated into the fill.
Embankment @ $33.70/tn x 4220.2= $142.220.74
Surfacing @ $33.70/tn x915.5 =$30,852.14
Culverts 18" @ $14.95/ LF x 2 x 60LF pipe = $1 ,794
Total = $142.220.74 + 30,852.14 + $1 ,794= $ 174,866.88
The following 4 locations were damaged and they are being reported under other project worksheets. They are listed here for informational purposes
only.
Location #9 EM — cul 394-31-.25 Repairs for this site were performed by Weld County within the City of Evans. The details are documented in the
City of Evans, PW EVANS09.
GPS 40.33815,-104.76958
Location #10 EM-cul-21-14-0.1 Repairs for this site are documented under PW WELCO03
GPS 40.08921 ,-104.86766
Location # 11 EM —cul-28-17-0.6 Repairs for this site are documented under PW WELCO03
GPs 40.18953,-10489123 to 40. 18953,-104.89043
Location #12 19.5-36-0.9 Repairs to this location are documented under PW WELCO23
GPS 40.25666,-104.87939 to 40.25256,-104.87827
END OF SCOPE OF WORK
Weld County Project Notes
1 . During repair or reconstruction, applicant may incur additional costs related to clearing and grubbing, placement of topsoil, erosion and
sedimentation control, sanitary facilities, dewatering, mobilization and flagging/traffic control. Such costs are generally addressed in the "in-place"
unit costs of repair or reconstruction items, and not specifically addressed in the Scope of Work. However, if a project requires an extraordinary use
of any such item, to where a specific reference in the PW should be considered, applicant is advised to contact Colorado Department of Emergency
Management requesting a revision to the PWs Scope of Work.
2. 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.
3. The applicant must obtain all required federal, state, and local permits prior to the commencement of work.
4. 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.
5. Project was reviewed for 406 Hazard Mitigation and a copy of 406 HMP proposal is attached with this project.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. All calculated quantities have been rounded to the nearest tenth of the applicable unit, i.e., tons, cubic yards. Minor discrepancies in quantities are
the result of rounding.
9. The Weld County employee pay policy and the Weld County procurement policy are on file in EMMIE.
10. 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.
11 . 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.
12. 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
https://connect 1 .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+d ispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 18 of 22
reconciliation and or closeout process. Attached is the CDOT average in-place cost for materials.
13. The applicant hauled damaged asphalt pavement to their county facility for crushing and reuse.
14. There are sites that lie within or very near the I/1 mile radius limit of a Bald Eagle nest. The applicant should contact the Colorado Division of
Wildlife to determine if the nests are active. The contact person is
Mr David Klute
Bird Conservation Coordinator
Colorado Division of Wildlife
6060 Broadway
Denver. CO 80216
Phone 303 291 7320
E mail: david.klute@state.co.us
END PROJECT NOTES
Does the Scope of Work change the pre-disaster conditions
at the site? Yes No Special Considerations included? Yes No
Hazard Mitigation proposal included? Yes No Is there insurance coverage on this facility? Yes No
PROJECT COST
ITEM CODE NARRATIVE QUANTITY/UNIT UNIT PRICE COST
' Version 0 ***
Work Completed
1 9999 Class 6 gravel fill material 7943.9/TON $ 33.70 $ 267.709.43
2 9999 Asphalt Pavement 59.4/TON $ 81 .70 $ 4.852.98
3 9999 Direct Administrative Cost-estimated 1 /LS $ 1 ,000.00 $ 1 ,000.00
4 9999 48" arch CMP 50/LF $ 48.19 $ 1409.50
5 9999 30" arch CMP 40/LF $ 25.01 $ 1 .000.40
6 9999 18" arch CMP 120/LF $ 14.95 $ 1 ,794.00
7 9999 ditch cleanout/shaping 760/LF $ 3.40 $ 2. 584.00
8 9999 Modification to Location #4 - using Total 1 /LS $ 32.252.98 $ 32.252.98
full repair solution
9 0909 Hazard Mitigation Proposal 1 /LS $ 10,372.24 $ 10.372.24
TOTAL $ 323,975.53
COST
PREPARED BY STEPHEN A MORENO TITLE Project Specialist SIGNATURE
APPLICANT REP. Roy Rudisill TITLE Director -OEM SIGNATURE
WELD (COUNTY) : PA-08-CO-4145-PW-00897
Conditions Information
Review Name Condition Type Condition Name Description Monitored Status
This review does not address all
federal. state and local requirements.
