HomeMy WebLinkAboutSupplemental Information246/3'1oc 103
!ARIA
- Proposed Pipeline = USFS end Counly Roads
Alternative Pipeline Beaver Greek Trail
- Tepee Park Ranch Pipeline f
- - - Proposed Pipeline and Roed I Cenlrel Processing Fealy
- Stream 1 SeclIon Lines
Ephemeral Stream Walarshed Boundary
Ped &les
CPXPICEANCE 1101.DINM. LLC
It TETRA TECH
TETRA TECH, INC.
February 15, 2018
Andy Schwaller, Chief Building Official Project Manager
Garfield County Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Engineering Evaluation of Pipelines
Tepee Ranch Project
Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Schwaller:
On behalf of CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC (CPX), this letter provides confirmation from Tetra Tech, Inc.,
that the pipeline design for natural gas, condensate, and produced water pipelines proposed to serve the
existing CPX Tepee Park Ranch natural gas operations near Rifle, Colorado, were conducted by an
engineer licensed in the state of Colorado. The selection of the piping materials for the subject pipeline
were made using sound engineering judgement and calculations. The materials are in compliance with
the requirements of "1100 Series Flowline Requlafions"of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission (COGCC). Detailed calculations were performed for the analysis of wall thicknesses and
pressure ratings to meet the applicable American Society of Mechanical Engineers American
(ASME)/National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards. Additional detailed information regarding the
analysis is available if needed. I have affixed my seal and signature to this letter.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 303-705-9362 BiII.Anderson @tetratech.com.
Sincerely,
Bill Anderson PE CO #15146
TTR Senior Project Manager
cc: Nick Kurtenbach, CPX
Gwen Brodsky, Tetra Tech
Tetra Tech, Inc.
115 Inverness Drive East, Suite 300, Englewood, CO 80112
Tel: 303.792.5911
www.tetratech.com
1
CPX Piceante, LLC
Colo
February 19, 2018
Mr. Andy Schwaller, Chief Building Official
Garfield County Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Tepee Park Ranch Project
Grading Permit Application
Dear Mr. Schwaller:
34 S. Wynden Dr. Ste 240
Houston, TX 77056
Phone: 713-554-9031
Enclosed, please find a Grading Permit application to authorize construction of a pipeline trench
on Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 245306100005 and a pipeline trench, access road, and
facilities pad on APN 240513400103 to serve Tepee Park Ranch, an existing natural gas facility
owned and operated by CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC (CPX). The development is shown on the
location figure, civil design drawings, and pipeline alignment drawings submitted with this
application.
Regarding the access road on APN 240513400103, CPX has been authorized by the U.S. Forest
Service, Rifle Ranger District, to construct a realignment for a portion of National Forest System
Road 824 (FS 824) in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Section 24. The road realignment will
cross CPX APN 240513400103 for approximately 1,025 feet, and then resume as a realigned FS
824 for approximately 4,225 feet before rejoining the existing FS 824 road alignment to its
terminus at CPX APN 245306100005 on the south end of FS 824. The road realignment is
shown on the enclosed Figure 1-2 and was analyzed and public noticed by the Forest Service to
support a final Decision Notice issued in November 2017. A driveway permit application has
been submitted to the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department. A roadway easement is
under discussion with the Forest Service and Garfield County for the approximately 1,025 -foot
portion of road that will cross CPX APN 240513400103.
Please contact me at nickQu7cpxpiceance.corn or (713) 554-9031 for any questions regarding this
application.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Kurtenbach
Principal
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Attachments: Grading Permit Application
Project Location Figure
Engineer Certification
Civil Design Drawings and Site Plan
Pipeline Alignment Drawings
Soils Report
Drainage Report
Stormwater Permit
Erosion Control Plan
Weed Management Plan
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
Reclamation Cost Estimate
cc: Gwen Brodsky, Tetra Tech, Inc.
Page 2 of 2
File Notes
CPX Grading Permit
Spoke with Joe Fazzi, Range Technician/Lands and Realty Specialist White River National Forest, Rifle
Ranger District about the new section of the FS 824 proposed with the CPX grading permit. I called to
verify that CR 317 would continue to provide access to the National Forest and to ask about the
schedule fot the work. Joe said they were still working on details but that the work would be in the near
future. He sent me a copy of the Decision Notice for the file that was approved in November 2017. He
said the new road section across CPX property would have an access easement associated with it to
assure public access onto Forest Service property. He anticipated some delays during construction but
said all would be in place prior to reclaiming the present access off of CR 317.
This information matched what was represented by CPX for the project.
Andy Schwaller
March 22, 2018
Decision Notice
Tepee Park Ranch Project Environmental Analysis
USDA Forest Service
Rifle Ranger District, White River National Forest
Garfield County, Colorado
Background
The Forest Service evaluated CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC's (CPX) proposal to construct the
Beaver Creek bypass, continue commercial use of upper Forest Service road (FS) 824, and install
underground pipelines on National Forest System lands between Garfield County Road (CR) 2417' 317
and Tepee Park Ranch. The project is located in the western portion of the White River National
Forest on the Rifle Ranger District, south of Rifle, Colorado.
Tepee Park Ranch is an existing exploratory natural gas operation owned and operated by CPX, a
Colorado -based company formed to acquire and develop oil and natural gas resources in the U.S.
The Tepee Park Ranch operation is located entirely on private property in unincorporated Garfield
County. CPX owns both surface and certain mineral rights on Tepee Park Ranch. CPX has
determined that the results of exploratory development of Tepee Park Ranch warrant further
development of the natural gas reserve.
CPX holds an existing 60 -foot -wide easement for commercial use of FS 824, which was granted
to the previous operator by the Forest Service on December 6, 2007 and has been transferred to
CPX. The existing above ground temporary 4.5 -inch -diameter steel pipeline authorization was
reissued in 2015 and does not meet CPX's needs as outlined in their proposal. In response to CPX's
proposal citing anticipated future development, the Forest Service, in its evaluation considers the
proximity of the FS 824 and pipeline to Beaver Creek, adequacy of FS 824 for commercial and
public use, and future pipeline needs.
The Selected Alternative authorizes the Beaver Creek bypass, continued commercial use of FS
824, and the installation of three underground pipelines to transport natural gas, natural gas
condensate, produced water, and fresh water that best meets the need of the project while balancing
effects to natural and social resources. The Forest Service carefully considered comments from
members of the public and developed site-specific design features to minimize negative effects
associated with road construction and decommissioning, and pipeline installation.
Other Alternatives Considered
In addition to the selected alternative, I considered four other alternatives, including three
alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed study. A comparison of these alternatives can
be found in Chapter 2 of the EA.
No Action
Under the No Action alternative, current management plans would continue to guide management
of the project area. CPX would not construct a new access road, underground pipelines, and
associated facilities (located on private lands) to support the continued development of Tepee Park
Ranch. CPX would continue to use the existing FS 824 for commercial traffic and the existing 4.5-
inch -diameter above -ground pipeline adjacent to Beaver Creek to transport natural gas. The CPX
property gate would remain in its current location, and no trailhead modifications would be made.
Road use and maintenance along the lower portion would continue to have potential to introduce
sediments to Beaver Creek, as was the finding of the Rifle Watershed Protection District
Cumulative Impact Study for Beaver Creek (Resource Engineering 2012). Continued commercial
use of the current FS 824 alignment also has potential for haul truck spills adjacent to Beaver
Creek.
The current road corridor of FS 824 does not provide optimal safety for the mix of anticipated
large commercial vehicles/traffic volumes and public use. In particular, continued use of the steep
switchbacks on FS 824 by vehicles such as those described in Table 2-2 of the EA is a concern.
Traffic safety concerns associated with the existing roadway, therefore, would not be addressed.
The no action alternative limits TPR development to the existing pipeline capacity, which is not
adequate to transport the volumes of natural gas, natural gas condensate, and produced water
anticipated from further development of natural gas resources.
Alternative(s) Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Study
• Continued commercial use of lower FS 824
• Pipeline construction adjacent to lower FS 824
• Public motorized access to Beaver Creek trailhead during winter travel management
Decision and Reasons for the Decision
DECISION
I have reviewed the Proposed Action and Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Tepee Park
Ranch Project. Based upon my review of all alternatives, I have decided to implement the proposed
action. A summary of the proposed action is outlined below:
• Beaver Creek Bypass — Special Use Authorization (SUA) for construction of an
approximately 0.75 -mile -long new access road (Beaver Creek bypass) from the upper
switchback on FS 824 north to CPX's private property in Township 7 South, Range 94
West, Section 24. The road will interconnect with the existing CR 317 for continued access
to National Forest System (NFS) lands (Figures 1-1 and 1-2 in Appendix A of the Tepee
Park Ranch Project EA). The road alignment represents a corridor, which allows for minor
route adjustments based on final road engineering design in consultation with the Forest
Service. The alignment will be located within a temporary construction corridor up to 100
feet wide. Areas with steeper slopes may be wider than 100 feet to accommodate slope -
specific cut and fill work. The post -construction authorization issued by the Forest Service
will be for a 75 -foot -wide permanent right-of-way.
A cattle guard will be placed at the Forest Service boundary, and existing fencing would
be tied into the structure. A winter closure gate would be installed south of the forest
boundary to prevent unauthorized motorized travel on NFS land in winter. An area north
of the gate would be widened to accommodate vehicles and vehicle turnaround for winter
recreational uses, such as hiking, snowshoeing, and skiing.
2
• Continued Commercial Use of Upper FS S24 — Authorization for continued commercial
use of the approximately 0.80 -mite -long upper (southern) FS 824; reconstruction of an
approximately 700 -foot -long section of upper FS 824 near the CPX property gate;
improvements for vehicle access at the Beaver Creek trailhead; and road improvements for
stormwater drainage and user safety. The temporary construction corridor is proposed to
be up to 100 feet wide. Areas with steeper slopes may be wider than 100 feet to
accommodate slope -specific cut and fill work. The permanent right-of-way easement
issued by the Forest Service would be increased from the current 60 -foot width to a 75 -
foot -wide right-of-way for consistency along the entire FS 824 road alignment. Road
improvements would provide better access along the Beaver Creek Road to reach and use
the Beaver Creek trailhead at the south end of FS 824.
• Underground Pipelines — Approximately 1.5 miles of three underground pipelines would
be installed within the temporary 100 -foot -wide construction corridor authorized for road
construction. The post -construction pipeline right-of-way likewise would overlap and sit
within the permanent 75 -foot -wide road easement. Pipelines would be authorized under a
Special Use Permit issued by the forest service for a maximum term of 30 years. The
pipelines would be located adjacent to the upper portion of FS 824 and the Beaver Creek
bypass in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Sections 24 and 25. The underground
pipelines would replace the existing, above -ground, 4.5 -inch -diameter steel pipeline used
to transport natural gas. The existing pipeline would be removed from both private and
federal land. Pipelines would be designed to meet all required regulatory standards and
would follow all monitoring and maintenance requirements. The pipelines would transport
natural gas, natural gas condensate, produced water, and fresh water. They would tie in to
surface facilities at a receiving point north of NFS land on CPX private property, adjacent
to CR 317 (Figure 1-2 of the EA). The receiving point is a contractual sales point where
CPX product would be transferred to a third -party natural gas pipeline company at a
contractual minimum operating pressure of 220 pounds per square inch (psi). There would
be less potential for third -party damage to the pipelines because they would be buried. The
existing 4.5 -inch -diameter pipeline could be repurposed as a buried pipeline to transport
condensate after meeting pipeline integrity, pressure testing, and other engineering
requirements. The Plan of Development, pipeline design, and material specifications would
be reviewed by the Rifle Watershed Protection District.
Pipeline
Flow
Direction
Number
Length
(miles)
Diameter
(inches)
Material
Natural gas
North
1
1.55
12
Carbon Steel
Condensate
North
1
1.55
2 to 4.5
Carbon Steel
Produced or fresh
water
Bidirectional
1
1,55
8
HDPE1
High-density polyethylene with flexible steel core for high pressure service and corrosion resistance
• Decommissioning Lower FS 824 — Decommissioning lower (northern) FS 824 in
response to a request from the Forest Service on NFS lands. CPX would he responsible for
earth work and revegetation to reclaim lower FS 824 from the upper switchback north to
the Forest Service boundary in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Section 24 (Figure 1-2
of the EA). All road use and public access to NFS lands would relocate to the proposed
3
Beaver Creek bypass. The Forest Service road easement through the Laramie property, as
granted by Colorado Parks and Wildlife, would be relinquished to Colorado Parks and
Wildlife.
RATIONALE
My decision involved balancing several considerations, including which alternative best supports
the need for action described in the EA while at the same time addressing the proximity of the
project area to Beaver Creek, water features, and public access within the project area. I reached
my decision after careful consideration of the social and environmental effects of the alternatives
discussed in detail in the EA, the associated planning records, the issues identified during the
planning process, and public comments. My decision meets the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and best responds to the need of the project while being
responsive to public comments. The rationale for my decision is further detailed below.
1. The Selected Alternative meets the need of CPX's proposal, and the requirement of the
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) Section 1323(a) and 36 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) 251.110(c) to provide access to non Federally owned land
within the boundaries of the National Forest System to secure to the owner the reasonable
use and enjoyment thereof: Provided that such owner comply with rules and regulations
applicable to ingress and egress to or from the National Forest System.
2. The Selected Alternative complies with the Multiple -Use Sustained -Yield Act of 1960
(MUSYA), which states that "it is the policy of the Congress that the national forests are
established and shall be administered for outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and
wildlife and fish purposes. The purposes of this Act are declared to be supplemental to, but
not in derogation of, the purposes for which the national forests were established as set
forth in the Act of June 4, 1897 (16 U.S.C. 475). Nothing herein shall be construed as
affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the several States with respect to wildlife
and fish on the national forests. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to affect the use of
administration of the mineral resources of national forest lands..."
3. The decommissioning of lower FS 824 and construction of the Beaver Creek Bypass is
consistent with the Forest Plan standards for Colorado River cutthroat trout by reducing
potential for sedimentation from existing roads, maintaining riparian vegetation,
maintaining stream habitat, and maintaining or reducing the existing net density of roads.
