Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.01 Exhibits Continued4 olc rarda!)rpoaratntnt and Ensin,nn, nt Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit REPORTING FORM FOR ORGANIC CONTAMINANT ANALYSES SAMPLER: FILL OUT ONE FORM FOR EACH SAMPLE Are these results to be used to fulfill compliance montioring requirements? YES Is this a check or confirmation sample? YES or NO PWSID: D13036 COUNTY Garfield SYSTEM NAME Crystal Ranch Corp X or NO X DATE COLLECTED 5/4/2010 SYSTEM MAILING ADDRES c/o Zancanella & Associates, 101 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 Street Address / PO Box Contact Person: Tom Zancanella Sample Collected By: CR Entry Point (F inished Water) Sample For Entry P oint Sample Please Indicat Chlorinate State Entry Point Code: City: State: Zip: Phone: 9709455700 Time Collected: 10:00:00 AM Source water Sample X Other Treatment 'inished - Not Treated (No chlorine or other treatment) Source(s) Represented: X DO SAMPLES NEED TO BE COMPOSITED BY THE LABORATORY? Yes No NOTE: CHECK OR CONFIRMATION SAMPLES CANNOT BE COMPOSITED For Laboratory Use OnlyBelowthis line Laboratory Sample #: D13036-1 Laboratory Name: Accutest Mountain States Client Name or ID: CRYSTAL RANCH Date Received in Lab: 5/5/2010 Comments: X Laboratory Phone: (303)425-6021 Date Analyzed: 5/6/2010 thru 5/17/2010 Page 1 of 5 E® 34 of 38 ®ACCLJTEST D13036 ja.; ,t t,, LABORATORY NUMBER: D13036-1 PWSID D13036 REGULATED PHASE I, II, V ORGANIC CHEMICALS - VOCs UNITS MUST BE REPORTED IN ug/L CONTAMINANT CAS# RESULT ug/L MCL ug/L STANDARD METHOD Lab Report Limit µ g/L Lab MDLµ g/L BLANK RESULT 1,1-Dichloroethylene 75-35-4 BDL 7 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 71-55-6 BDL 200 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 79-00-5 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2-Dichloropropane 78-87-5 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 120-82-1 BDL 70 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Benzene 71-43-2 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Carbon Tetrachloride 56-23-5 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 156-59-2 BDL 70 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Dichloromethane 75-09-2 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 BDL 700 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Monochlorobenzene 108-90-7 BDL 100 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL o -Dichlorobenzene 95-50-1 BDL 600 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL para -Dichlorobenzene 106-46-7 BDL 75 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Styrene 100-42-5 BDL 100 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Toluene 108-88-3 BDL 1,000 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 156-60-5 BDL 100 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Trichloroethylene 79-01-6 BDL 5 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 BDL 2 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Xylenes (total) 1330-20-7 BDL 10,000 E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL l3DL - indicates that the compound was analyzed for, but was be bw the Lab MDL. 6 = The analyt is found in the associated blank as well as in the sample. NT = Not Tested for Compound. MCL= Maximum Contaminant Level. lrg/L= Microg mins per Liter. Lab M UL= Laboratory Method Detection Limit. J -Indicates the presence ofa compound that meets the identifcation criteria, but the result is less than thesa nple quantitation limit and greater than the Lab MDL. (Above the Lab MDL, but below the PQL). Page 2of5 35of38 CACCVMPT D13036 Lab,rat: LABORATORY NUMBER: D13036-1 PWSID D13036 UNREGULATED ORGANIC CHEMICALS - VOCs UNITS MUST BE REPORTED IN ug/L CONTAMINANT CAS# RESULT ug/L MCL ug/L STANDARD METHOD Lab Report Limit µ g/L Lab MDLµ g/L BLANK RESULT 1,1-Dichloroethane 75-34-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,1-Dichloropropene 563-58-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane 630-20-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane 79-34-5 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87-61-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96-18-4 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95-63-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108-67-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,3-Dichloropropane 142-28-9 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 2,2-Dichloropropane 594-20-7 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL 1,3-Dichloropropene 542-75-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Bromobenzene 108-86-1 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Bromochloromethane 74-97-5 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Bromomethane 74-83-9 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Chloroethane 75-00-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Chloromethane 74-87-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Dibromomethane 74-95-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Dichlorodifluoromethane 75-71-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Fluorotrichloromethane 75-69-4 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Hexachlorobutadiene 87-68-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Isopropylbenzene 98-82-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL in -Dichlorobenzene 541-73-1 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Naphthalene 91-20-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL n-Butylbenzene 104-51-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL n-Propylbenzene 103-65-1 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL o-Chlorotoluene 95-49-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL p-Chlorotoluene 106-43-4 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL p-Isopropyltoluene 99-87-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL sec-Butylbenzene 135-98-8 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL tert-Butylbenzene 98-06-6 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL THMs - Bromodichloromethane 75-27-4 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Bromoform 75-25-2 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Chlorodibromomethane 124-48-1 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL Chloroform 67-66-3 BDL - E524.2 0.5 0.5 BDL BDL - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for, but was be bw the Lab MDL. 13 - The analyte is found in the associated blank as well as in the sample. NT = Not Tested for Compound. MCL= Maximum Contaminant Level. Itg/L= Micrograms per Liter. Lab MDL= Laboratory Method Detection Limit. J - Indicates the presence of a compound that meets the identification criteria, but the result is less than the sa nple quantitation limit and greater than the Lab MDL. (Above the Lab MDL, but below the PQL). Page 3 of 5 an 36 of 38 D13036 LABORATORY NUMBER: D13036-1 PWSID D13036 REGULATED PHASE I, II, V ORGANIC CHEMICALS - SOCs UNITS MUST BE REPORTED IN ug/L CONTAMINANT CAS# RESULT ug/L MCL ug/L STANDARD METHOD Lab Report Limit µ g/L Lab MDLµ g/L BLANK RESULT Dioxin 1746-01-6 NT 0.00003 - - NT 2,4-D 94-75-7 BDL 70 E515.4 0.1 0.1 BDL 2,4,5 -TP 93-72-1 BDL 50 E515.4 0.2 0.2 BDL Alachlor 15972-60-8 BDL 2 E525.2 0.2 0.2 BDL Atrazine 1912-24-9 BDL 3 E525.2 0.1 0.1 BDL Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 BDL 0.2 E525.2 0.02 0.02 BDL Carbofuran 1563-66-2 BDL 40 E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Chlordane 12789-03-6 BDL 2 E508 0.2 0.2 BDL Dalapon 75-99-0 BDL 200 E515.4 1 1 BDL Dibromochloropropane 96-12-8 BDL 0.2 E504.1 0.02 0.02 BDL Dinoseb 88-85-7 BDL 7 E515.4 0.2 0.2 BDL Diquat 85-00-7 BDL 20 E549.2 0.4 0.4 BDL Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate 103-23-1 BDL 400 E525.2 0.6 0.6 BDL Di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 117-81-7 BDL 6 E525.2 0.6 0.6 BDL Endothall 145-73-3 BDL 100 E548.1 4 4 BDL Endrin 72-20-8 BDL 2 E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Ethylene Dibromide 106-93-4 BDL 0.05 E504.1 0.01 0.01 BDL Glyphosate 1071-83-6 BDL 700 E547 5 5 BDL Heptachlor 76-44-8 BDL 0.4 E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Heptachlor Epoxide 1024-57-3 BDL 0.2 E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 BDL 1 E508 0.02 0.02 BDL Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 77-47-4 BDL 50 E508 0.05 0.05 BDL Lindane 58-89-9 BDL 0.2 E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Methoxychlor 72-43-5 BDL 40 E508 0.05 0.05 BDL Oxamyl 23135-22-0 BDL 200 E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 BDL 1 E515.4 0,04 0.04 BDL Picloram 1918-02-1 BDL 500 E515.4 0.1 0.1 BDL Polychlorinated Biphenyls 1336-36-3 BDL 0.5 E508 0.1 0.1 BDL Simazine 122-34-9 BDL 4 E525.2 0.07 0.07 BDL Toxaphene 8001-35-2 BDL 3 E508 0.5 0.5 BDL BDL = Indicates t ha t the compound was analyzed for, but was below the Lab MDL. B = The analyte is found in the assoc'aled blank as well as in the sample. NT - Not Tested for Compound. MCL- Maximum Contaminant Level. Fug/L= M icrograms per Liter. Lab MDL = Laboratory Method Dete tion Limit. J = Indicates the presence o f a compound that meets the identification criteria, but the result is less than the sang le quantitation limit and greater than the Lab MDL. (Above the Lab MDL, but below the PQL). Page 4 of 5 ® 37 of 38 ACCUTEST D13036 LABORATORY NUMBER: D13036-1 PWSID D13036 UNREGULATED ORGANIC CHEMICALS - SOCs UNITS MUST BE REPORTED IN ug/L CONTAMINANT CAS# RESULT ug/L MCL ug/L STANDARD METHOD Lab Report Limit µ g/L Lab MDL g/L BLANK RESULT Aldrin 309-00-2 BDL - E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Propachlor 1918-16-7 BDL - E525.2 0.25 0.25 BDL Metribuzin 21087-64-9 BDL - E525.2 0.25 0.25 BDL Metolachlor 51218-45-2 BDL - E525.2 0.25 0.25 BDL 3-Hydroxycarbofuran 16655-82-6 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Aldicarb 116-06-3 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Aldicarb sulfoxide 1646-87-3 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Methomyl 16752-77-5 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Butachlor 23184-66-9 BDL - E525.2 0.25 0.25 BDL Carbaryl 63-25-2 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL Dicamba 1918-00-9 BDL - E515.4 0.3 0.3 BDL Dieldrin 60-57-1 BDL - E508 0.01 0.01 BDL Aldicarb sulfone 1646-88-4 BDL - E531.1 0.5 0.5 BDL BDL =Indicates that the compound was analyzed for, b it was below the Lab MDL. B= The analyte is found in theassoc'ated blank as well as in the sample. NT=Not Tested for Compound. MCL= Maximum Contaminant Level. it g/L_ Micrograms per Liter. Lab MDL- Laboratory Method Detection Limit. 1= Indicates the presence ofa compound that meets the identification criteria, but the result is less than the sample quantitation limit and greater than the Lab MDL (Above the Lab MDL, but below the PQL). Lab director Laboratory Results Reviewed & Approved by MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80246-1530 Title FAX: 303-758-1398 5/26/2010 Date Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT D KELSO DITCH W-3944 IN THE. DISTRICT 'OUT IN A Jcr m FDR oa )7,22 SPRING CREEK IN -11",;:,D COUNT'Z AND r - NO. 5 FILF0 14\i wATER CCIJR": i. 7fl.:1 06 2D„1978, and was •- for wat.721: Divi7,i0,3 No, 5, State of - r_:ot)r:t on the 4th day of :3, 1973, 2--':OWA Lind Av7.1 t:hT! una,nad Rz4fore ▪ made such investigationa as are ,ThetMr oP L17;t-. stntelnents in 1:a are becol.aef11y ad7ised with respect. to the subject matter does rake the following determination and rui, in t:Iis to -wit: 1. in ne arc trae- 171.,Ilved are the Y.-7.11.ey Ditch ana Sprin,g Pirqline. 3. Tv t71,4 claimant znd addcess is John G. Powers; 131 113,gh,4.Ay 82; (22.rbondule', Colorado. 4. The SOUrCe Of the Water f .7Kel1V Ditch is Spring Creak, tri- butari: to the Roaring For.2: The no=ce of water for 1-1,?..r-;-Nartin Spring and Pipeline i a ,r.priag triburary to Spriag Crce1z, triburary to the Roaring Fork River. o: r)ir.,:h is lor-tt-,d on • Cr'r2o% in the NW.1-,7 of Si' 24. T.7 S.,R.F.13 W. o.,f • 6th about one and o.-.e-fDurth talDs abc.va the ▪ of Spring Crc-!%. (b) Th-: point ofdiversi:1,-7. o"! the Power,5-14arti_n Spring and rr is lo:7::Itc.J, t'- 5°7.% NEI of Sc.23, P.7 f,.,R.r;?. W. of tie 6th v.n., c: point w1,1212,L:g_the Wes. r.:lart_tc of S. -.1c.26, T.- S.,11.82 W. of the Gth P.., bears S. t32")..1,7. 7,443.61 feqt. (:11 fl. lir:UM, in DI.Ettrict Court o.warded 116, an ab -lc -:- o;'. wilr pE!r ,cond of t.1- ropriAtion L2.2.;:e .cti.on No. 132, the Garf',.,!ld County t'ae Ditch, Structure No- 84, right for 2.0 clbic feat to he used for irrigation, with .1 20, IU89. On November 29,1978, the claimant filed in Water Cou.-t for wc7.A: Division No. 5, an aoplication for chanqe. of witerigh Lc --quested th-_tt a change of use from ,..1 -tori • recreation, piscatorial, prot2cti..)n, anj livestock water be granted for 1.2.5 cubic fc,-: of w.tter par L1:7!cond of tinec he ,,;,Iter prev7lou-;17 to 1:.hL! uhder Priod.ty No. LH, turner rceY.s the ,At the in , used as an alternate p,.;.int of dtversi 0.75 cuoLc foot of water per second of .time. In suoport of these requests it is stated that Lr will serve tha same 1anc2A as have been historically sarv.,-.d by tha ell? Ditch water. 8. if au,Th pcsons or a cacraad contalal • ), No ater right ot othero cli:taa.4 is granid. conc7. tne entir..ld dp)1ic1 shotlid he gid td that t-'1-2 use. of 0.25 cubic' foot or'f water pi.tr secr.,ad oif time of that wa.:Ir a,sarded ko the Relly Ditch under PriorIty No. 116 be changed from irrigation to domestiu, irrigaion, piscEltorial, municipt..Vfire protnotoa und livestock wat, and further titnt the poillt of diversion of the Powers - Martin Sping and Pipeline, at the location as described in paragraph 5 (b) above, my ba rsd as an alternn,tn of diversion for said 0.23 cubic foot of water par second 01 I is accordingly ORDE2ED that this ruling shall be filed with the Water Clark an1 shall become effective u.. -Don such filing, subject to judicial review pursuant to Section 37-92-304 C.R.S, 1973. It is farther ORDERED that a copy of this ruling shall be -filed with priao Division Engineer ana the State Engineer. Done at the City oF Glenwood Springs, Colorado, this_Lfj day of 1979 No protest WP ruling conZirm.2 Oi tbi,J court; pr oE :;..fjury mun:iny in th„,.Va,_ BY THE RE.M11,4-: 4/ .,Lv•st.on L/ S1 -ate (-1,±: Colorado i hi iiet, and accordingly the foroing anai de thn Jzzdgemeat and Decree thai: L1-1,1 approval of this oh:align. of sjac-:. to re-sonsidaration by the Water Ju./ga on tha o of.f other du7:ing any ilariag 77.11r -J sVcccinq tha yoar :.n which thio dp!cision Dated 00. \-1.'?)r-w-k.00° EXHIBIT E KELLY WW DITCH CA132 A C7 Wo._ STATE `OP COU -° .w:' 'or OARFIELD. In the District- Court ot. the Ninth Judi- - }: ct*l Distrk t of the State of Color*•do, sitting ::::= a: ;ud,tor L.Ue. County of Girfleld. ht the matter o! tlie'' Adjadia►tton` of the' ,. • • .• • `• priority of Rights to the use of wster'tor =' • Deoretsl 'Omer::.,. . irrigation in water District. No: $8. • Now: on this filth day of May, A..D. 18814- this matter coming for 'tonal hearing' and adjudication, upoa:>the report of Ed*vartt T. Taylor, Rio:. Referee appointed -herein, and to whom this -matter was br•order of . this Court -Herein. entered.:on tho'. Sth day •of April, A.:'D: 1888, ;r erred for the _purposes in Bald order menst ed. se weU upon :the several .findings upon the evidence produced. hi this aatter as upon'Ibe id evidence- taken :by.. and before the said . Referee in =tbis-•-matter; and ,.the, .Court being ..satisfied from .the • .several rete `' of notice, certificates of publication, 'aliidavita Ind certificates of mkt •-Referee, that: the. said testimony returned, and -".,.ppon'vrhich the iiodings::hcr.lit returned -leave Severally -beim made, :Was taken upon due Mo lawful .notice.In.ail respects- according to - the ?petitions :or the statute in such "cage made • and provided,, and the: roles And .mv® l 'osiers• of this Court in -that behalf ".. this matter. made::an: queered; and farther, that the notice of'the, time set for tiling ceptions • in :.flair matter to said ```report ,and: • , .. figdings. •:and of the tEe set toe - the final hearing thereof and of this cause.•.. have been .duly' served on • all option entitled, to .notice : • - under the order -of .this Comet •in that ,behait entered, on the fist :• day at . April. `A: D."111119:12- meow and „term es : by acid order • • ▪ ,required: and farther, that ala Interested -1n this matter and, en- titled::. to notice. in ILO stage- of the - proeeedinge there*, US* at • el timer : been duty. notified aco ital:E o to luw and the,: orders -of -•• thie•.toiet; and; the report of the_ .said' Reta?se tiid Valor. together .with the- returns of. service of ' notices, :'Ildavits.. iadices`and- findii ga.beiiig tould'in dee tort, and the Court Uavi .: now here is o ude ` beard •.*11. psrttes. and• thea attorae7s so far uthey datire4 •.to be heard N peotively tonchink the esveral ,matters • 'b rain: ,tt_ is bf'the Court In sonlideeetton of ill ahs. primase! .here.. by ordered .and adjfdged- that the' several -•windings --ot the ;aid " eteree et reported to and. tiled .in .this' Court (as to pd. in• the re-. .urn .-,ihereot in: a certain.. book' numbered '"Book • 4," and. marked "Fiedinge of Reteree,"' and numbered . first. to twenty-seventh;^and 1 to 140 tactusive, on' pages .1:to-98_.of said: book.); bs':iu ttll:;thtngs approved and' coridrmed. -and :: that"they. tie tiikeu, deemed-- and'held :; in all respects asthe . findings. of'COO Courtin this Matter; and-tura •-••> • Cher,- it upon like -consideration by te Court here, ordered, ad-. • judged and- decreed in • respect to all and . singular., the ' findings aid dri►tt of a decree prepared by ',said Reter in respect to each ditch, canal and reservoir ,in said :findings <and dratt`ot • decree aa" found in:.ther return thereot In the, Certain book numbered "Hook. 6,7 and marked "Brett of es. prepared by fteteree,' numbered tlret to„twenty-nint '. and 1 to 140.. Inched* to pages 1 to .180 of said book., including the ryotr'ffndiags, and.,se "the .sane are Here-. !natter .; nttoned ;and designated •yin, separate '$arsgrapbs' •.-her t- 4 • as herelnatter L►, said, several paragraphs set totth object. • :;ever; -.to the, following next -mentioned.. provisions, to-wf't: Flrs't -- to -part of this decree shall in Fahy rase. be taken, deem- •-. ” ed. or. held to connnm,->hppair-or in any manner: affect any or right . of property held or ',chained by any person; aaeociatioa or x corporation': in.:. -or to any. ditch, Canal or. 'reseiwotr, i. e.., ti.e eon- itruction itself, or any part thereof, or the land or any part thereat, •-on which any_ such of the same.. nay be•� sitnged, .or the land held *r claimed: ses�a right of • way.,.of; any of them; • or aft t �or right," . interesciaia� oi', 'pro�Per4T arhatev.-er:• in or relattag :to any GE � �em: •= .. - Seebnd--No part of this, decree Miall he "taken, deemed or.-haid •: affecting In :any manner `Any question.':. or'cliim of -right„ -ba' tween the :ownets or •ei =*nate of—any—such diteb, canal or reser= noir,= sabetween each. other; whether capart•,ownere. 01 sharsheld- era era -Abstain,' or es stockholders• in any- rporatlon• or jotnt• stock company` claiming or. to claim the same or any. part: thereon nor .., " .. shall it, affect, the rights. interests or., elating of 'say consumers. ®t . water tor irrigation or domestic purposes. W'hether's* part owner. lessee, .shareholder or. stockhoider fn any corporation .holding or controllia�•tho same, ®i as: purchaser 01 wateraheretroai as ago. , x the rights;: interests or :claims>.of i►ny other party or part later • - estsd, •or clatmtpg ., ihterest or right' ih or to such_ditch, -canal or reservoir as owner,: lessee Or..part Ownersthereot..or as shareholder er stockholder:,in any corporation claiming: then .same as n .purcbaser o2 water therefrom—neither shall, it affect any claim,*. priority made,•or resisted us betwean 1partiesf tieing•'water for said • purposes - • " from the; same appropriation In -,aurditch, canal ,or reiervoir, to ch water, exceptingas hereinalter_Ideslgnated. S Third'-- No part of this decree Abell ins any;,Mann4r atect:.any •• questions between • two"or.. more parties,,clitn ing or :owning priori-...• ., ". tiea.:as -herein adjudged,. on .the same- stream •tn� any case where the' :. water,i0 :sncb.--streatei sinks and`"Irises: to the surface again -betweeeA,. • • ,....the locations. ot'tbo'beadgateg: ot'their,respecti6e ditches' or sonata, or •.in shy - dispute ss ,to- • the:, identity of the water - appropriated y either -part! out of suth sinking and' rising stream.- , • • • • Fourth—This decreer . sh i not affect : any- question o1 priority - -.between • cloth:ants 'Or. owned! otditches -:or' pals 'used• fa whole •. --or.. in . part tor milling or. manatacturing -or .water. power Lor other-- pub as to any. Water cayried'is iuch ditche s or •!thanks tor 'said' purposdi:. - • Fifth—This decree shall not affeiit.any olaiM, iaterest"or rlght •• Of any .cfr ,rctton br; to "the right of property. in any ditch; canal • • of Tosittotr, or, the ground on which the catie May' -be. itttuEated; : or any,Ouestton.:•whicp may arise between the stockholders-ctheroof or between thein and the State, .people or any -party.upoe the •solution of such corporition-, by -expiration of its- charter or ,other- wise •.as, to any appropriation of water or .rights secured by condom - nation proceeding by suck corporation: during its legal existence.. •= ... Stith; --No part of • this decree shall. 'affect in - any way any >rl bt. claim . or interest now or hereafter. held. or cfstmed to any ap• -proprlation of Water made atter° then. closing of testimony touching .ttm2 covet ction or enlargements of .the ditch, canal or reservoir: by means of wbtcb. such approl riation,;may have - been made: - .: Seventh --No ,part of ..tbls� deeres„ shall be taken or: held 'as .._ adjudging. to any clainfanta, or present or future rePressntativee • .of any claim oto any ditch, enotal er :raiervoir:.or party holding. us - lug or controlliug•the sameany right: W„take'aad,crirry by mewls of.any `canal, ditch.,or reservoir herein Mentioned or by.Virtue of • any appropriation herein adjudged' any water: from' any natural ` ".stream bit applt to the use tor,.whtch ch propriatlon has: -been`; trade: nor to allow any • excessive. Use or este ,ot wit*. `whatever nor .tp allow any .diversion? of water except for ba • and beneficial neer):, • • Eighth --That throuughout•esld Water District °%io,- 38 one cubic. :'foot of 'water per second of time is hereby •°adjudged and . decreed, to , ., • be• sualcient' in amount. to, properly and practicably „irrigate lltty acres of land,- and nothing in this. decree shall .be :taken' or : held,. to,. grant to., any tract or parcel of , land Water to•• any greater, aueouut ;. °• thai to said ratio ;and proportion. whether: d land be covered by one or more 4ttehes.> - " Nlntb :That the priorities •hereby established are. panted and ado absolute,.,but the . user of .•the respective amounts 'of -caster t reby 'granted' and declreed> Is' .restricted to the practieabie nttli- trots thereof by the parties, lawtutly entity thereto, and wirer is only allowed to flow *into said "dltches In Bald ruin and pro. portion se : the lend under Mid ditcnes. respectively,, shall be'' brought under 'practicable cultivation,v t. e., tilled, meadow; or. gcod • pasture land: .' And, provided. that ;the; laid lands --under. said •ditches. respectively, shall • be, brought under sacs.cuttt,tettion, and the asi�l proportionate', dreamt of water Used cher on. 'by dee parties lawttsilly retitled thereto; with reasonabla,dtllg ca. . Tenth:. -This- decree shall be 'taken, •'decreep. and held as . in- • -tended to determine and .esteblieh >tbe.several priorities hof.right• by .approprlatton :of water trona the. streams of saIdr:Wster Dis- trier No aa, for irrigation, of -the several 4itcbea,'csnals will --reser- vain -'in Bald\district, concerning which testimony hiss beer* oiler- e4, to thea matter, ,.each . according to the ooaet> uctlou, eelargomneot • . or entenatou thereof; With the.- amount:o2 . water held haft !nen appropriated thereby.. -,$object to -_the several bait m , entioned' tea provisions.' it lefur:.. - • Hier, .as to the id ,ditcbea; tansy end.. reservoirs,: and, tlie"severaf appropr-latioua of water,by means,oftbem respectively' clpianad -inn. . this matter, :ordered, adjudged' and=. decreed as. in Arid by the4liedinga oiaatd'It4tert?se,as follows; to-rritf.-• J • - Ebveritb. -That soil- dttcbes bs . and ;tba same. are hereby num... bered according to tbe:,date of•tbeir several and respective oonsirac... Mons: and ,said dates. are - hereby. determined and decreed to- be :as' tolloe►a: .. • - . 76R • NUMBER SEVENTY-SEVEN ,THE KELEY PITCH That said ditch „is, eatltied - PriorityNo. '10.1: Said ditch it claimed by'' Eltep. Keley. It Is a ,ditch n. ed for the, irrigation of lands and takes; Its supply' of water from' Sop: is Creek, in Pitktn County - The headgate is tented on the Aaetnk -oto said creek,-; about eix r Il" sbove. where -Sopris :'empties sintof the Roaring Fork Riven And it is. hereby`adJudged and decreed. that.there:be allowed Ao•flow..Into.-said ditch froth said creek,.; for. the use"atoresaid:'''and • for the beneft''o' the party -lawfully eatitletPthercto,' under and••by- > virtue of the appropriation by original construction—Priority -NO. t0 t-2.8 cubic Net of waterper sec®ad, of 'tante. NUMBER SEV$NTY•EIG$T.. THE pA$TLE CREEK DITCH4 ' That -said _ditch Is entitled • to isriortty No.,..102: Said ditch to claimed by J:' W. Elliott. It is a, ditch used for the irrigation:. ,,of lands and takes its-suj►pty of .water froM Castles Creek; in Pitkin • Counts►.." The headgate fs•>loc-ated on the west bank of said creek, ' about seven -eighths• of w mile above the, month of Queen's:-aulch: And it ifs. 'bereby , adjudged' and ds!cre that *ere • be' allowed to flow! into said ,.ditch from said -creek tor `the use atoreskid end' -< for the:>bengiit of the party lawfully entitled thereto, -under and:.br .. virtue of the i appropriation by . original •construction—Priorit;: ' No.., 102-4 cable feet. of water ,per second. of times NUS •SEEVENTY•NIpE THE Hula DITCH That. said ditch .is entitled. to :Priority N. 104. Said :ditch is claimed by A Miller. -It Is a ditch used for the irrigation ®f lands and taket its supply,;.ot water from Woddy ,Creek. The. . beadgate is located; a Moody Creek on tho .8.7T. quarter ®t 0, To. 9 8., II: 86` W. ;. And it ia,hereby .adjudged and decreed that there be: allowed to flow into, said ditch, from said creek, tor the use ,atoreaid and forthe benefit of e the. party law:fulfy, entitled . thereto. under :•and by virtue -of the approprlstton by:original contraction—Priority No. 1®4 04. of a cubic; foot of water per second of time. • AMMO • V• TIE SOU'ANE. ND.. CAVANAUGH DITCH •" This said -diteh "ts `entitled to - Prtorittes.Nos: 1084170:: Said' ditch' is ,claimed by Lewis Lang •tone -quarter) an ,Charles;Pravert® (three-quarters) 'their; interests one-fourth and :.three-tourthe. It virtue of the appropriation.* drat -enlarge Et® sic 1., bic feet, of water Per second of -time. That., the whole amount of *Ater to .which said ditch is at pr nt entitled is computed at 2.6 cubic feet per -second of. time. molt ziarmant THE KEIT+ DITCI That said ditch in entitled > nri rity No• 114. Said 'ditch • ia'claimed by 3Pbn Kelso,W.' D White and•Thoman ICellj►, one-t>zird interest, each. ' It Is a ditch used•.tor the Irrigation of .lends and takes; its supply of , water from the .R ring Fork : River, In Oarfietd, County. The headgate'.is located on! the north bank of said river: on Sec. 27, T. 7 S•; R. 88 W.' .. And it is hereby:.adjudged and decreed that there be allowed ., to flow Into said ditch from said 'river, for the 'nee aforesaid and ., for. the benefit of the parties lawfully eatitled theret<., underand by-,.;, virtue: of the appropriation by ,-original ;,coastructi®z�,—Priority NO:. '114--Y cubic foot of water per second of time. G$TY-FOUR THE KELLY DITCH That, said' ditch is entitled' : to• Priority No. 11-6: Said• ditch is claimed by Thomas Kelly. " It 1s a ditch used for the irrigatic of lands and takei its supply of water from Spring Creak; in Garfield County. ;The headgate Is located on the west bank of said: creek, . about one and,one-fourth 'lies;iibove where, it einptie4 into the Roar - „Inv Fork, in said County. „ ,: - • -And it is hereby adjudged and decreed that there be "allowed” • to noir :into said itch fro « said creek, for the use aforesaid and for benefit of the, party lawfully entitledthereto, -unde ;and'by virtue o8 the %appropriation:by. original conatructlof Priority No. •116--2 eeablc feet f miter -per sec®.';d of -ti,. -e< NUMBER EIGHT7f Tz WEAVER AND LEONHARD DITCH That said ditch >fs -• entitled . to. Priority No. =-117 Sato 44011 is claimed: 1» -Philip E.: Weaver, two-thirds: and:John.M Leonhardy. one-third, It Is a ditch Used for. the Irrigation of, lands and takait =:, 'its . supply Of water from Rock Creek, in Garfield County.. - , headgate'is<locete Vin;. the east base • of 'eat € ere* about two .and one -halt Ines- above..the mouth thereof. v, And' -It is hereby -'adjudged- and deoieed that there be allowed ^to flow 'Inca said . ditch from said creek, -for the use aforesaid and for the benefit ot`the parties lawfully entitied::thereto, ugder..and by virtue of the appropriation by original construction --Priority No 11.74=m4.8 cubic 'feet. of water:: per second gf ti ne :. V Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15— Exhibits Exhibit C - Geotechnical Report Geologic and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation prepared by CTL/Thompson, Inc. CTL THOMPSON R COQ, A• A?• 0 GEOLOGIC AND PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO Prepared For: CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. c/o Holland and Hart 600 East Main Street, Suite 104 Aspen, CO Attention: Mr. Art Daily Project No. GS05567-115 May 12. 2011 234 Center Drive 1 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601. Telephone: 970-945-2809 Fax: 970-945-7411 TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE 1 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS ,. 1 SITE DESCRIPTION ...............................2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ,.,......,.. 2 SITE GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 6 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 7 Effects on Ground Water and Aquifer Recharge Areas 8 Natural Clay -Silt 8 Gravel 8 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 9 Site Grading 9 Imported Fill 10 Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes 10 Utility Construction 10 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRUCTURES 12 Foundations 12 Slab -on -Grade and Basement Floor Construction 12 Below -Grade Construction 13 Surface Drainage 13 General Design Considerations 14 CONCRETE 14 FINAL DESIGN CONSULTATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS 15 GEOTECHNICAL RISK 16 LIMITATIONS 16 FIGURE 1 -LOCATIONS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 2 -SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS FIGURE 3 - CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN FIGURES 4 AND 5 - GRADATION TESTING RESULTS TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX A - GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. G5055€? -11S G.51355[17 0044115V. Rapartn1G505567 115 R1.doc SCOPE This report presents the results of aur Geologic and Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for the Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant in Garfield County. Colorado. The purpose of our investigation was to identify geologic hazards that may exist at the site and evaluate the subsurface conditions to assist in planning and budgeting for the proposed development. We have previously performed a Slope Stability Evaluation" for the Powers Pit. dated May 6.2010 under our Project No. GS -5464-145. We performed the evaluation to assist with reclamation of the site once ruining operations are complete. This report includes descriptions of site geology, our analysis of the impact of geologic conditions on site development. a description of the subsurface, ground water conditions found in our exploratory pits. and discussions of site development as influenced by geotechnical considerations. