The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20141004.tiff• Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects 1431 Fast I6'' Street Greeley,Colorado 50631 Telephone (970) 353-5310 Fax (970) 353-4047 Tuesday 25 March 2014 Weld County Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street Greeley, Colorado 80632 Subject: Varra Companies, Inc. - Varra Coulson Resource Project - Regular Impact (112) - Permit M-2013-064 Materials submitted to the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (CRMS) - Office of Mined Land Reclamation (OMLR): • Correspondence of 25 March 2014 from Varra Companies, Inc. to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation,with attending attachments. Attachments: I Proof of Placement of this material with the Weld County Clerk to the I3oard. 2 Correspondence of 23 March 2011 - AWES, LLC. 3 Signed & Notarized Statements of Understanding & related - 2 pgs. 4 Map Revisions: Revised Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map showing topsoil stockpile area and critical slope locations & extent. o Related Operation Reclamation Cost Determinations: Western Sugar Project Exhibit L & related 0MER Cost Estimate. RECEIVED lleintzelman Project Exhibit L & related OMLR Cost Estimate. MAR 2 6 2014 Other Attachments: WELD COUNTY 1 Well Permits for all Piezometers. COMMISSIONERS 2 Greeley Irrigation Company Agreement. Your signature below acknowledges receipt of the above referenced material, as attached. The material should be added to the above referenced Application, as originally submitted to the Weld County Clerk to the Board,and made accessible for public review. PLOitc V'e-u tQat CG R 1 RU 3' ai 2014-1004 Varra Companies, Inc. Varra-Coulson Resource Project OMLR 112 Permit Application 8 August 2013 Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects sI20 Gage Street Frederick. Colorado 80516 Telephone (970) 353-5310 Fax (970)353-4047 Tuesday 25 March 2014 To: Peter I lays, E.P.S. • Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation (ONILR, or 'the Office') 1313 Sherman St., #215 Denver. CO 80203 From: Varra Companies, Inc. Bradford Janes, Professional Forester Liaison, Office of Special Projects �^ Subject: Varra-Coulson Resource Project OMLR Permit M-2013-004 SECOND Adequacy Review Reply For greater continuity and ease of reference, we have iterated the comments from the OMLR Adequacy Review of 10 February 2014, necessitating a reply according to its respective items, iterated in a graphical box, with our comments in blue following: The Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division/DRNIS) has reviewed the content of the Varra Companies. Inc. 112c adequacy letter response dated • January 21, 2011 for the Varra-Coulson Resource Project, File No. M-2013-0(i4 and submits the following comments. The Division is required to nmke an approval or denial decision no later than March 1, 2011 therefore: a response Io the following adequacy review concerns should he submitted to the Division as soon as possible. 1. thru 10. The responses are adequate. Acknowledged. 11. The Applicant depicted on Exhibit C typical topsoil stockpile locations and provided typical cross-section dimensions of 75 feet long, 3 feet in height with a total width of 21 feet. The two proposed and depicted topsoil stockpiles would only account for 233 cubic yards (0300 cubic feet) of the proposed 5,307.87 cubic yards of topsoil required to be salvaged for reclamation. Please depict the topsoil stockpiles required to store 5,307.87 cubic yards of topsoil on Exhibit C-2 - Extraction Plan map. A revision to the soil stockpile reserve area is shown on the Revised Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map. The new soil area has a dimension of 30± feet in width x 2.O10± feet in length x 5± feet in height (it' 31I:1V = 5,667± cubic yards of soil stockpile area. Also shown are critical areas for modified slopes, as detailed in Item 25, below. 12. The response is adequate. Acknowledged. 6.4.7 Exhibit G - Water Information • 13. A copy of the second adequacy review memo from Tim Cazier, DE. dated February 6, 2014 is attached. 14. and 15. The responses are adequate. Acknowledged. 16. The Applicant committed to providing proof of monitoring well permits from the SEO. The response is adequate. Acknowledged. 17. The response is adequate. Acknowledged. 18. The Division of Water Resources requires the Applicant to conduct a field inspection of the site and document the locations of all wells within 600 feet of the permit area prior to approving a well permit. The Applicants response is adequate. Acknowledged. 19. The response is adequate. The Applicant will he required to protect all permitted groundwater user rights and the prevailing hydrologic balance Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 2 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 of the affected land and of the surrounding area for the quantity and quality of water in the surface and groundwater systems both during and after the mining operation and during reclamation. Acknowledged. 20. Please reference the second adequacy review memo from "him Cazier, P.F. dated February h, 2014. Plate 2 of the AWES, 1.LC report dated January 13, 2011 appears to indicate a mounding effect of 10-11 feet west of the lined Varra-Coulson mine and a shadowing effect of 1-2 feet east of the mine. Additionally, the mounding effects will potentially increase with the discontinuation of dewatering at the Durham site and the proposed relocation of the Greeley Ditch 113. Please provide mitigation measures to be implemented and trigger points which would put mitigation measures into effect. The mitigation measures must include a scenario for the installation of a French drain to direct groundwater around the clay liner and restore groundwater levels to the historic elevation in area of groundwater mounding. Please refer to correspondence from AWES of 23 March 2014. 21 . The Applicant committed to providing copies of the notification letters to well owners within (600 feet of the mine as required by SFO well permit. The response is adequate. Acknowledged. 6.4.12 Exhibit L - Reclamation Costs 22. The Division calculated the required financial warranty for the Varra- Coulson site at $87,1,700.00 based on the information submitted by the Applicant. A copy of the bond estimate is attached for review. Part of the difficulty of deriving warranty estimates from this end is in the anticipation of OMLR's utilization of its proprietary software. To this end. we rely upon bottom line unit costs from previously determined estimates from the ONILR calculations of like kind for similarly sited or compatibly Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 3 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 derived components, factors, and related considerations taken from Cost Summary Sheets• and provided with the submittal for reference. The genesis of our cost estimates originate from previous resolutions at Kurtz, Ileintzelman, and more recently, Western Sugar. Western Sugar was approved in July 2011. "I'he Coulson values determined in our original Exhibit I. Reclamation Costs, utilizing similar assumptions, yet updated to reflect the OMLR unit values for the determination of that financial warranty. to best estimate those determined by CIRCES. While we can get close to OMLR estimates, we will never match, so we try for 'close.' Examining the established Western Sugar warranty with those of Coulson. there is a marked departure from 'close.' and the effort is on to parse this and try to get there by further clarification and examination of the diverse values at play. If we look at the acreage, values, and assumptions at play at Western Sugar. they are similar for Coulson. Let's divide into columns and take a look••• Item Western Sugar Project Varra-Coulson Project "Total Permit Acres 102.18± 100.63± Original warranty $102,978.45± actual $874,700.00± OMLR (or estimate) OMLR determined warranty estimate warranty Total Extraction Area 75.02± Acres (;5.88± Acres Total Surface Water 62.81± Acres 59.30± Acres Area Total Water Volume 590,22.1.014± Gallons 571.801,•1i8± Gallons Affected Lands 34.23± Acres (i.58± Acres remaining above water Grading Identical concurrency Identical concurrency and methodology and methodology Total Resoil Volume 9,819.01± cu.yds. soil 5,307.87± cu.yds. soil Demand above water (land area, above) Seed Mixture Identical mixture Identical mixture Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2()13-064 4 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 In every instance, the size, volume, and methodology of the values and factors influencing financial warranty are identical. Further, the values utilized for the Western Sugar Project by OMLR via CIRCES, were used for the values identified for the Varra—Coulson Project. Now for the estimates: Item Varra Companies OMER estimate ($) estimate ($) Total Warranty 878,755.69± `874,700.00± Estimate When compared to the larger Western Sugar Project, the Varra Companies estimate is $21,222.7t3± less, or lower by 23.5± percent. When compared to an extraction area that is slightly more than 12± percent larger at Western Sugar, and a land area requiring recoiling and reseeding that is 46± percent smaller at the Varra-Coulson Project, along with slightly lower percentages for the remaining values, the Varra Companies estimate appears reasonable and consistent with previous OMER determinations. So how do we examine and clarify the determinations to find common ground with nearly an $800,000.00± difference in estimates recently determined for the Varra Coulso❑ Project? Let's look at the assumptions for the various categories and see if we can better clarify and understand them: Category OMLR estimate ($) Varra Companies estimate ($) Dewatering CIRCES used 63 acres Varra measured the instead of the 59.:3± actual extraction acres of estimated volume of surface water area. 3,162,350.51 cu.yds. CIRCES estimated of material within the 923,786,394.30 gallons 65.88± acre extraction of water to discharge. limits. The exposed This is 160 percent surface water area of greater than the reported 59.3± acres is 10 extraction volume and percent smaller, and extrapolated water we translated the total Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 5 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 volume within the volume accordingly to competed basin. Since be 2,846,115.46 the basins won't be fully cu.yds. or developed for 25± 574,801,478.08± years. some gallons of water total. consideration for time Since the exposed should be considered, area takes time within which the Varra a 30 year life of the Companies estimate mine, full extraction attempts to perform would occur in apx. 25 based upon 25 percent years. When the total exposure over a 6.25± volume of possible year time frame. discharge is divided by Extraction that is not 4, this means it would phased is still bound by take 6.25 years to time and demand, and is affect 25 percent of reflected in the original the volume area, and Varra Companies the parcel would be estimate, but in fairness, overbonded for this did not identify the category during this division in years, making time period for the the calculation less clear potential to the reader, and a 143,700,368.52 gallons communication fault. We of water if discharge hope the explanation stopped. helps remedy this consideration. The Varra Companies estimate utilized the The per unit costs for per unit costs derived discharge came to in the Western Sugar $0.000249 per gallon, or estimate of $0.000026 significantly more than per gallon. Since unit the Western Sugar unit costs determined by cost. In addition to OMLR were used, significantly higher values utilized at the volume of discharge, time in C1RCES are Part of this may also be embedded in the unit attributed to calculated price logic utilized, 'inflow volume per hour' where the values were reported at 143,268.21 similar. Some values gallons per hour. The were not similar Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 6 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 • • Western Sugar 'inflow beyond total volume • volume per hour' was differences, including a reported at 31, 175.52 119 percent greater gallons. It's difficult to inflow volume, which understand how a mile to is inconsistent with a the east the inflow similar sited location, volumes would he 419± as stated in the percent greater'? It adjacent column. should he noted that at •107,475 sq.ft., the total Values redetermined in inflow area is 310,275 Supplemental square feet larger for the Information #1, below, Varra-Coulson utilizing real world calculation for inflow values yield a total area than the 97,200 anticipated discharge sq.ft. reported for cost of $13,213.03±. Western Sugar'? Further, the conversion factor, which is a mystery in this instance is set a 1 for Western Sugar. and 325850.58 for the Varra-Coulson Project. • Can this he tied to some real world value, and the inconsistency between the two projects explained'? Also odd is that initial pond volume is reported at 2,835.00 for Varra-Coulson while Western Sugar used the 25% of the water volume for Initial and Final Pond volumes, without the unusually large reported final volume reported for Varra-Coulson of 923,786,39.1.30 gallons? Both Hourly Equipment Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 7 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 Costs and Pumping Time values varied widely between the two estimates. We attempted to identify real world pump times and costs in our Heintzelman Project, for which many of the values derived by Varra Companies for Western Sugar were utilized. These values are reflected in Supplemental Information #1, below. The real world values derived using these values yield a total anticipated discharge cost of $6,213.03±. This is slightly more than the $3,736.20± costs for Varra-Coulson using the previous Western Sugar per unit costs, but significantly less ($390,272.80) than the estimated $394,009.00 in the recent OMLR estimate. Further, the estimate determined for l-ieintzelman was for Tract A, an area of 65.57± acres and similar to the size of the entire Varra-Coulson extraction area. The initial ()MLR estimate for discharge of those waters was $24,107. Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 1 Grading Concurrent grading is The estimate for the anticipated for the same re clanmtion location and similar to methodology and walls other operations, should was $38.791 .28 consider that overall determined by ON11.R costs are nearly identical for Western Sugar, and to the Western Sugar $220.918.40 for location which estimated Varra-Coulson.? A 40-k5± foot limitations difference of to overall basin depths, $182,127.12 dollars whereas the mean depth more? Our original for Coulson is estimated estimate for Western at •10± feet. Sugar, iterated for the identical conditions at the Varra-Coulson Project was $ /16,272.82. which we will retain to offer the OMLR the benefit of the doubt. Soil Demand We believe your estimate No additional for soil replacement comment. costs of 53.5811.18 is within reason. Revegetation The primary difference It should be of this cost is related to understood that the the use of mulch. We've revegetation area for established the use of Western Sugar of hybrid cover crops in 3.1.23± acres is lieu of ineffective mulch approximately 520 applications and related percent larger than the methodology in an area NN.58± acres pending prone to Chinooks. The total revegetation at O\ILR has accepted this the Varra Coulson practice for reasons parcel. The OMLR for stated in the application. Western Sugar We believe when the estimated a costs are removed for revegetation cost labor, materials, there of $13,977.39, or equipment. etc. for the 166 percent more for Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 9 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 application of mulch. it an area 520 percent will make the estimate hirer, suggesting our more within reach. original estimate of 1,238.98± (or apx. 113 percent of a similar are is not out of bounds with previous OMLR estimates. When we add it up: Some correlation to prior We have assembled a Ol\11,l: determinations of revised summary of like kind on similarly costs based upon the sited parcels seems to logic presented here. be a reasonable in Supplemental expectation. In keeping Information #2, below. with that, we would request the OMLR to re- evaluate its current estimate consistent with those models. Mobilization- We used a value we $ 5,230. 1(1± from Demobilization could not source upon Western Sugar. review. The OMLR values for Western Sugar were $5.230.4(3. or slightly higher than the °MLR Varra-Coulson estimate of 4,322.93, yet lower than our undocumented source of 7,619.00 used in our estimates. Since a re evaluation utilizing Western Sugar is heavily relied upon in our logic, we will use the Western Sugar value of $5,230. 1(-3. Indirect Costs. 27.8% We formerly estimated at 24.35% based upon previous ()MLR Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 10 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 estimates, but times have changed. So there's a 3.-15 percent adjustment to our total. Supplemental Information #1 (values determined from the Ileintzelman • submittal): Utilizing a 16" floating 150 HP/110KW/Hr at 5,000 gallon per minute capacity Fisher Pump discharging at a mean rate of 3750± gallons of water per minute ...3750± gpm x 60 minutes = 225,000± gallons per hr. 143,700,369.52.0+ gallons -225,000± gal/hr = 638.67± hrs. - 24 = 26.61± days to discharge the water Speaking with Rich Elder w/ Fisher Pumps (2024 East 8't' St.; Greeley, CO), Rich indicated that his company does not rent Fisher Pumps, but if they did it would be determined in this manner. $18,750.00± cost of the pump of the same type as indicated above 2 Vii, half the value recovered in 3 months $ 9,375.00± 3 months $ 3,125.00± per month 30± days $ 104.17± per day x 25% mark-up for profit or $26.04 $ 130.21± per day (rental cost) x 26.61± days $3,464.89± Total Pump Use Cost The electrical cost for the pump will run as follows, utilizing information derived from United Power Company (Keith Emerson) based upon actual energy use from the same type and kind of Fisher Pump: Electric demand: 110KW x 638.67± hours of use x $0.034± cents per KWhour = $2,388.62± $40.20 Meter Charge (Service Charge) Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 I I Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 $ 2,428.82±Total Electric Charge Estimate labor at $12.00±/hour total x 26.61± hours (or one hour per day) = $319.32± Labor Supplemental Information #2: Revised Reclamation Cost Summary from Varra-Coulson column, above. Item: Notes Varra-Coulson Revised: Dewatering Using Supplemental $ 6,213.03± Information #1 Grading Using our original $46,272.82± Varra-Coulson estimate, which is higher than that determined by OMLR for identical concurrent methodologies and pit wall heights at Western Sugar Soil Demand Using OMLR Varra- $ 3,586.48± Coulson derived estimate. Revegetation Does not account for $ 1,238.98± some CIRCES variations. but should be close until OMLR revises for hybrid cover crop methodology in lieu of ineffective mulch applications. Mobilization Based upon the $ 5,230.46± Demobilization Western Sugar Project. Total prior to $ 62,541.77 Administrative Costs Revised Adm. Costs x 27.8% (revised from $ 17,386.61 24.35%) = Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 12 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 Grand Total = $ 79.928.38 The total derived as Revised is $ 1,172.60± more that our previous value. Given the lower overall footprint of the project from Western Sugar. it should justify a warranty compatible with that determined for Western Sugar, if not below. The value is highly similar to that derived by Varra— Companies, Inc. for Western Sugar prior to a revision by OMIT. using CIRCUS to establish it near $102,000± A value determined somewhere between this and the Western Sugar OMEN determination appears to be a reasonable expectation. We respectfully request the OMEN to reconsider its determination in light of those values and see if CIRCUS can agree. 23. and 24. The responses are adequate. Acknowledged. 6.4.19 Exhibit S - Permanent Man-made Structures 25. As required by the Division's Geotechnical Stability Exhibit policy, the Applicant must attempt to obtain structure agreements with all property, including easement holders, and structure owners within two hundred feet of the affected land. The Division will not consider the engineering evaluation as part of the permit application until all appropriate attempts to obtain agreements have been exhausted and documentation of the attempts are provided to the Division. Please provide the Division with signed copies of the notarized structure agreements with all owners of the structures and properties on and within 200 feet of the affected area of the site. Please refer to correspondence from AWES of 23 March 2014. The AWES reconfigures slope angles within critical areas identified on the Revised Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map. These critical areas comprise part of the east/north/west boundary as oriented to and surrounding the homestead along the center south boundary of the permit area; and a segment along the southerly boundary flanking the tank battery and related oil and gas facilities situated near the primary entrance and south of the access road as it enters the parcel from Fern Avenue. These critical areas are identified with a red boundary on the Revised Exhibit C— Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 13 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 2: Extraction Man Map, and will be identified in the field with posts tops painted in clay-glowed orange. forming line of site markers along the critical area extent of the extraction limits at those locations. All extracted slopes will meet the specifications consistent with the AWES report. It is our understanding consistent with the AWES determinations, a safety factor 1.3 or greater for the slopes as specified within the critical areas, that the good faith notifications are acceptable to the OMER, as previously submitted. Two additional Acknowledgements of our commitment for owners of structures arrived after the notification due date and are included for your records. Also included is the agreement with The Greeley Irrigation Ditch Company pertaining to the planned relocation of the ditch segment. 6.5 Geotechnical Stability Exhibit 26. The Divisions engineering- staff rrvie c d the slope stability anahsis report included uith the i arra-Coulson site dated June 21 201,7. .1 copy of the rc'tistrmemo from TC Itait is attached. The correspondence from AWES, PLC dated January 13, 201.1 did not respond to the memo from TC Wait dated October 17, 2013. Please refer to correspondence from AWES of 23 March 2011. 27. thru 28. The responses are adequate. Acknowledged. Please he advised the Varra—Coulson Resource Project application may be deemed inadequate, and the application may be denied on March 4, 201-I, unless the above mentioned adequacy review items are addressed to the satisfaction of the Division. If more time is needed to complete the reply. the Division can grant an extension to the decision date. This will he done upon receipt of a written waiver of the Applicants right to a decision by March -I, 2011 and request for additional time. This must he received no later than the deadline date. Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 14 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 On 14 February 2014, the OMLR extended the Decision Date to 3 April 2014. By this submittal, Varra Companies, Inc. requests additional time for the benefit of the OM1.R to reply to this submittal. Please extend the Decision Date an additional 30 days beyond 3 April 2014 if approval of the application is not determined prior to that time. Attachments: I Proof of Placement of this material with the Weld County Clerk to the Board. 2 Correspondence of 23 March 2014 AWES, LLC. 3 Signed & Notarized Statements of Understanding & related — 2 pgs. 4 Map Revisions: Revised Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map showing topsoil stockpile area and critical slope locations & extent. b Related Operation Reclamation Cost Determinations: Western Sugar Project Exhibit L & related OMLR Cost Estimate. i. I leintzelman Project Exhibit L & related OMLR Cost Estimate. Other Attachments: 1 Well Permits for all Piezometers. 2 Greeley Irrigation Company Agreement. Varra Companies, Inc. Coulson Resource Project OMLR M-2013-064 15 Correspondence to Peter Hays 23 March 2014 AWLS, lit Fort Collins, Colorado, USA March 23, 2014 Mr. Peter Hays Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 1313 Sherman Street, Suite 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 RE: Response to DRMS Second Adequacy Review Comments & Stability Analysis DRMS Permit M-2013-064 Varra Coulson Mine—Greeley, CO Dear Mr. Hays: I have reviewed the comments provided by the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) in the February 10, 2014, letter to Varra Companies, Inc. Below are my responses to the comments which require further clarification. 20. Plate 2 of the January 13, 2014, AWES, LLC (AWES) response submittal does not depict the shadow or mounding effects claimed by DRMS. The variations in water level referenced by DBMS were from inside the barrier wall, which would be the lined pond. The water table contours outside of the barrier wall do not depict water level changes of more than two feet at any location. The water level simulated within the barrier wall was modeled at 4627 feet (4027 was a typographical error). As the proposed weir elevation is on the order of 4614, an additional model simulation was performed with a constant head boundary(water level inside the barrier wall) of 4611. Plate 1 (Attachment A) depicts the location of the barrier wall and constant head boundary inside the wall. Plate 2, depicts the model output. In order to evaluate water level changes outside of the barrier wall Plate 2 in this submittal is compared to Plate 1 of the January submittal (Attachment A). A review of Plate 2 shows that water level contours outside of the barrier wall are unaffected by the constant head changes (water level changes) inside the barrier wall. The model runs support a conclusion that water within the pond is not in hydraulic connection with the surrounding aquifer. The model simulation(s) were ran without influence of the Durham mine dewatering or the Greeley#3 Ditch recharge. A conclusion that the cessation of the Durham mine dewatering or relocation of the ditch will exacerbate barrier wall influences is not consistent with the solutions provided.The water level changes associated with the barrier wall are so minor that any hydraulic influences will mask the effects of the barrier wall. 1MAWITS PO I 111 Mal III I. 11 r 1 1 1 .t 1 1/t , ItCM Second Adequacy Review Comments Varra Coulson Mine Operations Greeley,Colorado Page 2 Varra does not use typical slurry walls for its liners — rather it uses reworked native clay/claystone/shale for lining materials. These material are generally exposed at the base of the mine and are placed by pushing native materials up the side walls (and floor if needed) with a bull dozer. The liner is compacted in place with the heavy equipment. The side-wall liner thickness near ground surface can exceed 20 feet and a conservative value of seven feet was used for the model. Mr. Cazier's comments regarding Plate 1 and 2 are accurate and a reference to Plates A and B was a typographical error. Only Plates 1 and 2,were in the attachment. 25. To be addressed by Varra Companies, Inc. (Varra). The following addresses the stability analysis comments of February 14 by Mr. Peter Hays. All stability analysis plates are presented in Attachment B. 1. The plan map used for the stability cross section is provided as Plate 3. 2. This response addresses items 2 through 6. The site lithology varies greatly across the site however the soil profile submitted in the permit application accurately represents the average soil profile and pit depth. The proposed pit bottom can consist of claystone, clay or sand and gravel.The stability analysis used the soil profile from boring H-14 as the boring was located in in or near the mine wall face with unconsolidated soils extending well below the pit bottom. We have also generated a stability analysis, which accounts for a claystone/shale pit bottom with the upper three feet composed of weathered material. The soil profile for this analysis is depicted on Plate 4. For both soil profile scenarios trial and error runs were made so that a safety factor of greater than 1.3 was achieved for mine slopes in critical areas. In areas where cohesionless soils extend well below the pit bottom, and using the most conservative soil properties, the mine wall slope(bottom to top)was reduced to 3:1 for the first 10 feet, 2:1 for the next ten feet and 1.25:1 to the mine crest. The predicted safety factor for this scenario is greater than 1.4. The model output is presented as Plate 5. For the claystone/shale pit bottom scenario a mine wall slope of 3:1 for the first 20 feet is recommended. Keeping the remaining slope at a 1.25:1 achieves a good safety factor (>1.4 Plate 6) and allows for the maximum material extraction. For the bedrock pit bottom analysis a boundary load of 2500 pounds per square foot (psf), which is a typical allowable soil bearing pressure for sands and gravels, was simulated at a distance of 28 feet from the mine face within the termination zone.The addition of a boundary load at this distance did not affect the stability analysis.The boundary load simulation is depicted on Plate 7. oilsAWItS 0.1 PI i III 4 iIII LI I 4 _41 SI 411 IA 14 1.1 Second Adequacy Review Comments Varra Coulson Mine Operations Greeley.Colorado Page 3 7. Varra will implement the following slope monitoring program. All monitoring parameters will be documented on a weekly basis and will, at a minimum, include the following: 1. excessive raveling; 2. mine wall slopes; 3. side wall seepage; 4. temporary/permanent load surcharges; and, 5. tension cracks. Any tension cracks will be flagged, with the distance between markers measured on a weekly basis for the first month after marking and monthly thereafter. All observations will be documented in weekly Tailgate Health&Safety reports. 8. The recommended slopes for a stability factor of greater than 1.3 will be established in critical areas. We assume that this requirement will be waved. 