4. The Selected Alternative minimizes adverse effects on water resources, including streams,
wetlands, and springs, as documented in the EA. Beaver Creek provides irrigation and
domestic water to residents in the area and is located within the Rifle Watershed Protection
District. Adverse impacts to water resources are minimized through complete avoidance,
compliance with Best Management Practices, and protective measures as documented in
the EA.
5. The decommissioning of lower FS 824 and construction of the Beaver Creek Bypass would
move commercial and public traffic away from Beaver Creek, which would decrease the
potential for sediment transport and mitigate a primary water quality concern in an upper reach
of Beaver Creek. The City of Rifle's Cumulative Impact Study from 2011 concluded that
4
degradation of the health of Beaver Creek is largely related to sediment loading resulting from
the gravel road adjacent to the creek.
6. The Selected Alternative will have no significant adverse effect on vegetation diversity,
wildlife and their habitat, hydrologic function, soils, fisheries, scenic integrity, heritage, or
recreation resources as documented in the EA and the Biological Assessment (BA).
7, Public access to National Forest System lands will be enhanced through the Selected
Alternative with expanded parking at the southern Beaver Creek Trailhead that will
accommodate personal vehicles and horse trailers. The establishment of a designated
winter parking at the north end of the forest boundary provides the public close access from
Rifle to engage in non -motorized winter recreation on National Forest System lands.
8. The Beaver Creek Bypass and proposed improvements to upper FS 824 would eliminate
the need for traffic control devices (lights and pilot vehicles) as the Selected Alternative
would improve sight distance, pullouts, and width of travel surface. This will improve the
flow of public access to the Beaver Creek Trailhead during the summer travel management
season (May 21 -November 22).
This alternative meets requirements under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA at 40 CFR Parts
1500-1508, the Forest Service's NEPA implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part 220, the Forest
Service NEPA implementing guidance in Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, and the standards
and guidelines outlined in the WRNF Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) (USFS
2002).
Public Involvement
The Notice of Proposed Action (NOPA) and announcement of the 30 -day comment period was
issued on September 6, 2016 in the Glenwood Springs, Colorado Post Independent newspaper of
record, on the Forest Service website, and then mailed to the Forest Service distribution list. The
Forest Service elicited comments, concerns, and issues regarding the proposed action from
residents, interested individuals, public agencies, and organizations. Nine parties submitted
comments. In analyzing public comments, the interdisciplinary team identified 42 key issues
regarding the effects of the proposed action. Issues of concern included air and water resources,
old growth forests, land use, public access and wildlife.
A formal 30 -day opportunity to comment on the Draft EA was published on April 6, 2017 in the
Glenwood Springs, Colorado Post Independent, on the Forest Service website, and to the Forest
Service distribution list. Twenty-one parties submitted comments during the comment period. In
analyzing public comments, the interdisciplinary team identified 24 key issues regarding the
effects of the proposed action. Issues of concern included water resources, public access and
wildlife.
5
Comments received in response to the September 6, 2016 NOPA and the April 6, 2017 Draft EA
were categorized by substantive comment and resource issue and are shown in Appendices B and
C of the EA.
Consistency with Other Laws and Regulations
This decision is consistent with the White River National Forest Land and Resource Management
Plan (Forest Plan) as required by the National Forest Management Act and all other laws,
regulations and policies that govern Forest Service actions. The project was designed to conform
to the Forest Plan and all other laws, regulations and policies. Forest Plan standards and guidelines
will be applied as appropriate to meet Forest Plan goals, objectives, and desired conditions.
Finding of No Significant Impact
After considering the environmental effects described in the EA, I determined that these actions
will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment considering the context
and intensity of impacts (40 CFR 1508.27). Thus, an environmental impact statement will not be
prepared. See page 114 of the EA to review the Finding of No Significant Impact.
Administrative Review and Objection Opportunity
The Tepee Park Ranch Project Environmental Assessment is subject to the objection process
pursuant to 36 CFR 218, subparts A and B. The objection period was initiated by a legal notice in
the Glenwood Springs Post Independent on July 31, 2017, which initiated the 45 -day objection
period. Five objections were received during the 45 day objection period, which were addressed
through the objection resolution process.
On October 20, 2017, an objection resolution meeting was held between the objectors and the
Forest Service pursuant to 36 CFR 218.11(a). The objection review found no violation of law,
regulation or policy, and no changes to the analysis documents are necessary.
Implementation Date
The project can be implemented immediately.
Contact Person
For additional information concerning this decision contact Jason Gross, White River National
Forest, 2300 River Frontage Road, Silt, CO 81652 or phone (970) 876-9046.
6
Jet
iScott G. FitzwilF
Forest Supertiisor, White Ri\crNational Forest
A
)4474faStr— 3 -10j .7 --
Date
In accordance with 1 ederal civil rights law and U.S Department of. Agriculture (USDA) cit it rights re.gulations and policies,
the 1 SDA. its -\gencics, office, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering l SD \ programs are
prohibited front discrintitrating based an race, color national origin, religion. s, x. Render identity (including gender expression),
sexual orientation, disability, age marital status, fantily!parenttd status. income derived from a public assistance program,
political:heliers. or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity. in any program w actlelty conducted or funded b) USDA
(not all 1103CS apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines ear; b; pray.rttm of incident.
Persons ttith disabilities who require alternathe means ofconununicatioa for program information (e,g„ Braille large print,
midiotape, American Sign Language. etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or (rSDA's TARGIT Center at (202) 720-
2600 (spice and 'M Y) or contact USD \ thiough the Federal Kelay Service at (800) 877-8339.
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the l'SDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form. >D-3027, found
'snlittc, and at any USD,\ office nt write. a Ica_r addressed to USDA and ptoridc in the letter all ufthe information rectut.sted in
the forst. To request a copy of the complaint fnmt, call (866) 63'-9°K)2 Submit your completed form or (eller to I'11.1 by:
(I) mail: IN S. Department of.\rriculture, Office of the \ssistaat Secretary for Cit it Rights, I )0)) independence ',.venue. S\\,
Washington D.( 20250-9410: (2) fax. (202) 690--'442: or (3) email: progront intake:: trsdaGov
USDA is an equal opportunity provider. employer, and lender_
7
Andy Schwaller
From: Nick Kurtenbach <nick@cpxpiceance.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 3:52 PM
To: Andy Schwaller
Subject: RE: CPX Grading Permit Grad 2-18-5110
Andy, I just left you a voice message if we could connect over the phone that would be great. Give me a call anytime
713-554-9031.
Thanks,
Nick
Nicholas D. Kurtenbach
Principal
CPX Piceance Holdings
(713) 554-9031
nick@cpxpiceance.com
From: Andy Schwaller <aschwaller@garfield-county.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 2:05 PM
To: Nick Kurtenbach <nick@cpxpiceance.com>
Subject: RE: CPX Grading Permit Grad 2-18-5110
Please provide us with a copy of the temporary permit and I will run it up the flag pole. We cannot approve the grading
permit without access to the forest property established. It is kind of a strange situation.
From: Nick Kurtenbach [mailto:nick@cpxpiceance.corn]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 11:08 AM
To: Andy Schwaller<aschwaller@garfield-county.com>
Cc: 'Chris Hale' <chris@mountaincross-eng.com>
Subject: RE: CPX Grading Permit Grad 2-18-5110
Thanks Andy, we'll review and revert with any questions.
Public access to FS will continue however we are actively working with FS on mechanics suffice to say it may take some
time to work out fully and we'll likely begin construction under a temporary permit before completed. Does that have
an impact on our grading permit?
From: Andy Schwaller<aschwaller@garfield-county.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 11:41 AM
To: Nick Kurtenbach <nick@cpxpiceance.com>
Cc: 'Chris Hale' <chris@mountaincross-eng.com>
Subject: FW: CPX Grading Permit Grad 2-18-5110
Nick,
Here are the comments back from the engineer. LUDC is the Land Use Development Code available on our
website. Attached are the pipeline specifications that should be referenced in the plans. Let me know if any questions
come up. The comments are somewhat limited to the non-federal lands, but the road dimensions and pipeline
construction should be consistent. In order to assure public access to the forest, are there any updates associated with
the forest access across CPX property?
Thanks,
Andy
From: Chris Hale[mailto:chris@mountaincross-eng.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 8:45 AM
To: Andy Schwaller <aschwalier[rgarfield-county.com>
Subject: CPX Grading Permit
Andy:
I have reviewed the grading permit and have some comments and/or questions.
I do not see where they refer or note the Garfield County pipeline specifications. These should be included in
the plans.
The plan sheets for the pipelines do not show any construction details of the trench, the bedding, the offset, the
compaction requirements. The best there is shows pipes in the road cross-section but these is schematically
showing intended location of pipe lines.
There are many culverts. They should show how the pipelines avoid conflicts at culvert crossings with minimum
separation.
What are the pipe materials and specifications?
What is the anticipated road design capacity? The Applicant should verify that the road standards are congruent
with anticipated traffic demands and the Roadway Standards in Table 7-107 of the LUDC.
The geotech report states 2:1 max for cut slopes and 2.5:1 max for fill slopes. The plans show areas steeper than
this. The applicant should explain why they are exceeding the recommended maximums and if there are special
construction requirements.
Depending on the roadway classification, there are significant portions of 12%.
The applicant should evaluate the steep slopes adjacent to the road and determine if barriers are warranted,
such as barrier berms or guardrail.
The applicant should explain how quality control for compaction and material testing will be handled during
construction.
Call with any questions or comments. Thanks in advance.
Sincerely,
Mountain Cross
Engineering, Inc.
Chris Hale, P.E.
826 1/2 Grand Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Ph: 970.945.5544
Fx: 970.945.5558
2
COLORADO
Department of Public
Health & Environment
Facility Activity :
Disturbed Acres:
Facility Located at:
Specific Information
(if applicable):
CERTIFICATION TO DISCHARGE
UNDER
CDPS GENERAL PERMIT COR -0300000
STORMWATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Certification Number: COR03S794
This Certification to Discharge specifically authorizes:
CPX Piceance Holdings LLC
to discharge stormwater from the facility identified as
Tepee Park Ranch
To the waters of the State of Colorado, including, but not limited to:
- Beaver Creek
Pipeline and utilities
Oil and gas exploration and Well Pad development
9.3 acres
CR 317 and USFS Rd 824 uninc CO 81650
Garfield County
Latitude 39.42260 Longitude -107.82924
Certification is issued and effective: 2/14/2018
Expiration Date: This authorization expires upon effective date of the General Permit COR030000 renewal unless
otherwise notified by the division.
`ADMINISTRATIVELY CONTINUED
This certification under the permit requires that specific actions be performed at designated times. The certification
holder is legally obligated to comply with all terms and conditions of the permit.
This certification was approved by:
Margo Griffin Work Group Lead
Permits Section
Water Quality Control Division
*explanation of Admin Continued in cover letter
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S., Denver, CO 80246-1530 P 303-692-2000 www.colorado.gov/cdphe/wgcd
Inhn W Hirkr-nlonner. Governor Larry Walk. MD. MSPH. Exeourivr- Director -and Chief Medical Officer
C; f7
'-4;'
.
April 10, 2018
Mr. Andy Schwaller, Chief Building Official
Garfield County Community Development Department
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Tepee Park Ranch Project
Grading Permit Application Response to Comments
Dear Mr. Schwaller:
34 S. Wynden Dr. Ste 240
Houston, TX 77056
Phone: 713-554-9031
This letter responds to comments received from the Community Development Department on March
20, 2018, on the CPX Piceance, LLC (CPX) grading permit application for the Tepee Park Ranch (TPR)
Project. Individual comments and CPX responses are provided below. CPX notes that the portions of
pipeline and roadway construction not under U.S. Forest Service review are limited to approximately
6,500 feet of pipeline trench on Parcel 245306100005, south of National Forest System Land (a.k.a., TPR)
and approximately 1,000 feet of pipeline trench and 1,025 feet of roadway on Parcel 240513400103,
north of National Forest System land (a.k.a., CPX's "Lot 2").
From the Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc., email to Garfield County, dated March 20, 2018:
1. Note the Garfield County pipeline specifications on plans.
Pipeline specifications are described in the response to #4, below, and are shown in the material
summary inset on the pipeline drawings provided with the grading application. The pipelines will
meet ASME standards B31.4 and B31.8 for liquid and gas pipelines, and Colorado Oil and Gas
Conservation Commission Rule 1100 for flowlines.
2. Show construction details for the trench, bedding, offset, compaction requirements.
The pipeline trench will be approximately 100 inches wide with approximately 60 inches of soil
cover to protect the pipelines from frost damage and erosion. There will be an approximately 6 -inch
thick bedding layer placed on the floor of the trench. Backfilling the trench generally will use the
subsoil excavated for the trench. Select granular fill material may be imported for bedding if suitable
padding cannot be sifted from the excavated spoil. Considering the carbon steel and steel -
reinforced HDPE used for the pipelines, rocks greater than 3 inches in diameter will not be allowed
within 12 inches of a pipe or culvert (Attachment A). Bedding and padding for the pipelines
otherwise will meet the "Conditions to all Pipeline Grading and Installation Permits for Garfield
County." An illustration of offsets is shown in the Typical ROW detail on the pipeline alignment
drawings and is provided below. Compaction will be to 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as
determined by standard Proctor (AASHTO T99 or ASTM D698), which is consistent with the Garfield
County conditions for pipeline grading and installation.
TYPICAL ROW (NOT TO SCALE)
1
PROPOSE° 5' PROPOSED?'
WATER LINE
2'
r CONDENSATE LINE
lip ■al -IN -
30' 10'
3. Show how the pipelines avoid conflicts at culvert crossings with minimum separation.
The typical section shown on construction drawing Sheet C-024, and provided in Attachment B of
this letter, has been amended to show a minimum of 36 inches of separation between the bottom
of the culvert and top of pipelines.
4. What are the pipe materials and specifications?
The carbon steel natural gas pipeline is 12.750" x 0.250", ERW API 5L X-52 coated with FBE 14-16
mils thick. The carbon steel condensate pipeline will be 2.375" x 0.154", ERW API 5L Gr. B coated
with FBE 14-16 mils thick. The produced and fresh water bi-directional pipeline will be steel -
reinforced high-density polyethylene pipeline, rated to 1500 psi and manufactured by FlexSteel, 8-
1500-B. FlexSteel meets the requirements of API 15S Spoolable Reinforced Plastic Line pipe.