Acceptance of federal funding
Standard requires recipient to comply with all
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 federal. state and local laws. Failure No Approved
to obtain all appropriate federal. state
and local environmental permits and
clearances may jeopardize federal
funding.
Any change to the approved scope of
Standard work will require re-evaluation for
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?.. . 5/7/20 14
a
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 19 of 22
Final Review Other (EHP) Condition #1 compliance with NEPA and other No Approved
Laws and Executive Orders. pp
Applicant is responsible for
Executive Order coordinating with the local floodplain
Final Review Other (EHP) 11988 - manager. All required permits should No Approved
Floodplains be maintained as part of the
permanent record.
POST-CONSTRUCTION : 17. Upon
project completion. revegetate all
disturbed areas with native shrubs.
trees, and grasses. a. Rip compacted
access routes prior to replanting with
native vegetation. b. Fill and reseed
with weed free material and native
seed mixtures. c. Consult the Service
Endangered before finalizing a seed and plant list.
Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act 18. Bury riprap. then plant with native No Approved
(ESA) riparian vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate
adjacent habitats impacted by
floodwaters to restore connectivity
and prevent future impacts from
erosion or sedimentation. 20.
Consider monitoring the revegetated
areas for success. The Service can
help establish success criteria during
the consultation process.
The applicant should implement
appropriate FWS conservation
measures identified in the Emergency
Consultation between FEMA and
USFWS. dated September 24. 2013.
Endangered to the extent possible; including a
Final Review Other (EHP) Species Act post-construction estimate of the No Approved
(ESA) amount of habitat affected by the
emergency response, an evaluation
of how conservation
recommendations were implemented.
and the results of implementation in
minimizing adverse effects.
If ground disturbing activities occur
during construction, applicant will
Standard monitor ground disturbance and if any
Final Review Other (EHP) potential archeological resources are No Approved
Condition #3 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
Standard requires recipient to comply with all
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #2 federal, state and local laws. Failure No Recommended
to obtain all appropriate federal. state
and local environmental permits and
clearances may jeopardize federal
funding.
Any change to the approved scope of
EHP Review Other (EHP)
Standard work will require re-evaluation for
Condition #1 compliance with NEPA and other No Recommended
Laws and Executive Orders.
Applicant is responsible for
Executive Order coordinating with the local floodplain
https://connect I .dhs.gov/emir lei Dana 1nfo=isource.tema.net,SSL+dispatch Destination.do?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 20 of 22
11988 - manager. All required permits should
EHP Review Other (EHP) Floodplains be maintained as part of the No Recommended
permanent record.
POST-CONSTRUCTION : 17. Upon
project completion. revegetate all
disturbed areas with native shrubs.
trees. and grasses. a. Rip compacted
access routes prior to replanting with
native vegetation. b. Fill and reseed
with weed free material and native
seed mixtures. c. Consult the Service
Endangered before finalizing a seed and plant list.
EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act 18. Bury riprap. then plant with native No Recommended
(ESA) riparian vegetation. 19. Rehabilitate
adjacent habitats impacted by
floodwaters to restore connectivity
and prevent future impacts from
erosion or sedimentation. 20.
Consider monitoring the revegetated
areas for success. The Service can
help establish success criteria during
the consultation process.
The applicant should implement
appropriate FVVS conservation
measures identified in the Emergency
Consultation between FEMA and
USFWS. dated September 24, 2013,
Endangered to the extent possible; including a
EHP Review Other (EHP) Species Act post-construction estimate of the No Recommended
(ESA) amount of habitat affected by the
emergency response, an evaluation
of how conservation
recommendations were implemented.
and the results of implementation in
minimizing adverse effects.
If ground disturbing activities occur
during construction, applicant will
Standard monitor ground disturbance and if any
EHP Review Other (EHP) Condition #3 potential archeological resources are No Recommended
discovered, will immediately cease
construction in that area and notify
the State and FEMA.
Internal Comments
No. Queue User Date/Time Reviewer Comments
5 Award SYSTEM 05-01 -2014 ACCEPTED
Review 09:57 PM 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 are based upon the use of Colorado DOT unit bid
prices for the period Jan 1 thru March 31 . 2013. The project
specialist used the CDOT figures as an estimating factor for
4 Final ReviewPALACIO 04-30-2014 validating the Weld County cost estimates.Final Reviewer finds
JOSE 04:59 PM GMT eligible the application and approves the funding of this CAT-C
project worksheet based on the applicant having performed all
required procurement 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 04/30/2014
1 hops://connectI .dhs.gov/emmie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do'?... 5/7/2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 2 I of 22
Category C. 95.0% Complete. Weld County. The applicant
used force account labor, materials and equipment to replace
embankment material at 8 sites. reset or replace CMP
culverts, replace surface gravel. and replace 3 sections of
pavement. The applicant made temporary repairs to site 4 in
order to reopen the road including grouting a CMP culvert to a
damaged concrete box inlet and placing riprap on the inlet
face. The applicant subsequently permanently repaired this
site with work including using force account services to
excavate the temporary repairs, remove the pipe and box
culvert. install an arch pipe as an equivalent flow structure.
backfill. repave the road surface, and reseed two areas.