9. This requirement was used in the most recent stability analyses. If you have any questions regarding this letter or attachments, please contact me at 970-590-3807. Sincerely, AWES, LLC Toby L. Adams, P.G. Principal/Hydrogeologist cc: Garrett Varra—Varra Companies, Inc. Brad lanes—Varra Companies, Inc. AWESIS( DI III Sta. 4 III 1. 111111 Ilins.11 LI 1 1/1 r 1141 ATTACHMENT A Barrier Wall Analysis Plates KnA k�lYld L�lIIL4a,a co •:� ■ 1.4JJ2 a.,ri:� ._Wain -__ I 7 s L. 'I.iv -4,.'.-4,.'. _ • it2 - _ - to ltiggili 0111P_ - _ -ilii_ H ' . '. 1 j :i - - - C , r'��, a �iAn 3 e: a e` :�... .� -ter eMrtr miiil � ��A fi1II1+!(t� Mlle � �� .�` h su r, Ed• _ l al r. r o s i "E _ j q rqW r T^rl, uw: , , w g- u. ': I 1 1 7 .. RI l.. t i t I iiht ! i; ThrH L cv Ss ri iii , E+r' k :II FF. U!' fl' .1...►b.-.-I PE m _1 ''' . 0- 1111F1 14.4 ILA 1- 1 1 I , u.is xis .I . f I I , •.. lie— e -• — a .!1 cc-n.4 ,. I,. ' !L .... .- _ _... k ii ►^ ,, {. mss��rl C1�G7{SL� rr rT t_. ti in E ru �Yy�*1 ar kclit _441 �1 ' �' a' ptl I t hqd t = m r n.V:_.y ..••V1+..�.Wit; Jlr iii /.0 .d ,'I ` t �� r _. ' ,,��'' - . . ..I •ll , ,� , I I — V 'll r....1 - J::. .7 it:'.:' ...."lei r ____: 1,..... 1:k „it ..1,...1._ T__ . _.. 4 , 1: . i . °4 f� _ i r _ _ a Iii • I' i.a� : ►..;f _ I . , fly D , � r, I O . ._ ' Pd?91�..�Li� J.. r. 'as jui y��r:� _� .. �.__. l - - .. I , .'. f., _. t' -_ ,�, irni O - 4 a" c II.4:41 . I alr ,41 I 11 . . . . , , 1 , ; 4-2 k " ;.. .. ,' ; l i eft .. T .`��I � � t --;—,— I �� I mil, ..: -.. t PR � . � „� � — � L. 'lY.� . . =° ar r 4! • I 1 ;--t! f' I y{' I . Ja - ... _ n .ii • oak r_ 1 0 - .4 s _:j ,!w► k ,ateek._�I ,s*$ ,� • iiiem A ..3 8 'II . - i . r IF mrR, . Th, iiiillmgtr� -7IIIrIs.4; - z� »r .ie l ► ;a Ilia':d� : 4 t AI a Cult - ► 1`'lt,sI; - - S 1� , kv - 1 �, 1,� at_. I. :� rJUImmani IIfIr i Is, :At ee ��:: kilt= ,r • E:idderaC/ v a h4.-4. )88{ _ «,' L 4 $ A �� " IliR ERF Lek 'I II' 1 1 E pi k‘F. or In #a ii9 � 6 C rlr � relit �'!e. F EC .'�Irik F r .4.J., In PI!!00110 • 1 .1063VIIIIIIIII i -irD -.i It I_ • A- niaii ■a -.�aa _ Ma ii r I �.,s . U . b°� ,1 I ,_ ..�.. � �:-.' -11,115) . 1' 41"' ' [a •I 1 t {---.:-Y si-� . _ a j>f s1 Aga A:.sii�.Is !!I ll Div ,,q. Eke. airs !a �L :10.-ellet-1)--.t - sir .a 11 ,fr, L 7.iiii car ,.. .,,,,litso. . y: LIN II + l ill ii�P !]Ir"" Pil :rilliq� . : ti 4.1 IP: li ti A Fling, 1 iii f*tr Ocri :fay En lit 4iiit aIla! F0M c ii. / ,..; Fri b ! � 1. IT.I .� Tomeno L9{y nl. j "Yk f 4 O O AI . ii.., Air! 1 :j CU ;1 UI ' ii iiiiiir ga tI(` !� �� zw F r--'�`� �. � . u � 4.iiiiil�ii �� w� i M_ '�� r,.ti., ti 7■■■LULIC .. .- e'_'. k _ ___•_:.10r1•_ 5e _ ;_ _ • __ _r - r ,- N O O 1.- IrIZ9 0299 0'61. OPZI. OP GC O.8Z Os It' 084,1 6EO 0. . li . ) r* li. I -WI "Pe cr ' - .. .H.,,-.• , . _ . .lV re4 Lin I Ch fat - Any d : VI Y O O li gy • •• �" J .]�;:ay N ^ r j • '••f i • f At% Ns 1 it * Cdr :r ;-iQ: v N w, c • ri • /9` re, } M �\ . , li - \c. . ,14 ~ i An, lso n'Thr: / • EYn��'6 'i� -,l a le, , \ : _ ..1 ._ I• ,�- • _ ! , (• • a al, - i.. .p ,y , . , • ! F` n" .. ce i• 1 . 71._. ic,7: i 1 _ • ..._ . , i. m ..1 1 e' � 1 y ,�I b O 1(`fj'i ' •••?• ,a- ■s4� . ! UPI r • ^PI los:.41 : - I • A . <_ ifr - , �f j f 411101fr.\ , s '� ` • . XIS o bilk ei, .. 1DDfre 4 : r _ I. yr r' ` \ ,: r. _ --,-Tel rt r ail 11 U 1 , M 4 4 r A �. h s . '. ? • e ^;13N�" 3 IP l- - .f y • , fr, ..t. r ar - aNL$g17 t. . •t.4- ..r s . ' t , o f � • F. 1 i - r 'Iligrill . • . Pre ' , .'",4Y, us N z • t Ilk,4:-..#::: ..0 A 0 < it •..4-y� 4 Apr -0 •' • Otis. 1 f r r r CU . d iiia v .'34 r.IIP : tfil +-•' III 2199 odk9 Oils+• Or 9C ocizz 0681 006 I) 0- ., , t • n I ft''re.. t. ., •/ I j , lV T \ * : 1t 1 • I . � , Ci r- , 0 ti ^ r' •iv. t , "" �' ' .4,.. r dual r� ` Tta . *MX 'ad/ :Li .4614: . ., 'it Tit r a agellf 4C., Or vi %. Oil t Ottellr:,,,,if*-011 1 . r• t , j �.H r. • 74rihn• •-••••••6104 * - • cp,111 Ll e • ,wee ' a• 4., 3 ' '' , z '7 ir r• M ' �= 4 L rikVO4. a; i• r • i • • . iiiiii r' . - , l ` � _ r , _ as A; a- .1 % . 45.E , +F M " 4.` II, a• `'mot! w •• + 4.0. --) 41" is f •4 • • Ate"- i, • 1 • w -•►,�. ,4400 Ili .41 e. ii:Si , i ., . optiiik , .' • a 1 Cs ! . 4 li ., bill' a; "I ItS144.4. pi 4 • 4' at 1.4 -I.% I it I lb C.1 > • ! f ip •a .IMF I r 03 . iti 1 Q ,i„ * era .L 1 • • I • ,am Ilt a ; r en ft 0 • " :'-� a : • -. J• } I•44 il I : •' . • v CO ii • .10 -•- ' Cy' �.y Y i • • s .r • i t4 iliC I :: 1/24? ,"• . If 4 _ c ¢ cu • , iii . i I .. . fB t .,• or ef,+. i ,,. ': .. .. 4 WSJ C 'dirt'. h �M;.• •! . •? fi' • • Q •7 vO� I A.Cs • 9t c_y:" "-pri9 I nb6 0 CL G ATTACHMENT B Stability Analyses Plates I ,. T-'- y foe ♦T LC • 0 CC3 cc . r W . ^ , I I 440 Sp . . CO) ..., •' I lit :CI; ad . a '. l W +,fir• vi IIe-. ' I ' Cr t' 1 'agar i ',,t ' • ..c0 • it '! ilt �n - --- -. � . �._.r1''�� --'— FPcn�Ava'. 1— M pi 'tie O w j+ 4-1 it..)I-- ry O tNr: o ^� C . i -I F { L ..w . . .6 ,.� CO ` O I. ,v 4. O :;: '... Y la, c.—d) .sr' C 'S O ,o \ 41 ,. r VI O Q N�i (lii .• ,. L le \ \ Ar...7..." ' )11 4 „p.c. 1 N } ei :If 1 - i • \ . ritib • I. Y ' - r .� . •. . Cl: y • ,. , x{13_ 1 c } 4, .. . _ _ U ^ x. . tetJ �` . :�. • 1 t. .. . .. .. ...I -1/4 K . . r I ,• 5 .1 .. . ilt. E -II" ' ' Wilda rib' "Ns • ili V- V /er rmow~ , • -Pie- N. . to • ' • 4-tere 1 ' .411; 4 M :A;• 1 . * WH's r'� �r Q� L `e p • I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 . -L - _ - _ _ _ J - - _ 1 _ - _L _ _ - _ - - J - - - L _ - _L - - J_ _ - J - - _ L _ - -L - _ J- - _ J _ - - L _ - -L _ - J- - - J _ - - L - - _L - - J- _ - 1 _ _ _ L _ _ _ _ - _ J- _ _ 1 - _ _ L - 0 lir - -r - - - - - - l - - - T - - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - - -. , h r J O in 0 - _r �. CD 0 r i' ii La 0 . eta - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - J _ .. lit r Q (in Z/ 0 (l) .Nf r >1 C - -r - - - - - - l - - - T - - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - O O cu a 0 Ir.. - - r , - - - t - - -r -a - r r 1 r w .....1 o LL 2 r O L/1 /Q. OS I p .�,. l ' '- _L _ _ _ _ _ _ J _ _ _ LL 1 _ - _L J _ _ _ L _ _ _L{_�- J_ _ _ J _ LLJ O 1 Cr) a � IH CC= c C a Q J 17 w a) co _ cco c) U (1{) Q N u) in i � r - - - - - - l - - - T - - -r - - - - - - l - - - r - - -IW �- - - l - - - r - - -r - r t , F-• ll N ' t W 1 I CC I: 1 : JIII: - - - - - - : III : II1I :IIILII : II: IIi ' O L Cio CtI1 1 E1 I W 1 0 I Q1 t I t 1 I Al I I I a I LL I •- V/ I I I Q I �, I 4"' ^ J - - - 1 - _ -L - - - - - - J - - - L - - -N- J- - - J - - - L - - -I - - J: J _ O O n 0. -r 3.. ei LLI a. 2 .• �- a - - - - o i° L E . LL •O O - -r - - - - - - l - - - T - - -r - - - - - - l - - - r - - -r - - -- - - l - - - r - - -r - - n 0- 1 - - - r - - N — N O O CO - - - - - - - - r - - - T - - -r - - - - - - r - - - r - -r - - -I- - - 1 - - - r -r - - ile , - - - r 4-0 r _ - - -t - - - . O a. t I 0 r t 1 O Q1 I I • I I I N CO I I S - -I- - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - ► - - - - - - +- - - + - - - ► - - -► - - �- - y - - - ► - - - O M • ' •' / • I e 1 a a I t a Cr t 1 I 1 I I O CU T - - - I II • IIIII f ! i I • i • I I • I I - I I i • I I I I I I i t i • - I • - • I LAD to lip O Lin o Lo o LEI o LC) o la o in o LC) O LC) O Lc o Lin o Ln 0 LC) 0 N N r r O O C O1 CO CO N- N- LC) CD Ln Ln wriZt 01 M N N r- r ' r • 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 a I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 I O —L - - - - - - - — — - - - - - - - - - - L - - -L. - - J— - - J - - - L - - -1— — - J- - .. J — — — L — — - 0— — — — — — — J — - - L - - —L _ _ J- _ - 1 _ _ _ L _ _ -I- - _ !_ _ - 1 _ _ _ L _ I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I r I I I I I I I 1 lir"' I a 1 a a I a a 1 a I I a a a I I I I I I I I a 1 a I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I O -r - - - - - - 3 - - - T - - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - - - ti (D 'O I'' -r • - - - T - - -r .1fit- W O r I'm' 141 II r L. 0 - J - - - L - - - - - - - J - - - ' ] C r �� c 0,..) > -L J - - - 1 - - -L - - - - - - J - - (n ( M CO . i ' 06 C -a 0 .� . -r - - - - - - -- - - T - - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - I C . N G O r C 0 LL - - r - - - 7 - - -r 7 - - _ r . r r I iren CJ CD U) 1 / 1 1 1 I to 1 1 A111,, r ' CIOI I W I V Qi C — —a— — — — — — — J - - - A - - -L' - - - - - - J - - - L - - -L - - O- - J - a v7 eD e!„f CO U) II • -C W I— «) t/) CD m O U .� C (p O - r - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1 " - - 1- - -r - - 1- - - 1 - - - r - - - -0; "41 CD O (r11) I A CO /7 1 v Q V p - - - - - 0 r � - - � - -r � - - r - -r - - - - _ � - - r - - rN - - to CO 1 I I C 1 CD OI I 1-.O`� as U) CD o d CD op , A N C r-- N I '��O C cr, r co Ni J - - - L - - -L -- J- - - J - - - L - - -L - - J — — - �— - L Q f) me On. . . . in f0 (3 U. C 0 CD C ° O p a , .� o 141p upp..... CD O _ - - - r - - -r - - - - - i - - - r - - -r �- - - - - - r - - - - N 4� • .CoO /� (, V cu m C13 +no C CD It CD .C p C9 1D — ...Ne ,f 00 : -a L. 44 oa o O CO o I 1 r1 a; c.) fc 0 g � 0 T 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I �Jf V U .\Y V I 1 I I i a a a 1 a a I I I I a I a a a a a a a I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I Ln I I I 1 1 I 1 a a a 1 1 a a a 1 1 1 a 1 a 1 I 1 1 a o L - - - 1- - - J- - - J - - - L - - -l - - J- - - 1 - - - L - - -1- - - J- - - 1 - - - L r 1 i I I I I 1 a I 1 I 1 I I �}{ I I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I `1+ I 1 1 1 1 a a 1 1 1 a a 1 1 , 1 a I a 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I CL LID O Ln O LO CD Ln O Ln C7 LU O LO O Ul O Ln O Ll7 O Ln O Ln O Ln C IC) C N N r r O O O) CO CO CO N... N- (D CD 1.11 LID 'V' 'd' M eh N N r r I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I p I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O • ...IL. - - - - - J - - .. 1 .. - -L' - - - - - - - - - L - - -1.- - - J- - .... J - - - L - - -1- - - --- - - - - - - L - - - - - - - - - - J - - _ L - - -I- - - 2- - - 1 _ _ _ I- _ - - - - - - - _ _ 1 _ _ _ L _ co I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - T - - -r - - - - - - 1 - - - - _ N- I T 0.' : • O - I - - - - UD 1:/ 1 f- 1 1 i 1 I I • 1 I CD 41 I I I / • Om I I O O - - L - - - - - - J - - - L - - -L .i _ _ _ - .4 r 01 I 1 I I I O 0111 r 1 1 ' I C 1 �. I O 2 I - - - - - - - - N -r - - 1 - - T - -- -r - - 1 - - - 1 r- CO I 1 I 1 "I-- I 1 V, I ram 1 C] CD 03 I C 1 (y I I 1 C 1 a) I ,i1 C] m 1 co U I CO .� 1 OD 1 CD —. I _N- 1 I ri 7` I / O / - I ' O - - - - - - , - - - r - - -r - - -1- - - - UD CO i I0 1 17 1 I 1 N C I >` t 1 1 X V CD 1 1 1 C /A��+ Co 1 1 1 Q W "rt 1O to 1 1 1 ` C ti Cn 1 1 1 (O, ! O M T- .O%1 N J - - - L - - -L' - - J- - - J - - - L - - -L• - - J- - - J - CD 4a V 4-0 L CD O M on CO c d d d CD, t E O o oM - 0 •u) Lr/ P.- }, . C 1 - - - r - - -r - - - - - 1 - - - r - - -r - - �- - - 1 - - - r - O E ' O. a? m V AA;; U -0 [d 4a• (n � ' - - _ r - - -r - - �- - - 1 - - - r - - -r - �- - - � - r - - - OrC. O C .v 0YgU7 N a 2L. us *61c`� (nr�g� " _� 2 /� C ` 0 W � L. I I I I t I I I I I I 1 I CD V ' Cg I 1--- 03 $ ! 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I , �/ a I I t I 1 I I I i I I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I t 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I LID 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 CD ^, J — — — L — — —L - - - - - - J .. — — L — — —L — — — — — — J — — — L — — _L --J— — — J — — — L — — —L — — J— — — 1 ---L---'--- �---1 - - - L - r +.0I a a I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 II I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 I CO I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I r 1^L L Ll1 O LL1 O Lr) 0 LC) 0 L i Co LC7 0 L.r) O Lf) O Lc) O LU O LCD O Lin O co O la O N N r r O O CO CO CO CO I` N- 4b C0 U1 L[1 wt 't 01 01 CV CV r r ' r— I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 / I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 - - - - - - - - - - - — — 1 _ _ _ _ _ — — _ — — J — — — L — — —L — - J- - — J — — _ L — _ _L _ _ I_ _ _ J _ _ - L - _ _ _ _ _ _,_ J _ _ _ _ _ _ C) I _ _ _I _ _ _ _ _ _ I I _ _ _I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 _ _ _ L _ _ co I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I T_ 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I 1 I I I I I I I I O I I I I I I I I r 1 T 1 Nw- ill T ill I _r 1 1 T - -r 1 - CD to 0 .. T n} V - • 4L y T I ' ' C7 0 \ i 1 T tan• K C--, CO . - - - - - - - - J _ - _ 1 - - -II- J - - - 0l 1 T C •ti, 1\ Cl) CD .. t LI. - 1 - - - - - - 1 _ `' -.. \ 1 •CA _ - _ - - _ 'I - - - + - .. ..1. .. - - - - .. i - - I' - - -/' - - 1 CA i \ .. animm i I 1 MI I C - 1 - - - - _ _ - _L _ - - - - - - • Q Q) L - _ J _ L _ _ J _ _ L _ _L _ _ J_ - _ J _ V 7 d < : \I e __ . . ID ti I.1 ' O (T] - . \\I CIO L) OD LI. CD - - ;- - - - - - - - - - - T - - -r - - - - - - - - - - r - - -r - - -I- - - 1 - - - r - - -r - I. l•-- a) I 1 1 a ' 1 1 O i 1 i 1 1 �1I��1III I 1 a CC 1 1 \\11 0 • - — _. — - -. - ... - - - 1- - - '- - - - - - 1 _ p / \ 1 417 V/ C) 1 _ C I 1 = I cu f Q Q 061 I 0 CTi I _ _ 1 I O ^ cry r oo N - J- - - J - o .O Oi`y/, 1 I TI V 1 OD LL. I I S. I I E CD I 1 i 0 I I I CD i CO . `V C CD CD p p T- I 1 1 V 1 • le A CD CD CD en 1 LL, R 1 I 1 !! . '-`I 1 I I L p �V - � - - - r - - N O Co 1 I I -J AA'' 1 1 1 W I 1 1 all) C181) .�..r� 1 1 ISE /�I V/ 1 1 1 \V 25 n0 — — — — — — r — — — T /�� et /..� / ` �1/� 13 0 N Y V! W W cm T� 1 1 1 �.I lL (f� I I 1 c I A+ .-yy� /•`�� .Q Y .,�y1 0) 0) W W V/ L/ 0 0) CD 1 1 I C1) weA4 IN 1N iN 41 4 4 4• C C 3 _ ; co J m 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 0 W I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I N. , r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 ^, I iiy I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I O W ,I.�' _ _ _ _ . _ - .. L I J L I J L 1 I 1 L I 1 1 L ,�/ l� I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I r- 1.7A� 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 I I ' •t. , r. ,,� r r 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 ^ . , - 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I i 1 1 1 Om Ln 0 40 0 40 CD 4n O 14-) 0 40 0 4.0 o In C) 40 CD I.n © 40 0 40 o VCS 0 W) 0 N N r T O o CO CO 00 co h- h- LD LD Ln 40 et et en n N N T r I T Varra Companies, Inc. Office of Special Projects s120(lane Street Frederick, Colorado 80516 Telephone (303) 6hb-6637 I°Liy 1 t' t hhb-674 t Statement of Understanding Landowner of Adjacent Structure Statement: Our signature below testifies we have been provided with and opportunity to review: 1) a Stability Analysis Report pertaining to the proposed Varra -t «iihoa. Re-onrce Project - Regular Impact(112) Permit Application M-2013-064: and, 2) a Map showing the approximate relationship of our property and the potential for any qualified significant, valuable and permanent man-made structure(s), which may occur within 200 feet of lands affected within the proposed Varr.t—Coulsoii Resource Project — Regular Impact(112) Permit Application NI-2013-061. Upon review of the available materials; And understanding the relationship of any significant, valuable and permanent man-made structures under our ownership and which may stand within 200 feet of lands .iifeeted vv (thin the proposed Wart Coulson Resource Project—Regular Impact(112) Permit Application NI-?013-06 1; Further, by our signatures, as notarized below, we concur that planned activities detailed in the application for permit M-2013-064; do not impact our qualified significant, valuable and permanent adjacent man-made structures; and to assure you that in the unlikely event damage occurs to your strut ures as a direct result of our active operations, it will be compensated flu. consistent with esh ished law. U LZ-✓L /� V .f -. Snature of Adjac nt Landowner Dale ivt <dCE� Print Name BRENDA TRUJILLO Notmiy Public State of _ 1 5 ) Sate at Colorado Notary ID 199640145006 1 ss. '. immission Expires Sep 28, 2016 County of -�lC' ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 15 day of �!