5. What is the anticipated road design capacity? Verify that the road standards are congruent with
anticipated traffic demands and the Roadway Standards in Table 7-107 of the Garfield County
Land Use Development Code (LUDC).
The road design is supported by a geometric analysis prepared for the U.S. Forest Service using
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines (AASHTO
2001), Forest Service Road Preconstruction Handbook (USFS 2014), Forest Service design criteria
prepared for CPX (USFS 2017), and the results for average daily traffic (ADT) specific to National
Forest Service Road (NFSR) 824, obtained by the Forest Service in 2016. The Forest Service
measured ADT of 29 at the north end of NFSR 824, and 18 at the south end of NFSR 824 from August
18 to November 21, 2016. Of that, an estimated 62 percent of total traffic was attributed to CPX
commercial traffic. The road will be a semi -primitive roadway, based on its ADT. Roadway
specifications for a semi -primitive roadway in the Garfield County Land Use Development Roadway
Standards are listed below and compared to the project specifications.
Page 2of4
Design Capacity: 29 ADT
• Minimum ROW Width: 75'
• Lane Width: 8' (16' total)
• Shoulder Width: 2'
(20' total road width)
• Ditch Width: 4'
• Cross Slope: 2%
• Shoulder Slope: 2%
• Design Speed: 20 mph
• Minimum Radius: 180'
• Maximum Grade: <12%
• Surface: Gravel
Design
Design Capacity (ADT)
Major
Collector
2001+
Table 7
Minor
Collector
401- 2500
107: Roadway Standards
Secondary Rural Access
Access
201 — 400 101-200
Public Land
Access
No Access
to DU
Semi
Primitive
Primitive/
Driveway
21— 100
0 — 20
Minimum ROW Width
(Feet)
80
60
50 50
40
15 to 3a'
30
Lane Width (Feet)
12
12
11 11
8
Single Lane
12
Single Lane
12
Shoulder Width (Feet)
6 Min, Paved
6
4 Min. Paved.
6
4 Min. Paved
2 Min, Paved
2
0
0
Ditch Width (Feet)
10
10
6
64
3'
0
Cross Slope
2%
2%
2y6
2% Chip/Seal
3% Gravel
2% Chlp/Seal
3% Gravel
2%
n/a
Shoulder Slope
3%
3%
5%
5%
5%
n/a
n/a
Design Speed
35 mph
35 mph
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Minimum Radius (Feet)
425
185
80
80
50
40
n/a
Maximum % Grade
8%
85S
10%
12%
12%
I2%
12%
Surface
Asphalt or
Chip/Seal
Chip/Seal
Chip/Seal or
Gravel
Gravel
Gravel
Native
Material
n/a
' As determined adequate In an eng nearing review. Primitive road
either an easement or ROW.
2 If determined necessary for adeouate drainage.
shall be dedicated
ROW, driveway can be dedicated as
The design standards are consistent with Garfield County standards for a semi -primitive roadway.
The slight variance from the 3 percent cross slope standard for a semi -primitive road addresses
drainage concerns for the roadway, given the 8.8 percent longitudinal slope.
6. Explain why the plans show areas steeper than the 2:1 maximum cut slopes and 2.5:1 maximum
fill slopes stated in the geotechnical report. Explain whether there are special construction
r requirements.
The geotechnical report describes 2:1 cut slopes and 2.5:1 fill slopes as typical slopes for the
alignment. Location specific modeling, such as Cross-section A at Station 1+80, which modeled 1.8:1
cut slopes, provided the necessary factors of safety for areas of slightly steeper slopes used in the
civil grading design. The engineer of record is the same for both the geotechnical report and the
design drawings.
7. There are significant portions of roadway of 12 percent.
A 12 percent slope is the maximum slope in the Garfield County LUDC. The road grades are all below
the 12.0 percent threshold, with an average longitudinal slope on Parcel 240513400103 (CPX Lot 2)
of 8.8 percent. Slopes in the final road design were derived to achieve the elevation difference from
endpoint to endpoint, given the geometric constraints of the site.
8. Evaluate whether barriers are warranted (such as barrier berms or guardrail) adjacent to steep
slopes.
The road is in -sloped at 2 percent along the entire length. Typical downhill slopes are 2.5H:1V. The
two horizontal curves within the Lot 2 alignment have horizontal radii of 350 and 750 feet, both of
which meet and significantly exceed the minimum horizontal radius of 178 feet calculated in the
geometric analysis based on design speed, friction coefficient of the gravel road surfacing, and
superelevation.
Page 3 of 4
9. Explain how quality control for compaction and material testing will be handled during
construction.
Third -party construction inspections will be conducted.
Please contact me if you require additional information at (713) 554-9031.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Kurtenbach
Principal
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
nickP cr3xpit eance.coni
cc: Tetra Tech, Inc.
Attachments
Attachment A Pipeline Trench Detail STD -D013
Attachment B Construction Drawing Sheet C-024
Page 4 of 4
60"
OR SEE
ALIGNMENT
DRAWINGS
12
PIPE O.D.
6"
SANDBAGS UNDER PIPE
ARE PERMITTED.
SPACE IN 15' INTERVALS
12" 24" MIN 12' -24" MIN'',
TYPICAL DITCH
DETAIL
1. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCATING ALL UTILITIES.
2. CONTACT ONE CALL AT 811 PRIOR TO DIGGING.
3. FREE TRENCH OF DEBRIS, LARGE ROCKS, ROOTS, OTHER OBJECTS.
4. REMOVE SNOW AND WATER.
5. PERMITTED TO APPLY SHADING MATERIAL WITH AN OZZIE PADDER.
•
BACKFILL:
ABOVE 12" SHADING MATERIAL
ON TOP OF PIPE - BACKFILL
P 3RMII TEDEDIO INCLUDE
CLUDE ROCK,
SHADING:
< 3/4" PADDING MATERIAL COMPACTED IN
6" LIFTS
MIN DENSITY OF 95%
COMPACTION EFFORT ASTM 698
<3/4" PADDING MATERIAL COMPACTED
IN 6" LIFTS MAX
MIN DENSITY OF 95%
COMPACTION EFFORT ASTM 698
REVISIONS
A
ISSUED FOR REFERENCE
NQ DESCRIPTION
JMG
04/10/18
BMA
94/10/10
DATE CHK DATE APR DATE
TETRA TECH ROONEY
TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION DETAIL
SCALE: NONE
TYPICAL DITCH DETAIL
ENGINEERED CROSSING
DWG NUMBER: STD -D01 3 REV. A
ATTACHMENT A
DUSTIN GEHRETT. 3232010 3:
10' FROM WHICHEVER IS GREATER
OF PIPELINE TRENCH OR DITCH
EXCAVATION CLEARING WIDTH
_•
CLEARING LIMIT
SLOPE EXCAVATED
PER OSHA
1926.651 AND
1926.652
OR PERSONNEL
RESTRICTED
DISTURBANCE LIMITS
DRAINAGE DITCH
70'
2% INSLOPE
16" OR 17"
O,
1
►
10'
CLEARING LIMIT
10'
D Z
8' MAX. E
1.1 PIPELINE
CORRIDOR
CULVERT
CONSTRUCTION TYPICAL SECTION
A
1
CATCH
20' ROADBED B
•LU
MIN 10'
MIN
10'
CLEARING OR BRUSHING LIMIT
NOTES:
1. MAXIMUM CUT SLOPE 2H:1V AND MINIMUM FILL
SLOPE 2.5H:1V. UNLESS NOTED DIFFERENTLY ON
PLANS.
2. FILL COMPACTED TO 95% OR GREATER OF
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY DETERMINED BY
STANDARD PROCTOR.
3. CLEARING HEIGHT SHALL BE 14' ABOVE EDGES
OF ROADBED.
4. FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION CLEARING SHALL BE
10' MINIMUM BEYOND EITHER SIDE OF ROADBED
OR AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS OR STAKED ON
GROUND.
5. A & B DENOTE ALL AREAS TO BE SEEDED. SEE
PLAN & PROFILE SHEETS FOR ADDITIONAL
SEEDING AREAS.
6. DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED PRIOR TO
ACCEPTANCE.
7. CONSTRUCTION TOLERANCE IS CLASS D PER
USFS CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS.
8. EXCAVATION AND PLACEMENT OPERATIONS
SHALL BE CONDUCTED SO SLASH AND OTHER
CLEARING AND GRUBBING MATERIAL WILL NOT
BE INCORPORATED IN THE ROADWAY.
EXISTING GROUND LINE
TYPICAL ROAD SECTION
STA 0+00 TO STA 7+75
AND PRIVATE CPX ROAD
CDOT CI 055 5 0R 6
CDOT CLASS 1 OR 2
/ PREPARED SUBGRADE
TYPICAL ROAD SECTION
STA 7+75 TO STA 99+50 AND
STA 60+30 TO STA. 93+57 AND
BEAVER CREEK PARKING LOT
PROPOSED FINAL GROUND
SLOPE BETWEEN NFSR
824 AND SURFACE
FACILITY PAD
TOP OF CPX SURFACE
FACILITY PAD
2 MAX
INSTALL DRAINAGE DITCH @
TOE OF SLOPE SLOPE @
2% MIN AS SHOWN IN PLANS
TOE DRAINAGE DITCH DETAIL
NTS
2' ( :)
EXCAVATION LFMITS
EXCAVATION BENEATH FILL SLOPES DETAIL
EXISTING GROUND
TOPOF CPX
SURFACE
FACILITY PAD
MAX.
INSTALL SAFETY
BERM
3,
50' MIN.
TRANSITION
LENGTH VARIES, SEE PLANS
-
50' MIN,
TRANSITION
1 ~�
N
PLAN VIEW
TURNOUT WIDENING ON ONE SIDE
(LEFT OR RIGHT)
EDGE OF ROAD SUBGRADE, SEE
CONSTRUCTION TYPICAL SECTION
(THIS SHEET)
EXISTING GROUND
2.5' ---------ti
INSTALL DRAINAGE DITCH @
TOE OF SLOPE. SLOPE @
NOTE: 2% MIN AS SHOWN IN PLANS
SAFETY BERM MUST BE CONSTRUCTED TO A PROPOSED CPX PAD
HEIGHT GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO HALF THE FILL SLOPE GRADING -
WHEEL HEIGHT OF THE LARGEST PIECE OF
MOBILE EQUIPMENT ^-
SAFETY BERM &
DRAINAGE DITCH DETAIL
NTS
2
1
ROADSIDE DITCH
RUNDOWN = 1-0'
DITCH TRANSITION = 1.5'
16" OR 17"
(SEE TYPICAL
ROAD SECTION,
THIS SHEET)
9' (MIN.) WIDTH ON ACCESS ROAD FILL
SLOPES BETWEEN DITCH RELIEF CULVERT
OUTLETS AND SCOUR BASINS OVERALL
CHANNEL WIDTH MUST EXCEED WIDTH OF
CULVERT FLARED END SECTION.
NOTES:
1 CLASS 2 ROCK RIPRAP
2 THICKNESS = 15" (MIN)
3 EXTEND DITCH TRANSITION SECTION A MINIMUM OF 25
FEET BETWEEN TYPICAL ROADSIDE DITCH AND STREAM
CHANNEL
GEOTEICHLE FABRIC
AT ALL SOIL -ROCK
INTERFACES
CDRUNDOWN / TRANSITION DITCH DETAIL
NTS
2
NOTES:
1 TRANSITION ROADSIDE OR OTHER DRAINAGE
DITCH INTO LEAD-OFF DITCH AT LOCATIONS
SHOWN ON PLANS,
2, LEAD-OFF DITCH LONGITUDINAL SLOPE = 2%
(MAX ) WITH 10' (MIN,) END SECTION SLOPED <0,5%
4 \ LEAD-OFF DITCH DETAIL
— / NTS
CONSTRU
0
REFERENCE
ENGINEERS SEAL
/\
Scent: AS SHOWN
l \
I\
Designed by: CSS
Drawn by: DAG
Checked by: DC
Approved by: CSS
Descdplfon
BY
Oen
REVIS1t3N8
"r psATec"os"issan SL=
BY SUCH
IRO ARTY S NG FROM THE USE OF TNIS DOCUMENT BY TMEM WITHOUT
�`SA.1 'ONA °ucrviiureix`w".ae".°m Pfl4 .".s
co"rw,cre awrec"A""T"esT"T's
o4eti,N.ci eE swu""r Ae"aaw"c rws oocuuE,n,"arromrx
Issued tor:
CPX PICEANCE
HOLDINGS, LLC
Issued by:
TETRA TECH
3001 Automation Way Suite 100
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
(970) 223-9600 (970) 223-7171 fax
CPX ROAD DESIGN
TYPICAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE
SECTIONS AND DETAILS
Project:
CPX ROAD DESIGN
Location:
GARFIELD COUNTY. CO
Project no.:
114-910500X
Date:
6918/03/23
C-024
SHEET
24 OF 29
ATTACHMENT B
February 27, 2018
Garfield County
Andy Schwaller
Garfield County Community Development Department
RE: GRAD 5110 CPX Teepee Park Ranch
Dear Andy,
Vegetation Management
The Revegetation/Reclamation Plan and the Weed Management Plan are acceptable.
Staff recommends a revegetation security of $36,625 ($2500 per acre x 14.65 acres of disturbance).
The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully reestablished according to the
Reclamation Standards section in the Garfield County Weed Management Plan. The Reclamation Standards at the date of
permit issuance are cited in Sections 4.06, 4.07 and 4.08 of the Garfield County Weed Management Plan (Resolution #16-
12).
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Steve Anthony
Garfield County Vegetation Manager
195 W. 14th Street, Bldg. D, Suite 310
Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-945-1377 x 4305 Mobile Phone: 970-379.4456
Bond No. B011326
6R4 2 -J8- 'S -»o
PERMIT BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
THAT WE, CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC, as Principal, and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, a
Texas corporation authorized to do business in the State of Colorado, as Surety, are held and firmly
bound unto Garfield County Board of Commissioners, Colorado with an office at 108 8th Street,
Suite 101, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, as Obligee, in the penal sum of Thirty Six Thousand Six
Hundred Twenty Five and No/100 Dollars ($36,625.00), for the payment of which, well and truly to be
made by the said Principal and the said Surety, bind themselves, their heirs, executors and
administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
WHEREAS, the Principal has obtained or is about to obtain a grading permit for Reclamation
(Revegetation) for 14.65 acres of disturbance in Garfield County, Colorado.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CONDITIONS OF THIS OBLIGATION ARE SUCH, that if the Principal
shall faithfully perform all duties and protect said Obligee from any damage caused by the Principal's
non-compliance with or breach of any laws, statues, ordinances, rules or regulations, pertaining to the
license or permit issued, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise to remain in full force
and effect.