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Crystal Ranch Corp and Holland and Hart, based upon our understanding of the development plans. The recommendations are considered preliminary and can be used as guidelines for further planning of development and design of grading. We should review final development and grading plans to determine where additional investigations are merited. or if we need to revise our recommendations provided in this report. Additional investigations will be required to design building foundations..A summary of our findings and recommendations is presented below. More detailed discussions of the data, analysis and recommendations are presented in the report. SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS 1. No geologic or geotechnical conditions were identified which would preclude the planned development of this site. Collapse -prone soils outside of the pit area and potential for sink hole formation related to Eagle Valley Evaporite are the primary geologic concerns. 2. The subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory pits generally were man -placed fill consisting of aggregate base course and crusher fines underlain by clean to slightly silty gravel to the maximum CRYSTAL RANCH CORP 1 POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. 0505557-115 *S05567 01M116',2 Ru. rkaoG$G5657 '115 RI (tau explored depth of 12 feet. Four feet of sandy clay -silt was encountered in the bottom of our exploratory pit TP -2. 3. We did not encounter ground water in our exploratory pits at the time of exploratory excavation operations. Our exploratory pits were backfilled immediately after exploratory excavation operations were completed. 4. We anticipate footing or slab foundations will be appropriate for buildings constructed at the site. 5. Asphalt or asphalt with aggregate base course are suitable for access roads and parking Tots. Details are presented in this report. SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of the intersection of State Highway 82 and State Highway 133 in Garfield County. Colorado. The approximately 24 acre site consists of a Lafarge gravel pit and concrete batch plant Several areas of the pit floor have been used for disposal of waste concrete. State Highway 82 borders the site on the south. and Crystal Springs Road borders the site on the east. The parcel is surrounded by rural ranches and single-family residences, Ground surfaces on the floor of the pit are relatively flat, sloping down to the south at grades less than 5 percent. Steeper slopes (some vertical cuts) surround the pit. Areas of the Powers Pit were currently being rained. Vegetation at the site consisted of sparse weeds and grasses. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT We understand that potential development of the parcel could consist of commercial and light industrial Tots (including the continued operations of the concrete batch plant) with paved parking. roads and underground utilities (as shown on Figure 3). Below -grade construction associated with these uses will likely be one - level, if chosen. Preliminary plans indicate site grading will consist of construction of access roads, utilities and some building pads. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GSUSSS7.11S S:1GS05567.51X111512. Report51G505557 115 PIA or 2 SITE GEOLOGY AND GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Site geology and geologic hazards on this parcel were evaluated by David A. Glater. P.E.. C.P.G., using field reconnaissance on April 28, 2011 and a review of available literature. The ground surface at the time of our visit was clear of snow. Literature references are cited at the end of this section. We did not observe bedrock outcrops within the pit. If present at the pit bottom, it has been covered by mining operations. Outcrops were noted in road cuts along Crystal Springs Road, just northeast of the property. Mapping by the Colorado Geological Survey (2008, Reference 2) indicates bedrock materials beneath the Powers Pit are the Pennsylvanian age Eagle Valley Evaporite (Pee). a sedimentary deposit that comprises gypsum, anhydrite, limestone carbonate and shale. The bedrock in this area is highly folded and faulted due to tectonic forces and dissolution by ground water over hundreds of millions of years. An excerpt from CGS' 2008 geologic rnap is reproduced below r —) 2008 CGS Geologic Map — Scale_ Distance between section lines is about 1 mile or 5280 feet. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 S; osass57.00O 11542. Rnportn+GS06567 116 RI.dQc 3 Bedrock materials are covered by Glacial Terminal Moraine deposits (Qtm). The glacial material was deposited during recession of the middle to late Pleistocene ice sheets in this area. probably 500.000 to 1 million years ago. The moraine is a gravelly cobble -boulder soil with a clayey sand matrix. The gravel pit processes the moraine deposit. estimated to be about 30 feet thick or more. Geologically recent alluvium - colluvium (Qaco) and slopewash-colluvium (Qcs) up to about 25 feet thick covers the moraine deposit and is the "overburden" for the mine. The alluvium -colluvium is more granular and is exposed in un -mined areas in the southern portion of the pit. The slopewash is finer -grained, described as a pinkish -brown silty and sandy clay. Geologic hazards typical in Colorado are described in Reference 3. Brief reconnaissance found no evidence of avalanches, landslides, rockfalls, mudflows and debris fans. expansive soil and bedrock on the Powers Pit property. Portions of the pit are being actively mined. Some areas expose nearly vertical slopes within the silty and sandy clay overburden and the cobble -gravel mine zone. These over - steepened slopes are potentially unstable. Reclamation was underway in the east portion of the pit. Slopes were being graded at inclinations of about 3H:1V or flatter, as shown on the reclamation plan. Where engineered. reclaimed slopes are present or planned: we believe they will be stable. provided hydrostatic pressure is not allowed to build within them. Collapsible soil deposits are not expected inside the Powers Pit where the overburden has been removed for mining and replaced during reclamation. Some of the undisturbed soils around the pit may have some degree of collapse potential upon wetting. This should be investigated if improvements are planned outside the pit. The regional geologic hazard of sinkholes due to ground subsidence caused by widespread dissolution of salt in the bedrock may affect the property. CGS mapped two instances of sinkhole forrnation nearby on Crystal Springs Road, shown as X's on the geologic snap. We were not able to see the evidence of sinkhole activity mapped by CGS. We believe the likelihood of sinkhole formatiorn is smaller in the CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO, GSO5567.115 9�YGS65567M0114115\2. Popo 1 1GSb5587 115 R1.r104 4 mined pit than the surrounding area along Crystal Spring, because of the historically persistent drainage and the recently removed loading of 10's of feet of soil. A proper way to evaluate the presence of subsidence features such as filled or open voids is to perforin targeted deep drilling where critical structures will be located. The soil and bedrock units are not expected to respond unusually to seismic activity. Liquifaction potential is considered nil. We believe most locations on the pit bottom can be considered to be Site Class C. Sites outside the pit will likely be Site Class I]. Only minor damage to relatively new, properly designed and built structures would be expected. On April 27. 2011, our project engineer. Mr. Edward R. "Ted" White, visited the site and performed a radiation survey. Our survey consisted of walking along lines the length of the site in an east -west direction. Lines were spaced approximately 30 to 50 feet apart. We observed radiation measurements that were taken with a Ludlum Instruments. Inc. Model No, 19 Micro -R -Meter carried at arms length (approximately 2 feet above the ground surface). Radiation readings were observed by continuously glancing back and forth from the Micro -R -Meter to the line of travel. We observed radiation measurements averaging approximately 2 rnicroroentgens per hour. Some areas had readings as low as 0 microroentgens per hour and as high as 5 rnicroroentgens per hour. In our opinion, these readings on the site are indicative of normal background radiation for the area in Garfield County near the pit and do not indicate contamination. Excavations at individual sites will expose the subsoils and could yield different radiation readings. It may be appropriate to perform a radiation survey of completed excavations at individual locations on the property. In summary. we find no geologic hazards that preclude development of this parcel for the planned uses. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP, POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT Na G505567-115 S1GSO5567.0O04115' .RepnrtMGS05567 175 R1.dac 5 Geology Section References 1. ''Surficial Geology. Geomorphology. and General Engineering Geology of Parts of the Colorado River Valley, Roaring Fork River Valley, and Adjacent Areas. Garfield County. Colorado'' by J.M. Soule and R.K. Stover, Colorado Geologic Survey Open File Report 85-1, Plate 1A - Surficial Geologic Map.. Plate 2A - Geomorphic Features Map. Plate 3A — Geologic Hazards Map, and Plate 4A — Construction - Materials Map, 1985 2. "Geologic Map of the Carbondale Quadrangle. Garfield County. Colorado" compiled by Robert M. Kirkham and Beth L. Widmann. Colorado Geological Survey Map Series 36, 2008 3. "Guidelines and Criteria for Identification and Land -Use Controls of Geologic Hazard and Mineral Resource Areas" by W.P. Rogers, et al. Special Publication 6, Colorado Geologic Survey, 1974 4. Aerial Photography by Google Earth. Date believed to be several years ago. prior to construction of facilities south of the earth -filled ponds. "Collapsible Soils and Evaporite Karst Hazards Map of the Roaring Fork River Corridor, Garfield, Eagle. and Pitkin Counties. Colorado" by Jonathan L. White, Colorado Geological Survey Map Series 34, 2002. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Subsurface conditions were investigated by observing the excavation of seven exploratory pits at the approximate locations shown on Figure 1. The pits were excavated using a trackhoe. Our laboratory/field manager observed exploratory excavation operations, logged the soils found in the pits and obtained samples. Summary logs of the soils found in the pits are presented on Figure 2. Samples recovered from the exploratory pits were returned to our laboratory and visually classified by the geotechnical engineer. Laboratory testing included Atterberg limits, particle -size analysis, and water soluble sulfate content. Laboratory test results are presented on Figures 4 and 5 and summarized on Table I. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GSOSS 7.115 SAGS05567.000N1512. RapurtsiGS055G7 115 R1,rlor. 6 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface conditions found in our exploratory pits TP -1, TP -3 and TP -4 were approximately 2 feet of aggregate base course underlain by natural sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders. At the TP -5 and TP -6 locations our exploratory pits penetrated natural gravels from the ground surface to the maximum excavation depth. Three feet of crusher fine (sand and fine gravel) were underlain by natural gravel in TP -7. At the TP -2 location we found 2 feet of aggregate course above 6 feet of granular fill underlain by the natural gravels, We encountered an approximately 9 foot layer of waste concrete on the south edge of our pit TP -5. A more detailed description of the subsurface conditions is presented in our exploratory pit logs and laboratory testing. Ground water was not encountered in our exploratory pits at the time of exploratory drilling operations. Ground water levels on the parcel are likely related to the Roaring Fork River and are nearest the ground surface during peak snowmeltlrunoff, during April and May. We do not anticipate that ground water will significantly affect future development of the site. We reviewed the National Cooperative Soil Survey prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture (U.S.D.A.) The Sail Conservation Service (SCS) classifies the soils on the site as Almy loam with slopes of 1 to 12 percent, and Fluvaquents with slopes of 0 to 10 percent. The SCS indicates that sites with these soils may be very limited (poor) to not limited (excellent) for development of dwellings with or without basements, lawns and landscaping, local roads and streets, slopes, and small commercial buildings due to problems related to shrink/swell or low soil strength. The SCS indicates that corrosion of concrete is low and corrosion potential of steel may be high. Based on our site specific field and laboratory investigation. we believe mitigation may be required; however, the site is not considered "poor" for development. Adjacent developments have generally performed well. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS PfT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567.115 SaGS05567,06lR11S12. Rn1 orts1GS05567 115 R1.arz 7 Effects on Ground Water and Aquifer Recharge Areas The nearest major floodplain to the Powers Pit Concrete Plant is the Roaring Fork River floodplain. approximately 1/4 mile to the south. Proposed uses of the site do not include waste disposal. CTL Thompson. Inc. has previously provided a slope stability analysis for the Powers Pit under our Project No. GS05464-145, dated May 6. 2010. Natural Clay -Silt We encountered sandy clay -silt in the bottom 4 feet of our pit TP -2 near the south portion of the Powers Pit. Conceptual plans show this area will consist of a landscaped buffer and berm. These soils will not adversely affect landscape buffer or berm construction. Our observations during excavation operations indicated the sandy clay -silt was stiff. Atterberg limits testing on the clay were a liquid iirnit of 26 percent and a plasticity index of 5 percent. The clay -silt contained 85 percent silt and clay size particles (passing the No. 200 sieve). Laboratory test results are summarized on Table I. Gravel Sandy gravel with cobbles and boulders was encountered at the surface or below aggregate base course and crusher fine fill in our pits across the majority of the Powers Pit. Conceptual plans show that the future development at the site will occur in areas where the natural gravel with cobbles will be present at anticipated foundation elevations. Four samples of the gravel tested contained between 3 and 7 percent silt and clay size particles (passing the No. 200 sieve). The laboratory testing does not include larger diameter soils such as cobble and boulder and therefore is reflective of the finer sized portions of the actual soils. Gradation test results are shown on Figures 4 and 5. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05587-115 SaGS115567.00011512 Reports\GSG556T 115 R1.0o4 8 DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Site Grading Grading plans are being developed at this time. Based on the conceptual plans, we anticipate that site grading will be limited to that required to form Tots and construct roads and utilities across the site. We believe grading can be accomplished using conventional construction techniques and heavy-duty equipment, It is important that deep fills (if planned) be constructed as far in advance of surface construction as possible. It is our experience that fill compacted in accordance with the compaction recommendations in this report may settle about 0.5 to 1 percent of its thickness under its own weight. Most of this settlement usually occurs during and soon after construction. Some additional settlement is possible after development and landscape irrigation increases soil moisture content. We recommend delaying the construction of buildings underlain by deep fills as long as possible to allow for this settlement to occur. Delaying construction of structures up to one year where located on deep fills is recommended. The existing on-site soils are suitable for re -use as fill material provided the soils are free of particles larger than 6 inches in diameter, debris or deleterious organic materials. Prior to fill placement, all trash and debris should be removed from fill areas and properly disposed. The ground surface in areas to be filled should be stripped of vegetation. topsoil and other deleterious materials, scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended below. Topsoil is non-existent in most areas of the site. The depth of topsoil is not anticipated to be more than 4 to 8 inches thick where topsoil is present. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567.1 S Sf1GS055G7.O0O111512. RefponuUGS05587 11,F 111,doc 9 Site grading fill should be placed in thin, loose lifts. moisture conditioned and compacted. In areas of deep fill. we recommend higher compaction criteria to help reduce settlement of the fill. Compaction and moisture requirements are presented in Appendix A. The placement and compaction of fill should be observed and density tested during construction. Guideline site grading specifications are presented in Appendix A. Imported Fill If import material is required for fill, samples from each source should be provided for our review. Import structural fill should consist of a CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course or similar soil. The material should be placed and compacted as recommended in Appendix A. Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes We performed a slope stability evaluation for the Powers Pit under our Project No. GS05464-145, dated May 6. 2010. Recommendations form our evaluation should be followed for permanent cut/fill slopes. Utility Construction We believe excavations for utility installation in the soils at the site can be performed with conventional heavy-duty or large backhoes. Ground water is not anticipated in excavations at the site. if ground water is encountered during construction in shallow excavations, dewatering will likely be feasibly accomplished by sloping excavations to occasional sumps where water can be removed by pumping. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. 0505557.115 S•MS055G7.000111512 Reports;GSOS567 11G Ri.duc 10 Utility trenches should be sloped or shored to meet local. State and federal safety regulations. The gravel will classify as a Type C soil based on OSHA standards. The clay will classify as a Type B soil based on OSHA standards. Excavation slopes specified by OSHA are dependent upon soil types and ground water conditions encountered. Contractors should identify the soils encountered in the excavation and refer to OSHA standards to determine appropriate slopes. Excavations deeper than 20 feet should be designed by a professional engineer. The width of the top of an excavation may be limited in some areas. We believe "trench box" construction may be necessary. Bracing systems would need to penetrate the cobble and boulder. Sheet pile installation would likely be problematic. Lateral Toads on bracing depend on the depth of excavation, slope of excavation above the bracing, surface loads. hydrostatic pressures. and allowable movement. For trench boxes and bracing allowed to move enough to mobilize the strength of the soils with associated cracking of the ground surface. the "active" earth pressure conditions are appropriate for design. If movement is not tolerable. the "at rest" earth pressures are appropriate. We suggest an equivalent fluid density of 35 pcf for the "active" earth pressure condition and 50 pcf for the "at rest" earth pressure condition. assuming level backfill. These pressures do not include allowances for surcharge loading or for hydrostatic conditions. We are available to assist further with bracing design, if desired. Water and sewer lines are usually constructed beneath paved roads. Compaction of trench backfill can have a significant effect on the life and serviceability of pavements. Trench backfill should be placed in thin. loose lifts, and moisture conditioned to within 2 percent of optimum content. Trench backfill should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). The placement and compaction of fill and backfill should be observed and tested by our firm during construction. Backfill soils maximum diarneter should be limited to 3 inches to avoid nesting of larger diameter rock in the trench. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS Piz CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PRO.IECT NO. GS05567-115 SASD5557.0004115Q Reports1GSUJ 567 115 RI rim 11 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRUCTURES The property is currently planned for industrial or commercial construction. Our field and laboratory data indicate the soil conditions across the site generally consist of clean to slightly silty gravel with cobbles. The following discussions are preliminary and are not intended for design or construction. After grading is completed. a detailed geotechnical investigation should be performed for each structure and lot. Foundations Our geologic and preliminary geotechnical investigation for this site indicates structures can likely be founded on shallow foundations where gravel soils occur at foundation elevations. Shallow foundation types will likely include footings, mat/rafts, or post -tensioned slabs -on -grade for light structural Toads. A design level geotechnical investigation may identify potential constraints for specific areas not indicated by our pits. Slab -on -Grade and Basement Floor Construction The use of slabs -on -grade for main -level and basement floors will likely be appropriate. We believe most of the site will be rated low risk for poor slab performance. Excavations into the natural soils will Likely expose cobble and boulders. A leveling course of crusher fines or similar soil will likely be needed to achieve a flat surface to place concrete slabs on. Slab performance risk should be more thoroughly defined during the design -level geotechnical investigation. Buildings with mat -raft or post -tensioned slab -on -grade foundations will not require an independent slab -on -grade floor because the foundations will also be the slab. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05S67.116 5:W3506557.90n1115'k2. RnpartslGS0S667 115 Fi1.doc 12 Below -Grade Construction Surface water should not flow adjacent to foundation walls and below slabs. To reduce the risk of excess moisture and hydrostatic pressure developing on foundation walls. foundation drains may be necessary around below -grade areas. Foundation drains should discharge to sumps where water can be removed by pumping or by gravity. Foundation walls and grade beams should be designed to withstand lateral earth pressures. The design pressure should be established during design -level geotechnical investigations. Surface Drainage Proper surface drainage is critical to the performance of foundations and flatwork. The ground surface around proposed buildings should be shaped to provide runoff of surface water away from the structure and off of pavements. We generally recommend slopes of at least 12 inches in the first 10 feet where practical in the landscaping areas surrounding buildings. There are practical limitations on achieving these slopes. Irrigation should be minimized to control wetting. Roof downspouts should discharge beyond the limits of backfill.. Water should not be allowed to pond on or adjacent to pavements. Proper control of surface runoff is also important to limit the erosion of surface soils. Sheet flow should not be directed over unprotected slopes. Water should not be allowed to pond at the crest of slopes. Permanent slopes should be re -vegetated to reduce erosion. Water can follow poorly compacted fill behind curb and gutter and in utility trenches. This water can soften fill and undermine the performance af the roadways, flatwork and foundations. We recommend compactive effort be used in placement of all fill. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 SriGS45557,000411642 Rapnrta1L505667 116 R1 (Inc 13 General Design Considerations Exterior sidewalks and pavements supported by the gravel soil are subject to post construction movement. Flat grades should be avoided to prevent possible ponding, particularly next to buildings due to soil movement. Positive grades away from the buildings should be used for sidewalks and flatwork around the perimeter of the buildings in order to reduce the possibility of movement of this flatwork, resulting in ponding next to the structures. Joints next to buildings should be thoroughly sealed to prevent the infiltration of surface water. Where concrete pavement is used, joints should also be sealed to reduce the infiltration of water. Since some post construction movement of pavement and flatwork may occur, joints around the buildings should be periodically observed and resealed where necessary. Roof drains should be discharged well away from the structures. preferably by closed pipe systems. Where roof drains are allowed to discharge on concrete flatwork or pavement areas next to the structures, care should be taken to insure the area is as water tight as practical to eliminate the infiltration of this water next to the buildings. CONCRETE Concrete that comes into contact with soils can be subject to sulfate attack. A concentration was measured in a sample of the natural gravel at the site at 0.00 percent. For this level of sulfate concentration, ACI 318-0 Code Requirements for Structural Concrete indicates there are no special requirements for sulfate resistance. In our experience, superficial damage may occur to the exposed surfaces of highly permeable concrete, even though sulfate levels are relatively low. To control this risk and to resist freeze -thaw deterioration, the water-to-cementitiaus materials CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO GS05567.115 SAG565667.009111 S\2. RepnRz.1G505567 116 At 14 ratio should not exceed 0.50 for concrete in contact with soils that are likely to stay moist due to surface drainage or high water tables. Concrete should have a total air content of 6% +1-1.5%. We recommend damp -proofing of all concrete walls in contact with soils, including buried grade beams, to control moisture penetration into the concrete. FINAL DESIGN CONSULTATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Crystal Ranch Corp and Holland and Hart to provide geologic and geotechnical criteria for due diligence and preliminary planning of the project. The information and the conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based upon the considerations of many factors including. but not limited to, the type of development proposed, the configuration of the development, the geologic setting. and the subsurface conditions encountered. The conclusions and recommendations contained in the report are not valid for use by others. CTL ! Thompson. Inc. should be retained to provide design -level geotechnical investigations for the project when plans are further developed. Our firm should also be retained to provide geotechnical engineering and material testing during construction of the site grading, utilities. and drainage features. The purpose is to observe the construction with respect to the geotechnical design concepts, specifications or recommendations, and to facilitate design changes in areas where the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated before the start of construction. Based on the results of this investigation and the proposed development, we recommend the following investigations be performed: Review of final site grading plans by our firm: CRYSTA4. RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567.11 S $:!Gsods87.000t11512 RnpnrtsSGS06561 11S 131.dnc 15 2. Design -level geotechnical investigations to determine appropriate foundation and floor systems for structures after grading: and 3. Construction testing and observation for site development and building construction. GEOTECHNICAL RISK The concept of risk is an important aspect of any geotechnical evaluation. The primary reason for this is that the analytical methods used to develop geotechnical recommendations do not comprise an exact science. The analytical tools which geotechnical engineers use are generally empirical and must be tempered by engineering judgment and experience. Therefore. the solutions or recommendations presented in any geotechnical evaluation should not be considered risk-free and, more importantly, are not a guarantee that the interaction between the soils and the proposed structure will perform as desired or intended. What the engineering recommendations presented in the preceding sections do constitute is our estimate, based on the information generated during this and previous evaluations and our experience in working with these conditions. of those measures that are necessary to help the development perform satisfactorily. The developer, builder, and future owners must understand this concept of risk, as it is they who must decide what is an acceptable level of risk for the proposed development of the site. LIMITATIONS Our exploratory pits were located to obtain preliminary subsurface data indicative of conditions on this site. Although our pits were spaced to obtain a reasonably accurate picture of subsurface conditions, variations in the subsoils not indicated in our pits are always possible. We believe this investigation was conducted in a manner consistent with that level of skill and care ordinarily used by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the locality of this project. No warranty, express or implied, is made. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP POWERS PRT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 S'hGS05567,000111512. RopartaIG55567 115 R1.doc 16 This report was prepared from data developed during our field exploration, laboratory testing. engineering analysis and experience with similar conditions. The recommendations contained in this report were based upon our understanding of the planned construction. If plans change or differ from the assumptions presented herein, we should be contacted to review our recommendations. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report or in the analysis of the building and pavernent from the geotechnical point of view, please call. CTL j TH9 42809 Edward Trite, P. Project En • el(< Reviewed M hIiri . P.E. ch Manager Reviewed by: acaturkcc._4.. 14.7 David A. Glater, P.E.. C.Q.G. Principal Geologic Engineer ERW:JM:DAG:cd cc: Via email to landstudio2Aconicast.net CRYSTAL RANCH CORP_ POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO, GS05567.115 6 G.9,05557 W001512. RepnKs1GS05552 115 R1,dnc '17 Scala: 1•=200' Crystal Ranch Corp. Powers Ph Concrete Batch Piton Project No. GS05567-115 Note: Locations of exploratory pits are approximate. Locations of Exploratory Pits Fig. 1 TP -1 0 5 10 TP -2 TP -3 TP -5 TP -7 0 5 10 15 15 LEGEND: ® Asphalt pavement. Crusher fines — sand, fine gravel. Aggregate base course. ® Fill, gravel, sandy to clayey, cobbles, medium dense, moist, brown. Protect No. GS05567-115 NOTES: Clay—silt, sandy, stiff, moist, brown. 1. Exploratory pits were excavated with (CL—ML) a trackhoe on April 21, 2011. Gravel, sandy, cobbles, occasional boulders, very dense, moist, brown. (GP—GM) Indicates bulk sample. SUMMARY LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS 2. No free ground water was found in the exploratory pits cit the time of excavation. 3. Locations and elevations of exploratory pits shown on Figure 1 are approximate. 4. These exploratory pits are subject to the explanations, limitations and conclusions as contained in this report. door W 4+doU Fig. 2 emit 41•000 'moo .Sao this Radnnwlm Plot olehedn EMI_ -- to IM Malta impact Raw km ;01,1calbn ler as randreapvp 0001e el din ,,A, • £mabymenl Career war. 1171+ii' 1iiX it,� 1 i 1,111W lilli II A d1 �em•9nORy ucre cleft Ip Ye clewed el a anti w unwel when needed fa am Denims leer ,fpm *Prot $2 k / ,rpQry nns A.:t;rllCl +alt AL ba- RFTA Paris & Ride 1 or RHO Bus Maintenance Area oit 3.26 Acres J 1 1 1 f RPTA andlor CDOT Vehicle Maintenance Area 12 Acres a1 �� ta voy leHghway 92_ Sand and Gravel Sieckple I Concrete Batch Plant Area 4 Acres t - Recycled and Reclaimed CunLoile 'mow .andscape eaefor and Benin 4 Auea Crawl ranch Orap. Perww. Memos elrrea iialt Project No. G805067-116 1R 103 Pnrnnry Enlranoe la Rural Esnploymenl Cenl .r naw a ,r`-_, rn ^'•�_ Conceptual Lsnd Use Plan Fig. 3 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP - 1 AT 3-6 FEET GRAVEL 72 % SAND 21 % SILT & CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX OA HYDROMETER ANALYSIS t SIEVE ANALYSIS j HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN, 60 MIN. 19 MIN, 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 *100 *50 "40 *30 *16 *10'8 14 318" 314" 1X" 3' 5"6" 8" 0 100 V r 1 '10 90 120 80 ID 20 80 - -- •_z 130 w 70— z N — 30 n 70 a z G a60 U 40 60 V 1 40 = I- 150 v 50 -— k � i re 50 v 50 r 0- I r__ i-1 l60 a 40 1 - 1 I x 60 �. 