=≥_ 2013. by wn - I SCJ-m ( r) Tail irii.or for I itle Company or Corporation Nolan- Public Nly Commission comma-, - .„(s ift i I r, r ° ° �'° / o El a Companies, Inc, tom, �,, 6. m 1 0 0 1 ' t, cr ice of Special Projects C4En � rr, , o v E d v i. ado 30516 Telephone (303) 666-6657 I H\ (3(I)]r,6n-67,13 r. w a m O m r- ' - -. _ .. r �, m �° 6iio ml F ac m -- _ v n, ment of Understanding a v Q - v I y v in rat' = '-'°' ° .3 o � w mrm = ≥ ��°❑ r a' Lenient: Our -, ., :i.Fc.0 signature below testifies we E I a k d o6 a n� to review: 11 o .-9v g o o pertaining to the proposed \ arra-Cond.,u Resource Project ; N w 2 -j� N i E plication M-2013-064 and, _ a -°- �, - . ° mate relationship of our property and the potential for any EE ` am C V c0 -P ; g_t °.E m -� m le and permanent man-made structure(sl. which may occur N ` N 2 a g 2 - ft 'H :d within the proposed Vanra—Coulson Re,vnir(c Project— Re,,uLu NN-o o,, E N o m v v v o w TS •cr a ( M-2013-064" d U o :c.?..°a Lea O v) o ' "o 23 O a N a a' cii -o ,... �- t7� t~ >r w c« ii3 N 1-i x 1,4,1,4, 5 'SF) R `, o« N 0 a ri o, n 2 o 2 N v 'VF, 'O= m 11 1a O N , LL m o o 2 CI-1g ro z - a e ., my significant, valuable and permanent num made structures N '2.) 5 3=m ,p .. N v ro E _- co and within 200 feet of lands affected wit bin the proposed Varr.r av� n C >2 4 z b N 3 -� Nr (lam a'"rmpact (112)Permit Application M-201106-h J.- Ec ... N S-I Further. by our signatures, as notarized below, we concur that planned activities detailed in the application for permit M-2013-064; do not impact our qualified significant. valuable and permanent adjacent man-made structures; and to assure you that in the unlikely event damage occurs to your structures as a direct result of our active operations, it will be compensated for. consistent with established law. �� 0/57z 13 Signature of,-\dticent Landowner Date I S C OG:cS up j Print Name �i 1 ) State of ( .n O' '; Gc ichC 1 ) ss. ;County of l -,lak.c, ) T The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /� day of /1/0 c tiryLI5E, . 2013, by ( for ), Title ' i Com mny or Corporation ' Notairt. P't i - f SHANE W. do-NIES onm sion cspirr ±Ii Trit /V S0r P` ( Y MY COMM EXP 0f13-2014 COST SUMMARY WORK Task description: Cost Summary Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Permit/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 006 State: _Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/21/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-006 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DBMS TASK LIST(DIRECT COSTS1 Task Form Fleet I Task Description I Used Size I Hours Cost 001 Dewatering Tract A PUMPING I 2,495.69 1 $17,515.00 002 Backfilling highwall ' DOZER 2 94.35 538,791.28 1 003 Replacing Topsoil SCRAPER] I 1 21.19 54,821.10 004 Revegetation of Disturbed Areas REVEGE I 1 0.00 $13,977.39 005 Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization MOBILIZE I 3.57 $5,230.46 006 i Replacement Pump 1 NA I 0.00 $20,528.22 007 Road Maintenance MISCTRUK I 1 29.00 $1,883.00 008 Road Grading GRADER I ] 2.67 $232.00 SUBTOTALS: ��,I 2646.47 $$102,978.45 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD AND PROFIT: Liability insurance: 2.02 Total — S2,080.16 Performance bond: 1.05 Total = $1,081.27 Job superintendent: 0.00 Total= $0.00 Profit: 10.00 Total= $10,297.85 TOTAL O& P =- $13,459.28 CONTRACT AMOUNT(direct+O&P)_ $116,437.73 LEGAL-ENGINEERING -PROJECT MANAGEMENT: Financial warranty processing(legal/related costs): 0.00 Total= 0.00 Engineering work and/or contract/bid preparation: 4.25 Total= $4,948.60 Reclamation management and/or administration: 5.00 $5,821.89 CONTINGENCY: 0.00 Total— $0.00 TOTAL INDIRECT COST— $24,229.77 TOTAL BOND AMOUNT(direct+indirect)= $127,208.22 COST SUMMARY WORK Task description: Cost Summary _.. Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Pem>it/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 006 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/21/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-006 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DRMS TASK LIST(DIRECT COSTS) Form I Fleet Task Task Description _ _ j_Used j Size Hours Cost 001 Dcwatering Tract A PUMPING 1 2,495.69 $17,515.00 002 Backfilling highwall DOZER 2 94.35 _ $38,791.28 003 Replacing Topsoil SCRAPERI I 21.19 $4,821.10 004 Revegetation of Disturbed Areas REVEGE 1 0.00 $13,977.39 005 Equipment GRADER K 1 2 .00 $2 8830 02 _ - -— E ut ment Mobilization/Demobilization MOBILIZE 1 3.57 • $5,230.46.00 006 Replacement Pump 007 Road Maintenance 008 Road Grading SUBTOTALS: 2646.47 $ 102,978.45 PUMPING WORK Task description: Dewatering Tract A Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Permit/Job#: M20I0049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task 001 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None • Date: 6/20'2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-001 I User: MAC --- --- Agency or organization name: DRMS HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Description _ - , _Quantity Make and Model: Centrifugal pump -200M, 10 in. 1 Attachment 1: Suction pipe- 10 in. diam.,25 ft. 2 g l?P2 Labor Unit 1: Pump operator Attachment 2: Discharge I e- 10 in.D., I, I - - Horsepower: _ 70 Shift Basis: 1 per day Weight: 1.95 _ (US Tons) Cost Breakdown: Utilization Ownership Cost/Hour: _ $ i NA Operating Cost/Hour: $ 100 Operator Cost/Hour: _ $ NA _ Total Unit Cost/Hour: $ Total Fleet Cost/Hour: $7.02 PUMPING QUANTITIES Initial Pond Volume: 129,513,313.00 Conversion factor: ___ 1.0000 Final Pond Volume: 129,513,313.00 gallons Total Pond Inflow Surface Unit inflow rate in Area: 97,200 Sq. ft. gph/sq.ft.: 0.3516 Total Pond Inflow Volume per Hour: 34,175.52 gallons Source of estimated volume: Division Estimate PUMPING TIME Maximum Pump Capacity: 200,000 gph/pump Estimated Suction Head: 35 feet Estimated Discharge Head: 25 feet Total Head: 60 feet CPB Pump Capacity: 69,000 _ gph/pump Site Altitude: 4,600 feet Adjusted Pumping Capacity: 69,000 - gph Initial Unadjusted Pumping Time: 1,877.00 hours Inflow during Initial Pumping: 64,147,606 gallons Net Unadjusted Pumping Time: _ 2,806.68 1-lours Altitude Adjustment Factor: 0.9700 (3%rule) Pump Efficiency Factor: 0.9167 (55 min.:hr.) Total Adjusted Pumping Time: 2,49530 hours JOB TIME AND COST Total job time: 2,495.70 Hours CIRCES Cost Estimating Software • Total job cost: S17,515.00_ _ • • (IRCES Cost Estimating Software Page I oft BULLDOZER WORK Task description: Backfillinghighwall _ Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation PermitiJoba: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task fl: 002 State: Colorado - Abbreviation: None Date: 6/20/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-002 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DRMS HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Basic Machine: Cat D9R-9SU(2005) Horsepower: 405 Blade Type: Semi-Universal Attachment:Attachment: NA Shift Basis: I Ref day Data Source: (CRG) Cost Breakdown: Utilization% Ownership Cost/Hour: $49.19 —_ _ _ NA Operating Cost/Hour: $117.89 I 00 Ripper op. Cost/Hour: _ $0.00 0 Operator Cost/Hour: $38.49 NA Total unit Cost/Hour: $205.56 Total Fleet Cost/Hour: $411.13 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Volume: 69,259 Swell factor: 1.000 Loose volume: 69,259 LCY Source of estimated volume: _Division of Reclamation, Mining& Safety Source of estimated swell factor: Cat Handbook HOURLY PRODUCTION Average push distance: 50 feet Unadjusted hourly production: 2,110.5 LCY/hr _ Materials consistency description: Loose stockpile 12 Average push gradient: _30% Average site altitude: 4.600 feet Material weight: 2,650 Ibs/LCY Weight description: Decomposed rock-25%Rock, 75%Earth .lob Condition Correction Factor Source Operator Skill: 0.750 (AVG.) Material consistency: 1.200 l (CAT HB) CIRCES Cost Estimating Software Bulldozer Worksheet Cont'd Task#002 Page 2 of 2 Dozing method: 1.000 (GEN.) Visibility: 1.000 (AVG.) Job efficiency: 0.830 (1 SHIFT/DAY) Spoil pile: 0.900 (SSD-FC) Push gradient: 0.298 (CAT HB) Altitude: 1.000 (CAT HB) Material Weight: 0.868 (CAT HB) Blade type: 1.000 (PAT) Net correction: 0.1739 Adjusted unit production: 367.02 LCY/hr Adjusted fleet production: 734.04 LCY/hr JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size: 2 Dozer(s) Unit cost: $0.560/LCY Total job time: 94.35 Hours Total job cost: $38,791.28 CIRCES Cost Estimating Sofivare Page 1 of 2 SCRAPER TEAM WORK Task description: Replacing Topsoil _ Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Permit/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 003 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/20/2011 _ County: _Weld Filename: M049-003 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DRMS HOURLY EQUIPMENT COSTShift basis: 1 per day Equipment Description -Scraper: Cat 627G -Dozer: NA Support Equipment-Load Area: _NA -Dump Area: NA Road Maintenance—Motor Grader: NA -Water Truck: NA Cost Breakdown: Scraper Work Team Support Equipment Maintenance Equipment Scraper Dozer Load Area Dump Area Motor Grader Water Truck %Utilization-machine: 100 NA NA NA NA NA Ownership cost/hour: $48.66 NA NA NA NA NA Operating cost/hour: $140.14 1 NA NA NA NA NA Ripper op. cost/hour: NA NA NA NA NA NA Operator cost/hour: $38.67 NA NA NA NA NA Unit Subtotals: $227.48 NA NA NA _L NA NA Number of Units: 1 0 0 0 0 0 Group Subtotals: Work: $227.48 Support: $0.00 Maint: $0.00 Total work team cost/hour: $227.48 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial volume: 9,849 CCY Swell factor: 1.000 Loose volume: 9,849 LCY Source of estimated volume: Division of Reclamation,Mining&Safety Source of estimated swell factor: Cat Handbook HOURLY PRODUCTION Scraper Bowl(volume)Basis: Material weight: 1,600 lbs/LCY Struck Volume: 15.70 LCY Material description: Top Soil _ Heaped Volume: 22.00 LCY Rated Payload: 48,000 pounds Average Volume: 18.85 LCY Payload Capacity: 30.00 LCY Adjusted Capacity: 18.85 LCY CIRCES Cost Estimating Software Scraper Worksheet Cont'd Task#003 Page 2 of 2 Cycle Time: Scraper Loading Time: 0.70 Minutes Maneuver and Spread Time: 0.60 Minutes Job Condition Correction: Site Altitude:4600 feet I Scraper Push Dozer Source Altitude Adj: 1.000 NA - (CAT HB) I Job Efficiency: j 0.830 NA (CAT HB) Net Correction: t 0.830 NA Travel Time: Road Condition: Firm, smooth,rolling,din/It, surfaced,watered,maintained 3.0 Haul Route: Seg# Haul Distance(Ft) Grade Roll.Res Total Res ' Velocity(fpm) Travel Time (%) (%) (%) (min) 1-1 600.00 0.00 3.00 j 3.00 2824 0.39 Haul Time: 0.39 minutes Return Route: Seg# Haul Distance(Ft) Grade Roll.Res Total Res Velocity(fpm) Travel Time I (%) (%) C/o) (min) 1 600.00 0.00 3.00 13.00 2874 j 0.33 Return Time: 0.33 minutes Total Scraper team cycle time: 2.02 minutes Adjusted for job conditions: 464.72 LCY/Hour Selected Number of Scrapers: 1 _ Scraper(s) Adjusted single scraper team(unit)hourly production: 464.72 LCY/Hour Adjusted multiple scraper team(fleet)hourly production: 464.72 LCY/Hour Unadjusted unit production/hour: 559.90 LCY/Hour Optimal Number of Scrapers per push dozer: JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size: I Team(s) Total job time: 21.19 Hours Unit cost: $0.490 /LCY Total job cost: $4,821.10 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software I Page I of 2 REVEGETATION WORK Task description: Revegetation of Disturbed Areas Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Permit/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 004 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/21/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-004 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DBMS - -- FERTILIZING Materials Units/ Description Acre Unit Cost/Unit Cost/Acre Total Fertilizer Materials • Cost/Acre $0.00 Application _ Description Cost/Acre $ Total Fertilizer Application Cost/Acre j $0.00 TILLING Description Cost/Acre - Disc harrowing,6" deep(MEANS HCI) $130.32 Total Tilling Cost/Acre j $130.32 SEEDING Rate— Seed Mix PLS Seeds Cost/Acre • LBS/ per SQ. Acre i FT Alkali Sacaton 0.01 0.39 $0.09 Switchgrass- Blackwell 0.90 8.04 $6.45 Blue Grama- Lovington 0.20 3.26 $3.72 Indian Riceg ass-Native _ - 1..90 6.15 $53.94 Sand Dropseed — _ ' 0.01 1.19 $0.04 Kentucky Bluegrass-Ginter 0.05 2.47 $0.14 Little Bluestein -Pastura 0.70 4.18 $14.04 Sideoats Grama-Vaughn 1.80 5.91 $19.17 Strawberry Clover(coated) 0.10 0.68 $1.45 Smooth Brome- Manchar 0.10 0.33 50.31 C IRCES Cost Estimating Software • Reveg Worksheet Cont'd Task#004 Page 2 of 2 She p Fescue-Covar 0.40 6.24 I $4.95 Tall Wheatgrass-Jose 1.10 1.99 I S4.85 Totals Seed Mix 7.27 ' 40.84 $109.16 Application Description Cost/Acre Drill seeding {DM survey dates $87.19 Total Seed Application Cost/Acre $87.19 MULCHING and MISCELLANEOUS Materials Units/ Description Acre Unit Cost/Unit Cost/Acre Total Mulch Materials Cost/Acre •• $0.00 Application Description - i Cost/Acre $ Total Mulch Application Cost/Acre $0.00 NURSERY STOCK PLANTING No / Planting I Fertilizer Common Name Acre Type and Size • Cost Pellet Cost Cost/Acre Totals Nursery Stock Cost/Acre $0.00 JOB TIME AND COST No. of Acres: 34.23 Cost/Acre: $326.67 Estimated Failure Rate: 25% Cost/Acre*: $326.67 *Selected Replanting Work Items: _TILLING,SEEDING Initial Job Cost: $11,181.91 Reseeding Job Cost: $2,795.48 • Total Job Cost: $13,977.39 Job Flours: 0.00 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software • Page 1 of 2 EQUIPMENT MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION Task description: Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Perm it/Iob#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 005 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/21/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-005 User: MAC Agency or organization name: _DAMS EQUIPMENT TRANSPORT RIG COST Shift basis l per day Cost Data Source: CRG Data_. Truck Tractor Description: GENERIC ON-HIGIIWAY TRUCK TRACTOR,6X4, DIESEL POWERED, 400 HP(2ND HALF,2006) Truck Trailer Description: GENERIC FOLDING GOOSENECK, DROP DECK EQUIPMENT TRAILER (25T, 50T, AND 100T) Cost Breakdown: Available Rig Capacities 0-25 Tons 26-50 Tons_ . 