PROVIDED, that regardless of the number of years this bond is in force, the Surety shall not be liable
hereunder for a larger amount, in the aggregate, than the penal sum listed above.
PROVIDED FURTHER, that the Surety may terminate its liability hereunder as to future acts of the
Principal at any time by giving thirty (30) days written notice of such termination to the Obligee.
SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED this 23rd day of March, 2018.
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Principal
BY:
Title
U.S. Specialty Insurance Company
Surety
r -1
BY:
v V
Edwin H. Frank, !II, Attorney -in -Fact
tI POWER OF i'11. A ORNEX0 D _ -_.tiiS I�ND[NG COMPANY
AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNC _ — _
UNITED STATES SURETY Y COMPANYP°►C�i7�' ANCE COMPANY
_ , ID V
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That American Contractors Indemnity Company, a California corporation, Texas
Bonding Company, an assumed name of American Contractors Indemnity Company, United States Surety Company, a M aryland
corporation and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, a Texas corporation (collectively, the "Companies"), do by these presents make,
4ns>1tuCappvint: -� iZG
MOW
ed win H. Fr 1T hWe Win, W. Russell BtLOWn; Jr.,or STephen Michael Striitllo€ fobs o ;- i
its true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-fact, each in their separate capacity if more than one is named above, with full power and authority
hereby conferred in its name, place and stead, to execute, acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, recogntxances, undertakings
: a _sitter. instruments or contracts: of suretyship to include. ridersantendments, and consents of .surety, providing the bond
does not exceed ****'"*Uniimitt **'''***. , Dollars ($ ***unlintited***).
is rower' -of Attorney shall expire without further action on Noyei r-3 2019- This Power of Attorney. is granted under and by
authority of the following resolutions adopted by the Boards of Directors of the Companies:
Be it Resolved, that the President, any Vice -President, any Assistant Vice -President, any Secretary or any Assistant Secretary shall be and is hereby vested with full
power and authority to appoint any one or more suitable persons as Attorney(s)-in-Fact to represent and act for and on behalf of the Company subject to the following
provisions:
rirrorney-in-/Mier may be givggull power And authority for -and in the name ot'and on behalf of the C'ompsuiy, to execute.:-aeknow.ledge i d i 'ti_'.d all bonds,
reeognizances. connects. agrr uenls or indemnity :ntd Qtker conditional or •obligatory. undertakings, including any anti al es -_i.i, �! = of retained
rcerita a and/or final cstimai—S=Qn engineering.and conAtruction contracts, and any and all notices and documents canceling i; t =i� ' '}' y's liability
h g r.
then:auuler, and any such insiturril�itts so executed by any such Attorney -in -Fact shall be binding upon the Company as ifsigned by the[es�dent'and sealed and effected
by the Corporate Secretary.
Be it Resolved. that the signature of any authorized officer and seal of the Company heretofore or hereafter affixed to any power of attorney or any certificate relating
thereto by facsimile, and any power of attorney or certificate bearing facsimile signature or facsimile seal shall be valid and binding upon the Company with respect to
env bdrtd or undertaking to which it is.attached.--• = - '`
7 e• IN WIT .: - WHEREOF, The Companies have caused this instrument to be.sig_ned and their corporate seals ha be hereto affixed, this
r� 23, got �Y -
AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY TEXAS BONDING COMPANY
UNITED STATES SURETY COMPANY U.S. SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
Corperat.; Stals
x irmaurny� �"ngiJll t,, {inew°r�
Ni67F01:�tw
Re.1������N�J
'�rnirri i�xx`°bPyirpF Seo,.•.
Aguilar,=Vice President
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and nol the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
OnM gales 5S: •
Tt3n this 1st day of November; 2016, before me, Sabina Morgenstein, a notary publii ;personally appeared Daniel P. Aiuilar'Viz a President of American
Contractors indemnity Company, Texas Bonding Company, United States Surety Company and U.S. Specialty Insurance Company who proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in
his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted. executed the instrument.
1 certify under PENALTY Of PERJURY under the laws: -of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and `cor n= '
W ['NESS my band and °fag/ Mal; SABINA MQRGENSiEiH _
Commission N 21292511
(Seal)
Notary Public - California
Los Angeles County
"" My Comm. Exolris Now 3, 2010
Signature
IQ/Assistant Secretary cif American Contractors Indemnity Company, Te7ca otiding Company, United States Surety Company and U.S.
fie yirance Company, do hereby certi.fy that the above and foregoing is a tnTtsand corre tcopy of a Power of Attorney, executed by said
r==
=panics, which is still in full force and effect; furthermore, the resolutions of the Boards of Directors, set out in the Power of Attorney are in full
force and effect.
In
Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seals of said Companies at Los Angeles, California this
O3 re -hay
frYX-r0h+ rJ•d
of
Corporate Seals
Bond No. x0113? iv
Agency No. 8353
0 Lo, Assistant Secretary
Pril
U.S. Forest Service Road 824
Geotechnical Investigation and
Analysis Report
/74 -1"41 -144124-
()61 -L -X
Prepared for: k,''''
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC 4 -
Ir , ) E
l
Tepee Park Ranch
Garfield County, Colorado
(303) 489-8773
Prepared by:
Tetra Tech, Inc.
3801 Automation Way, Suite 100
Fort Collins, Colorado
(970) 223-9600
Tetra Tech Project No. 117-7463001
October 16, 2017
IVFSt< 824 Geotechnical Investigalko 0 and Aridly:
1T
;e Holdings, I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION 2
2.0 SITE CONDITIONS AND GEOLOGIC SETTING 3
3.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION 4
3.1 Geophysical Survey 4
3.2 Geotechnical Investigation 4
3.2.1 Drilling and Sampling 4
3.2.2 Groundwater... 5
3.2.3 Subsurface Soil Conditions and Laboratory Testing 5
4.0 SLOPE STABILITY 9
4.1 Existing Slope Conditions and Instrumentation 9
4.2 Slope Stability Analysis 9
4.3 Design Guidelines 10
4.4 Model Soil Parameters 10
4.5 Model Parameters 11
4.6 Modeling Results 11
4.6.1 Cross -Section A (Station
4.6.2 Cross -Section B (Station
4.6.3 Cross -Section C (Station
4.6.4 Cross -Section D (Station
1.,80) 11
59+15) 12
63+57) .... 13
5+50 and Private CPX Surface Facility Pad
Driveway) 14
4.6.5 Cross -Section E (Station 8+00 and CPX Surface Facility Pad) 15
5.0 ROADWAY AND GRADING 17
5.1 Proposed Roadway Section 17
5.2 Road Construction Recommendations 18
5.3 Fill and Grading 19
6.0 OTHER GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 21
6.1 Pipeline Construction 21
6.2 Corrosion 21
6.3 Frost Susceptibility 22
7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23
8.0 LIMITATIONS 24
9.0 REFERENCES 25
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Laboratory Testing Results , 8
Table 2. Model Input Material Properties 10
Table 3. Summary Of Factors Of Safety For Slope Stability At Cross -Section A 12
Table 4. Summary Of Factors Of Safety For Slope Stability At Cross -Section B 13
Table 5. Summary Of Factors Of Safety For Slope Stability At Cross -Section C 14
Table 6. Summary Of Factors Of Safety For Slope Stability At Cross -Section D 15
Table 7. Summary Of Factors Of Safety For Slope Stability At Cross -Section E 16
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location Map
Figure 2. Subsurface Investigation and Slope Stability Modeling Locations
Figure 3. USGS and CGS Mapped Geologic Units and Landslide Locations
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
AASHTO
ACI
ADT
CBR
CDOT
CGS
CPX
CR
ERT
ESAL
FHWA
LRFD
NFSR
OSHA
pcf
psf
psi
ppm
SPT
Tetra Tech
USGS
Geophysical Survey
Boring Logs
Laboratory Testing Results
Inclinometer Measurements
Slope Stability Calculations
Roadway Section Vehicle Loading Calculations
LIST OF APPENDICES
LIST OF ACRONYMS
American Society of State Highway and Transportation Officials
American Concrete Institute
Average daily traffic
California bearing ratio
Colorado Department of Transportation
Colorado Geologic Survey
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
County Road
Electrical Resistivity Tomography
Equivalent Single Axle Loads
Federal Highway Administration
Load and Resistance Factor Design
National Forest Service Road
Occupational Health and Safety Administration
pounds per cubic foot
pounds per square foot
pound per square inch
parts per million
Standard penetration test
Tetra Tech, Inc.
United States Geologic Survey
1\11 -SH 824 Geotechni
'tvestigaiion and Analysis Gt'.\ Piceance floidings. LLC
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the results of Tetra Tech Inc.'s (Tetra Tech's) geotechnical investigation and analysis
for segments of U.S. National Forest Service Road (NFSR 824. NFSR 824 is a gravel surfaced road running
north to south adjacent to Beaver Creek (Figure 1). NFSR 824 includes a switchback that separates lower
NFSR 824 (0.9 miles long) from upper NFSR 824 (0.8 miles long). CPX is seeking authorization from the
Forest Service to relocate lower NFSR 824 away from Beaver Creek and to eliminate the switchback by
constructing the "Beaver Creek bypass" to replace lower NFSR 824. Improvements along upper NFSR 824
will be limited to stormwater drainage and a vehicle turnout. An approximately 700 -foot -long section of
upper NFSR 824 would be reconstructed to separate Tepee Park Ranch traffic from access to a public
Beaver Creek trailhead. The existing parking lot for the Beaver Creek trailhead would be expanded. Buried
pipelines for fresh water, condensate, and natural gas associated with operations at Tepee Park Ranch
would be installed along the entire NFSR 824 and are described in the report.
The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions for use in road geometric design
and pipeline trenching, determine gravel road section thickness, and provide geotechnical design criteria
and construction recommendations for the project.
The subsurface included low to high plasticity clay with basalt clasts, clayey sand, and clay with gravel.
Sedimentary bedrock was encountered at depths 50 and 92 feet in two of the twelve borings. Thin layers
of perched groundwater were recorded in two of the twelve borings. Field observations by Tetra Tech have
identified slump features along the proposed road alignment at approximate road stations 43+50 and
49+00.
Slope stability analyses were conducted to determine the stability of the current slopes and to estimate the
potential impacts on slope stability that would result from the proposed project. Results indicate that the
slopes are stable under the current conditions, but certain locations are naturally susceptible to failure,
especially if the conditions change due to natural or human -caused events. Details are presented in the
report.
Regular monitoring of installed inclinometers and observations of the slopes in the project area should
continue and will provide on-going data to evaluate changing conditions during and after the planned
construction. In general, permanent excavation cut slopes of 2H:1V and permanent fill slopes of 2.5H:1V
are recommended for slopes with a maximum height of 35 feet. Different design grades for certain sections
are presented in Section 4. The grading plan associated with the road design being prepared by Tetra Tech
should reflect these recommended slopes.
The design procedure from a FHWA gravel road design manual (FHWA, 2000) was used to develop the
thickness of the gravel road sections based on the calculated ESAL values of 23,000 and 70,000. A gravel
road section of 9 inches of surface course over 7 inches of base was selected for NFSR 824 south of the
private CPX driveway to the proposed surface facility pad. For the segment of NFSR 824 from CR 317
south to the private CPX driveway a gravel road section of 9 inches of surface course over 8 inches of base
was selected. Details are presented in the report.
We have prepared this executive summary solely to provide a general overview; it should not be used for
any purpose except that for which it was intended. We recommend detailed review of the entire report for
information regarding our findings, recommendations and other details related to geotechnical conditions
for the site.
Hydrologic Analysis and Drainage Design
Tepee Park Ranch Project
Rifle, Colorado
PREPARED FOR
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
34 S. Wynden Drive, Suite 240
Houston, TX 77056
February 2018
PREPARED BY
Tetra Tech, Inc.
4750 West 2100 South, Suite 400
Salt Lake City, UT 84120
Hydrologic Analysis and Drainage Design CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1
3.0 DRAINAGE CRITERIA DESIGN 3
4.0 WATERSHED DELINEATIONS 4
4.1 Stream Features 4
4.2 Ditch Relief Culverts 4
5.0 DESIGN FLOW CALCULATIONS 5
5.1 Stream Features 5
5.2 Ditch Relief Culverts 5
6.0 DRAINAGE DESIGN 8
6.1 Culvert Design 8
6.2 Roadside Ditch Design 9
6.3 CPX Surface Facility Pad 10
6.4 Northern Access Road Tie-in with CR 317 10
6.5 Expanded Parking Area 10
7.0 EROSION PROTECTION 12
7.1 Energy Dissipation 12
7.2 Slope Protection 15
7.3 Additional Sediment Transport and Erosion Control 15
8.0 REFERENCES 16
FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Water Features
APPENDICES
Appendix A Figures
Appendix B Stream Feature Photographs
Appendix C Model Output Reports
[—lb] TETRA TECH
February 2018
Hydrologic Analysis and Drainage Design
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This analysis presents the methods and results for Tetra Tech, Inc.'s (Tetra Tech's) hydrologic modeling and
drainage analysis for the Tepee Park Ranch Project (TPR or "project"), proposed by CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
(CPX). The project consists of construction of facilities to support an existing natural gas operation located on two
non-contiguous, privately -owned parcels of land in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Sections 13 (Lot 2) and 25
(TPR). National Forest System land under the jurisdiction of the White River National Forest (WRNF), Rifle Ranger
District, in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Sections 24 and 25 connects these private parcels (Figure 1).
Proposed facilities in each of the areas consist of the following:
• Lot 2: Underground pipelines to transport natural gas, natural gas condensate, and produced and fresh
water; an access road; surface facility pad; and surface water controls;
• TPR: Underground pipelines, only, to transport the products described above.
