The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.00 Application1 Community Development Department 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-8212 www.garfield-county.com PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY TAX PARCEL NUMBER: Multiple DATE: 6/03/2021 PROJECT: Rocky Mountain Natural Gas – Phase 4 OWNERS: Multiple – provide with application CONTACT/REPRESENTATIVE: Anna Smith - Rocky Mountain Natural Gas OTHER PARTICIPANT: Dale Sostrom – Sargent & Lundy PRACTICAL LOCATION: Panorama Drive northeast to County Boundary TYPE OF APPLICATION: Pipeline – Administrative Review ZONING: Rural COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Residential Low, Residential Medium, Conservation Easement I. GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant is proposing Phase 4 of a gas transmission line update. They will be replacing a current 4-inch line with a 6-inch line. This phase will run approximately two miles. It is a continuation of the previous completed Phase 1 that replaced about 6 miles of line. Since the total length of all phases of the pipeline will extend over the 5-mile benchmark set in Section 9-101 of the Land Use & Development Code (LUDC), this proposed Phase 4 will require Administrative Review Application approval. The existing 4-inch pipeline will remain active during installation of the proposed 6-inch line. The existing 4-inch line is proposed to be abandoned in place according to their specifications. The proposed Phase 4 alignment will require crossing under Cattle Creek and a county road. These crossings are proposed to be made via borings. The Applicant indicated that they are currently in negotiations with landowners for access. They have not finalized a contractor yard location, though their preferred is outside of Garfield County. They also indicated that they have received their permits from Eagle County. 2 The Phase 1 portion of this line replacement was permitted through Article 9 procedures in 2019. That application file number was PDPA-02-19-9713. The Director’s Determination included 13 Conditions of Approval. These past conditions may be relevant to your current proposal as well. Please note the Review Criteria of Section 9-104 which specifically relate to pipeline projects such as these. Notice will be in accordance with Section 9-103.E LUDC which includes certified mail to property owners within 200 feet, as well as sign posting of the property. II. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The pipeline passes through two different future land uses, Residential Low and Residential Medium. Part of the area was indicated to be in a Conservation Easement. III. REGULATORY PROVISIONS APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO ADDRESS Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, specifically sections: 3  Submittal Requirements, Section 9-102  Review Process, Section 9-103  Review Criteria, Section 9-104 IV. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS As a convenience, outlined below is a list of information typically required for this type of application, taken from Section 9-102. General Application Materials as described in Section 4-203 Vicinity Map as described in Section 4-203 Site Plan as described in Section 4-203 - because of the scale of the project, staff will accept a site plan scale that does not specifically meet the requirements of Section 4- 203 provided that the document does not compromise a proper and complete review. Project Overview - 9-102 (D) Property Ownership and Authority to File Application – Section 9-102 (E) Adjacent Properties – Section 9-102(F) o For individual rights-of-way, a diagram showing adjacent properties and the approximate location of buildings and their uses within a distance of 350 feet of any proposed structure, facility, or area to be disturbed. Regulatory Permit Requirements – Section 9-102 (G) o The permit agency name, permit/action driving task, and the task to be performed to obtain the permit, prior to issuance of the permit by the County. Primary Project Participants – Section 9-102 (H) o The names, address, and phone numbers of the company representative; company and individual acting as an agent for the company; construction company contacts; and Federal and State agency contacts. Project Facilities – Section 9-102 (I) o This should include a demonstration of existing ROW and proposed new ROW Construction Schedule – Section 9-102 (J) o Hours of operation needs to be included. Sensitive Area Survey – Section 9-102 (K) Reclamation, Revegetation, and Soil Plan - Section 9-102 (L) o Staff recommends that the applicant contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager prior to the submittal of the application. Weed Management Plan – Section 9-102 (M) Emergency Response Plan – Section 9-102 (N) o Staff recommends the application contact the local Fire District in the area prior to the submittal of an application Traffic Impact – Section 9-102 (O) o Staff recommends that the applicant contact Garfield County Road and Bridge prior to the submittal of an application. The traffic impact should address both construction and post construction impacts. 4 Staging Areas – Section 9-102 (P) o The application should provide the general location of the staging areas required for pipeline construction. The applicant does not need to apply for a separate Contractor’s Yard application, provided the staging areas are identified as part of the application. However, those locations were not finalized and any changes beyond what was represented will be subject to a further review and determination. Pressure Testing – Section 9-102 (Q) Community Development Staff is available to meet with the Applicant to provide additional information and clarification on any of the submittal requirements and waiver requests. V. REVIEW PROCESS Call-Up for review by the Board in accordance with the procedures and review process contained in Section 4-112. Review by: Staff for completeness, recommendation, and referral agencies for additional technical review. Public Hearing(s): X No Public Hearing, Directors Decision (with notice per code) 5 Planning Commission Board of County Commissioners Board of Adjustment Referral Agencies: Garfield County Road and Bridge Department, Garfield County Environmental Health Manager, Garfield County Vegetation Manager, Garfield County Consulting Engineer, Fire Protection Districts, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Quality Division; Any other agency deemed appropriate upon review of the submittal. VI. APPLICATION REVIEW FEES Planning Review Fees: $400 (additional hours are billed at hourly rate of $40.50) Referral Agency Fees: $TBD (Engineering review fee based on hourly rate) Total Deposit: $400 VII. GENERAL APPLICATION PROCESSING The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the County. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. This summary does not create a legal or vested right. The summary is valid for a six-month period, after which an update should be requested. The Applicant is advised that the Application submittal once accepted by the County becomes public information and will be available (including electronically) for review by the public. Proprietary information can be redacted from documents prior to submittal. Pre-application Summary Prepared by: Phillip Berry & Vince Hooper 6-22-21 LANDOWNERS w/i 200 Feet APN OWNER 1 OWNER 2 MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 239104200249 SHIPPEES DRAW LLC 7747 COUNTY ROAD 100 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239104200262 WRIGHT, LORRIE 1302 SOUTH LAKESIDE DRIVE LAKE WORTH FL 33460 239104300263 WRIGHT, LORRIE 1302 SOUTH LAKESIDE DRIVE LAKE WORTH FL 33460 239104300264 X BAR RANCH LLC 1375 RED BUTTE DRIVE ASPEN CO 81611 239104300265 X BAR RANCH LLC 1375 RED BUTTE DRIVE ASPEN CO 81611 239104300266 MISSOURI HEIGHTS CONSULTING LTD 2080 FRANKLIN STREET DENVER CO 80210 239104300267 X BAR RANCH LLC 1375 RED BUTTE DRIVE ASPEN CO 81611 239104400298 PURPLE ORGANIZATION INC 2080 SOUTH FRANKLIN STREET DENVER CO 80210 239105400293 SHIPPEES DRAW LLC 7747 COUNTY ROAD 100 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239107400951 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 2300 RIVER FRONTAGE ROAD SILT CO 81652 239108100260 PYP LLC 8076 COUNTY ROAD 113 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239108200259 4 WILD ROSES LLC PO BOX 6127 BRECKENRIDGE CO 80424 239108400261 TURNBERRY RANCH LLC 19501 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD #400 NORTH MIAMI BEACH FL 33180 239109200235 QUARTER CIRCLE 8 LLLP 420 COUNTY ROAD 122 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239109300271 SORLI, CATHERINE MCNULTY MCNULTY, MARGARET PO BOX 193 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239109300290 HOME RANGE LLC PO BOX 193 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239109300291 HOME RANGE LLC PO BOX 193 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239109300292 HOME RANGE LLC PO BOX 193 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239116201016 FISHER, THOMAS DAVID HAUSE, COLLEEN JA 1090 FENDER LANE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239116201064 PROVOST, THOMAS A PROVOST, JODI A PO BOX 1128 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239116201065 BLODGETT, MARK W KRUGER, MAREIKE L PO BOX 12286 ASPEN CO 81612 239117101002 HEYDENBERK, PATRICIA HUTT HEYDENBERK, DONALD C 429 BUCK POINT RD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101004 FARVER, DENISE ANNE BURWELL, JAMES LANCE 312 BUCK POINT RD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101005 GILBERTI, CHRISTOPHER G 11734 GATEWAY BLVD LOS ANGELES CA 90064 239117101007 GILBERTI, CHRISTOPHER G 11734 GATEWAY BLVD LOS ANGELES CA 90064 239117101008 EARTHMAN, CYNTHIA W 6808 DRIFTWOOD LANE GALVESTON TX 77551 239117101010 THIEL, DAVID T THIEL, CAROL S 1233 PANORAMA DR CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101011 HO, KIRBY YEE 39612 BUENA VISTA TERRACE FREMONT CA 94538 239117101015 BUETTNER, LESLIE 1521 PANORAMA DRIVE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101058 RAINS, LUCAS S RAINS, SUSAN Q 412 BUCK POINT RD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101059 WHITE COLORADO HOLDINGS LLC 2550 VENETIAN WAY WINTER PARK FL 32789 239117101060 BORKOWSKI, HENRY V 1483 PANORAMA DR CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101063 KUHN, NANCY J DIAMANDOPOULOS, TED P 712 BUCK POINT RD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101066 BRUCKER, HANS E HUGHES, LEE ANNA 805 BUCK POINT RD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117102003 ZAMANSKY, JAKE A DAKIDES, TARA A 1212 PANORAMA DRIVE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101023 ZAMANSKY, DAVID ROBERT DIANE JEAN 1820 PANORAMA DRIVE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101029 TEZANOS, CHRISTOPHER TEZANOS, Kelli 2636 PANORAMA DRIVE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117401054 PANORAMA RANCHES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 931 GRAND AVE GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 239117200010 SJOBERG, ALICE 1526 BENNETT AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601 239117200128 FAULKNER, DAVID G SUSAN, M B 745 PANORAMA DR CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117200129 ROTHMAN, ARTHUR ROTHMAN, MAUREEN E 721 COUNTY RD 170 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117200130 ATCHISON, STEVEN M PO BOX 23253 GLADE PARK CO 81523 239117200148 JOHNS, DWIGHT E BINGHAM, ELIZABETH 645 COUNTY RD 170 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117200149 LEONARD, CONNIE BINKLEY, RANDY 647 COUNTY RD 170 CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101001 ANDREWS, LORI ANDREWS, RUSSELL 331 BUCK POINT ROAD CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117101003 SHETZER, ANGELA RENEE SHETZER, MATTHEW PAUL 231 BUCK POINT DRIVE CARBONDALE CO 81623 239117201009 CERNONOK, BROOKE SERSON CERNONOK, DOUG PO BOX 2766 BASALT CO 81621 Wright-LarosePIN: 239104300263 Purple Organization PIN: 239104400298 Missouri Heights PIN: 239104300266 X Bar Ranch PIN: 239104300265 Quarter Circle 8PIN: 239109200235 McNultyPIN: 239109300271 Turnberry Ranch PIN: 239108400261 Brucker-Hughes PIN: 239117101066 Kuhn-Diamandopoulos PIN: 239117101063 Heydenberk PIN: 239117101002 Burwell-Farver PIN: 239117101004 Ho PIN: 239117101011 Earthman PIN: 239117101008 Thiel PIN: 239117101010 CORD10AC O R D 1 1 3 ST HWY 82CORD100 CO RD 170 CO R D 1 2 2 CO RD 1 0 0 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Date Saved: 8/20/2021 9:37:06 AMDocument Path: C:\GIS\CWP4\MXD\VICINITY-MAP.mxd08/20/2108/20/2108/20/21 EMKEMKDAS DATE A ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GASCOTTONWOOD PASS 6" PIPELINE REPLACEMENTPHASE 4 - GARFIELD COUNTYVICINITY MAP APPROVALS CLIENT APPROVAL DRAWN/DESIGNEDCHECKEDAPPROVED OPERATIONSENGINEERINGPROJ. MGR. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J 0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,0002,000 Feet SCALE = 1:80,000 A14409.001-01-5301. GARFIELD COUNTY EAGLE COUNTY LEGEND PROPOSED 6" PIPE EXISTING 4" PIPE COUNTY BOUNDARY PARCELS WITHIN 3 MILES TOWN OFCARBONDALE 239117200178 239117102003 239117101066 239117101058 239117101063 239117101008 239117101010 239117101002 239117201009 239117101004 239117101007 239117101011 239117101059 239108400261 239109300290 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Date Saved: 8/25/2021 2:01:14 PMDocument Path: C:\GIS\CWP4\MXD\CULTURAL-SHEETS.mxdAuthor: 7 A B Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Colorado Central FIPS 0502 FeetProjection: Lambert Conformal ConicDatum: North American 1983False Easting: 3,000,000.0003False Northing: 1,000,000.0000Central Meridian: -105.5000Standard Parallel 1: 38.4500Standard Parallel 2: 39.7500Latitude Of Origin: 37.8333Units: Foot US DATE REFERENCE DRAWINGS REVISIONS APPROVALS CLIENT APPROVAL DRAWN/DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED OPERATIONS ENGINEERING PROJ. MGR. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE APP DATEAPP BYCHK DATECHK BYDATEBYDESCRIPTIONREVTITLEDRAWING NO. SCALE:DRAWING NO. 6 7 F JCDEGHI 1 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J .0 200 400 600 800100Feet A ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/18/21 08/18/21 08/18/21EMKDAS 08/18/2108/18/2108/18/21 EMKEMKDAS A14409.001-01-5101 B ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GASCOTTONWOOD PASS 6" PIPE REPLACEMENTPHASE 4 ADJACENT PROPERTIESSHEET 1 OF 4 1 : 1500 LEGEND STRUCTURE TYPE GARAGE/SHOP OUTBUILDING RESIDENCE SHEDS HDD BORE PROPOSED 6" PIPE EXISTING 4" GAS PROJECT BUFFER (350') PERMANENT EASEMENT GARFIELD CO PARCELS 350' B ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/25/21 08/25/21 08/25/21EMKDAS 239108400261 239109300290 239109200235239109300271 239117101066239117101002 239117101004 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Date Saved: 8/25/2021 1:59:47 PMDocument Path: C:\GIS\CWP4\MXD\CULTURAL-SHEETS.mxdAuthor: 7 A B Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Colorado Central FIPS 0502 FeetProjection: Lambert Conformal ConicDatum: North American 1983False Easting: 3,000,000.0003False Northing: 1,000,000.0000Central Meridian: -105.5000Standard Parallel 1: 38.4500Standard Parallel 2: 39.7500Latitude Of Origin: 37.8333Units: Foot US DATE REFERENCE DRAWINGS REVISIONS APPROVALS CLIENT APPROVAL DRAWN/DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED OPERATIONS ENGINEERING PROJ. MGR. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE APP DATEAPP BYCHK DATECHK BYDATEBYDESCRIPTIONREVTITLEDRAWING NO. SCALE:DRAWING NO. 6 7 F JCDEGHI 1 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J .0 200 400 600 800100Feet A ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/18/21 08/18/21 08/18/21EMKDAS 08/18/2108/18/2108/18/21 EMKEMKDAS A14409.001-01-5102 B ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GASCOTTONWOOD PASS 6" PIPE REPLACEMENTPHASE 4 ADJACENT PROPERTIESSHEET 2 OF 4 1 : 1500 LEGEND STRUCTURE TYPE GARAGE/SHOP OUTBUILDING RESIDENCE SHEDS HDD BORE PROPOSED 6" PIPE EXISTING 4" GAS PROJECT BUFFER (350') PERMANENT EASEMENT GARFIELD CO PARCELS 350' B ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/25/21 08/25/21 08/25/21EMKDAS 239109200235 239108400261 239109300271 239109400009 239104401002 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Date Saved: 8/25/2021 1:58:02 PMDocument Path: C:\GIS\CWP4\MXD\CULTURAL-SHEETS.mxdAuthor: 7 A B Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Colorado Central FIPS 0502 FeetProjection: Lambert Conformal ConicDatum: North American 1983False Easting: 3,000,000.0003False Northing: 1,000,000.0000Central Meridian: -105.5000Standard Parallel 1: 38.4500Standard Parallel 2: 39.7500Latitude Of Origin: 37.8333Units: Foot US DATE REFERENCE DRAWINGS REVISIONS APPROVALS CLIENT APPROVAL DRAWN/DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED OPERATIONS ENGINEERING PROJ. MGR. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE APP DATEAPP BYCHK DATECHK BYDATEBYDESCRIPTIONREVTITLEDRAWING NO. SCALE:DRAWING NO. 6 7 F JCDEGHI 1 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J .0 200 400 600 800100Feet A ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/18/21 08/18/21 08/18/21EMKDAS 08/18/2108/18/2108/18/21 EMKEMKDAS A14409.001-01-5103 B ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GASCOTTONWOOD PASS 6" PIPE REPLACEMENTPHASE 4 ADJACENT PROPERTIESSHEET 3 OF 4 1 : 1500 LEGEND STRUCTURE TYPE GARAGE/SHOP OUTBUILDING RESIDENCE SHEDS HDD BORE PROPOSED 6" PIPE EXISTING 4" GAS PROJECT BUFFER (350') PERMANENT EASEMENT GARFIELD CO PARCELSGARFIELD COUNTYEAGLE COUNTY350' B ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/25/21 08/25/21 08/25/21EMKDAS 239109200235 239104300265 239104401002 239104300266 239104401001 239104300267 239104400005 239104400298 239104300263 Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Date Saved: 8/25/2021 1:35:24 PMDocument Path: C:\GIS\CWP4\MXD\CULTURAL-SHEETS.mxdAuthor: 7 A B Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Colorado Central FIPS 0502 FeetProjection: Lambert Conformal ConicDatum: North American 1983False Easting: 3,000,000.0003False Northing: 1,000,000.0000Central Meridian: -105.5000Standard Parallel 1: 38.4500Standard Parallel 2: 39.7500Latitude Of Origin: 37.8333Units: Foot US DATE REFERENCE DRAWINGS REVISIONS APPROVALS CLIENT APPROVAL DRAWN/DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED OPERATIONS ENGINEERING PROJ. MGR. SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE APP DATEAPP BYCHK DATECHK BYDATEBYDESCRIPTIONREVTITLEDRAWING NO. SCALE:DRAWING NO. 6 7 F JCDEGHI 1 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D E G H IF J .0 200 400 600 800100Feet A ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/18/21 08/18/21 08/18/21EMKDAS 08/18/2108/18/2108/18/21 EMKEMKDAS A14409.001-01-5104 B ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GASCOTTONWOOD PASS 6" PIPE REPLACEMENTPHASE 4 ADJACENT PROPERTIESSHEET 4 OF 4 1 : 1500 LEGEND STRUCTURE TYPE GARAGE/SHOP OUTBUILDING RESIDENCE SHEDS HDD BORE PROPOSED 6" PIPE EXISTING 4" GAS PROJECT BUFFER (350') PERMANENT EASEMENT GARFIELD CO PARCELSGARFIELD COUNTYEAGLE COUNTY350' B ISSUED FOR REVIEW EMK 08/25/21 08/25/21 08/25/21EMKDAS I . .-= Recorded at 3:E' P.M. April 29, 1969 Book 401 Reception Chas.S.Keegan, Recorder . Page 388 N0.243289. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT , Grantor(s), of does; . hereby convey and warrant to ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIJRAI, GAS C , 1NC.S Denver, Cola- -eratiom, xeceipt of which is hereby acknowledged, a right of way and easement fifty (50) feet4n width, .to lay, maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move and replace pipelines, valves, valve boxes, and other gas distribution and related facilities over, through, unde and across the following described land and premises situated in the County of d&$I Q lc6 Grantee, its successors and assigns, fSr,the sum of hdL& Ah 4A -3 - DOLLARS ($,q&! --) and other good and valuable consid- , , State of Colorado towit: Crossing Heuschkel Ranch in the SE % SE % Section 8 Township 7 S Range 87 W 6th P M for approx. 2000' -- The center line of said right of way above described land and premises as ed in the office of the County Clerk i &- i and easement'-shall shown on a plat or and Recorder. 'W a extend through end across the map of said line to be record- TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the said Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, Inc. its successors and assigns, so long as such facilities or any of them above re- ferred to are Owned, operated or maintained, with the right of ingress and egress to and from said right of way to maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move, and replace the same. with the purposes for which this right of way and easement is granted. the laying, erecting, maintaining, operating, or removing of said pipe lines and re- lated facilities; said damages, if not mutually agreed upon shall be ascertained by three disinterested persons, one thereof to be appointed by the Grantor(s), one by the Grantee, and the third by the two so appointed and the written award of any two such persons shall be final and conclusive. any building or other improvement over or across said right of way. right of way shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the Grantor and the suc- cessors and assigns of the Grantee. The terms and provisions herein contained constitute the entire agreement between the parties and shall supersede all previous communications, representations, or agreements, whether verbal or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. WITNESS the hand of said Grantor(s) this day of # The Grantor(s) shall have the use of premises except for any use which conflicts The Grantee hereby-agrees-to-pay for damages to crops or fences resulting from The Grantor(s) shall not build or construct nor permit to be built or constructed This easement and - -- -. - - -- ss. trument was acknowledged before me by this day of MY Commission Expires J -. YXd- I. Notary Public .* Recorded at 3~12 P.M. April 29, 1969 Book 401 Rolv--socf Reception No, 243290 Chas.S.Keegan,Recorder. Page 389. RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT '. / , Grantor (6) , , does; hereby convey and warrant to ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAT, GAS COMPAhY, INC., Denver,E,l$; rado, Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the 'sum of B n 0 hLr oh e &/&s /rsnd/.Ft CDU&OLLARS ($/ST63 1 and other good and valuable consid: erations, receipt of w ich is hereby acknowledged, a right of way and easement fifty (SO) feet iswidth,. to lay, maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move and,replace pipelines, valves, valve boxes, and other gas distribution and related :facilities over, through, under and across the following described land and premises situated in the County of &--& 'a/ d Crossing McNulty Ranch in the SW % NW % Section 9 Township 7 S Range 87 W 6thPM for approx. 5000' - - --- - - - - dt e d , State of Colorado towit: -- A The center line of said right of way and easement shall extend above described land and premises as sham on a plat or map of -ed--.in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder. said Rocky Mountain Inc. its successors and assigns, so long as such facilities or ferred to are Owned, operated or maintained, with the right of \ TO.,HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the through and across the said line to be record- Natural Gas Company, any of them above re- ingress and egress to and from said right of way to maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move, and replace the same. with the purposes for which this right of way and easement is granted. the laying, erecting, maintaining, operating, or removing of said pipe lines and re- lated facilities; said damages, if not mutually'agreed upon shall be ascertained by three disinterested persons, one thereof to be appointed by the Grantor(s), one by the Grantee, and the third by the two so appointed and the written award of any two such persons shall be final and conclusive. any building or other improvement over or across said right of way. right of way shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the Grantor and the suc- cessors and assigns of the Grantee. The terms and provisions herein contained constitute the entire agreement between agreements, whether verbal or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. The Grantor(s) shall have the use of premises except for any use which conflicts The Grantee hereby agrees to-pay for damages to crops or-_fences resulting from The Grantor(s) shall not build or construct nor permit to be built or constructed This easement and the parties and shall supersede all previous communications, representations, or A. - WITNESS the hand of said Grantor(s) this -/ . - -_ -I-- - - -e--- nt was acknowledged before me e---- this day My Commission Expires I t . .:: 4- d Notary Public fQU- soy Book 401 Page 390. r- Recorded at 3:12 P.M. April 29, 1969 -7 :, - reception Nd.243291 RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT Chas*S*Keegan, - J / , Grantor(s), of 4L-L 202, , c-€%kzdA \l% , does; hereby- convey and warrant to ROCKY MQUNTAIN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC., Denver, Colo- rado, Grantee, its successors and assigns, for the sum of Ohr h~~dwd f,% Phq Do//uvs a L -(;%h t~en~s DOLLARS ($ /J%S-d) and other good and valuable c6nsid- erations, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, a right of way and easement fifty (SO) feet in width, to lay, maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move and replace pipelines, i?alves, valve boxes, and other gas distribution and related facilities over, through, under and across the following described land and premises situated I in the County of & c /e , State of 'Colorado towit: Crossing McNulty Ranch in the East -% Section 4, NW %t NW % Section 3 Township 7 S, Range 87 W, 6th PPI for approx. 5000'. -_ - The center line of said right of way and easement shall extend through and across the above described land and premises as shown on a plat or map of said line to be record- ed in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder. Inc. its successors and assigns, so long a"s such facilities or any of them above re- ferred to are Owned, operated or maintained, with the right of ingress and egress to and from said right of way to maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move, and replace the same. with the purposes for which this right of way and easement is granted. the laying, erecting, maintaining, operating, or removing of said pipe lines and re- lated facilities; said damages, if not mutually agreed upon shall be ascertained by three disinterested persons, one thereof to be appointed by the Grantor(s), one by the Grantee, and the third by the two so appointed and the written award of any two such persons shall be final and conclusive. any building or other improvement over or across said right of way. right of way shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the Grantor and the suc- cessors and assigns of the Grantee. The terms and provisions herein contained constitute the entire agreement between the parties and shall supersede all previous communications, representations, or agreements, whether verbal or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. WITNESS the hand of said Grantor(s) this TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the said Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, The Grantor(s) shall have the use of premises except for any use which conflicts The Grantee hereby agrees to pay for damages to crops or fences resulting from The Grantor(s) shall not build or construct nor permit to be built or constructed This easement and /> a day of $-, d7 ,190 n -.A @-instrument was acknowledged before me bmw &, . - this - > 7/. / 12d. fF My Commission Expires 1 Y , Grantor(s), of Glenwood Springs s Colorado , does; hereby convey and warrant to ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS COplpANy INC., Denyer, Colo- rado, Gran ee it8 suc sors and aas3. ns, for the sum of sb' - $&?E- DOLULRS ( ) and other =uaTi:Lz- erations, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, a right of way and easement fifty (SO) feet in width, to lay, maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move and replace pipelines, valves, valve boxes, and other gas distribution and related facilities over, through, under and across the following described land and premises situated in the County of Garfield , State of Colorado twit: The Section 17, Township 7 South, Range 87 West, 6 P.M. The Grantee agrees to install (3) three culverts. The Grantee further agrees to clean up rocks brought to the surface as a result of our operations. The Grantee further agrees to compensate the Grantor for pasture damage as the result of construction on the Grantors property.brdkfcr w;// purchase reed 4 reseed rigk+ rf way. B~MC, BLUE, [res fed wheat- /b *,&-. The line will run for approximately 5866 feet. - _- -- --_-- - -- - _I- _- Zt44 - - & The center line of said right of way and easement shall extend through and acro88 the 1 above described land and premises as Shawn on a plat or map of said line to be record- *-- ed in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder. Inc. its successors and assigns, so long as such facilities or any of them above re= ferred to are owned, operated or maintained, with the right of ingress and egress to and from said right of way to maintain, operate, repair, alter, inspect, protect, re- move, and replace the same. with the purposes for which this right of way and easement is granted. the laying, erecting, qintgin_iw, op_erati~,_or_removing of said _pipe lines and re-. __ lated facilities; said damages, if not mutually agreed upon shall be ascertained by the Grantee, and the third by the two SO appointed and the written award of any two such persons shall be final and conclusive. any building or other improvement Over or across said right of way. right of way shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the Grantor and the suc- cessors and assigns of the Grantee. The terms and provisions herein contained constitute the entire agreement between the parties and shall supersede all previous cammunications, representations, or agreements, whether verbal or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the said Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company, % The Grantor(@) shall have the use of premises except for any use which conflicts The Grantee hereby agrees to pay for damages to crops or fences resulting from 'i . three disinterested persons, one thereof to be appointed by the Grantor(s), one by The Grantor(s) shall not build or construct nor permit to be built or constructed This easement and WITNESS the hand of said Grantor(s) this ,ldd. was acknowledged before me by &Nq Gra*pP K - Notap Public MEMORANDUM OF SURFACE USE AGREEMENT This Memorandum of Surface Use Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “Memorandum”) is entered into this ____ day of _______, 2021, by and between Cynthia W. Earthman (“Landowner”), whose address is 6808 Driftwood Lane, Galveston, Texas 77551 and Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC (“RMNG”) doing business as Black Hills Energy, whose address is 96 Darrow Street, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601; each of the foregoing sometimes referred to individually as a “Party,” or collectively as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, on the _____ day of ______, 2021, the undersigned have entered into that certain Surface Use Agreement (“Agreement”) for RMNG to conduct pipeline replacement activities within the following described lands in Garfield County, Colorado: Owner: Cynthia W. Earthman Property Address: 180 Buck Point Road, Carbondale CO 81623 Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 2391-171-01-008 Legal Description: Homestead 8 Panorama Ranches, as recorded in Reception No. 298382 of the Clerk and Recorder’s records of Garfield County, Colorado, situated in the NE¼ of Section 17, Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th P.M. Said Agreement contains all required provisions and agreements as to RMNG’s activities and use of the above-described lands for the installation of a 6-inch natural gas transmission pipeline and associated above-ground appurtenances on or under the above-described lands. RMNG has an existing Right of Way and Easement on a portion the Property described in certain documents recorded in Book 401, Page 392, Reception No. 243293, dated July 10, 1967, in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder (the “Existing Right of Way”). This Memorandum is being executed by the undersigned for the primary purpose of recording and thus advising all interested parties of the existence and validity of such Agreement, the exact terms and conditions of which are more fully stated in the unrecorded instrument on file with the respective parties. This Memorandum shall constitute notice to all parties of the existence of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this Memorandum as of the date first hereinabove written. Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC _______________________________ _______________________________ Cynthia W. Earthman Mark Arnold Senior Manager of Gas Operations 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STATE OF ) ) ss COUNTY OF ) On this ______ day of , 2021, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said county and state, personally appeared Cynthia W. Earthman, known to me to be the person whose name is affixed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the instrument to be her voluntary act and deed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notary seal the day and year last above written. _________________________ ___________________________________ My Commission Expires Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) On this ______ day of ____________, 2021, before me, a notary public in and for said county and state, personally came the above-named, Mark Arnold_____, as Senior Manager of Gas Operations_____ of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC, known to me to be the person whose name is affixed to the above instrument and acknowledged the instrument to be their voluntary act and deed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notary seal the day and year last above written. _________________________ ___________________________________ My Commission Expires Notary Public MEMORANDUM OF SURFACE USE AGREEMENT This Memorandum of Surface Use Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “Memorandum”) is entered into this ____ day of ________, 2021, by and between, Quarter Circle 8 LLLP, a Colorado limited liability limited partnership, (“Landowner”), whose address is 420 County Road 122, Carbondale, CO 81623, and Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC (“RMNG”) doing business as Black Hills Energy, whose address is 96 Darrow Street, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601; each of the foregoing sometimes referred to individually as a “Party,” or collectively as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, on the _____ day of __________, 2021, the undersigned have entered into that certain Surface Use Agreement (“Agreement”) for RMNG to conduct pipeline replacement activities within the following described lands in Garfield County, Colorado: Owners: Quarter Circle 8 LLLP Property Address: 420 County Road 122, Carbondale, CO 81623 Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 2391-092-00-235 (Garfield County) Legal Description: a Metes and Bounds description situated in Section 4 and Section 9, Township 7 South, Range 87 West of the 6th P. M., Garfield County, Colorado. Being more particularly described in a Correction Special Warranty Deed, recorded on May 10, 2004, in Reception# 651799 of the Clerk and Recorder’s records of Garfield County, Colorado. Said Agreement contains all required provisions and agreements as to RMNG’s activities and use of the above-described lands for the installation of a 6-inch natural gas transmission pipeline and associated above-ground appurtenances on or under the above-described lands. RMNG has two existing Right of Way and Easements on a portion the Property described in certain documents dated July 17, 1967, and recorded in Book 401, at Page 389, Reception No. 243290, and in Book 401 at Page 390, Reception No. 243291 in the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder (the “Existing Right of Way”). This Memorandum is being executed by the undersigned for the primary purpose of recording and thus advising all interested parties of the existence and validity of such Agreement, the exact terms and conditions of which are more fully stated in the unrecorded instrument on file with the respective parties. This Memorandum shall constitute notice to all parties of the existence of this Agreement. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said parties have executed this Memorandum as of the date first hereinabove written. Quarter Circle 8 LLLP, a Colorado limited liability limited partnership By: ________________________________ Sarah L. McNulty, General Partner Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC By:_______________________________ Mark Arnold Senior Manager of Gas Operations ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF ) On this ______ day of , 2021, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said county and state, personally appeared Sarah L. McNulty, as General Partner for Quarter Circle 8 LLLP, a Colorado limited liability limited partnership, known to me to be the person whose name is affixed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the instrument to be her voluntary act and deed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notary seal the day and year last above written. _________________________ ___________________________________ My Commission Expires Notary Public 3 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss COUNTY OF GARFIELD ) On this ______ day of ____________, 20____ before me, a notary public in and for said county and state, personally came the above-named, Mark Arnold_____, as Senior Manager of Gas Operations_____ of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC, known to me to be the person whose name is affixed to the above instrument and acknowledged the instrument to be their voluntary act and deed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notary seal the day and year last above written. _________________________ ___________________________________ My Commission Expires Notary Public DITCH CROSSING AGREEMENT This Ditch Crossing Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ________ day of ________________ , 2021, by and between the C&M Ditch Company, whose address is _________________________ (“Company”) and Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC d/b/a Black Hills Energy, whose address is 7001 Mount Rushmore Road, Rapid City, South Dakota, 57702, (“RMNG”). Referred to collectively herein as the “Parties.” A. The Company operates and maintains an Irrigation Ditch known as the C&M Ditch (“C&M Ditch”) and RMNG owns and operates a natural gas pipeline and appurtenances across the following described lands in Garfield County, Colorado. B. Parcel ID#: 239109200235 Township 7 South, Range 87 West, 6th P.M. Section 9: A part of the NW/4 Garfield County, Colorado The location of the pipeline and ditch crossing is more generally described on “Exhibit A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. C. RMNG plans to replace an existing 4-inch natural gas steel transmission pipeline with a 6-inch steel pipeline on the lands described above. RMNG intends to bore under the C&M Ditch. D. The Company and RMNG both have easements for their facilities and operations. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: 1. RMNG shall bore under the C&M Ditch as described on “Exhibit A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. RMNG shall be solely responsible for the construction, maintenance and operation of its operations under the C&M Ditch. 2. RMNG shall bore under the C&M Ditch at a minimum depth of 10' (ten feet) below the ditch. Bore pits associated with the bore work shall be located at least 20' (twenty feet) away from either side of the banks of the C&M Ditch. 3. RMNG agrees to provide to the Company an as-built drawing upon completion of the boring and construction activities. Upon completion, the construction area shall also be restored by RMNG to its former condition so far as practicable and in accordance with RMNG's agreement with the landowner. This Agreement is binding upon RMNG and its successors and assigns, in consideration that the Company does not object and otherwise allows construction of RMNG’s bore under the C&M Ditch, consistent with the Agreement of the Parties stated herein. If the foregoing correctly sets forth your understanding of our agreement, please signify by executing and returning one (1) copy of this Ditch Crossing Agreement to my attention at Black Hills Energy, 96 Darrow Street, Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601, or email to Ditch Crossing Agreement Page 2 of 2 david.c.gremel@blackhillscorp.com. Scanned pdf copies of each party’s execution to this Ditch Crossing Agreement shall be considered originals for all purposes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date and year first written above COMPANY: C&M DITCH COMPANY By: ______________________________ Name: _____Mike Cerise_____________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ By: _______________________________ Name: _____________________________ RMNG: ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS, LLC By: ________________________________ Mark Arnold Senior Manager of Gas Operations DITCH CROSSING AGREEMENT This Ditch Crossing Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this ________ day of ________________ , 2021, by and between the Needham Ditch Company, whose address is _________________________ (“Company”) and Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC d/b/a Black Hills Energy, whose address is 7001 Mount Rushmore Road, Rapid City, South Dakota, 57702, (“RMNG”). Referred to collectively herein as the “Parties.” A. The Company operates and maintains an Irrigation Ditch known as the Needham Ditch (“Needham Ditch”) and RMNG owns and operates a natural gas pipeline and appurtenances across the following described lands in Garfield County, Colorado. B. Parcel ID#: 239109200235 Township 7 South, Range 87 West, 6th P.M. Section 9: A part of the NW/4 Garfield County, Colorado The location of the pipeline and ditch crossing is more generally described on “Exhibit A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. C. RMNG plans to replace an existing 4-inch natural gas steel transmission pipeline with a 6-inch steel pipeline on the lands described above. RMNG intends to bore under the Needham Ditch. D. The Company and RMNG both have easements for their facilities and operations. NOW THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: 1. RMNG shall bore under the Needham Ditch as described on “Exhibit A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. RMNG shall be solely responsible for the construction, maintenance and operation of its operations under the Needham Ditch. 2. RMNG shall bore under the Needham Ditch at a minimum depth of 10' (ten feet) below the ditch. Bore pits associated with the bore work shall be located at least 20' (twenty feet) away from either side of the banks of the Needham Ditch. 3. RMNG agrees to provide to the Company an as-built drawing upon completion of the boring and construction activities. Upon completion, the construction area shall also be restored by RMNG to its former condition so far as practicable and in accordance with RMNG's agreement with the landowner. This Agreement is binding upon RMNG and its successors and assigns, in consideration that the Company does not object and otherwise allows construction of RMNG’s bore under the Needham Ditch, consistent with the Agreement of the Parties stated herein. If the foregoing correctly sets forth your understanding of our agreement, please signify by executing and returning one (1) copy of this Ditch Crossing Agreement to my attention at Black Ditch Crossing Agreement Page 2 of 2 Hills Energy, 96 Darrow Street, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601, or email to david.c.gremel@blackhillscorp.com. Scanned pdf copies of each party’s execution to this Ditch Crossing Agreement shall be considered originals for all purposes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date and year first written above COMPANY: RMNG: NEEDHAM DITCH COMPANY By: ______________________________ Scott Strand ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS LLC By: ________________________________ Mark Arnold Senior Manager of Gas Operations Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 1 of 8 LUDC Section 9-102(D) – Project Overview A description of the project including the length and diameter of the pipeline, pipeline commodity, general description of the pipeline, and pipeline route. PURPOSE AND SCOPE Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC (RMNG), a private corporation doing business as Black Hills Energy (BHE), is an intrastate transmission pipeline company whose rates, terms, and conditions of service are regulated by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and its Code of Colorado Regulations, 4 CCR 723-4. RMNG’s transmission pipelines provide gas transportation services to public utilities, natural gas producers, and other transportation customers in Colorado, as well as directly to end-user customers. End-user customers serviced by the transmission pipeline addressed in this land use application are located in the Carbondale and Eagle Valley areas, including but not limited to the American Gyp-board plant and residents within the towns of Gypsum and Eagle and along the route of the existing pipeline alignment. This submitted application is for RMNG’s final phase, Phase 4, of their 21-mile Cottonwood Pass pipeline replacement project. The extent of this overall replacement project, which commenced in 2019, is from Carbondale north to Gypsum and consists of replacing RMNG’s existing 4-inch natural gas transmission steel pipeline with a 6-inch steel pipeline. This replacement will occur within RMNG’s existing 50-ft wide pipeline right-of-way (ROW). The last 1.95 miles of Phase 4 is situated in Garfield County and extends from the Eagle/Garfield County line in the Ten Peaks Mesa subdivision down to Panorama Drive in the Panorama Ranches subdivision (specifically in Township 7 South, Range 87 West, 6th P.M - SE¼W½ of Section 4; SE¼SE¼ of Section 8; W½ of Section 9; and NE¼ of Section 17). Please refer to the Vicinity Map included in the Vicinity Map segment of this submittal packet. Once Phase 4 of this Cottonwood Pass pipeline replacement project is completed, the total length of pipeline replaced in Garfield County will be approximately 6.4 miles in length, 4.5 miles of which were replaced in Phase 1 in 2019. Please refer to PDPA-02-19-9713 for RMNG’s application on the Phase 1 replacement. Additionally, the portion of Phase 4’s alignment in Eagle County was approved through the Eagle County Location and Extent application review process in March of 2021 (LEA-9132-2021). The primary purposes of this replacement project are to: a) increase reliability of gas transmission; b) provide adequate natural gas supply due to growth and customer needs; c) improve integrity of the pipeline; and d) decrease fugitive emissions through the installation of modern materials and fittings. Construction activities for Phase 4 are scheduled to occur between April 15 and November 1 of 2022 within RMNG’s existing pipeline ROW and all landowner-authorized temporary workspace areas (TWAs). Included in the Property Ownership and Authority to File Application section of this application packet are copies of the originally recorded pipeline ROW and easement instruments for all the affected parcels as well as the applicable recorded subdivision plats, which depicts RMNG’s easements. Based on the language in these recorded instruments, RMNG will be exercising their legal right to enter these properties to perform the replacement work. Also included in this section are copies of Memorandum of Surface Use Agreements that will be executed with the respective private landowners for three TWAs. Please refer to the narrative section addressing Section 9-102(P) for further information on the TWAs. Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 2 of 8 Portions of the pipeline alignment will also be situated within two County Road ROWs. RMNG has submitted the Utility Permit Applications to the Garfield County Road and Bridge Department and have already obtained the necessary permits for the installation of the pipeline in these road ROWs. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Within their existing pipeline ROW, RMNG will be replacing the existing 4-inch steel transmission pipeline with approximately 10,281 linear feet (LF) or 1.95 miles of new 6-inch steel pipe between the Eagle/Garfield County line and Panorama Drive. Of this total pipeline length, 10,216 LF will occur on privately owned properties of which approximately 7,388 LF is proposed to be installed via open trenching and the remaining 2,828 LF via directional boring. No disturbance is expected to occur between bore entry and exit points. Included in this bored length are: a landowner’s hay field, Cattle Creek, C&M ditch, Needham ditch, and approximately 1,225 LF between Buck Point Road and Panorama Drive in order to avoid sloping topography and landowner encroachments in RMNG’s ROW. The remaining 65 LF of the overall pipe length would be situated in the following road ROWs: CR 122 (Upper Cattle Creek Rd) – 30 feet and Buck Point Road – 35 feet. RMNG is proposing to install the pipeline via boring beneath both roadways. Please refer to the Alignment Sheets in Appendix A of this Project Overview narrative. All landowners and ditch owners directly affected by the Phase 4 pipeline replacement project have been notified of the work that is scheduled to occur within RMNG’s recorded ROW and easement. RMNG staff and its ROW agent have notified and/or met with each landowner/ditch owner to document any concerns or stipulations not already addressed by the existing ROW and easement instruments. Unless specified otherwise by these owners in executed agreements, RMNG and their contractor will restore and reclaim all disturbance areas back to pre-construction conditions. Please refer to WestWater Engineering’s Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline Project Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan (dated August 2021) included in the SWMP/Revegetation/Weed Management Plans section of this submittal packet. This pipeline replacement work will affect 14 privately owned parcels within Garfield County. Table 1 below lists the affected parcels as well as affected roads. Parcels are listed from the county line south to end of line (EOL). Table 1. Landowner List Phase 4 (in Garfield County) PIN RMNG Easement (Reception #) Subdivision Plat (Reception #) Lorrie Wright 239104300263 W 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243291) 625692 Purple Organization Inc kna Slang Colorado RE, Inc 239104400298 E 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243291) 625692 Missouri Heights Ltd 239104300266 50’ ROW (243291) 625692 X Bar Ranch LLC 239104300265 50’ ROW (243291) 625692 CR 122 (Upper Cattle Creek Rd) Road ROW N/A N/A Quarter Circle 8 239109200235 50’ ROW (243290) N/A Catherine McNulty Sorli/Margaret McNulty 239109300271 50’ ROW (243290) N/A Turnberry Ranch LLC 239108400261 50’ ROW (243289) N/A Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 3 of 8 Donald & Patricia Heydenberk 239117101002 W 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Hans Brucker & Lee Anna Hughes 239117101066 E 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Buck Point Road Road ROW N/A James Burwell & Denise Farver 239117101004 W 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Nancy Kuhn & Ted Diamandopoulos 239117101063 E 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Kirby Yee Ho 239117101011 E 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Cynthia Earthman 239117101008 W 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 David & Carol Thiel 239117101010 E 25 feet of 50’ ROW (243293) 298382 Per the posted online Garfield County Official Zone District Map, dated December 15, 2014, all affected parcels are zoned Rural. Based on the length of trenched pipe, approximately 8.48 acres of surface disturbance would occur within RMNG’s pipeline ROW. An additional 0.26 acres of disturbance is anticipated for the three TWAs for a total disturbance of 8.74 acres in Garfield County. Section 9-102(E)(2)(c) – Property Ownership and Authority to File Application Evidence of authority of Applicant to file the application as follows: c. Deed, easement, surface use agreement, or BLM right of way… Included in the Property Ownership and Authority to File Application section of this application packet are copies of the recorded Right of Way and Easement documents for RMNG’s pipeline ROW, purchased over 50 years ago from the landowners at the time. Also included are copies of the subsequent subdivision plats, which depict RMNG’s ROW and/or existing pipeline. RMNG’s opinion is that these easements provide RMNG with the rights, privileges, and opportunity to pursue the project contemplated by RMNG, including but not limited to the legal right to enter these properties and perform the replacement work. Also included in this section are copies of the Ditch Crossing Agreements (Agreements) and Memorandum of Surface Use Agreements (Memos) for the TWAs that are expected to be executed. Prior to construction commencing, RMNG will submit with the required Grading Permit application, if not sooner, all executed Agreements and Memos. Section 9-102(F) – Adjacent Properties Please refer to the maps included in the Adjacent Properties section of this application packet. Section 9-102(G) – Regulatory Permit Requirements The permit agency name, permit/action driving task, and the task to be performed to obtain the permit, prior to issuance of the permit by the County. Based on the location of the pipeline route, RMNG has initiated application processes with the following agencies for their review and approvals: • Garfield County Road & Bridge Department for the installation of approximately 65 LF of pipeline within CR 122 and Buck Point Road ROWs. Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 4 of 8 For copies of the R&B applications and permits, please refer to Appendix B of this Project Overview narrative. Air Per Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) Regulations 3, Part A, Subpart II.D.1.j., an exemption is made for certain land development applications. The exemption from permitting and air pollutant emission notices (APEN) is stated as follows: “Disturbance of surface areas for purposes of land development, that do not exceed twenty-five contiguous acres and that do not exceed six months in duration. (This does not include mining operations or disturbance of contaminated soil).” Therefore, since the pipeline replacement work activities will not exceed 25 contiguous acres of disturbance and no area of disturbance will remain open for greater than 6 months in duration, this project meets the exemption listed in Regulation 3. Stormwater For Phase 4, RMNG will continue to work under its current active Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) General Stormwater Permit (Certification #COR404117), which covers all construction phases of this project in both Eagle and Garfield Counties. Included in the SWMP/Revegetation/Weed Management Plans section of this application packet is a copy of the Stormwater Management Plan for Phase 4, which includes a copy of the permit. RMNG will comply with the permit requirements outlined in this Plan. CDPHE’s permit will remain in effect until such time a uniformed revegetation of 70% cover of pre-existing conditions have been achieved on all phases of this project. BHE will comply with CDPHE’s stormwater requirements, including inspection frequency. Per internal policy, all inspections will be completed by a third-party qualified stormwater manager. All reports completed for each inspection are kept on file in the event of an audit by CDPHE personnel. Once revegetation has been achieved, a Stormwater Permit Notice of Termination will be submitted to CDPHE. Section 9-102(H) – Primary Project Participants ROW Holder Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, LLC RMNG Project Manager Anna Smith 96 Darrow Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 250-6697 Construction – Not yet selected. Engineering Sargent & Lundy Dale Sostrom 400 Inverness Pkwy #200 Englewood, CO 80112 Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 5 of 8 (303) 877-1263 Land Department BHE ROW Division Senior ROW Agent David Gremel (303) 548-5451 Environmental BHE Environmental Services Department Senior Environmental Professional Ally Little (307) 778-2123 Avian/Raptor Surveys WestWater Engineering Amie Wilsey (719) 469-8621 Stormwater Inspections/Reclamation Oversight HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc Tanner Ridgway (970) 261-0082 Section 9-102(I) – Project Facilities Along this section of the pipeline alignment, the following existing above-ground permanent appurtenances are located within the 50-ft pipeline ROW: farm taps, fire valves, above- and below- ground block valves, and District Regulator Stations (DRSs). Planned changes during construction of this Phase are to: 1) relocate one of the existing DRSs to the north of CR 122 in order to remove it from within a landowner’s hay field, per the landowner’s request, and 2) to remove the existing under-ground block valve. This block valve will be replaced with a new above-ground block valve further north on the alignment in Eagle County. Please refer to the Alignment Sheets in Appendix A of this Project Overview section for the locations of these appurtenances. Once the new 6-inch pipeline is in service, the existing 4-inch pipeline will be abandoned in-place in accordance with the procedures outlined in BHE’s Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Manual, specifically Procedures #13 and #66, which require: • All above-ground piping that is connected to any pipeline being abandoned in-place shall be severed below grade at the point of connection and removed. • Any pipeline that is to be abandoned in-place will not be maintained and should not be considered for reactivation for service at a later date. • The remaining underground pipeline will be purged either via compressed air or air mover (blower) of any flammable substance. Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 6 of 8 • Once purging is completed, the remaining underground pipeline will be sealed, including all openings, to make the pipeline air/gas tight. Sealing methods include but are not limited to: welding on a steel plate, installing a 4”x12” foam plug, threading on a cap, or other Company approved methods. By implementing the methods outlined above, RMNG’s existing 4-inch natural gas transmission pipeline would be removed from service. Section 9-102(J) – Construction Schedule April 15, 2022 to November 1, 2022. RMNG and their contractor will work Mondays through Saturdays, excluding holidays, from 7am to 6pm, depending on weather, material delivery delays, or unforeseen safety concerns. Section 9-102(K) – Sensitive Area Survey In August of 2021, WestWater Engineering conducted a survey of the pipeline ROW in Garfield County. A copy of their report is provided in the Sensitive Area Survey section of this application packet. RMNG’s intent is to brush hog their ROW this Fall after all avian nesting seasons have ended to reduce risk of avian interactions during the 2022 construction season. In 2022, prior to commencing construction activities, RMNG will have WestWater conduct another raptor/avian survey along the perimeter of the alignment to determine any active nests and their respective protective buffers. For any active nests found, BHE will review Colorado Parks and Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service recommended seasonal and spatial buffers. Jurisdictional “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) anticipated to be encountered along this segment of Phase 4 in Garfield County includes Cattle Creek, a perennial stream. Based on previous communication with and determination by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), this pipeline replacement project qualifies for coverage under the Nationwide Permit 3 - Maintenance (NWP 3), a copy of which is included in the Sensitive Area Survey section of this application packet. Cattle Creek, along with any associated wetlands, is proposed to be bored. Nonetheless, pipeline construction activities will comply with NWP 3 and the 2017 Regional Conditions to Nationwide Permits in the State of Colorado. Section 9-102(L& M) – Reclamation, Revegetation, and Soil and Weed Management Plan Please refer to WestWater‘s Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline Project Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan (dated August 2021) included in the SWMP/Revegetation/Weed Management Plans section of this submittal packet. Section 9-102(N) – Emergency Response Plan – A Fire Protection and Hazardous Materials Spills Plan that specifies planned actions for possible emergency events, a listing of persons to be notified of an emergency event, proposed signage, and provisions for access by emergency response teams. The emergency plan must be acceptable to the appropriate fire district or the County Sheriff, as appropriate. The plan shall include a provision for the operator to reimburse the appropriate emergency service provider for costs incurred in connection with emergency response for the Operator’s activities on the site. Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 7 of 8 Please refer to the Black Hills Energy O&M 116 - Emergency Response Plan included in the Emergency Response Plan section of this application packet. Section 9-102(O) – Traffic Impact. For construction traffic that will use a County Road, the anticipated types of vehicles, number of each type, anticipated number of trips per day for each type, County roads to be used, and the percentage of the construction traffic that will travel on each road. Estimated Construction Equipment and Trips Temporary construction office trailer approx. 8-ft x 30-ft – 2 trips (mob in/mob out) Excavators, 4 (+/- during construction) – 4 trips (mob in/mob out and 2 mob arounds) Dozer, 2 – 4 trips (mob in/mob out and 2 mob arounds) Moto Grader, 1 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Pipelayers, 4 – 8 trips (mob in/mob out and 2 mob arounds) Skidsteer, 1 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Welding rigs, 3 – 2 trips/day Heavy Haul/Lowboy, 1 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Bending Machine, 1 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Personnel onsite at one time – 50+/- (construction, bore, surveyor, x-ray, and inspection crews) Pick-up trucks/vehicles, 16 (+/- during construction) – 2 trips each/day Frac tank, 3 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Water truck, 1 – up to 3 trips/day depending on certain conditions, including weather Boring Machinery + Mud Truck, 1 – 3 trips (mob in/mob out and 1 mob around) Hydro-vac Truck, 1 – 2 trips/day for about 2 weeks Other – dumpster, port-a-johns, trailers, UTVs Roads anticipated to be traveled by construction equipment are: CR 100, CR 113, CR 122, CR 10A, Panorama Drive, and Buck Point Rd. Section 9-102(P) – Staging Areas. The general location of the staging areas required for pipeline construction. The main staging area for Phase 4 will not be located in Garfield County but on private property in Eagle County off of CR 10A. Within Garfield County, RMNG is proposing two 50-ft x 100-ft TWAs, to be utilized solely for the purpose of boring activities, and one 25-ft x 50-ft TWA, to be utilized as additional work area for equipment turning into and out of the pipeline ROW. These TWAs, totaling 0.26 acre, will be reclaimed in accordance with each respective landowner’s executed Surface Use Agreement. Section 9-102(Q) – Pressure Testing. Indicate the quantity of water or other fluid required, legal source of water if utilized, and the disposition of the water or other fluid after testing. Following installation, the new pipeline would be strength-tested in compliance with applicable regulations and RMNG standards, and all necessary permits would be acquired. Water for hydrostatic testing would be acquired from local Garfield County water plant(s) located within Carbondale, Glenwood Springs, or Rifle or other approved water source. RMNG estimates approximately 1,007 barrels (BBLs) would be utilized for testing the newly installed pipeline. The purchased water would be delivered to the site via transport truck and utilized as needed within the hydrostatic process. Should Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 Page 8 of 8 the hydrostatic testing occur in phases, it is the intention to re-use the water from each phase in each subsequent test. Should unforeseen instances occur preventing the re-use of the water from previous phases, new water would be purchased from the municipality that has agreed to supply the water. Once pressure testing is complete, the water quality would be analyzed according to Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) Water Quality Division permit standards to determine water quality. Based on the sample results and the permit conditions, the water would either be discharged onto the ground surface or delivered to a properly licensed wastewater treatment facility in accordance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State, and local county disposal requirements. Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 APPENDIX A Black Hills EnergyTM Black Hills EnergyTM Black Hills EnergyTM Project Overview RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement – Phase 4 in Garfield County August 30, 2021 APPENDIX B Garfield County Road & Bridge 0298 CR 333A Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-625-8601 Fax: 970-625-8627 Email: roadandbridge@garfield-county.com Utility Permit Application Fee: $150.00 plus $.25 a foot 1.Permit Owner:Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC 2. Address: 96 Darrow Street 3.City, State, Zip: Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Email: Anna.Smith@blackhillscorp.com 4.Phone No: 970-250-6697 5.Permit Start Date: April 16, 2022 6.Sub-Contractor: TBD 7.Sub-Contractor Phone: Email: 8. Job Number: Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline Replacement Project 9. County Road No: Buck Point Road 10.Type of Installation: Open Road Cut Road Bore Utility Trench ROW 11. Job Description: Bore 6” steel transmission pipe. Existing 4” steel pipe would be abandoned in place once 6” pipe is in service. 12.Nearest Intersection or Address:412 Buck Point Road 13.Distance from Int. or Address: @40 ft 14.Direction from Int. or Address: N E S W 15.Side of Road: N E S W Full Road Width 16.Road Bore Pits: County Right of Way Private Property 17. Road Bore Cased: Yes No See Permit Requirements (A) 18. Depth of Installation: Min 5 feet 19. Length of Installation: 35 feet Installations within County right of way over 1000-feet in length require a survey, BOCC approval and an as-built upon completion of project. X X X X X 20. Survey Required Before Issuing Permit: Yes No 21. Type of Backfill: Road Base Flofill Excavated Material See Permit Requirement (B) 22. Asphalt Replacement: Yes No If Yes, See Permit Requirement (C) 23. Replacement of Mag. Chloride Surface: Yes No If Yes, See Permit Requirement (D) 24. Certified Traffic Control with Plan Required: Yes No Holds are not to exceed 10 minutes at a time. 25. Work Zone Signage Only Required: Yes No 26. Road Closure Requested: Yes No NOTE: Additional information will be required for full road closure. Approval for full road closure must be approved by the Director of Road & Bridge or Designee per Resolution No. 2003-113, Section 6.2. (Request for Full Road Closure Form Attached) 27. Person Requesting Permit: Anna Smith 970-250-6697 28. Person Approving Permit: 29. Date Approved: Payment Information Check Visa Mastercard Name of Cardholder: Billing Address: Card Number: / / / / / / / / / / / / Expiration Date: / V Code (last 3 or 4 numbers on back of card) Signature Required Authorized Cardholder Signature X X X X X Black Hills EnergyTM NOT TO SCALE 100’ 100’ 100’ 100’ 100’ 100’ SLOW TRUCKS TURNING ON HWY PANORAMA DR / BUCK POINT RDNOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR WILL NEED TRUCKS TURNING ON HWY ADVANCED WARNING WITH OPTIONAL FLAGGING OPERATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION EGRESS & INGRESS AT LOCATIONS ON A TWO LANE ROAD, DURING ALLOWABLE WORKING HOURS ONLY. 2. FLAGGERS WILL STOP TRAFFIC TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AS NEEDED. 3. AT NIGHT, HAZARDS WILL BE BARRICADED WITH DRUMS AND OR VERTICAL PANELS AND FLASHING LIGHTS. 4. REFER TO MUTCD 2009 EDITION FIGURE 6H-13 FOR A TYPICAL APPLICATION. 5. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS & DEVICES SHALL ADHERE TO STANDARDS OF THE 2009 MUTCD. SIGNS & DEVICES: 2 - TRUCKS TURNING ON HWY 2 - BE PREPARED TO STOP (OPTIONAL) 2 - FLAGGER SYMBOL CONES/DRUMS AND OR VERTICAL PANELS & LIGHTS/SIGN COVERS RMNG21-008-02 TYPICAL ACCESS POINT BE PREPARED TO STOP BE PREPARED TO STOP TRUCKS TURNING ON HWY PREPARED BY: Ashley E. Lee 08/20/21 ATSSA TCS NAME DATE PHONE: 970-242-0669 CERTIFICATION # 00245585 ISSUE DATE: 07/01/2021 EXPIRATION DATE: 07/01/2025 CC ENTERPRISES - TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS, INC Contractor: ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS / BLACK HILLS ENERGY Project: COTTONWOOD PASS PHASE 4 PIPELINE PROJECT - PANORAMA DR & BUCK POINT RD Method of Handling Traffic: TYPICAL TRUCKS TURNING ON A TWO LANE ROAD Garfield County Road & Bridge 0298 CR 333A Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970-625-8601 Fax: 970-625-8627 Email: roadandbridge@garfield-county.com Utility Permit Application Fee: $150.00 plus $.25 a foot 1.Permit Owner:Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC 2. Address: 96 Darrow Street 3.City, State, Zip: Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Email: Anna.Smith@blackhillscorp.com 4.Phone No: 970-250-6697 5.Permit Start Date: April 16, 2022 6.Sub-Contractor: TBD 7.Sub-Contractor Phone: Email: 8. Job Number: Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline Replacement Project 9. County Road No: 122 (Upper Cattle Creek Rd) 10.Type of Installation: Open Road Cut Road Bore Utility Trench ROW 11. Job Description: Bore 6” steel transmission pipe and 2” PE line. Existing 4” steel pipe would be abandoned in place once 6” pipe is in service. 12.Nearest Intersection or Address:420 CR 122 13.Distance from Int. or Address: @600 ft 14.Direction from Int. or Address: N E S W 15.Side of Road: N E S W Full Road Width 16.Road Bore Pits: County Right of Way Private Property 17. Road Bore Cased: Yes No See Permit Requirements (A) 18. Depth of Installation: Min 5 feet 19. Length of Installation: 30 feet Installations within County right of way over 1000-feet in length require a survey, BOCC approval and an as-built upon completion of project. X X X X X 20. Survey Required Before Issuing Permit: Yes No 21. Type of Backfill: Road Base Flofill Excavated Material See Permit Requirement (B) 22. Asphalt Replacement: Yes No If Yes, See Permit Requirement (C) 23. Replacement of Mag. Chloride Surface: Yes No If Yes, See Permit Requirement (D) 24. Certified Traffic Control with Plan Required: Yes No Holds are not to exceed 10 minutes at a time. 25. Work Zone Signage Only Required: Yes No 26. Road Closure Requested: Yes No NOTE: Additional information will be required for full road closure. Approval for full road closure must be approved by the Director of Road & Bridge or Designee per Resolution No. 2003-113, Section 6.2. (Request for Full Road Closure Form Attached) 27. Person Requesting Permit: Anna Smith 970-250-6697 28. Person Approving Permit: 29. Date Approved: Payment Information Check Visa Mastercard Name of Cardholder: Billing Address: Card Number: / / / / / / / / / / / / Expiration Date: / V Code (last 3 or 4 numbers on back of card) Signature Required Authorized Cardholder Signature X X X X X Black Hills EnergyTM BASED ON A ONE LANE ROAD WORK ZONE: TAPER: 50’ DEVICE SPACING: 20’ BUFFER: 100’ DEVICE SPACING: 40’ END TAPER: 50’ DEVICE SPACING: 20’ TRANSITION AREA: 100’ CC ENTERPRISES - TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALISTS, INC Contractor: ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS / BLACK HILLS ENERGY Project: COTTONWOOD PASS PHASE 4 PIPELINE PROJECT - CR113/CR 122 Method of Handling Traffic: TYPICAL ONE LANE CLOSED ON A TWO LANE ROAD NOT TO SCALE 500’ 500’ 500’ 500’ 500’ 500’ SLOW UTILITY WORK AHEAD UTILITY WORK AHEAD ONE LANE ROAD AHEAD ONE LANE ROAD AHEAD CR 113 / CR 122NOTES: 1. CONTRACTOR WILL NEED ALTERNATING SINGLE LANE CLOSURES, ON A TWO LANE RURAL ROAD DURING ALLOWABLE WORKING HOURS ONLY, UNTIL COMPLETION OF PROJECT. 2. FLAGGERS WILL STOP TRAFFIC FOR ONE LANE ROAD WORK ZONE. 3. AT NIGHT, HAZARDS WILL BE BARRICADED WITH DRUMS AND OR VERTICAL PANELS AND FLASHING LIGHTS. 4. REFER TO MUTCD 2009 EDITION FIGURE 6H-10 IN ADDITION TO COLORADO STANDARDS S-630-1 CASE NO 17 FOR TYPICAL APPLICATIONS. 5. ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS & DEVICES SHALL ADHERE TO STANDARDS OF THE 2009 MUTCD. SIGNS & DEVICES: 2 - UTILITY WORK AHEAD 2 - ONE LANE ROAD AHEAD 2 - FLAGGER SYMBOL CONES/DRUMS AND OR VERTICAL PANELS & LIGHTS/SIGN COVERS TYPICAL LINE CROSSING PREPARED BY: Ashley E. Lee 08/20/21 ATSSA TCS NAME DATE PHONE: 970-242-0669 CERTIFICATION # 00245585 ISSUE DATE: 07/01/2021 EXPIRATION DATE: 07/01/2025 RMNG21-008-01 COTTONWOOD PASS PIPELINE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PREPARED FOR: Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC Doing business as: Black Hills Energy 7060 ALEGRE STREET FOUNTAIN, COLORADO 80817 PREPARED BY: HRL COMPLIANCE SOLUTIONS, INC. 2385 F ½ Road Grand Junction, CO 81505 970.243.3271 DATE PREPARED: JANUARY 14, 2019 Revised: August 2021 Note: SWMP has been reduced in size for County submittal. Full CDPHE COR400000-compliant SWMP will be available prior to construction. Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 STORMWATER RUNOFF PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................... 1 2.0 CONSTRUCTION SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 2 2.1 SITE LOCATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 SITE AREA CHARACTERISTICS .............................................................................................................................. 3 2.2.1 Runoff Characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.2.2 Existing Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................... 9 2.3.1 Clearing/Grubbing/ and Grading ............................................................................................................... 10 2.3.2 Trenching/Backfilling ................................................................................................................................. 10 2.3.3 Final Reclamation ....................................................................................................................................... 10 3.0 POTENTIAL POLLUTION SOURCES ..................................................................................................... 11 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF SOIL CONTROL MEASURES ................................................................................ 12 4.1 STRUCTURAL PRACTICES FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ..................................................................... 12 4.1.1 Rock Check Dams ....................................................................................................................................... 12 4.1.2 Straw Wattles .............................................................................................................................................. 12 4.1.3 Roadside Bar Ditch ..................................................................................................................................... 12 4.1.4 Culvert Inlet/Outlet Protection ................................................................................................................... 13 4.1.5 Water Bars .................................................................................................................................................. 13 4.1.6 Berms .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 NON-STRUCTURAL PRACTICES FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ............................................................ 13 4.2.1 Seeding of Disturbed Areas ......................................................................................................................... 13 4.2.2 Mulching ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.2.3 Surface Roughening .................................................................................................................................... 14 4.2.4 Erosion Control Blankets ............................................................................................................................ 14 5.0 PHASED CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................ 15 5.1 CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 15 5.2 INTERIM RECLAMATION ...................................................................................................................................... 15 5.3 FINAL STABILIZATION ......................................................................................................................................... 16 6.0 MATERIALS HANDLING AND SPILL PREVENTION ........................................................................ 18 6.1 WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL................................................................................................................ 18 6.2 FUELS AND MATERIALS MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................. 18 6.3 CONSTRUCTION SITE HOUSEKEEPING ................................................................................................................. 19 7.0 DEDICATED CONCRETE OR ASPHALT BATCH PLANTS ............................................................... 20 8.0 VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL ........................................................................................................... 21 9.0 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES ........................................................................... 22 10.0 NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES ...................................................................................................... 24 11.0 CERTIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 25 11.1 OWNER/APPLICANT CERTIFICATION ................................................................................................................. 25 11.2 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN ADMINISTRATOR ...................................................................................... 26 12.0 ADDITIONAL CONTROL MEASURE REFERENCES ......................................................................... 27 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Stormwater Permit Authorization Appendix B Site Maps/Alignments Appendix C Stormwater Inspection Form Appendix D Control Measure Installation Details Appendix E Project Seed Mixes Appendix F Black Hills Spill Response Plan Appendix G Training Documentation Appendix H Soil Information TABLES Table 1. SWMP Revisions Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project Stormwater Management Plan 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) has been created to comply with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s (CDPHE) General Permit COR-400000 and applicable U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater regulations. This SWMP addresses construction activities associated with the construction of a Pipeline Right-of-Way (ROW) and materials staging yards for the construction subcontractor(s) working on the Pipeline ROW. This SWMP is intended to be periodically updated as needed to address planned developments, new disturbances, and other changes needed to manage stormwater and protect surface water quality. This SWMP contains general stormwater management practices, as well as site specific information related to specific construction activities. Site specific information control measure implementation, potential pollution sources, final stabilization measures, etc.) can be found throughout the text of this document. Phase 4 is planned for Spring 2022 construction, linking the Phase 3 pipeline with the Phase 1 pipeline. The purpose of this SWMP is to: •Identify all potential sources of pollution which may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges associated with construction activity from the pipeline; •Describe the practices to be used to reduce the pollutants in stormwater discharges associated with construction activity at the facility; •Ensure the practices are selected and described in accordance with good engineering practices, including the installation, implementation and maintenance requirements; •Be implemented as written and updated, from commencement of construction activity until final stabilization is complete per the General Permit conditions. 1.1 Stormwater Runoff Permitting Requirements The Federal Clean Water Act [Section 402(p)] requires that discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States from any point source be regulated by NPDES permits. In compliance with the Colorado Water Quality Act (25-8-101 et seg., CRS, 1973 as amended) and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; the “Act”), this SWMP meets the requirements of the CDPS General Permit- stormwater discharges associated with construction activity Permit Number COR-400000 permit. Stormwater construction permits are required for oil and gas activities that disturb one (1) or more acres during the life of the project, or, are part of a larger common plan of development. See Appendix A for Permit certification. Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC (RMNG), doing business as Black Hills Energy (BHE), will oversee all aspects of this project. Contractor(s) will conduct the actual construction and grading with all work supervised by RMNG and all decisions made by RMNG. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 2 2.0 CONSTRUCTION SITE DESCRIPTION This SWMP covers construction activities associated with excavating, coating, and installing a natural gas pipeline. 2.1 Site Location The Cottonwood Pass pipeline project is located across Garfield and Eagle Counties, Colorado and will be constructed in multiple phases. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project: Garfield County •Township o 7S •Range o 87, 88 W •Sections o 31,30,25,20,19.17,9,8,4 Eagle County •Townships o 5,6,7S •Range o 86,87,98W •Sections o 1,4,8,12,13,17,18,23,24,26,27,33,34 The community of El Jebel is the nearest population center approximately 2.81 miles east of the Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project start and is approximately 3.85 miles southwest of the town of Carbondale. The pipeline ends near the town of Gypsum, Colorado. See Appendix B for site maps. Receiving waters: Phase 1 The receiving waters for Phase I of the pipeline project include the following: •Multiple unnamed drainages; •Roaring Fork River; •Colorado River. Refer to Appendix B for the Site Maps and applicable receiving waters. Phase 2 The receiving waters for Phase II of the pipeline project include the following: •Multiple unnamed drainages; •Gypsum Creek; •McBrayer Ditch; •Swamp Drain Ditch; •Spring Gulch •Eagle River. Refer to Appendix B for the Site Maps and applicable receiving waters. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 3 Phase 3 The receiving waters for Phase III of the pipeline project include the following: •Multiple unnamed drainages; •Cottonwood Creek; •Tom Creek; •East Coulter Creek; •Spring Gulch; •Eagle River; •Colorado River; Refer to Appendix B for the Site Maps and applicable receiving waters. Phase 4 The receiving waters for Phase III of the pipeline project include the following: •Multiple unnamed drainages; •Van Spring Resevoir; •Shippees Draw; •Cattle creek; •Multiple unnmaed irrigation ditches; •Roaring Fork River; Refer to Appendix B for the Site Maps and applicable receiving waters. 2.2 Site Area Characteristics 2.2.1 Runoff Characteristics Runoff characteristics are based on site topography, soil type, and vegetative cover. Soils identified on this project are described below. The structural and nonstructural control measures as outlined in this SWMP are specifically designed to minimize erosion and sediment transport associated with these soil types. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the soil types within the disturbance areas of this Project within Garfield & Eagle Counties consist of twenty-eight (28) general soil units. Please see Appendix H for Soil Maps. Garfield County Soils 1-Acree loam (3-6% slopes) This map unit is found on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. The soil is a deep well drained soil. Elevations range from 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, and the average frost-free period is 95-105 days. Permeability is slow, available water is high, and effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 4-Acree loam (6-12% slopes) This map unit is found on alluvial fans and valley side slopes. The soil is a deep, well-drained soil. Elevations range from 6,500 to 8,200 feet. The average annual precipitation is 16 to 18 inches, and the average frost-free period is 95-105 days. Permeability is slow, available water is high, and Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 4 effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 6 – Almy laom (1 to 12% slopes) This map unit is found on fans and uplands. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,000 to 7,800 feet. The average annual precipitation is 12 to 14 inches, and the average frost- free period is 85-105 days. Permeability is moderate, available water is high, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 13 – Atencio-Azeltine complex (3-6 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans, and terraces. This unit is approximately 60% Atencio sandy loam and 30% Azeltine gravelly sandy loam. The Atencio soil is deep and well drained. Permeability is moderately to a depth of 30 inches and is rapid below this depth. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and hazard of water erosion is slight. The Azeltine soil is deep and well drained. Permeability is rapid or very rapid below a depth of 16 inches. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and hazard of water erosion is slight. Potential plant community – mainly western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, needleandthread, big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Main limitations are cobbles and stones. 34 – Empedrado loam (2-6 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans and upland hills. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,500 to 9,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, and the average frost-free period is 75-95 days. Permeability is moderate, available water is high, and effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrasss, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 35 – Empedrado loam (6-12 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans and upland hills. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,500 to 9,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 18 inches, and the average frost-free period is 75-95 days. Permeability is moderate, available water is high, and effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 38 – Evanston loam (1-6 % slopes) Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 5 This unit is found on alluvial fans, terraces, and valley sides. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,500 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 13 to 15 inches, and the average frost-free period is 80-90 days. Permeability is moderate, available water is high, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, cheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 42 – Fluvaquents (0-10 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial valley floors and flood plains. The soil is deep and poorly drained. The water table fluctuates between depths of 0.5 foot and 2.0 feet during spring and summer. These soils are occasionally flooded for brief periods in late spring and early summer. Potential plant community – cottonwood, willow, water-tolerant grasses, sedges, and rushes. 54 – Grotte gravelly loam (25-65 % slopes) This unit is found on mountainsides. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,000 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 15 to 17 inches, and the average frost-free period is 80-105 days. Permeability is moderately slow, available water is moderate, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on steeper slopes. Potential plant community –Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, Wyoming big sagebrush, Utah juniper, and pinyon pine. 55 – Gypsum land-Gypsiorthids complex (12-65 % slopes) This unit is found on mountainsides, hills, and dissected drainageways. The soils are shallow and well drained. Permeability is moderate, available water is low or moderate, and effective rooting depth is 10-40 inches or more. Runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is slight to severe on steeper slopes. Potential plant community –sparse grasses, forbs, and Utah Juniper. This map unit supports very little native vegetation. 69 – Kilgore silt loam (1-6 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial valley floors, flood plains, low terraces, and alluvial fans. The soil is deep and poorly drained. Elevations range from 6,000 to 9,800 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18 to 20 inches, and the average frost-free period is 70-95 days. Permeability is moderately slow, available water is low, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight or moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, cheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 87– Morval-Tridell complex (12-50 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans and mountainsides. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 6,800 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 13 to 15 inches, and the average frost-free period is 85-95 days. Permeability is moderate, available water is moderate, and the Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 6 effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, prairie junegrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, cheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 94 – Showalter-Morval complex (5-15 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans, terraces, and valley sides. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 7,000 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 14 to 16 inches, and the average frost-free period is 80-90 days. Permeability is slow, available water is moderate, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, cheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 95 – Showalter-Morval complex (15-25 % slopes) This unit is found on alluvial fans, terraces, and valley sides. The soil is deep and well drained. Elevations range from 7,000 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 14 to 16 inches, and the average frost-free period is 80-90 days. Permeability is slow, available water is moderate, and the effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – Letterman needlegrass, Idaho fescue, Indian ricegrass, western wheatgrass, mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, Gambel oak, lanceleaf rabbitbrush, elk sedge, slender wheatgrass, cheatgrass, and Saskatoon serviceberry. 106 – Tridell-Brownsto stony sandy loams (12-50%) This unit is found on terraces and mountainsides. The Tridell soil is deep and somewhat excessively drained. Permeability is moderately rapid, available water capacity is low, and effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The Brownsto soil is deep and well drained. Permeability is moderate, available water capacity is low, and effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community – mainly pinyon pine, Utah juniper with an understory of bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, Wyoming big sage, mutton grass, bottlebrush squirreltail, antelope bitterbrush, and true mountain mahogany. Eagle County Soils 9-Ansel-Anvik association, (25-45% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on fans, foot slopes, and in mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived from alluvium and colluvium from material of mixed mineralogy. Elevation is 7,500 to 9,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-22 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38-40 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 70 to 80 days. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is high. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. Potential plant community on this unit is mainly Douglas fir. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 7 11-Anvik-Skylick-Sligting association, (25-50% sloped): This deep, well-drained soil is on fans and mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived alluvium and colluvium from material of mixed mineralogy. Elevation is 8,500 to 10,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 36-38 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 45 to 60 days. Permeability is moderately slow. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. Potential plant community on this unit is mainly bearded wheatgrass, fescues, native bromes, and mountain snowberry. 17-Cochetopa-Antrobus association, (6-12% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on fans and mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived from basalt. Elevation is 7,500 to 9,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-22 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38-40 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 70 to 80 days. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community on this unit is mainly Thurber fescue, bearded wheatgrass, Columbia needlegrass, mountain brome, and Idaho fescue. Western wheatgrass, mountain snowberry, geranium, and western yarrow also are included. 18-Cochetopa-Antrobus association, (12-25% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on fans and mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived from basalt. Elevation is 8,500 to 10,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 35-38 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 45 to 60 days. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potential plant community on this unit is mainly Thurber fescue, bearded wheatgrass, Columbia needlegrass, mountain brome, and Idaho fescue. Western wheatgrass, mountain snowberry, geranium, western yarrow, and small areas of aspen are also included. 19-Cochetopa-Antrobus association, (25-50% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on mountainsides. It formed in alluvium derived from basalt. Elevation is 8,500 to 10,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 36-38 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 45 to 60 days. Permeability is slow. Available water capacity is moderate. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. Potential plant community on this unit is mainly Thurber fescue, bearded wheatgrass, Columbia needlegrass, mountain brome, and Idaho fescue. Western wheatgrass, mountain snowberry, geranium, and western yarrow are also included. 20-Coulterg loam, (12-50% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on mountainsides and fans. It formed in alluvium and colluvium derived dominantly from siltstone, soft shale, and limestons. Elevation is 7,500 to 9,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 39-43 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 65 to 80 days. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is high. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium or rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate or severe on the steeper slopes. Native vegetation include Douglas fir and lodgepole pine. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 8 25-Cushool-Rentsac complex, (15-65% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on mountains and mesa side slopes. It formed in residuum derived dominantly from sandstone and shale. Elevation is 6,200 to 7,600 feet. The average annual precipitation is 10-15 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42-45 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 85 to 105 days. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is low. Effective rooting depth is 20-40 inches. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is severe. The potential plant community is mainly pinyon pine and Utah juniper with an understory of big sagebrush, Indian ricegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, and galleta. Rocky Mountain juniper, true mountainmahogany, and bottlebrush squirreltail commonly are also included. 56-Gypsum land-Gypsiorthids complex (12-65 % slopes): This unit is found on mountainsides, hills, and dissected drainageways. The soils are shallow and well drained. Permeability is moderate, available water is low or moderate, and effective rooting depth is 10-40 inches or more. Runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is slight to severe on steeper slopes. Potential plant community –sparse grasses, forbs, and Utah Juniper. This map unit supports very little native vegetation. 56-Ipson cobbly loam, (3-25% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on terraces, terrace side slopes, and fans. It formed in alluvium and outwash derived dominantly from sandstone and basalt. Elevation is 6,700 to 8,300 feet. The average annual precipitation is 13-15 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42-46 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 70-90 days. Permeability is moderate in the Ipson soil. Available water capacity also is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The potential plant community is mainly bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass, western wheatgrass, true mountainmahogany, and big sagebrush. Prairie junegrass, mountain snowberry, and scattered pinyon pine and Gambel oak also are included 64-Jerry loam, (25-65% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on alluvial fans and hills. It formed in alluvium derived dominantly from sandstone and shale. Elevation is 7,500 to 9,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18-20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 37-40 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 70-80 days. Permeability is moderate in the Jerry soil. Available water capacity also is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The potential plant community is mainly mountain brome, elk sedge, mountain snowberry, Gambel oak, and Saskatoon serviceberry. Other plants that characterize this site are slender wheatgrass, needlegrass, and western wheatgrass. 69-Kilgore silt loam: This deep, poorly drained soil is on alluvial valley floors, flood plains, low terraces, and alluvial fans. It formed in alluvium derived dominantly from mixed sources. Elevation is 6,000 to 9,800 feet. The average annual precipitation is 18 to 20 inches, the average annual air temperature is 38-40 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 70 to 95 days. Permeability is moderately slow in the Kilgore soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of water erosion is slight or moderate on the steeper slopes. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly tufted Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 9 hairgrass, Nebraska sedge, slender wheatgrass, ovalhead sedge, and willow. Other plants that characterize this site are western yarrow, Rocky Mountain iris, and shrubby cinquefoil. 98-Southace cobbly sandy loam, (12-25% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on upland terraces, mountainsides, the sides of mountains and valleys, and alluvial fans. It formed in alluvium and colluvium derived dominantly from redbed sandstone and shale intermixed with gypsiferous material. Elevations is 6,000 to 7,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is 14 to 16 inches, the average annual air temperature is 42 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 95-105 days. Permeability is moderate in the Southace soil. Available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The potential plant community is mainly western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, muttongrass, Wyoming big sagebrush, and Utah serviceberry. Needleandthread, Douglas rabbitbrush, squaw apple, and scattered Utah juniper commonly are also included. 115-Yamo loam, (6-12% slopes): This deep, well-drained soil is on fans and toe slopes. It formed in colluvium derived dominantly from sandstone, shale, and gypsum. Elevation is 6,200 to 7,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is 10 to 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is 40 to 44 degrees F, and the average frost-free period is 85-105 days. Permeability is moderate in the Yamo soil. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The potential plant community on this unit is mainly western wheatgrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, prairie junegrass, Wyoming big sagebrush, and Douglas rabbitbrush. Other plants that characterize this site are needleandthread, bottlebrush squirreltail, and Sandberg bluegrass. 2.2.2 Existing Vegetation Estimated percent vegetative ground cover is approximately 60%. Native vegetation in the project area consists mainly of Rocky Mountain juniper, Utah juniper, mountain big sagebrush, gambel oak, blue and Engelman spruce, quaking aspen, rabbitbrush, and serviceberry with an understory of saltbush, desert parsley, fleabane species, arrowleaf balsamroot, milkvetch, yellow sweet clover, alfalfa, crested wheatgrass, blue grama, slender wheatgrass, Russian wild-rye, Utah fescue, smooth brome, Indian ricegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass and Sandberg bluegrass. 2.3 Proposed Schedule of Construction Activities Construction activities covered by the Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project SWMP are expected to last approximately 4 years and will be disturbing approximately 127.3 acres. Approximately 36 acres will be disturbed in Garfield County and approximately 91 acres will be disturbed in Eagle County. The project has been broken out into multiple phases. Each phase of the ROW will be seeded and mulched upon construction completion. Temporary Use Areas (TUAs) will be reclaimed to original contours. The main objective of this project is to construct a pipeline ROW for natural gas transportation. Activities associated with construction of the project that may affect stormwater quality include; clearing and grading, access road modifications, vehicle operation, maintenance and fueling, coating pipe joints, and possible herbicide application to control noxious weeds. The pipeline ROW for the proposed site is on state, county, and private land. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 10 2.3.1 Clearing/Grubbing/ and Grading The ROW will be grubbed as applicable along the proposed route. Prior to earth disturbing activities, straw bales or straw wattles will be placed along the edge of disturbance where grades are greater than 3:1. The construction site will be cleared and grubbed as applicable. Topsoil and/or other materials will be salvaged or stockpiled as necessary. All stockpiles will have control measures implemented to reduce sediment transport and erosion of topsoil as needed. Sediment traps, rock check dams, and diversion ditches may be implemented where applicable. Check dams may be utilized in ditches to dissipate water flow velocity. 2.3.2 Trenching/Backfilling Once clearing/grubbing and grading are completed, trenching will commence. Control measures installed prior to construction may continue to be used. Erosion and sediment controls installed that are no longer necessary will promptly be removed. Open trench will be backfilled at the end of each workday. When feasible, trench spoils will be stored on the up-gradient side of the trench. Spoil stockpiles that are unable to be stored on the up-gradient side of the trench will have erosion and sediment controls installed to mitigate sediment transport. Soils will be placed in the trench in reverse order of removal. Last soil to be excavated will be first to be backfilled, leaving the topsoil as the last stockpile to be spread evenly across the ROW. Any excavated materials not used for backfill will be disposed of properly. 2.3.3 Final Reclamation Reclamation will occur after the pipeline is installed and backfill activities are completed. Temporary control measures no longer necessary may be removed and permanent control measures will be installed. Erosion Control Blankets (ECBs) or spray on tackifier may be utilized. Seeding will occur in accordance with Garfield County Revegetation and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) requirements. Site specific reclamation details are provided in the reclamation plan. Each activity in the project will be under routine inspection until final stabilization has occurred. Construction on Phase 1 began in April of 2019 and is complete. Phase II began in May of 2020 and is complete. Phase III is scheduled to be complete in the Fall of 2021. Phase IV is scheduled to be begin in the Spring 2022. An inactivation notice will be filed for the project once all construction activities have been completed and all areas have reached final stabilization as described in section 5.3. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 11 3.0 POTENTIAL POLLUTION SOURCES Potential pollution sources associated with the construction of the natural gas pipeline ROW project include: All Phases: •Sediment resulting from erosion of soil stockpiles and other areas cleared of vegetation; •Vehicle tracking on paved roads; •Leakage of fuels and lubricants from equipment and spills from fueling; •Trash and debris from clearing activities, construction materials, and workers; and •Sanitary sewage associated with portable toilets. The most common source of pollution from construction is sediment, which can be transported off the work site with stormwater runoff and ultimately impact the water quality of receiving waters. Clearing, grading, and otherwise altering previously undisturbed land has the potential to increase the rate of soil erosion compared to pre-disturbance rates. For locations of potential pollution sources, refer to the Site Maps in Appendix B. There are currently no anticipated concrete or asphalt batch plants associated with this project. All control measures implemented throughout the project are intended to mitigate for the release of sediment and all other potential pollution sources described above. Refer to Appendix B for site specific locations of potential pollution sources and locations of control measures implemented to mitigate for the potential release of the respective potential pollutants. RMNG spill prevention and response policies must be followed and include the following: •Notification procedures to be used in the event of a material release or accident. At a minimum, the field supervisor should be notified. Depending on the nature of the spill and the material involved, RMNG staff, the CDPHE, downstream water users, or other agencies may need to be notified. The Water Quality Control Division (WQCD) toll-free 24-hour environmental emergency spill reporting line is 1-877-518-5608. •Provisions for absorbents will be made available for use in fuel areas, and ROW access points. A spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plan will be developed for any above ground containers that will store more than 1,320 U.S. gallons of hydrocarbons on site. Refer to Appendix F for additional information on Black Hill’s Spill Response Policy. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 12 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF SOIL CONTROL MEASURES The objective of erosion and sediment controls is to minimize the release of sediment and other potential pollutants by stormwater runoff. This can be accomplished through the use of structural and/or nonstructural controls. This section describes erosion and sediment controls to be used during the pipeline construction to minimize possible pollutant impacts to stormwater runoff. Refer to Appendix D (Installation Details) for implementation details of soil control measures. Refer to Appendix B (Site Maps) for locations of soil control measures. 4.1 Structural Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control Structural practices implemented to provide erosion and sediment control can include temporary and permanent control measures. Temporary structural control measures include, but are not limited to; straw bale barriers, check dams, temporary water bars and straw wattles. When applicable, temporary control measures will be implemented during construction and interim reclamation phases. All temporary control measures will be removed upon final stabilization. Permanent structural control measures include, but are not limited to; earthen berms, drainage dips, bar ditches, diversion ditches, sediment basins, culvert inlet/outlet protection, and rock check dams. 4.1.1 Rock Check Dams Rock check dams may be installed in areas of concentrated flow. The purpose of a check dam is to reduce the velocity of water, while allowing the clean water to continue migrating. Some sediment will accumulate behind the check dam. Sediment should be removed from behind the check dams when it has accumulated to one-half of the original height of the dam and properly disposed of. Check dams will be inspected for erosion along the edges of the check dams and repaired immediately, as required. 