HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplicationGur.field Connty
Community Development Department
108 8th Sffeet, Suite 40L
Glenwood Springs, CO 8160L
(970)945-82t2
www. garf ield-co u ntv, co m
TYPE OF GRADING
EI MAJoR tr MINOR
INVOLVED PARTIES
Property owner: Chevron (Rick Cross)Phone:
Mailing Address: 8311 County Road 215,Parachute, CO 81635
Emait Addrerr. RickCross@chevron.com
1 620-8564
contractor: Moody Construction (Shawn Moody)Phone
Mailing Address:1629 P Road, Loma CO 81524
0 986-7244
EmailAddress:shawn.moody@moodyan dsons. com
Rrch¡tect: N/A Phone: (_)
Mailing Address
EmailAddress:
Engineer:Eric Zamora (Wlliams Bargath, LLC) p¡on..1303 726-4720
Mailing Address 2717 County Road 215, Suite 200, Parachute, CO 81635
EmailAddress:Eric. Zam ora@wi lli ams.com
PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION
Project Na . Grand Vall 16" Pipeline Emergen Remediation
Describe work: A Williams (Bargath) 16" gas gathering line ruptured on 111812019. A
spray of condensate covered a large area of ground (see figures in Reveg/Reclamation
Plan). Surface had to be quickly scraped to avoid run-off and contamination into Parachute '
Creek. The rupture area on the pipeline has been excavated
Job Address:Section 20, Township 65, Range 96W
39.504085, -1 08. 1 24532
Assessor/s Parcel N umber:
Sub,
217118200008
Lot _Block
Earthwork (square feet). Max 8.5 acres Earthwork (Cubic Yards):
ALL UTILITIES MUST BE LOCATED PRIOR TO ANY GRADING
NOTICE
Authorítv. This application for a Building Permit must be signed by the Owner of the property, described above, or .
anauthorizedagent, lfthesignaturebelowisnotthatoftheOwner,aseparateletterofauthority,signedbythe
Owner, must be provided with this Application,
Lesal Access. A Building Permit cannot be issued without proof of legal and ade{uate access to the property for I
purposes of inspections by the Build¡ng Division,
Other Permits, Multiple separate permits may be required: (1) State Electrical Permit, (2) County OWTS Permit,
(3) another permit required for use on the property identified above, e,g, State or County Highway/ Road Access or
a State Wastewater Discharge Permit.
VoidPermit. ABuildingPermitbecomesnull andvoidiftheworkauthorizedisnotcommencedwithinlS0daysof
the date of issuance and if work is suspended or abandoned for a period of L80 days after commencement.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certif,i that I have read this Application and that the information contained above is true and correct, I
understand that the Building Division accepts the Application, along with the plans and specifications and other
data submitted by me or on my behalf (submittals), based upon my certification as to accuracy. Assuming
completeness of the submittals and approval of this Application, a Building Permit will be issued granting
permission to me, as Owner, to construct the structure(s) and facilities detailed on the submittals reviewed by the
Building Division. ln consideration of the issuance of the Building Permit, I agree that I and my agents will comply
with provisions of any federal, state or local law regulating the work and the Garfield Çounty Building Code, OWTS
regulations and applicable land use regulations (County Regulation(s)), I acknowledge that the Building Permit
may be suspended or revoked, upon notice from the County, ifthe location, construction or use ofthe structure{s)
and facility(ies), described above, are not in compliance with County Regulation(s) or any other applicable law.
I hereby grant permission to the Building Division to enter the property, described above, to inspect the work. I
further acknowledge that the issuance of the Building Permit does not prevent the Building Official from: (L)
requiring the correction of errors in the submittals, if any, discovered after issuancei or (2) stopp¡ng construction
or use of the structure(s) or facility(ies) if such is in violation of County Regulation(s) or any other applicable law,
Review of this Application, including submittals, and inspections of the work by the Building Division do not
constitute an acceptance of responsibility or liability by the County of errors, omissions or discrepancies. As the
Owner, I acknowledge that responsibility for compliance with federal, state and local laws and County Regulations
rest with me and my authorized agents, including without limitation my architect designer, engineer and/ or
builder.
I hereby acknowledge that I have read and understand the Notice and Cert¡f¡cat¡on above as well as
have ed the requ¡red information which is correct and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Property Owner Print and sign Date
J \OFFICIAL USE ONLY aô(
speciarcond¡t¡o""'\)'ñ.tL¡61 ltü 'Ro* u W G*oy A Ð. uJ. LLt iTTr
Ro,m ftñ þl.-.øut l)'¡-{r, *v- Qcr-"r' QV @fG t{Dt^/^
Swn 4-s ?p, Sor¡ " frÐtu1øL B¡aro,¿EyrtpyÅ
Misc Fees:'$ti"ffa. oo Fees- Paid: ^ ^ó4 nn t'uPermit Fee:ó9rn Ø
Grading Permit:gaÊiD*5(o5â
lssu6 Daterãql'p Zoningt
ftt_
Balance due:
ôd.oo
-f ?- /V^Zo | 1BUILDING / PI-ANNING DIVISION :
Date
T-T
Project name/operator: hJ,- lt?c/ltS
Project general location: Å/ a-l
Project acreage:
Project length and pipe size:
Bond Amount (must equal acreage x 52500):
21, 25Ð
Weed management plan approved by Veg. Management:
Property owners including federal lands with easements:
e ttø,17^'Q(
Engineered sealed plans:
Plan set to county engineer consultant for review:
Pipeline Grading Permit Checklist
2.5 t/î+t "
erlf,þ-ç ú Q,.**"t'
l* Ccî- cSoaÒo'>\State storm water Permit:
Any county road cut permits needed:KA
Any land use permits needed based on size or flood nlain: tr(
Any Corp of Eng. wetland issues: ü.