• Forest Service: Underground pipelines, as described above; realignment of portions of National Forest
Service Road 824 ("NFSR 824"), referred to as the Beaver Creek bypass; and installation of surface water
controls.
Areas of disturbance are shown on the design drawings submitted together with this analysis for Garfield County
review. Separately, construction proposed on Natural Forest System land was reviewed by the Rifle Ranger District,
including a Decision Notice issued by the Forest Service in November 2017, to authorize easements and use
permits for the project. The Forest Service also will oversee decommissioning and reclamation for a portion of the
existing NFSR 824 from County Road (CR) 317 to the upper switchback on NFSR 824, as shown on Figure 1.
The primary objective of this hydrologic modeling and drainage analysis is to provide recommendations for the
design of culverts that will adequately convey water from drainage features crossed by the project to maintain their
nexus with Beaver Creek, a perennial waterbody downstream of the project area. Another objective, together with
stormwater controls, is to ensure that the drainage features maintain existing water quality by minimizing or avoiding
sediment from stormwater runoff from entering the waterbodies during project operation. Sediment during project
construction will be managed separately under the project's construction stormwater management plan.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project area is located between approximately 7,900 and 9,300 feet above sea level along the east -facing side
of Battlement Mesa, approximately 3 miles northeast of North Mamm Peak and 9 miles south of Rifle, Colorado.
The surrounding area consists of densely vegetated hillsides that slope downhill from west to east. The proposed
road is approximately 820 feet higher at the south end of the project area than at the north end. No utilities are
located along the road except for a temporary, above -ground 4 -inch -diameter steel pipe owned by CPX and used
to transport natural gas.
Tetra Tech conducted a field survey in 2014 to delineate Waters of the U.S. (WUS) in the project area and to support
an Aquatic Resources Report (Tetra Tech 2017a) for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Figure 2 shows
WUS that would be crossed by the proposed road and/or pipelines. Temporary impacts to WUS during construction
were authorized by a Clean Water Act, Section 404, Nationwide Permit issued by the Corps on July 7, 2017.
Wetland crossings are avoided by project routing around delineated wetlands.
Nine drainage features were documented in the Aquatic Resources Report. The features drain into Beaver Creek,
a perennial stream that drains into the Colorado River. The Forest Service recognizes Beaver Creek as Colorado
River cutthroat trout habitat. Stream features are listed in Table 1, from south to north. Table 1 describes the stream
TETRA TECH
February 2018
Hydrologic Analysis and Drainage Design
Table 6. Roadside Ditch Design Table
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Road Station
Slope
Qio Design Flow Flow Depth Freeboard Velocity Evaluate Scour
West: 0+00 — 2+80
West: 6+90 — 10+26 5%
West: Typical - Flat
West: Typical - Steep
3%
3%
12%
7.2 cfs
10.2 cfs
5.6 cfs
5.6 cfs
11.0"
11.4"
10.0"
7.7"
18"
17.6"
19"
21.3"
4.3 ft/s
5.7 ft/s
4.0 ft/s
6.8 ft/s
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
6.3 CPX SURFACE FACILITY PAD
A drainage design was prepared for the proposed surface facility pad on the east side of the access road, located
approximately between stations 6+90 and 10+00. The pad is on the east side and downgradient of the access road.
To avoid daylighting ditch relief culverts on the pad, relief culverts were eliminated along the section of access road
adjacent to the pad between stations 6+90 and 10+26. A single ditch relief culvert is proposed at station 10+26,
and has been reconfigured to discharge into a scour basin south of the pad. Between stations 6+90 and 10+26,
runoff from the access road and upland wooded area to the west will enter the roadside ditch and drain to a 30 -inch
diameter CMP ditch relief culvert at station 6+90. This culvert discharges into a scour basin on the east side of the
access road, north of the pad. Check dams are proposed within the western roadside ditch between stations 10+26
and 6+90 to reduce flow velocity and scour potential. The proposed pad is self-contained, and runoff from the pad
will be collected in triangular perimeter ditches, as shown in the design drawings. The perimeter ditches will drain
to a scour basin installed on natural grade off the southeast corner of the pad.
6.4 NORTHERN ACCESS ROAD TIE-IN WITH CR 317
The proposed access road is entirely in cut at the tie-in with CR 317. The natural terrain slopes with the access
road, making ditch relief culverts or other cross drainage features impractical. Along the west side of the road, a
single ditch relief culvert is proposed to be installed at station 2+80. Runoff from the access road and from the
tributary areas to the west will be collected in the west roadside ditch between station 0+00 and 2+80. Flow from
the existing roadside ditch along the south side of CR 317 will also drain to the tie-in location. Due to the natural
grade, it is impractical to install a ditch relief culvert across the proposed access road here. Instead, a 30 -inch
diameter CMP culvert at station 0+00 is proposed to drain runoff from the roadside ditch and into a scour basin on
the north side of CR 317, which is subject to discussion with Garfield County.
Along the east side of the access road, a roadside ditch will extend approximately from station 6+00 to the tie-in
with CR 317, collecting runoff from the cut slopes above. The tributary area generating runoff to this ditch is minimal
but has the potential to generate scouring velocities. Wattles are proposed between stations 0+00 and 6+00 to limit
these velocities. At the tie-in location, the eastern roadside ditch will transition into the existing roadside ditch along
the south side of CR 317. Aerial imagery appears to show an existing ditch relief culvert east of the proposed tie-in
location that drains roadside ditch flows from the south to north side of CR 317. This culvert is assumed to be a
minimum of 18 -inch diameter CMP, and in good condition. The typical design details for a widened ditch section
and ditch block should be installed here to promote drainage into the culvert and across CR 317. An existing riprap
basin at the outlet is also apparent in the site aerial imagery, and should be sufficient for the reduced flows the
culvert will be conveying.
6.5 EXPANDED PARKING AREA
A detailed grading and drainage design was prepared for the proposed expanded parking area on the east side of
the access road, located approximately at station 86+50. The expanded parking area is an incised 50 foot by 80 -
[it) TETRA TECH
10 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Rifle, Colorado
PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
34 S. Wynden Dr., Suite 240
Houston, TX 77056
February 2018
Tetra Tech, Inc.
1100 South McCaslin Blvd., Suite 150
Superior, CO 80027
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PLAN CERTIFICATION 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION 2
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 3
3.1 Description of Construction 3
3.2 Sequence of Activities 3
3.3 Areas .. 4
3.4 Soils 4
3.5 Vegetation 4
3.6 Potential Pollutant Sources 5
3.7 Non-Stormwater Discharges 5
3.8 Receiving Waters 6
4.0 SITE MAP 7
5.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROLS 8
5.1 SWMP Administrator 8
5.2 Potential Pollutant Sources 8
5.2.1 Construction Equipment Maintenance 8
5.2.2 Construction Materials 8
5.2.3 Construction Trash 9
5.2.4 Sediment Loading 9
5.2.5 Portable Sanitary Facilities. 9
5.3 Best Management Practices for Stormwater Control 9
5.3.1 Berms 10
5.3.2 Silt Fences 10
5.3.3 Straw Check Dam 10
5.3.4 Temporary Vegetation 10
5.3.5 Permanent Vegetation and Mulching 10
5.4 Notifications 10
6.0 FINAL STABILIZATION AND LONG-TERM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 12
7.0 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE 13
7.1 Inspections 13
7.2 BMP Maintenance 13
7.3 Record Keeping 14
TETRA TECH
February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
8.0 REFERENCES 15
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Figures
Appendix B Design Drawings
Appendix C Stormwater Inspection Report Form
Nil TETRA TECH
February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
LIST OF ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Acronyms/Abbreviations? Definition
amsl
BMP
CDPHE
CDPS
CNHP
CPX
NFS
SWMP
TPR
WQCD
above mean sea level
Best Management Practice
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Colorado Discharge Permit System
Colorado Natural Heritage Program
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
National Forest System
Stormwater Management Plan
Tepee Park Ranch
Water Quality Control Division
[ ] TETRA TECH
February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
1.0 PLAN CERTIFICATION
I 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 gather and evaluate
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 best 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 fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name and Title
Date
El
TETRA TECH
Signature
February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This Construction Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) was developed on behalf of CPX Piceance Holdings,
LLC (CPX) to guide the use and placement of stormwater erosion control best management practices (BMPs) for
construction activities to support the Tepee Park Ranch (TPR) Project ("project"). The project consists of
construction of facilities for an existing natural gas operation near Rifle, Colorado, which is described in Section
3.0.
The SWMP has been developed in accordance with requirements of the Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment (CDPHE), Water Quality Control Division (WQCD). The SWMP complies with provisions in the
Colorado Construction Stormwater General Permit COR -030000, issued May 31, 2007, which has been
administratively extended and continues in force.
Coverage under the General Permit is required for construction activities that disturb 1 or more acres of land, or
activities that disturb less than 1 acre of land but which are part of a common plan of development that ultimately
disturbs 1 or more acres. The project will exceed 1 acre of disturbance for road and pipeline construction.
The construction stormwater permit requires that a SWMP be prepared in compliance with Parts B and C of the
permit. This SWMP conforms to permit requirements and WQCD SWMP guidance to provide the following
information:
Section 3.0: Site Description
Section 4.0 Site Map
Section 5.0: Stormwater Management Controls
Section 6.0 Final Stabilization and Long-term Stormwater Management
Section 7.0 Inspection and Maintenance
Section 8.0 References
TETRA TECH
2 February 2018
Construction Siormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The project area is located between approximately 7,900 and 9,300 feet above sea level along the east -facing
side of Battlement Mesa, approximately 3 miles northeast of North Mamm Peak and 9 miles south of Rifle.
The project is located on two non-contiguous, privately -owned parcels of land in Township 7 South, Range 94
West, Sections 13 (Lot 2) and 25 (TPR). National Forest System (NFS) land under the jurisdiction of the White
River National Forest (Forest Service or USFS), Rifle Ranger District, in Township 7 South, Range 94 West,
Sections 24 connects these private parcels (Figure 1). Proposed facilities in each of the areas consist of the
following:
• Lot 2: Underground pipelines to transport natural gas, natural gas condensate, and produced and fresh
water; an access road; surface facility pad; and surface water controls;
• TPR: Underground pipelines, only, as described above.
• Forest Service: Underground pipelines, as described above; realignment of portions of National Forest
Service Road 824 ("NFSR 824"), referred to as the Beaver Creek bypass; and installation of surface
water controls.
3.1 DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION
Underground pipelines will be collocated in a shared trench, approximately 8 feet wide. A 12 -inch carbon steel
pipeline will be used for natural gas; a 2 -inch carbon steel pipeline will be used for natural gas condensate; and a
4 -inch FlexPipe high density polyethylene pipeline will be used to alternately transport produced water from the
natural gas wells or fresh water for well development. The pipeline corridor will be approximately 1,000 feet long
on Lot 2; 6,500 feet long on TPR, and 8,200 feet long on NFS land.
The new access road ("Beaver Creek bypass") will be approximately 1,200 feet long on Lot 2 and 4,000 feet long
on NFS land. Road construction south of the Beaver Creek bypass will be limited to NFS land and will consist
only of turnouts for two-way vehicle passing, erosion controls, and improvements to the Beaver Creek Trailhead
at the south end of NFSR 824. The road construction corridor will be a maximum approximately 75 feet wide, only
where necessary to support both pipeline and road construction.
A surface facility pad to support TPR operations with an unpaved truck turnaround will be located on Lot 2.
Imported aggregates to complete construction for the roads and pad will include riprap, road base, and pipe
bedding sand.
3.2 SEQUENCE OF ACTIVITIES
The project is estimated to require approximately 3-4 months to construct. Construction sequencing will begin with
clearing, topsoil salvage, cut (benching), fill, and grading for the pipelines. Then, pipeline installation, pressure
testing, and backfilling of the pipeline trench would occur, followed by road construction and installation of culverts
and a road -side borrow ditch. Soil removed during construction will be segregated to preserve topsoil for
revegetation. In areas where pipelines will be installed against the cut slope, dirt spoils will be brought down to the
road surface and then backfilled into the pipeline trench. Disturbed areas outside of the roadway will be
revegetated. Public road use will continue along FS 824 during construction of the Beaver Creek bypass, but road
closures will occur during pipeline and road construction along upper NFSR 824.
Ll TETRA TECH
3 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
3.3 AREAS
The estimated area of temporary disturbance during project construction is an estimated 28.5 acres, including
road construction, pipeline trenching, Lot 2 surface facility pad development, and Beaver Creek Trailhead
improvements. The overall project area, including construction staging on previously -disturbed, developed land on
CPX property will be 31 acres.
3.4 SOILS
The Forest Service previously mapped soils in the vicinity of the project (USFS 1993). Major soil map units for the
area are Tampico-Echemoor (Map Unit 449C), Doughspon (Map Unit 345B), and Leadville (till) (Map Unit 220B).
Leadville (till) is present on the southern portion of NFSR 824. Soil textures for major soil map units include:
• Tampico soils: loam to clay loam texture
• Echemoor soils: silt loam to clay loam texture
• Doughspon soils: loam to clay texture
With the exception of some areas of poorly -drained soils, soils generally drain well. The area has low overall
potential for mass movement for landslide and debris flows. Six hand -excavated pits dug to a depth of 10 to 18
inches during a July 2014 field survey conducted by Tetra Tech, Inc., (Tetra Tech)(Tetra Tech 2014) identified the
following:
• Aspen and subalpine fir forest soil profiles contained fine to fine loamy A and B soil horizons, with A
horizon soil coloring indicating moderate to high organic matter content. The predominant texture was
clay loam and 0 to 5 percent coarse rock fragments, with an estimated erodibility value of 0.27.
• Scrub oak shrubland soil profiles were similar to aspen and subalpine fir forest soil profiles, with exception
of clay accumulation in the B horizon, and lower observed organic matter content resulting in an
approximated higher erodibility value.
A subsequent geotechnical investigation in 2016 showed layered subsoil to depths of approximately 30 feet,
which is consistent with fine to medium grained sand and a mixture of course and fined -grained materials Tetra
Tech 2016). Subsurface investigation results indicate soils similar to published Forest Service mapping and
previous investigations.