40 30 — — - I70 30 20 - ... - _ 1.70 11 . Ij 1 I � 80 20 BO 10 1 .-14_ 1 � k w w . 1 d, 1 190 ! 100 0 .001 0,002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42.590 1.19 2,0 2.38 4.76 9,52 19.1 36.1 76.2 127i52200 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE 114 MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SANDS GRAVEL (PLASTIC) (NON -PLASTIC) FINE 1 MEDIUM I COARSE FINE I- COARSE I COBBLES 401 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42. 590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.75 9.52 19,1 36.1 76.2 12752 200 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP - 1 AT 3-6 FEET GRAVEL 72 % SAND 21 % SILT & CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX OA Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTYGP-GM) GRAVEL 73 % SAND From TP - 3 AT 6-8 FEET S1LT & CLAY 4 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 SfGS05567.0005115I6. CalcsIGS05567-115.Gradation.xls Gradation Test Results 23 % FIG. 4 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS t SIEVE ANALYSIS j 25 HR. 7 HR, TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN, 15 MIN. 60 MIN.19 MKN. 4 MIN, 1 MIN. '200 *100 '5D *40 *30 '16 '10 *8 '4 378" 314" 1W 3" 5"6" 8" 100 10 90 20 80 •_z - - — 30 n 70 a 40 60 V -— k � i re 50 v 50 r 0- 1 - 1 I x 60 �. 40 30 — — - - ... - _ 1.70 0. . Ij 1 I � 80 20 1 � k 401 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42. 590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.75 9.52 19,1 36.1 76.2 12752 200 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SANDS GRAVEL (PLASTIC) (NON -PLASTIC) FINE 1 MEDIUM ICOARSE FINE I COARSE I COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTYGP-GM) GRAVEL 73 % SAND From TP - 3 AT 6-8 FEET S1LT & CLAY 4 % LIQUID LIMIT PLASTICITY INDEX CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 SfGS05567.0005115I6. CalcsIGS05567-115.Gradation.xls Gradation Test Results 23 % FIG. 4 Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 81 % SAND 16 % From TP - 4 AT 5-7 FEET SILT & CLAY 3 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX HYDROMETER ANALYSIS 1 SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN. 4 MIN. 1 MIN. "200 '100 `50 "40 'SS '16 10 '8 "4 318" 3/4" 114" 3' 5"6" 8" 100 90 — i I —I0 80 -- --r - -f110 i; ' 70 —. .. — — --- -i 20 2 co O 0 0 0 0) 01 0 0 PERCENT RETAINED 30 z d60 to 50 -7-- 40 ff ce a 40 ._ 50 U EtILIa 30 -' • 60 + 70 i 0 �' ' 1100 .001 0,002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0.42590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9,52 19.1 36.1 76.2 12152200 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY (PLASTIC) TO SILT (NON SANDS GRAVEL FINE lMEDIUM ICCARSE FINE ! COARSE +COBBLES -PLASTIC) FINE J MEDIUM !COARSE FINE 1 COARSE I COBBLES Sample of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) GRAVEL 81 % SAND 16 % From TP - 4 AT 5-7 FEET SILT & CLAY 3 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX Samp[e of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP - 7 AT 4-6 FEET CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. G505567-115 5:1GS05567A00111516, CaICs1GS05567.115.Gradatlon.xls GRAVEL 72 % SAND 21 % SILT & CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX : Gradation Test Results FIG. 5 HYDROMETER ANALYSIS I SIEVE ANALYSIS 25 HR. 7 HR. TIME READINGS U.S. STANDARD SERIES CLEAR SQUARE OPENINGS 45 MIN. 15 MIN. 60 MIN. 19 MIN, 4 MIN. 1 MIN. •200 "100 "50 '40 "30 '16 "10 "8 "4 316" 314" IW' 3' 5"6" Fa 0 PERCENT PASSING ro w 4.4, CD -4 m m C D O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O 0 0 0 0) 01 0 0 PERCENT RETAINED -7-- ._ .001 0.002 .005 .009 .019 .037 .074 .149 .297 0 42590 1.19 2.0 2.38 4.76 9.52 19.1 36 1 76.212152200 DIAMETER OF PARTICLE IN MILLIMETERS CLAY TO SILT SANDSGRAVEL (PLASTIC) (NON -PLASTIC) FINE lMEDIUM ICCARSE FINE ! COARSE +COBBLES Samp[e of GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) From TP - 7 AT 4-6 FEET CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. G505567-115 5:1GS05567A00111516, CaICs1GS05567.115.Gradatlon.xls GRAVEL 72 % SAND 21 % SILT & CLAY 7 % LIQUID LIMIT % PLASTICITY INDEX : Gradation Test Results FIG. 5 TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 LOT DEPTH (FEET) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITY (PCF) ATTERBERG LIMITS SWELL TEST RESULTS' SOLUBLE SULFATES (%) PERCENT GRAVEL (%) PERCENT SAND (%) PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE (%) DESCRIPTION LIQUID LIMIT (%) PLASTICITY INDEX (%) SWELL (%) TP -1 3-6 6.2 72 21 7 GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) TP -2 10 7.3 26 5 _ 85 CLAY -SILT, SANDY (CL -ML TP -3 6-8 3.5 73 23 4 GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) TP -4 5-7 2.6 81 16 3 GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) TP -7 4-6 4.1 0.000 72 21 7 GRAVEL, CLEAN TO SLIGHTLY SILTY (GP -GM) * SWELL MEASURED WITH 1000 PSF APPLIED PRESSURE, OR ESTIMATED IN-SITU OVERBURDEN PRESSURE. NEGATIVE VALUE INDICATES COMPRESSION. Page 1 of 1 APPENDIX A GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 SAG505567.000111512. Reports1G505557 115 R10: GUIDELINE SITE GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1. DESCRIPTION This item shall consist of the excavation, transportation, placement and compaction of materials from locations indicated on the plans, or staked by the Engineer, as necessary to achieve preliminary street and overlot elevations. These specifications shall also apply to compaction of excess cut materials that may be placed outside of the development boundaries. 2. GENERAL The Soils Engineer shall be the Owner's representative. The Soils Engineer shall approve fill materials, method of placement, moisture contents and percent compaction, and shall give written approval of the completed fill. 3. CLEARING JOB SITE The Contractor shall remove all vegetation and debris before excavation or fill placement is begun. The Contractor shall dispose of the cleared material to provide the Owner with a clean and neat appearing job site. Cleared material shall not be placed in areas to receive fill or where the material will support structures of any kind. 4. SCARIFYING AREA TO BE FILLED All topsoil and vegetable matter shall be removed from the ground surface upon which fill is to be placed. The surface shall then be plowed or scarified until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks or other uneven features, which would prevent uniform compaction. 5. COMPACTING AREA TO BE FILLED After the foundation for the fill has been cleared and scarified, it shall be disked or bladed until it is free from Targe clods, brought to the proper moisture content (within 2 percent of optimum moisture content) and compacted to not less than 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D698. 6. FILL MATERIALS Fill soils shall be free from organics, debris or other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks or lumps having a diameter greater than six (6) inches. Fill materials shall be obtained from cut areas shown on the plans or staked in the field by the Engineer. Onsite materials classifying as CL, CL -ML, CH, SC, SM, SW, SP, GP, GC and GM are acceptable. Concrete, asphalt, organic matter and other deleterious materials or debris shall not be used as fill. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 5:16505567.00 011 1 612. Reports1G505567115 R1.doc A-1 7. MOISTURE CONTENT AND DENSITY Fill material shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to the criteria in the table below. Maximum density and optimum moisture content shall be determined from the appropriate Proctor compaction tests. Sufficient laboratory compaction tests shall be made to determine the optimum moisture content for the various soils encountered in borrow areas. FILL COMPACTION AND MOISTURE REQUIREMENTS Soil Type Depth from Final Grade (feet) Moisture Requirement (% from optimum) Density Requirement Clay 0 to 15 feet -2 to +2 95% of ASTM D 698 Gravel -2 to +2 95% of ASTM D 698 Clay Greater than 15 feet -2 to +2 98% of ASTM D 698 Gravel -2 to +2 100% of ASTM D 698 The Contractor may be required to add moisture to the excavation materials in the borrow area if, in the opinion of the Soils Engineer, it is not possible to obtain uniform moisture content by adding water on the fill surface. The Contractor may be required to rake or disc the fill soils to provide uniform moisture content through the soils. The application of water to embankment materials shall be made with any type of watering equipment approved by the Soils Engineer, which will give the desired results. Water jets from the spreader shall not be directed at the embankment with such force that fill materials are washed out. Should too much water be added to any part of the fill, such that the material is too wet to permit the desired compaction from being obtained, rolling and all work on that section of the fill shall be delayed until the material has been allowed to dry to the required moisture content. The Contractor will be permitted to rework wet material in an approved manner to hasten its drying. 8. COMPACTION OF FILL AREAS Selected fill material shall be placed and mixed in evenly spread layers. After each fill layer has been placed, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than the specified percentage of maximum density. Fill shall be compacted to the criteria above. At the option of the Soils Engineer, soils classifying as SW, GP, GC, or GM may be compacted to 70 percent relative density for cohesionless sand soils. Fill materials shall be placed such that the thickness of loose materials does not exceed 12 inches and the compacted lift thickness does not exceed 6 inches. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 S:1GS05567.000111512. Reports1GS05567115 R1.doc A-2 Compaction as specified above shall be obtained by the use of sheepsfoot rollers, multiple -wheel pneumatic -tired rollers, or other equipment approved by the Engineer for soils classifying as CL, CL -ML, CH, or SC. Granular fill shall be compacted using vibratory equipment or other equipment approved by the Soils Engineer. Compaction shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Compaction of each layer shall be continuous over the entire area. Compaction equipment shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the required density is obtained. 9. COMPACTION OF SLOPES Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction operations shall be continued until slopes are stable, but not too dense for planting, and there is not appreciable amount of loose soils on the slopes. Compaction of slopes may be done progressively in increments of three to five feet (3' to 5') in height or after the fill is brought to its total height. Permanent fill slopes shall not exceed 2.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). 10. PLACEMENT OF FILL ON NATURAL SLOPES Where natural slopes are steeper than 20 percent in grade and the placement of fill is required, benches shall be cut at the rate of one bench for each 5 feet in height (minimum of two benches). Benches shall be at least 10 feet in width. Larger bench widths may be required by the Engineer. Fill shall be placed on completed benches as outlined within this specification. 11. DENSITY TESTS Field density tests shall be made by the Soils Engineer at locations and depths of their choosing. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the soil may be disturbed to a depth of several inches. Density tests shall be taken in compacted material below the disturbed surface. When density tests indicate that the density or moisture content of any layer of fill or portion thereof is not within specification, the particular layer or portion shall be reworked until the required density or moisture content has been achieved. 12. SEASONAL LIMITS No fill material shall be placed, spread or rolled while it is frozen, thawing, or during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy precipitation, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed materials are as specified. 13. NOTICE REGARDING START OF GRADING The Contractor shall submit notification to the Soils Engineer and Owner advising them of the start of grading operations at least three (3) days in advance of the starting date. Notification shall also be submitted at least 3 days CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 S:1GS05567.000111512. Reporfs1GS05567115 R1.doc A-3 in advance of any resumption dates when grading operations have been stopped for any reason other than adverse weather conditions. 14. REPORTING OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Density tests made by the Soils Engineer, as specified under "Density Tests" above, shall be submitted progressively to the Owner. Dry density, moisture content, and percentage compaction shall be reported for each test taken. 15. DECLARATION REGARDING COMPLETED FILL The Soils Engineer shall provide a written declaration stating that the site was filled with acceptable materials, and was placed in general accordance with the specifications. CRYSTAL RANCH CORP. POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT PROJECT NO. GS05567-115 5:1G505567.000111512. Reports1G505567115 R1.doc A-4 Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Exhibit D - Management Plans Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan prepared by Lafarge West, Inc. Stormwater Management Plan prepared by Lafarge North America Certification for the Colorado Wastewater Discharge Permit System issued by the CDPH&E Construction Permit issued by the CDPH&E Air Pollution Control Division Cerise Mine Air Quality Statement prepared by Lafarge West, Inc. Analysis of Noise from Proposed Cerise Gravel Mine prepared by Hankard Environmental, Inc. Powers Ready Mix Plant GI, 817, 857 SPCC Plan LAFARG E NORTH AMERICA SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC) PLAN LAFARGE WEST, INC. Powers Ready Mix Plant 14I56 Highway 82 Carbondale, CO 81623 Original Date of Facility's Plan: none available; previous owner Date of Last Plan Amendment / P.E. Certification: 0.3/15/2011 Date of Last Plan Review: 03/15/2011 Designated person responsible for spill prevention: John Costanzo, Facility Manager EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NUMBERS: (Immediate emergency, use Lafarge Crisis Management Plan and dial 911) Notification Contacts: 1, John Costanzo, Facility Manager, 2, Steve Fisk, Operations Manager 3. Walt Wright, Manager of Environment and Public Affairs Government Agencies: • Carbondale Fire Department • State of Colorado Dept of Health & Environment • National Response Center • Garfield County LEPC (Further spill response items on page 2) 970-704-4824 970-618-4688 303-657-4466 911 1-877-518-5608 (toll-free) 1-800-424-8802 970-945-8020 1 Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817.857 SPCC Plan Reportable Quantities: Any spill or overfill of petroleum products to the environment is reportable to the Lafarge Environmental Division if: • Quantities are unknown, and/or • The release is equal to or greater than 25 gallons, unless you can conclusively show the rel asc was less than the reportable quantity, and/or • The release, in any amount, reaches or threatens to reach surface water, groundwater, dry gullies, or storm sewers, and/or • The release is a hazardous substance that exceeds 1 gallon, and/or • The release is less than 25 gallons, but cannot be cleaned -up within 24 hours, In the event of a spill of petroleum products: DO: • Enact Lafarge Crisis Management Plan, if appropriate • Shut off supply, stop leak (if possible) • Shut off ignition sources • Contain spill and/or dike ahead of spill • Call your supervisor and/or Lafarge Environmental Technical Services • Protect adjacent people, property, surface waters, and equipment from contact with spill • Follow MSDS for clean-up guidance • If the need arises,. evacuate the spill area DO NOT: • Do not smoke • Do not risk personal injury • Do not wash down spill with water • Do not try to hide spill Should a major release occur, use Lafarge Crisis Management Plan and have the following information available (See Attachment D): • Your name and phone number: • Date and time: • Site name, phone number, and address: • Description of release: o Material discharged o Estimate quantity discharged o Cause and source of discharge o Affected media o Any damages or injuries • Emergency response actions taken: o Actions to stop, remove, or mitigate discharge o Names of individuals and organizations contacted • Person responsible for spill prevention: 2 Power; heady Mix Plano GL 817. 857 SPCC Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS P.E. Certification and Management Approval Page 4 Certification of the Applicability of the Substantial Harm Criteria Checklist 5 Five-VPar Ilevb w Plan ,Summary 5 Location of Plan Statement 6 Spill Experience / History 6 Introduction 6 Facility Information 7 General Description 8 Fixed and Mobile Storage List 8 General Requirements (40 CFR 112.7) 8 Potential Equipment Failures Predictions Resulting in Spills 10 Containment and Diversionary Structures 11 Demonstration of Practicability 11 Inspections, Tests and Records 11 Personnel Training and Spill Prevention Procedures 11 Security 12 Tank Car and Truck Loading / Unloading Rack 12 Facility Drainage 13 Bulk Storage Containers 13 Facility Transfer Operations, Pumping, and Facility Process 15 FIGURES: Figure 1. Facility Diagram 16 ATTACHMENTS: A. Substantial Harm Criteria Determination Checklist 17 B. Monthly Inspection Checklists 18 C. Spill Report Form 19 D. SPCC Training Records 20 E. Integrity Testing Worksheet 21 3 Powers Ready til ix I'1an1 (,1..817.457 SPCC' plan PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER CERTIFICATION 40 CFR 112.3 (d) CERTIFICATION: ICATION: By means of this certification, 1 attest that 1 and familiar with the requirements of provisions of 40 CFR 112, that 1 or my designated agent have visited and examined the facility, that this SPCC Plan has been prepared in accordance with good engineering practices. including consideration of applicable industry standards, and with the requirements of this Part, that procedures for required inspections and testing have been established and that the Plan is adequate for the facility.. Engineer: Michael McDowell Registration Number: 40150 State: Colorado Signature: Date of Plan Certification: o 3/ f C/1/ 2"1 SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE PLAN MANAGEMENT APPROVAL 40 CFR 112.7 1 hereby certify that the necessary resources to implement this Plan have been committed. Bill Arrasmith GM, West Slope Ready Mix Date 4 Powers Reedy Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Pian CERTIFICATION OF THE APPLICABILITY OF THE SUBSTANTIAL HARM CRITERIA CHECKLIST (C -II Form) Please see Attachment A. FIVE YEAR REVIEW PLAN SUMMARY PAGE In accordance with 40 CFR 112.5(b), a review and evaluation of this SPCC Plan is conducted at least once every three years prior to August 16, 2002, and at least once every five years after August 17, 2002. As a result of this review and evaluation, you must amend your SPCC Plan within six months of the review to include more effective prevention and control technology if the technology has been field -proven at the time of the review and will significantly reduce the likelihood of a discharge. A Professional Engineer must certify any technical amendments. By signing the below table, the reviewer agrees that they completed the review and evaluation of the SPCC Plan, for the facility listed in the top left corner of this page, and the below comments are accurate. These reviews and evaluations are recorded below: Reviewer (signature) Reviewer (print) Date Comments P.E. Cert. Required N/A N/A see Page 4 1. Erich Rauber 08/21/06 Review Plan Yes George Robinson 08/21/06 Review Plan No Michael McDowell 03/15/11 Review Plan* Yes * Completed a review and evaluation to have new plan be in compliance with regulation change. 5 Powers Ready Mix Plant GI. 817. 857 SPCC Plan A COMPLETE COPY OF THE SPCC PLAN IS MAINTAINED AT THE OFFICE OF THIS FACILITY PER 112.3 (e)(1). SPILL EXPERIENCE / HISTORY INTRODUCTION Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans for facilities are prepared and implemented as required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA) Regulation contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 112, (40 CFR 112). A non -transportation related facility is subject to SPCC regulations if: the aggregate aboveground capacity of the facility exceeds 1,320 gallons (excluding those tanks and oil filled equipment below 55 gallons in capacity) or if the aggregate underground capacity of the facility exceeds 42,000 gallons (excluding those that are currently subject to all of the technical requirements of 40 CFR Part 280 or all of the technical requirements of state programs approved under 40 CFR 281); and if, due to its location, the facility could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of the United States., An SPCC plan is not required to be filed with the EPA, but a copy must be available for on-site review by the Regional Administrator (RA) during normal working hours. The SPCC plan must be submitted to the US EPA Region 8 RA and the state agency along with the other information specified in Section 112.4 (a) if either of the following occurs: 1. The facility discharges more than 1,000 gallons of oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in a single spill event; or 2. The facility discharges oil in quantities greater than 42 gallons in each of two spill events within any twelve-month period. The following spill information must be submitted to the RA within 60 days if either of the above thresholds is reached. This report is to contain the following information (112.4 (a)): 1.. Name of the facility, 2. Name of individual submitting the information.. 3. Location of the facility. 6 Description of Spill or Correction Actions Taken Plan for Preventing Release Recurrence Based on previous SPCC Plans and discussion with facility personnel, there has never been a reportable spill event. INTRODUCTION Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans for facilities are prepared and implemented as required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA) Regulation contained in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 112, (40 CFR 112). A non -transportation related facility is subject to SPCC regulations if: the aggregate aboveground capacity of the facility exceeds 1,320 gallons (excluding those tanks and oil filled equipment below 55 gallons in capacity) or if the aggregate underground capacity of the facility exceeds 42,000 gallons (excluding those that are currently subject to all of the technical requirements of 40 CFR Part 280 or all of the technical requirements of state programs approved under 40 CFR 281); and if, due to its location, the facility could reasonably be expected to discharge oil into or upon the navigable waters or adjoining shorelines of the United States., An SPCC plan is not required to be filed with the EPA, but a copy must be available for on-site review by the Regional Administrator (RA) during normal working hours. The SPCC plan must be submitted to the US EPA Region 8 RA and the state agency along with the other information specified in Section 112.4 (a) if either of the following occurs: 1. The facility discharges more than 1,000 gallons of oil into or upon the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines in a single spill event; or 2. The facility discharges oil in quantities greater than 42 gallons in each of two spill events within any twelve-month period. The following spill information must be submitted to the RA within 60 days if either of the above thresholds is reached. This report is to contain the following information (112.4 (a)): 1.. Name of the facility, 2. Name of individual submitting the information.. 3. Location of the facility. 6 Powers Ready Mix• Plain GL. 817, 857 SPCC Plan 4. Maximum storage or handling capacity of the facility and normal daily throughput. 5. The corrective actions and/or countermeasures taken, including adequate description of equipment repairs and/or replacements. 6.. Descriptions of the facility including maps, flow diagrams, and topographical m• s 7 The cause(s) of such spill(s), including a failure analysis of system or subsystem in which failure occurred. 8, Additional preventive measures taken or contemplated to minimize the possibility of recurrence. 9. Such other information as the Regional Administrator may reasonably require that is pertinent to the plan or discharge(s). The SPCC plan must be amended within 6 months whenever there is a change in facility design, construction, operation, or maintenance that materially affects the facility's spill potential. The SPCC plan must be reviewed at least once every 5 years and amended to include more effective prevention and control technology, if such technology will significantly reduce the likelihood of a spill event and has been proven in the field, All such amendments must be recertified by a registered professional engineer (PE) If the owners and operators of a facility that are required to prepare an SPCC plan and are not required to subrnit a Facility Response Plan, the SPCC plan should include a signed certification form, provided in Attachment A (per Appendix C to 40 CFR 112), FACILITY INFORMATION Name: Powers Ready Mix Plant Mailing Address: Lafarge- Powers Ready Mix P.O. Box 368 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Street Address: 14156 Highway 82 Carbondale, CO 81623 Owner: Lafarge West, Inc. 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Westminster, CO 80021 303-657-4000 Facility Contact: John Costanzo, Facility Manager 970-704-4824 Owner Contact: Meghan McDonald, Director of Environment 303-807-2973 7 Powers Ready Mix plant GLIM. 857 SPCC Plan Location: Facility is located approximately 'A mile east of the Roaring Fork River. All facilities are housed within the boundaries of the pit, GENERAL DESCRIPTION The Powers pit is a sand and gravel mining, processing and storage operation that includes mining pits, aggregate stockpiles, conveyor systems, and office/storage trailers. Portable crushing and washing plants may be brought on site as needed, Situated within the pit is a ready mix concrete operation facility. The facility operates up to 12 hours per day, 6 days per week, with approximately 2.3 employees on-site during a normal working day.. Fixed and Mobile Storage [112.1 (d)(2)(ii)I: AST 1 — Diesel Tank Transformer - Mineral Oil 10,000 gallons 250 gallons Total regulated oil storage capacity: 10,250 gallons 40 CFR 112.7 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 112.7 (a)(1) This facility is in complete conformance to the SPCC Regulation, which became effective on July 17, 2002, 112.7 (a)(2) In complying with all applicable requirements of the SPCC Regulation, no deviations were employed or claimed in this Plan. 112.7 (a)(3) See the Facility Diagram in Figure 1 for the location of the fuel tank and general arrangement of the facility. Also provided on this diagram are storm water drain inlets and flow (slope) directions of rainwater (and spilled oil paths) As required under this section, this facility diagram indicates the location and contents of each container. 112.7 (a)(3)(i) The main oil storage on site consists of a fuel island that contains one 10,000 -gallon diesel tank (AST 1). The tank is double -walled and the fueling area is composed of impervious concrete with surrounding berrning structure to catch incidental drips and overfills. A transformer located near the haul road holds 250 gallons of oil and is situated on a concrete pad. 8 Powers Ready Mix Plant GI, 817.857 SPCC Plan Sources of oil and diversionary or containment structures are situated in such a way that spilled material could not leave the site or reach navigable waters, Oil storage at the time of this plan is based on observations made at the site, but in future amounts may fluctuate due to the number of drums stored on-site. Additionally, a portable crusher plant, which is sometimes utilized on-site, has one 10,000 gallon diesel AST The AST is covered under a sepalte-spm-plan 112.7 (a)(3)(ii) The Powers Facility uses several measures to prevent storm -water runoff or spills and other pollution from reaching the navigable waters of the United States. Those measures include both structural and non-structural controls. Cleanup materials and supplies shall be kept stocked and shall be located near all oil - storage and handling areas. At least one person, whether a Lafarge attendant or a delivery contractor, shall be continuously present during all fueling and oil -transfer operations. Oil -storage tanks shall be checked routinely to establish the volumes of materials in storage at the facility, All piping connections shall be properly secured and inspected before transfer pumps are turned on. Drivers shall conduct visual inspections before departure; the inspections shall include a close examination of the lowermost drain and all outlets to ensure that caps are tight and properly adjusted, and that they will prevent liquid discharges while in transit, Fuels and oils shall be poured or pumped carefully to prevent spilling and over -filling.. Employees shall visually inspect the area following all fueling and oil -transfer activities. Lafarge employees shall promptly clean up drips and small spills. 112.7 (a)(3)(iii) The fuel island is provided with adequate secondary containment to contain the largest compartment of any tank truck utilized in the facility. The unloading / loading area drains to a catchment area (detention) that is shown on the facility diagram. 112.7(a)(3)(iv) The facility's countermeasures for discovery of a discharge will ensure rapid discovery of leaks or spills. They are based on awareness training, inspections, and site security. The facility's countermeasures for response to a discharge are designed to ensure rapid and appropriate responses to leaks or spills and that the health and safety of employees and the public are protected. They are based on response training, Lafarge's internal notification procedures, and ensuring that access to the spill area is restricted. Emergency -Response Contractors have been established and agreements include approved emergency -response contractors to deal immediately with large spills. Spill kits are utilized to clean-up minor spills The facility's countermeasures for cleanup of a discharge will ensure that all areas and media affected by the spill are identified, that the 9 Powers Rcady Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Plan health and safety of employees and the public are protected, and that the cleanup actions will protect the quality of surface and groundwater. resources. 112.7(a)(3)(v) Materials recovered during spill cleanup can be recycled through on-site processes or disposed of offsite. The decision between the two will depend on the types and quantities of fuels or oils spilled; types and quantities of materials recovered during cleanup (i.e., contaminated soil or water); and concentrations of oil products in the recovered materials. Offsite disposal of contaminated materials may be recycled through a nearby Lafarge hot plant, through a vendor, or an appropriate landfill, The Lafarge Environmental Management (Operations or Environmental) must pre -approve all disposals of spill cleanup materials. 112.7 (a)(3)(vi) See the cover page of this Plan for the spill notification contacts. The clean-up contactors to be utilized to handle Targe spills will be: Environmental Resources Management (ERM) Water and Waste Engineering, Inc. Safety-Kleen Lafarge Environmental 303-741-5050 303-292-350.3 303-761-1365 303-657-4466 (W. Wright) 303-807-2973 (M. McDonald) 112.7 (a)(4) See Pages 1 & 2, and Attachment C, Spill Report Form, which must be filled -out prior to reporting a spill report to the proper notification contacts. The Lafarge Crisis Management Plan and the first two pages of this Plan should be followed when responding to an oil release. The Spill Report Form will help remind the operator ofthe information which must be furnished. 40 CFR 1.12.7 (b) POTENTIAL EQUIPMENT FAILURE PREDICTIONS RESULTING IN SPILLS: Source Type of Failure S'piII ., Volume Rate (gallon/hr) Direction. of Flow Containmeent, Volume Containment Type. Aboveground Storage Tanks AST 1. Diesel Rupture; leakage 10,000 gal 10.000 gal/11r Northwest Greater than 110% of largest compartment Double Wailed Facility Loading/Unloading Operations Fuel Truck Unloading Rupture; leakage; overfill 3,000 gal 3,000 gal/1.1r West Greater than 110% of largest compartment Concrete pad with curb Other Storage Transformer Rupture; Leakage 250 gal 250 gal/hr northwest Greater than 110% of largest compartment Surface Depression I0 Powers heady Mix Plant 01. 