\,Original Bond and map to Treac¡u+er's office:/7à
Copy of bond in file:
Map to GIS:
Other:
l¡¿
Pending items/date:
GørIieId County
Vegetatíon Management
March 13,2019
Andy Schwaller
Garf ield County Community Development Department
RE: GRAD 5652 Chevron Grand Valley 16 inch Pipeline Remediation Project
Dear Andy,
The RevegetationlReclamation Plan and the Weed Management Plan are acceptable.
Statf recommends a revegetation security of $20,250 ($2500 per acre x 8.1 acres of disturbance).
The security shall be held by Garfield County until vegetation has been successfully reestablished according to the
Reclamatioñ 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.A7 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: 970'3794456
,@l COLORADO
Department of Pul¡lic
Health & Environment
Facility Activity :
Disturbed Acres:
Facility Located at:
CERTIFICATION TO DISCHARGE
UNDER
CDPS GENERAL PERMIT COR-O3OOOOO
STORMWATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Certification Number: COR03U828
This Certification to Discharge specifically authorizes:
Bargath LLC
to discharge stormwater from the facitity identified as
Grand Valley l6in Pipeline Emergency Remediation
To the waters of the State of Colorado, including, but not limited to:
Parachute Creek - Colorado River
Pipetine and utitities
8.5 acres
5100 CR 215 Parachute CO 81635
Garfietd County
Latitude 39.504036 Longitude -108.124520
Specific lnformation
(if applicabte):
Certification is issued and effective: 1/29/2019
Expiration Date: This authorization expires upon effective date of the General Permit COR030000 renewaI unless
otherwjse notified by the division.-ADMIN ISTRATIVELY CONTI N U ED
This certification under the permit requires that specific actions be performed at designated times. The certification
hotder is tegatty obtigated to compty with att terms and conditions of the permit.
This certification was approved by:
Meg Parish, Unit Manager
Permits Section
Water Quatity Control Djvision
*exptanation of Admin Continued in cover letter
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S., Denver, CO 80246-'1530 P 303-692-2000 www.colorado.gov/cdphe/wqcd
REVEGETATION AND
RECLAMATION PLAN
GRAND VALLEY 16-INCH PIPELINE
REMEDIATION PROJECT
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
JANUARY 2OL9
Prepared for:
wtLLIAMS, LIC
Parachute, Colorado
Prepared by:
LT ENVIRONMENTAL, lNC.
4600 West 60th Avenue
Arvada, Colorado 80003
(303) 433-9788
LT Environmental,lnc.
Advancina oDDortunitv
r:t}t,Ðvr,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
7
t
3
EXISTING CONDITIONS
CONSTRU CTION ACTIVITI ES
SALVAGE OF ON-SITE TOPSOIL
ESTIMATED TIMETABLE...,...
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS..
DUST SU PPRESSION MEASU RES
SOI L RE PLACEM ENT......,..
L.I
7.2
1.3
2.7
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
PROJECT LOCATION
NOXTOUS WEEDS........
oBSERVATTONS ..........
I NTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT...,......
PREVENTION AND ASSESSMENT OF NOXIOUS WEEDS.
TREATM ENT AN D CONTROL OF NOXIOUS WEE D I N FESTATIONS
Re com m e n d ed Treotm e nt Stroteg ¡ es
Herbicides .....
Mechanicol....
Grozing..........
Alternative M ethods .......
MONITORING
3
3
3
3
4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.5.L
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.5,5
3.6
4.0 SURFACE RECLAMATION PIAN 8
DTSTURBANCE 4RE4.......................,
RECLAMATION OBJECTIVES...,,,..,...,
REVEGETATION AN D RESTORATION
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
4.1,
4.2
4.3
8
I
9
æ
1.O INTRODUCTION
Ll- Environmental, lnc. (LTE) has prepared this report on behalf of Williams, LLC (Williams) detailing the
Revegetation and Reclamation Plan (RRP) associated with the 16-inch Barrett-Rulison to Grand Valley
Suction pipeline (Site) release located approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the town of Parachute on
pr¡vate surface in Garfield County, Colorado. Per Garfield County requirements, all cleanup activities of
released fluids and contaminated ground will require a grading permit for all projects involving excavation,
grading, or earthwork construction.
The following RRP has been prepared in accordance with the Garfield County Vegetation & Site
Reclamation Requirements as referenced in the Williams grading permit application. The purpose of this
RRP is to ensure that the project does not result in:
. Generation of erosion and dust;
. Propagation of noxious weeds;
. Source of excessive loss of wildlife habitat and food sources; or
. Creation of long-term visual eyesores.