3.5 VEGETATION
The major project area vegetation type is the North-Central Highlands and Rocky Mountain Ecological Subregion
of the Southern Rocky Mountain Steppe -Open Woodland -Coniferous Forest -Alpine Meadow Ecological Province
(USFS 2007). The area is characterized by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) ecological system
descriptions of Rocky Mountain Aspen Forests and Woodlands interspersed with small areas of the following:
• Rocky Mountain Subalpine Dry-Mesic Spruce -Fir Forests and Woodlands
• Rocky Mountain Mesic Spruce -Fir Forests and Woodlands
• Rocky Mountain Gambel Oak -Mixed Montane Shrublands (CNHP 2014)
The field survey conducted in 2014 (Tetra Tech 2014) confirmed these vegetation and community types.
I I TETRA TECH
4 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
3.6 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT SOURCES
Potential pollutant sources associated with construction activity include:
• Construction equipment
• Construction materials
• Construction debris
• Sediment from earthwork
Construction equipment fueling and maintenance predominantly will occur off site. Incidental chemical and fuel
use will occur on site to support construction equipment, and will be properly containerized. Stormwater BMPs are
described in Section 5.0.
3.7 NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES
Exempt non-stormwater discharges are specified in Section D.3 of the General Permit and include:
• Discharges from emergency firefighting activities
• Discharges from uncontaminated springs
• Discharges from landscape irrigation return flow
• Discharges from concrete washout water with source and BMPs identified in the SWMP and whose
discharges to not leave the site as surface runoff to surface waters
• Discharges from construction dewatering water from groundwater or groundwater combined with
unpolluted stormwater with source and BMPs identified in the SWMP and whose discharges to not leave
the site as surface runoff to surface waters
• Discharges from construction dewatering water from a source identified in the SWMP with source and
BMPs identified in the SWMP and whose discharges to not leave the site as surface runoff to surface
waters
The facility is evaluated for non-stormwater discharges by observing stormwater discharge points during
inspections. Non-stormwater discharges specifically associated with project work are the following:
• Water used for dust control
• Vehicle wash water (associated with weed management, following work in weed infested areas,
equipment will be washed to prevent spread of weeds)
• Surface water flows from unnamed creeks crossing the construction area
Water from dust control or vehicle washing will be contained and will not be allowed to flow to tributaries to
Beaver Creek. The quantity of water used for dust control or vehicle washing will be managed to avoid or reduce
runoff potential. No construction dewatering or concrete washout activities are anticipated during project work.
Surface water flows from unnamed tributaries crossing the construction area will be temporarily managed during
culvert installation. Temporary management will vary based on the nature of flow and topography surrounding
each individual unnamed creek. Management techniques may include the following:
• No flow — if no flow is present in the tributary during construction, a depression will be excavated
upstream of the culvert construction area to allow any flows from storm events to be contained and
managed through infiltration or pumping.
f ib I TETRA TECH
5 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
• Flow — if flow is present in the tributary during construction, the flow will be directed to collection basin for
temporary pumping or gravity flow around active construction zones for discharge into the original
drainage channel below the construction area.
3.8 RECEIVING WATERS
Receiving waters include unnamed tributaries to Beaver Creek. The unnamed tributaries flow into Beaver Creek,
approximately 250 to 1,300 feet to the east of the project area.
['It' TETRA TECH
6 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
4.0 SITE MAP
The project location is shown on Figure 1 in Appendix A. Project design drawings are shown in Appendix B. The
design drawings identify surface water; construction area boundaries; and areas of ground surface disturbance,
cut and fill work, equipment and pipeline material storage, and soil storage. The design drawings also show
locations for structural and non-structural BMP placement, as well as typical design details for erosion and
sediment control devices.
TETRA TECH
7 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
5.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROLS
5.1 SWMP ADMINISTRATOR
The following individual has been designated as the SMWP Administrator accountable for compliance with this
plan. This person reports directly to CPX management:
Individual: Bryan Clark
Entity: Bryan Clark Excavating
Phone: (970) 987-2220
5.2 POTENTIAL POLLUTANT SOURCES
Stormwater management controls for the potential pollutant sources are discussed below.
5.2.1 Construction Equipment Maintenance
Construction equipment presents a potential pollutant source during maintenance and fueling, as well as during
general use (leaks, hose breaks etc.). To avoid or minimize the potential for stormwater pollutants from
construction equipment, major maintenance and repair will occur off site. Minor repair and fueling will occur on
site in designated areas to prevent fuels or other pollutants from entering stormwater. Fuel will be transported to
the site for equipment refueling in day tanks on an as -needed basis and will not be stored on-site. In addition, spill
kits and absorbent materials will be provided on-site for control of hydrocarbons or other contaminants if a spill
occured. Equipment will be inspected and maintained to mitigate the potential for equipment malfunction resulting
in spills or leaks.
5.2.2 Construction Materials
Construction materials will include aggregates and pipeline materials as follows:
• Aggregates
o Imported
• Road base
• Riprap
• Pipe bedding sand
o Native
• Excavated fill
• Topsoil
• Pipeline and Culvert Materials
o Culverts
o Carbon steel pipe
o FlexPipe
o Welding equipment
o Girth weld coating (epoxy based)
[J TETRA TECH
8 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Imported and native aggregates used in construction will be managed to avoid or minimize sediment transport by
locating stockpiles away from surface water and covering, or otherwise stabilizing, the stockpiles.
Pipeline and culvert materials will be stockpiled in staging areas on-site prior to installation. Materials are not
anticipated to present any sources of stormwater pollutants. Pipeline joining materials (welding equipment and
girth weld coatings) will be managed to properly contain materials throughout the construction duration, including
proper storage prior to and during use, and proper disposal of excess materials. Pipeline pressure testing is
proposed to be completed using compressed air (not water). As a result, water management associated with
hydrotesting the pipeline is not anticipated for this project.
5.2.3 Construction Trash
Litter and construction debris will be removed as soon as is practicable following construction activities in a
specific work area. This will include welding rod stubs, pipe or culvert scrap, and geotextile scrap. Domestic
wastes will be collected and disposed at an off-site landfill.
5.2.4 Sediment Loading
Sediment may result from runoff from unstabilized areas and stockpiles of native or imported materials.
Engineering and construction practices will be employed to reduce sediment loading. These include, at a
minimum, the following practices:
• Limit vegetation clearing to the minimum needed for construction activities.
• Limit soil disturbance to the minimum needed for construction activities.
• Select and install BMPs according to manufacturer or designer specifications, including but not limited to
berms, silt fences, straw check dams, and revegetation.
• Locate BMPs to address probable sources of sediment, downgradient of disturbed areas, material
stockpiles, and in areas where stormwater collects.
• Maintain natural vegetative buffers around surface water.
• Conduct revegetation in the soonest possible revegetation season.
• Imported aggregate materials will be brought to the site as needed to reduce stockpile size and duration
on-site.
5.2.5 Portable Sanitary Facilities
Portable sanitary facilities will be provided on site. These facilities will be located in an area away from
construction equipment traffic areas to prevent potential spills resulting from impact.
5.3 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR STORMWATER CONTROL
BMPs for stormwater control include the construction of structural and non-structural BMPs. Structural BMPs are
erosion and sediment controls, equipment, or materials that will be installed to prevent movement of sediment -
laden stormwater runoff from the project site. Non-structural BMPs are revegetation and mulching.
The structural controls provide temporary measures to both reduce the velocity of stormwater flows and to
intercept suspended sediments in the stormwater flow, while allowing stormwater runoff to continue downgradient.
The controls are designed to retain sediment within the affected area and to avoid, to the greatest extent possible,
sediments from entering surface water. Structural controls will be selected, installed, and maintained in
accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and standard engineering practices. The specific erosion and
sediment controls planned for use in the project area are described below.
TETRA TECH
9 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, I I C
5.3.1 Berms
Berms will be constructed in areas along the perimeters of the construction area to prevent stormwater from
entering the disturbed area, and also to prevent stormwater from the disturbed area from leaving the site. Berms
will be inspected, at a minimum, on a weekly basis. Water collected within the bermed areas will be allowed to
infiltrate into the ground.
5.3.2 Silt Fences
Silt fences will be used on the downgradient slopes of construction pads, access roads, and material storage
areas to capture sediment from stormwater. The silt fences provide a temporary barrier which reduces runoff
velocities and allows sediment to collect behind the silt fence. Silt fences consist of filter fabric stretched between
support posts in increments less than 6 feet apart. Posts will be anchored in 4 -inch by 4 -inch trenches. Silt fence
will be attached on the up-slope side of the posts, and the bottom will be buried in the anchor trenches. The
trenches will be backfilled with excavated soil and compacted. Silt fences will be inspected periodically to ensure
they remain anchored correctly. They will be cleared of accumulated sediments, as necessary.
5.3.3 Straw Check Dam
Straw check dams will be installed in existing unnamed channels to filter collected runoff. Straw check dams will
be comprised of straw bales staked a minimum of 6 inches below the base of the straw bale and entrenched a
minimum of 4 inches into the ground. Sand and gravel filter outlets will be installed along lower portions of the
project area, as needed, together with straw bales.
5.3.4 Temporary Vegetation
Temporary vegetation will be conducted on aggregate stockpiles that will be present for over 90 days. Based on
construction sequencing, this may include windrow stockpiles of salvaged topsoil and windrow stockpiles of native
fill excavated for trenching purposes. Temporary vegetation will be conducted according to the revegetation plan.
5.3.5 Permanent Vegetation and Mulching
Permanent vegetation will be established on all disturbed areas, with the exception of permanent disturbances for
the access road and trailhead, and the surface facility pad. Permanent vegetation and mulching will be conducted
according to procedures described in the Reclamation and Revegetation Plan for the project. Specifically,
hydroseeding is typically conducted on slopes steeper than 3(H):1(V). The majority of the project area will require
revegetation on steeper slopes. Hydroseeding, therefore, is forecast to be used to maximize revegetation
success.
Hydroseed application will include mulch and tackifiers. Mulch will be hydraulically applied and will consist of a
certified weed -free wood -fiber mulch, with an application rate of approximately 2.0 tons per acre, or as
recommended by the supplier. Tackifiers will adhere the seed and mulch mixture to the ground to reduce
redistribution of the seed after application.
Hydroseeding will avoid undisturbed shrubs and trees. Seed application will not be conducted immediately
following rain or snowfall, during excessively windy periods, or when the ground is too dry.
5.4 NOTIFICATIONS
Notification will be made of any spill or discharge of hazardous substances or oil which may cause pollution of
WUS, or any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. For noncompliance involving
environmental hazards and chemical spills and releases, within 24 hours of discovery the noncompliance must be
reported to the CDPHE 24-hour spill reporting hotline (888-518-5608). Within 5 calendar days of discovery of the
fit) TETRA TECH
10 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
spill, a written report must be submitted to CDPHE containing a description of the noncompliance and its cause;
the period of noncompliance; dates and times of the noncompliance; the anticipated time noncompliance is
expected to continue; and steps taken to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance.
(ibl TECH
11 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
6.0 FINAL STABILIZATION AND LONG-TERM STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT
Final stabilization will be conducted on disturbed surfaces, as described in Section 5.3.5. Areas that will remain
permanently disturbed (access road and trailhead, surface facility pad) will be equipped with long-term stormwater
management controls. Long-term stormwater management controls planned for permanently -disturbed areas
include the following:
1. Natural vegetation will remain between disturbed areas and Beaver Creek to provide a vegetative buffer
between developed areas and the creek.
2. A roadside ditch will be installed along the uphill side of the new access road. This roadside ditch will
direct stormwater to natural surface water channels and to culverts that convey stormwater under the
road.
3. The road surface will be graded to direct stormwater runoff from the road surface into the uphill roadside
ditch.
4. The road will have permanent culverts installed under the road at stream crossings.
5. The surface facility pad grading will direct stormwater runoff to the northeast to be collected in the existing
CR 317 roadside ditch and a proposed culvert under CR 317.
Areas of temporary disturbance that will be reclaimed are the following:
1. Pipeline corridor, with the exception of allowing large -diameter trees to establish roots
2. Road construction corridor outside of the permanent rights-of-way
3. Road embankments
4. Cut slopes
Reclamation includes regrading, replacing topsoil, and revegetation. Regrading will involve backfilling pipeline
corridors to approximate original grade where possible, and to minimize slope angles where the final grade is
different than the original grade. Regrading will be conducted to stabilize slopes and blend the disturbed area into
the surrounding landscape. Following regrading, salvaged topsoil will be redistributed over excavated areas.
Topsoil salvaged from the new road footprint will be redistributed over cut and fill slopes. Topsoil salvaged from
the surface facility pad will be redistributed over the fill slope north of the pad.
Revegetation using hydroseeding, mulch, and a tackifier is described in Section 5.3.5. Seedbed preparation for
this work will be conducted in areas compacted through the extensive passage of construction equipment during
the construction phase. Seedbed preparation will typically include disking to loosen highly -compacted soils prior
to seeding. All seed and mulch used on-site will be certified weed -free. Revegetation will be conducted as
earthwork in an area is completed and will be timed to coincide with spring or fall to optimize germination and
growing seasons for the vegetation species in the seed mix.
After construction is complete, excess materials, including soil and aggregates, will be removed from the site.
TETRA TECH
[lb -1
12 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
7.0 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE
7.1 INSPECTIONS
Inspection and maintenance procedures will be implemented to verify that adequate sediment and erosion
controls are in place. BMPs will be inspected every 14 days at a minimum, and within 24 hours after the end of a
precipitation or snowmelt event causing surface erosion. Post -storm inspections may also fulfill the 14 -day routine
inspection requirement. If the site is temporarily idle, post -storm inspections may be conducted just prior to
resuming construction activities, or within 72 hours, whichever comes first. If a post -storm inspection is delayed
due to temporary idle status of site, a note must be made in the record that the inspection was delayed.
In the case where the site or portions of the site are stable except for final vegetation cover (that is, all
construction activities are complete and all final stabilization activities are complete, with the exception of seed
application due to seasonal conditions), a reduced inspection schedule can be followed. In this case, thorough
inspections of the stormwater management system must be made at least once per month (additional post -storm
inspections are not required).
If construction extends over the winter, routine and post -storm inspections are not required, but only if
construction is halted, snow cover exists over the entire site for an extended period of time, and melting
conditions which could pose a risk of surface erosion do not exist. If inspections are halted due to winter
conditions, the inspection record must note the dates when snow cover occurred, the date when construction
activity ceased, and the date melting conditions began. The commencement of melting triggers the resumption of
routine and post -storm inspections.