817, 857 SPCC Plan 40 CFR 112.7 (c) CONTAINMENT AND DIVERSIONARY STRUCTURES 112.7 (c)(1)(i-vi) AST 1 is a double -walled tank, which provides its own secondary containment. A transformer located near the haul road is situated on a concrete pad. The only other hydrocarbons kilt n'i sitP are found oQ the mobile equipmr't all of whirl) are plrkPd at night within the pit to ensure any spills would be contained on site, The loading/unloading area is paved with a curb so small spills and the majority of large spills would be retained on this impervious surface. Any material that leaves the curbed concrete area would flow into the surface depressions within the pit, which can contain over 3,300 gallons. The entire amount of any release would be contained within the site boundaries, even during a severe storm. Due to the areas evaporation rate, annual precipitation, fueling occurrences, and the availability of remedial equipment, there should be no need for any further engineering controls. 112.7 (c)(1)(vii) Sands, absorbent materials, and a spill kit are located near the fuel island.. 216 feet of boom sections, eight 2x2 foot pillows, and fifty 16x20 inch absorbent pads and stockpiles of sands or absorbent pit run material are standard inventory for the facility, These inventories are replenished if used. 112.7 (c 2 i -ii Off -shore facility references are not applicable. 40 CFR 112.7 (d) DEMOSTRATION OF PRACTICABILITY Lafarge management has determined that the use of the containment and diversionary structures and the use of readily available spill equipment to prevent discharged oil from reaching navigable water, is practical and effective at this facility. 40 CFR 112.7 (e) INSPECTIONS, TESTS AND RECORDS Daily visual inspections consist of a walk-through of the facility to check the following: piping, equipment and tanks for leakage, soils for staining and discoloring. The checklist provided in Attachment B is used during monthly inspections. The items covered in the inspections are performed in accordance with API standards and good engineering practices. This written monthly report (checklist) is prepared, signed by the inspector, and the original copies are maintained on file for three years. 40 CFR 112.7 (f) PERSONNEL TRAINING AND SPILL PREVENTION PROCEDURES 112.7 (f)(I) Oil handling personnel have been instructed by management in the operation and maintenance of equipment to prevent discharges, to follow discharge procedure protocols 11 Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817.857 SPCC Plan and general facility operations, and to understand the contents of the Powers Facility SPCC Plan. 112.7 (f)(2) The Facility Manage, see Page 1, is accountable for oil spill prevention at this facility. 112.7 (f)(3) Yearly spill prevention briefings are provided by management for operating personnel to ensure adequate understanding of the SPCC plan. These briefings highlight any past spill events or failures and recently developed precautionary measures. Training includes oil spill prevention, containment, and retrieval methods. Records of these briefings and spill prevention training are kept on the form shown in Attachment D. 40 CFR 112.7 (g) SECURITY 112.7 (g)(1) Barbed wire fencing or natural barriers surround the facility. The entrance gate and buildings are locked when the facility is unattended. 112.7 (g)(2) The master flow and drain valve are locked in the closed position when in non-operating or standby status. 112.7 (g)(3) The electrical starter control center for the oil pumps is located near the fuel island. The switch box is locked when the facility is not in use, 112.7 (g)(4) The loading and unloading connections of oil pipelines are capped when not in service or when in standby service for an extended time, 112.7 (g)(5) Sufficient lighting is maintained at the facility for nighttime operations and inspections. 40 CFR 112.7 (h) TANK CAR AND TRUCK LOADING / UNLOADING RACKS 112.7 (h)(1) The loading / unloading area is situated on a concrete pad with a curb that extends along the fuel island's concrete containment area. Drainage created by grading and surface depressions within the outside of the impervious vehicle loading / unloading containment area will hold the single largest compartment of any tank truck servicing the facility, which is 3,000 gallons plus freeboard to contain precipitation. 112.7 (h)(2) Warning signs are utilized at the loading / unloading racks to prevent premature vehicular departure, where applicable. 12 Powers Ready Mix Plant GI 817. 857 SPCC Plan 112.7 (h)(3) The lower-most drain and all outlets on tank trucks are inspected for leaks prior to departure.. All deliveries and transfers of oil products are supervised by at least one person, Rail tank cars are not utilized in this facility. 112.7 (1) There are no field constructed ASTs at this facility_ 112.7 (j) There are no other prevention standards that are required to be followed, including other prevention and containment procedures listed in this Part or any applicable State of Colorado or local rules, regulations or guidelines. 40 CFR 1.12.8 (a) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The general requirements for the plan under the regulation have been met. 40 CFR 112.8 (b) FACILITY DRAINAGE 112.8 (b)(1) Drainage from the oil storage areas at the facility is not discharged off property. The facility does have stormwater and process water discharge permits that require inspection of all discharges for oils or sheen. 112.8 (b)(2) Not applicable; no flapper -type drain valves used to drain diked areas. 112.8(b)(3) Spills outside of containment areas will flow by gravity into the low points inside the pit where oil will be detained until it can be pumped out. 1 I2.8 (b)(4) & (5) Not applicable, no water treatment. 40 CFR 112.8 (c) BULK STORAGE CONTAINERS 112.8 (c)(1) The existing bulk -storage containers have been, and any new containers shall be, constructed using materials, methods and standards that are appropriate for the types of oil stored in them and for the conditions under which the materials are stored (e.g., pressure and temperature). 112.8 (c)(2) AST 1 is a double -walled steel tank. A 250 -gallon transformer located near the haul road is situated on a concrete pad within a surface depression. Any spills that occur outside of 13 Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817. 857 SPCC Plan the containment area would be contained with a surface depression of the pit until the material could be properly removed. 112.8 (c)(3) No bypass valves are present in the containment areas.. 112.8 (c)(4) & (5) There are no buried or partially buried underground storage tanks at the facility. 112.8 (c)(6) As required and deemed necessary, Lafarge shall implement the integrity -testing protocols presented in Attachment E for bulk storage containers and ancillary equipment. All aboveground bulk storage containers for fuels, oils or oil products shall be included in the integrity -testing program. The facility does not have any piping that is subject to integrity testing requirements.. Integrity testing shall be performed on a regular schedule, and following all material repairs or modifications. Appropriate repairs shall be undertaken whenever a tank or other equipment fails an integrity test, Records of all integrity testing shall be kept with this Plan.. Visual inspections are performed regularly according to the procedures, and include inspection of tank supports and foundations. Inspections are recorded on a monthly basis and are maintained for 3 years. 112.8 (c)(7) There are no internal heating coils at this facility that contain oil. 112.8 (c)(8) AST 1 is equipped with visual gauges and adequate venting. Venting capacities are suitable for the anticipated fill and withdrawal rates. The gauges are tested in accordance with Attachment B. The volumes of the tanks are checked regularly and the sight gauges prevent overfilling. Additionally, at each of these tanks, the individual filling the tanks must stay by the vehicle while fuel is being transferred to ensure rapid response to overfill / spill incidents.. 112.8 (c)(9) The facility does not have an effluent treatment system. 112.8 (c)(10) Fuel leaks, which result in a loss of fuel from tanks, will be promptly corrected and cleaned. 112.8 (c)(11) The only mobile bulk storage associated with the facility is the fuel and hydraulic cells on the front-end loader and ready mix trucks.. All of these containers are position or stored overnight in an area that will prevent a discharge to navigable waters. However, in 2006 the EPA exempted motive power containers from the SPCC regulations. 14 Powers Ready MiN Plant GL 817,857 SPCC Pian 40 CFR 112.8 (d) FACILITY TRANSFER OPERATIONS, PUMPING, AND FACILITY PROCESS 112.8 (d) (1) The facility does not have buried piping, 112.8 (d)(2) Pipelines not in service or on standby for an extended period (over .3 months) are capped or blank flanged and marked as to their origin.. 112.8 (d)(3) All pipe supports are designed to minimize abrasion and corrosion and to allow for expansion and contraction. 112.8 (d)(4) All aboveground valves and appurtenances are examined regularly to assess their condition and written records are kept on a monthly basis,. 112.8 (d)(5) Not applicable.. 40 CFR 112.9, 112.10, 112.11 & SUBPARTS C & D Not applicable. 15 HARGE 001 • at et Jainism is m BONE,,/ DUMPSTER YARD ROPERTY BOUNDARY 2.2:MEMOS2.Minna2.. 2.MEM-2 2 PORTABLE CRUSHING DIESEL RETENTION 10,000 POND GAL. Wf SPILL FIT 0+1GH POND W/ BERM .. ar".RT B c CRU ■ ■;.,■.. W••w • OND f .ECYCLED °`,CONCRETE: STOCK PILES STOCK PILES .: UMP STOCK TER PILES PORTABLE TOILET1 V h q . � hQ,S TOILET " PCP 0-' Q' o �- STOCK r- STOCK i 0 � / Q. PORTABLEP11 Psi `'i: '°, TOILET AST 1 DIESL` 10,1700 GAL , W/:SPILL KIT 57OC1C PILES: HAUL ROSS AC 2 HOPPE ac sII TRANSI'ORMER' .MINERAL OIL -250 GAL.: 4t FLOW DIRECTION N form DUCH ROM tor. 981E 1-» =WOO eoxn 365-657-+m3 POWERS SWMP MAP ORM 1E TWK PROJECT FIEF ACADIR,RIAI yG 00712011 OPAL SHEET rQ 10F1 F:ILAND1 acadtGLBOO 817-PowersiJwg\SWMP\Powers SWMP 12-13-10.dwg, SWMP. 302011 7:55:17 AM Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Plan ATTACHMENT A CERTIFICATION OF THE APPLICABILITY OF THE SUBSTANTIAL HARM CRITERIA CHECKLIST Facility Name: Powers Facility Facility Address: H156 Hiehwav 82, On -bond -11c, CO 81623 1. Does the facility transfer oil over water to or from vessels and does the facility have total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 42,000 gallons. Yes 2 Does the facility have a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 1 million gallons and does the facility lack secondary containment that is sufficiently large to contain the capacity of the largest aboveground oil storage tank plus sufficient freeboard to allow for precipitation within any aboveground oil storage tank area? Yes 3. Does the facility have a total capacity greater than or equal to 1 million gallons and is the facility located at a distance (as calculated using the formula in Attachment C-II1, Appendix C, 40 CFR 112 or a comparable formula) such that a discharge from the facility could cause injury to fish and wildlife and sensitive environments? For further description of fish and wildlife and sensitive environments, see Appendices I, 1I, and III to COC/ NOAA's "Guidance for Facility and Vessel Response Environments" (Section 10, Appendix E, 40 CFR 112 for availability) and the applicable Area Contingency Plan. Yes (90 4 Does the facility have a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to I million gallons and is the facility located at a distance (as calculated using the appropriate formula (Attachment C -III, Appendix C, 40 CFR 112 or a comparable formula) such that a discharge from the facility would shut down a public drinking water intake? Yes 5 Does the facility have a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 1 million gallons and has the facility experienced a reportable oil spill in an amount greater than or equal to 10,000 gallons within the last 5 years? Yes �o 1 certify under penalty of law that 1 have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals responsible for obtaining this information, I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. Name: Medan McDonald Title: Director of Environment Signature: -A\r\.6 Date: Lt•1c.)/ 17 LAFARG E NORTH AMERICA Site Name: Division: Inspected 13y: Attachment B: AST Monthly Visual Inspection Form GL #: Date: OPS tank registration # (if known): Tanlc Inspection YES NO N/A If YES, Describe Action Taken Are any tanks not properly labeled? (contents, warnings, etc) Are there any visible signs of tank deterioration? Any leakage from fittings? Any leakage from seams? Any leakage from connections? Any visible signs of corrosion? An evidence on concrete or wround of new leaks or so ills? Secondary Containment Inspection If NO, Describe Action Taken Operation of leak detection verified? (for all double-wall tanks) Leak detection test passed? Are all valves locked in the closed position? Is secondary containment free from cracks or holes? is containment free of .roduct, other li•uids, and debris? Piping Inspection If YES, Describe Action Taken Any visible corrosion? Any leakage from fittings? Any leakage from seams? An leakae from connections? Filling/Overflow Inspection If NO, Describe Action Taken Test overfill alarm. In working condition? Is "Turn Overflow Alarm On" sign posted? 1 -las the tank been stuck this month? Dale of last readin_: Level of tank: Gallons: Does your reading match the tank clock gauge (if one exists)? Have your tank readings been filled in on your tillage log? Do you have all of your readings for the last 3 years? Is all other overflow .rotection e•uiament in working condition? Dispenser Area Inspection If YES, Describe Action Taken Any leakage from the hoses? Any leakage from the nozzles? Are all required signs posted? (see guidance document) 1R Working fire extinguisher within 100 feet? Is there a labeled, stocked spill kit located near tank storage area? Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Plan ATTACHMENT C SPILL REPORT FORM (Use Pages 1 & 2 of this Plan while tilling out this Sheet) 1 Date: 2 Time: 3 Your name and title: 4 Facility name: 5 Facility address: 6 Facility phone numbers: 7 Type of product discharged or spilled: 8 Estimate quantity discharged: Cause and source of discharge: 10 Affected media: 11 Any damages or injuries as a result: 12 Emergency actions taken to stop, remove or mitigate discharge: 13 Names of individuals or organizations contacted: 14 Person responsible for spill prevention: 15 Other Remarks: 19 Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Plan ATTACHMENT D SPCC TRAINING SESSION RECORDS ATTENDEE SIGNATURE / DATE INSTRUCTOR 20 Powers Ready Mix Plant GL 817, 857 SPCC Flan ATTACHMENT E INTEGRITY TESTING ATTACHMENTS As required and deemed necessary, Lafarge will perform integrity testing on oil enntaining Abovegrnl3nd Storm Tanks (ASTs) The tesfs will be per -film -Ned nri a regular schedule and whenever material repairs are made. This testing will use one of the following testing methods such as hydrostatic, radiographic, ultrasonic, acoustic emissions, or another system of non-destructive shell testing. Lafarge will perform ultrasonic shell testing as the method used for testing the ASTs integrity. Lafarge will likely use an A&D Company's Ultrasonic Thickness Gage (AD - 3253) or an equivalent ultrasonic device. The testing will be performed on a regular schedule that will be based upon the condition and age of the each AST.. The records of integrity testing will be kept with this plan. 21 LAFARGE NORTH AMERICA Environmental Stormwater Management Plan Powers Pit and Ready Mix .Plant Garfield County, Colorado PERMIT NO. COG -501127 Revised: December 2010 PLA ;1' C FR711 l(: t710:1 .3 SECTION 1 4 D1:,SCR!PTON (1L IND( 1111,11 Aril{ "I771: S -4 SECTION 2 C SITE MAP . . 6 SECTION 3 7 STORAII ITER Ai 1NAGIs:HENT CONTROLS . • 7 S1f'AIP Administration Team 7 Identification of Potential Pollutant Sources and Best Afanagement Practices ... 8 Sampling Informations ... _ .8 History of Significant Leaks or Spill ..8 Preventative Alamtenance . 9 Good HousekLeping.,........ 10 Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. 11 Emp1 ijee Identification of Discharge other than Stormwaler.. ... 13 SECTION 4 14 C"OMPREIIINSf € 7: INSP/: .........................................................................../4 .... .. 14 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 15 SECTION 5 .16 Appendix' Plan Certification Facility Name: Facility Type: Powers Pit and Ready Mix Plant Construction Sand and Gravel (SIC Code 1442) Ready Mix Concrete (SIC Code 3273) NPD1 S General Permit Number: COG -501 127 Date that initial operation began: Lafarge Operations began in 2001 Facility Address: 14156 Highway 82 Car bondaie. CO 81623 Emergency Contact: David Jordan, Aggregate Plant Manager- 303-809-2093 John Costanzo, Ready Mix Plant Manager- 970-704-4824 Operation Schedule: 12 horns per day, 6 days per week Number of Employees: 25-30 1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the hest of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of line and imprisonment for known violations. This Storm Water Management Plan will be implemented as herein described. Bob Cartmel Nam President, West U.S. and Latin America 4210ZZ ID Date Powers Pit and heady Mix Pant Storm Water Management Plan Page 3 or 20 SECTION I Description of Industrial Activities This SWMP has been prepared for the Powers Pit and Ready Mix facility in Garfield County. FIGURE 1 identifies the general location of the facility, as well as the nearest receiving waters. Industrial activities present at the site are as follows: ® STOCKPILING (Check irapplicable) ® OVERBURDEN AND TOP SOIL Stockpiles niay occur in the form of earthen berms.. 1E1 SAND AND GRAVEL Raw and processed aggregates are stockpiled for future use. (El AGGREGATE MIX FOR CONCRETE PRODUCTION Aggregate can be stored in stockpiles, and loaded into a ground hopper as needed, and then conveyed to the plant.. Material may also be loaded directly into a series offhoppers located above the plant that directly discharge into the plant. D AGGREGATE MIX FOR ASPHALT PRODUCTION Raw material can be stockpiles or put into storage bins. ❑ ASPHALT MILLING The existing roadway is milled, emptied into haul trucks and hauled offsite. ❑ ASPHALT PAVING Hot mix asphalt is transported to the project from a production plant located off-site. It is then placed, compacted and rolled according to project specifications. ❑ ASPHALT MANUFACTURING A hot -mix asphalt plant blends together aggregate and asphalt cement to produce a hot, homogeneous asphalt paving mixture, which is then hauled to off-site construction projects The aggregate used can be a single material, such as a crusher run aggregate or a pit run material, or it can be a combination of coarse and fine aggregates, with or without mineral filler. The binder material used is normally asphalt cement but can also be an asphalt emulsion or one of a variety of modified materials.. Various additives, including liquid and powdered materials, can also be incorporated into the mixture.. Activities at these sites may include the following: raw material unloading into stockpiles or storage tanks, raw material feed to plant, material batching, raw material storage area, recyclable asphalt disposal area, truck wash out, and water supply and settling lakes. ❑ READY MIXED CONCRETE, CENTRAL BATCHING These operations mix sand, gravel, cement, and water together to form ready mix concrete, which is then hauled to offsite construction projects. The raw materials are made up of sand, gravel, cement, water and additives, The sand and gravel Powers 191 aril itendv Mix Plant Storm Wnlcr Aianagcrnent Phan Page 4 or 20 is either stored in stockpiles located outside and fed into the plant via loaders and conveyors, or it is stored directly in a series of hoppers located directly above the central plant The remainder of tate raw materials is stored in tanks to protect them from exposure to moisture and temperature until they are pumped Into the mixer. Once the raw materials are fed into (he central mixer and combined to form Ready Mix concrete, the final product is placed within trucks and reproved from the site. O READY MIXED CONCRETE, DRY BATCHING These operations apportion out a mix of sand, gravel, cement, and water together, which is then mixed within the truck to forst Ready Mixed concrete that is hauled to off-site construction projects. The raw materials are made up of sand, gravel, cement, water and additives. The sand and gravel is either stored in stockpiles located outside and fed into the plant via loaders and conveyors, or it is stored directly in a series of hoppers located directly above the central plant. The remainder of the raw materials is stored in tanks to protect theist from exposure to moisture and temperature until they are pumped into the mixer. Dry batching, then apportions out and dumps the raw materials into the concrete truck -mounted mixer where it is continually agitated and (nixed to keep it from hardening before it arrives on the assigned job site. ® EQUIPMENT FUELING Diesel and/or gasoline tanks are located on site for fueling of equipment, Offsite vendors refill tanks as needed. ❑ EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE The site contains a shop area where necessary maintenance can be conducted fits site equipment, Typical chemicals associated with maintenance, such as used oil, antifreeze, motor oil, hydraulic oil, brake fluid, etc, may be stored on site as needed.. All chemicals are stored in such a manner as to prevent materials from mixing with stormwater or being accidentally discharged off site or to waters of'the U.S. ® EQUIPMENT WASHING The site contains washout pits where concrete mixer trucks are washed out after deliveries are made. Washout pits are located at least 50 feet away from storm drains, open ditches, or other water bodies. There is no runoff from this area. If possible a below grade washout pit is used Washout pit never exceeds 75% fill. ❑ WASTE TREATMENT Waste generated on site is recycled, taken to landfills, exchanged or returned.. Posers Pit and Ready Mis Plant Scorn Water Management I'Ian Page 5 of 20 SECTION 2 Site Map The site specific map may be found in the appendix under FIGURE 2, which indicates site-specific characteristics and BMPs implemented at the lovers Pit and Ready Mix plant.. The site comprises 38.9 aci es.. the site has been determined to be wtttun a single drainage area. 1 he entire site is graded to retain all process water.. The nearest receiving water that may receive storm water flows from the facility is the Roaring fork River which is located to the south of the facility (FIGURE. 1). The following is a list of specific information included on the Site Map: ✓ Site boundary ✓ Access & haul roads ✓ Storrttwater outfalls and an outline of each drainage area for each outfall ✓ An estimate of the direction of flow ✓ Material handling areas ✓ Each structural control measure to help reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff ✓ Areas used for storage or disposal of overburden, materials, soils, or wastes ✓ Areas used for mineral stilling & processing ✓ Springs, streams, wetlands and other surface waters ✓ Location of mint drainage or any other process water discharge points ✓ Boundary of tributary area that is subject to effluent limitations ✓ Date the map was prepared and subsequent revision dates ✓ Locations of potential pollutant sources ✓ Locations of sampling points Powers Pit and heady Mix Plant Storm Water Management Plan Page f( of 20 SECTION 3 Storniwater Management Controls This section describes the development and implementation of stormwater management controls specifically designed for Powers Pit and Ready Mix facility including: SWMP Administration. ictenriticatlon of potential pollutant sources and Best Management Practices (13MPs), sampling information, preventative maintenance, good housekeeping techniques, Spill Prevention and Response Procedures, employee training, and identification of discharges other than storrnwater SWMP Administration Team Team Members Responsibilities Name: David Jordan Title: Plant Manager (Aggregate) Phone: 303-657-4000 - Assist in plan development - Advise Environmental Group of site changes - Facility inspections - Employee training Name: John CosEanro Title: Plant Manager (Ready Mix) Phone: 970-704-4824 - Assist in plan development - Advise Environmental Group of site changes - FaciIity inspections - Employee training Name: Todd Ohlheiser Title: VP Front Range Aggregates Phone: 303-657-4000 - Review and certify plan Name: Walter Wright Title: Environmental Manager Phone: 303-657-4466 - Complete plan and maps - Update plans as informed of changes - Assist in implementation, maintenance, and revision of the SWMP at the site - Employee Training Name: Mcghan McDonald Title: Director of Environment Phone: 303-657-4148 - Develop BMPs for regional storm water management - Manage any significant release of pollutants - Employee Training NOTE: Any team member may designate other trained personnel to conduct a facility inspection.. Powers Pii and heady Mix P lani Storm Water Management Plnir Page 7 of 20 Identification of Potential Pollutant Sources and Best Management Practices See FIGURE 3 (APPENDIX pg. 20) Figure 3 evaluates the potential of contributing pollutants to storniwater BEFORE any Best Management Practices are implemented. The BMPs listed in Figure 3 were implemented as a result of the initial evaluation of pollutants. Sampling Information Scitedu!e and Procedrrrer for Monitoring Sampling Location Pollutant Parameters to be Sampled Monitoring Schedules Numeric Limitations Discharge Point OOIA, 002A Flow Continuous N/A Discharge Points 001 002A pH 2/Month 6 5-9.0 Discharge Points 001A, 002A oil and Grease 2/Month 10 mg/I Discharge PointsTSS 001A, 002A 2/Month 7 -day - 45 rrtgll 30 -day - 30 mgll Discharge Points 001A, 002A TDS Quarterly N/A History of Significant Spills or Leaks of Toxic or Ilazardous Materials Date Description of Spill or Leak — Location, Material, Quantity, Remediation Actions No reportable spills or leaks in the last .3 years Powars Pit unci Ready Mitt Pinot 51om Water Mattagenteni Plan Page 8 of 20 Preventative Maintenance Daily inspections of all storage and activity areas are conducted as a part of the operation.. Comprehensive inspections are completed as required based on activity at the site (please see Section 4 for additional details). Inspections include at a minimum the following: o Integrity of diesel storage tank and secondary containment o Integrity of perimeter berms and truck Wash out berms o Fuel spills in diesel fueling area, and material spills in the silo area and mixer area o Open aggregate storage bins • Air and oil leaks on machinery and equipment a Belts, pulleys, rollers, and gates on plant equipment Cleaning and maintenance is performed as needed and in response to inspection results, Records of these inspections are available through the plant manager or another member of the site SWMP Administration Team. Management Device Inspection Frequency Cleaning Fre Irene ' Potential Failures to Observe Closet Hydrocarbon tanks Monthly As needed Adequate containment Hydrocarbon secondary containment Monthly As needed Adequate containment Catch basins As needed As needed Insufficient capacity Settling ponds As needed As needed Insufficient capacity Additive Storage Monthly As needed Adequate containment Containment devices (berms, ditches, etc.) Weekly As needed Adequate containment General Plant Conditions Daily As needed Perimeter Erosion Weekly As needed Breach Truck Washout Pits Daily As needed Adequate containment/Insufficient capacity Adequate containment/breach Structural BMPs Monthly As heeded Vehicles Weekly As needed Leaks Material Handling Equipment As Needed As needed Leaks Powers Pit and Ready Mix Plant Storni Water Management Plan Page 9 or20 Good Housekeeping Good housekeeping practices at the site are designed to maintain a clean and orderly work environment This is accomplished through proper operation and maintenance of machinery and processing equipment. Careful material storage practices have been implemented.. (louse keeping includes prevention and/or reduction of spilled cement, aggregate, fly ash, and other particulate material. Watering of internal roads is performed as needed to control fugitive dust. Principal good housekeeping procedures are as follows: o The material inventory is kept up to date, and all containers are labeled with the name and associated hazards. o Material safety data sheets (MSDS) are available on site to ensure that operation staff is aware of hazards and pollution potential.. • Routine cleanup operations are ongoing and scheduled to ensure that the storage areas and maintenance areas are clean and orderly. • Good housekeeping, including cleanup procedures and disposal requirements, are incorporated into employee training • Solid waste receptacles arc available on site and are emptied regularly. Powers I'it and Ready Mix Plant Storm Waiter Management Plan Page 10 n1.20 Materials Handling, Spill Prevention and Response Procedures This facility has a formai Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Training and procedures established under SPCC rules are applied to all petroleum storage within the facility. Secondary containment is provided Jrothe fuels and lubricating oil tanks should releases occur. Removal of accumulated liquids from the contarnments is accomplished by use of absorbents, portable pump, or other technique, and waste material is properly disposed of. In the event that a spill occurs: o Do— c Shut oft supply, stop Teak (if possible) Shut of ignition sources Contain spill and/or dike ahead of spill Notify Plant Manager. If the spill leaves the site or is greater than 25 gallons, the Plant Manager will notify Environmental Group. • Protect adjacent people, property, surface waters, and equipment from contact with spill ▪ Look to Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for clean up guidance ® Follow site SPCC plan a Place absorbents, dirt, or other solid materials in a non -leaking container and dispose of according to state and federal regulations o Don't— • Smoke Risk personal injury W Wash down spill with water • Cover and not cleanup spill The majority of manufacturing process includes solid earthen materials with inert properties that would not impair surface or groundwater characteristics, The most common liquid not covered under the facility petroleum management plan would be process water used in the production ofconcretc, and small amounts of cleaning liquids that have no identified impairment of surface or ground water. Areas where spills can occur, and their accompanying drainage points, are clearly identified in the site map (see Figure 2). Dowers Pit and heady Mix Ptah Storm Water Management Plan I'agc I t of 20 Employee Training Training of personnel is conducted annually to educate employees, at all levels of responsibility, about the components and objectives of the storm water management plan for the site.. The training scope will include the following topics: Spill Prevention Spill Response Good Housekeeping techniques Materials Management Sediment & Erosion Prevention Definition of Process Water Best Management Practices in Place and Proper Maintenance While operations are conducted on site, it will be the responsibility of the site manager or operator in charge to train appropriate on-site personnel so that the goals of the SWMP arc achieved. Various other types of environmental training are conducted at different levels of the site management, Environmental Training topics are produced for `tailgate' meetings to discuss site-specific environmental management. Site managers participate in a number of internal and industry management meetings where environmental pollution control, regulations, and responsibilities are discussed,. Records of -personnel training conducted, including personnel in attendance, date of training, and scope of training are available through the facility manager. Contractors and temporary personnel are informed of site specific design features and operations on their first visit to the site. Powers Pa and Ready Mix Plant Sturm Water Management Phut Page 12 of 20 Identification of Discharge other than Stormwater The site has been cvaltrated for the presence of non-stormwater discharges, Water stored and applied on site for dust abatement is periodically utilized on the yard site and the access road to suppress fugitive dust. Applied dust control is not applied in excess amounts that would result in an off-site discharge of li uid . W 11 1 contained within the plant area. Any mechanical failure with the potential to allow a surfaces release would be addressed through the site's spill response or emergency response protocols, free liquids would be isolated and adsorbed, and adsorbents properly disposed Should subsequent water uses be initiated on site, these water sources will be identified m the table below: Types of Discharge No Discharge Permitted Process Water Unpernritted Exempt Control Measures �..,.