51+Tons Ownership Cost/Hour: ] $16.63 $18.37 $22.33 Operating Cost/Hour: $44.38 $46.13 $50.07 Operator Cost/Hour: $27.66 - $27.66_ $27.66 Helper Cost/Hour: $0.00 S25.39 $2539 Total Unit Cost/Hour: $88.67 $117.55 $125.45 NON ROADABLE EQUIPMENT: Machine Weight' Owner ship Haul Rig Fleet r Haul Trip Return Trip DOT Permit Description Unit Cost/hr/unit Cost/ht./unit Size Cost/hr/ Cost/hr/fleet Cost! fleet (IONS) ' fleet i Centrifugal pump- ''1 1.95 $8.39 ' $88.67 I $97.06 $88.67 $250.00 200M, 10 in. _ I _ ' _ -- Cat D9R-9531 ' 60.61 $49.19 $125.45 2 $349.27 $250.90 $500.00 (2005) Cat 627G 40.90 $48.66 x$117.55 _ I $166.21 $11755 $250.00 [CAT 16H - 27.28 x$48.67 $117.55 l I $16622 j $117.55 $250.00 -- - - Subtotals: $778.76 . j $57467 _ 1 $1,250.00 ROADABLE EQUIPMENT: r P Cost/hr/fleet 1 Machine Description Total Cost/hr/unit Fleet Size Haul Trip I Return Trip Cost/hr/fleet Water Tanker.2.500 Gal. I $26.23 1 $26._3 $26.23 Subtotals: H S26.23 $26.23 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software Mobilization Worksheet Cont'd Task#005 Page 2 of 2 EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE and Time Nearest Major City or Town within project area region: GREELEY Total one-way travel distance: 5.00 miles Average Travel Speed: 35.00 mph Total Non-Roadable Mob/Demob Cost* $5,222.97 `*two round trips with haul rig: Total Roadable Mob/Demob Cost** $7.49 ** one round trip,no haul rig: Transportation Cycle Time: Non-Roadable Roadable Equipment E moment Haul Time(Hours): 0.14 0.14 •• Return Time(Hours): 0.14 0.14 Loading Time(Hours): 0.75 NA Unloading Time(Hours): 0.75 NA Subtotals: 1.79 - 0.29 JOB TIME AND COST Total job time: 3.57 Hours Total job cost: $5,230.46 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software MISCELLANEOUS TRUCK WORK Task description: Road Maintenance Western Sugar Permit Action: Financial Reclamation Land Warranty Site: Development Project _Calculation Permit/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 007 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/27/2011 County: Weld Filename: M049-007 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DRMS HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Make and Model: Water Tanker,2,500 Gal. Horsepower: 150 Attachment I: _ Shift Basis: 1 per day Attachment 2: Weight: 5.25 Labor Unit 1: Tanker Driver- I rear axle (US Tons) Labor Unit 2: Cost Breakdown: Utilization% Ownership Cost/Hour: $7.64 NA Operating Cost/Hour: _ $18.59 100 Operator Cost/Hour: $38.70 NA Total Unit Cost/Hour: $64.92 Total Fleet Cost/Hour: $64.92 JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size: 1 Truck(s) Total job time: 29.00 Hours Unit cost: $64.92 /Hour Total job cost: $1,883.00 C IRCES Cost Estimating Software MOTOR GRADER WORK Task description: Road Grading Western Sugar Reclamation Permit Action: Financial Warranty Site: Land Development Project Calculation Permit/Job#: M2010049 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task#: 008 State: Colorado Abbreviation: None Date: 6/27/2011 County: Weld Filename: _ M049-008 User: MAC Agency or organization name: DBMS HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Basic Machine: CAT 14H Horsepower: 215 Ripper Attachment: Shift Basis: I per day Data Source: (CRG) Cost Breakdown: Utilization% Ownership Cost/Hour: $34.52 NA Operating Cost/Hour: $13.93 25 Ripper Operating Cost/Hour: $0.00 Operator Cost/Hour: $38.49 NA _ Total Unit Cost/Hour: $86.95 Total Fleet Cost/Hour: $128.74 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Total Area to be graded or ripped: 4.60 acres Source of estimated acreage: Exhibit D-Mining Plan HOURLY PRODUCTION Average Grader Speed: 6.25 mph Selected Application: Road maintenance(3-9.5 mph)-6.25 Selected Blade Angle: 30 degrees Effective Blade Length: 12.10 _ feet Width of blade overlap per pass: 2.00 feet Net grading or ripping width per pass: 10.10 feet Unadjusted Hourly Unit Production: 7.6515 acres/hour Job Condition Correction Factors Site Altitude:4600 feet Source Altitude Adj: 1.00 (CAT HB) Job Efficiency: 0.90 (lsh/d,fay.) Net Correction: 0.9000 multiplier Adjusted Hourly Unit Production: 6.8864 acres/Hour Adjusted Hourly Fleet Production: 6.8864 acres/Hour JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size: 1 Grader(s) Total job time: 2.67 Hours Unit cost: $12.63 per acre Total job cost: $232.00 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software OVERHEAD As percent of direct costs... minimum = 5% average = 13% maximum = 3O0/0 OVERHEAD & PROFIT (by project size)... under$100,000 project = 30% $500,000 project= 25% $2,000,000 project= 20% over$10,000,000 project= 15% 1. Liability insurance The"General Conditions"section of most government construction contracts requires that the successful bidder obtain adequate public liability insurance. To account for this expense, DMG utilizes data from MEANS Site Work & Landscape Cost Data, Administrative Requirements Section - Project Management/Coordination —Average public liability insurance- expressed as a percentage of job cost. EXAMPLE: In the 2006 edition of MEANS Site Work and Landscape Cost Data, the average public liability insurance expense is listed at 2.02% of job cost. For a reclamation project with an estimated total direct cost of $100,000, the contractor's liability insurance expense will be $2,020. 2. Performance bond Although the main objective of preparing a reclamation cost estimate is to determine the total amount of reclamation bondto be held by the regulatory authority, be aware that whenever a reclamation bond is actually forfeited and the agency contracts with a construction company to perform the work, the General Conditions section of the contract usually requires that the contractor obtain a different type of bond known in the construction industry as a performance bond The performance bond is essentially a guarantee by a bank or bonding company to the project owner (e.g. DMG) that all work will be completed in the event the contractor fails to perform per the terms of the contract. In some cases, a labor& materials payment bond may also be required. To account for this expense, DMG utilizes data from MEANS Site Work & Landscape Cost Data, Administrative Requirements Section -Project Management/Coordination- Performance bond- expressed as a percentage of job cost. EXAMPLE: In the 2006 edition of MEANS Site Work and Landscape Cost Data, the average performance bond expense is listed at a minimum value of 0.62%of job cost and a maximum value of 1.50%. This works out to an average value of 1.06%. For a reclamation project with an estimated total direct cost of $100,000, the contractor's performance bond expense will be $11060. 3. Job superintendent State & Federal construction contracts often require that the contractor keep a job superintendent on site at all times work is being performed. For small projects involving a simple sequence of tasks where each task can be performed by one piece of equipment, the equipment operator can sometimes double as job superintendent 4 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs 6.4.12 EXHIBIT L - Reclamation Costs (1) All information necessary to calculate the costs of reclamation must be submitted and broken down into the various major phases of reclamation. The information provided by the Operator/Applicant must be sufficient to calculate the cost of reclamation that would be incurred by the state. (2) The Office may request the Operator/Applicant to provide additional, reasonable data to substantiate said Operator/Applicant's estimate of the cost of reclamation for all Affected Lands. St \1\I:\R\- OVE RVIE\\: Summary Status of Affected and Unaffected land as of this Amendment (Exhibit C-1: Existing Conditions and Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map): Of the 128.18± Acres of lands comprising the parcel boundary, 25.31± acres of zoned commercial/industrial lands within the City of Greeley are not included in the permit boundary, resulting in total permit area of 102.87± acres remaining in the Weld County I-3 Industrial Zone District. Of the 102.87± Acres to be permitted the nature of each aspect of the affected lands are as follows: 20.84± Acres of Planned Extraction — Tract A 12.88± Acres of Planned Extraction — Tract B 29.31± Acres of Planned Extraction — Tract C 11.99± Acres of Planned Extraction — Tract D 75.02± Acres of Planned Extraction — TOTAL Comprised of: 62.81± Acres - Completed basins (within Total Area of Extraction) — total area at anticipated static water level. 12.21 Acres - requirinq resoilinq and revegetation between the anticipated static water level of the completed basins and the extraction limits And a remainder of: 27.85± Acres — previously affected lands remaining outside of the extraction limits, comprised of: 4.60± Acres - Internal Access Roads 1 .23± Acres — disturbed by existing above ground oil and gas facilities 22.02± Acres outside area of extraction (extraction limits) requirinq revegetation only . NOTE Well: All lands within the 102.87± acre permit area are to be considered as affected lands under C.R.S. 34-32.5-103(1) respective of this permit application and any subsequent permit revisions or amendments to the permit as originally approved. Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project I ()MLR 112 Permit Application 2010 Exhibit L Reclamation Costs The following assumptions of are based upon the pre-disturbed state of the application for purposes of determining estimated costs of reclamation and correlated financial warranty. Where appropriate, information is generalized and approximated from similar estimates determined by the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation (OMLR), as indicated: Summary of Reclamation Costs: $ 3,836.45±Total Site Discharge — Avg. Life of the Mine $ 46,272.82±Total Grading per Extraction Front. $ 8,303.04±Total Re-soiling $ 7,290.93±Total Re-vegetation $ 65,703.24±Sub-Total $ 7,619.00±Possible Mobilization and Demobilization Costs (pending OMLR estimate — estimate ) $ 73,322.24±Sub-Total Direct Costs $ 17,842.97±Possible Indirect Costs Pending RMS Indirect Costs @ 24.335 % of Total Reclamation Costs $ 91,165.21±Grand Total — Financial Warranty Amount — Pending OMLR Review and estimates including estimated expenses for State of Colorado Mobilization and Demobilization and other `Indirect' cost determinations by the Office. RECLAMATION EXPOSURE: Based upon the Mining and Reclamation Plans of this application, the status and trend of activities and affected land; and related calculations to estimate reclamation liability, are determined as follows. Please Note: Due to the difficulty of calculating heavy equipment costs similar to the Division's software program, unit costs from previous and reasonably current Division estimates of like or similar kind have been utilized to create a reasonably close estimate. The per unit basis from Division records are shown along with other sources used or referenced to determine unit costs, at the back of this exhibit. Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 2 ()MLR 112 Permit Application 2010 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs DEWATERING: Volumes per Tract: Tract A: 641,371.13 cu.yds. x 27 = 17,317,020.51 cult. x 7.48 gal/cu.ft. = 129,531,313 gal. Tract B: 214,847.38 cu.yds. x 27 = 5,800,879.26 cu.ft. x 7.48 gal/cu.ft. = 43,590,577 gal. Tract C: 1,651,035.02 cu.yds. x 27 = 44,577,945.54 cu.ft. x 7.48 gal/cu.ft. = 333,443,033 gal. Tract D: 415,226.24 cu.yes. x 27 = 11,211,108.48 cu.ft. x 7.48 gal/cu.ft.= 83,859,091 qal. = 590,224,014 gal. Avg. = 590,224,014 gal. ± 4 = 147,556,003.5 gal x $ 0.000026/gal. discharge (refer to Kurtz est. utilizing similar pump and rates.) Total Average Life of Mine Discharge Cost = $ 3,836.45 NOTE: The basins resulting from extraction will be reclaimed in an unlined state, since the operator retains sufficient water resources to do so. The basins may be lined or otherwise segregated from the area groundwater as an option to the approved permit, in order to liberate the water otherwise retained to supplement loss from evaporation in the unlined state. Since sufficient water resources exist, the option to line the resulting basins at an unspecified time during the life of the permit is retained under this application and as part of the approved permit. GRADING: As stated in Exhibit D — Extraction Plan: A 1600± linear foot standard morphing extraction front is comprised of a 1.251-I:1V face along an approximate 800-1200± linear foot advancing; wall with trailing side slopes up to 400 total linear feet combined along either side of the advancing wall where it serves to define the predetermined boundary of the extraction limits shown on Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map. Concurrent grading follows immediately behind the trailing side slopes as they occur along the extraction limits. This morphing extraction front, with its advancing wall, trailing side slopes, and concurrent reclamation along the extraction limits is approximate for all active Tracts. The 1600± linear foot total extraction front is 'morphing' in that the total linear feet of the front will not exceed 1600± linear feet, however, the advancing wall and side slopes may deviate from the 'standard' Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 3 OM LR 112 Permit Application 2010 Exhibit L — Reclamation costs lengths described above. For example: If the advancing wall is only 600± linear feet, trailing side slopes may have a combined length pending finished grading of up to 1,000± linear feet. Another example is if the advancing wall is 1,400± linear feet long, there is only 200± linear feet of trailing wall, and operations must be more Johnny on the spot in keeping up with concurrency in this configuration. So the 'morphing of the front generally affects the pace of concurrent reclamation of the trailing wall. • • Assuming a mean depth of advancing wall and sidewalls of 35.0± feet. 1600.00± lin.ft. (extraction front) x 927.38 sq.ft. (required fill — Diagram 1, above) = 1,483,808.00 cu.ft. _ 27 = 54,955.85 LCY Average push distance is 50± feet using equipment and assumptions leading to per unit cost previously determined by OMLR (refer to Kurtz estimates at back of this exhibit) = $0.842 per LCY. 54,955.85 LCY x $ 0.842 per LCY. _ $ 46,272.82± to grade to required slope per 1600.0± lin.ft. extraction front. Varra ( ompanics, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 4 ()MLR I12 Permit Application _'1111) Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs Soil Demand AND Re-soiling of Affected Lands (refer to Exhibit D): NOTE: The soil demand (and related costs) will decrease proportionately as extraction activities increase over each Tract of planned extraction. For now, an area estimate of 12.21± acres (Refer to Exhibit D) will be determined for resoiling expenses. At a depth of 0.5± feet, the total volume = 12.21± acres x 0.5± feet of soil replacement x 43,560.0± sq.ft./acre - 27 cu.ft./cu.yd. = 9849.40± cu.yds. total soil requirement. The majority of soil placement can occur using the an average placement distance of 600 ft., or less along embankments, (utilizing the same assumptions utilized at either Kurtz or Heintzelman Projects as shown at the back of this exhibit). 9,849.4± cu.yds of soil demand x $ 0.843 per LCY. $ 8,303.04 to replace 0.5± feet of soil over the existing affected lands remaining above the anticipated final water level. Establishment of Vegetation over Affected Lands: The demand establishment of vegetation over the affected lands will also diminish proportionately with the planned extraction of the Tracts. For now, the total exposure is estimated as indicated above to be 34.23± acres under a default: NOTE: The vegetation demand (and related costs) will decrease proportionately as extraction activities increase over each Tract of planned extraction. The cost for seed is shown on Exhibit L - Table L-1: Primary/Preferred Re-vegetation Seed Mixture and Costs and Exhibit L - Table L-2: Optional/Default Re-vegetation Seed Mixture and Costs. The mixture includes a substitute for mulch in the inclusion of a wheatgrass hybrid. The Division has historically agreed with and approved the inclusion of this hybrid as a substitute for mulch. These costs are as follows: $ 77.00± Preferred Seed Mix x 34.23± acres $ 2,635.71± Sub-Total Seed The cost for applying seed is based upon information derived in proximity to the Northern Colorado economy. Costs for tilling, fertilizing and seeding are based upon estimates from Longs Peak Equipment Co. These costs, including labor, are reflected as follows: $ 25.00± per acre Tilling $ 20.00± per acre Fertilizing $ 20.00± per acre Seeding $ 65.00± per acre Total Application Cost per Acre. Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 5 OMLR 112 Permit Application 2010 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs x 34.23± acres $ 2,224.95± Sub-Total — Application Costs $ 4,860.66± Sub-Total Re-vegetation (seed + application) Costs. Assume a 50± percent failure and add half the expense back into the total for reseeding, or: $ 2,430.33± Sub-Total Re-seeding costs $ 7,290.93± Total Re-vegetation Expense OTHER MISCELLANEOUS COSTS: Mobilization and demobilization costs are based upon the Division's estimates, which are pending. Demolition of Structures: None. Building Permits for structures will be obtain where required from the Weld County Building Department. Please Note: The per unit cost values derived from previous OMLR determinations for heavy equipment, as applied to this exhibit, are included at the back of this exhibit. Since there is no possibility of the applicant in fully reproducing the Division's methods, utilizing similarities from past OMLR calculations is the most viable and accurate means available for the applicant to derive reasonable estimates of per unit costs and should result in estimates very reliable with that of the Division. Summary of Reclamation Costs: $ 3,836.45±Total Site Discharge — Avg. Life of the Mine $ 46,272.82±Total Grading per Extraction Front. $ 8,303.04±Total Re-soiling $ 7,290.93±Total Re-vegetation _ $ 65,703.24±Sub-Total $ 7,619.00±Possible Mobilization and Demobilization Costs (pending OMLR estimate — estimate ) $ 73,322.24±Sub-Total Direct Costs $ 17,842.97±Possible Indirect Costs Pending RMS Indirect Costs @ 24.335 % of Total Reclamation Costs $ 91,165.21±Grand Total — Financial Warranty Amount — Pending OMLR Review and estimates including estimated expenses for State of Colorado Mobilization and Demobilization and other `Indirect' cost determinations by the Office. Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Dev clopmcnt Project 6 OM LR 112 Permit Application 2010 STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY I lepailuvcnl of Natural Re5outcrs 711 '.ilrrrr1.rn St., Room 215 I]enver.Gdrrr arin tlId)t C O LIIL O R A D O n III VISION r s t u ry n rlronr- 1071 Abo-r,6- RECLAMATION FAY: i 106 11 12-8106 MINING SAFETY 11,44 Haler.Ir I)ceenlher 2, 2009 (-coon, Mann U thwmen Lxo,ulrv[`Uurcinr Garrett Varra Varra Companies R.0w <artanr Division Direttot 5120 Ciage Street Natural Rectane Iructa• Frederick_ CO 50516 RN: Fleintzelman Project (Pit 116): DRMS File No. M-?009-0I 8: Financial Warranty Calculation I)car Mr. Varna. the Division of Reclamation. Mining and Safety has completed the l•inaneial Warranty calculation (cops' enclosed) for the above referenced permit. Please review the enclosed figures as soon as possible and contact our office if any calculation errors are noted. If you have any questions. please contact me at (303)866-3567 s81 16. Sinnceereely, Michael A. Cunni 'ham linvironmental Protection Specialist Pnclnsure ('C: Tony Waldron, DRMS 13rad Janes. Varra Companies (via e-mail) • _.- OOir r of (Mite of Mined and Reclamation Denver • Grand jam lion • Duran&^ At live and Inat live Mims CIRCES Cost Estimating Software COST SUMMARY FORM PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Date_ 05-Jan-2010 Permit or job no. : M-2009-018 Site_Heintle/man Project(Pit 116) User_ MAC Abbreviation - none State Colorado Filename : M018-000 County :Welt/ Agency or organization name Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safely Permit or job action :Bond Estimate TASK LIST(DIRECT COSTSI FORM FI.EEl TASK DIRECT NO. TASK DESCRIPTION USED SIZE HOURS COST 001 -Grading Pit Walls in Tract A dozer 2 I 1082Q $78,602 002 -Dewatering Tract A pimping 1 i 3.434 0 $24,107 003 -Replacing Topsoil scraperl , 2 20.122 $15,350 004 -Reyegetation of Disturbed Areas I revege 1 I 16 0 $11.134 005 -Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization mobilize 1 9.2� $7.619 006 -Replacement Pump pumping 1 0 1, $20.528 -----_ suarotnLs ', 3.677.70' $157.340 InJudos inflation Onto,adjustment of NA % TOT AL IlIkL(:T CO 5T'=[ $157,340 INDIRECT COSTS OVERHEAD AND PROFIT- Liability insurance- 2.02 % of direct total = $3,178 Performance bond : 1.05 %of direct total= $1,652 Job superintendent : 386.50 lrrs"...$/hc $52 10 total = $20,137 Profit : 10.00 % of direct total= $15,734 -net working hours compnsing job Intel O&P- $40,701 LEGAL-ENGINEERING-PROJECT MANAGEMENT- CON I RACT AMOUNT (duo(l , n E P)= $198,041 Financial warranty processing (legal/related costs) : 0.00 total$ NA total= $0 Engineering work and/or contract/bid preparation _ NA NA NA total= NA Reclamation management and/or administration 5.00 %o/colt NA total = _$9,902 CONTINGENCY• NA' NA total = NA 'r'onttegencres accounted roraf task level TOTAL INplkt f.I COC1= $50,603 TOTAL BOND AMOUNT(direct+ indirect) = $207,943 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software BULLDOZER WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task# 001 State .Colorado Permit/job# :M-2009-018 Date 01/05/2010 County Weld Abbreviation :noon User MAC Site /leintzelrnann Project(I'il lit f-ilenarne MO18-001 Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation. Mining Arid Safety Permit or other job action .Bond Estimate I ask description :Grading Pit Walls in Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Basic machine :Cat D9R-9U(2005) I lorsepower 405 Blade type :Universal Attachment no. 1 :RODS Cah ! hilt basis 1 pet day Attachment no. 2 :NA I fah) corn ce (CPC) Utilization Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour $58.16 NA Operating cost/hour $101.59 100 Ripper op. cost/hour $0.00 NA Operator cost/hour: $38.54 NA Total unit cost/hour: $198.29 Total fleet cost/hour $396.57 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Swell Loose volume 93,333 LGY factor NA vnlume 93,333 I CY Source of estimated volume_Preliminary Adequacy Review Response (Pace 17) Source of estimated swell factor:NA HOURLY PRODUCTION Job Condition Correction Facture_; Source Operator skill . 0 75 (a vu) Average push distance 50 feet Material consistency 0 00 (Cat HP) Unadjusted hourly production 2,222.9 LC/Mr Dozing method 100 (rlen) Visibility 100 (avg) Material consistency description : Job efficiency . 0.83 (lshifl/day) Compacted fill or embankment Spoil pile : 0.80 (bid-r1) Push gradient 0 30 (Col HO) Average push gradient 30 00 % (post Altitude 100 (Cat 1113) Average site altitude 4.830 feet • Material weight 0.79 (Cal HO Blade type 1.00 (S/SU/U) • Material weight 2.900 Ibs/L.CY Net correction 0 11 Weight description : Decomposed rock-50% Rock, 50%Earth I Adjusted unit production 235..15 LCY/hr Adjusted fleet production 470.90 LCY/hr JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size 2 Dozer(s) Total job time 198.20 Hours Unit cost $0-842 /LCY Total job cost $78,602 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software PUMPING WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Task no. 002 State :Colorado Pe:mit/job no. :M-2009-018 Date - 11/25/2009 County:Weld Abbreviation _none User : MAC Site Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename M018-002 Agency or organization name Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description :Dewatering Tract A HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Data Description Quantity Source Pump :Centrifugal pump-200M, 10 in. _ - I (user) Suction hose NA 0 - NA Discharge hose NA 0 NA Labor:NA 0 _ NA Cost Breakdown : Job Utilization : Ownership cost/hour: $0.00 NA Job shift basis- 3 per day Operating cost/hour: $7.02 100 % I Iorsepower : 70 Operator cost/hour : $0.00 NA Weight (US1) : 1.95 Total cost/hour: $7.02 Total fleet cost/hour : $7.02 PUMPING QUANTITIES Initial pond Conversion I final pond volume : 916,049,700.00 gallons factor: 1.0000 volume : 916,049,700 gallons Total pond inflow surface Unit inflow rate in Total pond inflow volume area : NA sq ft gph/sq. ft NA per hour 0 00 gph Source of volume estimate :Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs PUMPING TIME Maximum pump capacity 70 gph/pump Adjusted pumping capacity- 300.000 gph Estimated suction head 0 feet Initial unadjusted pumping time 3.053 50 hours Estimated discharge head 15 feet Inflow during initial pumping 0 gallons Total head 15 feet Net unadjusted pumping time 3.053 50 hours CPB pump capacity 300,000 gph/pump Altitude adjustment factor 1.030.9 (3%nde) Site altitude : 4,800 feet Pump efficiency factor. 1.0909 (55 nrin./hc) Inflow as % of pond volume : NA % Total adjusted pumping time 3.434.00 hours JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : 3434.08 hours Unit cost : $0.000026 per gallon Total job cost : $24,107 sheet 1 of 2 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software SCRAPER TEAM WORK PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency or organization name :Colorado Division Of Reclamation, Mining And Safety Task# : 003 State :Colorado Permit/job# M-2009-018 Date: 09/16/2009 County:Weld Abbreviation none User MAC Site :Heintzelman Project(Pit 116) Filename M018-003 Permit or other job action :Bond Estimate t ask description :Replacing Topsoil HOURLY EQUIPMENT COST Shift basis : 1 per Jay Equipment Description Scraper work team -Scraper:Cat 637G -Push dozer NA Support equipment-Load area :NA -Dump area :NA Road maintenance-Motor grader NA -Water truck :Water Tanker, 2.500 Gal. Cost Breakdown : Scraper Work Team Support Equipment Read Maintenance Equipment Scraper Dozer Load area Dump area Grader Water truck Import data filename: scraper2 NA NA _.- NA NA rnisclmk 43/O Utilization-machine : 100 NA NA NA NA 50 -Ripper attachment: NA NA NA NA NA ' NA Ownerhip cost/hour : $95.86 NA NA NA NA $7.87 Operating cost/hour : $218.11 NA NA I, NA NA $1103 Ripper op. cost/hour: NA NA NA NA NA NA Operator cost/hour: $38.72 NA NA NA NA $38.70 Unit subtotals : $352.69 � NA NA NA NA $57.59 Number of units 2 I 0 0 O 0 1 Group subtotals Work : $705.38 Support : $0.00 Maintenance $57.59 Total work team cost/hour $762.97 MATERIAL QUANTITIES Initial Swell Loose volume 18.215 LCY factor : NA volume 18,215 LCY Source of quantity take-off:Exhibit L-Reclamation Costs(Page 4) Source of estimated swell factor:NA HOURLY PRODUCTION sheet 2 of 2 Hauling Capacity : Scraper Payload (weight) Basis: Scraper Bowl (volume) Basis Material weight: 1,600 pounds/LCY Struck volume 24 CO ICY • Material description Heaped volume ;4 60 LCY Top Soil Aver age volume 29 60 I CY Rated payload : 75000 pounds Adjusted capacity 29.00 Payload capacity 46.88 LCY "'hourly production reflects vo'unrc cor sir rp.•r p.m on r„irh pall rnodnis Cycle Time : Job Condition Corrections : (.;de altitude (ft.) 4,830 Scraper ', Push dozer Source Scraper loading time 1.80 minutes Altitude adj : 1-000 NA (Cat LIB) Maneuver and spread time 0.60 minutes Job efficiency: 0.830 NA (Cat NB) bad time per scraper parr on push-pull models I Net correction 0.830 NA Navel time Road condition description :Finn, smooth, rolling, dirt/It. surfaced, watered, maintained Haul Route Seg. k Haul distance (feet) Grade (%n) Poll- res.(°/) Total res. (%) Velocity (fpm)! I ravel time(min.)" • 1 600 0.00 I 3.00 3 00 :'800 0 44 • laul time 0.44 minutes Return route- 1 600 0.00 3.00 3 00 I 2949 0.:35 "travel Imp for each cegmenl is adjusted for acceleration/deceleration. Return time: 0.35 minutes table velocities are 1nax attamab'e per total resistance shown.not average Total scraper team cycle time (load+ haul + maneuver and spread r return) 3.19 minutes Unadjusted unit production/hour 545.41 LCY/hour"` Adjusted for job conditions 45% 09 I CY/hour Optimal number of scrapers per push dozer NA Selected number of scrapers _ sulaper(s) Adjusted single scraper team (unit) hourly production 905.38 LCY/hour Adjusted multiple scraper team (fleet) hourly production 905.38 LCY/hour JOB TIME AND COST Fleet size- 1 Team(s) Total job time 20.12 Hours Unit cost $0.843 /LCY Total lob cost $15,350 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software REVEGETATION WORK sheet 1 of 2 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Agency/company name Colorado Division Of Reclamation. Mining And. rfrty Task no . 004 State.Colorado Pc ml,l_t_no M-2009-018 Date. 05-Jan-2010 County Weld Abbrevlalinn none Use' MAC Site name Heinlzelman Project(PiLlib) Flle•Ianro CH in 004 Permit or other Job action Bond Estimate Task description'.Revegetation of Disturbed Areas FERTILIZING DESCRIPTION(data source) -f UNITS ACRE UNIT ii' I UNIT COST/ACRE. Materials -item no. 1 No fertilizer or amendments required I -item no 2. _ -item no 3 I TOTAL FERTILIZER MATERIAIS COST I ACRE: $0.00 Application -method no 1 No fertilizer application required lI -method no 2 TOTM.FERTILIZER APPLICATION COST/ACRE'. $0.00 TILLING -method no I Chisel plowing fOMG survey data) I $620r -method no 2 TOTAI III LING COST I ACRE $82.01 SEEDING RATE PLS I NATIVE OR WARM r SOUL t IDS COST Seed Mix COMMON NAME VARIETY [ SCIENTIFIC NAME I LBS/ACRL INTRODUCED SFA ION 1 I H ,O.FT. i PLS/ACRE GRASSES,RUSHES and SEDGES 'NOTE.Table values on drill seed basis Totals are doubled if any seeding method oncii Pao dr I reeding is used Svitdlgrass-Blackwell I Panicumvirgatum 090 Nzhvn Warm 110 $631 Sideoals Crania-Vaughn Idouteloua curtlpendula 1 60 Native Warm 5 9 $1873 Sheep Fescue-Covar Festuca ovina 0.40 Native Con! 62 ! 5484 Indian Hicegrass-Native iOryzopsis hymenoides __- 1.90 Native Cool i 6.2 $5272 Blue Grama-Lei/muffin Bouteloua gracilis 0.20 Naive Warr, - .3 3 $3.64 Little Bluestein-Pasture Schizachyrium sco anus 0 70 Naive Warm 4 2 $13 73 P . Kentucky Bluegrass GingerFos pratensis 0.05 Infmduced Con! 25 $0.13 Tall Wheatgrass-Jose (Agropyronelongatum 110 Infmdur.ed I Cool 20 $4.75 Smooth Brome-Mancha,' Bromus inermis 010 Introduced Coal 03 $030 Alkali Saca/nn SPorobolus airoides 0Of Native rm Mimi 24 $009 Sand Dropseed Sporobolus crypfandms 001 Native Warn 12 SO 05 WheatXWheatgrass Regreen 1000 r na 00 I $27.50 I ORBS :heel 2 ci 2 Strawberry Clover(coated) ITri(oleen lragrfcrum 010 I lllbeducad NA ?1 $141 i SHRUBS AND FELLS(scodr I I I J __._—._ _. _.__ _ . _ _--_. 'TOTAL SEEDS SO.FT.: 40D 'TOi4L POUNDS PIy/ACRE'. 1i 21 'IOTAI SIIu\u.a i�tir 1pCRE $134 21 beed 1ppFITa;ion -Method Orr,seedrey(OMG survey 83/4) IOTA! S(ED APP ur:A-ION 1 (LA/ACRE $8523 MULCHING and MISCELLANEOUS DESCRIPTION(data source) i UNITS/ACRF Urn, F r I,-T/UNIT (.05! /ACRE Materials -Item no 1 No mulct,rltafenals required , -loin no 2 . -deli,n0 3 i 'tom,no 4 -. tOTAI_WAGE rnA roan,:cosr l ACRE. 50.00 Apphcaten -molls)))no I No mulch applmahon required mJhFUnn 2 -method no 3 __I TOTAI MITI CR APPI ICAT IFN L(Sr I ACRE $000 NURSERY STOCK PLANTING TYPE and SIZE MATERIAL PIANIIN( r:OST'r i,I In IA' IOIAI COMMON NAML NO /ACRE (planting cost data source) COST/PI ANT C()ST PI ANT PHI( )) r A r:fl PI ANT CO))I /AulfL Nnr c.ry sfuchrequled _ I -- - _ TOTAL NURSE'RV TM(NURSE' ,CN f 051/ACRE E0.00 JOB COST No of acres 27.08 Cast,ao^ $.101.44 MICA!mr .,OB x051 $8 RV ve _..