Inspections will be conducted by field personnel trained in the standards of performance and maintenance
requirements for individual BMPs. Inspections will be documented using the inspection report form in Appendix C,
or similar. Inspectors will note specific indicators of storm water runoff, such as runnels and sedimentation. The
inspector will note areas where sediment transport may be occurring and BMPs that need maintenance or
replacement. BMP maintenance or replacement normally will be initiated within 24 hours of the inspection
findings. Records of inspections will be maintained for 3 years following the completion of the project.
Inspections will monitor the following project locations and components:
1. Construction site perimeter
2. Disturbed areas
3. Material storage areas, including pipe material, culvert material, and any other storage areas that may
exist onsite
4. Stockpiles, including topsoil, road base, and pipe bedding materials
5. Discharge locations to unnamed tributaries to Beaver Creek, and the eastern perimeter of the surface
facility pad
6. Vehicle access points to construction areas
7. Erosion and sediment control BMPs
7.2 BMP MAINTENANCE
BMPs will be proactively maintained in effective operating condition, as follows:
• Berms will be inspected for integrity and repaired as appropriate.
ri TETRA TECH
13 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
• Silt fences and straw check dams will be inspected for tears and gouges, or disintegration, and will be
repaired or replaced, as needed.
• BMPs which have been disabled, run over, removed, or otherwise rendered ineffective will be replaced or
corrected upon discovery.
• Sediment build up will be removed from sediment barriers when it has reached one-half of the height of
the barrier. Sediment will be placed in a stabilized location to prevent re-entry into the same site or
another entrapment area.
• Seeding will be inspected for bare spots, washouts, and healthy growth until the planted area has
achieved a minimum of 70 percent ground cover or preexisting conditions.
7.3 RECORD KEEPING
Copies of this SMWP, inspection records, and documentation of corrective actions taken will be maintained for 3
years after the expiration/inactivation of permit coverage.
A copy of this SMWP will be maintained at the construction site throughout the active construction portion of the
project, and will be maintained at the CPX office following completion of all earthwork activity but prior to complete
establishment of vegetation required for final stabilization.
[m] TETRA TECH
14 February 2018
Construction Stormwater Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
8.0 REFERENCES
CNHP 2014. Ecological Systems of Colorado.
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/ag_Conservation/CBON/1251618874438. Colorado Natural Heritage
Program. Accessed July 24, 2014.
Tetra Tech 2014. Tepee Park Ranch Project Field Soil Survey. Tetra Tech, Inc. July 2014.
Tetra Tech 2016. Geotechnical Investigation and Analysis Report, Tepee Park Ranch. Tetra Tech, Inc. February
2017.
USFS 1993. Holy Cross Soil Survey -Parts of Garfield, Grand, Mesa, Pitkin, and Summit Counties. U.S. Forest
Service. 1993.
USFS 2007. Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections of the Conterminous United States. U.S. Forest
Service. 2007.
WQCD 2012. Colorado Discharge Permit System General Permit Stormwater Discharges Associated with
Construction Activity COR -030000. Water Quality Control Division Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment, July 1, 2012.
tit] TETRA TECH
15 February 2018
Weed Management Plan
Tepee Park Ranch Project
Rifle, Colorado
PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
34 S. Wynden Dr., Suite 240
Houston, TX 77056
February 2018
Tetra Tech, Inc.
1100 South McCaslin Blvd., Suite 150
Superior, CO 80027
Weed Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Adaptive Management Approach 1
1.2 Noxious Weed Regulation ... 1
2.0 WEED MANAGEMENT 2
2.1 Pre -Construction Site Survey 2
2.2 Construction 2
2.3 Post -Construction Revegetation 3
3.0 REFERENCES 4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Tepee Park Ranch Project Noxious Weed Map — North
Figure 2 Tepee Park Ranch Project Noxious Weed Map — South
APPENDICES
Appendix A Garfield County Designated Noxious Weeds
Appendix B Colorado Department of Agriculture Noxious Weed Fact Sheets
Lib
TETRA TECH
February 2018
Weed Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Weed Management Plan (Plan) was developed on behalf of CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC (CPX) to address
the potential for spread of noxious and invasive weeds from construction activities to support the CPX Tepee Park
Ranch Project in Garfield County, Colorado. CPX construction activities will include construction of a road, pipelines,
pad facilities, and surface water controls for an existing natural gas operation. The Plan is a Garfield County
requirement for issuance of a county grading permit for construction activity.
1.1 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT APPROACH
This Plan incorporates a proactive approach to weed management to eliminate or minimize the potential for weed
spread and invasion. A goal of the Plan is to achieve desired plant species communities post -construction.
The Plan is organized according to the following management phases: pre -construction site survey; construction;
and post -construction management. Preventive measures during construction will be implemented to reduce the
potential for introducing new weed species and to keep existing weeds from spreading. Post -construction
revegetation, control measures, and monitoring will help to ensure that desired plant communities are achieved.
The Plan incorporates the principal of adaptive management, which refers to adjusting techniques in response to
field conditions. The Plan is based on the following objectives:
• Establish land management goals and weed management objectives for the disturbed area
• Identify existing weed species through an inventory of the disturbed area
• Consider available control measures relative to their impacts for construction and post -construction (e.g.,
revegetation) phases
• Plan and implement control measures
• Monitor and evaluate
1.2 NOXIOUS WEED REGULATION
State and local regulations and management plans addressing noxious weeds include the Colorado Noxious Weed
Act (Act) (2003); the Permanent Rules Pertaining to the Administration and Enforcement of the Colorado Weed
Management Act; and the Garfield County Weed Management Plan. The Garfield County Division of Vegetation
Management maintains a list of 41 weed species on the noxious weed list, which is provided in Appendix A. Weed
species that occur within the project area that are not listed in the Garfield County Weed Management Plan are still
be subject to the Act and rules. Weed species are categorized as List A, B, or C, as follows:
• List A: species designated by the Commissioner of the Colorado Department of Agriculture (Commissioner)
for eradication. Eradication is the removal or destruction of growing or emerged plants of a population.
Eradication would continue for the duration of a particular species.
• List B: species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with other agencies, develops and implements
state noxious weed management plans designed to stop the continued spread of these species.
• List C: species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with other agencies, develops and implements
state noxious weed management plans designed to provide education, research, and resources for
biological controls to jurisdictions that choose to manage List C species.
TETRA TECH
February 2018
Weed Management Plan
CPX F'iceance Holdings, LLC
2.0 WEED MANAGEMENT
Successful weed management is accomplished through management activities prior to, during, and after
construction. The sections below discuss the findings of the pre -construction site survey conducted for CPX
operations, approaches to manage weeds during construction, and approaches to manage and monitor weeds
post -construction during revegetation of disturbed areas.
2.1 PRE -CONSTRUCTION SITE SURVEY
A noxious weed survey was conducted on August 26, 2017 by a Tetra Tech, Inc., biologist on CPX land proposed
for disturbance by road and pipeline construction. The survey identified weed species occurrence and degree for
listed noxious weed species, in accordance with Garfield County guidance. The findings of the noxious weed site
survey are listed in Table 1 and shown on Figures 1 and 2.
Table 1. Noxious Weed Site Survey Findings
Approximate
Weed Species Observed / List Designation Location Area Affected
Plumeless Thistle, Carduus acanthoides
List B
Bull Thistle, Cirsium vulgare
List B
Houndstongue, Cynoglossum officinale
List B
Scentless Chamomile, Tripleurospernum
perforatum
List B
Canada Thistle, Cirsium arvense
List B
Curlydock, Rumex crispus
Garfield County listed weed
Adjacent to CR 317
Adjacent to CR 317
Adjacent to CR 317
Tepee Park Ranch Road
Adjacent to CR 317
Tepee Park Ranch Road
Tepee Park Ranch Road
Tepee Park Ranch Road
2%
<2%
<2%
<2 — 2%
2 - 75%
<2 — 2%
The site survey identified seven discrete areas where weeds are present. All seven were areas where vegetation
had been disturbed adjacent to roadways or drainage ditches. No weeds were observed on undisturbed land outside
of areas adjacent to roads and ditches. The density of weeds in the affected areas was estimated based on the
number of plants observed relative to the area vegetation. The predominant noxious weed species was Canada
thistle.
2.2 CONSTRUCTION
During construction, the following measures will be taken to prevent or minimize the spread of noxious weeds:
1. Construction equipment will be washed and treated to remove seeds, plants, and plant fragments from the
equipment before the equipment is used at the project site. Washed construction equipment, including the
undercarriage, will be inspected to ensure that the washing removed the dirt, debris, and seeds from the
construction equipment.
ffli1 TETRA TECH
2 February 2018
Weed Management Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
2. Water used for dust suppression will be obtained from an off-site, municipal source.
3. Imported products, such as road base, erosion control devices (straw wattles, straw bales), seed, and mulch
will be certified weed -free.
4. Seed used for temporary erosion control will be certified weed -free.
5. Should construction scheduling require stockpiles to be present for greater than 90 days, the stockpiles will
be covered or will be temporarily revegetated using an approved seed mixture.
6. Interim weed treatments will be used if noxious weeds are observed in disturbed areas prior to post -
construction revegetation.
7. Disturbed areas will be minimized to the areas necessary for construction, Iaydown, trenching, and
equipment access. Disturbing areas already infested will be avoided or minimized.
8. Construction workers will be informed of known weed populations and mitigation measures.
2.3 POST -CONSTRUCTION REVEGETATION
Post -construction, the following measures will be taken to prevent or minimize the spread of noxious weeds:
1. Topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled to provide the top layer of backfill for use as growth medium prior
to revegetation.
2. Revegetation will be conducted as soon as practicable following disturbance using protocols established in
the revegetation plan for the project.
3. Seedbed preparation to encourage vegetation growth, including surface roughening, will be conducted prior
to seeding.
4. Seeding will be conducted during spring and fall seeding seasons to improve opportunity for germination
and more effective revegetation.
5. Revegetation will be conducted using an approved seed mix, certified weed -free, and will incorporate native
plant species. Site topsoil contains organic material such that added fertilizer is not anticipated to be
necessary to encourage successful reintroduction of a self-sustaining plant community.
6. Revegetated areas will be monitored and re -seeding will be conducted, as needed, until the revegetated
areas has achieved 70% of pre -disturbance vegetation levels.
7. Weed control will be conducted according to Colorado Department of Agriculture recommendations by
weed species. Weed fact sheets for the noxious weed species observed during the site survey are provided
in Appendix B. Garfield County Vegetation Management will be contacted for preferred control techniques
prior to any treatment for Curlydock.
8. CPX will maintain documentation for the locations and methods of treatments applied.
TETRA TECH
3 February 2018
Weed Management Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
3.0 REFERENCES
Colorado Code of Regulations 2003. Rules Pertaining To The Administration And Enforcement Of The Colorado
Noxious Weed Act. Office of the Secretary of State.
Garfield County 2002. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Resolution #2002-94. Prepared by
Garfield County Vegetation Management and the Garfield County Weed Advisory Board.
Garfield County 2016. Garfield County Noxious Weed List. Adopted by Board of County Commissioners. February
16, 2016.
TETRA TECH
4 February 2018
Figures
Leoend
--- Proposed Pipeline
Alternative Pipeline
USFS end County Roads
Beaver Creek Trail
- Tepee Park Ranch Pipeline Pad Saes
• • • k Proposed Pipeline and Road I Central Processing Facilely
- SIM.* e1ne11+aw
•
Ephemeral Stream I • • Watershed Boundary
TETRA TECH
Sep as 2017
•
Hasn9
— Proposed Pipeline ® LISPS and County Roads
Alternative Pipeline Beaver Creek Trail
- Tepee Perk Ranch Pipeline I Ped Sites
--•- Proposed Pipeline and Road Cenlrel Processing Feclliy g—
Skein
- Ephemeral Skean
I I
Section Linea
1• Welershed Boundary 111
CPXPICEANCE NCLLNNOS, LLC
TETRA TECH
Derv:
Sep 00.2011
Fine No
Appendix A
Garfield County Designated Noxious Weeds
Garfield County Designated Noxious Weeds
Common Name
Scientific Name
State of
Colorado
Designations
Identified
in CPX
Protect
Area
Absinth wormwood
Artemsia absinthium
List B
Black henbane
Hyoscyamus niger
List B
Bouncing bet
Saponaria officinalis
List B
Bull thistle
Cirsium vulgare
List B
Canada Thistle
Cirsium arvense
List B
X
Chicory
Cichorium intybus
List C
Chinese clematis
Clematis orientalis
List B
Common Burdock
Arctium minus
List C
Common tansy
Tanacetum vulgare
List B
Common teasel
Dipascus fullonum
List B
Corn chamomile
Anthemis arvensis
List B
Curly dock
Rumex crispus
Not Listed
Cutleaf teasel
Dipsacus lacinatus
List B
Cypress spurge
Euphorbia cyparissias
List B
Dalmatian toadflax
Toadflax Linaria dalmatica
List B
Dame's rocket
Hesperis matronalis
List B
Diffuse Knapweed
Centaurea diffusa
List B
Hoary Cress
Cardaria draba
List B
Houndstongue
Cynoglossum officinale
List B
X
Jointed Goatgrass
Aegilops cylindrica
List B
Leafy Spurge
Euphorbia esula
List B
Mayweed chamomile
Anthemis cotula
List B
Meadow knapweed
Centaurea pratensis
List A
Mediterranean sage
Salvia aethopsis
List A
Musk Thistle
Carduus nutans
List B
Myrtle spurge
Euphorbia myrsinites
List A
Oxeye Daisy
Chrysanthemum leucantheum
List B
Perennial pepperweed
Lepidium latifolium
List B
Plumeless Thistle
Carduus acanthoides
List B
Poison hemlock
Conium maculatum
List C
Garfield County Designated Noxious Weeds
Common Name
Scientific Name
State of
Colorado
Designations
identified
in CPX
Project
Area
Purple Loosestrife
Lythrum salicaria
List A
Russian Knapweed
Acroptilon repens
List B
Russian Olive
Elaeagnus angustifolia
List B
Salt Cedar
Tamarix parviflora,
List B
Salt Cedar
Tamarix ramosissima
List B
Scentless chamomile
Tripleurospernum perforatum
List B
Scotch Thistle
Onopordum acanthium
List B
Spotted Knapweed
Centaurea maculosa
List B
Sulfur cinquefoil
Potentilla recta
List B
Yellow Starthistle
Centaurea solstitalis
List A
Yellow Toadflax
Linaria vulgaris
List B
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
Tepee Park Ranch Project
Rifle, Colorado
PREPARED FOR PREPARED BY
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
34 S. Wynden Dr., Suite 240
Houston, TX 77056
February 2018
Tetra Tech, Inc.