µ�.� Transport Discharge X ,_ _ m _ Equipment Wash Water X Dust Control (roads) X Irrigation return (lows X Other Agricultural dlschargc X Fire Fighting discharges X Foundation Draining(SUMP) X Springs x Pit Dewatering X Other Powers Pit anti Itcady Mix Plant Storer Mtter lxianag& ni nt I"Ian Page 13 o120 SECTION 4 Comprehensive Inspections Comprehensive inspections performed by qualified individuals, record keeping and internal reporting are essential activities under the SWMP and are outlined below.. All records and reports are to be maintained C plain at rice rnrandgtog 011 ice. Qualified personnel shall make a comprehensive inspection of the stormwater management system at least twice per year in the spring and fall for all active facilities. For idle sites where an employee is not stationed or does not routinely visit the site, inspections shall be conducted every two years. For inactive sites, inspections shall be conducted every three years. These comprehensive inspections must be documented and summarized in the Annual Report. Material handling areas, disturbed areas, areas used for material storage that are exposed to precipitation, and other potential sources of pollution identified in the SWMP in accordance with the permit shall be inspected for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system. Structural stormwatei° management measures, sediment and control measures, and other structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be observed to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of equipment needed to implement the plan, such as spill response equipment, shall be made Based on the results of the inspection, tfie description of potential pollutant sources and pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be revised as appropriate.. Such revisions shall provide for implementation of any changes to the plan in a timely manner, but in no case more than 90 days after the inspection. A report summarizing the scope of the inspection, personnel making the inspection, the date(s) of the inspection, major observations relating to the implementation of the SW MP, and actions taken as described above shall be made and regained as part of the SWMP for at least three years. rhe report shall be signed by a Lafarge employee authorized to certify the plan, Powers Pit and Ready Mi. Plant Sturm Water Management Plan Page 14 of 20 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS The following is a list of documents that are kept on site and may be viewed upon request: CI)PS General Permit For Stormwatcr Discharges For Sand and Gravel Mining and Processing (And Other Nonmetallic Minerals Except Fuel) • Stoi ntwater Inspection tteports • Annual Reports a Stormwatcr braining Sign -in Records o Preventative Maintenance Records • Site Specific Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Powers Pit and Ready Mix Plant Sturm Water \t:ntagenrent Plan Page 15 of 20 Appendix Other Pollution Prevention Measures PRACTICE EMPLOYED On site kY(N) AREA WHERE PRACTI(`F Is EMPLOYED DESCRIPTION OF HOW ANI) WHERE PRACTICE WORKS/IS IMI'LEMENTEII Lt•nsio>rlk Control: DATE OF IM 1'LEIVIEN'1'A"1'ION Chern ical Stabilization Compost Blankets Dust Control Geotextiles Gradient Terraces Mulching_ Rprap Seeding Sodding Soil Retention Soil Roughening Temporary Slope Drain Temporary Stream Crossings Wind Fences and Sand Fences Other (describe) uinoil'f Control Check Dams Grass -Line Channels Permanent Slope Diversions Temporary Diversion Dikes Other (describe) Sediment Contral Brush Barrier Compost Filter Berms Compost Filter Powers Pit and Ready Mix Plant Storni 'Vater Management Pian Page 1 or 20 Socks Const. Entrance Fiber Rolls Filter Berms Sediment Basins and Rock Danis Sediment Filters • and Sediment Chambers Sediment Traps Silt Fences Storm Drain Inlet Protection Straw or Hay Bales Vegetated Buffers Other (describe) Concrete Washout General Construction Site Waste Management Spill Prevenetion and Control Plan Vehicle Maintenance and Washin Areas Sediment Baslns and Rock Dams Sediment Filters and Sediment Chambers Sediment Traps Silt Fences Storm brain Inlet Protection Straw or Hay Bales Vegetated Buffers Other (describe) Powers Pit and Ready Mitt Plant Storm Water Management Pian Page 17 ol`20 Figure 1 Genera! Location Map PiriretS Pit and Ready Mix Plant Storni Witter Management Plan Page i 8 of 21) 0 su 4, n Ci Data Zoom 12-0 0 `° 31 Figure 2 Site Specific Map Powers 1'it and Ready Mix Plant Storm (Vater Management Page 19 of 20 C1f5Ci1ARzyT C7€72 _W Illm MUM orf. DISCHARGE 001 STOCK PILES BOLE, a1DUMPSTER YARD t 5TOC K PILES 0UM PSTER EVEPSEOI FIF :r 1-� SCALE l STOCK FILES mmmmmmenull STOCK PILES PORTABLE �TOILET STOCr.. PILES MAUL ROAD, PORTABLE CRUSHING 0IESEL. 0.000\ GAL. Wi ' SPELL OT PROPERTY BOy1.11: ®� mmm� ■ ■ mEtEllElE� • ®mom ■ RETENTION POND\ / \. CRUS11.Ei ` r , Wj�XSM t PORTABL TOILET, Or�`• `RCP �JQ�' STOCK ' /4 PORTABLE PILES :DUMPSTFR \ . TOILET ApNSiY " .. AST 1..*DIESEL • 10.000;GAL. 1 WI SPELL KIT • ACID BA `, 2 HOPPER .PLANT AGG B[•N5 • POND" $12 TRANSFORMER, • MINERAL OIL -250 GAL. ,11 PP,OPA'1 - 1 CONC. BLOCF"s N. FLOW Di RECTiON 10170 CHURC}f RI= TAY. pRogn POWERS 1 SWMP MAP - NEMMITR. Ca01um 150421 7-4004 ORM TWK I Mt; o3"d7f2O11 1wDECr 1aE k ucwVAeIrwG sw> NTS EE1 r+tk 1 OF I F: LAND11natlSGLE0E31317 - PowersOwg\SWMPSPowers SWMP 12-13-10.dwg, SWMP, 318/2011 7:55:17 AM Figure 3 BMP -fable Powers Pit and Read) Mix Plant Storm Water Management Plan l'agc 20 of 20 FIGURE 3 Identification of Potential Pollutant Sources/ Best Management Practices Industrial Activity (Matenals Inventory) Potential Impact on Receiving Water (Potential Pollutants Present) Likelihood of Contributing Pollutants Best Management Practices (Date Implemented) to Storrnwater On Site Addi ional!Added (0 BMPs to Implemented) Haul Roads Low (Total Suspended Solids) Water Truck High Berms Disturbed Areas (Erosion Control) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Berms High Site Grading Buffer Strips Loading/Unloading Operations (Aggregate Unloading) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Berms Low Stockpiles of overburden, raw material. intermediate products, byproducts, finished products (Sand & Gravel Storage Piles) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Berms Water Truck High Site Grading Areas used for recycling of asphalt or concrete (Recyclable Concrete Piles) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Bemis High Site Grading Areas used for recycling of asphalt or concrete (Recyclable Asphalt Piles) N/A N/A N/A Outdoor Storage Activities (Lime Storage Silo) High (pH, T55) Stored on concrete pad in tank Low Berms Outdoor Storage Activities (Boneyard} Low (Hydrocarbons, pH, TSS) Berms Low Outdoor Storage Activities (Unleaded Fuel Tank) NIA NIA NIA Indoor Storage Activities (Used Oil) NIA N/A N/A Continued on next page FIGURE 3 Identification of Potential Pollutant Sources/ Best Management Practices Outdoor Storage Activities (Diesel Tanksi High (Hydrocarbons) Low Rouble Wall Tanks Outdoor Storage Activities (Calcium Chloride Storage) Low (pH) Low Secondary Containment Outdoor Storage Activities (Concrete Admixtures! Low (phi} Low Stared in contained areas Outdoor Storage Activities (Asphalt/Concrete Truck Cleaners) Low (pH) Low Stored in contained areas Outdoor Storage Activities (Truck Parking) Low (Hydrocarbons) Low Berms Site Grading Outdoor Storage Activities (Cement Storage Silo) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Low Stored on concrete pad Significant dust or particulate generating processes (Batching) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Low Haghouse Dust Collector On-site waste disposal practices (Trash. Recycling) Low (Total Suspended Solids) Low Contained in dumpster with lid Presence of salt piles N/A N/A NIA Routine Maintenance Activities (Washout Pits) High (Total Suspended Solids) Low Site Grading Berms Routine Maintenance Activities (Shop/Equipment Maintenance) High (Hydrocarbons) Low Site Grading Berms Miscellaneous STATE OF COLORADO Bill Ritter, Jr., Governor James B. Martin,: Executive Director Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Laboratory Services Division Denver, Colorado 80246-1530 8100 Lowry Blvd. Phone (303) 692-2000 Denver, Colorado 80230-6928 TDD Line (303).691-7700 (303) 692-3090 Located in Glendale, Colorado http://www.cdphe.state.co.us June 10, 2008 LaFarge West, Inc. Todd Ohlheiser, VP Rocky Mountain Aggregate 10170 Church Ranch Way, Ste 200 Westminster, CO 80021 RE: Certification, for the Colorado Wastewater Discharge Permit System Permit Number: COG -500000, Facility Number: COG -501502 Dear Mr. Ohlheiser: Colorado Department: of Public Health and Environment Enclosed please find a copy of the Certification, which was issued under the Colorado Water Quality Control Act. You are legally obligated to comply with all terms and conditions of the permit and certifications. Please read the permit and if you have any questions, contact me at (303) 692-3531. Should you have questions on the fee, please call (303) 692-3529. Sincerely, Loretta Houk, Administrative Assistant Water Quality Protection Section WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION Enclosure xc: Regional Council of Government M. Kadnuck, DE, Technical Services Garfield County Permit File Permit Fees Ilh cert Permit Number COG -500000 Facility Number COG -501502 CORMS Permit No. M-1979-134 Page 1 Colorado Discharge Permit System Regulations CERTIFICATION under DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH SAND AND GRAVEL MINING AND PROCESSING OPERATIONS (AND OTHER NONMETALLIC MINERALS EXCEPT FUEL) Category 07, Subcategory IA, Current annual fee $270 (CRS 25-8-502) This certification specifically authorizes Lafarge West, Inc. to discharge in accordance with the General Permit for Sand and Gravel Mining and Processing Operations (and other nonmetallic minerals except fuel). All correspondence relative to this facility should reference the specific facility number, COG -501502. Permittee Lafarge West, Inc. Todd Ohlheiser, VP, Rocky Mountain Aggregate 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Westminster, CO 80021 Phone: 303-657-4000 Fax: 303-657-4339 Contact Corey Hansen, Environmental Manager, CO and WY Phone: 303-657-4330 Corey.Hansen@lafarge-na.com Project Name, Activity and Location Powers Pit — The facility is located at 14156 CO Hwy 82, near Carbondale (Garfield County), CO; Latitude: 39° 24' 57.96" north, longitude: 107° 11' 23.77", west. Ground water is discharged from this site. Outfalls 001A The discharge from a settling area located in the northwest area of the site, prior to entering an irrigation ditch* that flows to the Roaring Fork River. Avg.= 11.5 MGD The discharge from a settling area located in the north central area of the site 002A (northeast of Outfall 001A), prior to entering an irrigation ditch* that flows to the Avg.= 11.5 MGD Roaring Fork River. * with permission of ditch owner Effluent Parameters The discharges go to the Roaring Fork River, within Segment 03a of the Roaring Fork River Sub -basin, Upper Colorado River Basin. This segment is found in the Classifications and Numeric Standards for the Upper Colorado River Basin (Regulation No. 33; last update effective March 1, 2008). Segment 03a is designated as Reviewable and is classified for the following beneficial uses: Aquatic Life, Class 1 (Cold); Recreation, Class la; Water Supply; and Agriculture. Effluent Limitations and Monitoring Requirements _________________ ______________General Permit Requirements Flow, MGD Report NA Report Discharge Evaluation Continuous / Recorder / Instantaneous2 In-situ 2 pH, s.u. Oil and Grease, mg/1 Total Suspended Solids, mg/1 N/A N/A 30 NA NA 45 6.5-9.0 10 NA Water Quality Standards State Effluent Regulations State Effluent Regulations 2 Days/Month 2 Days/Month 2 Days/Month Grab Visual 3 Grab -Site-Specific Requirements Total Dissolved Solids, mg/1 Report NA Report Salinity Regulations Quarterly Grab — If power is not available, flow may be measured on an instantaneous basis. Facility shall monitor flow 2 days / month. 3 - If a visual sheen is noticed, a grab sample must be taken and analyzed for oil and grease ISSUED: JUNE 9, 2008 EFFECTIVE: JULY 1, 2008 EXPIRATION: JUNE 30,2013 Permit Number COG -500000 Facility Number COG -501502 CDRMS Permit No. M-1979-134 Page la Other Conditions Chemicals The permittee did not specify any chemicals for use in waters that may be discharged. On this basis, no chemicals are approved under this permit. Prior to use of any applicable chemical, the permittee must submit a request for approval which includes the most current Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for that chemical. Until approved, use of a chemical in waters that may be discharged could result in discharge of pollutants not authorized under the permit. Antidegradation An antidegradation (AD) analysis may apply in the future if additional parameters are added to this certification. No current limits are water quality -based, thus antidegradation does not apply. Sampling Sampling shall occur at a point after treatment, or after the implementation of any Best Management Practices (BMPs). If BMPs or treatment are not implemented, sampling shall occur where the discharge leaves control of the permittee, and prior to entering the receiving stream. Samples must be representative of what is entering the receiving stream. Monitoring and Reporting Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) must be submitted quarterly as long as the certification is in effect. The permittee shall provide the Division with any additional monitoring data on the permitted discharge collected for entities other than the Division. This will be supplied to the Division within 48 hours of the receipt of the data by the peuirittee. This certification to discharge is effective long term. For termination of permit coverage, the permittee must initiate this by sending a letter to the Division requesting the permit certification be terminated. Best Management Practices The permittee shall implement and maintain Best Management Practices (BMP) for the prevention of erosion and the control of solid and liquid pollutants due to the discharge. BMPs include various options, such as: modification of the pipe discharge structure to disperse flows; containment of water by hay bales or other comparable structures; the use of geocloth, filter fabric, or plastic sheeting for protection of containment structures; rip -rap; and/or any other approved methods. Stormwater Management Plan See Part I.C. of the permit for stormwater requirements. At the time of application, the permittee certified that they had developed and implemented a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) for this facility. The permittee shall amend the SWMP whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance which has a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants to the waters of the State, or if the SWMP proves to be ineffective in achieving the general objectives of controlling pollutants in stormwater discharges associated with mining activity. A copy of the SWMP must be kept on site and provided to the Division upon request. The General Permit for Sand and Gravel Mining and Processing Operations (and other nonmetallic minerals except fuel) is attached. The permittee should review this permit for familiarity with all of the permit requirements. If the permittee has questions related to this certification that cannot be answered by a review of the permit, the permit writer should be contacted. Permit Writer Erin Scott 303-692-3506 June 9, 2008 STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION TELEPHONE: (303) 692-3150 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PERMIT NO: 07GA0972 DATE ISSUED: December 12, 2007 ISSUED TO: Lafarge West, Inc. FINAL APPROVAL THE SOURCE TO WHICH THIS PERMIT APPLIES IS DESCRIBED AND LOCATED AS FOLLOWS: Construction materials (including ready mix cement concrete) production facility, known as Powers Pit, located at 14156 Colorado State Highway 82, Carbondale, Garfield County, Colorado. THE SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT OR ACTIVITY SUBJECT TO THIS PERMIT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING: One (1) Erie Strayer, Model: TwinBin MG -IIT, S/N: AS -7348, truck mix {dry) type, cement concrete batch plant, production design rated at 250 cubic yards per hour. Emissions of particulate matter are controlled by baghouse / dust collector. Operation of the batch plant is supported by: two (2) Erie, cement silos, each with a capacity of 67 tons; one (1) Erie, flyash silo, with a capacity of 67 tons. These silos are equipped with pneumatic transfer systems and associated silo vent baghouses. Materials handling and on-site vehicular traffic. THIS PERMIT IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO AIR QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION AND THE COLORADO AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT C.R.S. (25-7-101 et seq), TO THOSE GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN THIS DOCUMENT AND THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 1. With the issuance of this permit, portable source permit, Permit No. 01P00173 (AIRS Point ID: 777/1696/001), issued for the same equipment, stands canceled. 2. The permit number shall be marked on the subject equipment for ease of identification. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section III.E.) (State only enforceable) AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 1 of 6 Colorado Depai tment of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Control Division Lafarge West, Inc. Permit No. 07GA0972 Final Approval 3. Visible emissions shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) opacity during normal operation of the source. During periods of startup, process modification, or adjustment of control equipment visible emissions shall not exceed 30% opacity for more than six minutes in any sixty consecutive minutes. Opacity shall be measured by EPA Method 9. (Reference: Regulation No. 1, Section II.A. L & 4.) 4. Emission control devices shall be inspected, monitored, maintained / renewed, and operated as per the recommendations of the manufacturers, and ensure ongoing satisfactory performance. 5. The particulate emission control measures listed on the attached page (as approved by the Division) shall be applied to the particulate emission producing sources as required by Regulation No. 1, Section IILD.1.b. 6. This source is subject to Regulation No. 6, Part B, III - Standards of Performance for New Manufacturing Process. 7. The source is also subject to the following requirements of Regulation No. 6, Part A, Subpart A, General Provisions: a. At all times, including periods of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction, the facility and control equipment shall, to the extent practicable, be maintained and operated in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether or not acceptable operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the Division, which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the source. (Reference: Regulation No. 6, Part A. General Provisions from 40 CFR 60.11 b. No article, machine, equipment or process shall be used to conceal an emission that would otherwise constitute a violation of an applicable standard. Such concealment includes, but is not limited to, the use of gaseous diluents to achieve compliance with an opacity standard or with a standard that is based on the concentration of a pollutant in the gases discharged to the atmosphere. (§ 60.12) c. Records of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions shall be maintained, as required under § 60.7. AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 2 of 6 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Control Division Lafarge West, Inc. Permit No. 07GA0972 Final Approval 8. This source shall be limited to a maximum production rate as listed below and all other activities, operational rates and numbers of equipment as stated in the application. Annual records of the actual production rate shall be maintained by the applicant and made available to the Division for inspection upon request. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section II.A.4.) Production of ready mix cement concrete shall not exceed 100,000 cubic yards per year. Materials handled shall not exceed the quantities that correspond to the production limit. 9. A Revised Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) shall be filed: (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part A, Section II.C.) a. Annually whenever a significant increase in emissions occurs as follows: For any criteria pollutant: For sources emitting less than 100 tons per year, a change in actual emissions of five tons per year or more, above the level reported on the last APEN submitted; or For any non -criteria reportable pollutant: If the emissions increase by 50% or five (5) tons per year, whichever is less, above the level reported on the last APEN submitted to the Division. b. Whenever there is a change in the owner or operator of any facility, process, or activity; or c. Whenever new control equipment is installed, or whenever a different type of control equipment replaces an existing type of control equipment; or d. Whenever a permit limitation must be modified; or e. No later than 30 days before the existing APEN expires. APEN/s expires five (5) years from the date/s of submittal. AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 3 of 6 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Control Division Lafarge West, Inc. Permit No. 07GA0972 Final Approval 10. Emissions of air pollutants shall not exceed the following limitations (as calculated in the Division's preliminary analysis): (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section II.A.4.) Particulate Matter: PM10 (Particulate Matter<10 pm): Particulate Matter - Fugitive: PM10 (Particulate Matter<10 µm) - Fugitive: 3.1 tons per year. 1.5 tons per year. 3.0 tons per year. 1.5 tons per year. Compliance with the fugitive particulate matter emission limits shall be demonstrated by not exceeding the production / materials handling limits. Ram N. Sectharam Permit Review Engineer Permit History: R K Hancock III, P.E. Construction Permits Unit Supervisor Date Action Description This issuance FA Final Approval. Cancels previously issued portable source permit, Permit No. 01P00173. Issued to Lafarge West, Inc. APEN Submittal Log (to be maintained further by the permittee): APEN Submittal Date APEN Expiry Date Renewal APEN to be submitted by Remarks May 18, 2007 May 18, 2012 April 18, 2012 AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 4 of 6 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Control Division Lafarge West, Inc. Permit No. 07GA0972 Final Approval Notes to Permit Holder: 1) The production or raw material processing limits and emission limits contained in this permit are based on the production/processing rates requested in the permit application. These limits may be revised upon request of the permittee providing there is no exceedance of any specific emission control regulation or any ambient air quality standard. A revised air pollution emission notice (APEN) and application form must be submitted with a request for a permit revision. 2) This source is subject to the Common Provisions Regulation Part II, Subpart E, Affirmative Defense Provision for Excess Emissions During Malfunctions. The permittee shall notify the Division of any malfunction condition which causes a violation of any emission limit or limits stated in this permit as soon as possible, but no later than two (2) hours after the start of the next working day, followed by written notice to the Division explaining the cause of the occurrence and that proper action has been or is being taken to correct the conditions causing said violation and to prevent such excess emission in the future. 3) This source is classified as a: At a: Minor Source Minor Facility 4) The emission levels contained in this permit are based on the following overall controlled emission factors (pounds per cubic yard of ready mix concrete produced): Pollutant EmiFactor Emission Controls Cont.Eff. % Particulate Matter (PM) 0.0620 Controlled EF 0.00 PM10 (PM < 10 um) 0.0300 Controlled EF 0.00 PM — Fugitive 0.0300 Controlled EF 0.00 PM10 — Fugitive 0.0300 Controlled EF 0.00 AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 5 of 6 Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Control Division Lafarge West, Inc. Permit No. 07GA0972 Final Approval GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS: (IMPORTANT! READ ITEMS 5,6,7 AND 8) This permit is issued in reliance upon the accuracy and completeness of information supplied by the applicant and is conditioned upon conduct of the activity, or construction, installation and operation of the source, in accordance with this information and with representations made by the applicant or applicant's agents. It is valid only for the equipment and operations or activity specifically identified on the permit. 2. Unless specifically stated otherwise, the general and specific conditions contained in this permit have been determined by the APCD to be necessary to assure compliance with the provisions of Section 25-7-114.5(7)(a), C.R.S. 3. Each and every condition of this permit is a material part hereof and is not severable. Any challenge to or appeal of, a condition hereof shall constitute a rejection of the entire permit and upon such occurrence, this permit shall be deemed denied ab initio. This permit may be revoked at any time prior to final approval by the Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) on grounds set forth in the Colorado Air Quality Control Act and regulations of the Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC), including failure to meet any express term or condition of the permit. If the Division denies a permit, conditions imposed upon a permit are contested by the applicant, or the Division revokes a permit, the applicant or owner or operator of a source may request a hearing before the AQCC for review of the Division's action. 4. This permit and any required attachments must be retained and made available for inspection upon request at the location set forth herein. With respect to a portable source that is moved to a new location, a copy of the Relocation Notice (required by law to be submitted to the APCD whenever a portable source is relocated) should be attached to this permit. The permit may be reissued to a new owner by the APCD as provided in AQCC Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section II.B. upon a request for transfer of ownership and the submittal of a revised APEN and the required fee. 5. Issuance (initial approval) of an emission permit does not provide "final" authority for this activity or operation of this source. Final approval of the permit must be secured from the APCD in writing in accordance with the provisions of 25-7-114.5(12)(a) C.R.S. and AQCC Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section III.G. Final approval cannot be granted until the operation or activity commences and has been verified by the APCD as conforming in all respects with the conditions of the permit. If the APCD so determines, it will provide written documentation of such final approval, which does constitute "final" authority to operate. Compliance with the permit conditions must be demonstrated within 180 days after commencement of operation. 6. THIS PERMIT AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRES IF you (1) do not commence construction or operation within 18 months after either the date of issuance of this permit or the date on which such construction or activity was scheduled to commence as set forth in the permit, whichever is later; (2) discontinue construction for a period of 18 months or more; or (3) do not complete construction within a reasonable time of the estimated completion date. Extensions of the expiration date may be granted by the APCD upon a showing of good cause by the permittee prior to the expiration date. 7. YOU MUST notify the APCD at least thirty days (fifteen days for portable sources) prior to commencement of the permitted operation or activity. Failure to do so is a violation of Section 25-7- 114.5(12)(a), C.R.S. and AQCC Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section II1.G.1., and can result in the revocation of the permit. You must demonstrate compliance with the permit conditions within 180 days after commencement of operation as stated in condition 5. 8. Section 25-7-114.7(2)(a), C.R.S. requires that all sources required to file an Air Pollution Emission Notice (APEN) must pay an annual fee to cover the costs of inspections and administration. If a source or activity is to be discontinued, the owner must notify the Division in writing requesting a cancellation of the permit. Upon notification, annual fee billing will terminate. 9. Violation of the terms of a permit or of the provisions of the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and control Act or the regulations of the AQCC may result in administrative, civil or criminal enforcement actions under Sections 25-7-115 (enforcement), -121 (injunctions), -122 (civil penalties), -122.1 (criminal penalties), C.R.S. AIRS Point ID: 045/0101/003 Page 6 of 6 AIR QUALITY STATEMENT LAFARGE, WEST INC. - CERISE MINE jAFARGE Garfield County, CO Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution Article IV Section 4-502 Description of Submittal Requirements E. Impact Analysis 10. Nuisance. Impacts on adjacent land from generation of vapor, dust or smoke Prepared by: Buys & Associates, Inc. 300 E. Mineral Ave., Suite 10 Littleton, CO 80122 303-781-8211 www.buysandassociates.com JULY 23, 2010 1.0 INTRODUCTION Lafarge, West Inc. (Lafarge) is proposing to mine gravel on a 97.8 -acre parcel east of an existing gravel pit and at the corner of State Highway 82 and Crystal Springs Road. The new mine site is zoned rural and is used for agriculture. Powers pit, an existing gravel mine owned by Lafarge, is to the west of the proposed new mine. Mining at the existing site will be completed prior to the start of mining operations at the Cerise Mine site. The Cerise Mine is planned to operate for 15 years and will be developed in eight sequences. Gravel material will be extracted on 65.5 acres in the southern portion of the site. Per the requirements of Article VII, Section 7-840 (B) of the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, a fugitive dust control plan (Plan) must be submitted for all gravel extraction operations in the county. The purpose of the Air Quality Statement is to identify and address the how Lafarge will prevent, reduce or mitigate impacts on Air Quality from activities associated within the Cerise Mine. Specifically, the Air Quality Statement will demonstrate how Lafarge will comply with the Air Quality requirements identified in Article VII, Standards, 7-840 Additional Standard applicable to Gravel Extraction, Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended, as well as satisfy the impact analysis requirements of Section 4-502 (E) Part 10 of the Garfield County Land Use Change Permit Application. 2.0 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT GENERATING ACTIVITIES As discussed above, Lafarge plans to phase in construction of the mine over a 15 -year period. Activities with the potential to emit vapor, dust, smoke or other emanations while developing and operating the mine include construction of roadways, excavation, grading, crushing and screening. More specifically: 00 Removal of gravel from the mine. 0o Transportation to screening, crushing and loading operations via a conveyor system. 00 Crushing and screening of gravel. 0o Vehicle traffic in and around the processing areas of the site. 00 Traffic associated with trucks entering and exiting the site. 00 Wind blowing dust from exposed areas. 