The total area of disturbance related to cleanup efforts is approximately 8.1 acres. Following reclamation,
the long-term disturbance will be negligible.
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The Grand Valley 16-inch pipeline remediation project location is located on private surface Section 20,
Township 6 South, Range 96 West in Garfield County, Colorado (Table 1; SWMP - Figure L). Field
investigations and a noxious weed survey were conducted on January 21'-23' 2019.
Table 1. Surface ownership
Parcel Owner Garfield County Parcel Number
Chevron USA, LLC 2171.18200008
Assocìated parcel information, Garfield county, colorado.
t.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Site is located within the eastern portion of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Major
Land Resource Region (LRR) E - Rocky Mountain Range and Forest Region, Major Land Resource Area
(MLRA) 484 - Southern Rocky Mountains (NRCS 2016). Approximately 5 percent (%) of the MLRA is in
Wyoming, i6%is in Colorado, 11%is in New Mexico, andS% is in Utah. The Site is located in the canyon
lands zone that extends from northeastern Utah into western Colorado. The higher hills and mesas receive
more than 12 inches (305 millimeters) of annual precipitation.
The geologic formations within the Site include siltstone and/or mudstone dominated formations of all
ages and quaternary age, younger alluvium. and surficial deposits. Soils within the Site are dominated by
Olney loam and Arvada loam.
t
Vegetation in the Site area is composed primarily of desert shrublands, a small riparian area, and bare
ground associated with existing activities, roads, and other disturbances in the area. Common plants
observed in and around the Site are outlined in Table 2.
Table 2. Common Plants Observed within the Site
ScientÍfic nome Common Name USDA Plant Code
Acer negundo Boxelder ACNE2
Ach nothe ru m hy me n oi de s lndian ricegrass ACHY
Amelanchier olnifolia Serviceberry AMAL2
Artemisio tridentoto Sagebrush ARTR2
Artium minus Common burdock ARMI2
Bossio scoparia Burning bush BASC5
Bromus tectorum Cheatgrass BRTE
Carduus nutons Musk thistle CANU
Chenopodium sp Lambsquarter CHENO
Cichorium intybus Chicory CIIN
Cirsium vulgore Canada thistle CIVU
Cl e m otis I i g usti cifo I i o Western clematis CLLI2
Convolvulus orvensis Field bindweed COAR4
Cy nog loss u m offi ci n o le Houndstongue CYOF
E I o e o g n us a ng ustifo Ii o Russian olive ELAN
Eremopyrum triticeum Annual wheatgrass ERTR1"3
Ericameria nauseoso Rubber rabbitbrush ERNAlO
Grindelio sp.Gumweed GRIND
Hologeton glomerotus Halogeton HAGL
Lepidium lotifolium Perennial pepperweed LELA2
Lepidium perfoliatum Clasping pepperweed LEPE2
Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass PASM
Populus deltoides Cottonwood PODE3
Roso woodsio Vi/ood's rose ROWO
Rumex sp.Dock RUMEX
Solix sp.Willow SALIX
Solsolo trogus Russian thistle SATR1.2
So rco botu s ve rm i cu I otu s Greasewood SAVE4
Sphoerolcea coccinea Scarlet globemallow SPCO
Sporobolus airoídes Alkali sacaton SPAI
Tomerix sp.Tamarisk TAMAR2
Verboscum thapsus Common mullein VETH
2
1.3 CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES
Ground disturbing activities will be limited to the permitted areas. Stormwater controls may be placed
outside the permitted areas as long as they do not interfere with normal operations or sensitive areas.
2.0 SOIL HANDLING
Ground disturbing activities associated with the Grand Valley L6-inch pipeline remediation project will
include construction areas as well as areas used for staging of personnel, equipment, and material
necessary for the project (SWMP - Figure 1). Stormwater controls for the project activities are outlined
in detail in the Sformwoter Monogement P/on (SWMP).
2.T SALVAGE OF ON-SITE TOPSOIL
When possible, removing and segregating unimpacted during clean-up efforts will be conducted as
follows:
. The topsoil horizon or the top six inches, whichever is deeper, but no greater than six feet will be
stripped and stockpiled on location in an area that does not interfere with day-to-day operations.
. Topsoil will be segregated from subsurface soil and characterized by changes in texture, color,
and/or consistency.
. Areas with little to no topsoil will be segregated as thoroughly as possible and stockpiled as
previously mentioned.
2.2 ESTIMATED TIMETABTE
Topsoil salvage piles will be replaced within approximately 60 days following cleanup activities. lf soils are
not replaced within 90 daysfrom the initial excavation date, theywill be compacted and tracked in using
a track dozer where tracks are perpendicular to water flow, to protect soils from wind and runoff erosion'
Refer to the SWMP Appendix C - BMP Manual for design criteria.
2.3 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS
Sediment controls will be placed at the base of soil stockpiles. Sediment controls may include, but are not
limited to berms, straw wattles, or ditches. Combinations of these methods may be employed as
necessary for sediment control of runoff.