1100 South McCaslin Blvd., Suite 150
Superior, CO 80027
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SOIL HANDLING 2
2.1 Salvaging On-site Topsoil 2
2.2 Schedule for Stockpile Elimination 2
2.3 Erosion Control 3
2.4 Dust Suppression 4
2.5 Weed Management 4
3.0 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION 5
3.1 Topsoil Replacement 5
3.2 Plant Material List 5
3.3 Planting Method 6
3.4 Planting Schedule 6
4.0 RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE 7
5.0 REFERENCES 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Schedule for Stockpile Elimination 2
Table 2. Recommended Seed Mix 5
APPENDICES
Appendix A Reclamation Cost Estimate
h) TETRA TECH
February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Revegetation and Reclamation Plan (Plan) was developed on behalf of CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC (CPX)
to address Garfield County, Colorado, grading permit requirements for the CPX Tepee Park Ranch (TPR) Project
("project"). The project consists of construction of a road, pipelines, pad facilities, and surface water controls to
support an existing natural gas operation. The project is located on two non-contiguous, privately -owned parcels of
land in Township 7 South, Range 94 West, Sections 13 (Lot 2) and 25 (TPR). The project area is shown on the
design drawings submitted together with this Plan as part of the grading permit application for the project.
TETRA TECH
February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
2.0 SOIL HANDLING
2.1 SALVAGING ON-SITE TOPSOIL
Soil and geotechnical investigations were conducted for the project in 2016 and 2017. The resulting Geotechnical
Investigation and Analysis Report (Tetra Tech, August 2017) is being submitted to Garfield County with the grading
permit application for the project.
Soil surveys conducted for the project included collection of shallow soil samples, which indicated typical topsoil
depths from 6 to 18 inches. Topsoil will be salvaged during clearing and grubbing for the project. Specifically, areas
disturbed for trench excavation, road construction, or pad development will be stripped of topsoil 6 to 12 inches
deep, depending on the depth of topsoil observed in the area, and as directed by the construction manager, who is
experienced with topsoil management from previous work supporting TPR operations.
Topsoil will be windrowed adjacent to the trench, road, and pad footprints to make it more readily accessible for site
reclamation. Topsoil stockpiles will be segregated from subsoil stockpiles. Stockpile locations will be maintained at
a distance from site access areas, operation of construction equipment, and natural drainages. Stockpiles will
constructed with low angle side slopes and heights that reduce the potential for erosion of materials that could
create sediment runoff and compaction that could result in anaerobic conditions.
Pipeline and road construction will be conducted linearly. Pipeline construction will consist of excavation for the
entire alignment before initiating backfilling because of the nature of pipelines to be installed and to allow for welding,
inspections, and x-rays to be conducted in single mobilizations. Specifically, high-density polyethylene FlexPipe is
delivered on 2,000 -foot reels, with an approximately 3 -day timeframe to lay the entire length of pipe in a single
mobilization. Likewise, contractors specializing in pipeline integrity and testing will be mobilized in phases to address
the entire length of carbon steel pipeline before the trench is backfilled.
2.2 SCHEDULE FOR STOCKPILE ELIMINATION
The project has been designed to balance cut and fill material. As such, excess backfill is not anticipated. If excess
backfill is generated during the project, it will be incorporated into facility operations on TPR where it will be
compacted and permanently stabilized. Topsoil generated from permanently disturbed areas (e.g., road surface
and the Lot 2 pad) will be redistributed over cut and fill slopes where it will be vegetated. Table 1 shows the schedule
for stockpile elimination by source, material type, and schedule.
Table 1. Schedule for Stockpile Elimination
Material Source
Material Type
Schedule for Elimination
Road and Pad Construction
TPR Pipeline Construction
Topsoil
Topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled at the beginning of
disturbance. Topsoil will be redistributed as areas are
constructed and final grading completed. Final stockpile
elimination will occur after road and pad grading is complete.
Stockpiling subsoil is not anticipated. Typical construction will
Subsoil include single -handling material from cuts, placement in lifts,
and compacting in fill areas.
Topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled at the beginning of
Topsoil disturbance. Subsoil will be excavated and stockpiled as
pipeline trenching proceeds along the TPR pipeline
TETRA TECH
2 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
GPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
Material Source
Material Type Schedule for Elimination
Lot 2 Pipeline Construction
Imported Aggregates
Subsoil
Topsoil
Subsoil
Riprap
Road base
Bedding sand
alignment. The anticipated construction sequencing of
construction from south to north would result in the southern
area being disturbed first, with stockpiles present on site until
final pipe stringing for the pipeline alignment is complete.
Final stockpile elimination will occur after pipeline stringing is
complete and the trench can be backfilled with topsoil
redistributed.
Topsoil will be salvaged and stockpiled at the beginning of
disturbance. Subsoil will be excavated and stockpiled as
pipeline trenching extends across Lot 2. The anticipated
construction sequencing of construction from south to north
would result in this area being disturbed last. Final stockpile
elimination will be conducted as the pipeline stringing is
completed and the trench can be backfilled with topsoil
redistributed.
Material will be brought on site, as needed. Stockpiles will be
constructed only when necessary for temporary storage of
material in advance of placement. Final stockpile elimination
will occur as the material is incorporated into construction. If
there is excess material at the end of construction, the
material will be removed from the site or used for operations
on TPR where it will be permanently stabilized.
Stockpiled material and disturbances are not anticipated to remain exposed for greater than 90 days. If construction
is halted by seasonal weather constraints, disturbances will be seeded with the approved site seed mix to provide
temporary stabilization.
2.3 EROSION CONTROL
A Stormwater Management Plan was prepared for the project (Tetra Tech, February 2018) as part of the project
construction stormwater management requirements. That plan describes that erosion controls will be installed
during construction, which consist of silt fence and straw check dams, as shown on the site plans. Silt fence will be
used during construction on downgradient slopes of the pipeline trench, new road, Lot 2 pad, and material storage
areas to capture sediment from stormwater runoff. The silt fences will form a barrier to collect sediment behind the
silt fence. They will consist of filter fabric stretched between support posts in increments no greater than 6 feet
apart. Posts will be anchored in approximately 4 -inch by 4 -inch trenches. Silt fence will be attached on the up-slope
side of the posts, and the bottom will be buried in the anchor trenches. The trenches will be backfilled with excavated
soil and compacted. Silt fences will be inspected periodically to ensure they remain anchored correctly. They will
be cleared of accumulated sediments, as needed.
Straw check dams will filter runoff and will be installed at unnamed drainages in locations where the drainages cross
the construction area. Straw check dams will be composed of straw bales staked at a minimum of 6 inches below
the base of the straw bale and entrenched a minimum of 4 inches into the ground.
After completion of site earthwork, final stabilization will be conducted using hydroseeding with mulch and tackifier,
which aids in soil stabilization until vegetation is established. Erosion control logs will be placed in periodic rows
over the seeded areas on steep slopes or on slopes with long slope lengths to further aid in soil stabilization and
erosion control until vegetation is established. Energy dissipating structures are included at culvert outlets and within
drainage channels to reduce erosion, as well.
TETRA TECH
3 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
2.4 DUST SUPPRESSION
Dust suppression will be conducted on disturbed areas to avoid soil Toss and to ensure that exposed soil does not
generate excessive dust. Dust suppression will be conducted using water trucks with spray bars or hoses. Water
will be supplied from an off-site source provided by the commercial hauler. Sources for water generally are municipal
sources (e.g., fire hydrant).
2.5 WEED MANAGEMENT
A Weed Management Plan was prepared for the project (Tetra Tech, February 2018) for submittal to Garfield County
as part of the project grading permit requirements. The Weed Management Plan describes the pre -construction
noxious weed survey conducted for the project area in August 2017, the findings from the survey, noxious weed
control practices, and post -construction revegetation.
lb] TETRA TECH
4 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
3.0 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION
Site restoration will consist of topsoil replacement and revegetation, as described below.
3.1 TOPSOIL REPLACEMENT
After final grading for the pipeline trench, salvaged topsoil will be backfilled over the trench in a shallow dome to
address anticipated subsidence. Salvaged topsoil also will be redistributed on areas disturbed during construction
that will not be permanently un -vegetated surfaces, such as the road, pad, and access areas. Topsoil will be placed
in layers 6 to 12 inches thick. Topsoil will be placed in such a manner to achieve the final grades on Lot 2 shown in
the design drawings, and in such a manner to achieve the approximate original grade along the pipeline corridor.
3.2 PLANT MATERIAL LIST
Vegetation surveys conducted for the project area by Tetra Tech, Inc. in 2014 and 2015 determined that the project
area is dominated by aspen with a mix of Douglas fir and subalpine fir, plus a mixture of shrubs, grasses, and weed
species typical of Rocky Mountain aspen forest and woodlands, with areas of Rocky Mountain subalpine dry-mesic
and mesic spruce -fir forests and woodlands, and Rocky Mountain gambel oak -mixed montane shrublands.
The seed mix proposed to revegetate the project area is shown in Table 2. It includes a mix of native and introduced
grasses and forbs. The seed mix was recommended by a vegetation specialist at the Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS)(NRCS, September 2017) based on the project location, elevation, and purpose
(erosion control and revegetation). The seed varieties in Table 2 shown as introduced were selected by NRCS
based on their fast-growing nature to facilitate rapid vegetation and erosion control. The seeding rates in Table 2
are based on a drill seeding application of 80 seeds per square foot, which is the NRCS critical area seeding rate.
This rate doubles when using hydroseeding application. Seed used for revegetation will be certified weed -free, and
will have labeling documenting its variety, purity, and germination rates.
Table 2. Recommended Seed Mix
Common Name
Scientific Name
Native/
Introduced Lbs/Acre Percent
Intermediate Wheatgrass
Western Wheatgrass
Stream bank Wheatgrass
Smooth Brome
Arizona Fescue'
Rocky Mountain Penstemon'
Thinopyrum intermedium
Pascopyrum smithii
Elymus lanceolatus psammophilus
Bromus inermis
Festuca arizonica
Penstemon strictus
Introduced
Native
Native 8.9 20
Introduced 9.9 20
Native 1.2 5
Native 1.2 5
TOTAL 52.2 100
15
16
25
25
'According to NRCS, Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda) could replace Arizona Fescue or Rocky Mountain Penstemon,
depending on availability.
n TETRA TECH
5 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan CPX Piceance Holdings, L.L.0
3.3 PLANTING METHOD
3.3A Seedbed Preparation
Preparing the seedbed loosens compacted soil, improves seed to soil contact, and roughens the soil surface to
reduce erosion from sheet flow of stormwater. Seedbed preparation will include the following:
• Breaking up excessive soil aggregates (i.e., clods) that generally exceed 6 inches in any dimension within
2 inches of the soil surface;
• Chiseling, disking, or harrowing the area to a depth of 4 inches to provide a reasonably firm but friable
seedbed; and
• Maintaining existing drainage patterns.
Seedbed preparation will be conducted immediately before seeding to ensure that the seedbed preparation provides
the maximum benefit for revegetation success.
3.3.2 Revegetation methods
Drill seeding is typically conducted on slopes flatter than 3(H):1(V), and dry broadcast or hydroseeding is typically
conducted on slopes steeper than 3(H):1(V). The majority of the project area will require revegetation on steeper
slopes. Hydroseeding, therefore, is forecast to be used to maximize revegetation success.
Hydroseed application will include mulch and tackifiers. Mulch will consist of a certified weed -free wood -fiber mulch
with an application rate of approximately 2.0 tons per acre, or as recommended by the supplier. Tackifiers will
adhere the seed and mulch mixture to the ground to reduce redistribution of the seed after application.
Hydroseeding will avoid undisturbed shrubs and trees. Seed application rates are shown in Table 2. Seed
application will not be conducted immediately following rain or snowfall, during excessively windy periods, or when
the ground is too dry.
3.3.3 Irrigation and fertilization
Irrigation will not be conducted for this project because hydroseeding will be conducted during the appropriate
growing season. The timing eliminates the need for additional watering, given the alpine project location. Application
of fertilizer at a rate of 1,000 pounds per acre is specified to promote initial growth and to reduce erosion. If
monitoring of revegetation success indicates that vegetation is not adequately reestablished, irrigation or additional
fertilization in discrete areas will be reconsidered.
3.4 PLANTING SCHEDULE
Preferred seeding seasons are early spring and fall to coincide with increased precipitation and climate conditions
favorable to seed germination. In the project area, seeding would occur after spring thaw, until June 15, or from
approximately mid-August until a consistent ground freeze. It is anticipated that the project area can be revegetated
in a single mobilization during one construction season.
QTETRA TECH
6 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
4.0 RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE
The reclamation cost estimate for the project is provided in Appendix A. The reclamation cost estimate was prepared
to determine the amount of financial security required for the project, according to Garfield County grading permit
application guidance.
The reclamation cost estimate was developed in two parts. The first part of the reclamation cost estimate shows
costs for the CPX Lot 2 pad, road, and pipeline construction. These costs were determined by construction activity
and unit costs. Unit costs were obtained from the RS Means Heavy Construction Cost Handbook, using the
Glenwood Springs location adjustment factor. Construction quantities are based on the project design drawings.
The second part of the reclamation cost estimate shows costs for the TPR pipeline portion of the project, where the
final post -construction grade will be the same as the existing grade. As such, reclamation costs are based on the
$2,500 per acre value provided by Garfield County guidance.
TETRA TECH
7 February 2018
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan
CPX Piceance Holdings, LLC
5.0 REFERENCES
NRCS 2017. Communication between A. Hussey, Tetra Tech, Inc., and D. Davidson, NRCS, Glenwood Springs.
September 2017.
RS Means 2017. Heavy Construction Cost Handbook, 31 st Annual Edition. 2017.
i' ] TETRA TECH
8 February 2018