3.0 FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN The purpose of the Fugitive Dust Control Plan (Plan) is to identify measures that Lafarge can employ to prevent, reduce or mitigate fugitive dust as a result of activities associated within the Cerise Mine. Furthermore, the Plan will provide a means to minimize fugitive dust emissions from potential activities and prevent impacts to air quality in the surrounding community. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan is attached in Appendix A. 4.0 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Lafarge will comply with all applicable Garfield County, State of Colorado and Federal regulations regulating air pollution. Lafarge shall not operate in a manner constituting a public nuisance or hazard. Additional standards that Lafarge will adhere to include: 00 Visible emissions of fugitive dust will not exceed 20% opacity. 00 Any repair and maintenance activities that will generate odors beyond the property boundaries will be conducted within a building at anytime, or outdoors only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM, Monday - Saturday. 09 Lafarge will submit permit applications, acquire permits, and comply with all operating and emission standards as applicable for emission sources that require Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Air Pollution Permits for operation. Permits for emission sources will be acquired before the permitted equipment is operated. 5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Cumulative impacts from the generation of dust will be limited. As the primary mining operations at the Powers Pit operated by Lafarge will completed prior to the start up of the Cerise Mine, any potential cumulative dust impacts are anticipated to be offset. Access to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's (CDPHE) stationary source mapping tool shows six (6) PMlo (dust) emission sources within a 10 -kilometer radius of the proposed gravel mine. Two of these sources, the Powers and Sievers Pits, are Lafarge gravel pits, of which the Powers Pit will be shutting down upon startup of the Cerise Mine. The four (4) other existing sites have PMlo emission limits totaling less than 2.5 tons per year (TPY). These sites include a hospital, an animal hospital, an earthmoving company and a natural gas pipeline company. CDPHE's mapping tool can be found at this link: http://www.colorado.gov/airquality/stationary map.aspx. In order to ensure that mining operations at the Cerise Mine will meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards, background pollutant concentrations will be taken at the project boundary. This information will be submitted along with CDPHE Air Pollution permits for regulated equipment. Appendix A - FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN Lafarge will implement the following dust control measures and best management practices (bmp) to reduce fugitive dust generated from the mine: 0o Exposed areas will be vegetated or stabilized to limit wind erosion and to provide screening. 0o Frequent watering by water truck of gravel as it is removed and transported. 0o Install, operate and maintain water spray bars in conveyor system and crushing and screening plant. 0o Limit drop heights of gravel for conveyor loading, transfer points, screening and crushing. 0o Limit on-site vehicle speeds. 0o Treat frequently traveled roadways on-site with stabilizers and/or watering to minimize re -entrainment of dust from the surface of the road. 0o Minimize dust from loaded haul trucks by covering or watering as necessary. 0o A minimum 50 -foot setback around the property to allow any fugitive dust to settle before being carried by wind. CO Emission controls and limits as required by CDPHE will be enforced and followed. 0o Construction of berms and mine walls to serve as wind breaks. 0o Reclaim the site once mining has been completed. �ANIECARD FIIRONMINTAL ACOUSTICS AND Vta RATION CONSULTING November 17, 2010 Mr. Sean Frisch, AICP Land Coordinator - Colorado Lafarge West, Inc. 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200 Westminster, Colorado 80021 Re: Analysis of Noise from Proposed Cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado Dear Mr. Frisch, Hankard Environmental predicted the level of noise that will be generated by the proposed Cerise Gravel Mine, which will be located along US Highway 82 approximately two miles northeast of Carbondale, Colorado (Garfield County). The predicted noise levek were compared to the applicable noise level limits contained in the State of Colorado noise regulations, which are deferred to by Garfield County. Our analysis demonstrates that noise from the proposed mine will be in compliance with applicable limits, provided that certain mitigation (reduction) measures are implemented. This report describes the noise regulations applicable to the proposed Project, the methods and data used to predict noise levels from the Project, existing noise levels in the vicinity, and the assessment of noise level compliance. APPLICABLE NOISE CONTROL REGULATIONS Noise emissions from the proposed Cerise Gravel Mine must adhere to Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution, Article VII, Section 7-840, Additional Standards Applicable to Gravel Extraction. Paragraph C of Section 7-840 requires the "Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado Revised Statutes at the time any new application is made." Noise levels are regulated in the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) in Title 25, Article 12, Noise Abatement. CRS §25-12 noise limits are listed in Table 1, and depend on the time of day of operations, the land use of adjacent properties, and the type of operations. The limits need to be met at a point 25 feet outside of the Project boundary (permit boundary), as clearly stated by Garfield County resolution 7-840. Time of Day The proposed Project will operate during the following times: 7:00 am to 8:00 pm Monday through Saturday. Crushing, digging, and heavy hauling will only be allowed from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, with only administrative and maintenance activities taking place until 8:00 pm. No operations except emergency maintenance to ensure the integrity of operating equipment shall take place on Sunday. COLORADO • WISCONSIN • MAINE phone: (303) 6660617 • www.hankardinc.com • fax (303) 6000282 HANKARD ENVERONMENTAL Ac Du®tics AND Via AATI M CDNSuI111NF These operating hours fall primarily into the 'Daytime' category defined by CRS §25-12 (7:00 am to 7:00 pm). Therefore, only the 'Daytime' noise level limits shown in Table 1 are applicable to the proposed Project. Land Use The strongest determinant of the applicable noise limit is adjacent land use. Note that in this analysis, it is the use of the adjacent property that determines the noise limit, not the zoning of the property. Table 2, below, lists the land zoning and land use of the properties adjacent to the Project (refer to Figure 1 for the location of these properties). Adjacent land use to the north is residential (Cerise residences and others). Adjacent land use to the west consists of gravel mining (Powers Mine), which for the purposes of this analysis was interpreted as 'industrial' per CRS §25-12. Adjacent land use in all other directions is primarily agriculture/grazing, which for the purposes of this analysis was interpreted as 'light industrial' per CRS §25-12. The resulting daytime noise level limits in each direction are shown in Table 2. Type of Operation Two caveats apply to these limits. During the daytime, the noise level limit can be increased by 10 dBA for 15 minutes in any one-hour period. This will be applicable to intermittent sources of mining noise, such as earth moving equipment approaching and receding from the edges of the permit boundary. Noise level limits are decreased by 5 dBA for intermittent, shrill type sounds, which on this project primarily applies to back-up alarms on earth moving equipment ('white -noise' back-up alarms are recommended, which are not impulsive or shrill). TABLE 1 - Maximum Permissible Noise Levels (dBA)- Colorado Revised Statutes §25-12 Zone Daytime (1), (2) Nighttime (2) (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) (7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) Residential 55 50 Commercial 60 1 55 Light Industrial 70 65 Industrial 75 MIME (1) During the daytime, noise levels can be increased by 10 dBA for 15 minutes in any one-hour period (2) Noise level limit decreased by 5 dBA for intermittent, shrill type sounds Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 2 November 17, 2010 1 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL AC OYS11L5 AHD V.fl FATION CONSlI111NF TABLE 2 — Zoning and Land use of Properties Adjacent to Proposed Cerise Mine Garfield County Parcel No. Direction from Proposed Project Garfield County Zoning Land Use for Daytime Cerise Noise Noise Limit Analysis (7am to 7pm) 2393-254-00-265 SE ARRD (1) Light industrial 70 2393-253-00-270 E Ag (2) Light industrial 70 2393-253-00-158 N Ag (2) Residential 55 2393-234-00-131 W ARRD (1) Industrial (3) 80 2393-264-00-004 SW Ag (2) Light industrial 70 2393-264-00-003 S Ag (2) Light industrial 70 2393-264-00-005 SSE Ag (2) Light industrial 70 (1) ARRD = Agricultural Residential Rural Density (2) No zoning given by Garfield County, 'Property Code' is agricultural (Ag) (3) Based on current land use, which is industrial (Powers Mine) FIGURE 1— LOCATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 3 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVERONMENTAL Ac Du®tics AND Via AATI M CDNSuI111NF NOISE LEVEL PREDICTION METHODOLOGY AND DATA Noise producing equipment to be employed on the proposed Cerise Mine Project includes: 1. Diesel -powered earth moving equipment (loaders, dozers, excavators, etc.) 2. Rock crushing plant (cone crusher and jaw crusher) 3. Diesel -powered electrical generators 4. Conveyors and feeders 5. Wash/processing plant (two dry screens and two wet screens) 6. Ready mix plant 7. Hot mix asphalt plant A sound power level (noise emission factor) was developed for each of these sources using a combination of measurements and published sources. The Table 3 lists the sound power level (abbreviated 'PWL', expressed in dBA, and referenced to 0.00002 Pascals) of each source included in the analysis, as well as a reference for each PWL. The PWL is independent of distance from the source, ground conditions, etc. It is a measure of how much sound energy is radiating from the source in all directions. The next step in the noise analysis was to determine which pieces of equipment will be used during each phase of the Project, where this equipment will be located, and how and when it will be operated. Gravel will be mined in eight sequences, ranging from initial stripping and stockpiling to final grading (refer to Mining Plan, Tetra Tech, July 16, 2010 for more detailed information). In general, gravel mining operations will consist of scrapers removing the top layer of dirt, followed by loaders digging up raw aggregate and loading it onto conveyors that will carry the raw aggregate to the aggregate plant. Finally, a wheel loader will load the crushed aggregate into dump trucks for transportation off-site. The aggregate plant is powered by diesel -powered electrical generators. A concrete batch plant and asphalt batch plant will also be operated. The following describes the anticipated operations for each Sequence based on information from the Project Team and the mining plan: Sequence 1 Initial Stripping and Stockpiling a. Diesel -powered earth moving equipment (scrapers and dozers) will operate on the northern and western portions of the site b. An earthen berm will be constructed along the northern boundary to shield the residences located to the north (approximately 50 feet tall) c. A smaller berm will be constructed along portions of the western boundary (approximately 17 feet tall) Sequence 2 Phase 1 Mining a. Diesel -powered earth moving equipment (scrapers, dozers, loaders) will excavate a tailings pond and construct additional stockpiles Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 4 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVERONMENTAL Ac Du®tics AND Via AATI M CDNSuI111NF b. The aggregate plant will be installed and operated in the center/northwest portion of the site (includes rock crushing plant, diesel -powered electrical generators, conveyors and feeders, and wash/processing plant) c. The ready mix plant will be installed and operated d. The hot mix asphalt plant will be installed and operated e. Dump trucks will arrive on site, be loaded with aggregate, and depart Sequence 3 Phase 2 Mining a. Diesel -powered earth moving equipment (scrapers, dozers, loaders) will excavate the southeast portion of the mine and construct additional stockpiles b. The aggregate plant, ready mix plant, and hot mix asphalt plant will be operated c. Dump trucks will arrive on site, be loaded with aggregate, and depart Sequence 4 Phase 3-A Mining a. The aggregate plant and asphalt plant will be moved to the southeast portion of the site, which will place the plant at a lower elevation and now shielded by the rim of the pit b. Diesel -powered earth moving equipment (scrapers, dozers, loaders) will excavate the northwest portion of the mine, and will now operate below grade c. The aggregate plant, ready mix plant, and hot mix asphalt plant will be operated d. Dump trucks will arrive on site, be loaded with aggregate, and depart Sequence 5 Phase 3-B (Acoustically the same as Sequence 4) Sequence 6 Phase 4-A (Acoustically the same as Sequence 4) Sequence 7 Phase 4-B (Acoustically the same as Sequence 4) Sequence 8 Reclamation (Acoustically the same as Sequence 1) The proposed Project will operate primarily during the 'Daytime', as defined by CRS §25-12 (7:00 am to 7:00 pm), with all aggregate processing, and production and off-loading of concrete and asphalt taking place from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. Only administrative and maintenance activities will be allowed from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm, which are considered acoustically insignificant. A summary of the equipment assumed for each mining sequence is shown in Table 4. The PWL and equipment information was used with SoundPlan (v7.0), which is a software program that predicts the propagation of sound outdoors per ISO 9613-2, to predict the noise level in all directions around the Project for mining Sequences 1 through 4. The SoundPlan model considered the effects of topography (elevations), ground type, distance and the frequency content of the sound sources. Also, ISO 9613-2 predicts noise levels assuming 'downwind' conditions (wind blowing from source to receptor). Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 5 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL AC OYS11L5 AHD V.fl FATION CONSlI111NF TABLE 3 — Sound Power Level (PWL, dBA) of Major Noise Producing Equipment Noise Source Sound Power Level (dBA) Reference GenSet Exhaust - 500 Hp w/ GT 201-2100 127 Representative unit: Cummins GenSet Exhaust -1500 Hp w/ GT 201-2100 126 Representative unit: CAT GenSet Engine - 1500 Hp - Unenclosed 119 Representative unit: Cummins GenSet Engine0l 500 Hp - Unenclosed 111 Representative unit: CAT Jaw Crusher 123 Measured Dry Screen 116 Measured Cone Crusher 110 Measured Wet Screen 110 Measured Concrete Batch Plant - Load Out 114 Measured Concrete Batch Plant- Dust Collector 114 1 Measured Asphalt Plant 121 Measured Loader 113 Measured Dozer 112 Measured Motor Grader 112 Measured Backhoe 106 Measured Water Truck 105 FHWA RCNM v1.0 Contractor Truck 105 FHWA RCNM v1.0 Concrete Truck 105 FHWA RCNM v1.0 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 6 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL AC OYS11L5 AHD V.fl FATION CONSlI111NF TABLE 3 — Number of Ma or Noise Producing Eauioment per Sequence Equipment Sequence 1 & 8 2 thru 7 Transient Mining II Scraper 4 4 Dozer 1 1 Motor Grader 1 1 Backhoe 1 1 Loader --- 4 Water Truck --- 1 Contractor Vehicles(1) Contractor Truck --- 4 Concrete Truck --- 4 Aggregate Plant Sources Jaw Crusher --- 1 Cone Crusher --- 1 Dry Screen --- 2 Wet Screen --- 2 Concrete Batch Plant Sources Dust Collector --- 1 Load Out --- 1 Asphalt Plant Sources Asphalt Plant 1 Generator Sources (2) GenSet Engine 1500kW --- 1 GenSet Exhaust 1500kW --- 1 GenSet Engine 450 kW --- 1 GenSet Exhaust 450kW --- 1 (1) Moving (not idle) on site at any one time. (2) All GenSets assumed to be unenclosed, but include a commercial grade exhaust silencer (-14 to 20 dB reduction). Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 7 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVERONMENTAL Ac Du®tics AND Via AATI M CDNSuI111NF EXISTING NOISE LEVELS While not required by CRS §25-12, it is useful in the analysis of environmental noise situations to have an understanding of existing noise levels. Existing levels provide a reference point, and in some cases there are existing noise sources that need to be figured into the analysis. Noise measurements were conducted near the proposed Cerise Mine at the three locations shown as M1 -M3 in Figure 1 (above). Audible sources at all three locations include distant traffic (SH 82), the crusher at the Powers Mine, birds, wind blowing through the grass, and the Western Slope Aggregate mine to the east (at M2 only). Measurements were conducted using Larson Davis Model 820 sound level meters. The meters are rated as 'Type 1' by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), were calibrated within the past one year by a certified and traceable calibration laboratory, and were field calibrated prior to the measurement. The microphones were placed five -feet above the ground, and fitted with standard windscreens. The meters were configured to constantly measure and log the 5 -minute, A -weighted equivalent noise level (Leg), and were left unattended for approximately 24 hours. The measured sound levels are shown in the Appendix. Overall, noise levels late at night are in the low -30 to low -40 dBA range. During the daytime, noise levels are generally in the 40 to 50 dBA range, with occasional 'peaks' of 70 dBA. Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 8 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVERONMENTAL Ac Du®tics AND Via AATI M CDNSuI111NF NOISE ANALYSIS RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Noise levels were predicted for Mining Sequences 1, 2, 3, and 4. Sequences 5 through 7 are considered equivalent to Sequence 4, and Sequence 8 is considered equivalent to Sequence 1. Noise levels were predicted for the loudest operating scenarios (i.e. equipment at grade, near edge of permit line, etc.) at locations 25 feet outside of the proposed permit line. The predicted levels were then compared to applicable CRS §25-12 noise level limits. The predicted noise levels are shown in the Appendix, as are noise level contour plots which graphically show noise levels in relation to the permit boundary and site topography. A few mining activities are predicted to exceed applicable noise limits. The noise mitigation (reduction) measures required to bring all operations into compliance with Garfield County noise regulations include: 1. The two berms shown in the 'Mining Sheets' (Tetra Tech, July 16, 2010) must be constructed early in the project. The northern berm is approximately 50 feet tall and the western berm is approximately 17 feet tall. 2. The dust collector that is situated on top of the concrete batch plant requires a noise reduction of at least 5 dBA (particularly to the north). Mitigation could include adding a silencer or adding a barrier. 3. Noise levels from earth moving equipment operating at the very edges of the mine (at grade) are predicted to occasionally exceed the allowable limits, but they should be well within the allowable 10 dB increase for 15 minutes per hour. 4. Electrical generators (gen-sets) must be equipped with commercial grade silencers or better (at least 15 to 20 dB of insertion loss). 5. The use of white noise back up alarms is recommended for all Lafarge equipment Backing up by contractor vehicles not outfitted with these alarms should be minimized. The predicted noise levels, compliance determination, and recommended mitigation measures are based on the operational information provided by Lafarge. These results will change if significant changes are made to the type of equipment used, the location of its use, or the hours of its operation. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jeff M. Cerjan Senior Engineer Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page 9 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL ACOUSTic3 AND V. ii QATION CONSIIXTING APPENDIX A EXISTING BACKGROUND NOISE LEVELS Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page Al November 17, 2010 OIOZ ALL daaivaaoN Zy aXvd opvdojoj 'fijunoj pjazjdvD ui auw laavAD asuaa pasodod j waif asioN fo szslijvuy 41N 1V S13/013SION ONf10219)1OV 4321f1SV9W — 6`d 32if19I3 2:00 PM 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM 7:00 PM -. 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM 12:00 AM - 1:00 AM 3 2:00 AM m 3:00 AM 4:00 AM - 5:00 MI -. 6:00 AM 7:00 AM - 8:00 AM 9:1:10 AM - 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM "1NuI11�NO3 NOI vua,A ®NV SOIJSJIO'U TV.iNAINN011I NIA Sound Pressure Level (5 minute intervals, dBA) . ... .. ,., ..=. , ...a... '1. 1 I 1. IN.1. t_-_-_..- !T ,m.1..•1.11,51,7,1._ _ _ +.1......: C, ANKARD •11—.FiNVIRONMENTAL ACOUSTif23 AND Vu8PATION CONSUtlTING - 00:T hid 00:1I - LAW 0 0: II - VJV 00:01 - ViVO06 - INV 00:8 - 00:i - IAN 00:9 - 00:g - 0017 - 00:E. - 00:Z - IAN 00:I - LAN 00:11 - LAid 0 0: II - LAId 00:01 - rid 00:6 - Vkld 00:8 - LAW 00:t - V\Id 00:9 (vgp'steniallp alnuRy s) laAai .1 nssa.id pu nos FIGURE A2 — MEASURED BACKGROUND NOISE LEVELS AT M2 - 0 0: - 00:17 - LAId 00:E LAW 00:1 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page A3 November 17, 2010 OIOZ ALL daquwaaoN fry aXvd opvdoioj 'fijunoj 1)14:sbp ui auw laavAD asyao pasododcl waif asloN fo szsliivuy £W IV S13A313SION ONf10219)iOV O If1Sb'3W — CV 3bf19Id 2:00 PM 3:00 PM -. 4:00 PM 5:00 Prvl 6:00 PM 7:00 PM -. 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM 12:00 AM -. 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM -. 6:00 AM 7:00 AM -. 8:00 AM 9:00 AM -. 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM SNI,1'1SNO W} (fNI, SDI/811ODV TVL laINNOxT A li� ati.)D,VH Sound Pressure Leve] (5 minute intervals, d BA) of a ssx - HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL ACOUSTic3 AND V. ii QATION CONSIIXTING APPENDIX B PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AND CONTOURS Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page B1 November 17, 2010 Rat R02 R04 R27,r�- ;- R26' Asphalt Plant (Seq 2 & 3) Aggregate Plant (Seq 1 & 3) IIFNVIRONMENTAL ACOUSTic3 AND Vu8PATION CONSIItlTING R05 Phase 4a R06 Phase 2 R18 R16 Aggregate Plant (Seq 24 to 7) Asphalt Plant (Seq 4 to 7J R13 ---------- FIGURE — FIGURE B1 — PREDICTED NOISE LOCATIONS R12 RO7 ROB R09 R10 R11 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page B2 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL ACOUSTic3 AND V.bQATION CONSIIXTING TABLE B1 - Predicted Daytime Noise Levels 25 feet Outside of Permit Line Prediction Location 1 Sequence 2 3 4to7 R01 68 67 67 61 R02 68 56 56 54 R03 76 53 53 47 R04 1 67 56 55 47 R05 80 53 53 47 R06 63 49 58 57 R07 66 50 62 60 R08 ' 59 71 70 R09 62 61 71 65 R10 61 71 63 R11 56 60 63 61 R12 59 60 59 R13 52 61 62 60 R14 U 54 62 63 58 R15 46 56 56 52 R16 55 60 58 54 R17 80 63 74 67 56 65 64 60 R19 53 80 61 56 50 63 57 52 R21 57 78 56 53 R22 79 73 65 63 R23 70 72 72 72 R24 76 60 59 58 R25 69 60 60 55 gr R26 69 64 63 59 R27 68 64 64 59 (1) Noise levels shown are without any of the recommended noise mitigation measures except for the commercial grade silencers on the generators. Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page B3 November 17, 2010 HA' ' ENVIRONMENTAL AcON51hCS AND V.®4ATI0t1 CONSLIt�TIG v v v v v oOv pp FIGURE B2 - PREDICTED NOISE CONTOUR FOR CERISE MINING SEQUENCE 1 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado page B4 November 17, 2010 HANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL . Acausrics AAD V,IRATIGPICorrsunnc FIGURE B3 — PREDICTED NOISE CONTOUR FOR CERISE MINING SEQUENCE 2 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado November 17, 2010 page B5 ANKARD ENVIRONMENTAL - ACOYShCS AND 11,i7/./ION CION SLIIIRG 000a o n CI Ir !r q 4 v v v v v v II ■ v vv v v v S Wpti 8 W FIGURE B4- PREDICTED NOISE CONTOUR FOR CERISE MINING SEQUENCE 3 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado November 17, 2010 page B6 HANRARD ENVIRONMENTAL AL 9YF4i:5 AND V ORATION CON 41.\4,NG FIGURE B5 — PREDICTED NOISE CONTOUR FOR CERISE MINING SEQUENCE 4 Analysis of Noise from Proposed cerise Gravel Mine in Garfield County, Colorado November 17, 2010 page B7 Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Exhibit E - Engineering Reports Engineering Report for Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant preparedby Sopris Engineering, LLC Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant Comp Plan Amendment Drainage Study prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC Can and Will Serve Letters provided by Sopris Engineering, LLC ENGINEERING REPORT FOR POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT Garfield County, Colorado Stephanie 0. Helfenbein E.I. Prepared by: Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 SE Project Number: 11016 Yancy Nichol, P.E. Engineering Report- Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No, 11016.01 June 24, 2011 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE 3 2.0 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM 2.1 Existing Potable Water System 3 2.2 Proposed Potable Water System 3-4 2.3 Water Demand 4 2.4 Fire Protection....... 4 3.0 SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 3,1 Existing Sanitary Sewer System 5 3.2 Proposed Sanitary Sewer System 5 4.0 IRRIGATION SYSTEM 5 5.0 SHALLOW UTILITIES 5-6 6.0 NATURAL HAZARDS 6 7.0 ACCESS 6 8.0 ROADS/SITE IMPROVEMENTS 6 9.0 TRAFFIC 6 10.0 DRAINAGE 7 11.0 CONCLUSIONS 7 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil,,,,,;,t,,,: Engineering Report— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No. 11016.01 June 24, 2011 Page 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE This report presents our summary of engineering analysis and findings associated with the proposed Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant Comp Plan Amendment and accompanies drawings prepared by Sopris Engineering (SE) dated June 24, 2011. The Powers Pit is located north east of Carbondale, Colorado, on the north side of State Highway 82 in Garfield County, Colorado. The entire property consists of approximately 453 acres. Of that area, approximately 68,5 acres is currently leased to LaFarge for mining and batch plant operations while the remaining property is developed as rural residential. The developable portion of the currently leased area will consist of approximately 19.25 acres exclusive of the roadway, detention pond and slopes. This report and this amendment do not apply to the rural residential or agricultural portion of the property. Because the final developed uses of this project are not determined at this time, SE made some assumptions on what can/will be developed based on Garfield County Code Requirements. There is approximately 19.25 acres of usable area outside of the roadway, detention pond and slopes. Per Garfield County Code (3-206), lot coverage is limited to 75% which equates to 14.44 acres (629,006 SF). Per Garfield County Code (3-304-A), parking space requirements are 1 space/2000 SF for "Wholesale Establishment, Warehouse, Rail or Truck Freight Terminals". Assumed area of a parking space including required access roads=400 SF r Balancing the required parking, snow storage and allowable building square footages: -Approximate Potential Future Allowed Building SF=572,297 SF - Approximate Potential Future required parking spaces=286 - Approximate Potential Future area of parking spaces=51,507 SF - Approximate Potential Future required snow storage at 2.5% of parking surface=1,288 SF - Approximate Potential Future TOTAL lot coverage (Building + Parking) =623,804 SF < 75% Allowed The various site engineering studies summarized in this report are intended to provide an evaluation and assessment of infrastructure needs associated with the proposed subject development. Engineering summaries and findings addressing utilities, natural hazards, access, drainage, and roads are included. 2.0 POTABLE WATER SYSTEM 2.1 EXISTING POTABLE WATER SYSTEM Currently, the La Farge gravel pit site does not have a domestic water source. 2.2 PROPOSED POTABLE WATER SYSTEM The proposed development will be served by a domestic well that has recently been drilled in the southeast corner of the pit floor. The system will be designed to provide a reliable water supply adequate to meet fire flow requirements and in-house needs of the development. A storage tank will be constructed to allow storage and treatment of the water prior to distribution. Once the uses of the Rural Employment Center are determined, the potable tank will be designed to provide 2 days of storage for the entire development, plus 180,000 gallons (1,500 gallons per minute X 2 hours) to 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civilconsultants Engineering Report— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No. 11016 01 June 24, 2011 Page 4 provide the required fire flows of 1,500 gallons/min. The anticipated water uses are primarily potable water and fire protection. No potable water will be used for irrigation. 2.3 WATER DEMAND Water demand represents the total water usage required within a distribution system. As is stated above, the anticipated water uses are primarily potable water and fire protection. No potable water will be used for irrigation. The Average Day Demand (ADD) calculated below represents the total annualized water use on a daily basis. It forms a basis for estimating Peak Day Demand (PDD) and Peak Hour Demand (PHD). The PDD us used in establishing the required water production capacity and represents the daily use during peak periods. Water production and treatment capacity should, at a minimum, equal the PDD. The PDD was estimated based upon peak factor ratios applied to the ADD. These peak factors generally differ by uses types since they are most often include both indoor and outdoor water use. As a result, peak factors are normally substantially influenced by irrigation demand and in this case, irrigation is provided by a raw water system. Water demand can be calculated in a variety of ways. Garfield County uses a system which translates residential and commercial uses into Equivalent Residential Units or EQRs, where 1 EQR=300 gallons per day/household. Garfield County does not allow a reduction in water demand or peaking factors as a result of using a raw water system to supply irrigation water. As there is no Garfield County EQR schedule, this development was analyzed using the West Glenwood Sanitation District's "Non -Retail Work Area Such as Garages, Machine Shops, Fire Stations and Warehouses" with 0.2 EQR/1000 SF. Utilizing the assumptions outlined in the Introduction above for potential buildout of the project, ADD for the project is estimated at 34,200 gallons per day with the PDD estimated at 85,500gallons per day, as is outlined in the table below, with no reductions being applied for utilizing raw water for irrigation. Maximum Building (SF) EQRs (0.2,11000 SF) ADD (gpd) Peak Day Factor PDD (gpd) 572,297 114 34,200 2.5 85,500 2.4 FIRE PROTECTION The LaFarge pit is located within the Carbondale Rural Fire Protection District. The County has adopted the Uniform Fire Code of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and all aspects of the PUD's design will need to meet this code. All PUD lots are required to have primary and secondary access points to allow escape from fire entrapment, Buildings constructed within the PUD will need to meet the requirements of Appendix B of the International Fire Code (IFC), "Fire Flow Requirements for Buildings." All roads within the subdivision will need to be designed and constructed to Garfield County standards to ensure unrestricted access to the District's emergency vehicles. Since the PUD will not be served by Carbondale's public water system, a fire protection storage tank will be required, per NFPA Standard 1142, "Standard on Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting." The tank will be supplied by a well and will be sized designed to provide 2 days of storage for the entire development, plus 180,000 gallons (1,500 gallons per minute X 2 hours) to provide the required fire flows of 1,500 gallons/min. We estimate that the largest required tank would be in the range of 240,000 gallons. 