Seeding may be employed as a stabilization method to guard against erosion if soils are not replaced
within 90 days from the initial excavation date. A certified weed-free seed mix with a fast-growing cover
crop may be used to establish a temporary vegetative cover of the soil during the construction project.
2.4 DUST SUPPRESSION MEASURES
Roads will be surfaced or dust inhibitors will be used if appropriate (e.g., surfacing materials, non-saline
dust suppressants, water, etc.). Dust suppression will be used on roads and construction areas where soil
is susceptible to wind erosion to reduce the amount of fugitive dust generated bytraffic or other activities.
Speed limits will be enforced to the extent practicable on roads in and adjacent to the Site, to further
reduce fugitive dust.
3
2.5 SOIL REPLACEMENT
When cleanup activities are complete, segregated soils will be replaced as close as practicable to their
original position. Salvaged topsoil will not be used as fill, Reclamation will be conducted per Section 4'0
below.
3.0 WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN
3.1 NOXIOUS WEED5
Noxious weeds are plants that are not native to an area and considered harmful to animals or the
environment. Most noxious weed species were introduced from Europe or Asia, either accidentally or as
ornamentals that have escaped. Once these non-natives are established in a new environment they tend
to spread quickly because the insects, diseases, and animals that normally control them are absent.
Noxious weeds are spread by man, animals, water, and wind. Prime locations forthe establishment of
noxious weeds include: roadsides, sites cleared for construction, areas that are overused by animals or
humans, wetlands, and riparian corridors. Subsequent to soil disturbances, vegetation communities can
be susceptible to infestations of invasive or exotic weed species. Vegetation removal and soil disturbance
during construction can create optimal conditions for the establishment of invasive non-native species.
Construction equipment traveling from weed infested areas into weed free areas could disperse noxious
or invasive weed seeds and propagates, resulting in the establishment of these weeds in previously weed
free a reas.
The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop
noxious weed management plans. The State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of plants that
are considered noxious weeds. The State of Colorado noxious weed list includes three categories: List A,
List B, and List C. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected. List B species include weeds whose
spread should be halted. List C species are widespread, but the State will assist localjurisdictions which
choose to manage those weeds. Garfield County has developed a weed management program and has
compiled a list of noxious weeds in their county. List C species are not included in the County list and
therefore are not treated as noxious weeds for the purpose of this document'
3.2 OBSERVATIONS
Noxious weeds observed in the surveyed area include Bull thistle, Musk thistle, Field bindweed, Perennial
pepperweed, Houndstongue, Tamarisk, and Russian olive. Noxious weeds documented during the noxious
weeds field survey are shown on Figure l- in the SWMP and in Table 2 below.
Table 3. Noxious Weeds Observed Onsite
Latitude Longitude Common Name USDA
species code
Garfield County
List
Approximate
Quantity
39.504541 -1"08.125316 BullThistle CIVU B 5 individuals
39.503614 -708.124277 BullThistle CIVU B 50 individuals
39.502792 -108.126584 Musk thistle CANU B l" individual
39.503497 -1o8.1.10752 Tamarisk TAMAR B 3 individuals
39.s03159 -r08. t26457 Tamarisk TAMAR B l individual
39.502768 -108. 125868 Tamarisk TAMAR B 1 individual
4
Latitude Longitude Common Name
USDA
species code
Garfield County
L¡st
Approximate
Quantity
39.502906 -108.r26s92 Tamarisk TAMAR B 7 individuals
39.5027543 -L08.126582 Tamarisk TAMAR B 2 individuals
39.503122 -108. L26441 Houndstongue CYOF B +10 individuals
39.503122 -108.126441 Pere n nia I
pepperweed LELA2 B 30 individuals
39. 503116 -108. 126295 Russian olive ELAN B f. individual
3.3 INTEGRATED WEED MANAGEMENT
Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive ongoing control measures. Care must
be taken to prevent damage to desirable plant species during treatments to avoid further infestations by
other pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved through a variety of methods over a long
period of time including inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention through best management
practices, monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection efforts. Weed management
strategies are used primarily to control existing species and to prevent further infestations (existing and
new species) ratherthan eradication. After successfuland effective management, decreases in infestation
size and density can be expected, and after severalyears of successful management practices, eradication
is sometimes possible.
3.4 PREVENTION AND ASSESSMENT OF NOXIOUS WEEDS
Weed management is costly and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for practical
treatment. Prevention is especially valuable in the case of noxious weed management. Several simple
practices should be employed to prevent most weed infestations. The following practices should be
adopted for any activity to reduce the costs of noxious weed controlthrough prevention:
. lf working in sites with weed seed contaminated soil, equipment will be cleaned of potent¡ally
seed-bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to uncontaminated
terrain.
. All maintenance vehicles will be regularly cleaned of soil.
. Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist.
. Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds for an area is essential for the
development of an integrated weed management plan. This report provides an initial assessment
of the occurrence of noxious weeds for the Site. To continue effective management of noxious
weeds, further inventory and analysis is necessary to L) determine the effectiveness of past
treatment strategies; 2) modify the treatment plan if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations
early, resulting in more economical treatments.