__ _ —. I-stnnated failure rate(Rep Grin 50 00% Cost l aide' 5219 43 RI TI 113.1 JOB COST_ 529i 1 1 r 'b010(toil replanting work,toms s 101 Al JOB COST_ $11,134 CIRCES Cost Estimating Software EQUIPMENT MOBILIZATION I DEMOBILIZATION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION sheet 1 of 2 Agency or organization name Colorado Division Of Reclamation. Mining And SrJcpt [ask# 005 State •Colorado Permit/job it M-2009-018 Date 11/25/2009 County :Weld Abbreviation -none User MAC Site:Heintzelman Project(['it 116) f-ilename M018-O05 Benoit or other job action :Bond Estimate Task description Equipment Mobilization/Demobilization EQUIPMENT TRANSPORT RIG COST Shift basis 1 per day Cost data source CRC; Data Truck tractor description Generic on-highway truck tractor, 6x4. diesel powered, 4001IP(2nd half. 2006) Tr uck trailer description •Generic folding gooseneck. drop deck equipment trailer(251 501. and 100T) • Available rig capacities 0-25 Tons 26-50 Ions b Ur Ions Cost Breakdown : Ownership cost/hour• $16.63 $18.37 $22 33 Operating cost/hour• $44 38 $46 13 $50.07 Operator cost/hour $27 66 $27.66 :12/ 66 Helper cost/hour $0.00 $25.39 $25.39 Total Unit Cost/hour- $88.67 $117.55 $125 45 NON-ROADABLE EQUIPMENT Machine Weight/unit Ownership Haul Pig Fleet Size I taut I rip I Return l rip DOT permit Description (Tons) Cost/hr/unit Cost/hr/unit (No. units) _ Cosl/hr/fleet Coshlrr/fleet Cost/fleet -Cat D 10R- 10U(2005) 83.99 $76.61 $125.45 2 $404 12 :5250.90 i $0.00 -Cat 6375 57.38 $96.37 $125.45 2 I $443.64 $250.90 $0.00 • • • • • • • Subtotals : $847.75 $501.80 80.00 ROADABLE EQUIPMENT sheet 2 of 2 Machine Total Fleet Size Haul Trip Return Trip Description Cost/hour/unit (No_ units) Cost/hr/fleet Cost/hr/fleet -Water Tanker, 2,500 Gal_ $45.35 1 $45.35 $45 35 Subtotals :`.. $45.35 $45.35 EQUIPMENT HAUL DISTANCE and TIME Nearest major city or town within project area region : Longmont Transportation Cycle Time : Non- Total one-way travel distance : 120 miles Roadable Roadable Average travel speed 10 0 mph Equipment Equipment Haul time (hours)= 0.30 0.30 Total non-roadable mob/demob cost *- $7,591.77 Return time (hours)= 0.30 0.30 'two round Ups with haul rig Loading time (hours) _ 2.00 NA Total roadable mob/demob cost"_ $27.21 Unloading time (hours)= 2.00 NA "one retina tbin,no harm ns Subtotals= 4.60 0.60 JOB TIME AND COST Total job time : 9.20 hours Total job cost: $7.619 Exhibit L Reclamation Costs 6.4.12 EXHIBIT L - Reclamation Costs (1) All information necessary to calculate the costs of reclamation must be submitted and broken down into the various major phases of reclamation. The information provided by the Operator/Applicant must be sufficient to calculate the cost of reclamation that would be incurred by the state. (2) The Office may request the Operator/Applicant to provide additional, reasonable data to substantiate said Operator/Applicant's estimate of the cost of reclamation for all Affected Lands. SUMMARY OVERVIEW: Assumptions of Affected Lands in the Pre-Disturbed State of the Application for Warranty Determinations. Where appropriate, information is generalized and approximated from similar estimates determined by the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (RMS), as indicated: Total Affected Lands (assume active extraction front in default — or — 1600.0+ linear feet for two active tracts — with 400.0+ linear feet of concurrent reclamation in default on the sides of each front — for an additional 1600 linear feet total additional wall, with a an average wall depth of 50.0+ percent of the 50.0± feet optimal depth of extraction (or 25+ feet mean depth), for a total linear feet at 25+ feet of depth of 1600.0+ linear feet Tract A + 1600.0+ linear feet Tract C — Acitive estraction front + 1600.0+ additional unreclaimed front from failed concurrent grading and reclamation = 4800.0+ linear feet Total to reduce to 311:1V median slope with a 75.0+ distance to achieve 3H:1 V if mean depth is 25.0+ feet = an approximate area of 8.27+ acres or 8.25+ acres to reclaim under default, assuming the balance is either permanent roads or under water. Further, assume Stage 3 has been reached and the plant site area and stockpiles contribute an additional 14.32+ acres of unreclaimed area upon default, leaving a total area requiring revegetation under default of 22.57+ acres. Finally, for purposed of determining an estimate for discharge of waters for regarding and reclamation under a default for extracted basins lower than the anticipated final water level, assume that approximately 25.0+ percent (essentially 21 .0+ Acres) of the potential basin area has been achieved and are full of water over Tracts A and C. Finally, assume an equal area of land to the extraction front is pending seeding or revegetation has failed, or an additional 8.25+ Acres (keeping in mind that the total Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzclman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 1 11 November 2008 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs area needed to reclaim if the site reaches the optimumal reclaimed area will be 27.08± acres (determined by subtracting the final basin area at the anticipated final water level, or 105.44± acres, from the area of the extraction limits, or 132.52± acres): Summary of Reclamation Costs: $ 33,212.71± Total Site Preparation Prior to Re-soiling. $ 7,522.61± Total Re-soiling $ 4,072.77± Total Re-vegetation $ 44,808.09± Sub-Total $ 4,000.00± Mobilization and Demobilization Costs (8 pieces of equipment) $ 48,808.09± Sub-Total $ 8,834.27± RMS Indirect Costs a� 18.1 % of Total Reclamation Costs $ 57,642.36± Grand Total — Financial Warranty Amount RECLAMATION EXPOSURE: Based upon the Mining and Reclamation Plans of this application, the status and trend of activities and affected land; and related calculations to estimate reclamation liability, are determined as follows. Please Note: Due to the difficulty of calculating heavy equipment costs similar to the Division's software program, unit costs from previous and reasonably current Division estimates of like or similar kind have been utilized to create a reasonably close estimate. The per unit basis from Division records are shown along with other sources used or referenced to determine unit costs, at the back of this exhibit. DEWATERING: Dewater 42.0±± Acres .•.21 .0± acres to dewater x 50± feet - depth 1050.0± Acre Feet of water x 325,900.00± gallons of water per Acre Foot 342,195,000.0± gallons of water to dewater Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzelman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 2 I I November 2008 Exhibit L Reclamation Costs Utilizing a 16" floating 150 HP/110KW/IIr at 5,000 gallon per minute capacity Fisher Pump discharging at a mean rate of 3750± gallons of water per minute ...3750± gpm x 60 minutes = 225,000± gallons per hr. 342,195,000.0+ gallons _225,000± gal/hr = 1520.87± hrs. - 24 = 63.37± days to discharge the water Speaking with Rich Elder w/ Fisher Pumps (2024 East 8`h St.; Greeley, CO), Rich indicated that his company does not rent Fisher Pumps, but if they did it would be determined in this manner. $18,750.00± cost of the pump of the same type as indicated above 2 @ half the value recovered in 3 months $ 9,375.00± 3 months $ 3,125.00± per month 30± days $ 104.17± per day x 25% mark-up for profit or $26.04 $ 130.21± per day (rental cost) x 63.37± days 8,251.41± Total Pump Use Cost The electrical cost for the pump will run as follows, utilizing information derived from United Power Company (Keith Emerson) based upon actual energy use from the same type and kind of Fisher Pump: Electric demand: 110KW x 1520.87± hours of use x $0.034± cents per hour = $5,688.10± $40.20 Meter Charge (Service Charge) $ 5,728.10± Total Electric Charge Estimate labor at $12.00±/hour total x 63.4± hours (or one hour per day) $760.80± Labor ...$ 14,740.31± Total Discharge Cost prior to grading sloped below existing pond. Varra Companies, Inc. Hcintzelman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 3 11 November 2008 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs GRADING TRACTS A & C plus 1600.00± feet margin for default: (refer to Exhibit L— Addendum A: Volume Graphic): Assuming a mean depth of basin of 25.0± feet with no walls above the basin. Average push distance is 50± feet using 2 — Cat D8N dozers @ $0.247/LCY Perimeter is 4800.0± feet x Cross-Section Area (Area difference between a 1 :25H: I V slope and a 3H:1V slope) = 546.88± sq. ft. 2,625,024.00± cu. ft 27 cu. ft. per cu. yd. 97,223.12± cu. yds. x $ 0.19± cu yds. $ 18,472.40± to grade to 3H:1V @ Tract A & C plus additional I600.0± feet margin for default RIPPING (none). SUMMARY OF SITE PREPARATION COSTS: $ 14,740.31± Dewatering $ 18,472.40± Grading Tracts A, C, plus Default $ 33,212.71± Total Site Preparation Prior to Re-soiling. Soil Demand AND Re-soiling of Affected Lands (refer to Exhibit I & J - Table I-1: Soil Volumes): NOTE: The soil demand (and related costs) will decrease proportionately as extraction activities increase over each Tract of planned extraction. For now, an area estimate of 22.57± acres (default area) will be determined for resoiling expenses. At a depth of 0.5± feet, the total volume = 22.57± acres x 0.5± feet of soil replacement x 43,560.0± sq.ft./acre - 27 cu.ft./cu.yd. = 18,214.54± cu.yds. total soil requirement. The majority of soil placement can occur using the an average placement distance of 600 ft. a the plant site location, or less along embankments, utilizing a Cat 637E. Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzelman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 4 I I November 2008 Exhibit L Reclamation Costs Since there is some swell, the volume of stockpiled soil is multiplied by a swell fact or 1 .33 to this effect: 18,214.54± cu.yds of soil demand x $0.413 per L.cu.yd. $ 7,522.61 to replace 0.5± feet of soil over the existing affected lands remaining above the anticipated final water level. Establishment of Vegetation over Affected Lands: The demand establishment of vegetation over the affected lands will also diminish proportionately with the planned extraction of the Tracts. For now, the total exposure is estimated as indicated above to be 22.57+ acres under a default: NOTE: The vegetation demand (and related costs) will decrease proportionately as extraction activities increase over each Tract of planned extraction. The cost for seed is shown on Exhibit L - Table L-1 : Primary/Preferred Re-vegetation Seed Mixture and Costs and Exhibit L - Table L-2: Optional/Default Revegetation Seed Mixture and Costs. The mixture includes a substitute for mulch in the inclusion of a wheatgrass hybrid. The Division has historically agreed with and approved the inclusion of this hybrid as a substitute for mulch. These costs are as follows: $ 27.80± Dry Land Mix $ 27.50± Hybrid Mix $ 55.30+ Total The cost for applying seed is based upon information derived in proximity to the Northern Colorado economy. Costs for tilling, fertilizing and seeding arc shown in Exhibit L — Addendum D: Longs Peak Equipment Co. estimate. These costs, including labor, are reflected as follows: $ 25.00+ per acre Tilling $ 20.00+ per acre Fertilizing $ 20.00+ per acre Seeding $ 65.00+ per acre Total Application Cost. Total reseeding expense = $ 120.30/acre. $120.30±/acres x 22.57+ acres = $ 2,715.18+ Sub-Total reseeding costs. Assume a 50+ percent failure and add half the expense back into the total, or: $ 2,715.18+ Sub-Total reseeding costs Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzelman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 5 II November 2008 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs + 1 ,357.59± (50+ % failure) $ 4,072.77+ Total reseeding costs OTHER MISCELLANEOUS COSTS: Mobilization and demobilization costs are based upon the Division's estimate of 8 pieces of equipment at $125.00± per hour for 4.0± hours, or $4,000.00±. Demolition of Structures: None. Building Permits for structures will be obtain where required from the Weld County Building Department. Please Note: The per unit cost values derived from previous RMS determinations for heavy equipment, as applied to this exhibit, are included at the back of this exhibit. Since there is no possibility of the applicant in fully reproducing the Division's methods, utilizing similarities from past RMS calculations is the most viable and accurate means available for the applicant to derive reasonable estimates of per unit costs and should result in estimates very reliable with that of the Division. Summary of Reclamation Costs: $ 33,212.71± Total Site Preparation Prior to Re-soiling. $ 7,522.61± Total Re-soiling $ 4,072.77± Total Re-vegetation $ 44,808.09± Sub-Total $ 4,000.00± Mobilization and Demobilization Costs (8 pieces of equipment) $ 48,808.09± Sub-Total $ 8,834.27± RMS Indirect Costs L 18.1 % of Total Reclamation Costs $ 57,642.36± Grand Total — Financial Warranty Amount Varra Companies, Inc. Heintzclman Project RMS 112 Permit Application 11 November 2008 111111111111(111111 III 1111111 III 1111111111IIIII(III(III /‘,5L 2788164 08118/2000 03:53P JA Suki Tsukamoto 1 of 1 R 5.00 0 0.00 Weld County CO THE GREELEY IRRIGATION COMPANY P.O. Box 449 Greeley, CO 80632 July 11, 2000 Mr. Robert Hanes 2305 East 16'" Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: #3 ditch on your property/Thorkel Nelson agreement Dear Bob: In connection with the sale of your property to Jake Kauffman & Son, Inc., you requested permission for the ditch running through your property to be relocated to the west to facilitate gravel mining operations. It is understood that Kauffman will cover the cost of moving the ditch and any headgates. The Company requires that a road for use by the Company and by Kauffman be constructed along the ditch. As consideration for permission to move the ditch, the 1885 agreement between the Company, Greeley, and Thorkel Nelson, or any subsequent similar agreements, to which you are a successor in interest by virtue of ownership of the land, will cease to exist. The Company will take back the maintenance of the ditch, and there will no use by you or your successor(s) in interest to the "waste water" referred to in said agreements. Please sign and date a copy of this letter for the Company's records indicating your agreement with the above. Yours very truly, (t.."' John C. Leone President Ro ert Hanes r� Dated: 7- / z- - O AFFECTED PROPERTY: The East Halt (E1./2) of the Northeast Quarter (NE1/4) and the East Half (E1/2) of the Southwest Quarter (SW1/4) of the Northeast. Quarter (NE1/4) of Section Ten (10) , Township Five (5) North, Range Sixty-five (65) West of the 6th P.M. , Weld County. Colorado Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St, Denver, Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293700 - - • APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SE 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2336 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 2256 Ft. from West Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I) for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring wafer levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-1. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules(2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED r �� / / // C�� /04 /// ,CJ rV7 SVJ Receipt No. 3663731A State Enginee DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 By XPIRATION DATE N/14 Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St,Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293701 - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD 3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2125 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 2075 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-2. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules(2 CCR 402-2),monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer,a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED cliakt z/04 SVJ �Cl State Engineer By /�/� Receipt No. 36637316 DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE A// �`f Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg. 1313 Sherman St. Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293702 - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 1356 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1913 Ft from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(0. Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-3. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED I 6-1/4- aiGt/,r/r9 SVJ State Engineer By „ /7A Receipt No.3663731C DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE (V • Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St, Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293703 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES BASIN MD • APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 915 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 438 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone.13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting. Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I) for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-4. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of wafer level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE. Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2). monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the Stale Engineer. a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatenng system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED 9,•;./ /� GGu+,�� SVJ State Engineer By /y ///) Receipt No. 3663731D DATE ISSUED O3-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE 7 )/ /� Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St., Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293704 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 138 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1338 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone.13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(1). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-5. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate. and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules(2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED tin kati(p/4 SVJ State Engineer By �t M Receipt No. `y 3663731E DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg., 1313 Sherman St.,Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293705 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD 3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 61 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1955 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting Northing ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIQNS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f) Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-6. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate. and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed welt driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules(2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer,a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatenng the aquifer.) APPROVED 4tbit�,�(' /6 SVJ State Engineer By Receipt No. 3663731F DATE ISSUED 0 -11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg . 1313 Sherman St. Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293706 - -_ APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD • APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2540 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1874 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NADB3) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I) for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-7. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. • 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE' Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally. pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2). monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED CaWKio4 SVJ State Engineer By ^ /M Receipt No. 3663731G DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE / y • Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St., Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293707 - -_ APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SW 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2223 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1674 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-8. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE. Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) 4ThAPPROVED ar 64 SVJ A State Engineer By i( �/A ,Receipt No. 3663731H DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE V / 1 Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St Denver, Colorado 80203 1303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293708 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SW 114 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 1876 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 1873 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting. Northing. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. • 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-9. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water • Resources within 60 days of plugging. • 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) aae69 � r ' APPROVED 64 SVJ n/ /� ,Receipt No. 36637311 State Engineer By �'/ f DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE / Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg, 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 (303) 866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293709 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2531 Ft. from North Section Line • FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 479 Ft from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-10. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well • The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the welt in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate. and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE: Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally,pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be convened to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED zD /�4 e,4O4 SVJ ( / Receipt No. 3663731J State engit r DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 BE /`7 /XPIRATION DATE 4 Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg.. 1313 Sherman St., Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293710 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2535 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS. CO 80524- 8O Ft from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone.13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 4O2-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-6O2(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(0. Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-11. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. • 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate. and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally. pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules(2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED r atu �t4 SVJ ,� / Receipt No 3663731K State Enginee DATE ISSUED 0 -11-2014 BEXPIRATION DATE /v/4 Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St.. Denver,Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293711• - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD • APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2190 Ft from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 53 Ft. from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting. Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-12. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE. Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer,a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED / a'V a1 04 SVJ State Engineer By A //� Receipt No. 3663731E DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE A Form No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg 1313 Sherman St Denver.Colorado 80203 (303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293712 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY SE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M. C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 2154 Ft. from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 557 Ft from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone:13.NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting: Northing. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(1). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-13. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shalt mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE. Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well. (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer. a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED aateitiG SVJ ,Receipt No 3663731M State Engin r DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 By EXPIRATION DATE N/A Form No OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS-25 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES 818 Centennial Bldg, 1313 Sherman St., Denver, Colorado 80203 1303)866-3581 EXST WELL PERMIT NUMBER 293713 - - APPLICANT DIV. 1 WD3 DES. BASIN MD APPROVED WELL LOCATION WELD COUNTY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Section 10 VARRA COMPANIES INC Township 5 N Range 65 W Sixth P.M C/O AWES LLC DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 4809 FOUR STAR COURT 1280 Ft from North Section Line FT COLLINS, CO 80524- 80 Ft from East Section Line (970) 590-3807 UTM COORDINATES (Meters,Zone.13,NAD83) PERMIT TO USE AN EXISTING WELL Easting Northing: ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shall be used in such a way as to cause no material injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402-2, unless approval of a variance has been granted by the State Board of Examiners of Water Well Construction and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(I)for uses as described in CRS 37-92-602(1)(f). Use of this well is limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved for the use of an existing well known as P-14. 5) This well must be equipped with a locking cap or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality analyses shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Division of Water Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 of the Water Well Construction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) The owner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with the well permit number and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must have been constructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well driller or other authorized individual according to the Water Well Construction Rules. 10) This well must be located not more than 200 feet from the location specified on this permit. NOTE Issuance of this permit does not guarantee that this well can be converted to a production well under a future permit. Additionally, pursuant to Rule 14.2 of the Water Well Construction Rules (2 CCR 402-2), monitoring holes constructed pursuant to a monitoring hole notice shall not be converted to a production well (Upon obtaining a permit from the State Engineer, a monitoring hole may be converted to a monitoring well, recovery well for remediation of the aquifer, or a dewatering system for dewatering the aquifer.) APPROVED SVJ State Engineer By //� ,Receipt No. 3663731N DATE ISSUED 03-11-2014 EXPIRATION DATE / l� -w amminIummi .t."- / � �� • - 1 • r • • 1 • 9 r • . , ` ` � . . .. + • ie. • ago ' ' 0 9 .f - - ' ) t • --1 t I - t t: • t '1 I. • • r .C �. A IJr •• • . 'N in- e ,� 0061: ,ig I 7 ' '�� 4iim 7 / 14I 4 ♦ aA _ . . a • • r t.` I`( 0\ \ tom- . . r - ' -- � ,, 4583. 01 `n z • I • ( � <t Ili ` gA (ipR 'NORT . FIELD .. T • _ t F " • LL . a .lrw1 . Y•� r .rco I(YP• ' I '. 22 /i/ w I r • "- mean UM sic.a _ , . 4:-. + kim 11 ` • IS .• A LEGEND• , .. . t •.le �� r , _ r 4 ` i PERMIT BOUNDARY • t . TS r ; j j EXTRACTION "If r ti I I • it LIMITS t J h r � - r . ts it DIRECTION OF �� ' {• — - 3 PO -. ` • p Z. • ' i 4 • II EXTRACTION I • .•s "eat . . �. ir Frnw.$ho. •h, - i • i, ! GREELEY IRRIGATION ` � ' ` 3 " ' XI 11 DITCH #3 • • ♦ r � _ L •• ti a I • It PLANT & • r• r w I‘Iclill!Illi. STOCKPILE ARE F' � " I in i /• • • l ' •. _� C4r 100 YEAR FLOC r5' C ) • N PLAIN LIMITO ter, n , ` '/ s, i- a (1' r I •,..1 — t �rr . FLOODWAY LIMITS L 4 N •. 47 o- l• \ 1� i I ti , , 41 ; O �� 457(T55 LQ _ • 11 1- 1 •, �k III _ W . r x mss..• ' , +— ,ti . • �,0 + .l • r F. .. NI nia IDDLE �. Ili N ,. • 4 , .� • . I 'II 1. • • .- - , • • - t W Wit" f�-'r'+_ _s #3 `� Q a . - r • • � I �. 3 SC - APGL .vi � * I X01 \ T & 3 � FCTC \ .i. - . - \\ 5 �, an Rood . .:�_ - _ 'ell �. \_ \ :tee" ' :,..e-22:23"E 658.28'(M) - _ I I I I^r__sr e ' 11 Ns. Found No. 4'M1Oar with 2-1`)Y' dh. Ala . n ( I II T5N R65W C-N-SW-NE fi . 1/64 I I . 510 2002 . I LS 30462 r• , 1'10/ ,, °° wily 1 s `/4,// M : ?I' I !I / T ill Y � 1 J • I 4580 . 92 I )1• r r l . 1; i 4588. 51 4568 . 33 14 b . ', SOUTH FIELD I I � 4576 . 76 I I I 700 • 1 YEgR , , F( °°° F$' j 3 Li 1 •1 -I J i / O ' I I. _r f ' • L ^ii,RYA - • r I . , � I A585. 69 x„P1 WD _ i 'Teti 5 ; ud I4 4587. 00 I 1 . I : I rLij li Q -' LA \ T & STOCK -' L AREA I I w I- �yriIl r • rr , 1 "fK, T t REM/U.0010g SOIL II STOCKPILE AREA - . . _ • - • 2 •t� • ANA 1 v" I rw \ 0Cli 4582 . 96 I : os . w>;, , ! • C.0 LI I Y w , • w 1 •+1.f 2N jW • `� r ' . r • , 7 4 , 4584 . 95 1, I 1 _ -Tr:- r .-,eba. _ - _ _ - _ - — _•—os rrlra � __ a —_ JCYb�.` �_ • — r — . : ' 1 — — — y _ _- . - -1�-.k 1_- - - . -. . . : - trail rr. — . _ - • 1� _ _ - 3 33 1 I_ _ r --rot-— ' — - -.". ,_ .— . - _ .. - _ _ N89'5 Duna No. 6 ftcbaF with ]--�.Zti Ca•I I. •' _ • '-` 1 - a_ • :/ w FY * • 11 ~� '•. • • g , + ,aim • _ H rC • . t ' j ifi�� t • " . . EAST 1eTH STRE , , , STRE N T - S R65W *, •7 •. . • t: •", . - .. t _.c • r I 1 . N \ r-SW-NE it510of yl • 1[ • • ' ,� . 1 - t.‘ all Prigs \ • . • Ls2�oaez 11 .. IN ill 1 I A i ellT it: tin" , ..° ' , , a 11 ' ., - ‘ tam- it, -' • st . , i ' •.:.[ ;t2".:, * Irik-4- 1 .A....1 T. .. . _. _ . _ h • _ - y • r • W - _ n SCALE: 1 INCH = 100 FEET VARRA COMPANIES, INC. PROJECT: \ / C r r C C son I \ C S r C C Project NOTES: DATE: 8 August ZO1 3 V r � . alzo GAGE STREET _ REVISION: 20 March 2014 FREDERICK, COLORADO 80534 + �/ + r r + n n TELEPHONE: (303) 666-6657 DRAWING: I V n 1 l C 2 e I- x l c c l o 1 OF 1 FI 1 • ' Ip� PAGE: Hello