3,0 SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civilconsultants Engineering Report— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No.11016.01 June 24, 2011 Page 5 3.1 EXISTING SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM Currently, the LaFarge gravel pit does not have an existing sanitary sewer system. The on-site buildings are served by a port -a -potty. 3.2 PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM The most viable option for serving the wastewater needs of the future Rural Employment Center is the use of individual onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) for each property developed. A county -permitted OWTS will be required for future Rural Employment Center uses to be developed. The design of these individual treatment systems will be based on on-site geotechnical characteristics, organic loading, and proposed peak wastewater flows. Setbacks from on-site wells, irrigation ditches, dwellings, and property lines are required for each system. As part of the OWTS design, a site-specific geotechnical evaluation is required by a qualified geotechnical engineer. Maximum wastewater flow per day for an OWTS is 2,000 gallons/day for 2 acres which limits this development to approximately 20,000 gallons/day (ADD) or 67 EQRs. Using a peaking factor of 2.5, the projected peak day demand will be 50,000 gallons/day. Therefore, development of this property is limited by the capacity of the OWTS systems, limiting developed square footage to approximately 336,350 SF (572,297 SF/114 EQR=5020 SF/EQR). Based on preliminary site geotechnical information, any OWTS constructed in this area will require an active secondary treatment system for treatment of the primary effluent from the lot's septic tank. A secondary treatment system would consist of a pressure dosed dispersal field or a treatment/absorption field with imported filter sand and synthetic media. These secondary treatment systems will be sized to allow for infiltration of treated effluent into the ground based on site soil permeability. Accordingly, future lots will need to be sized sufficiently to accommodate required setbacks from each OWTS. 4.0 IRRIGATION SYSTEM The site currently receives raw water from the Roaring Fork River for process and irrigation uses. The gravel pit's water rights, which are owned by Crystal Ranch Corp and leased to Lafarge, are decreed for irrigation and industrial uses associated with the operations of the gravel pit. The existing infrastructure and easements that are in place for transporting the river water to the gravel pit are also owned by Crystal Ranch Corp and leased to Lafarge. Currently, the water is pumped and routed to the gravel pit by means of a pump station located on the south side of Highway 82 and 10 -inch and 4 -inch pipelines that cross below the highway. 5.0 SHALLOW UTILITIES Providers of electrical, natural gas, telephone and cable TV services were contacted regarding providing utility service to the site: Electric Electrical service is currently provided to the LaFarge gravel pit by Holy Cross Energy. Existing overhead power lines onsite provide three-phase electrical power to the machinery on site. Holy Cross Energy reports that the existing lines have adequate capacity to serve a new development. The power lines will be able to service both three-phase and single phase electrical equipment. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Engineering Report— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No, 11016.01 June 24, 2011 Page 6 Gas Source Gas reports that natural gas is not currently provided to the site, and the closest point of connection to their system is a high-pressure main located 900 feet east of the site along Highway 82, therefore at this time, providing gas to the future development is cost prohibitive and will not be supplied. Telephone Telephone service is currently to the LaFarge gravel pit by Qwest Communications. Currently, there are two telephone service terminals/pedestals located along the south property boundary/Highway 82 right-of-way. Qwest reports that the telephone cable that connects to these terminals has adequate capacity to serve a new development at the site. Cable Comcast reports that cable TV is not currently provided to the site, and therefore will not be supplied to the development. 6.0 NATURAL. HAZARDS The proposed site appears not to have any natural hazards (ie. rockfall or wildfire) located on or near the site that might affect the site. Please refer to the Soils Study prepared by CTL Thompson for further information. 7.0 ACCESS As part of the lease termination agreement between Powers Ranch and LaFarge current access from Highway 82 will be discontinued, and a new access road into the property will be constructed from County Road 103. The proposed access road has been designed and an access permit application has been prepared and will be submitted to Garfield County concurrently with this amendment. The road's intersection with the County Road is designed to begin approximately 275 feet north of Highway 82, which will allow for adequate space for staging of vehicles between the PUD entrance and the highway. The proposed PUD access road will form a tee intersection with County Road 103, with one lane for vehicles entering the PUD and dedicated right and left turn lanes for vehicles exiting the PUD. The road has been designed as a 24 -foot wide asphalt road with 2 -foot gravel shoulders and drainage borrow ditches on both sides of the road. We propose that the existing access to the pit from Highway 82 be utilized as an Emergency access only. 8.0 ROADS/SITE IMPROVEMENTS. All access ways throughout the parking areas are designed to be 24 -feet wide with 2 -foot wide gravel shoulders which is in compliance with Garfield County Standards for a rural/secondary access. 9.0 TRAFFIC Please refer to Traffic Impact Analysis for this information. 10.0 DRAINAGE Please refer to the Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant Comp Plan Amendment Drainage Study prepared by Sopris 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEEHING • LLC civil consultants Engineering Report— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No. 11016.01 June 24, 2011 Page 7 Engineering, dated June 24, 2011 for additional information pertaining to drainage and stormwater mitigation for this proposed development. 11.0 CONCLUSION The goal of this report and accompanying engineering drawings is to meet Garfield County's requirements for a comp plan amendment. Through this preliminary design process the following has been determined: 1) The development can be served by all required utilities. 2) Water service required for domestic service and fire suppression capabilities will be provided to all proposed structures on the property. 3) Buildout of this project is limited by the capacity of the wastewater infrastructure. Although, per code, as is outlined in the introduction, the actual developable square footage of the property allows for approximately 572,297 square feet of building, the capacity of the OWTS systems will limit the buildout to approximately 336,350 SF. Sopris Engineering can be contacted for any questions and needed clarifications. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civilco,,,,,ta,t, DRAINAGE STUDY FOR POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLAINT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT Garfield County, Colorado Prepared by: Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main Street Suite A3 Carbondale, Colorado 81623 SE Project Number:11016 June 24, 2011 Step anie 0. Helfenbein Ed Yancy Nichol, P.E. Master Drainage Study- Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No, 11016 Paget June 24, 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE 3 2.0 DESIGN POINTS 3 3.0 EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDITION AND FEATURES 3.1 Onsite Drainage 3-4 3.2 Offsite Drainage... 4 3.3 Existing Basin Descriptions 4 4.0 DEVELOPED DRAINAGE CONDITION AND FEATURES 4.1 Developed Sites 4-5 4.2 Stormwater Detention 5-6 5.0 ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS 5.1 Rainfall 6 5.2 Time of Concentration 6 5.3 Runoff Curve Number 6 6.0 DRAINAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE 6 7.0 SUMMARY 6 ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Appendix A Pre Development Drainage Basins Post Development Drainage Plan/Basins Supporting documentation and calculations. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Master Drainage Study— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No. 11016 Page3 June 24, 2011 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The Powers Pit is located north east of Carbondale, Colorado, on the north side of State Highway 82 in Garfield County, Colorado. The entire property consists of approximately 453 acres. Of that area, approximately 68.5 acres is currently leased to LaFarge for mining and batch plant operations while the remaining property is developed as rural residential. The purpose of the drainage study is: To identify the existing drainage flows and patterns to and across the subject site. • To estimate stormwater runoff rates that may be expected through the additional development of the project. • To determine the volume of stormwater detention that will be necessary to maintain the existing peak runoff and stormwater volume of the project and provide a safe routing of stormwater to the detention or retention areas. • To comply with the drainage standards for the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008 Section 7-206. Sopris Engineering, LLC (SE) has analyzed the project's impacts and has designed drainage detention structures to detain the entire 100 -year storm. The appendices located in the back of this report contain all supporting calculations associated with this analysis. 2.0 DESIGN POINTS The existing site has two "release" points, which SE is referring to as Design Paints (DP). The DPs are used to describe both the existing and developed drainage conditions. The developed site has been designed to not release any stormwater as the terrain prohibits the release of any stormwater. The design points and the existing and developed basins associated with them are further described below. DESIGN POINT 1 -DPI is located at the western portion of the leased site. The existing basin which contributes to the flows at this DP is Ex -Basin 1. When developed, P -Basin 1 will flow to this DP. With development, there are no changes to this basin. DESIGN POINT 2-DP2 is located at the existing detention pond. The existing basin which contributes flows at this DP is Ex -Basin 2. When developed, P -Basins 2-5 will contribute flows to this DP. Since the site has been mined and reclaimed, the site does not have a real "release" point for the majority of the leased site as the grades are much lower than Highway 82, water cannot physically leave the site. 3.0 EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDITION AND FEATURES 3.1 Onsite Drainage The site consists of 62.16 acres. The site has recently been reclaimed with slopes on the west, north and east of 3:1 and gentle slopes southwest across the floor of 1-3%. A 210,000 CF detention pond exists in the western portion of the site which collects all on site drainage. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING LLC civil consultants Master Drainage Study— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No, 11016 Page4 June 24, 2011 3.2 Offsite Drainage Since the site has been reclaimed, no offsite drainage enters the site. It is intercepted by irrigation ditches on the northern portion of the project site. 3.3 Existing Basin Description There are two existing drainage basins, 1 and 2 and they are shown on Exhibit 1: Existing Drainage Basins. The two drainage basins contribute to two different design points which correlate with the developed drainage basins design points. The design points associated with the existing basins are further described below: DESIGN POINT1: Existing Basin 1 contributes flows to DP1. y EX Basin 1 is the westernmost drainage and contains 2.0 acres. This basin contributes to Design Point 1. The runoff from this basin flows into HWY 82 right-of-way drainage. DESIGN POINT2: Existing Basin 2 contributes flows to DP2. EX Basin 2 is the remainder of the project site and consists of 60.55 acres. This basin contributes to Design Point 2. The runoff from this basin flows into an existing swale around the perimeter of the floor and west into an existing detention pond. TABLE A: EXISTING DRAINAGE SUMMARY BASIN ID DESIGN POINT AREA (acres) WEIGHTED CN TIME OF CONCENTRATION (min) EX 25 YEAR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) EX 100 YR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) EX 1 DP1 2 69 10 0.56 1.05 TOTAL DP 1 0.56 1.05 EX 2 DP2 60.55 72 24.19 17.41 29.86 TOTAL DP2 17.41 29.86 Refer to Appendix A for a summary of existing drainage basin calculations. 4.0 DEVELOPED DRAINAGE CONDITION AND FEATURES 4.1 Developed Site The proposed drainage concept for the entire project includes planned drainage facilities to manage stormwater runoff from the site. A combination of drainage swales and a storm drain network is proposed to route runoff from the roadways, parking areas and building roofs to one detention area. Runoff from the paved areas will drain to drainage swales which drain to the detention area in the western portion of the site. Curve numbers were assigned to each basin based on the anticipated developed land use, being conservative and assuming that the entire floor, exclusive of the drainage swales and detention pond, will be impervious. The minimum time of concentration for the developed sub basins was assumed to be 10 minutes. The developed site is designed to detain the entire 100 - year, 24-hour storm as the water cannot physically leave the site. Refer to Exhibit -2: Post Development Drainage Plan for a map that illustrates the delineation of each of these developed sub- basins. A total of 5 drainage basins from development occur and contribute to one of the two design points. To simplify the description of the developed basins, the descriptions are per design point, each of which includes several proposed basins. The developed basins and design points are shown on Exhibit 2 and are further described below. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 * (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 Sorais ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Master Drainage Study— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No, 11016 Page5 June 24, 2011 DESIGN POINT 1: Developed Basin 1 contributes flows to this design point. Y Developed Basin 1 is the westernmost drainage and contains 2 acres. There is no proposed development within this basin, therefore no detention is proposed within this basin and no storm infrastructure is proposed within the basin. It will continue to flow to the drainage facilities within Hwy 82. DESIGN POINT 2: Developed Basin 2-5 contribute flows to this design point. ➢ Developed Basins 2-5 encompass the remainder of the project site and consist of a total of 60.55 acres. We have assumed that the entire floor, exclusive of the drainage swales and detention pond, will be impervious as we do not have a development plan at this time. We have not proposed any stormwater infrastructure at this time and instead, propose that any confined drainage will infiltrate. However, the detention pond on the western portion of the project site has been designed to, at some point, accept and detain all on-site drainage. Table B summarizes the developed onsite sub basin data and calculations for the 25 and 100 -year storm events. Appendix A contains supporting calculations for the developed on site basins. TABLE B: DEVELOPED DRAINAGE SUMMARY BASIN ID DESIGN POINT AREA (acres) WEIGHTED CN TIME OF CONCENTRATION (min) POST 25 YEAR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) POST 100 YR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) P1 DP1 2 69 0:10:00 0.56 11.05 TOTAL DP1 0.56 1.05 P2 DP2 43.62 77 0:22:01 23.08 34.21 P3 DP2 6.9 86 0:10:00 9.67 12.75 P4 DP3 9.73 84 0:10:00 11.57 15.71 P5 DP4 0.3 98 0:10:00 0.73 0.87 TOTAL DP2 45.05 63.54 4.2 Stormwater Detention Garfield County requires that the rate of runoff from the developed site shall not exceed the pre -development runoff rate of runoff for the 25-eyear storm event. However, as is noted in section 4.1 above, due to the existing terrain, water cannot physically leave the site, it has therefore been designed to detain the entire 100 -year storm. The peak runoffs for the existing and developed storms were compared using the SCS hydrograph method to determine the required storage volume. Using the StormNet program, a required volume for the developed drainage sub areas was calculated and was used to size the proposed detention pond to ensure that the existing 210,000 CF detention pond is sufficient. As is mentioned above, the site was designed based upon two design points, which are the existing "release" points of the site. Only one of the two design points, design point 2, is required to have detention associated with it. A summary of the required detention volume for design point 2 and the attenuated peak flow leaving the site is included in Table C below. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Master Drainage Study— Powers Pit Concrete Batch Plant - SE Project No. 11016 Page6 June 24, 2011 TABLE C: REQUIRED STORMWATER DETENTION SUMMARY DESIGN POINT # POND # EX BASINS EX 100 YEAR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) DEVELOPED BASINS POST 100 YEAR PEAK RUNOFF (cfs) Q out (cfs) REQUIRED STORAGE VOLUME (CF) PROVIDED STORAGE VOLUME (CF) POND DEPTH (FT) 2 1 2 26.86 2-5 63.54 0 206,000 210,000.00 12 5.0 ANALYSIS METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS The peak runoff rates for the basins were analyzed for the 25 year and the 100 year storm using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) TR -55 method. All calculations and analysis were accomplished using StormNet software. 5.1 Rainfall As stated above, the SCS Type II Distribution is applicable to this region. Two design storms were utilized: 25- year/24 —hour and the 100-year/24-hour storms. Precipitation data for the site was taken from the NOAA atlas rainfall maps for Colorado. 5.2 Time of Concentration Time of Concentration calculations were performed using the TR -55 method. Hydraulic routing of sub basins was calculated using hydrodynamic link routing. A minimum time of concentration for the on-site drainage of 10 - minutes was utilized. 5.3 Runoff Curve Number Drainage basin soil information was obtained from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soil survey to determine the curve number. The two major determinants of the curve number (CN) are hydrologic soil group and cover type. The soils on site are classified as type "B" and type "D" while the curve numbers vary from 69 to 98, with the higher curve numbers being the least permeable. 6.0 DRAINAGE FACILITY MAINTENANCE Stormwater maintenance tasks will include checking and cleaning out culverts, inlets and outlet structures of any debris or sediment accumulation as well as maintaining any vegetation in roadside swales. The detention pond shall be monitored for any sediment loading within the ponds themselves as well as the outlet structures. Maintenance of surrounding landscaping/vegetation may also be required after major storm events. Final construction stages of work must follow a complete landscaping and ground covering task to permanently re - vegetate and cover bare grounds that will remain open space to avoid long-term soil erosion. This effort will reduce the risk of unnecessary clogging and failure of the drainage system. 7.0 SUMMARY The results from this drainage study suggest that no long-term, adverse impacts to drainage are anticipated with the development of the Powers Pit. Although onsite peak rates will increase with development, runoff from the drainage basins will drain to the detention areas and drywells via a storm drain distribution system and will be released at pre -development rates. Detention is provided for the anticipated stormwater volume increase upon development. 502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970) 704-0311 • Fax (970) 704-0313 SOPRIS ENGINEERING • LLC civil consultants Appendix A 11016-pre-25.txt BOSS International StormNET® - Version 4.19.3 (Build 221) **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units cfs Subbasin Hydrograph MethodSCS TR -55 Time of Concentration SCS TR -55 Pond Exfiltration None Starting Date MAY -11-2011 00:00:00 Ending Date MAY -I2 -201I 00:06:00 Report Time Step 00:05:00 ************* Element Count ************* Number of rain gages Number of subbasins Number of nodes Number of links 2 2 2 0 *******ow******* Raingage Summary **************** Gage ID Data Source Data Type Interval hours 100 -year 25 -year Subbasin Summary o*************** Subbasin ID 100 -YEAR 25 -YEAR Total Area acres EX -1 ************ Node Summary ************ Node ID 2.00 60.55 Element Type CUMULATIVE 0.10 CUMULATIVE 0'I0 Invert Elevation ft Maximum Elev. ft Ponded External Area Inflow ft2 Out -1 Out -2 OUTFALL OUTFALL **«*********************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** Total Precipitation Surface Runoff 0.00 0.00 Volume acre -ft 11.620 0.195 Page 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Depth inches 2.229 0.037 11016-pre-25.txt Continuity Error (%) -0.000 ************************** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** volume acre -ft volume mgallons External Inflow 0.000 0.000 External Outflow 1.953 0.637 Initial Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Final Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Continuity Error (%) 0.000 ****************************************** Composite Curve Number Computations Report ****************************************** Subbasin Ex -1 Soil/Surface Description CN Area Soil (acres) Group ---- Pasture, grassland, or range, Fair 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 69.00 Subbasin Ex -2 Soil/Surface Description CN 2.00 B 2.00 Area Soil (acres) Group - 60.55 72.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 60.55 72.00 *************************************************** SCS TR -55 Time of Concentration Computations Report *************************************************** Sheet Flow Equation Tc = (0.007 * ((n * Lf)A0.8)) / ((PA0.5) * (sfA0.4)) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) n = Manning's Roughness Lf = Flow Length (ft) P = 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (inches) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Page 2 11016-pre-25.txt Shallow Concentrated Flow Equation v = 16.1345 (SfA0.5) (unpaved surface) v = 20.3282 :; (SfA0.5) (paved surface) v = 15.0 (SfA0.5) (grassed waterway surface) v = 10.0 (SfA0.5) (nearly bare & untilled surface) v = 9.0 (SfA0.5) (cultivated straight rows surface) v = 7.0 :; (SfA0.5) (short grass pasture surface) v = 5.0 (SfA0.5) (woodland surface) v = 2.5 :; (SfA0.5) (forest w/heavy litter surface) Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Channel Flow Equation v = (1.49 * (RA(2/3)) * (SfA0.5)) / n R = Aq / wp Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) R = Hydraulic Radius (ft) Aq = Flow Area (ft2) wp = wetted Perimeter (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) n = Manning's Roughness Subbasin EX -1 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin EX -2 Sheet Flow Computations Flowpath c Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (in): 1.20 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): Page 3 Flowpath A 0.15 211.00 9.00 1.20 0.22 15.93 Flowpath B 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 11016-pre-25.txt 0.00 Shallow Concentrated Flow Computations Flowpath C Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 Surface Type: Unpaved velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Channel Flow Computations Flowpath C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Channel Slope (%): 0.00 Cross Section Area (ft2): 0.00 wetted Perimeter (ft): 0.00 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Flowpath A Flowpath B 504.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 Grass pasture Unpaved 3.50 0.00 2.40 0.00 Flowpath A 0.03 2187.00 2.00 5.00 6.00 6.22 5.86 Flowpath B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total TOC (minutes): 24.19 Subbasin Runoff Summary Subbasin Total Total Peak weighted Time of ID Precip Runoff Runoff Curve Concentration in in cfs Number days hh:mm:ss EX -1 EX -2 2.200 0.292 0.560 69.000 0 00:10:00 2.200 0.381 17.410 72.000 0 00:24:11 System 2.200 0.378 17.97 Analysis begun on: Tue Jun 28 10:11:11 2011 Analysis ended on: Tue Jun 28 10:11:14 2011 Total elapsed time: 00:00:03 Page 4 II0I6-pre-I00.txt BOSS International StnrmNET6 - Version 4.19.3 (Build 221) **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units cfs Subbasin Hydrograph MethodSCS TR -55 Time of Concentration SCS TR -55 Pond Exfiltration None Starting Date MAY -11-2011 00:00:00 Ending Date MAY -I2 -201I 00:06:00 Report Time Step 00:05:00 ************* Element Count ************* Number of rain gages Number of subbasins Number of nodes Number of links 2 2 2 0 *******ow******* Raingage Summary **************** Gage ID Data Source Data Type Interval hours 100 -year 25 -year ******»********* Subbasin Summary **************** Subbasin ID 100 -YEAR 25 -YEAR Total Area acres EX -1 ************ Node Summary ************ Node ID 2.00 60.55 Element Type CUMULATIVE 0.10 CUMULATIVE 0'I0 Invert Elevation ft Maximum Elev. ft Ponded External Area Inflow ft2 Out -1 Out -2 OUTFALL OUTFALL *******»****************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ****************«********* Total Precipitation Surface Runoff 0.00 0.00 Volume acre -ft 13.732 0.299 Page 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Depth inches 2.634 0.057 11016-pre-100.txt Continuity Error (%) -0.000 ************************** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** volume acre -ft volume mgallons External Inflow 0.000 0.000 External Outflow 2.989 0.974 Initial Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Final Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Continuity Error (%) 0.000 ****************************************** Composite Curve Number Computations Report ****************************************** Subbasin Ex -1 Soil/Surface Description CN Area (acres) Soil Group ---- Pasture, grassland, or range, Fair 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 69.00 Subbasin Ex -2 Soil/Surface Description CN 2.00 B 2.00 Area Soil (acres) Group - 60.55 72.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 60.55 72.00 *************************************************** SCS TR -55 Time of Concentration Computations Report *************************************************** Sheet Flow Equation Tc = (0.007 * ((n * Lf)A0.8)) / ((PA0.5) * (sfA0.4)) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) n = Manning's Roughness Lf = Flow Length (ft) P = 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (inches) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Page 2 11016-pre-100.txt Shallow Concentrated Flow Equation v = 16.1345 (sfA0.5) (unpaved surface) v = 20.3282 :; (sfA0.5) (paved surface) v = 15.0 (sfA0.5) (grassed waterway surface) v = 10.0 (sfA0.5) (nearly bare & untilled surface) v = 9.0 (sfA0.5) (cultivated straight rows surface) v = 7.0 ;; (sfA0.5) (short grass pasture surface) v = 5.0 (sfA0.5) (woodland surface) v = 2.5 :; (sfA0.5) (forest w/heavy litter surface) Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Channel Flow Equation v = (1.49 * (RA(2/3)) * (sfA0.5)) / n R = Aq / wp Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) R = Hydraulic Radius (ft) Aq = Flow Area (ft2) wp = wetted Perimeter (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) sf = slope (ft/ft) n = Mannings Roughness Subbasin Ex -1 user -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin Ex -2 Sheet Flow Computations Flowpath c Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (in): 1.20 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): Page 3 Flowpath A 0.15 211.00 9.00 1.20 0.22 15.93 Flowpath B 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 11016-pre-100.txt 0.00 Shallow Concentrated Flow Computations Flowpath C Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 Surface Type: Unpaved velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Channel Flow Computations Flowpath C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Channel Slope (%): 0.00 Cross Section Area (ft2): 0.00 wetted Perimeter (ft): 0.00 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Flowpath A Flowpath B 504.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 Grass pasture Unpaved 3.50 0.00 2.40 0.00 Flowpath A 0.03 2187.00 2.00 5.00 6.00 6.22 5.86 Flowpath B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total TOC (minutes): 24.19 Subbasin Runoff Summary Subbasin Total Total Peak weighted Time of ID Precip Runoff Runoff Curve Concentration in in cfs Number days hh:mm:ss EX -1 EX -2 2.600 0.467 1.050 69.000 0 00:10:00 2.600 0.581 29.860 72.000 0 00:24:11 System 2.600 0.577 30.91 Analysis begun on: Tue Jun 28 10:13:24 2011 Analysis ended on: Tue Jun 28 10:13:27 2011 Total elapsed time: 00:00:03 Page 4 II0I6-pnst-25.txt BOSS International StnrmNET6 - Version 4.19.3 (Build 221) **************** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units Subbasin Hydrograph Method Time of Concentration Link Routing Method Pond Exfiltration Starting Date Ending Date Report Time Step ************* Element Count ************* Number of rain gages Number of subbasins Number of nodes Number of links cfs SCS TR -55 SCS TR -55 Hydrodynamic None MAY -II -201I 00:00:00 MAY -I2 -201I 00:06:00 00:05:00 2 5 4 3 **************** Raingage Summary **************** Gage ID Data Source Data Type Interval hours 100 -YEAR 25 -year **************** Subbasin Summary **************** Subbasin ID 100 -YEAR 25 -year Total Area acres P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 ************ Node Summary ************ Node ID 2.00 43.62 6.90 9.73 0.30 Element Type CUMULATIVE CUMULATIVE Invert Elevation ft Maximum Elev' ft 0.10 0.10 Ponded External Area Inflow ft2 Jun -4 Out -1 Out -3 Jun -1 JUNCTION OUTFALL OUTFALL STORAGE 6179.50 6200.00 6179.00 6180.00 Page 1 6183.00 6200.00 6180.50 6186.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ************ Link Summary ************ Link Manning's ID Roughness From Node 11016-post-25.txt To Node Element Length Slope Type ft % Con -1 Jun -1 Jun -4 CONDUIT 0.0150 Con -4 Jun -4 Out -3 CONDUIT 0.0150 Reg -1 Jun -1 Jun -4 ORIFICE ********************* Cross Section Summary ********************* 135.1 4.8175 66.6 0.7512 Link Shape Depth/ width No. of Cross Full Flow Design ID Diameter Barrels Sectional Hydraulic Flow Radius ft Capacity cfs Area ft ft ft2 Con -1 0.38 Con -4 0.38 CIRCULAR 19.98 CIRCULAR 7.89 ************************** Runoff Quantity Continuity ************************** 1.50 1.50 1 1.77 1.50 1.50 1 1.77 Volume Depth acre -ft inches Total Precipitation 11.620 Surface Runoff 0.345 Continuity Error (%) -0.000 ************************** Flow Routing Continuity ************************** Volume acre -ft 2.229 0.066 Volume Mgallons External Inflow 0.000 0.000 External Outflow 3.360 1.095 Initial Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Final Stored volume 0.088 0.029 Continuity Error (%) 0.001 ****************************************** Composite Curve Number Computations Report ****************************************** Subbasin P-1 Page 2 11016-post-25.txt Soil/Surface Description CN Area (acres) Soil Group Pasture, grassland, or range, Fair 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 69.00 Subbasin P-2 Soil/Surface Description CN 2.00 B 2.00 Area (acres) Soil Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 77.36 Subbasin P-3 Soil/Surface Description CN 12.57 31.05 43.62 Area (acres) Soil Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 86.15 Subbasin P-4 Soil/Surface Description CN 4.08 2.82 6.90 Area (acres) Soil Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 83.57 Subbasin P-5 Page 3 4.89 4.84 9.73 Area Soil 11016-post-25.txt Soil/Surface Description (acres) Group CN - 0.30 98.