3.5 TREATMENT AND CONTROT OF NOXIOUS WEED INFESTATIONS
Recommended control methods for the listed noxious weed species found in the Site are described in
Table 4 below.
5
Table 4. Recommended Weed Control Methods
*B = biennial; P = perennial
3.5.1 RecommendedTreatmentStrateg¡es
It is important to know whether the target is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies for
effective control and eradication. Treatment strategies are different depending on plant type and are
summarized below. Note that herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other
methods can be effectively employed.
. Treatment strategies for annual and biennial noxious weeds to prevent seed production (Sirota
2O0a):
. Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. lf seeds
develop, cut and bag seed heads.
. Cut roots with a spade just below soil level.
. Treat w¡th herbicide in rosette or bolting stage, before flowering.
. Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent flowering
but can reduce total seed production.
Treatment strategies for perennials to deplete nutrient reserves in root system and prevent seed
production (sirota 20041:
. Allow plants to expend as much energy from the root system as possible. Do not treat when first
emerging in spring but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. lf seeds develop cut and bag if possible.
. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August L5 when
natural precipitation is present). ln the fall plants draw nutrients into the roots for winter storage.
Herbicides will be drawn down to the roots more efficiently at this time due to translocation of
nutrientsto roots ratherthan leaves. lf theweed patch has been presentfora long period of time
another season of seed production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root
6
Common Name Scientific
Name (USDA Symbol)Type*Recommended Control Methods
Bull Thistle / Cirsium vulgore
(crvu)B Apply herbicide in the fall. PIant competitive grasses
Houndstongue /
Cy nog loss u m offi ci no le
(cYoF)
B
Reseed disturbed sites with fast growing grasses, physical removal
of plants at flowering or early seed formation, herbicides at pre-bud
or rosette stage.
MuskThistle / Carduus
nutons (CANU4)B
Apply herbicide in the fall. Plant competitive grasses. Musk thistle
seed head weevil.
Tamarisk / Tamerix sp.
(TAMAR)P
Mechanical removal for small stands with stump treatment.
Followed by herbicide to resprouts when L-3 meters tall
Russian olive / Eloeognus
anqustifolia (ELAN)P
Mechanical removal for small stands with stump treatment.
Followed by herbicide to resprouts.
Perennial pepperweed /
Lepidi u m lotifoli um (LELA2)P Spring mowing combined with chemicaltreatments can be effective.
a
system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will killthe following year's shoots, which are being
formed on the roots at this time.
Mowing usually is not recommended because the plants will flower anyway, rather, seed
production should be reduced. Many studies have shown that mowing perennials and spraying
the regrowth is not as effective as spraying without mowing. Effect of mowing is species
dependent therefore it is imperative to know the species and its basic biology. Timing of
application must be done when biologically appropr¡ate, which is not necessarily convenient.
Tillage may or may not be effective. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5- 1.0
inches long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the infested area.
Hand pulling is generally not recommended for perennial species unless you know the plants are
seedlings and not established plants. Hand pulling can be effective on small patches but is very
labor intensive because it must be done repeatedly (Sirota 2004).
a
3.5,2 Herbicides
Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre-bud stage after germination or in the spring of
the second year. Several of the species identified in the survey are susceptible to commercially available
herbicides. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to desirable grass species.
Professionals or landowners using herbicides must use the concentration specified on the label of the
container in hand. Herbicides generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Most herbicide
failures observed by WWE are related to incomplete control caused by high concentrations killing top
growth before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through the nutrient translocation
process. Most herbicide applications should use a surfactant, if directed on the herbicide label, or other
adjuvant as called for on the herbicide label. A certified commercial applicator is a good choice for
herbicide control efforts. Restricted herbicides require a state licensed applicator. An applicator has the
full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with noxious weeds.
3.5.3 Mechanical
Small isolated infestations of weed species can often be controlled with cutting and digging by hand. For
dense or more extensive infestations, mechanicaltreatments can be usefulin combination with chemical
control. Effectiveness of mechanical control can often be increased by severing the root just below the
crown of noxious weeds. Weeds that easily re-sprout from rootstocks, such as Canada thistle and Russian
knapweed, may increase rather than decrease if mechanical control is the only method used.
3.5.4 Grazing
ln the event grazing is allowed in the Site it will be deferred in reclaimed areas until the desired plant
species that have been seeded are established.
3.5.5 AlternativeMethods
Biological control of noxious weeds may be feasible for some weed species found along the proposed
pipeline alignment. The musk thistle seed head weevil, Rhinocyllus conicus, for example, is a biological
control agent for musk thistle (Roduner et al. 2003). This weevil may be usefulfor reducing musk thistle,
but significant results may take several years.
7
3.5.5.1 Vesicular-Arbuscular Mvcorrhizal Fungi
An alternative method to ass¡st revegetation, particularly where there is poor or destroyed topsoil, is the
application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizalfungi, typically referred to as AMF. These fungi, mostly of
the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo-mycorrhizal fungi are
associated mostlywith grasses and forbs and could be helpfulwhen reclaimingthis project. ln symbiosis,
the fungi increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the host root system by as much as several
orders of magnitude (Barrow and McCaslin L995),
Over-the-counter commercial AMF products, which are better adapted to coating seeds when reseeding
and treating roots of live seedling trees and shrubs at time of planting, come in powder-form and are
available from many different sources. Some also come in granular form to be spread with seed from a
broadcast spreader. The best AMF products should contain more than one species.