Damaged asphalt was hauled to the county's facility for
crushing and reuse. Gravel and embankment material was
purchased or sourced from county borrow sites.
Mitigation: The applicant will install geo fabric overlaid with rip
rap around both headwalls of the culverts at each site.
- dsharon - 04/21 /2014 14:05:07 GMT
Project work for Sites 1 and 5 is in mapped wetlands. Project
has no potential to impact the wetland function or resources
and substantially restores site to pre-disaster condition. No
further wetland review is required under the 8-step process.
Project work for Site 2 is <$5,000, and substantially restores
site to pre-disaster condition. Per 44 CFR Pad 9.5 (c) (13) this
project is exempt from the 8-step process and no further
wetlands review is required.
Project work for Sites 3, 4. 6. 7. and 8 is not in a mapped
wetland. - dsharon - 04/18/2014 20:06:50 GMT
3 EHP Review EAKINS 04-21 -2014 The entire community will benefit from the completion of this
WYNN 05:49 PM GMT project. - dsharon - 04/18/2014 20:07: 13 GMT
Action is addressed under the attached Emergency
Consultation between FEMA and USFWS. dated September
24, 2013. The consultation includes conservation measures
intended to minimize impacts to the federally listed Preble's
Meadow Jumping Mouse. Ute's Lady's Tress and Colorado
Butterfly Bush, and Designated Critical Habitat protected under
the ESA. - dsharon - 04/18/2014 20:03:54 GMT
Work involves removal. staging, transporting. and/or disposal
of debris. (Includes culverts) - dsharon - 04/18/2014 20:05:58
GMT
Project Site 1 is located on a non-printed panel number
0802660175C.
Project work for Site 2 is <$5,000. and substantially restores
site to pre-disaster condition. Per 44 CFR Part 9.5(c) (13) this
project is exempt from the 8-step process and no further
floodplain review is required.
Project Site 3 is located in Zone AE, FIRM panel
0802660637C, dated September 28th, 1982. Per 44 CFR Pad
9.5 (g) Step 1 : Project repairs are determined to have no effect
on floodplain or wetlands provided that the repairs remain in
the existing footprint and do not impact previously undisturbed
areas. No further floodplains review is required.
Project Sites 4. 6, 7, and 8 are located in Zone A, FIRM panel
0802660750C, dated September 28th, 1982. Per 44 CFR Part
9.5 (g) Step 1 : Project repairs are determined to have no effect
on floodplain or wetlands provided that the repairs remain in
the existing footprint and do not impact previously undisturbed
areas. No further floodplains review is required.
https://connect I .dhs.gov/em ie/,Danalnfo=isource.fema.net,SSL+dispatchDestination.do?... 5/7/2014
-=- - _ _
Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants Page 22 of 22
Project is located in Zone X. FIRM panel 08026609800. dated
September 28th . 1982. - dsharon - 04/18/2014 20:06:22 GMT
The scope of work has been reviewed and meets the criteria of
the May 5. 2013 signed Programmatic Agreement. Item III;
Sections A. B, C. and F agreed to by FEMA and the SHPO. -
dsharon - 04/18/2014 19:58:29 GMT
A review of the documentation provided has identified that
Weld County is insured for property damages through:
Colorado Counties Casualty and Property Pool. Policy Number
020412751 .
This policy does not provide coverage for darns. dikes.
Insurance JOHNSON 04-17 2014 bridges, culverts. roadways. streets, walks. paved surfaces.
2 Review KENNETH 08:46 PM GMT tunnels. canals. land.
The insurance policy will not provide coverage for costs
identified in this PW
There will not be an insurance reduction for this PW.
The FEMA eligible damages are not to building, contents,
equipment, or vehicles: therefore. there will not be an
insurance commitment required.
1 Mitigation PETITT MARK 04-17-2014 The hazard mitigation proposal is approved. Mark W. Petitt.
Review 02:42 PM GMT 406 Specialist
https://connectl .dhs.gov/emm ie/,Danaln fo=isource.fema.net.SSL+dispatch Destination.do?. .. 5/7/2014
Hello