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 0.30 98.00 SCS TR -55 Time of Concentration Computations Report Sheet Flow Equation Tc = (0.007 ., ((n ., Lf)A0.8)) / ((PA0.5) * (SfA0.4)) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) n = Manning's Roughness Lf = Flow Length (ft) P = 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (inches) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Shallow Concentrated Flow Equation v = 16.1345 (SfA0.5) (unpaved surface) v = 20.3282 ;; (SfA0.5) (paved surface) v = 15.0 (SfA0.5) (grassed waterway surface) v = 10.0 :; (SfA0.5) (nearly bare & untilled surface) v = 9.0 (SfA0.5) (cultivated straight rows surface) v = 7.0 :; (SfA0.5) (short grass pasture surface) v = 5.0 (SfA0.5) (woodland surface) V = 2.5 :; (SfA0.5) (forest w/heavy litter surface) Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Channel Flow Equation v = (1.49 * (RA(2/3)) (SfA0.5)) / n R = Aq / Wp Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) R = Hydraulic Radius (ft) Aq = Flow Area (ft2) wp = wetted Perimeter (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Page 4 Sf = Slope (ft/ft) n = Manning's Roughness 11016-post-25.txt Subbasin P-1 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-2 Sheet Flow Computations Subarea C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (in): 1.20 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Shallow Concentrated Flow Computations Subarea C Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 Surface Type: unpaved velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Channel Flow Computations Subarea C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Channel slope (%): 0.00 Cross Section Area (ft2): 0.00 wetted Perimeter (ft): 0.00 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Page 5 Subarea A 0.15 211.00 9.00 1.20 0.22 15.93 Subarea B 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 Subarea A Subarea B 504.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 Grass pasture Unpaved 3.50 0.00 2.40 0.00 Subarea A 0.03 1686.00 3.00 5.00 6.00 7.62 3.69 Subarea B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11016-post-25.txt Total TOC (minutes): 22.02 Subbasin P-3 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-4 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-5 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin Runoff Summary Subbasin Total Total Peak weighted Time of ID Precip Runoff Runoff Curve Concentration in in cfs Number days hh:mm:ss P-1 2.200 0.292 0.56 69.000 0 00:10:00 P-2 2.200 0.574 23.08 77.360 0 00:22:01 P-3 2.200 1.012 9.670 86.150 0 00:10:00 P-4 2.200 0.865 11.570 83.570 0 00:10:00 P-5 2.200 1.972 0.730 98.000 0 00:10:00 System 2.200 0.665 45.61 Node Depth Summary Node Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Total Total Retention ID Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Flooded Time Time Attained Attained Attained volume Flooded ft ft ft days hh:mm acre -in minutes hh:mm:ss Page 6 11016-post-25.txt Jun -4 0.55 2.59 6182.09 0 12:35 0 0 0:00:00 Out -1 0.00 0.00 6200.00 0 00:00 0 0 0:00:00 Out -3 0.47 1.50 6180.50 0 12:07 0 0 0:00:00 Jun -1 0.61 3.69 6183.69 0 12:35 0 0 0:00:00 Node Flow Summary Node Element Maximum Peak Time of Maximum Time of Peak ID Type Lateral Inflow Peak Inflow Flooding Flooding Inflow Occurrence Overflow Occurrence cfs cfs days hh:mm cfs days hh:mm Jun -4 JUNCTION 0.00 11.05 0 12:34 0.00 Out -1 OUTFALL 0.56 0.56 0 12:09 0.00 Out -3 OUTFALL 0.00 11.04 0 12:36 0.00 Jun -1 STORAGE 39.71 39.71 0 12:10 0.00 Detention Pond Summary Detention Pond ID Maximum Maximum Time of Max Average Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max. Total Ponded Ponded Ponded Ponded Ponded Pond Exfiltration Exfiltration Exfiltrated Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Outflow Rate Rate volume 1000 ft3 (%) days hh:mm 1000 ft3 (%) cfs cfm hh:mm:ss 1000 ft3 Jun -1 11.05 45.000 54 0 12:35 6.405 8 0.00 0:00:00 0.000 Outfall Loading Summary Outfall Node ID Flow Average Peak Frequency Flow Inflow (%) cfs cfs Page 7 Out -1 78.83 Out -3 90.13 11016-post-25.txt 0.04 0.56 2.35 11.04 System 84.48 Link Flow Summary 2.40 11.17 Link ID Element Design Ratio of Ratio of Type Flow Maximum Maximum Capacity /Design cfs Flow Depth Time of Maximum Total Peak Flow Velocity Time Occurrence Attained Flow Surcharged days hh:mm ft/sec Minutes Length Peak Flow Factor during Analysis cfs Con -1 19.98 Con -4 7.89 Reg -1 0.00 1.40 CONDUIT 0.50 CONDUIT 1.00 ORIFICE 1.00 0 00:00 0.00 1.00 0 0 12:36 6.25 1.00 115 0 12:34 Analysis begun on: Tue Jun 28 10:18:50 2011 Analysis ended on: Tue Jun 28 10:18:53 2011 Total elapsed time: 00:00:03 Page 8 0.00 11.04 11.05 I1016-post-I00.txt BOSS International StormNET6 - Version 4.19.3 (Build 221) �****.*********** Analysis Options **************** Flow Units Subbasin Hydrograph Method Time of Concentration Link Routing Method Pond Exfiltration Starting Date Ending Date Report Time Step ************* Element Count AAAAAAAAA1��� Number of rain gages Number of subbasins Number of nodes Number of links cfs SCS TR -55 SCS TR -55 Hydrodynamic None MAY -II -201I 00:00:00 MAY -I2 -201I 00:06:00 00:05:00 2 5 4 3 **************** Raingage Summary **************** Gage ID Data Source Data Type Interval hours 100 -YEAR 25 -year **************** Subbasin Summary **************** Subbasin ID 100 -YEAR 25 -year Total Area acres P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 ************ Node Summary ************ Node ID 2.00 43.62 6.90 9.73 0.30 Element Type CUMULATIVE CUMULATIVE Invert Elevation ft Maximum Elev' ft 0.10 0.10 Ponded External Area Inflow ft2 Jun -4 Out -1 Out -3 Jun -1 JUNCTION OUTFALL OUTFALL STORAGE 6179.50 6200.00 6179.00 6180.00 Page 1 6183.00 6200.00 6180.50 6186.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Link Summary Link Manning's ID Roughness From Node 11016-post-100.txt To Node Element Length Slope Type ft Con -1 Jun -1 Jun -4 CONDUIT 0.0150 Con -4 Jun -4 Out -3 CONDUIT 0.0150 Reg -1 Jun -1 Jun -4 ORIFICE Cross Section Summary 135.1 4.8175 66.6 0.7512 Link Shape Depth/ width No. of Cross Full Flow Design ID Diameter Barrels Sectional Hydraulic Flow Radius ft Capacity cfs Area ft ft ft2 Con -1 0.38 Con -4 0.38 CIRCULAR 19.98 CIRCULAR 7.89 Runoff Quantity Continuity 1.50 1.50 1 1.77 1.50 1.50 1 1.77 volume Depth acre -ft inches Total Precipitation 13.732 Surface Runoff 0.482 Continuity Error (%) -0.000 Flow Routing Continuity Volume acre -ft 2.634 0.092 volume Mgallons External Inflow 0.000 0.000 External Outflow 4.706 1.533 Initial Stored volume 0.000 0.000 Final Stored Volume 0.104 0.034 Continuity Error (%) 0.001 Composite Curve Number Computations Report Subbasin P-1 Page 2 11016-post-100.txt Soil/Surface Description CN Area (acres) Soil Group Pasture, grassland, or range, Fair 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 69.00 Subbasin P-2 Soil/Surface Description CN 2.00 B 2.00 Area Soil (acres) Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 77.36 Subbasin P-3 Soil/Surface Description CN 12.57 31.05 43.62 Area Soil (acres) Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 86.15 Subbasin P-4 Soil/Surface Description CN 4.08 2.82 6.90 Area Soil (acres) Group 98.00 69.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 83.57 Subbasin P-5 Page 3 4.89 4.84 9.73 Area Soil 11016-post-100.txt Soil/Surface Description (acres) Group CN - 0.30 98.00 Composite Area & weighted CN 0.30 98.00 SCS TR -55 Time of Concentration Computations Report Sheet Flow Equation Tc = (0.007 ., ((n ., Lf)A0.8)) / ((PA0.5) (SfA0.4)) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) n = Manning's Roughness Lf = Flow Length (ft) P = 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (inches) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Shallow Concentrated Flow Equation v = 16.1345 (SfA0.5) (unpaved surface) v = 20.3282 :; (SfA0.5) (paved surface) v = 15.0 (SfA0.5) (grassed waterway surface) v = 10.0 :; (SfA0.5) (nearly bare & untilled surface) v = 9.0 (SfA0.5) (cultivated straight rows surface) v = 7.0 :; (SfA0.5) (short grass pasture surface) v = 5.0 (SfA0.5) (woodland surface) V = 2.5 :; (SfA0.5) (forest w/heavy litter surface) Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Sf = Slope (ft/ft) Channel Flow Equation v = (1.49 (RA(2/3)) (SfA0.5)) / n R = Aq / wp Tc = (Lf / v) / (3600 sec/hr) where: Tc = Time of Concentration (hrs) Lf = Flow Length (ft) R = Hydraulic Radius (ft) Aq = Flow Area (ft2) wp = wetted Perimeter (ft) v = velocity (ft/sec) Page 4 11016-post-100.txt sf = Slope (ft/ft) n = Manning's Roughness Subbasin P-1 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-2 Sheet Flow Computations Subarea C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 2 yr, 24 hr Rainfall (in): 1.20 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Shallow Concentrated Flow Computations Subarea C Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Slope (%): 0.00 Surface Type: Unpaved velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Channel Flow Computations Subarea C Manning's Roughness: 0.00 Flow Length (ft): 0.00 Channel Slope (%): 0.00 Cross Section Area (ft2): 0.00 wetted Perimeter (ft): 0.00 velocity (ft/sec): 0.00 Computed Flow Time (minutes): 0.00 Page 5 Subarea A 0.15 211.00 9.00 1.20 0.22 15.93 Subarea B 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 Subarea A Subarea B 504.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 Grass pasture Unpaved 3.50 0.00 2.40 0.00 Subarea A 0.03 1686.00 3.00 5.00 6.00 7.62 3.69 Subarea B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11016-post-100.txt Total TOC (minutes): 22.02 Subbasin P-3 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-4 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin P-5 User -Defined TOC override (minutes): 10.00 Subbasin Runoff Summary Subbasin Total Total Peak weighted Time of ID Precip Runoff Runoff Curve Concentration in in cfs Number days hh:mm:ss P-1 2.600 0.467 1.120 69.000 0 00:10:00 P-2 2.600 0.821 34.210 77.360 0 00:22:01 P-3 2.600 1.336 12.750 86.150 0 00:10:00 P-4 2.600 1.167 15.710 83.570 0 00:10:00 P-5 2.600 2.369 0.870 98.000 0 00:10:00 System 2.600 0.928 58.10 Node Depth Summary Node Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max Total Total Retention ID Depth Depth HGL Occurrence Flooded Time Time Attained Attained Attained volume Flooded ft ft ft days hh:mm acre -in minutes hh:mm:ss Page 6 11016-post-100.txt Jun -4 0.64 3.36 6182.86 0 12:38 0 0 0:00:00 Out -1 0.00 0.00 6200.00 0 00:00 0 0 0:00:00 Out -3 0.52 1.50 6180.50 0 12:02 0 0 0:00:00 Jun -1 0.75 5.26 6185.26 0 12:38 0 0 0:00:00 Node Flow Summary Node Element Maximum Peak Time of Maximum Time of Peak ID Type Lateral Inflow Peak inflow Flooding Flooding Inflow Occurrence Overflow Occurrence cfs cfs days hh:mm cfs days hh:mm Jun -4 JUNCTION 0.00 13.48 0 12:37 0.00 Out -1 OUTFALL 1.05 1.05 0 12:05 0.00 Out -3 OUTFALL 0.00 13.48 0 12:39 0.00 Jun -1 STORAGE 56.96 56.96 0 12:10 0.00 Detention Pond Summary Detention Pond ID Maximum Maximum Time of Max Average Average Maximum Maximum Time of Max. Total Ponded Ponded Ponded Ponded Ponded Pond Exfiltration Exfiltration Exfiltrated Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Outflow Rate Rate volume 1000 ft3 (%) days hh:mm 1000 ft3 (%) cfs cfm hh:mm:ss 1000 ft3 Jun -1 13.48 70.192 84 0 12:38 8.089 10 0.00 0:00:00 0.000 Outfall Loading Summary Outfall Node ID Flow Average Peak Frequency Flow Inflow (%) cfs cfs Page 7 Out -1 77.77 Out -3 91.26 11016-post-100.txt 0.06 1.05 2.78 13.48 System 84.51 Link Flow Summary 2.83 13.66 Link ID Element Design Ratio of Ratio of Type Flow Maximum Maximum Capacity /Design cfs Flow Depth Time of Maximum Total Peak Flow Velocity Time Occurrence Attained Flow Surcharged days hh:mm ft/sec Minutes Length Peak Flow Factor during Analysis cfs Con -1 19.98 Con -4 7.89 Reg -1 0.00 1.71 CONDUIT 0.50 CONDUIT 1.00 ORIFICE 1.00 0 00:00 0.00 1.00 0 0 12:39 7.63 1.00 180 0 12:37 Analysis begun on: Tue Jun 28 10:20:45 2011 Analysis ended on: Tue Jun 28 10:20:47 2011 Total elapsed time: 00:00:02 Page 8 0.00 13.48 13.48 . 1 - I .tr . ., / i i / . . • CT i, . M 5 p• i 0 ' . ke , ,, A . • / " A . n\ ' ,r# .A i , oR \, /1 0 A \ 7,-- I ,. . '.... , \ .. (I I 1 2 ' 1 .56",•'-':''' -.. --.......... r ?2 0 -,..,-- -- ,ir, _ ----z,,,-;,<• - _,.. . - 0:4 g0 co x cA ., ,, % y , V A it„ 1 11 II , lir,' ' • '1 'r .... _-$ -; ' 'teit_i .. P \ 1 I -IIt)czc2z0›ri1o.nai. ../ \ \ .0 1 , // 1. \ i *;;. -- -,-.' b LA - n Ic>2nol I.Pcxr.on. --...... , ..., 3 n1022 , 0 — = 'I -v.17447 _'. 1.9:„-4".„.,.0.' :- ;" - • :::,,,, ,=-- -",,.. 4,-.., '-..- , -' \''' ''''.6. % c1'JNil 11 ,,I 1 I I 1 111,111111:.:41. • . ,; _ 2‘H,4,pl11.,110:i1io1010,1:14iu1t;0i1l11:ii40ol4111ir1:i.! 0 "...--. r fr ..4. .• \ 9., ' ' \ .„, . . • .---,- •-.., N • 1 . I ET.1 .. 1 1 / 2 . .... . I i; 1 t - 4 i - 1 POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO I 11 twonr4.41104,01.10100 ..• ,..",,,,, S OPRTSENCINEERINa LLC., M=ELMM 6.22 KRIVISTREET GFIBC611.1.1..E. comma 0929]90Por I orrtm-cala p.n.. ,,,,,,, 1 X EXHIBIT 1: PREOWELOPMENT DRAINAGE BASINS einem erf gPAX ( 7/..ti rg F.,3 / d�-� ti 1 + rn . r x±� .' __ .. — — _ ` r 1 a . — ___1. , - 2-'�' tit Y - , l� mar az +n �lrr•— - = _ \ ' t I iv i / I ' 4 rn .a ,2 \ ` a s z +�1 '' w a o �t 'r ,,. :.;dam `+ •!.. t N K b �I111 14 t111 VII1111111 111 1'I ly V\ ''` ii 111U1'1i ltif4i'1`il+'i{'4i 1i ni , 11� 1I��l ;;ijk/::L i (---- - Ir r Ir! r r ! I +� h1iE _.. f . r W @ ‘ �� �ll�yl lY~I�fIl7��l��t4y'l��'1' 1 I 11 rlfllllliIdflr dii11+(11+l IJrl `!1+lr'!r1,1 �rlilr111 !1, ,. r i ' z uv,1 1 to \ ' !+r 1 ► I f 1 w Az I 2 i n rl II �! f Ir ,ci � y, 1��� N11. 0 m a f a j I Z > rrr ---/} __� �� .1 •-.,. m 1% .� ' `, 1g r •r ♦ \ cs m N I/ yy I i! 1 r", 1 1 1' 1 4 ', , %._ y+ , J 11 1. 1 +1 111 tl ♦A _ _ -.. r� I ` \ �'' ! \ , ', t1 \ `, It t 1 \ ', ,` I \, 1 ,'\ , , • � �• v I \ �,\v` 1 471 IE -r �• \1i \. 'r Irf. l/r// \\ \\I „p A, 4M M1 t , 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 3 ;♦\\ \. \�,\. rrr \��� `• � 1 '1 l+ V+1\1 � 1r t'111' • - 1' 1 V \ 1 1 / 1 // r ! I - I E ?/ d § i POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENINENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO ma S OPR£SE.NG£NEERING, LLC -\ t V. \, 1 \ \ \ ± uwnw•.s m._ _ rte, , ... ' altii mem \ ' 'CIVIL CONS1JLa'ANT4 m' f/r lo, ,1 EXHIBIT 2: POST-0EYELOPMEA1T DRAINAGE BASINS — MA. AN 3799 HIGHWAY 82 • P.O. BOX 2150 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 (970) 945-5491 • FAX (970) 945-4081 May 9, 2011 Ms. Stephanie O. Helfenbein, E.I. 502 Main Street, Suite A3 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Power Pit concrete Batch Plant Dear Ms. Helfenbein: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of Holy Cross Energy. Holy Cross Energy has existing power facilities located on or near the above mentioned project. These existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide electric power to the development, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any power line enlargements, relocations, and new extensions necessary to deliver adequate power to and within the development will be undertaken by Holy Cross Energy upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please advise when you wish to proceed with the development of the electric system for this project. Sincerely, HOLY CROSS ENERGY (/ czn- Phyllis Wittet, Engineering Department Pwittet@holycross.com (970)947-5469 PW:vw Wittit\Helfenbein Servl A Touchstone Energy' Cooperative Qwest. Spirit of Service 05/04/2011 Attn: Stephanie 0. Helfenbein Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main St suite A3 Carbondale, CO 81623 Re: Powers Pit Qwest Communications will provide telephone facilities to Powers Pit as defined by the current PUC Tariffs. Jason Sharpe Senior Field Engineer 970-384-0238 Sourcjas 5-10-11 From: Carla Westerman SourceGas 0096 County Rd. 160 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 970-928-0407 To: Stephanie O. Helfenbein Sopris Engineering, LLC 502 Main Street Suite A-3 Carbondale, CO 81623 RE: Gas Service -Pit Comprehensive Plan Amendment Garfield County, CO SE Job# 11016 Dear Stephanie: The above mentioned development is within the certificated service area of SourceGas. SourceGas has existing natural gas facilities located near the above mentioned project. At this time it appears that these existing facilities have adequate capacity to provide natural gas service to your project, subject to the tariffs, rules and regulations on file. Any upgrading of our facilities necessary to deliver adequate service to and within the development will be undertaken by SourceGas upon completion of appropriate contractual agreements and subject to necessary governmental approvals. Please contact us with any questions regarding this project, and with a timeline of when you would like to proceed with your project. Sincerely, Carla Westerman Field Coordinator e ri Comcast.. May 6, 2011 Sopris Engineering, LLC Stephanie Helfenbein 503 Main St, Suite A3 Carbondale, Colorado 81 623 RE: Powers Pit Comprehensive Plan Carbondale, Colorado Please accept this letter as confirmation that Comcast of Colorado has the ability to provide cable service to the captioned location. The provision of service is contingent upon successful negotiations of an Agreement between the developer and Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. Should you require additional information, please contact Michael Johnson. I can be reached at (970) 930-4713. Sincerely, 7/U-1 Michael Johnson Supervisor Construction Comcast Cable Communications This letter is not intended to give rise to binding obligations for either party. Any contractual relationship between the parties will be the result of formal negotiations and will only become effective upon execution of the contract by representatives of the parties authorized to enter into such agreements. During any negotiations, each party will bear its own costs and will not be responsible for any costs or expenses of the other party, unless separately agreed to in writing. Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Major Impact Review Section 15 — Exhibits Exhibit F — 11"x17" Maps CPA1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment— Rural Employment Center EC1 Existiing Conditions as of April 2010 S1 Site Plan: Site Boundary prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC S2 Overall Site Plan prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC S3 Enlarged Site Plan prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC IA1 Impact Analysis: Existing Conditions/Site Conditions After Reclamation IA2 Impact Analysis Reclamation Plan prepared by Sopris Engineering, LLC ES1 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: Existing Conditions/Site Conditions After Reclamation ES2 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: Grading Plan LS1 Land Suitability Analysis: Existing Conditions/Site Conditions After Reclamation LP1 Highway 82 / CR 103 Landscape Plan prepared by The Land Studio, Inc. • RFTA andlor CDOT Vehicle Maintenance Area 12 Acres ± ■�, /1 CFn1ar I / / RFTA Park 8 Rede / or RFSD Bus / Maintenance Area 3.25 Acres ± .+Emergency (Cass VHS Ia I» solid Il i, Intl es ircipI wpan :re Mid ax itairginc &cress to W ware r11.300e0y412 ir6r4p' -- Sand and Gravel `r Stodrpiies 1 Concrete Batch_ i 1 Plant Area $Acres # Emergency access aray to eya2t, -. rLandScape Butter and Berm 4 Art vs t ten 5 �' d$c 43 "fain, t. GRAPHIC SCALE Mete An RFTA CDOT. and RFSD uses portrayed on this degrarn are ccncrplwuaI In nature and aro for rNustratwe purposes only 91a pleas will be deyetaped for Mese entrees Should any of them moue forward with a Mafa Impact Review application to Garfield Ccunty In the future -Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant CPA1 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment PriO3 mary Entre PCBth Rural 24 Acre Rural Employment Center Concept Diagram Employment Center Prepared March 14 2011 by The Lend Studio, Inc Revised March 28, 2011 Submtled June 30, 2011 to Gareeld Canty atior.931.3 87.11.1. ¢1t0.1[404,31.V., 1.600-1,04.[MV 2,71 f sikivaniasxoo "FAIA 'OM 'OPT17339N1n1a SIHJOS OM Med JO SV SNOLOCINOD 9riL1SIX3 J.N31410N9INV PrAricl c11100 affld NODS 31310N0311 -el SkRAACId 2 5 dhhlk 113 111111111111111111111 8 888 nitZ43.%8 men.o. • \\W0t43.33avELZ,,,,,. • I 4.4,1.44 WO N.1 L I WWI 0.+4,0 MVP 00 a-mr..orma i.lika ,11411 MS ; , 1 g X: I .. _ • . AlivoNao9a.us :hrtrld US .1,1143 ; v. ...I.. Ran I swum* r iNSINITUNif mnd MOD Iffrld 1-131ve 312110NC* lh:1 SMOtl '077 wrayffArionegS171dOS N.. oda.. Stike itabl.11 „... • . , wlimek. . • 70.7orimit. 4,1 s era.cE .,. , e; • ' I • l' b L'i"..-, .-.. -..... ' ' • •• '.--4.-' I , • ....%=...nr_t.;..r.i. : , 1 .. { _ ..... ,.,, -+,..,.- . . --- --k-'—,,W—i—•-• ,, ...„.., .b , . • . . . .—. — .,.. — ,.. • —• . . P , • . .. . .,-.. ...4,-., . ,..,• . . , .____ • .? ...- 11' \ 7., ,..: 1 - F.'' f .. .., • ' ; . 011beidge, r , •• . i , . , • • , - _ ' , '.---- ‘,,,,extrA. ,r. Ap.wv - '. o. • ,..94 '' d .2 --- --,..,-:-._,:.- . : _,' .t,17• _ i L ;,, ,,,, - , ,-_-___ --- 4 . , . ,_____.,..... ,.: _-.. ' I' :••••:.- - - )... r -••• -- -.'- ' [ ...7-----------jr.:t.: _ ._7. _ - '. ' • - •,./. ..Mf:ZZ.,,, . -------- ' ''-rZ.---,;c' -,- . - • "-•:•Z'-$.1 •-• ''.:61641r..rr''-'; . 0 f -i • Ls_ c z , J C-1 . • 41441'1 Yr .' i' V • . . P . .. a: 'T. •-•-z. t ,.., •L, '' k4 k P 3- 3 .. .:! ; -i NI i 11.41 ' L. t. , : • • iti A is .1 , • --___ IA t .3 . "qtalt414,5i .1.0fb3.49 .• 1:k'NiArit ;• i! Auf gave.. wa aemrmaiu 11.03 yieLtiveln46 woo 1.1113 7.111 77 'ON ThIS NIA SMkDg IALLe Enos Ko CSaseorl Ntlld 3115 TIV113AO ; NV" td 3iJS cromoio3'1.1Nnoo a—Emn. DONIGN INV NVId dINCO 1Mdld I-3iV° 313a3M:30ltd SIBMOd MM. Oa Y. M402 .3TVONCetr. OM. PIRM ES ''OAFTMEHAI Yak! a Sred0 S 077 e' .-. ascant.ND 1.4V1d 311$ 03071VIN3 :Nhfld AlIS wrtia aft ral ram. '''''' ''''' 1101...1.11.a.lia.11101.12 a OCAW/00 ')Jr0100 1:111*IVO IN3INONailli Weld cRINO0 ard NOM 21.3110N00 did St2MOd ''UMMMEMEGI 3a. 61.1.1 rt...ailabalaa nal... L 3., ..3. ( \ . ,. '.. •• , . , •••• • 1 ' % ,..,....\ , , , , • • .„ --- - .--' \ ,-„ '. ''. W. .' '' '.. ' ' '''', ''N. \ I I 1 1 \ F:11 a- I -- 1 , , , / 7 , , . / • 1 \ 1 1•\,111 TC-, I I \ \ , \ 1 , , / , /, 11 . ; Ai ';.,6•4111111 1 1 \ 1 L. 1 I I I I I . r ; ; ., 111111 ii t. ,*1 1 I H I • I :0) I # 1 1 I \ ' ' . \ 1 r ' 1 .1 ' I I I 1 / ; . ,„ ; 1 1 HI Hui I I 1 1111 1 1 1 1. , '• . / / / • ill I II / 1 • i , ; ; , ' 1.[•,,•1 1 1 \ \ , ' \ \ / / / /// 111 I I I, I 7 • 1 I I 4 ih ii, \\ \ e ,..----- 7.----------------___ / q2. ...---- / / / //i717.-----____-__.„ / , i / /I/ -.., ... • 1 , , 1, I I I !1„„, 1 1l 1 l' ,•/ ' r ' 1 I 1 1 _ ---- ----, •-•.. -------- ---, - --- -------.. - - -. , ...' / /7----, ---....„---< • --„., .__ , _. -.. - / --, ---- L'----. `'LL--- --1 ..„- ,..---- ------>-- -------- - -- ------ — .// /i,---- • 1 ..-- 1 ... 1 I 1 .--,---, .- / / 1 .' / a • 111 -.:. -/—:••• i 1 , _ , , , _ ----., •---_. 1 , 1 _ - -' . XI' ..-- ) 'zi•,,„ . - 1 isn IP \ .., gtil §4 , •, „ . \-• - --; , • / s.. ! , _ '.. ', . , _.'.2,. \ Li' . r L:,\ / --,' , ,..,,,,Lie .:... - L. - '• ' / r i -//,, L ' - - ' 1 ' ' i / ' - I I,,,i,, i a------ 1 /;::•c, , 6 . -!! ,,4._,../r) / I I. -.'-' - 0 ' -'-'-' ' fri)/ ' 1 l'; _ , , , . • . ._::_ _ / , ,-- / / . , / ; / , . / : . / / • , •..,- / .; I' ; 1. g I i - ' - .* --- . -- - V • i ' --1_ •-, \ ..-------, ----- " -__ . • — ,--Z , I- \ -- II - 1 ili , ., / 4ittr r ' ,t- • I, ,' i / / I , , ' lii ' r kF r• 1 P. / + /o 1` !r jI1 R=, I _ ig a Iia!UHVHI � r -_._- ..,:...„,-,._.:.„..-,,......._:—__.—.,,:„.s. ....:,:-<,:-,Z,„,-.".,7-11.--"--------46 i \ . ----:-.7---,_-----� 1 '-A, V J 17jIP1' re's' r,) ` j 911 1'il7IIIA l / i t ,� 1 r 1i I \ / i' f% -,',�t o 1 , I1 , r ri it / 1 � ' �N i lir ,tc •i_ -- 41,1 0§ N. Lel ka Qt 1 I d * ®ee. 48114 o e I• 1 a iii!IUUV11 -f,7rf e. --, Il(r ., ,4f LILL_ _ I 111' i. ��C,irf •ir,� 1� +`r!, ,fi \ \ \. \ \ \ ` \ w\ Vin,,,. '1 II' 1144� 6\V 1111+1( CY ir yti SII I' L& 1� 1 ¢ ° IMPACT SITE P4wERs PTr CONCRETE BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO 41 ""5910" 5 WE S'OPRI3 ENCTNEERING, LW. ' WINES 1599Fnu"e,' : 511ESOFISI as w+ .5, 15.1 ICLVLL CONSULTANTS] DOMED BY ANALYSIS' "EXISTING CONDMONS" 34, E PRO. enean Fnx: ryFOFroaca+s CONDITIONS AFTER RECLAMATION 1 414b1110 M114 .1.11 000110 4 • .10 .111000 01010 1011 .611016.0 311106 27.4•14. ucalw•olel as 1,14,9,0! SE...601,37,0380138,03 13a. WW1 LW MEME=Ml • Yri 'ONEEIMISIDM 61818I0 S 110.1.0160 auari• SoMm .utla ma...! Awn. Law raaer.3 •cote•axi Mrld NaLWV1D3H :SisAivw iovani g oaroacnao --uNnoo eismavo 1.H3NON31W 1•10.1.V8 3.13KNOD Ed SnAhOd g • g . . I 11 I '1 il N ,Illq ,Il ij 1 1111(1' , . . . . . . . ..,., . . . . ,_. . _ ,_ _, ,:::_,:,„ i, ___7,7_,,i--,- . _ = - - __- —= . .zt-__, _ ,._ s __. _ __, _ _:. -.__- -- ,_-,,,,,,_..:,,_"- q•-_. - -_ , _ _ _-'_+,:___,Z, 1 ' - ' ' , . -• - - - . - _ , _ _ _7•-,,----_ _._ _ _.==—._ _ _ = . - -.- ._,..,... _. __-, - - . - - - . . ..-•--,,_,._-•,-- ,-- '''' -- : : - .-- " /- ,, •',..--r_`,,,;',`-,,,,Z---'''-•-•-------------,__=-_=-. ' ''''.4,--2-1 ,•:•:'.' ...... . ,. '";•:"-----...,_.----__.--_,„-----===.— . , .7_,- 6 .J.....4•ES il,_„•,21:6 r•_,,..f.18.•1'• , •,,,.. „'.•7,........,,,,,,... f . , , - ."•-•-,..:' ' .:.„---',A,- -:1.-=‘!.._-:-:._=----:•:-:' -=---7-----,---- ...--.,---`• - „- - 4- r . 1 it E ,, ,, I I' 9 I / i "' hlr Ai X114 A¢ g Si . 1 I I 1 ,\ Milli a a 1e 'yt 6 w I Baa as p \ ,ti \ • i . la 4. ,1 r .o p \ 1 I 1 Al irspsp sk I 1 \ J 1 I I aa as a /•- r r SMillIll ,11 '? . ; p c POWERSNCPIT PLN AME BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO - SQPRIS ENGINEERING. LW. vrumee Rn r' r w... xx , .... t MEcnumue111rF9n ,w � CIVIL CONSULTANTSSI .ea,rrne. DR*. a.a+rn r+ sa. ,.a EROSION AND SEDLMENT CONTROL PM'EXlSTING CONDITIONS' S. �ti•sr�++r i 1..SI.: ..9390.1.4E. MINIM FA. 4°,81'°'1":' SITE CONDEMNS AFTER RECLAAIAEON ‘ , \ ,I . I , , , . 1 , . .: i , --- ‘. , .„.- ,. - ------ ____ . / , I I'', I ( / ' ,-- -.' ! , / . 3 I I't II ' I . -- - i ,e- -,., 0 0 1 —2.7.1 . — _. ..- . 0 2 _ • , ,.7.#L---7-_-=-,-------_ / - ,-, - : ---_:--,7-:- IV r ---_---,-::,f--, , - / ',,:,-,----,-_-_, .'''''' --„-- -_==--=--.=-_,;___2,_-,--.-____---- / „ \ .I. I?//ri--------..„----_-':-Z-_-„, ''',',2--___,_.:---- ' --,=--,_=.-----_-_---________---,:\„, • • • , •.L• / ,..• • ./ , _ - — I „ 1 '',,,. / - ,I - -:------ ' ( ._ ----- ' / i .. I/ • .,,, ----- ._.,.._ L.. 0 _ . • i\i •i -,-r---_-,-_--_-1-„- 1 // ..- 1 i =- , . _,--...-.-.-r-.-.-.-.-_----_L-C. • -__, - '',- -• 4:1 - -.-----,-1---------...„:„ - I ---.:,,,, - - -- .!:-,-f---.--...-----_---.--,--------=-=----- -----,,--*--.,--.---,-,7. '' ..-- ..,,., I lilt(11 1 H II _1.4,: 1'1 - ---.\-r-c'k iiilII',,• , 1 1111111111 (!1I11II, 1:' 1.10 . M4*101nll 1•,/,I1l''11' : . 1d /i11l' ; l r/(I1i N",,,,:\0,41, \ \ '' • 1.0 ' • . ', ' a OP , e , .• '• ', ' 1 , ) I • , '1, : I 1 I ,, , . \ , I / • // 1E - " — — •-, • ,,, ., ' \ ''' : -...,_, ''''-`-,...•,,,,,-.... " 1 - .. - ... •,........„ , -->'---.;:-.,--------____=-------- '''''-• ---,...,:=.-.7------,.„----- -"----_---_-_____-------1." r------=_:,---_--.----------------"''__,--:-/ 1 , ( ' / 1 . ,1". / , ..- / / i r P . S, ?:.„_.----_•- ,-. ..._,:„..„,. , \ •,, / ,, — 1.' 11 , , ' I . 1 11fr 1 \ \ , L, 1 , . . .1 ! N Ij l' i'-' POWERS PIT CONCRETE BATCH PLANT COMP PLAN AMENDMENT GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO knee. SOPRISENGINEERING. LW ner. e WV "I'Y 2JVJL YR MN SWEET 0.0.130301.0.1.E, 013.1572 II0e)..0111 P. 0130311.3.1.01.1 EIROSIION & SEDIMENT CONTROL: GRADING PLAN ORWIfe 34.1 plk31.11 teeteell. I . . • 1 I ' II # e 1 I II ... 1 i II II . - - --.- -----___ — _ - .-----'-.._ I ad - IlI ll -- \ gi ..., \ / \ •• 1 . .. i • . .. . . ; 7... I • i d I 1i ii , . 1 , . I 0 ' 1 • ...:... . e I 1 ' i ier"----------, ii i \ .., ...., -..... -..„ 1 1,0 XI X -.4 4 a..„.... • 4 el 4 'Fr ...... a El .r. 1 4 1 --- -, , \ \ , 1 I 1 i I I 1 I gi . •zr--------- _-- .-...-------- \ 1 L.,• a 3 - ' 21: ., ______. --3 -:.l-i ;- ,---, ------ • _ -,•..-._..-- ,_-- ___-- ...e ' \ \ \ ; _ _ ,--- --- ._------ --_. , I • .. ' \ \ ..• \ \ \ ,_.._.,%-,.,.-,-..,.,C'":,-••.z•,.'• - • 1 I 1 \ \ N \ \ . . 1_. ' • \ \ i - , • \ \ • , — I \ \ \ x \••\, \ \ ".. _-, r , , ..,- I 1,1 _ ill II, 41j 11 , \ •'.1 .* i i31 li 1 aa a za a 'I'111,9' ,,1,11"Tililliull' iiql1g111 lilillgqiiq11/11111 4 Rflx.vh; Of El' m ' 2 POWERS PLANT GARf LAND SUITABILITY sin Pr CONCRETE BATCH CCOdl P PLAN AMENDMENT PELL) COUNTY. COLORADO „:, ....MON SOPRISENCINEERINC, LLC. i WM. RE19 0:111W1,90EW -1. NW, BP- .,...., m mum.mwsorrelmmwmm ,,,••• ram 'CIVIL CONSULTARTS1 DE9431E0Bf ANALYSIS: 'EXISTING CONDITIONS" so...Pftv .m.aftExemm M.0.170431.11 MXWM..1011.313 coNorsONS AFTER RECLAMATION REVISED LEASED PREMISES 5.845 ACRES_ BUSLI]@IG'r —==, ... re. C3 jievegETATII7N :EEG M Vl Seed Vapory },be PNAer05 Crested VNtea[gres5 5A8(U3yren G135[94,m} 3 0 PUoe5c01,13M10at7e55. lima IAgrap5'an tndwinionsn 'Lune) 5 0 B0'erdleas Elureuneh le neelaress feamer1100 name} 3 5 Slender Neteat3a55 tApmpymn traChyCamluel] 5 I] borer pl5gm5s TlOSpar tOmocand5 hymprgldes 5505par} 2 0 4maoth Brame 'Mancha" ipomuc noennls'Merachar} a 0 IA115 Bien 9(Melds m01501mil5) 110 Bie BW0Or0ES'5mmnxr Mos empla 'Shaman'} 20 Goer Milk ritod VA117agau5 bread} 2 0 Vald5owars Slue Flax Owen Lavish 10 Podgy Moa Peretemon SPenetem on atddus] 5 Tonne IArreill.1 mlllofdlum i 5 Mateielniumno (Loren. alp, tro} 5 OLIN P5595 L are '550 32 5 Sipa mu reel ear mm0Aea 10 A rnmm odic roslorAror to weed. cwesllrm 01 property lying home 0279 0wim5r LIMA rrn 9111 AVIATlf5 P1 AIJ PR5F 505155 AI TFRAIATI511 The preuesto plant sperm ono their Ia WAan5 an 1115 pian a'e apprapnate for rneir KWalreal 2+Me, 3s dappacat 111 the"eoloci al Sae 08y515" 4Wgran. This Ialdscase plat 1s based on he'Evhact Sreclamation plan' dated 2115/08. adjustments have peen made To the prupo.ed. Want spades aid 1}talntles based on the 0510155]5110t1111110515001010 5555[101911 gating modllrabons. Tho total e,Mantrty or plant material eldwn In ftneple1 r5 equal TO On tots earthy m'erdliber a feClallan n 4451', 1151 price pJ 5'351 s only, for aesthenerdly and eco10q,0BI1y S3Ccassh1 re-vegetsion of !Re 0151905100010?. we 5ltpges] Arlstanhally rrlcrea055 5110 wept quantities old 15511011551 ln,ga1ron Tar Ilse entire re -vegetated as -a 955115,5(504511.0150 approved notes regarding topsoil aid engalrn SZtal8LN9.TES: 11 Evrvong coo tows per May, 2037 aerial mapping, 6915 wore' to s0rlfy t of ban,, toe or slope and ha roar tapog rphy performed deaden. 2009. lailTFF" 1) 115) 51srurce 1 ams Mira be covered wall a m 1nlmLah 01 6' ,5f itira(le stril5 11' user eFGen meanie. Ups completion or the oaerturfen pia eel Frit, a 0111105.011 of 9 or topsoil must De placee om 05 Imposed overburden. 25 The e1155155 Holy Cross power line will he restored to 55rra11mately the arlgma position Song the westerly edge at the pa floor. 32 The detention pond 5520 W01 tie a meo mom or 1 0,0X) 01 accordng to the needs of Latarge'5 mimed Operations with a maximum 529 of 75,000 i"y and a maniere) deem of 20 feet farm sire slopes no greater than 3 10 1, 41 A swaa/bean cam ammo. is to tee Irr5gh5e gong the Northam edge of the lease Sea In order to ream:t Sly rlsrof 1 from tie Pf91Th5rn rand, area way From the FOCra m ed pit NON old NW the westing rcrlgaflan etas Northwest of the lease. arra The Ewalt Seal 09 a minimum 529 per the A=A 59a10n.. If a 51515 15 Wood It Mai be a minimum 05 4' In deght with a 3 to 1 side slope. 51 The one 1g Irrt 50)111'+111 tyd 1g41Raatg4led M Ino hew detention peed to pump a=reas wales 1155 the prt 191 0.10 the acipmng rand+ Property. 5) Lessee has certla0 Rexlblllty 1n the design and lmplementatlon or toe 157151 cont olds or tn5 pat Noor, 50 10555 as era Elope iib a manlmlrn 340 grade and a mmlmum 150grade and 7065662 Mt Soplvs I3,gmeering s+,g,s off on the Ma slope p 71 Lafarge Is respon9ole for a alp 551901(55 system to water the tiros red Shrubs 10 5e Installed per the 11)150C prig 153rd. Latage may add, at their as0415111 , aoatlo50 Ire ratIan systems to ad me native seed Drees. en Lafarge Is responscde for verifying Ihat the 4' and 1 Cr Waterline 0151015151505 emteny 8dge of tea 54 Root 1515 Wowing conation aN ame59ble for onnneilon 50 al IINQatlarl 5y2em. PLANTS PINON 11111E 410 1111545 edulus QUANTITY 512E 30 to height t• -t 1,0, mo1lpar 156 5 gallon 113 1 gallon 183 1 gallon 462 drillings :IP PNap1R0 efl501 1FC01 ONWODO q3 cp8.co ROCKYMO1JNTAIN IU11IPE � 00 1001peru9 scopuln nim 04 MOUNTAIN 81G SAGE 'i3'0 Aiteh119W triderilaht O tl SFRVICEBERIIV n 0 Amedamchler alrefo11a 546.40GAMBLE OAK Quattua NerMINII REVEGETATION SEEP MI% 7,5 Aare Sre 55950.55515.115111 Se:,,, -114.1x (lair: rxail, . See Sopris Engineering Reclamation Plans for all proposed landscape outside of these hatched areas. GRAPFIC SCALE x1 n Note: All RFTA, COOT, and 8550 uses portrayed Or, this diagram are concephual 115 nature and are far illustrative 55153305 only. Site plena will be developed for these entities should any of them move forward with a Malor Impact Review application to Garfield County in the future ib Ir33 Crystal Ranch Corp Concrete Batch Plant LPI - Highway 821 CR 103 Landscape Plan Submitted June 30. 2011 to Garfield County