AllColorado State Forest Salida District tree and shrub plantings include the application of AMF (Tischler
2006). Most, if not all, Colorado Department of Transportation revegetation/reseeding projects now
require use of AMF and BioSol, a certified by-product of the penicillin manufacturing process composed
primarily of mycelium,
3.5.5.2 Humates
Compacted soils respond well to fossilized humic substances and by-products called humates. These
humates, including humic and fulvic acids and humin were formed from pre-historic plant and animal
deposits and work especially well on compacted soils when applied as directed.
3.6 MONITORING
Areas where noxious weed infestations are identified and treated will be inspected overtime to ensure
that control methods are working to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. The sites will be
monitored until the infestations are eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels. These inspections can
then be used to prioritize future weed control efforts.
4.0 SURFACE RECLAMATION PLAN
The SWMP contains mitigation measures designed to reduce or eliminate sediment moving off-site or into
area drainage ways prior to site stabilization. Reclamation activities, including reestablishment of
vegetation cover, willfacilitate stabilization of the disturbed areas and, once accomplished, will eliminate
the potential for sediment transport from areas disturbed by project activities. Changes and additions to
the Surface Reclamation Plan may be necessary over the lifetime of a site to achieve the reclamation
objectives and standards. Disturbed areas will be reclaimed after cleanup efforts are complete.
4.L DISTURBANCE AREA
The total area of surface disturbance in the Site is approximately 8.1 acres. The Site boundaries and areas
of disturbance are identified on Figure 1 in the SWMP.
4.2 RECLAMATION OBJECTIVES
The objective of final surface reclamation is to return the land to a condition approximating that which
existed priorto disturbance. This includes restoration of the landform and naturalvegetative community,
8
hydrologic systems, ecologicalfunction and other natural resource values to maintain healthy, biologically
active topsoil; to control erosion and sediment transport; and to minimize loss of habitat, forage, and
visual resources. Surface reclamation will be judged successful when disturbed areas have been re-
contoured, stabilized, and re-vegetated with a self-sustaining, vigorous, diverse, native (or otherwise
approved) plant community sufficient to minimize visual impacts, provide forage, stabilize soil, and
impede the invasion of noxious weeds.
4.3 REVEGETATION AND RESTORATION
Disturbed areas will be seeded using a seed mix appropriate to the location based on the common plants
observed during the January 20L9 vegetation survey (Table 5). Prior to seeding, local soil conservation
authorities associated with the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, surface owners,
and/or reclamation contractors familiar with the area may be consulted regarding other seed mixes to be
used. The seed mix is subject to change.
Table 5. Recommended Seed Mix for Revegetation
Weed-free seeds will be planted in the amount specified in pounds of pure live seed (PLS) per acre. No
primary or secondary noxious weeds will be in the seed mix. The re-establishment of vegetative cover as
well as watershed stabilization measures will be scheduled during the working season and before the
succeeding winter. Re-vegetation will be accomplished as soon as practical following the reclamation of
the Site. Mulch will be laid down during re-vegetation as appropriate. The cut vegetat¡on and rocks will
act like mulch in the areas where they are applied. Where straw or hay mulch is applied, the mulch will
be applied and crimped into the soil.
Seeding rate should be doubled for broadcast application. The preferred seeding method is multiple seed
bin rangeland drill. ln areas with slopes greater than 3To, imprinting of the seed bed is recommended.
lmprinting can be in the form of dozer tracks or furrows perpendicular to the direction of slope. When
hydro-seeding or mulching, imprinting should be done pr¡or to seeding unless the mulch is to be crimped
into the soil surface. lf broadcast seeding and harrowing, imprinting should be done as part of the
harrowing. Furrowing can be done by several methods, the simplest of which is to drill seed perpendicular
to the direction of slope in a prepared bed. Other simple imprinting methods include deep hand raking
9
Scientific Name Common Name Variety
Drilled Application
Rate
(PtS lbs./acre)
Atriplex conescens Four-winged saltbush Rincon 3.70
Atri plex co nfertifolio Shadscale saltbush 2.00
Arte m i s i o tri d e ntota su bs p.
Wyomingensis Wyoming big sagebrush Hobble Creek 0.05
Pascopyrum smithii Western wheatgrass Arriba 3.00
Pleurophis jamesii Ga lleta Viva 1.80
Sporobolus oiroìdes Alkali sacaton Salado o.20
Poo secunda Sandberg bluegrass 0,40
Onobrychis viciifolio Sainfoin Eski 7.30
Total 18.45
and harrowing, always perpendicular to the direction of slope.
Alternative seeding methods include, but are not limited to:
. Harrowing with just enough soil moisture to create a rough sutface, broadcasting seed and re-
harrowing, preferably at a right angle to the first harrow.
. Hydro-seeding (most economical in terms of seed cost).
. Hand raking and broadcasting followed by re-raking at a right angle to the first raking.
. The need for fertilizers will be determined in conjunction with the landowner. lf fertilizing is
necessary, the rates of application will be based on site-specific requirements of the soil.
5.0 COST ESTIMATE
Williams is financially prepared to implement the measures outlined in Sections 2.0 through 4.0 above.
Estimated costs to conduct re-vegetation and reclamation activities at the Grand Valley 16-inch pipeline
remediation project location are listed in Table 6.
Table 6. Estimated costs for re-vegetation and reclamation
Task Estimated Cost
Mobilization S2,ooo
Earthmoving Slo,ooo
Seeding and Planting $6,ooo
Weed- Free Mulch, Erosion Control,
Dust Suppression $6,ooo
lrrigation N/A
Weed Management s2,500
per year
TOTAT s26,5oo
6.0 REFERENCES
Barrow, J. R., and Bobby D. McCaslin. 1995. Role of microbes in resource monogement in orid ecosystems.
ln: Barrow, J. R., E. D. McArthur, R. E. Sosebee, ond Tousch, R. 1., comps. L996. Proceedings:
shrublond ecosystem dynamics in o chonging environmenf. General Technical Report, INT-GTR-
338, Ogden, Utah: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, lntermountain Resource
Station, 275 pp.
Garfield County. 2002. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory
Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Monagement Plan, Resolution #2002- 94, Oclober 2t,
Roduner, M., G. Cuperus, P. Mulder, J. Stritzke, M. Payton; Successful Biological Control of the MuskThistle
in Oklahomo lJsing the Musk Thistle Head Weevil ond the Rosette Weevil. Am Entomol 2003; 49
(21:1,12-120.
10
Sirota, J.2AA4. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. Colorado State University,
Coopcrative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado. URL:
http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/Weeds/weed msmt. htm I
State of Colorado. 2O05. Rules pertaining to the administrotion ond enforcement of the Colorodo Noxious
Weed Act,35-5-L-11.9, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant lndustry Division, Denver, 78
pp.
Tischler, Crystal. 2006. District Forester, Colorado State Forest Service, Salida, Colorado. Personal
communication with Bill Clark, WestWater Engineering, Grand Junction, Colorado.
TL
IN$PECTION DATE:
¿F
FIGURE 1
GRAND VALLEY 16-INCH PIPELINE REMEDIATION PROJECT
REMEDIATION PROJECT
SESE SEC 20 T65 R96W
GA R F I E L D€ o
T illi;Sgt"" RAD o
COMMENTS
SITE LOCATION IIAP choo
,:
0
Feet
¡
i
i:
l.
{'.
I
¡i,:1. :'
2,000
"j
:r
t'
ì t,::l i.:'ri i,.'r.
,.ljr,l:l
.l,l
.li:i ì:l
a
t
1..
i' '-J
t
.t
:l
'lirl
)
*
I\l
!
't
ç
rlt
þ
t
*
t
t
ooC4IIIo
E
SJ
(¡
Þ
i, .' u *
.a¡-, 1 a t,-3 '* +.*' t''¡} -'ali,,ff'
i:, L.
¡
*¡Ë"
)
N
A
0 150 300
Feet
LEGEND
¡-1 EXcAVATED/scRAPED AREA
I i sÊcroN
PARCEL BOUNDARY (O\I\NËR NAMED)
PROJECT AREA ACRES SQUARE FEET
EXCLUSION ZONË/
RELEASE POINT 0.1 4,356
RELEASE AREA
(SOIL SCRAPING PLANNED)0.1 4,356
RELEASEAREA
(SOIL SCRÁPING COMPLETËD)6.8 296.208
RELEASE AREA
(I NSITU TR EATMENT SCI.lEDULED)1.1 4S.820
TOTALAREA OF DISTURBANCE 8.1 354_740
.ñir!t$t¡ tl-:ri'+lll-ÊrçÉ! I RLrLrSS; ¡ij"151ìil-iia:lltlt-Èr:'i''r'L*r j*r Ê¡rlr a:îj¡,.Erj^lr{cc's ¡ñç 1ll: tla1-a¡ìì¿:
INSPECTION D ATÊ: 311 12019
¿æ
FIGURE 2
ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION SITE MAP
GRAND VALLEY 16-INCH PIPËLINE REMEDIATION PROJËCT
SESË. SEC 20 T65 R96W
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
WIt.LIAMS MIDSTREAM
COMMENTS
\. \
\1\r '; tI
ir
\r\-Õ
1\ 1\VY\rtIt1\l
1l\\
Þ.
Æi
r,
-ì,rfl
LEGEND
I nasonerNT BooM
r ROCK RUNDOWN
A CULVERT INLET
¿\ CULVERT OUTLET
. SEDIMENT TRAP
' CHECK DAM
f suRFAcE FLow DTRECTToN
I
O DAM
O EMERGENCY DITCH RELIEF
tr PORTABLE SANITARY FACILITY
IRRIGATION DITCH
CATCHMENT TRENCH
: CULVERT
: STRAWWATTLE
BENCHED SHELF
STRAW BALE BARRIER
WATER BAR
: DIVERSION DITCH
C)o
z--l
7o
o
l\)
(¡
II\
t
' : ¡ l ri ìi\iì'r\lÀ1, :i ì 1,,'l¡r.li,l i I r'ii\f\i1 l Ì :
i.t i :r )r )¡.¡ r,;ti :i I i l;) i l( ll I l l,'\i ll.- I ¡'i | ì I
\
l l. jìr; 1,4.i l. :t; r i : i t. r. :i.i i\,1'l i',1( ì, i ì r ì.1,i Ì;'ll ivl l ; i i' i i
\i\rj 1i i.1 {;1 )i'll ìl i il ìÌ'.iìi,1.l.ii' íi( ri.li rl i:.ilr'i
i ti ¡r'l{ iVL.r¡ili}()iìl i il I l';'.{ 1',/',irll! lì{ rL.iiìri:ì
þ.ri lì i l .'\l'i'i'l.r]'i rl,'\ i i r.
IMAGF COURTESY OF ESRI
N
RELEASE AREA (SOIL SCRAPING COMPLETËD) - 6.8 ACRES
[ f, RELEASEAREA (tNstru TREATMENT ScHEDULED) - 1
UPPER OXBOW
LOWER OXBOW
. EOUIPMENT STAGING AREA
GRAVEL ROAD TRACK PAD
1 ACRES
TOTAL PLANNED
DISTURBANCE: 7.9 ACRES
150 300
Feet
0
A
(jl It\l.l f.,lIIAl I.;!:lrli!ìl:i'.i ÍIlii\lr:l/ií.'jr.){llllr('l'.¡rAlvì:.1
l,,l; i\iì I I ri )lII r ¡r,¡.,;¡.1,, iì/lÅiil 1 )l\"/ir I ì r:l( rl'1. ll'll-, 1,¡\1.1.
.t\lri)iiiílll,/\l fìiil:(ìl:.l],\l\,i1],ìj,\1':lll:lli/\iil'¡'j',liii'l(;
t:.1Í:i..1,1 i\',\ill] i.iiiliìl:lì ¡il-{;i'liri'iiì ()i lii\ll tì:)1(lfl llliilÌl
; iìirlfrij:;l.j I l iì,rri, li.ì I I j!.!.¡.ì.lir iìlj1.Viìli ¡
1,. r I I iiì l'Äir tl,1l I i' i:l lliì(ìi:l). vl:1. illl:il;illi.i
I 't rl..ll rll¡\:i {.;;"!1..irlr:l.i ) i:r )l Il:l I i'li l'ri'ììi iil\i/':1..
il : :i1.1':l¡li,ì lI I ¡ l ri.ìi ii( ìir. l ii )i\j i li i llì i l
iìirì'¡iili tìl :i V.:ri.l i ìi'.ll l r I
i
r'
q
a
¿¿
{
-./.8:=
t. )ê
\\
\
b
\\Ò
lol.
./eét
/t
/
I il: I j,\1.1. i ir..rr ì;i I l,'\ 1!"i V:il : i.i l I :
i ilV :i.iiìli.rl',1 i:il I l:i r'l 1 li'ìi Li'.
PROJECTAREA ¡TCRES SQUARE FEE'I
RETEASEAREA
(sorL scRAPr l.]G COtu1PLËrED)296.208
RELEASE AREA
(INSII U f REATIVIENIT SCHEDULEIJJ 1.1 49.820
TOTAL AREA OF DISTURBAI'ICE 7S 346.028
F r-:F.r::1r:"Gl: :'l::FF: :11i r::1-:'a::rr:::: i:J¡:ii,E FfE-Fr'rL': lr'l:' lr rr-r '-_
tsÞ.N\JAPPENDIX A: PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 1: View South on east side county Road 215.
Photograph 2: View East on east side of County Road 215
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado
Photographs Taken : Janua ry 22, 20\9
Page 1 of 7
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 3: View North on east side of County Road 215
Photograph 4: View South on west side of County Road 215.
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado Page 2 of 7
Photographs Taken: January 22, 2O!9
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 5: View West on west side of County Road 215.
Photograph 6: View North on west side of County Road 215
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado Page 3 of 7
Photographs Taken: Janua ry 22, 2019
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 7: Population of CIVU along canal
Grand Valley L6-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Coloracjo Page 4 of 7
Photographs Taken : lanua ry 22, 2OI9
V:
h
I
Photograph 8: Population of CIVU, CYOF, LELA2 near Oxbow, view North
\
I
I
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 1: Populations of TAMAR2, CIVU, and CUOF, view North East
Photograph 2: CIVU Bull thistle.
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado Page 5 of 7
Photographs Taken : Janua ry 22, 2Ot9
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 1: CYOF, Hounds tongue.
Photograph 2: LEIA2, Perennial pepperweed
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado Page 6 of 7
Photographs Taken : Jan ua ry 22, 2079
PHOTOGRAPHIC LOG
Photograph 1: CANU, MuskThistle.
Photograph 2: TAMAR, Tamarisk, view West site overview.
Grand Valley 16-lnch Pipeline Remediation Project
Garfield County, Colorado PageT of 7
Photographs Taken : Janua ry 22, 2019
'{
i