4.1.2 Straw Wattles Straw wattles are intended to capture and keep sediment on a disturbed slope. Straw wattles are useful to temporarily stabilize slopes by reducing soil creep and sheet and rill erosion until permanent vegetation can be established. Straw wattles will last an average of one (1) to two (2) years. The slope needs to be prepared before the wattles are placed. Small trenches are created across the slope on the horizontal contour. The trench should be deep enough to accommodate half the thickness of the wattle. The trenches need to be 10 to 25 feet apart. The wattles need to be installed perpendicular to water movement, parallel to the slope contour. The wattles need to fit snugly against the soil. No gaps should be between the soil and wattle. There should only be one (1) to two (2) inches of stake exposed above the wattle. The stakes should be installed every two (2) to Three (3) feet. 4.1.3 Roadside Bar Ditch Roadside bar ditches can be a temporary or permanent structural control measures installed to direct runoff or run-on stormwater away from construction activity. Ditches direct water into sediment basins or other control measures structures designed to capture sediment while allowing clean water to move through. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 13 4.1.4 Culvert Inlet/Outlet Protection Inlets and outlets of culverts will be protected to prevent sediment build up within the culvert, thus maintaining culvert functionality. Temporary protection during construction can be implemented by installing straw bales or straw wattles around the inlet/outlet. For permanent protection, inlets/outlets can be protected via rock armoring. Sediment accumulated at the inlet/outlet shall be removed as needed to ensure that there will be no blockage of the culvert. 4.1.5 Water Bars Water bars can be a temporary or permanent structural control measures installed to direct stormwater runoff or run-on away from construction activities. Water bars slow the velocity of the water, and direct water into a sediment basin, or other associated BMP structure designed to capture sediment while allowing clean water to move through. 4.1.6 Berms Berms can be used in conjunction with a diversion channel to convey runoff or run-on. Berms are commonly used along the top edges of cuts and fills to protect the embankment. Berms also contain and divert water from disturbed areas in order to control storm water and sediment leaving the site. Berms to intercept and divert runoff should not be used where the drainage area exceeds 10 acres. 4.2 Non-Structural Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control Non-structural practices implemented for erosion and sediment control will consist of permanent control measures that will be utilized during all project phases from construction to interim reclamation, and ultimately to final stabilization. Non-structural controls typically include, but are not limited to; vegetative buffers, mulching, seeding of disturbed areas, erosion control blankets, surface roughening, and administrative management. 4.2.1 Seeding of Disturbed Areas Seeding of disturbed areas will be implemented as a measure taken to achieve final stabilization. Upon construction completion, all disturbed areas to undergo reclamation shall be seeded. As a disturbed area is seeded, it will remain in the interim reclamation phase until the site has reached a vegetative cover of 70% of pre-disturbance conditions. At this point, the site will be at the final stabilization phase. The main objective of drill seeding is to place the seed in the soil at the depth most favorable for seed germination. Topography will determine if seed will be applied via a drill seeder, hand broadcast or hydroseeding. Hand broadcasting is commonly used in areas too small for large equipment or if the terrain is too steep for equipment to work safely. Broadcast seeding throws the seeds randomly on the soil surface. This allows for a more mosaic plant population, but must be applied at twice the drill seed rate for successful germination. Once seed has been broadcast, raking or chaining the area will ensure seed to soil contact. Refer to Appendix E for the Project seed mixes and associated application rates. 4.2.2 Mulching Mulching is a non-structural control measure implemented to aid in seed establishment. After a disturbed area has been seeded, certified weed free straw mulch will be applied at 2,000 lbs. per acre. Where accessible, the mulch will be crimped into the ground to provide additional soil stabilization. A tackifier may be applied once the ROW has been mulched to ensure mulch is not blown away. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 14 4.2.3 Surface Roughening Surface roughening is an erosion control practice often used in conjunction with grading. Surface roughening involves increasing the relief of a bare soil surface with horizontal grooves by either stair-stepping (running parallel to the contour of the land) or using construction equipment to track the surface. Slopes that are not fine graded and left in a roughened condition also reduces erosion. Soil roughening reduces runoff velocity, increases infiltration, reduces erosion, traps sediment, and prepares the soil for seeding and planting; giving the seed an opportunity to germinate and establish. Used as a temporary or permanent control measure, surface roughening may take many different forms including, but not limited to, ripping, pocking and tracking. 4.2.4 Erosion Control Blankets Erosion Control Blankets are structural control measures installed to eliminate rain drop impact on soil particles. Erosion control blankets are permanent, non-structural control measures installed on steep slopes to provide soil stabilization and to keep seed in place. Erosion control blankets are a geotextile biodegradable material that is implemented during the interim reclamation phase. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 15 5.0 PHASED CONTROL MEASURE IMPLEMENTATION The Cottonwood Pass Pipeline project will consist of a construction phase, an interim reclamation phase, and a final stabilization phase. The following sections outline specifications of each phase. 5.1 Construction The construction stages of the project will consist of clearing, trenching and backfilling. Appropriate control measures will be installed for this stage of the construction. The following outlines the necessary steps of the construction stage: All Phases: •Vegetation Clearing: Vegetation will be removed and place around edge of disturbed area on the down gradient side of the fill slope, as applicable. •Asphalt clearing: Asphalt will be removed the width of the necessary trench and stockpiled wherever space is available. Trench will be back filled every day. •Straw bale barriers will be installed as a temporary control measures prior to construction. •Straw wattles will be installed as a temporary control measures prior to construction. •Street sweeping will occur as applicable during construction within drive lane. Phase 1 Construction Start Date: 4/29/2019 Inspector: Bracket Mays Phase 2 Construction Start Date: 05/26/2020 Inspector: Bryan Watt Phase 3 Construction Start Date: 05/10/2021 Inspector: Bryan Watt Phase 4 Construction Start Date: TBD Inspector: TBD 5.2 Interim Reclamation Interim reclamation will be the phase of the project between construction and final stabilization. The project will enter into interim reclamation when construction is completed, disturbed areas have been seeded, and permanent control measures have been installed. Temporary control measures that were implemented during the construction phase may continue to be maintained during interim reclamation. The project will remain in interim reclamation until disturbed areas have been reclaimed to 70 percent of pre-disturbance vegetation or otherwise permanently stabilized (i.e. graveled or paved). Please refer to the reclamation plan for more detail. The following steps will be taken to reach interim reclamation: Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 16 All Phases: •Disturbed areas will be seeded to prevent sediment transport, and enhance soil integrity for reclamation. o Area will be drill seeded where terrain allows. Broadcast or hydroseeding will be implemented for areas not suitable for a drill seeder to access. •Temporary control measures such as straw bale barriers and wattles will be removed if no longer a viable control measure. o All wooden stakes used to secure wattles and straw bales and other waste associated with construction of the site will be disposed of properly. •Slopes steeper than 2:1 will be hydroseeded or hand broadcasted and mulched, or stabilized with ECBs. •All revegetation efforts will comply with the Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Re-vegetation Plan. •Temporary fencing installed during construction will be removed. Existing fence lines or historic fence lines within the designated area of the construction site will be repaired, replaced, or removed as agreed to by RMNG. •Areas not seeded will be graveled or otherwise permanently stabilized (i.e. paved). Phase 1 Interim Start Date: 11/25/2019 Inspector: Tanner Ridgway Phase 2 Interim Start Date: 11/30/2020 Inspector: Bryan Watt Phase 3 Interim Start Date: TBD Inspector: TBD Phase 4 Interim Start Date: TBD Inspector: TBD 5.3 Final Stabilization Areas which have been disturbed are considered to be stabilized when a uniform vegetative cover with a density of 70 percent of the pre-disturbance levels has been established, or when an equivalent permanent, physical erosion reduction method is in place. Disturbed areas will remain in interim reclamation status until final stabilization is achieved. Stormwater compliance inspections will be performed at required intervals until final stabilization is reached. Temporary control measures will be removed and disposed of properly. To accurately determine if the site has reached final reclamation requirements, vegetative surveys will be conducted utilizing a variant of the Daubenmire Method. This method will determine Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 17 percent vegetative cover and vegetative composition. To ensure an acceptable confidence interval that allows for accurate site representation, sample points (disturbed and undisturbed) will be randomly determined for each location to be surveyed utilizing global information system (GIS) analysis. Survey areas will be delineated utilizing a 3ft X 3ft tool. When final stabilization is achieved, and all temporary control measures have been removed RMNG will apply for an Inactivation Notice to terminate the Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Permit and Stormwater Management Plan. Phase 1 Final Stabilization Date: 08/24/2021 Inspector: Casey Williams Phase 2 Final Stabilization Date: TBD Inspector: TBD Phase 3 Final Stabilization Date: TBD Inspector: TBD Phase 4 Final Stabilization Date: TBD Inspector: TBD Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 18 6.0 MATERIALS HANDLING AND SPILL PREVENTION 6.1 Waste Management and Disposal The construction activities mentioned in this SWMP will generate various other waste materials during construction. These wastes typically include, but are not limited to: •Trees and shrubs from clearing operations; •Trash and debris from construction materials and workers; •Sanitary sewage from temporary sanitary waste facilities; •Sediment in areas that vegetation establishment is lacking; •Milled asphalt; and •Petroleum products from heavy equipment including fuel, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, and oil. All potential pollutants will be managed to not contribute to stormwater pollution. 6.2 Fuels and Materials Management Petroleum Products Petroleum products which may be present at the construction site include, but are not limited to: gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricant oils, hydraulic oils, used oils, and solvents. Gasoline and diesel fuel will be stored in portable storage tanks with secondary containment. Lubricant, hydraulic, and miscellaneous oils and solvents will be stored in containers up to 55-gallons in volume. All storage containers must be compatible with proposed contents. Storage containers will be labeled with contents and placed in a secondary containment. Pollutants from petroleum products used during construction activities adhere easily to soil particles and other surfaces. In case of a spill or leak, soils contaminated with petroleum products will be contained and removed to a proper disposal site. Proposed soil erosion and sediment control practices can aid in retention of spills or leaks. Use of secondary containment and drip pans will reduce the likelihood of spills or leaks contacting the ground. Proposed maintenance and safe storage practices will reduce the chance of petroleum products contaminating the site. Oily wastes such as crankcase oil, cans, rags, and paper containing oils will be placed in proper receptacles and disposed of or recycled. An additional source of petroleum contamination is leaks from equipment and vehicles. Routine daily inspections will be conducted to identify leaks and initiate corrective actions, if needed. The following guidelines for storing petroleum products will be applied: •All product containers will be clearly and properly labeled; •Emergency spill response procedures will be available on-site. Persons trained in handling spills will be on call at all times; •Spill cleanup and containment materials (e.g. absorbent, shovels, etc.) will be readily available. Spills will be immediately cleaned up and contaminated materials will be properly stored on site until they can be disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations; •Containers will be regularly monitored for leaks and repaired or replaced as necessary. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 19 Materials Management The construction contractor will maintain a staging area for equipment and materials storage on site. These areas will be maintained with good housekeeping and will be inspected on a regular basis for spills, leaks, and potential contamination. 6.3 Construction Site Housekeeping Housekeeping, during control measure repair or maintenance, will consist of neat and orderly storage of materials and containerized fluids. Wastes will be temporarily stored in sealed containers and regularly collected and disposed of at appropriate off-site facilities. In the event that a spill occurs, prompt cleanup is required to minimize any commingling of waste materials with stormwater runoff. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 20 7.0 DEDICATED CONCRETE OR ASPHALT BATCH PLANTS No concrete or asphalt batch plants are anticipated for this project. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 21 8.0 VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL As the project progresses, access to the ROW will be clearly marked and track pads or other mud and sediment removal devises will be implemented. Refer to the site map and installation details (Appendix B, D respectively). Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 22 9.0 INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES To meet requirements of the General Permit, inspection and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls must occur during the project. Continued inspection and maintenance is required for specific structures after construction is completed. The inspection program will include the following: 1. A certified person familiar with the SWMP and control measures will conduct the inspections. 2. Inspections will cover the following items within construction site: • Disturbed areas without stabilization; • All structural and non-structural control measures (temporary and permanent); • Material storage areas; • Surface water diversions; • Down gradient areas; • New access roads; • Site vehicle entrance/exit locations. 3. Inspections will occur at least once every week (during construction). Once all measures have been taken to reach interim reclamation, inspections shall occur at least once every 30 calendar days. 4. A log of inspections will be maintained. 5. Water quality will be visually assessed for all receiving streams and discharge areas during each inspection. 6. Disturbed areas and material storage areas that are exposed to precipitation will be inspected for evidence of pollutants entering nearby drainages. 7. Roads used for vehicle access will be inspected for evidence of off-site sediment transport. 8. Following each inspection, the SWMP will be modified as necessary to include additional controls designed to correct identified problems. Necessary revisions to the SWMP will be made within 72 hours of the inspection. 9. An inspection report summarizing the scope of the inspection, the name of the person conducting the inspection, the date of the inspection, and observations relating to proper implementation will be prepared. Inspection reports will be retained for at least three years from the date that the site is finally stabilized. 10. Actions taken to modify any stormwater control measure will be recorded and maintained with the SWMP. 11. If no deficiencies are found during the inspection, the report will contain certification that the site is in compliance with the SWMP. Maintenance Procedures Maintenance will include prompt repairs and/or adjustments to any erosion and sediment control structures that are deteriorating or found to be performing inadequately. Control measure conditions and dates of control measure maintenance will be documented within the stormwater inspection checklists. Repairs are to be made as soon as possible and prior to the next anticipated storm event. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 23 Inspection Forms Inspection forms shall be a part of this SWMP and will include information such as dates of maintenance/modifications of existing control measures, installation of new control measures, any site housekeeping requirements, and general comments. Refer to Appendix C for an example of the stormwater inspection document. Employee Training HRL inspectors are all certified stormwater inspectors. The respective inspectors receive training and continuing education with regards to stormwater and reclamation on a yearly basis. Initial stormwater training is conducted by Altitude Training, and continuing education classes are attended each year through the International Erosion Control Association and Altitude Training. A weekly meeting is conducted to ensure all inspectors apprised of changes to permits and regulations for applicable agencies. Environmental Training is provided to the operator upon request, usually pertaining to specific facility locations. This training provides an overview of stormwater management, spill response and waste management. Qualified Stormwater Manager(s) Name Company Title Austin Belcher Black Hills Corporation Environmental Professional II Ally Little Black Hills Corporation Environmental Professional II Tanner Ridgway HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. Program Manager Shane Armendariz HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. Project Lead Bryan Watt HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. Project Lead Casey Williams HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. Staff Environmental Scientist Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 24 10.0 NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES The Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) General Permit allows the following non- stormwater discharges in combination with stormwater discharges associated with construction sites: • Emergency firefighting activities • Uncontaminated springs (none present) • Landscape irrigation return flows (none present) • Discharges to the ground of concrete washout waste (additional provisions apply, concrete washout will either be controlled on site in accordance with accepted control measures or will be hauled offsite for disposal.) • Discharges to the ground of water from construction dewatering activities (additional provisions apply) The potential for other allowable sources of non-stormwater discharges from this site is minimal. If any sources are identified, they will be indicated on the Site Map at the time of discharge. Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 25 11.0 CERTIFICATIONS 11.1 Owner/Applicant 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. Signature: Name: Title: Date: Operator Name and Address: Black Hills Energy 7060 Alegre Street Fountain, Colorado 80817 Site Name and Location: Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project SWMP Prepared by: HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. 2385 F ½ Road Grand Junction, Colorado 81505 Phone: 970.243.3271 Kellie Ashcraft Director of Operations 8-30-21 *to be signed prior to construction Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Stormwater Management Plan 27 12.0 ADDITIONAL CONTROL MEASURE REFERENCES The structural and non-structural control measures listed in this SWMP are intended to include all control measures that may be used for gas gathering projects. However, there may be situations where a control measure is needed but not included in this SWMP, or project personnel may need additional information on the installation, use, specifications, and/or maintenance of control measures. Additional information regarding various control measures is available by referencing the following: •For oil and gas operations, the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service have developed “Surface Operating Standards and Guidelines for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development,” “Gold Book.” The most recent version (fourth edition) of this is available on the internet at: http://www.blm.gov./bmp/GoldBook_Draft_v12.pdf. •For Construction BMPs the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, a Colorado Front Range group of city and county agencies has developed a BMP manual that is available on the internet at: http://swcc.state.al.us/pdf/ASWC_June_2003_Alabama_Handbook _ConstructionE&S_Control.pdf. •For construction BMPs and surface stabilization methods, the Alabama Soil and Water Conservation Committee have developed “Erosion Control, Sediment Control and Stormwater Management on Construction Sites and Urban Areas, Volume 1 Developing Plans and Designing Best Management Practices.” This information is available on the internet at: http://www.blm.gov/bmp/field%20guide.htm •For access roads, the US Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management have developed “Low-Volume Roads Engineering, Best Management Practices Field Guide,” which is available online at: http://www.blm.gov/bmp/field%20guide.htm •For seeding methods and applications information was obtained from the Practical Handbook of Disturbed Land Revegetation. Frank F. Munshower,CRC Press Inc. 1994 Appendix A Stormwater Permit Authorization 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80246 303-692-3500 www.colorado.gov/cdphe/wqcd CERTIFICATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER CDPS GENERAL PERMIT COR400000 STORMWATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Certification Number: COR404117 This Certification to Discharge specifically authorizes: Owner Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC Operator Rocky Mountain Natural Gas LLC to discharge stormwater from the facility identified as Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Project To the waters of the State of Colorado, including, but not limited to: Roaring Fork River Facility Activity : Pipeline and Utilities (including natural gas, electricity, water and communications) Disturbed Acres: 133.72 acres Facility Located at: Hwy 82 and Roaring Fork Ave Carbondale CO 81623 Garfield County Latitude 39.40955 Longitude -107.16509 Specific Information (if applicable): Certification is issued and effective : 3/30/2021 Expiration date of general permit: 3/31/2024 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: Meg Parish, Section Manager Permits Section Water Quality Control Division Appendix B Site Maps/Alignments Phase 4 GARFIELD COUNTY ONLY DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 14 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd EAGLEGARFIELD0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 14 of 21Eagle & Garfield Counties, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 15 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd 122 122 TenPeaksMesaRdEAGLEGARFIELDNo surface disturbancealong bored segment Flume Crossing 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 15 of 21Eagle & Garfield Counties, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 16 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd CattleCreek 122 No surface disturbancealong bored segments No surface disturbancealong bored segment 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 16 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 17 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd No surface disturbancealong bored segment 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 17 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 18 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd Flume Crossing 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 18 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 2 Date: 8/31/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 19 083121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 19 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 20 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd No surface disturbancealong bored segment southof Buck Point Road 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 20 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Bu c k PointRdMapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction DISCLAIMER: This representation and the Geographic Information System (GIS) usedto create it are designed as a source ofreference and not intended to replace official records and/or legal surveys. HRL assumesno responsibility for any risks, dangers, orliabilities that may result from its use and makes no guarantees as to the quality oraccuracy of the underlying data. Author: A. Asay Revision: 3 Date: 9/1/2021 Document Path: T:\CLIENTS\BLACK HILLS\2021\Cottonwood Pass\Maps\Stormwater\Phase IV\Erosion Control\Phase IV Erosion Control Map 21 090121 (LANDSCAPE).mxd 170 170 170BuckPointRd PanoramaLoopDrNo surface disturbancealong bored segment 0 100 200Feet Cottonwood Pass Phase IVErosion Control Map 21 of 21Garfield County, CO ± Mapped Features Straw Wattle Local Road Canal / Ditch Ephemeral Stream or River Temporary ROW Staging Area Existing Permanent ROW Intermittent Stream or River Perennial Stream or River Water Bar Track Pad Compacted Earthen Berm Proposed Trenched 6" Transmission Pipeline Proposed Bored 6" Transmission Pipeline Surface Flow Direction Appendix C Stormwater Inspection Form CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER SITE INSPECTION REPORT Facility Name Permittee Date of Inspection Weather Conditions Permit Certification #Disturbed Acreage Phase of Construction Inspector Title Inspector Name Is the above inspector a qualified stormwater manager? (permittee is responsible for ensuring that the inspector is a qualified stormwater manager) YES NO INSPECTION FREQUENCY Check the box that describes the minimum inspection frequency utilized when conducting each inspection At least one inspection every 7 calendar days At least one inspection every 14 calendar days, with post-storm event inspections conducted within 24 hours after the end of any precipitation or snowmelt event that causes surface erosions •This is this a post-storm event inspection. Event Date: _____________________ Reduced inspection frequency - Include site conditions that warrant reduced inspection frequency •Post-storm inspections at temporarily idle sites •Inspections at completed sites/area •Winter conditions exclusion Have there been any deviations from the minimum inspection schedule? If yes, describe below. YES NO INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS* i. Visually verify all implemented control measures are in effective operational condition and are working as designed in the specifications ii. Determine if there are new potential sources of pollutants iii. Assess the adequacy of control measures at the site to identify areas requiring new or modified control measures to minimize pollutant discharges iv. Identify all areas of non-compliance with the permit requirements, and if necessary, implement corrective action *Use the attached Control Measures Requiring Routine Maintenance and Inadequate Control Measures Requiring Corrective Action forms to document results of this assessment that trigger either maintenance or corrective actions AREAS TO BE INSPECTED Is there evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants leaving the construction site boundaries, entering the stormwater drainage system or discharging to state waters at the following locations? NO YES If "YES” describe discharge or potential for discharge below. Document related maintenance, inadequate control measures and corrective actions Inadequate Control Measures Requiring Corrective Action form Construction site perimeter All disturbed areas Designated haul routes Material and waste storage areas exposed to precipitation Locations where stormwater has the potential to discharge offsite Locations where vehicles exit the site Other: ____________________ CONTROL MEASURES REQUIRING ROUTINE MAINTENANCEDefinition: Any control measure that is still operating in accordance with its design and the requirements of the permit, but requires maintenance to prevent a breach of the control measure. These items are not subject to the corrective action requirements as specified in Part I.B.1.c of the permit.Are there control measures requiring maintenance?NO YESIf “YES” document belowDate ObservedLocationControl MeasureMaintenance RequiredDate Completed INADEQUATE CONTROL MEASURES REQUIRING CORRECTIVE ACTIONDefinition: Any control measure that is not designed or implemented in accordance with the requirements of the permit and/or any control measure that is not implemented to operate in accordance with its design. This includes control measures that have not been implemented for pollutant sources. If it is infeasible to install or repair the control measure immediately after discovering the deficiency the reason must be documented and a schedule included to return the control measure to effective operating condition as possible.Are there inadequate control measures requiring corrective action?NO YESIf “YES” document belowAre there additional control measures needed that were not in place at the time of inspection?NO YESIf “YES” document belowDate DiscoveredLocationDescription of Inadequate Control MeasureDescription of Corrective ActionWas deficiency corrected when discovered? YES/NOif “NO” provide reason and schedule to correctDate Corrected REPORTING REQUIREMENTSThe permittee shall report the following circumstances orally within twenty-four (24) hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances, and shall mail to the division a written report containing the information requested within five (5) working days after becoming aware of the following circumstances. The division may waive the written report required if the oral report has been received within 24 hours.All Noncompliance Requiring 24-Hour Notification per Part II.L.6 of the Permita. Endangerment to Health or the EnvironmentCircumstances leading to any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment regardless of the cause of the incident (See Part II.L.6.aof the Permit)This category would primarily result from the discharge of pollutants in violation of the permit b. Numeric Effluent Limit ViolationsoCircumstances leading to any unanticipated bypass which exceeds any effluent limitations (See Part II.L.6.b of the Permit)oCircumstances leading to any upset which causes an exceedance of any effluent limitation (See Part II.L.6.c of the Permit)oDaily maximum violations (See Part II.L.6.d of the Permit)Numeric effluent limits are very uncommon in certifications under the COR400000 general permit. This category of noncompliance only applies if numeric effluent limits are included in a permit certification.Has there been an incident of noncompliance requiring 24-hour notification?NO YESIf “YES” document belowDate and Time of IncidentLocationDescription of NoncomplianceDescription of Corrective ActionDate and Time of 24 Hour Oral NotificationDate of 5 Day Written Notification * *Attach copy of 5 day written notification to report. Indicate if written notification was waived, including the name of the division personnel who granted waiver. After adequate corrective action(s) and maintenance have been taken, or where a report does not identify any incidents requiring corrective action or maintenance, the individual(s) designated as the Qualified Stormwater Manager, shall sign and certify the below statement: “I verify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, all corrective action and maintenance items identified during the inspection are complete, and the site is currently in compliance with the permit.” _____________________________________________________________________________ Name of Qualified Stormwater Manager Title of Qualified Stormwater Manager _____________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Qualified Stormwater Manager Date Notes/Comments Appendix D Control Measure Installation Details Removed from County Submittal package for document size management. Installation details available upon request. Appendix E Project Seed Mixes 2 Table 2. Pinyon-Juniper Woodland or Wyoming Sagebrush Shrubland (12-16 inches precipitation) Common Name Species Name Variety Seeds per Pound PLS lbs/acre Plant Two of the Following Grasses (15% of Mix Each, 30% Total) Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata Colorado/Utah source, or Anatone, Goldar 140,000 2.8 Indian Ricegrass Achnatherum hymenoides Colorado/Utah source, or Nezpar, Paloma, Rimrock 141,000 2.8 Sandberg Bluegrass Poa secunda “sandbergii” UP* Colorado-Sims Mesa or High Mesa 882,000 0.3 And One of the Following Grasses (15% of Mix Each, 15% Total) Thickspike Wheatgrass (coarser soil) Elymus lanceolatus Bannock, Critana, Schwendimar 154,000 2.5 Western Wheatgrass (finer soil) Pascopyrum smithii UP* or Colorado/Utah source or Arriba, Recovery, Rodan, Rosana 110,000 3.6 And Three of the Following Grasses (10% of Mix Each, 30% Total) Blue Grama Chondrosum gracile Colorado/Utah source, or Alma, Bad River, Hachita 825,000 0.3 Bottlebrush Squirreltail Elymus elymoides Colorado/Utah source, State Bridge, or Fish Creek, Toe Jam Creek, Wapiti 192,000 1.4 Muttongrass Poa fendleriana Colorado/Utah source preferred 890,000 0.3 Needle-and-Thread Hesperostipa comata Colorado/Utah source preferred 115,000 2.2 Slender Wheatgrass Elymus trachycaulus San Luis 159,000 1.6 And Two of the Following Shrubs/Subshrubs (7.5% of Mix Each, 15% Total) Shadscale Saltbush Atriplex confertifolia Colorado/Utah source, or Rincon, Snake River, Wytana 60,000 3.3 Sticky-flowered Rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Colorado/Utah source preferred 782,000 0.25 Winterfat Krascheninnikovia lanata Colorado/Utah source preferred 123,000 1.6 And Four of the Following Forbs/Subshrubs (2.5% of Mix Each, 10% Total)** Common Name Scientific Name PLS lbs/acre Common Name Scientific Name PLS lbs/acre Arrowleaf Balsamroot Balsamorhiza sagittata 1.2 Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea 0.13 Blanket-flower Gaillardia aristata 0.5 Silvery Lupine Lupinus argenteus 3.6 Bluestem Penstemon Penstemon cyanocaulis 0.1 Sulphur Buckwheat Eriogonum umbellatum* 0.3 Broom Snakeweed Gutierrezia sarothrae 0.04 Tapertip Hawks- beard Crepis acuminata 0.08 Hairy Golden-aster Heterotheca villosa 0.1 Thickleaf Penstemon Penstemon pachyphyllus 0.3 Lewis Blue Flax Linum lewisii 0.4 Utah Sweetvetch Hedysaurum boreale 1.4 Scarlet Gilia Ipomopsis aggregata 0.18 Western Yarrow Achillea millefolium 0.02 *Uncompahgre Project (UP), Kathy See, nativeplant@upartnership.org, 970-240-9498, 970-901-8247 Appendix F Black Hills Spill Response Plan Removed for document size management. Spill response information available on BHE intranet site or upon request. Appendix G Training Documentation Stormwater Management Plan Training Topics to cover: •This project – Cottonwood Pipeline Project is a Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) stormwater permit controlled site. •This project must comply with the State of Colorado General Stormwater Permit issued by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. •At any time, a State Inspector may come on site and inspect the project for stormwater runoff control and the effectiveness of the construction practices and engineering controls. •By law, the State Inspector is allowed to access any area of the project. •If an Inspector observes evidence of sediment runoff from the site or related poor construction practices, both Black Hills Energy and the contractor responsible for the work that causes the runoff may be cited for violations of state or county laws and may be required to pay a fine associated with the violation. •If an Inspector asks to inspect the site, please be polite. Take the inspector to the main staging area. Questions about the project should be directed to a supervisor, foreman or to the Black Hills Energy Construction Supervisor: ▪Anna Smith, Construction Planner Additional technical assistance can be obtained from: ▪Ally Little Senior Environmental Professional, SWMP Manager ▪Casey Williams Environmental Scientist, Site inspector •There is a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) kept at this site. It is located in the site inspector’s work truck. All records related to stormwater are available for review by an Inspector upon request. •The Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) identifies all stormwater controls that have been identified for this project. Additional temporary controls may be used throughout the project as needed. Any temporary controls used will be described in the SWMP. •If at any time, stormwater runoff is observed, assure controls are in place to prevent transport of sediment. Then, immediately notify your supervisor or a Black Hills Energy Construction Representative (listed above). •If at any time, sediment is observed running off the site, immediately evaluate controls in place to prevent transport. Then, immediately notify Black Hills Energy Manager (listed above). •Black Hills Energy will repair or replace all damaged or ineffective stormwater controls within 24 hours of identifying a deficiency. If the repair is beyond the capability of Black Hills Energy, the Construction Representative will immediately contact the Stormwater Contractor available for this project. The costs for any ineffective or damaged controls are solely the responsibility of the Construction Contractor. Course:Stormwater Compliance Training for Construction Sites FACILITY NAME/LOCATION:Cottonwood Pipeline Project Date PRINT: Employee name Employee ID Dept ID BHC Contacts: Ally Little: 307-778-2123; Donald Green: 970-255-7522; Anna Smith 970- 250-6697 V1.1 dated August 10, 2010 Stormwater Compliance Training for Construction Sites training is for gas and electric operations personnel involved in construction projects that disturb the ground surface and may cause erosion allowing sediment and other construction site pollutants to contaminate surface waters. This training covers the regulatory framework behind stormwater compliance, developing Stormwater Pollution Prevention plans, obtaining permits, use of best management practices, inspecting sites and other related topics. This training is specific to the project listed above. Black Hills Corp. Training Attendance Log INSTRUCTOR: See below for BHC Contacts Instructions: Be sure to fill out all information below. PRINT LEGIBLY. This information will be transferred manually to BHCampus training records. Signature Appendix H Soil Information Soil information described in SWMP narrative. Maps have been removed from County SWMP submittal for document size management. Maps available in full SWMP or upon request. Table 1 SWMP REVISIONS Table 1 - COTTONWOOD PASS PIPELINE SWMP - REVISION SHEET Review Date Representative/Designee Printed Name Representative/Designee Signature Type of revision (e.g. SWMP text, site modification, etc.) SWMP Amended (Y/N) 1/31/2019 Tanner Ridgway Initial SWMP Drafting N/A 3/4/2019 Tanner Ridgway Updated SWMP to reflect COR400000 general permit requirements.Yes 4/15/2019 Brackett Mays Updated SWMP receiving waters to reflect COR400000 general permit requirements.Yes 8/27/2019 Rob Hale Updated SWMP with new project managers name and added vehicle tracking to Appendix D. Yes 10/24/2019 Tanner Ridgway Removed site map due to clutter and updated with new revised site map.Yes 11/5/2019 Tanner Ridgway Included all phases language.Yes 12/4/2019 Tanner Ridgway General amendments to SWMP language and appendices. Yes 5/5/2020 Tanner Ridgway General amendments to SWMP language and appendices. Yes 9/1/2020 Bryan Watt General amendments to SWMP language and appendices. Yes 12/15/2020 Tanner Ridgway Updated CWP Phase 1 & 2 Site Maps.Yes 1/6/2021 Tanner Ridgway Updated Phase 3 Site Maps and information.Yes 3/31/2021 Tanner Ridgway Added permit modification to Appendix A Yes 5/21/2021 Tanner Ridgway Revisions to Phase III Maps Yes 7/16/2021 Casey Williams Revisions to Phase II & III Maps Yes 8/30/2021 Tanner Ridgway Updated SWMP to include Phase 4.Yes The plan must be amended when the following occurs: ▪A change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance of the site requiring implementation of new or revised control measures; ▪The plan proves ineffective in controlling pollutants in stormwater runoff in compliance with the permit conditions; ▪Control measures identified in the plan are no longer necessary and are removed; and ▪Corrective actions are taken onsite that result in a change to the plan. ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS, LLC COTTONWOOD PASS PHASE 4 PIPELINE PROJECT RECLAMATION, REVEGETATION, AND NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN Cover photo: View of the proposed pipeline alignment. Prepared for: Black Hills Energy Cheyenne, WY Prepared by: WestWater Engineering, Inc. 2516 Foresight Cr. #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 Amie Wilsey, Environmental Scientist/Project Manager August 2021 WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 15 August 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description At the request of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, LLC (RMNG), doing business as Black Hills Energy (Black Hills), WestWater Engineering (WestWater) has prepared this reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan for the proposed Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline project that would be located on privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. This document reports the results and analysis of the findings that are pertinent to Sections 9-102-L and 9-102-M of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (as amended) as it applies to this project. RMNG proposes to replace an existing portion of their pipeline in Sections 4, 8, 9, and 17, Township 7 South, Range 87 West (Figure 1). This reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan applies to the proposed pipeline project. The current land uses include rangeland, pasturelands, wildlife habitat, and residential housing. 1.2 General Survey Information Pedestrian surveys of the project area were conducted by WestWater biologists on July 29, 2021 within the right-of-way (ROW) limits for the portions of the pipeline proposed for replacement (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Survey permission was not granted beyond the ROW. Surveys were conducted within the growing season for noxious weeds. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Ackerfield 2015, Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2007, Weber and Wittmann 2012). Noxious weed locations were recorded with the aid of handheld global positioning system (GPS) receivers using NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system in Zone 12. Mapped soil types, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed to determine the soil types and vegetation characteristics at the project site (NRCS 2021). 2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING 2.1 Terrain The pipeline alignment is located along the rolling ridges near Cottonwood Pass and Cattle Creek Road at an elevation range from approximately 7,200 feet to 7,400 feet. The pipeline is in the vicinity of Cattle Creek and Shippees Draw. The pipeline alignment crosses Cattle Creek which eventually drains into the Roaring Fork River located southwest of the project area. 2.2 Soils The pipeline alignment passes through 8 mapped soil types as described below in Table 1 and shown on Figure 3. Soils in the survey area are typically well drained and occur along alluvial fans, valley sides, and mountain sides (Table 1) (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2021). Table 1. Soil Types within the Project Area. Soil Map Unit Symbol Soil Series Description 3 Acree loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans and valley sides. It is a well drained soil type that has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 15 August 2021 Soil Map Unit Symbol Soil Series Description 4 Acree loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans and valley sides. It is a well drained soil type that has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 34 Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes This soil type occurs on fans and hills. It is a well drained soil type and has medium runoff potential. It is considered Prime Farmland if irrigated. 35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes This soil type occurs on fans and hills. It is a well drained soil type and has high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 54 Grotte gravelly loam, 25 to 65 percent slopes This soil type occurs on mountains. It is a well drained soil type and has high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 69 Kilgore silt loam This soil type occurs in depressions. It is not well drained and has medium runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 87 Morval-Tridell complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans. It is well drained and has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans, terraces, and valley sides. It is well drained and has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 2.3 Vegetation There are three main vegetation community types present in the project area: mountain shrublands, sagebrush shrublands, and pasturelands. The mountain shrublands are composed primarily of Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) intermixed with mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), and Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). Sagebrush shrublands are present along portions of the alignment and are intermixed with various forbs and perennial grasses. The pasturelands are composed of native and non-native perennial grass species. Common plants observed throughout the project area are described in Table 2. WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 15 August 2021 Table 2. Common plants observed throughout the project area. Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Grasses Bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata xx Sagebrush shrubland Intermediate wheatgrass Thinopyrum intermedium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Kentucky bluegrass Poa pratensis xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Muttongrass Poa fednleriana xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda x Sagebrush shrubland Smooth brome Bromus inermis xxx Pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Forbs American vetch Vicia americana xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Brittle pricklypear Opuntia fragilis xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Common dandelion Taraxacum officinale xx Sagebrush shrubland, Pastureland Common yarrow Achillea millefolium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland European stickseed Lappula squarrosa x Sagebrush shrubland Hairy goldenaster Heterotheca villosa xx Sagebrush shrublands Hoary tansyaster Machaeranthera canescens xx Sagebrush shrubland Plains pricklypear Opuntia polyacantha x Sagebrush shrubland Rayless tansyaster Machaeranthera grindelioides xx Sagebrush shrublands Spiny phlox Phlox hoodii xxx Sagebrush shrubland Wyoming Indian paintbrush Castilleja linariifolia x Sagebrush shrubland Yellow salsify Tragopogon dubius x Pastureland Shrubs/Trees Antelope bitterbrush Purshia tridentata x Sagebrush shrubland Gambel oakbrush Quercus gambelii xx Mountain shrubland Mountain snowberry Symphoricarpos oreophilus xx Mountain shrubland, sagebrush shrubland Rubber rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosa xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Saskatoon serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia xxx Mountain shrubland Wood’s rose Rosa woodsii x Mountain shrubland WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 15 August 2021 Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Wyoming sagebrush Artemisa tridentata ssp. wyomingensis xxx Sagebrush shrubland Yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidflorus xx Sagebrush shrubland, pastureland * x= uncommon in project area. xx= moderate frequency throughout project area. xxx = common frequency throughout project area. Bold = Non-native species 3.0 REVEGETATION, RECLAMATION, & SOILS RECOMMENDATIONS Successful reclamation of the project area is dependent upon soil type and texture, slope gradient and aspect, proper weed control, available water, and revegetation with suitable plant species. Site-specific reclamation plans utilizing native species should be developed with a qualified reclamation contractor. Reclamation services using multiple seed bin range drills and specialized equipment are available and should be used for reclamation seeding projects. 3.1 Soil Preparation Compaction can reduce water infiltration and also hinder the penetration of the sprouting seed. Practices that will reduce compaction and prepare the seedbed include: scarification, tillage, or harrowing. In areas with slope greater than three percent or where laminar flows from runoff could affect reseeding success, imprinting of the seed bed is recommended. Imprinting can be in the form of dozer tracks or furrows perpendicular to the direction of slope. When utilizing hydro-seeding followed by mulching, imprinting should be done prior to seeding unless the mulch is to be crimped into the soil surface. If 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 and harrowing, always perpendicular to the direction of slope. 3.2 Soil Amendments The addition of soil amendments in rangeland reclamation projects can create more optimal growing conditions for non-native or invasive plant species, with which native plants compete poorly. There is potential that the use of soil amendments (fertilizer) containing nitrogen will disproportionately benefit undesirable annual plants (Perry et al. 2010). If the company determines the use of soil amendments to be beneficial, the type and rate should be based on results from lab analysis of soil samples collected at the site. A potentially beneficial alternative method to enhance reclamation success, particularly where there is poor or destroyed topsoil, is the application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). These fungi, mostly of the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo- mycorrhizal fungi are associated mostly with grasses and forbs and could be helpful in reclamation. In symbiosis, the fungi can increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the host root system (Barrow and McCaslin 1995). Over-the-counter commercial products are available, and the best products should contain more than one fungus species. WestWater Engineering Page 5 of 15 August 2021 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 can benefit reclamation efforts on compacted soils when applied as directed. 3.3 Seed Mixture The primary vegetation communities that would be disturbed by the pipeline alignment include irrigated and non-irrigated pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands, and mountain shrublands. The recommended seed mix below (Table 3) is adapted from the Bureau of Land Management’s Colorado River Valley Field Office seed menu recommendations (BLM 2017). The seed mix is well suited for the vegetation communities present along the pipeline alignment. The mix includes perennial native grasses and forbs that should establish well, protect topsoil, and provide a basis for rehabilitation of the site upon reclamation. Portions of the project area that are privately owned may be subject to landowner-requested modifications to the seed mixture. Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain shrubland, including oakbrush. Common Name Scientific Name Variety Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Plant Both of the Following (20% Each, 40% Total) Bottlebrush Squirreltail Elymus elymoides, Sitanion hystrix VNS Cool Bunch 2.7 Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata, Agropyron spicatum Secar, P-7, Anatone, Goldar Cool Bunch 3.7 and Two of the Following (15% Each, 30% Total) Thickspike Wheatgrass Elymus lanceolatus ssp. lanceolatus, Agropyron dasystachyum Critana, Bannock, Schwendimar Cool Sod- forming 2.5 Slender Wheatgrass Elymus trachycaulus, Agropyron trachycaulum San Luis Cool Bunch 2.5 Western Wheatgrass Pascopyrum [Agropyron] smithii Arriba, Rosana Cool Sod- forming 3.6 and One of the Following (10% Total) Big Bluegrass Poa ampla Sherman Cool Bunch 0.3 Canby Bluegrass Poa canbyi, P. secunda Canbar Cool Bunch 0.3 Muttongrass Poa fendleriana VNS Cool Bunch 0.3 and One of the Following (10% Total) Letterman Needlegrass Achnatherum [Stipa] lettermanii VNS Cool Bunch 1.7 Columbia Needlegrass Achnatherum [Stipa] nelsonii, Stipa columbiana VNS Cool Bunch 1.7 Green Needlegrass Nassella [Stipa] viridula Lodorm, Cucharas Cool Bunch 1.4 and One of the Following (10% Total) Indian Ricegrass Achnatherum [Oryzopsis] hymenoides Nezpar, Paloma, Rimrock Cool Bunch 1.9 WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 15 August 2021 Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain shrubland, including oakbrush. Common Name Scientific Name Variety Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Junegrass Koeleria macrantha, K. cristata VNS (North American origin) Cool Bunch 0.1 OPTIONAL: Any combination from the following species may be substituted for up to 10% of the above grasses. Silvery Lupine Lupinus argenteus VNS Arrowleaf Balsamroot Balsamorhize sagittata VNS Sulfur Flower Eriogonum umbellatum VNS Yarrow Achillea millifolium VNS Utah Sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale VNS Rocky Mountain Beeplant Cleome serrulata VNS Utah Serviceberry Amelanchior utahensis VNS Mountain Snowberry Symphoricarpus oreophilus VNS Wood’s Rose Rosa woodsii VNS White Sage Artemisia ludoviciana VNS *Based on 60 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill-seeded. Double this rate (120 PLS per square foot) if broadcast or hydroseeded For best results and success, reseeding should be done in late autumn. The seed application rate should be doubled for broadcast applications such as hydroseeding or hand broadcasting of seed (CNHP 1998). Seeding Methods Typically, the preferred seeding method would be with a multiple-seed-bin range drill with no soil preparation other than simple grading to slope and imprinting and water bars where applicable. This method would likely be the most economical method. Hydroseeding or hand-broadcast seeding at twice the recommended drill seed rate will be required for steep slopes or for smaller areas where drill seeding would be impractical or dangerous. Alternative seeding methods include, but are not limited to: • harrow with just enough soil moisture to create a rough surface, broadcast seed and re-harrow, preferably at a 90 degree angle to the first harrow; • hydroseeding; and • hand raking and broadcast followed by re-raking at a 90 degree angle to the first raking. These are not the only means of replanting the site. However, these methods have been observed to be effective in similar landscapes. After desired grasses are established and control of target weed species is successful, then shrubs, forbs, and trees can be planted without concern for herbicide damage. Few native forb seeds are available commercially as cultivars. Most are collected from natural populations. Native shrubs and forbs often do not establish well from seed, particularly when mixed with grasses. Past experience has shown that stabilizing the soil with grasses, accomplishing weed control, and then coming WestWater Engineering Page 7 of 15 August 2021 back to plant live, containerized woody species in copses has been the most cost-effective method for establishing the woody species component of the plant community. For sites where soil disturbance will be temporary, grasses should be seeded after construction activities cease and the equipment is removed from the site. After two years of controlling weeds (with herbicides) and allowing the grasses to become established, forbs and woody species should be inter-seeded or hand- planted to increase the diversity and value of the reclamation plantings. 3.4 Mulching Crimped straw mulch is the most cost effective and practical method of mulching areas prone to erosion after drill seeding this site. No mulching is recommended for areas that are hydroseeded. Potential detrimental effects of mulching include the introduction of weed species and the establishment of non- native cereal grains. Use of a certified weed-free sterile wheat hybrid straw mulch would limit these effects. On steeper slopes where crimping is impractical, wood straw mulch would be an alternative to crimped straw mulch that might stand up better to wind and rain that could blow or wash uncrimped straw mulch off of seeded areas. 4.0 NOXIOUS WEEDS 4.1 Introduction to Noxious Weeds Most noxious weed species in Colorado were introduced, mostly from Eurasia, either unintentionally or as ornamentals that established wild populations. These plants compete aggressively with native vegetation and tend to spread quickly because the environmental factors that normally control them are absent. Disturbed soils, altered native vegetation communities, and areas with increased soil moisture often create prime conditions for weed infestations. The primary vectors that spread noxious weeds include humans, animals, water, and wind. The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop noxious weed management plans. Both the State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of plants that are considered to be noxious weeds (Garfield County 2021). The State of Colorado noxious weed list segregates noxious weed species based on priority for control: 1. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected. 2. List B species spread should be halted; may be designated for eradication in some counties. 3. List C species are widespread and the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage those weeds. The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has compiled a list of 40 plants considered to be noxious weeds within the county (Appendix A). The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has duties to: 1. Develop a noxious weed list; 2. Develop a weed management plan for designated noxious weeds; and, 3. Recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that identified landowners submit an integrated weed management plan for their properties (Garfield County 2016). 4.2 Observations Several weed species listed by the State of Colorado (2005) were detected during surveys including: Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), common burdock (Arctium minus), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides), Russian knapweed (Rhaponticum repens), scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), and whitetop (Lepidium draba). WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 15 August 2021 Noxious weeds were observed in dense infestations primarily along irrigated and non-irrigated pasturelands (Figure 2). In addition to noxious weeds, WestWater biologists also observed Harrington’s penstemon in the sagebrush shrublands along the southern portion of the alignment (Figure 2). Harrington’s penstemon is endemic to Colorado and is listed as a sensitive plant species by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. 4.3 Integrated Weed Management Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive on-going control measures. Care must be taken to avoid negatively impacting desirable plant communities and inviting infestation by other pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved by employing varied methods over several growing seasons, including inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention through best management practices, monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection efforts. Weed management is often limited to controlling existing infestations and prevention of further infestations, rather than eradication, but through effective weed management practices eradication can be possible in small to medium sized weed populations. Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds in 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 project area. In order to continue effective management of noxious weeds, further inventory and analysis is necessary to 1) determine the effectiveness of the past treatment strategies; 2) modify the treatment plan, if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations early, which would result in more economical and effective treatments. 4.4 Prevention of Noxious Weed Infestations Weed management can be costly, and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for practical treatment. Prevention is an especially valuable and economical strategy for noxious weed management. Several simple practices should be employed to prevent weed infestations. The following practices will prevent infestation and thereby reduce costs associated with noxious weed control: • Prior to delivery to the site, all equipment and vehicles, including maintenance vehicles, should be thoroughly cleaned of soils from previous sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. • If working in sites with weed-seed contaminated soil, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed-bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. • Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist. • Use of weed-seed-free reclamation materials such as mulch and seed. 4.5 Treatment and Control of Noxious Weed Infestations The treatment method and timing will be determined by the project proponent and their contracted licensed pesticide applicators. The recommendations provided in this report will be considered when developing annual treatment plans. General control methods for the species detected in the project area are provided for reference in Table 4. WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 15 August 2021 Table 4. General noxious weed control methods for species in the project area. Common Name* Scientific Name Type Control Methods Canada thistle B Cirsium arvense Perennial Cutting and mowing prior to seed set, continuously and annually indefinitely; cutting and mowing combined with herbicide; cutting, herbicide, and biological (recommended). Common burdockC Arctium minus Biennial Cut and bag seed-bearing plants from previous year, cut rosettes below soil surface with shovel or spade, cut or spot spray bolting plants; and spot spray rosettes and bolting plants annually. Common mulleinC Verbascum thapsus Biennial Tillage, mowing, cutting, hand grubbing prior to bolting. Herbicide treatment during rosette stage or bolting stage before flowering. HoundstongueB Cynoglossum officinale Biennial Early Spring tillage before weed emergence in the existing corridor to a depth of 2 to 4 inches. Herbicide application in Spring while plants are small and it the late fall, bagging the seed heads. Plumeless thistleB Carduus acanthoides Biennial Tillage or hand grubbing in the rosette to pre-flowering stages. Repeated mowing at bolting or early flowering. Seed head and rosette weevils, leaf feeding beetles. Herbicides in rosette stage. Russian knapweedB Acroptilon repens Perennial Early spring tillage at rosette stage. Herbicide applications in spring before the plant buds and in the late fall, bagging seed heads. Scotch thistleB Onopordum acanthium Biennial Tillage or hand grubbing in the rosette to pre-flowering stages. Repeated mowing at bolting or early flowering. Seed head and rosette weevils, leaf feeding beetles. Herbicides in rosette stage. Whitetop B Cardaria draba Perennial Mow and/or spray with herbicides; graze with sheep; and manage for native grasses. Bold = Garfield County List, *State List A, B, or C 4.6 Recommended Treatment Strategies The following treatment strategies are presented for reference. It is important to know whether the weed species being managed is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies that effectively control and eliminate the target. Treatment strategies vary depending on plant type, which are summarized in Tables 5 and 6. Herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be effectively employed. Table 5. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Target: Prevent Seed Production 1. Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. If flowers or seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads. 2. Cut roots with a spade 2”-3” below soil level. 3. Treat with herbicide in seedling, rosette or bolting stage, before flowering. WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 15 August 2021 Table 5. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Target: Prevent Seed Production 4. Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent flowering but can reduce total seed production. (Sirota 2004) Table 6. Treatment Strategies for Perennials Target: Deplete nutrient reserves in root system, prevent seed production 1. Allow plants to expend as much energy from root system as possible. Do not treat when first emerging in spring but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. If seeds develop cut and bag if possible. 2. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15 when natural precipitation is present). In 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 nutrients to roots rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present for a long period of time another season of seed production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will kill the following year’s shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time. 3. 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 appropriate, which is not necessarily convenient. 4. Tillage may or may not be effective or practical. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5 inch – 1.0 inch long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the weed patch. 5. 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) Some weeds, particularly annuals and biennials, can develop resistance to herbicides. The ability to quickly develop immunity to herbicides, especially when they are used incorrectly, makes it imperative to use the proper chemicals at the correct time in the specified concentration according to the product label. Excessive application, either in frequency or concentration, can result in top kill without significantly affecting the root system. Repeated excessive applications may result in resistant phenotypes. 4.7 Noxious Weed Management – Best Management Practices Construction: The following practices should be adopted for any construction project to reduce the costs of noxious weed control and aid in prevention efforts. The practices include: • Prior to delivery to the site, equipment should be cleaned of soils remaining from previous construction sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. • Equipment and material handling should be done on established sites to reduce the area and extent of soil compaction. • In all cases, temporary disturbance should be kept to an absolute minimum. • Top soil, where present, should be segregated from deeper soils and replaced as top soil on the final grade, a process known as live topsoil handling. • If stored longer than one growing season, topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with non-invasive sterile hybrid grasses. WestWater Engineering Page 11 of 15 August 2021 • Wetland vegetation, if encountered, should be live handled like sod, temporarily watered if necessary, and placed over excavated sub-soil relative to the position from which the wetland sod was removed. • Cut-off collars should be placed on all wetland and stream crossings to prevent back washing (seed vector) and to ensure that soil moisture conditions are not impacted after construction so that native plants can re-establish from the existing seed bank. • If working in weed infested sites, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed-bearing soils and vegetative debris prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. • After construction, disturbed areas outside the footprint of the development should be immediately reseeded with an appropriate seed mix. Herbicides: Many of the listed noxious weed species in Colorado can be controlled with commercially available herbicides. Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre-bud stage after germination or in the spring of the second year. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to desirable grass species. It is important that applicators adhere to concentrations specified on herbicide containers. Herbicides generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Herbicide failures are frequently related to high concentrations that result in top kill before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through the nutrient translocation process. If directed on the herbicide label, a surfactant or other adjuvant should be added to the tank. Grazing: In the event grazing is allowed in the project area, it should be deferred in reclaimed areas until revegetation of desirable species has been successfully established and seeded plants have had opportunity to reproduce. Monitoring: Areas where noxious weed infestations are identified and treated should be inspected over time to ensure that control methods are working to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. The sites should be monitored until the infestations are eliminated. These inspections can then be used to prioritize future weed control efforts. 4.8 Commercial Applicator Recommendations A certified commercial pesticide applicator licensed in rangeland and/or right-of-way/industrial weed control (depending on site characteristics) is a necessary choice for herbicide control efforts. An applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with tough noxious weeds. In addition, the purchase and use of restricted use herbicides requires a Colorado pesticide applicator license. 4.0 REFERENCES Ackerfield, J. 2015. Flora of Colorado. Botanical Research Institute of Texas, Fort Worth, Texas. Barrow, J. R., and Bobby D. McCaslin. 1995. Role of microbes in resource management in arid ecosystems. In: Barrow, J. R., E. D. McArthur, R. E. Sosebee, and Tausch, R. J., comps. 1996. Proceedings: shrubland ecosystem dynamics in a changing environment. General Technical Report, INT-GTR-338, Ogden, Utah: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Resource Station, 275 pp. BLM. 2013. Revised Revegetation Seed Mix Menus, CRVFO Energy Team. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office. Silt, Colorado. WestWater Engineering Page 12 of 15 August 2021 CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D’Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial. Garfield County. 2016. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Adopted by Board of County Commissioners Feb. 16, 2016. Garfield County. 2021. Vegetation Management Section – Noxious Weed List. Available online: http://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/noxious-weed-list.aspx. Rifle, CO. Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington. NRCS. 2021. Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Perry, L.G., D.M. Blumenthal, T.A. Monaco, M.W. Paschke, and E.F. Redente. 2010. Immobilizing nitrogen to control plant invasion. Oecologia: 163:12-24. Sirota, Judith M. 2004. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. Colorado State University, Cooperative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado. URL: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/Weeds/weedmgmt.html State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Denver, 78 pp. Weber, William A., and Ronald C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope. Fourth Edition, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee and R. Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West – 9th edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming, Laramie. WestWater Engineering Page 13 of 12 WestWater Engineering Appendix A-1 May 2018 WestWater Engineering Appendix A-2 May 2018 ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS, LLC COTTONWOOD PASS PHASE 4 PIPELINE PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS: SECTION 9-102-K - SENSITIVE AREAS SURVEY Cover photo: View along a portion of the proposed pipeline alignment. Prepared for: Black Hills Energy Cheyenne, WY Prepared by: WestWater Engineering, Inc. 2516 Foresight Cr. #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 Amie Wilsey, Environmental Scientist/Project Manager August 2021 WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 22 August 2021 INTRODUCTION Project Description At the request of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, LLC (RMNG) doing business as Black Hills Energy (Black Hills), WestWater Engineering (WestWater) has prepared a sensitive areas survey report for the proposed Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline project that is located on privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. This document reports the results and analysis of the findings that are pertinent to Section 9-102-K of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (as amended) as it applies to this project. RMNG proposes to replace an existing portion of their pipeline in Sections 4, 8, 9, and 17, Township 7 South, Range 87 West (Figure 1). This Sensitive Areas Report applies to the areas where RMNG plans to cause surface disturbance associated with the proposed pipeline project. The current land uses include rangeland, pasturelands, wildlife habitat, and residential housing. Survey Methods WestWater biologists surveyed the pipeline replacement alignment on July 29, 2021 for the potential occurrence of special status plants and wildlife (including federally threatened and endangered species), raptors, noxious weeds, and potential Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. (WoUS). The surveys were completed within the annual growing season for plants and within the nesting season for migratory birds. Survey permission was not granted beyond the right-of-way (ROW) limits. Vegetation types were determined through aerial photography and on-the-ground assessments. Plant species identification was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Ackerfield 2015, Spackman et al. 1997, Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2007, Weber and Wittmann 2012). Mapped soil types, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed to determine the soil types and expected natural vegetation characteristics at the project site (NRCS 2021). Data locations were recorded using handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) units (Datum: NAD83, Zone 12) and photographs were taken of the habitat, terrain, and biological features found during the survey. Surveys for threatened and endangered plant species were conducted within suitable habitats in conjunction with noxious weed and wildlife surveys. Noxious weed infestations along the pipeline alignment were documented and are reported in a Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan that has been prepared for this project (WestWater 2021). Threatened and endangered wildlife surveys and raptor nest surveys were conducted in suitable habitats along the pipeline alignment only. Nest searches into nearby tree stands were conducted with binoculars from within the ROW. WestWater biologists also searched for raptor nest sites along cliffs within 0.5 mile of project features with the use of binoculars from the ROW. SECTION 9-102-K – SENSITIVE AREAS Terrain The pipeline alignment is located along the rolling ridges near Cottonwood Pass and Cattle Creek Road at an elevation range from approximately 7,200 feet to 7,400 feet. The pipeline is in the vicinity of Cattle Creek and Shippees Draw. The pipeline alignment crosses Cattle Creek which eventually drains into the Roaring Fork River located southwest of the project area. Vegetation There are three main vegetation community types present in the project area: mountain shrublands, sagebrush shrublands, and pasturelands. The mountain shrublands are composed primarily of Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) intermixed with mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 22 August 2021 Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), and Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). Sagebrush shrublands are present along portions of the alignment and are intermixed with various forbs and perennial grasses. The pasturelands are composed of native and non-native perennial grass species. Common plants observed throughout the project area are described in Table 1. Table 1. Common plants observed throughout the project area. Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Grasses Bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata xx Sagebrush shrubland Intermediate wheatgrass Thinopyrum intermedium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Kentucky bluegrass Poa pratensis xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Muttongrass Poa fendleriana xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda x Sagebrush shrubland Smooth brome Bromus inermis xxx Pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Forbs American vetch Vicia americana xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Brittle prickly pear Opuntia fragilis xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Common dandelion Taraxacum officinale xx Sagebrush shrubland, Pastureland Common yarrow Achillea millefolium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland European stickseed Lappula squarrosa x Sagebrush shrubland Hairy goldenaster Heterotheca villosa xx Sagebrush shrublands Hoary tansyaster Machaeranthera canescens xx Sagebrush shrubland Plains prickly pear Opuntia polyacantha x Sagebrush shrubland Rayless tansyaster Machaeranthera grindelioides xx Sagebrush shrublands Spiny phlox Phlox hoodii xxx Sagebrush shrubland Wyoming Indian paintbrush Castilleja linariifolia x Sagebrush shrubland Yellow salsify Tragopogon dubius x Reclaimed/disturbed area Shrubs/Trees Antelope bitterbrush Purshia tridentata x Sagebrush shrubland Gambel oakbrush Quercus gambelii xx Mountain shrubland Mountain snowberry Symphoricarpos oreophilus xx Mountain shrubland, sagebrush shrubland Rubber rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosa xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Saskatoon serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia xxx Mountain shrubland Wood’s rose Rosa woodsii x Mountain shrubland WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 22 August 2021 Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Wyoming sagebrush Artemisa tridentata ssp. wyomingensis xxx Sagebrush shrubland Yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidflorus xx Sagebrush shrubland, pastureland * x= uncommon in project area. xx= moderate frequency throughout project area. xxx = common frequency throughout project area. Bold = Non-native species Special Status Species of Plants (SSS) Special Status Species (SSS) of Plants include those listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened, endangered, and candidate species and species considered sensitive by the U.S. Forest Services and/or Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Observations No federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species of plants were detected during the survey and none (Table 2, Figure 2) are expected to be affected by the project (USFWS 2021a). A review of the available literature, evaluation of soils and terrain at project site, and previous WestWater surveys indicated that no known populations of these plants exist nearby. Table 2. Federally listed threatened, endangered, and candidate plant species for Garfield County. Common Name Scientific Name Status Colorado hookless cactus Sclerocactus glaucus Threatened DeBeque phacelia Phacelia submutica Threatened Parachute penstemon Penstemon debilis Threatened Ute ladies’-tresses orchid Spiranthes diluvialis Threatened Parachute penstemon occurs along the Roan Cliffs north of Parachute and Rifle, Colorado. There is no suitable habitat for this species in the vicinity of the proposed project. DeBeque phacelia is endemic to the areas surrounding DeBeque, Colorado. There is no suitable for this species in the vicinity of the proposed project. Colorado hookless cactus occurs in sagebrush and desert shrublands west of Parachute, CO. The nearest known occupied habitat for Ute ladies’-tresses orchid is located on the Roaring Fork River near Carbondale. Harrington’s penstemon (Penstemon harringtonii) occurs in open sagebrush or, less commonly, pinyon- juniper habitats. Preferred soils are rocky loams and rocky clay-loams derived from coarse calcareous parent materials from elevations of 6,800 feet to 9,200 feet. This species is considered a sensitive plant by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. This species was observed in 12 locations along the southern portion of the alignment as shown on Figure 2. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts In areas where Harrington’s penstemon occurs along the pipeline alignment, RMNG plans to bore these sections in order to avoid impacts to wetlands and SSS plant species; therefore, there should be no impacts to this species as a result of project construction activities (Figure 2). WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 22 August 2021 Noxious Weeds Observations Several weed species listed by the State of Colorado (2005) were detected during surveys including: Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), common burdock (Arctium minus), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides), Russian knapweed (Rhaponticum repens), scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), and whitetop (Lepidium draba). Noxious weeds were observed in dense infestations primarily along irrigated and non-irrigated pasturelands. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts The pipeline would be constructed within an existing pipeline ROW. This strategy will serve to reduce cumulative loss and fragmentation of native vegetation and is a good mitigation technique. The best method to mitigate the loss of native vegetation is by reclaiming and reseeding the disturbance area with a native seed mix. Revegetation with native species provides the greatest benefit for wildlife. A Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan have been developed for this project (WestWater 2021), which includes recommendations for vegetation management applicable to this project. Special Status Wildlife Species (excluding raptors) WestWater biologists conducted literature reviews and surveyed the project area for the presence of Special Status Species (SSS) of wildlife and their habitat including: species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as candidate, threatened, and endangered; Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) threatened, endangered, and species of concern (CPW 2021a); and Birds of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2021b). Species that could potentially occur are described in Table 3. Literature reviews of species occurrence in the project area included BCC habitat and nesting records as described in the Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas (Wickersham 2016) and Colorado Birds (Andrews and Righter 1992), references in Mammals of Colorado (Fitzgerald et al. 2011), and references in Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado (Hammerson 1999). Table 3. Status of SSS wildlife species that may occur within the project area. Species Common Name Species Scientific Name Status Habitat Description Habitat or Species Potentially Occurring within Landscape Area MAMMALS Canada lynx Lynx canadensis T, SE Coniferous forests with uneven aged stands having open canopies and a well-developed understory. Closely associated with snowshoe hare. Potential to occur in nearby spruce/fir forests above the project area. Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes S Roosts in caves or mines near ponderosa pine forests, oakbrush, greasewood, or saltbush shrublands. Feeds on insects. Elevation up to 7,500 ft. May roost in mountain shrublands. WestWater Engineering Page 5 of 22 August 2021 Table 3. Status of SSS wildlife species that may occur within the project area. Species Common Name Species Scientific Name Status Habitat Description Habitat or Species Potentially Occurring within Landscape Area Townsend’s big- eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens SC Semi-desert shrublands, pinyon/juniper woodlands, and open montane forests associated with caves or crevices in rockfaces. Elevations up to 9,500 ft. Known in all W. CO counties. May roost in mountain shrublands. BIRDS Cassin’s Finch Carpodacus cassinii BCC Nests in ponderosa pine, Douglas- firs, and conifer forests. May occur in pinyon/juniper forests. May occur in the mountain shrublands of the project area. Evening Grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus BCC Nests in mature, open, coniferous forests, aspen stands, riparian woodlands, and occasionally oak/montane shrublands. Potential to occur in project area and in forests surrounding the project. Lewis’s Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis BCC Open conifer forests, riparian areas, or burns where they can forage for flying insects. Primarily nests in cottonwoods. Potential to occur in forests surrounding project. Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi BCC Nests in conifer forests with snags near meadows and water. Confirmed breeder in Garfield County. Potential to occur in forests surrounding the project area. Virginia’s Warbler Vermivora virginiae BCC Nests in oak and montane shrublands from 6,000 ft. to 9,000 ft. in elevation. Confirmed breeder in Garfield County. May occur in the oak and mountain shrublands present in the project area and surrounding areas. FISH Bluehead sucker Catostomus discobolus SC Small to mid-size tributaries in the Upper Colorado River Basin and suitable habitat in larger main-stem streams; runs and riffles with rocky or gravelly substrate and cool temperatures. Occurs downstream in the Colorado River. WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 22 August 2021 Table 3. Status of SSS wildlife species that may occur within the project area. Species Common Name Species Scientific Name Status Habitat Description Habitat or Species Potentially Occurring within Landscape Area Colorado pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius E, ST The Colorado River and its major tributaries; adults require pools, deep runs, and eddy habitats and high spring run-off flows that flush sediment from spawning areas; spawn on gravel and cobble substrates; nursery habitat includes backwaters and flooded lowlands. Occurs downstream in the Colorado River. Colorado River cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus SC Cold to cool water portions of the Upper Colorado River system, including small tributaries. Complex streams with sinuosity and a variety of substrates. Likely occurs downstream of the project area in the Roaring Fork River. Mountain sucker Catostomus platyrhynchus SC Small streams to large rivers (lakes and reservoirs to a lesser extent); in streams, low gradient segments with riffles, runs, and pools associated with cover and woody debris and a variety of substrates; spawn in riffles below pools; shallow, slow moving water behind obstructions or aquatic vegetation provides nursery habitat. Occurs downstream in the Colorado River. Razorback sucker Xyrauchen texanus E, SE Main-stem of the Colorado River and its major tributaries; seasonal pattern to habitat use by adult fish; fall/winter preference for pools and slow eddies, runs and backwaters in early spring, backwaters and flooded lowlands in June, and runs and pools in late summer and early fall; may also utilize reservoir habitats. Occurs downstream in the Colorado River. Roundtail chub Gila robusta SC Medium and large tributaries to the Colorado River Stream reaches with pool and riffle habitats, often occupying deep, slow areas with debris and cover on a rocky, gravel, silt, or sandy substrate. Occurs downstream in the Colorado River. AMPHIBIANS WestWater Engineering Page 7 of 22 August 2021 Table 3. Status of SSS wildlife species that may occur within the project area. Species Common Name Species Scientific Name Status Habitat Description Habitat or Species Potentially Occurring within Landscape Area Northern leopard frog Lithobates (Rana) pipiens SC Wet meadows and the banks and shallow areas of ponds, marshes, lakes, streams, reservoirs, ditches; known in all W CO counties. Likely to occur along perennial water sources within project area. REPTILES Midget faded rattlesnake Crotalus viridis concolor SC Habitat varies from riparian to semi-desert shrublands and foothills. Elevation to appx. 7,500 ft. Known in Mesa, Delta, and Garfield Counties. May occur within the project area. *BCC- Birds of Conservation Concern, E – USFWS Endangered Species, C- USFWS Candidate species, SC – Colorado Sensitive Species, ST – Colorado Threatened Species Observations Mammals: Potential habitat for Canada lynx is located approximately 3.2 miles from the project area (Figure 3) . Mapped potential habitat occurs at the upper elevations of Cottonwood Pass above the project area within the U.S. Forest Service boundary (CPW 2021b). There is no potential habitat for lynx within the project boundaries. The proposed project would be located within vegetation communities composed of pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands, and mountain shrublands. There are no conifer forests present in the project area to provide potential habitat for lynx. Sensitive species of bats may roost and occupy the mountain shrublands present throughout the project area. However, it is unlikely that they would breed within the project boundaries due to lack of suitable habitat (i.e. mines, caves, rocky outcrops). No bat-specific surveys were conducted for this project. Birds: Several migratory birds including those listed as BCC (Table 3) likely occur and nest in the sagebrush shrublands and mountain shrublands present in the project area. No nests were observed during surveys. Bird species observed during the survey are presented in Table 4 below. Table 4. Bird species detected during biological surveys. Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name American Robin Turdus migratorius Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia Mountain Bluebird Sialia currucoides Green-tailed Towhee Pipilo chlorurus Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura Broad-tailed Hummingbird Selasphorus platycercus Mountain Chickadee Poecile gambeli Common Raven Corvus corax Lesser Goldfinch Spinus psaltria WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 22 August 2021 Table 4. Bird species detected during biological surveys. Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Woodhouse Scrub Jay Aphelocoma woodhouseii Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus American Goldfinch Spinus tristis Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis Black-billed Magpie Pica hudsonia Suitable nesting habitat for migratory bird species, including BCC species, would be directly affected by the project. Most non-game bird species and their active nests are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712; Ch. 128; July 13, 1918; 40 Stat. 755) and destruction of occupied nests could be considered a “take” resulting in a violation of federal laws. Fish: The Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker, which are federally listed endangered fish species, occur within the Colorado River downstream of the project area below the City of Rifle bridge (USFWS 1994). Designated critical habitat for these two species also occurs downstream of the project area in the Colorado River. No records indicate that the humpback chub and bonytail occur in the Colorado River near Rifle, CO; however, these two species occur further downstream in the Colorado River (USFWS 1994). Several State species of concern species of fish are known to occur downstream of the project area in the Colorado River and the Roaring Fork River. Colorado River endangered fishes and State species of concern and their habitats could be impacted by project development related to any increase in sediment to waterways and contamination from spills. Reptiles: The midget faded rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis concolor) is listed by CPW as a species of concern, and is known to occur in northwestern Colorado in a variety of habitats, including sagebrush shrublands (Hammerson 1999). It is a subspecies of the prairie (western) rattlesnake (C. viridis), and Hammerson (1999) states that intergradation occurs between the subspecies concolor and the subspecies viridis. None were observed during surveys. Amphibians: Northern leopard frogs likely occur in wet meadows, irrigation ditches, perennial streams, and ponds in the project area and vicinity. However, none were observed during surveys. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts Mammals: It is unlikely that project development would impact Canada lynx due to the lack of potential habitat present in the project area for this species. There is the potential that sensitive species of bats would be impacted by project related construction activities; however, it is unlikely the project would impact populations of sensitive species of bats due to the lack of caves and/or crevices in the project area to support maternity roost sites and hibernaculas. During project construction bats would likely relocate to alternate roosting sites; therefore, the species would not be directly impacted by the project. Birds: Impacts to migratory bird species, which nest in sagebrush and mountain shrublands, can be minimized if surface disturbing construction activities take place outside the nesting season. Nesting season is generally considered from April 1 to August 31 in this area. May 1 to July 15 is the peak period when most incubation and brood rearing takes place. If brush clearing can occur prior to May 1, most affected birds will relocate to alternate nesting sites. After mid-to-late July, most fledging has occurred and brush clearing impacts would be minimized. WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 22 August 2021 Fish/Amphibians: Water depletions, if any occur, and stormwater run-off may affect special status aquatic species downstream in the Roaring Fork and Colorado Rivers. Stormwater management plans and spill prevention and counter control measures should be implemented as appropriate for projects of this nature. Reptiles: Rattlesnakes may den communally or individually in a variety of habitat features that offer insulation and security, including deep crevices in rocky outcroppings and rodent dens. There are no rock outcrops and crevices near the project area to provide suitable denning habitat for snakes. Rattlesnakes are uncommon, but construction personnel and surveyors should be educated on snake identification and conflict avoidance in an effort to prevent injury to personnel and mortality to snakes that may be encountered during the project development. Raptors Several raptor species could nest in the project area (Table 5). Nesting season for raptor species in this area begins in January for eagles and continues through mid-August for some hawks. The most common raptor species observed in the area include American Kestrel, Cooper’s Hawk, Great Horned Owl, and Red-tailed Hawk. Table 5. Raptor species that may be present near the project area. Common Name Scientific Name BCC* American Kestrel Falco sparverius No Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii No Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus Yes Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos Yes Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus No Long-eared Owl Asio otus No Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis Yes Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus No Northern Pygmy Owl Glaucidium gnoma No Northern Saw-whet Owl Aegolius acadicus No Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Yes Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus Yes Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis No Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus No Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni No *BCC=U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bird of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2021b Observations No raptor nests were observed during surveys; however, it should be noted that surveys were limited to the ROW and it is likely that raptors are nesting within 0.25 mile of the pipeline alignment in the Gambel oak and aspen woodlands surrounding the project site. No nests would be directly removed by the proposed project. Long-term impacts resulting from project development would be unlikely because no nests are directly affected and once the pipeline has successfully revegetated, hunting and foraging habitat losses would be minimal. The proposed project would not directly impact nesting raptors; however, indirect effects could occur if construction takes place near nests during the active nesting season if no topographical or vegetative screen exists. Project activity has the potential to impact nesting raptors within 0.25 and 0.5 WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 22 August 2021 miles of project features through disruption of nesting and brood rearing activities due to the presence of human activity. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts In cases where raptor nests exist near a project and no mitigating factors are present, every effort should be made to apply timing and buffer distance limitations to reduce indirect effects (Table 6). These recommendations are based on CPW recommendations (Craig 2002, Klute 2008) and literature review of nesting season timing for raptors in the region (Andrews and Righter 1992, Poole 2021, Righter et al. 2004). Table 6. Timing and buffer recommendations for occupied raptor nests. Species Buffer Zone Seasonal Restriction American Kestrel * * Bald Eagle 0.50 mile 15 October – 31 July Burrowing Owl 150 feet 15 March – 31 October Cooper’s Hawk 0.25 mile 1 April – 15 August Ferruginous Hawk 0.50 mile 1 Feb – 15 July Flammulated Owl 0.25 mile 1 April – 1 August Golden Eagle 0.50 mile 15 December – 15 July Great Horned Owl * * Long-eared Owl 0.25 mile 1 March – 15 July Northern Goshawk 0.50 mile 1 March – 15 September Northern Harrier 0.25 mile 1 April – 15 August Northern Pygmy Owl 0.25 mile 1 March – 15 July Northern Saw-whet Owl 0.25 mile 1 March – 15 July Osprey 0.25 mile 1 April – 31 August Peregrine Falcon 0.5 mile 15 March – 31 July Prairie Falcon 0.5 mile 15 March – 15 July Red-tailed Hawk 0.33 mile 15 February - 15 July Sharp-shinned Hawk 0.25 mile 1 April – 15 August Swainson's Hawk 0.25 mile 1 April - 15 July * Great Horned Owls and Kestrels are relatively tolerant of human activity. Keep activity to a minimum during breeding season. Terrestrial Wildlife (Excluding SSS) American Elk and Mule Deer The pipeline alignment is located within American elk (Cervus canadensis) severe winter range as mapped by CPW (Figure 5). The project would also be located within overall range for mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and elk (Figure 5) (CPW 2021b). The project area provides habitat for deer and elk nearly year-round. The pipeline replacement project would be located within an existing ROW, near existing county roads, and in the vicinity of rural residential homes. The effects of vegetation removal necessary for the project are likely to be small once revegetation and reclamation have occurred. The loss of forage and cover for big game would be temporary and because the pipeline would be along existing developments, the project would not further fragment habitat. Deer and elk populations have become somewhat habituated to human activity in the area and indirect impacts from construction of this project would be low. No migration corridors will be affected. Vehicle related mortality attributable to this project is unlikely given the current traffic volumes and generally low speed limits on the existing roads. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts WestWater Engineering Page 11 of 22 August 2021 Project construction activities should avoid activity within severe elk winter range during December to April to reduce impacts to big game species during critical times of the year. Open trenches if left open during construction can entrap big game species. Regularly spaced earthen escape ramps should be installed in open trenches to prevent wildlife entrapment. Any necessary fencing should be constructed consistent with published standards that reduce impacts to big game (Hanophy 2009). Black Bear and Mountain Lion CPW mapping shows the site to be within overall ranges for black bear (Ursus americanus) and mountain lion (Puma concolor) (CPW 2021b). Affects to mountain lion are unlikely. Potential bear encounters could occur if garbage or food is not properly managed during construction. Interactions with humans sometimes result in the euthanasia of offending bears by the CPW and would be the most conceivable potential impact on either species. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts All garbage and food items should be stored in bear-proof receptacles and/or removed from the site on a daily basis to prevent attracting bears to the site. Small Mammals Common small mammal species in the project area include coyote (Canis latrans) and cottontail (Sylvilagus spp.). Northern pocket gophers (Thamomys talpoides) are known to occur in the area and a multitude of additional rodent species may occur (Fitzgerald et al. 2011)., Non-sensitive (SSS) bat species may occupy the area seasonally, but no bats were observed. Due to the abundance of available habitat surrounding the project area for these species, it is unlikely that the proposed project would have detrimental impacts that would result in effects to the populations of these species. Reptiles Other species of reptiles within the project area may include western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis elegans), gopher (bull) snake (Pituophis catenifer sayi), side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), plateau striped whiptail (Cnemidophorus velox), sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus), tree lizard (Urosaurus ornatus), and western whiptail (Cnemidophorus tigris), among others (Hammerson 1999). Due to the abundance of available habitat surrounding the project area for these species, it is unlikely that the proposed project would have detrimental impacts that would result in effects to the populations of these species. Aquatic Species No aquatic features that provide suitable habitat for fish were observed in the project area. There is potential for several species of amphibians including those listed by the CPW as species of concern to occur in the project area along permanent and temporary water sources. Species with potential to occur include: Northern leopard frog (State species of concern - Rana pipiens) and tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) (Hammerson 1999 and CPW 2021a). There is potential that aquatic wildlife downstream could be affected by increased sedimentation and potential spills from chemicals stored on site during construction of the pipeline. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts-Small Mammals, Reptiles, and Aquatic Species The Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan developed for this project (WestWater 2021), which includes recommendations for vegetation management applicable to this project would mitigate any impacts to small mammals and reptiles. Implementation of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC), a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP), and Best Management Practices (BMPs) associated with this type of project will provide a good degree of mitigation for any potential impacts to critical habitat for aquatic species. Waters of the U.S. WestWater Engineering Page 12 of 22 August 2021 Waters of the U.S. include wetlands and drainages under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams and drainages, as indicated on U.S. Geological Survey mapping, are considered WoUS if they exhibit evidence of flow (i.e., ordinary high- water mark) and are hydrologically connected to a perennial stream. In addition to hydrology, a jurisdictional wetland will also demonstrate the unique soil and vegetation characteristics that result from inundation or saturation. Observations WestWater biologists surveyed the area for aquatic resources including wetlands and WoUS crossings that would fall under the jurisdiction of the ACOE in conjunction with other surveys that were conducted for this report. One potential WoUS was observed which contains wetlands, and three irrigation ditch crossings were also observed. Mitigation and Minimizing Impacts RMNG plans to bore all WoUS and wetland crossings present along the pipeline alignment. No fill material will be placed into WoUS located along the project. In the event of a bore failure it is recommended that a contingency plan is prepared in order to prevent project delays. To protect the integrity of ephemeral/intermittent streams, precautions should be taken when crossing or intersecting the waterways identified. Best Management Practices (BMPs), including adequate barriers and filtration methods, should be used to prevent soil erosion and sedimentation to downstream waterways. SUMMARY OF EFFECTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Native vegetation: Vegetation within the previously disturbed pipeline ROW is composed of a mix of native and non-native species, including many noxious and nuisance species. Additional native vegetation would be cleared for construction and revegetated upon completion. Reseeding with native grasses and forbs would be beneficial and with implementation of an active weed management plan, vegetation conditions along the right-of-way should be improved over present conditions. SSS plants: No threatened or endangered species of plants would be affected by the project. Harrington’s penstemon, a plant listed as sensitive by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, was observed along the alignment. Noxious Weeds: Several noxious weed species listed by the State of Colorado and Garfield County were present in the project area. Infestation locations, general control techniques, and revegetation recommendations are reported in a Reclamation, Revegetation, and Noxious Weed Management Plan that was prepared for this project (WestWater 2021). SSS wildlife: The project area eventually drains to the Colorado River, which provides Critical Habitat for four species of endangered fish. Sedimentation, pollution, or water depletions may have an indirect effect on these species if they occur. It is recommended that a stormwater control plan and spill prevention and counter-control measure plan are implemented to prevent increased sedimentation and spills from reaching downstream waterways. Forage and cover for wildlife and habitat fragmentation: The long-term effects of vegetation removal necessary for the project are likely to be minimal once revegetation and reclamation have occurred. The pipeline would be along existing disturbances and would not further fragment existing habitat. Suitable nesting habitat for birds would be directly affected by the project. To reduce negative effects, vegetation removal should occur outside of the nesting season and should be limited to that which is necessary for pipeline installation. WestWater Engineering Page 13 of 22 August 2021 Big game migration corridors: No migration corridors would be affected. Big game species are not restricted to specific movement corridors in this area and the presence of this pipeline will not create a barrier. Fencing, if necessary, could alter daily big game movements on a small scale and could pose a hazard to animals if not built with wildlife in mind. Elk and mule deer winter range: The pipeline alignment is located within elk severe winter range. It is recommended that construction activities are minimized in big game winter ranges during winter months (December - April). Open trenches: Trenches or pits left open during construction can present a dangerous obstacle for wildlife. Regularly spaced earthen ramps would enable animals that do enter the trench to escape. Direct affects from construction and operation: Direct removal of migratory bird nests or disruption of nesting and brood rearing activities are possible if project construction occurs during the nesting season. Vehicle related mortality connected to this project is expected to be low. In order to reduce project construction related affects to nesting birds it is recommended that brush clearing and grubbing activities occurs outside the nesting season for migratory birds. Indirect effects from construction and operation of the pipeline: Wildlife in the project area has become somewhat habituated to human activity and indirect impacts from construction of this project would be low. Increased sedimentation and the potential for chemical spills to reach downstream waterways would be mitigated with the implementation of a stormwater management plan and spill prevention and counter control measure plan. The presence of construction personnel and noise has a low potential to affect wildlife in a negative manner, since the construction activities would be short in duration, occur during daylight hours, and occur adjacent to and within an area of considerable human activity. REFERENCES Ackerfield, J. 2015. Flora of Colorado. Botanical Research Institute of Texas, Fort Worth, Texas.In Andrews, R., and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds: A Reference to Their Distribution and Habitat. Denver Museum of Natural History. Denver. CPW. 2021a. State of Colorado Threatened, Endangered, and Species of Concern List. Available online: http://wildlife.state.co.us/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/Pages/SpeciesOfConcern1.aspx CPW. 2021b. CPW All Species Activity Mapping Data available online at: http://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=190573c5aba643a0bc058e6f7f0510b7. Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Craig, G. R. 2002. Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D’Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial. Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney and D.M. Armstrong. 2011. Mammals of Colorado, Denver Museum of Natural History and University Press of Colorado, Denver. Hammerson, G. A. 1999. Amphibians and Reptiles in Colorado, Second Edition. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. Hanophy, W. 2009. Fencing with Wildlife in Mind. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Denver. Available online: http://wildlife.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/DOW/LandWater/PrivateLandProgra ms/DOWFencingWithWildlifeInMind.pdf WestWater Engineering Page 14 of 22 August 2021 Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington. Klute, D. 2008. Recommended Buffer Zones and Seasonal Restrictions for Colorado Raptors. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver. NRCS. 2021. Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, Available online: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Poole, A. (editor). 2021. The Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA/. Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Righter, R., R. Levad, C. Dexter, and K. Potter. 2004. Birds of Western Colorado Plateau and Mesa Country. Grand Valley Audubon Society, Grand Junction. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Denver, 78 p. USFWS. 1994. Determination of Critical Habitat for the Colorado River Endangered fishes: Razorback sucker, Colorado squawfish, humpback chub, and bonytail chub. Federal Register Vol. 59. No. 54. Monday March 21, 1994 – Rules and Regulations. USFWS. 2021a. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation. Available online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/IPG2GNNTSBCHPEGRT4WJOR3Z3Y/resources USFWS. 2021b. Birds of Conservation Concern 2008. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arlington, Virginia. Weber, W. A., and R. C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope. Fourth Edition, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. WestWater. 2021. Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, LLC, Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline Project, Revegetation, Reclamation, & Weed Management Plan. WestWater Engineering, Grand Junction, CO. Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee and R. Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West – 9th edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming, Laramie. Wickersham, L.E. 2016. The Second Colorado Breeding Bird Atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership, Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Denver, CO. WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 22 August 2021 Nationwide Permit No. 3 Maintenance. (a) The repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable structure or fill, or of any currently serviceable structure or fill authorized by 33 CFR 330.3, provided that the structure or fill is not to be put to uses differing from those uses specified or contemplated for it in the original permit or the most recently authorized modification. Minor deviations in the structure's configuration or filled area, including those due to changes in materials, construction techniques, requirements of other regulatory agencies, or current construction codes or safety standards that are necessary to make the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement are authorized. This NWP also authorizes the removal of previously authorized structures or fills. Any stream channel modification is limited to the minimum necessary for the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of the structure or fill; such modifications, including the removal of material from the stream channel, must be immediately adjacent to the project. This NWP also authorizes the removal of accumulated sediment and debris within, and in the immediate vicinity of, the structure or fill. This NWP also authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of those structures or fills destroyed or damaged by storms, floods, fire or other discrete events, provided the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement is commenced, or is under contract to commence, within two years of the date of their destruction or damage. In cases of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes or tornadoes, this two-year limit may be waived by the district engineer, provided the permittee can demonstrate funding, contract, or other similar delays. (b) This NWP also authorizes the removal of accumulated sediments and debris outside the immediate vicinity of existing structures (e.g., bridges, culverted road crossings, water intake structures, etc.). The removal of sediment is limited to the minimum necessary to restore the waterway in the vicinity of the structure to the approximate dimensions that existed when the structure was built, but cannot extend farther than 200 feet in any direction from the structure. This 200 foot limit does not apply to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated sediments blocking or restricting outfall and intake structures or to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated sediments from canals associated with outfall and intake structures. All dredged or excavated materials must be deposited and retained in an area that has no waters of the United States unless otherwise specifically approved by the district engineer under separate authorization. (c) This NWP also authorizes temporary structures, fills, and work, including the use of temporary mats, necessary to conduct the maintenance activity. Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain normal downstream flows and minimize flooding to the maximum extent practicable, when temporary structures, work, and discharges, including cofferdams, are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of construction sites. Temporary fills must consist of materials, and be placed in a manner, that will not be eroded by expected high flows. After conducting the maintenance activity, temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The areas affected by temporary fills must be revegetated, as appropriate. (d) This NWP does not authorize maintenance dredging for the primary purpose of navigation. This NWP does not authorize beach restoration. This NWP does not authorize new stream channelization or stream relocation projects. Notification: For activities authorized by paragraph (b) of this NWP, the permittee must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity (see general condition 32). The pre-construction notification must include information regarding the original design capacities and configurations of the outfalls, intakes, small impoundments, and canals. (Sections 10 and 404) Note: This NWP authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized structure or fill that does not qualify for the Clean Water Act section 404(f) exemption for maintenance. Nationwide Permit General Conditions Note: To qualify for NWP authorization, the prospective permittee must comply with the following general conditions, as applicable, in addition to any regional or case- specific conditions imposed by the division engineer or district engineer. Prospective permittees should contact the appropriate Corps district office to determine if regional conditions have been imposed on an NWP. Prospective permittees should also contact the appropriate Corps district office to determine the status of Clean Water Act Section 401 water quality certification and/or Coastal Zone Management Act consistency for an NWP. Every person who may wish to obtain permit authorization under one or more NWPs, or who is currently relying on an existing or prior permit authorization under one or more NWPs, has been and is on notice that all of the provisions of 33 CFR 330.1 through 330.6 apply to every NWP authorization. Note especially 33 CFR 330.5 relating to the modification, suspension, or revocation of any NWP authorization. 1. Navigation. (a) No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. (b) Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard, through regulations or otherwise, must be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in navigable waters of the United States. (c) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation, or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby, without expense to the United States. No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 2. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. All permanent and temporary crossings of waterbodies shall be suitably culverted, bridged, or otherwise designed and constructed to maintain low flows to sustain the movement of those aquatic species. If a bottomless culvert cannot be used, then the crossing should be designed and constructed to minimize adverse effects to aquatic life movements. 3. Spawning Areas. Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g., through excavation, fill, or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning area are not authorized. 4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 5. Shellfish Beds. No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, unless the activity is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48, or is a shellfish seeding or habitat restoration activity authorized by NWP 27. 6. Suitable Material. No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g., trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.). Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see section 307 of the Clean Water Act). 7. Water Supply Intakes. No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 8. Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity creates an impoundment of water, adverse effects to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 9. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable, the pre- construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream channelization, storm water management activities, and temporary and permanent road crossings, except as provided below. The activity must be constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high flows. The activity may alter the pre-construction course, condition, capacity, and location of open waters if it benefits the aquatic environment (e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities). 10. Fills Within 100-Year Floodplains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA-approved state or local floodplain management requirements. 11. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats must be placed on mats, or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls. Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low-flow or no-flow, or during low tides. 13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate. 14. Proper Maintenance. Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety and compliance with applicable NWP general conditions, as well as any activity-specific conditions added by the district engineer to an NWP authorization. 15. Single and Complete Project. The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project. 16. Wild and Scenic Rivers. (a) No NWP activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a “study river” for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct management responsibility for such river, has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. (b) If a proposed NWP activity will occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a “study river” for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, the permittee must submit a pre-construction notification (see general condition 32). The district engineer will coordinate the PCN with the Federal agency with direct management responsibility for that river. The permittee shall not begin the NWP activity until notified by the district engineer that the Federal agency with direct management responsibility for that river has determined in writing that the proposed NWP activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. (c) Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency responsible for the designated Wild and Scenic River or study river (e.g., National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Information on these rivers is also available at: http://www.rivers.gov/. 17. Tribal Rights. No NWP activity may cause more than minimal adverse effects on tribal rights (including treaty rights), protected tribal resources, or tribal lands. 18. Endangered Species. (a) No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to directly or indirectly jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or which will directly or indirectly destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species. No activity is authorized under any NWP which “may affect” a listed species or critical habitat, unless ESA section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. Direct effects are the immediate effects on listed species and critical habitat caused by the NWP activity. Indirect effects are those effects on listed species and critical habitat that are caused by the NWP activity and are later in time, but still are reasonably certain to occur. (b) Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the ESA. If pre-construction notification is required for the proposed activity, the Federal permittee must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The district engineer will verify that the appropriate documentation has been submitted. If the appropriate documentation has not been submitted, additional ESA section 7 consultation may be necessary for the activity and the respective federal agency would be responsible for fulfilling its obligation under section 7 of the ESA. (c) Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity, or if the activity is located in designated critical habitat, and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that might affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat, the pre-construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed activity or that utilize the designated critical habitat that might be affected by the proposed activity. The district engineer will determine whether the proposed activity “may affect” or will have “no effect” to listed species and designated critical habitat and will notify the non- Federal applicant of the Corps’ determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre- construction notification. In cases where the non-Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity, and has so notified the Corps, the applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification that the proposed activity will have “no effect” on listed species or critical habitat, or until ESA section 7 consultation has been completed. If the non- Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps. As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may add species-specific permit conditions to the NWPs. (d) Authorization of an activity by an NWP does not authorize the “take” of a threatened or endangered species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization (e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with “incidental take” provisions, etc.) from the FWS or the NMFS, the Endangered Species Act prohibits any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take a listed species, where "take" means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. The word “harm” in the definition of “take'' means an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. (e) If the non-federal permittee has a valid ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit with an approved Habitat Conservation Plan for a project or a group of projects that includes the proposed NWP activity, the non-federal applicant should provide a copy of that ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit with the PCN required by paragraph (c) of this general condition. The district engineer will coordinate with the agency that issued the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit to determine whether the proposed NWP activity and the associated incidental take were considered in the internal ESA section 7 consultation conducted for the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit. If that coordination results in concurrence from the agency that the proposed NWP activity and the associated incidental take were considered in the internal ESA section 7 consultation for the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, the district engineer does not need to conduct a separate ESA section 7 consultation for the proposed NWP activity. The district engineer will notify the non-federal applicant within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification whether the ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit covers the proposed NWP activity or whether additional ESA section 7 consultation is required. (f) Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices of the FWS and NMFS or their world wide web pages at http://www.fws.gov/ or http://www.fws.gov/ipac and http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/esa/ respectively. 19. Migratory Birds and Bald and Golden Eagles. The permittee is responsible for ensuring their action complies with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The permittee is responsible for contacting appropriate local office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine applicable measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds or eagles, including whether “incidental take” permits are necessary and available under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act for a particular activity. 20. Historic Properties. (a) In cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places, the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) have been satisfied. (b) Federal permittees should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. If pre-construction notification is required for the proposed NWP activity, the Federal permittee must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. The district engineer will verify that the appropriate documentation has been submitted. If the appropriate documentation is not submitted, then additional consultation under section 106 may be necessary. The respective federal agency is responsible for fulfilling its obligation to comply with section 106. (c) Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer if the NWP activity might have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including previously unidentified properties. For such activities, the pre- construction notification must state which historic properties might have the potential to be affected by the proposed NWP activity or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties. Assistance regarding information on the location of, or potential for, the presence of historic properties can be sought from the State Historic Preservation Officer, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, or designated tribal representative, as appropriate, and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)). When reviewing pre-construction notifications, district engineers will comply with the current procedures for addressing the requirements of section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The district engineer shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the information submitted in the PCN and these identification efforts, the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed NWP activity has the potential to cause effects on the historic properties. Section 106 consultation is not required when the district engineer determines that the activity does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties (see 36 CFR 800.3(a)). Section 106 consultation is required when the district engineer determines that the activity has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. The district engineer will conduct consultation with consulting parties identified under 36 CFR 800.2(c) when he or she makes any of the following effect determinations for the purposes of section 106 of the NHPA: no historic properties affected, no adverse effect, or adverse effect. Where the non-Federal applicant has identified historic properties on which the activity might have the potential to cause effects and so notified the Corps, the non-Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer either that the activity has no potential to cause effects to historic properties or that NHPA section 106 consultation has been completed. (d) For non-federal permittees, the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre- construction notification whether NHPA section 106 consultation is required. If NHPA section 106 consultation is required, the district engineer will notify the non-Federal applicant that he or she cannot begin the activity until section 106 consultation is completed. If the non-Federal applicant has not heard back from the Corps within 45 days, the applicant must still wait for notification from the Corps. (e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NHPA (54 U.S.C. 306113) prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of section 106 of the NHPA, has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it, allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circumstances justify granting the assistance, the Corps is required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, the degree of damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This documentation must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/THPO, appropriate Indian tribes if the undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those tribes, and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on historic properties. 21. Discovery of Previously Unknown Remains and Artifacts. If you discover any previously unknown historic, cultural or archeological remains and artifacts while accomplishing the activity authorized by this permit, you must immediately notify the district engineer of what you have found, and to the maximum extent practicable, avoid construction activities that may affect the remains and artifacts until the required coordination has been completed. The district engineer will initiate the Federal, Tribal, and state coordination required to determine if the items or remains warrant a recovery effort or if the site is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 22. Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include, NOAA-managed marine sanctuaries and marine monuments, and National Estuarine Research Reserves. The district engineer may designate, after notice and opportunity for public comment, additional waters officially designated by a state as having particular environmental or ecological significance, such as outstanding national resource waters or state natural heritage sites. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opportunity for public comment. (a) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs 7, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 49, 50, 51, and 52 for any activity within, or directly affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. (b) For NWPs 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, and 54, notification is required in accordance with general condition 32, for any activity proposed in the designated critical resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no more than minimal. 23. Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal: (a) The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and permanent, to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., on site). (b) Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or compensating for resource losses) will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal. (c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland losses that exceed 1/10-acre and require pre- construction notification, unless the district engineer determines in writing that either some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate or the adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal, and provides an activity-specific waiver of this requirement. For wetland losses of 1/10-acre or less that require pre-construction notification, the district engineer may determine on a case-by-case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in only minimal adverse environmental effects. (d) For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre- construction notification, the district engineer may require compensatory mitigation to ensure that the activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. Compensatory mitigation for losses of streams should be provided, if practicable, through stream rehabilitation, enhancement, or preservation, since streams are difficult-to-replace resources (see 33 CFR 332.3(e)(3)). (e) Compensatory mitigation plans for NWP activities in or near streams or other open waters will normally include a requirement for the restoration or enhancement, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g., conservation easements) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, the restoration or maintenance/protection of riparian areas may be the only compensatory mitigation required. Restored riparian areas should consist of native species. The width of the required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns. Normally, the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. If it is not possible to restore or maintain/protect a riparian area on both sides of a stream, or if the waterbody is a lake or coastal waters, then restoring or maintaining/protecting a riparian area along a single bank or shoreline may be sufficient. Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the district engineer will determine the appropriate compensatory mitigation (e.g., riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation) based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In cases where riparian areas are determined to be the most appropriate form of minimization or compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses. (f) Compensatory mitigation projects provided to offset losses of aquatic resources must comply with the applicable provisions of 33 CFR part 332. (1) The prospective permittee is responsible for proposing an appropriate compensatory mitigation option if compensatory mitigation is necessary to ensure that the activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. For the NWPs, the preferred mechanism for providing compensatory mitigation is mitigation bank credits or in-lieu fee program credits (see 33 CFR 332.3(b)(2) and (3)). However, if an appropriate number and type of mitigation bank or in-lieu credits are not available at the time the PCN is submitted to the district engineer, the district engineer may approve the use of permittee-responsible mitigation. (2) The amount of compensatory mitigation required by the district engineer must be sufficient to ensure that the authorized activity results in no more than minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects (see 33 CFR 330.1(e)(3)). (See also 33 CFR 332.3(f)). (3) Since the likelihood of success is greater and the impacts to potentially valuable uplands are reduced, aquatic resource restoration should be the first compensatory mitigation option considered for permittee-responsible mitigation. (4) If permittee-responsible mitigation is the proposed option, the prospective permittee is responsible for submitting a mitigation plan. A conceptual or detailed mitigation plan may be used by the district engineer to make the decision on the NWP verification request, but a final mitigation plan that addresses the applicable requirements of 33 CFR 332.4(c)(2) through (14) must be approved by the district engineer before the permittee begins work in waters of the United States, unless the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation (see 33 CFR 332.3(k)(3)). (5) If mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program credits are the proposed option, the mitigation plan only needs to address the baseline conditions at the impact site and the number of credits to be provided. (6) Compensatory mitigation requirements (e.g., resource type and amount to be provided as compensatory mitigation, site protection, ecological performance standards, monitoring requirements) may be addressed through conditions added to the NWP authorization, instead of components of a compensatory mitigation plan (see 33 CFR 332.4(c)(1)(ii)). (g) Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage limits of the NWPs. For example, if an NWP has an acreage limit of 1/2-acre, it cannot be used to authorize any NWP activity resulting in the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United States, even if compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However, compensatory mitigation can and should be used, as necessary, to ensure that an NWP activity already meeting the established acreage limits also satisfies the no more than minimal impact requirement for the NWPs. (h) Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in-lieu fee programs, or permittee-responsible mitigation. When developing a compensatory mitigation proposal, the permittee must consider appropriate and practicable options consistent with the framework at 33 CFR 332.3(b). For activities resulting in the loss of marine or estuarine resources, permittee-responsible mitigation may be environmentally preferable if there are no mitigation banks or in-lieu fee programs in the area that have marine or estuarine credits available for sale or transfer to the permittee. For permittee- responsible mitigation, the special conditions of the NWP verification must clearly indicate the party or parties responsible for the implementation and performance of the compensatory mitigation project, and, if required, its long-term management. (i) Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely affected by a regulated activity, such as discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States that will convert a forested or scrub-shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a permanently maintained utility line right-of- way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse environmental effects of the activity to the no more than minimal level. 24. Safety of Impoundment Structures. To ensure that all impoundment structures are safely designed, the district engineer may require non-Federal applicants to demonstrate that the structures comply with established state dam safety criteria or have been designed by qualified persons. The district engineer may also require documentation that the design has been independently reviewed by similarly qualified persons, and appropriate modifications made to ensure safety. 25. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously certified compliance of an NWP with CWA section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in more than minimal degradation of water quality. 26. Coastal Zone Management. In coastal states where an NWP has not previously received a state coastal zone management consistency concurrence, an individual state coastal zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained, or a presumption of concurrence must occur (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)). The district engineer or a State may require additional measures to ensure that the authorized activity is consistent with state coastal zone management requirements. 27. Regional and Case-By-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian Tribe, or U.S. EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination. 28. Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits. The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit. For example, if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14, with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project cannot exceed 1/3- acre. 29. Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications. If the permittee sells the property associated with a nationwide permit verification, the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A copy of the nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter, and the letter must contain the following statement and signature: “When the structures or work authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred, the terms and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special conditions, will continue to be binding on the new owner(s) of the property. To validate the transfer of this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below.” (Transferee) ____________________________________ (Date) ___________________________________ 30. Compliance Certification. Each permittee who receives an NWP verification letter from the Corps must provide a signed certification documenting completion of the authorized activity and implementation of any required compensatory mitigation. The success of any required permittee-responsible mitigation, including the achievement of ecological performance standards, will be addressed separately by the district engineer. The Corps will provide the permittee the certification document with the NWP verification letter. The certification document will include: (a) A statement that the authorized activity was done in accordance with the NWP authorization, including any general, regional, or activity-specific conditions; (b) A statement that the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions. If credits from a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program are used to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements, the certification must include the documentation required by 33 CFR 332.3(l)(3) to confirm that the permittee secured the appropriate number and resource type of credits; and (c) The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the activity and mitigation. The completed certification document must be submitted to the district engineer within 30 days of completion of the authorized activity or the implementation of any required compensatory mitigation, whichever occurs later. 31. Activities Affecting Structures or Works Built by the United States. If an NWP activity also requires permission from the Corps pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 408 because it will alter or temporarily or permanently occupy or use a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) federally authorized Civil Works project (a “USACE project”), the prospective permittee must submit a pre-construction notification. See paragraph (b)(10) of general condition 32. An activity that requires section 408 permission is not authorized by NWP until the appropriate Corps office issues the section 408 permission to alter, occupy, or use the USACE project, and the district engineer issues a written NWP verification. 32. Pre-Construction Notification. (a) Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre- construction notification (PCN) as early as possible. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt and, if the PCN is determined to be incomplete, notify the prospective permittee within that 30 day period to request the additional information necessary to make the PCN complete. The request must specify the information needed to make the PCN complete. As a general rule, district engineers will request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, then the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not commence until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer. The prospective permittee shall not begin the activity until either: (1) He or she is notified in writing by the district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer; or (2) 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer’s receipt of the complete PCN and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the district or division engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that listed species or critical habitat might be affected or are in the vicinity of the activity, or to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 20 that the activity might have the potential to cause effects to historic properties, the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that there is “no effect” on listed species or “no potential to cause effects” on historic properties, or that any consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) and/or section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)) has been completed. Also, work cannot begin under NWPs 21, 49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps. If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP, the permittee may not begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. If the district or division engineer notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit has been obtained. Subsequently, the permittee’s right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2). (b) Contents of Pre-Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following information: (1) Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the proposed activity; (3) Identify the specific NWP or NWP(s) the prospective permittee wants to use to authorize the proposed activity; (4) A description of the proposed activity; the activity’s purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the activity would cause, including the anticipated amount of loss of wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters expected to result from the NWP activity, in acres, linear feet, or other appropriate unit of measure; a description of any proposed mitigation measures intended to reduce the adverse environmental effects caused by the proposed activity; and any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity, including other separate and distant crossings for linear projects that require Department of the Army authorization but do not require pre- construction notification. The description of the proposed activity and any proposed mitigation measures should be sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse environmental effects of the activity will be no more than minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation or other mitigation measures. For single and complete linear projects, the PCN must include the quantity of anticipated losses of wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters for each single and complete crossing of those wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters. Sketches should be provided when necessary to show that the activity complies with the terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the activity and when provided results in a quicker decision. Sketches should contain sufficient detail to provide an illustrative description of the proposed activity (e.g., a conceptual plan), but do not need to be detailed engineering plans); (5) The PCN must include a delineation of wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters, such as lakes and ponds, and perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral streams, on the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps. The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters on the project site, but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is large or contains many wetlands, other special aquatic sites, and other waters. Furthermore, the 45-day period will not start until the delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps, as appropriate; (6) If the proposed activity will result in the loss of greater than 1/10- acre of wetlands and a PCN is required, the prospective permittee must submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied, or explaining why the adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal and why compensatory mitigation should not be required. As an alternative, the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or detailed mitigation plan. (7) For non-Federal permittees, if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the activity, or if the activity is located in designated critical habitat, the PCN must include the name(s) of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed activity or utilize the designated critical habitat that might be affected by the proposed activity. For NWP activities that require pre-construction notification, Federal permittees must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; (8) For non-Federal permittees, if the NWP activity might have the potential to cause effects to a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on, or potentially eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic Places, the PCN must state which historic property might have the potential to be affected by the proposed activity or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property. For NWP activities that require pre- construction notification, Federal permittees must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; (9) For an activity that will occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a “study river” for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, the PCN must identify the Wild and Scenic River or the “study river” (see general condition 16); and (10) For an activity that requires permission from the Corps pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 408 because it will alter or temporarily or permanently occupy or use a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers federally authorized civil works project, the pre-construction notification must include a statement confirming that the project proponent has submitted a written request for section 408 permission from the Corps office having jurisdiction over that USACE project. (c) Form of Pre-Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is an NWP PCN and must include all of the applicable information required in paragraphs (b)(1) through (10) of this general condition. A letter containing the required information may also be used. Applicants may provide electronic files of PCNs and supporting materials if the district engineer has established tools and procedures for electronic submittals. (d) Agency Coordination: (1) The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and state agencies concerning the proposed activity’s compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs and the need for mitigation to reduce the activity’s adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal. (2) Agency coordination is required for: (i) all NWP activities that require pre- construction notification and result in the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United States; (ii) NWP 21, 29, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, and 52 activities that require pre-construction notification and will result in the loss of greater than 300 linear feet of stream bed; (iii) NWP 13 activities in excess of 500 linear feet, fills greater than one cubic yard per running foot, or involve discharges of dredged or fill material into special aquatic sites; and (iv) NWP 54 activities in excess of 500 linear feet, or that extend into the waterbody more than 30 feet from the mean low water line in tidal waters or the ordinary high water mark in the Great Lakes. (3) When agency coordination is required, the district engineer will immediately provide (e.g., via e-mail, facsimile transmission, overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy of the complete PCN to the appropriate Federal or state offices (FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, and, if appropriate, the NMFS). With the exception of NWP 37, these agencies will have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to notify the district engineer via telephone, facsimile transmission, or e-mail that they intend to provide substantive, site-specific comments. The comments must explain why the agency believes the adverse environmental effects will be more than minimal. If so contacted by an agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days before making a decision on the pre-construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame concerning the proposed activity’s compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs, including the need for mitigation to ensure the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal. The district engineer will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The district engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre-construction notification that the resource agencies’ concerns were considered. For NWP 37, the emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to life or a significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur. The district engineer will consider any comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (4) In cases of where the prospective permittee is not a Federal agency, the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. (5) Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps with either electronic files or multiple copies of pre-construction notifications to expedite agency coordination. District Engineer’s Decision In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the district engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest. If a project proponent requests authorization by a specific NWP, the district engineer should issue the NWP verification for that activity if it meets the terms and conditions of that NWP, unless he or she determines, after considering mitigation, that the proposed activity will result in more than minimal individual and cumulative adverse effects on the aquatic environment and other aspects of the public interest and exercises discretionary authority to require an individual permit for the proposed activity. For a linear project, this determination will include an evaluation of the individual crossings of waters of the United States to determine whether they individually satisfy the terms and conditions of the NWP(s), as well as the cumulative effects caused by all of the crossings authorized by NWP. If an applicant requests a waiver of the 300 linear foot limit on impacts to streams or of an otherwise applicable limit, as provided for in NWPs 13, 21, 29, 36, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, 52, or 54, the district engineer will only grant the waiver upon a written determination that the NWP activity will result in only minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects. For those NWPs that have a waivable 300 linear foot limit for losses of intermittent and ephemeral stream bed and a 1/2-acre limit (i.e., NWPs 21, 29, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 50, 51, and 52), the loss of intermittent and ephemeral stream bed, plus any other losses of jurisdictional waters and wetlands, cannot exceed 1/2-acre. 1. When making minimal adverse environmental effects determinations the district engineer will consider the direct and indirect effects caused by the NWP activity. He or she will also consider the cumulative adverse environmental effects caused by activities authorized by NWP and whether those cumulative adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal. The district engineer will also consider site specific factors, such as the environmental setting in the vicinity of the NWP activity, the type of resource that will be affected by the NWP activity, the functions provided by the aquatic resources that will be affected by the NWP activity, the degree or magnitude to which the aquatic resources perform those functions, the extent that aquatic resource functions will be lost as a result of the NWP activity (e.g., partial or complete loss), the duration of the adverse effects (temporary or permanent), the importance of the aquatic resource functions to the region (e.g., watershed or ecoregion), and mitigation required by the district engineer. If an appropriate functional or condition assessment method is available and practicable to use, that assessment method may be used by the district engineer to assist in the minimal adverse environmental effects determination. The district engineer may add case-specific special conditions to the NWP authorization to address site- specific environmental concerns. 2. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1/10-acre of wetlands, the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN. Applicants may also propose compensatory mitigation for NWP activities with smaller impacts, or for impacts to other types of waters (e.g., streams). The district engineer will consider any proposed compensatory mitigation or other mitigation measures the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are no more than minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the district engineer determines that the activity complies with the terms and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse environmental effects are no more than minimal, after considering mitigation, the district engineer will notify the permittee and include any activity-specific conditions in the NWP verification the district engineer deems necessary. Conditions for compensatory mitigation requirements must comply with the appropriate provisions at 33 CFR 332.3(k). The district engineer must approve the final mitigation plan before the permittee commences work in waters of the United States, unless the district engineer determines that prior approval of the final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan. The district engineer must review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation would ensure the NWP activity results in no more than minimal adverse environmental effects. If the net adverse environmental effects of the NWP activity (after consideration of the mitigation proposal) are determined by the district engineer to be no more than minimal, the district engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant. The response will state that the NWP activity can proceed under the terms and conditions of the NWP, including any activity-specific conditions added to the NWP authorization by the district engineer. 3. If the district engineer determines that the adverse environmental effects of the proposed activity are more than minimal, then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (a) that the activity does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit; (b) that the activity is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant’s submission of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal; or (c) that the activity is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions. Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse environmental effects, the activity will be authorized within the 45- day PCN period (unless additional time is required to comply with general conditions 18, 20, and/or 31, or to evaluate PCNs for activities authorized by NWPs 21, 49, and 50), with activity-specific conditions that state the mitigation requirements. The authorization will include the necessary conceptual or detailed mitigation plan or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse environmental effects so that they are no more than minimal. When compensatory mitigation is required, no work in waters of the United States may occur until the district engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan or has determined that prior approval of a final mitigation plan is not practicable or not necessary to ensure timely completion of the required compensatory mitigation. Further Information 1. District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of an NWP. 2. NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or authorizations required by law. 3. NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. 4. NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. 5. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project (see general condition 31) ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS, LLC COTTONWOOD PASS PHASE 4 PIPELINE PROJECT RECLAMATION, REVEGETATION, AND NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN Cover photo: View of the proposed pipeline alignment. Prepared for: Black Hills Energy Cheyenne, WY Prepared by: WestWater Engineering, Inc. 2516 Foresight Cr. #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 Amie Wilsey, Environmental Scientist/Project Manager August 2021 WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 15 August 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description At the request of Rocky Mountain Natural Gas, LLC (RMNG), doing business as Black Hills Energy (Black Hills), WestWater Engineering (WestWater) has prepared this reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan for the proposed Cottonwood Pass Phase 4 Pipeline project that would be located on privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. This document reports the results and analysis of the findings that are pertinent to Sections 9-102-L and 9-102-M of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (as amended) as it applies to this project. RMNG proposes to replace an existing portion of their pipeline in Sections 4, 8, 9, and 17, Township 7 South, Range 87 West (Figure 1). This reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan applies to the proposed pipeline project. The current land uses include rangeland, pasturelands, wildlife habitat, and residential housing. 1.2 General Survey Information Pedestrian surveys of the project area were conducted by WestWater biologists on July 29, 2021 within the right-of-way (ROW) limits for the portions of the pipeline proposed for replacement (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Survey permission was not granted beyond the ROW. Surveys were conducted within the growing season for noxious weeds. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Ackerfield 2015, Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2007, Weber and Wittmann 2012). Noxious weed locations were recorded with the aid of handheld global positioning system (GPS) receivers using NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system in Zone 12. Mapped soil types, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed to determine the soil types and vegetation characteristics at the project site (NRCS 2021). 2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING 2.1 Terrain The pipeline alignment is located along the rolling ridges near Cottonwood Pass and Cattle Creek Road at an elevation range from approximately 7,200 feet to 7,400 feet. The pipeline is in the vicinity of Cattle Creek and Shippees Draw. The pipeline alignment crosses Cattle Creek which eventually drains into the Roaring Fork River located southwest of the project area. 2.2 Soils The pipeline alignment passes through 8 mapped soil types as described below in Table 1 and shown on Figure 3. Soils in the survey area are typically well drained and occur along alluvial fans, valley sides, and mountain sides (Table 1) (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2021). Table 1. Soil Types within the Project Area. Soil Map Unit Symbol Soil Series Description 3 Acree loam, 3 to 6 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans and valley sides. It is a well drained soil type that has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 15 August 2021 Soil Map Unit Symbol Soil Series Description 4 Acree loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans and valley sides. It is a well drained soil type that has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 34 Empedrado loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes This soil type occurs on fans and hills. It is a well drained soil type and has medium runoff potential. It is considered Prime Farmland if irrigated. 35 Empedrado loam, 6 to 12 percent slopes This soil type occurs on fans and hills. It is a well drained soil type and has high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 54 Grotte gravelly loam, 25 to 65 percent slopes This soil type occurs on mountains. It is a well drained soil type and has high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 69 Kilgore silt loam This soil type occurs in depressions. It is not well drained and has medium runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 87 Morval-Tridell complex, 12 to 50 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans. It is well drained and has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 95 Showalter-Morval complex, 15 to 25 percent slopes This soil type occurs on alluvial fans, terraces, and valley sides. It is well drained and has very high runoff potential. It is not considered Prime Farmland. 2.3 Vegetation There are three main vegetation community types present in the project area: mountain shrublands, sagebrush shrublands, and pasturelands. The mountain shrublands are composed primarily of Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia) intermixed with mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), and Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis). Sagebrush shrublands are present along portions of the alignment and are intermixed with various forbs and perennial grasses. The pasturelands are composed of native and non-native perennial grass species. Common plants observed throughout the project area are described in Table 2. WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 15 August 2021 Table 2. Common plants observed throughout the project area. Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Grasses Bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata xx Sagebrush shrubland Intermediate wheatgrass Thinopyrum intermedium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Kentucky bluegrass Poa pratensis xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Muttongrass Poa fednleriana xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda x Sagebrush shrubland Smooth brome Bromus inermis xxx Pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum smithii xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Forbs American vetch Vicia americana xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Brittle pricklypear Opuntia fragilis xx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland Common dandelion Taraxacum officinale xx Sagebrush shrubland, Pastureland Common yarrow Achillea millefolium xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland European stickseed Lappula squarrosa x Sagebrush shrubland Hairy goldenaster Heterotheca villosa xx Sagebrush shrublands Hoary tansyaster Machaeranthera canescens xx Sagebrush shrubland Plains pricklypear Opuntia polyacantha x Sagebrush shrubland Rayless tansyaster Machaeranthera grindelioides xx Sagebrush shrublands Spiny phlox Phlox hoodii xxx Sagebrush shrubland Wyoming Indian paintbrush Castilleja linariifolia x Sagebrush shrubland Yellow salsify Tragopogon dubius x Pastureland Shrubs/Trees Antelope bitterbrush Purshia tridentata x Sagebrush shrubland Gambel oakbrush Quercus gambelii xx Mountain shrubland Mountain snowberry Symphoricarpos oreophilus xx Mountain shrubland, sagebrush shrubland Rubber rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosa xx Pastureland, sagebrush shrubland Saskatoon serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia xxx Mountain shrubland Wood’s rose Rosa woodsii x Mountain shrubland WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 15 August 2021 Common Name Scientific Name Abundance* Habitat Type Wyoming sagebrush Artemisa tridentata ssp. wyomingensis xxx Sagebrush shrubland Yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidflorus xx Sagebrush shrubland, pastureland * x= uncommon in project area. xx= moderate frequency throughout project area. xxx = common frequency throughout project area. Bold = Non-native species 3.0 REVEGETATION, RECLAMATION, & SOILS RECOMMENDATIONS Successful reclamation of the project area is dependent upon soil type and texture, slope gradient and aspect, proper weed control, available water, and revegetation with suitable plant species. Site-specific reclamation plans utilizing native species should be developed with a qualified reclamation contractor. Reclamation services using multiple seed bin range drills and specialized equipment are available and should be used for reclamation seeding projects. 3.1 Soil Preparation Compaction can reduce water infiltration and also hinder the penetration of the sprouting seed. Practices that will reduce compaction and prepare the seedbed include: scarification, tillage, or harrowing. In areas with slope greater than three percent or where laminar flows from runoff could affect reseeding success, imprinting of the seed bed is recommended. Imprinting can be in the form of dozer tracks or furrows perpendicular to the direction of slope. When utilizing hydro-seeding followed by mulching, imprinting should be done prior to seeding unless the mulch is to be crimped into the soil surface. If 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 and harrowing, always perpendicular to the direction of slope. 3.2 Soil Amendments The addition of soil amendments in rangeland reclamation projects can create more optimal growing conditions for non-native or invasive plant species, with which native plants compete poorly. There is potential that the use of soil amendments (fertilizer) containing nitrogen will disproportionately benefit undesirable annual plants (Perry et al. 2010). If the company determines the use of soil amendments to be beneficial, the type and rate should be based on results from lab analysis of soil samples collected at the site. A potentially beneficial alternative method to enhance reclamation success, particularly where there is poor or destroyed topsoil, is the application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). These fungi, mostly of the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo- mycorrhizal fungi are associated mostly with grasses and forbs and could be helpful in reclamation. In symbiosis, the fungi can increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the host root system (Barrow and McCaslin 1995). Over-the-counter commercial products are available, and the best products should contain more than one fungus species. WestWater Engineering Page 5 of 15 August 2021 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 can benefit reclamation efforts on compacted soils when applied as directed. 3.3 Seed Mixture The primary vegetation communities that would be disturbed by the pipeline alignment include irrigated and non-irrigated pasturelands, sagebrush shrublands, and mountain shrublands. The recommended seed mix below (Table 3) is adapted from the Bureau of Land Management’s Colorado River Valley Field Office seed menu recommendations (BLM 2017). The seed mix is well suited for the vegetation communities present along the pipeline alignment. The mix includes perennial native grasses and forbs that should establish well, protect topsoil, and provide a basis for rehabilitation of the site upon reclamation. Portions of the project area that are privately owned may be subject to landowner-requested modifications to the seed mixture. Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain shrubland, including oakbrush. Common Name Scientific Name Variety Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Plant Both of the Following (20% Each, 40% Total) Bottlebrush Squirreltail Elymus elymoides, Sitanion hystrix VNS Cool Bunch 2.7 Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata, Agropyron spicatum Secar, P-7, Anatone, Goldar Cool Bunch 3.7 and Two of the Following (15% Each, 30% Total) Thickspike Wheatgrass Elymus lanceolatus ssp. lanceolatus, Agropyron dasystachyum Critana, Bannock, Schwendimar Cool Sod- forming 2.5 Slender Wheatgrass Elymus trachycaulus, Agropyron trachycaulum San Luis Cool Bunch 2.5 Western Wheatgrass Pascopyrum [Agropyron] smithii Arriba, Rosana Cool Sod- forming 3.6 and One of the Following (10% Total) Big Bluegrass Poa ampla Sherman Cool Bunch 0.3 Canby Bluegrass Poa canbyi, P. secunda Canbar Cool Bunch 0.3 Muttongrass Poa fendleriana VNS Cool Bunch 0.3 and One of the Following (10% Total) Letterman Needlegrass Achnatherum [Stipa] lettermanii VNS Cool Bunch 1.7 Columbia Needlegrass Achnatherum [Stipa] nelsonii, Stipa columbiana VNS Cool Bunch 1.7 Green Needlegrass Nassella [Stipa] viridula Lodorm, Cucharas Cool Bunch 1.4 and One of the Following (10% Total) Indian Ricegrass Achnatherum [Oryzopsis] hymenoides Nezpar, Paloma, Rimrock Cool Bunch 1.9 WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 15 August 2021 Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain shrubland, including oakbrush. Common Name Scientific Name Variety Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Junegrass Koeleria macrantha, K. cristata VNS (North American origin) Cool Bunch 0.1 OPTIONAL: Any combination from the following species may be substituted for up to 10% of the above grasses. Silvery Lupine Lupinus argenteus VNS Arrowleaf Balsamroot Balsamorhize sagittata VNS Sulfur Flower Eriogonum umbellatum VNS Yarrow Achillea millifolium VNS Utah Sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale VNS Rocky Mountain Beeplant Cleome serrulata VNS Utah Serviceberry Amelanchior utahensis VNS Mountain Snowberry Symphoricarpus oreophilus VNS Wood’s Rose Rosa woodsii VNS White Sage Artemisia ludoviciana VNS *Based on 60 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill-seeded. Double this rate (120 PLS per square foot) if broadcast or hydroseeded For best results and success, reseeding should be done in late autumn. The seed application rate should be doubled for broadcast applications such as hydroseeding or hand broadcasting of seed (CNHP 1998). Seeding Methods Typically, the preferred seeding method would be with a multiple-seed-bin range drill with no soil preparation other than simple grading to slope and imprinting and water bars where applicable. This method would likely be the most economical method. Hydroseeding or hand-broadcast seeding at twice the recommended drill seed rate will be required for steep slopes or for smaller areas where drill seeding would be impractical or dangerous. Alternative seeding methods include, but are not limited to: • harrow with just enough soil moisture to create a rough surface, broadcast seed and re-harrow, preferably at a 90 degree angle to the first harrow; • hydroseeding; and • hand raking and broadcast followed by re-raking at a 90 degree angle to the first raking. These are not the only means of replanting the site. However, these methods have been observed to be effective in similar landscapes. After desired grasses are established and control of target weed species is successful, then shrubs, forbs, and trees can be planted without concern for herbicide damage. Few native forb seeds are available commercially as cultivars. Most are collected from natural populations. Native shrubs and forbs often do not establish well from seed, particularly when mixed with grasses. Past experience has shown that stabilizing the soil with grasses, accomplishing weed control, and then coming WestWater Engineering Page 7 of 15 August 2021 back to plant live, containerized woody species in copses has been the most cost-effective method for establishing the woody species component of the plant community. For sites where soil disturbance will be temporary, grasses should be seeded after construction activities cease and the equipment is removed from the site. After two years of controlling weeds (with herbicides) and allowing the grasses to become established, forbs and woody species should be inter-seeded or hand- planted to increase the diversity and value of the reclamation plantings. 3.4 Mulching Crimped straw mulch is the most cost effective and practical method of mulching areas prone to erosion after drill seeding this site. No mulching is recommended for areas that are hydroseeded. Potential detrimental effects of mulching include the introduction of weed species and the establishment of non- native cereal grains. Use of a certified weed-free sterile wheat hybrid straw mulch would limit these effects. On steeper slopes where crimping is impractical, wood straw mulch would be an alternative to crimped straw mulch that might stand up better to wind and rain that could blow or wash uncrimped straw mulch off of seeded areas. 4.0 NOXIOUS WEEDS 4.1 Introduction to Noxious Weeds Most noxious weed species in Colorado were introduced, mostly from Eurasia, either unintentionally or as ornamentals that established wild populations. These plants compete aggressively with native vegetation and tend to spread quickly because the environmental factors that normally control them are absent. Disturbed soils, altered native vegetation communities, and areas with increased soil moisture often create prime conditions for weed infestations. The primary vectors that spread noxious weeds include humans, animals, water, and wind. The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop noxious weed management plans. Both the State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of plants that are considered to be noxious weeds (Garfield County 2021). The State of Colorado noxious weed list segregates noxious weed species based on priority for control: 1. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected. 2. List B species spread should be halted; may be designated for eradication in some counties. 3. List C species are widespread and the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage those weeds. The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has compiled a list of 40 plants considered to be noxious weeds within the county (Appendix A). The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has duties to: 1. Develop a noxious weed list; 2. Develop a weed management plan for designated noxious weeds; and, 3. Recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that identified landowners submit an integrated weed management plan for their properties (Garfield County 2016). 4.2 Observations Several weed species listed by the State of Colorado (2005) were detected during surveys including: Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), common burdock (Arctium minus), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides), Russian knapweed (Rhaponticum repens), scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium), and whitetop (Lepidium draba). WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 15 August 2021 Noxious weeds were observed in dense infestations primarily along irrigated and non-irrigated pasturelands (Figure 2). In addition to noxious weeds, WestWater biologists also observed Harrington’s penstemon in the sagebrush shrublands along the southern portion of the alignment (Figure 2). Harrington’s penstemon is endemic to Colorado and is listed as a sensitive plant species by the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. 4.3 Integrated Weed Management Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive on-going control measures. Care must be taken to avoid negatively impacting desirable plant communities and inviting infestation by other pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved by employing varied methods over several growing seasons, including inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention through best management practices, monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection efforts. Weed management is often limited to controlling existing infestations and prevention of further infestations, rather than eradication, but through effective weed management practices eradication can be possible in small to medium sized weed populations. Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds in 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 project area. In order to continue effective management of noxious weeds, further inventory and analysis is necessary to 1) determine the effectiveness of the past treatment strategies; 2) modify the treatment plan, if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations early, which would result in more economical and effective treatments. 4.4 Prevention of Noxious Weed Infestations Weed management can be costly, and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for practical treatment. Prevention is an especially valuable and economical strategy for noxious weed management. Several simple practices should be employed to prevent weed infestations. The following practices will prevent infestation and thereby reduce costs associated with noxious weed control: • Prior to delivery to the site, all equipment and vehicles, including maintenance vehicles, should be thoroughly cleaned of soils from previous sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. • If working in sites with weed-seed contaminated soil, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed-bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. • Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist. • Use of weed-seed-free reclamation materials such as mulch and seed. 4.5 Treatment and Control of Noxious Weed Infestations The treatment method and timing will be determined by the project proponent and their contracted licensed pesticide applicators. The recommendations provided in this report will be considered when developing annual treatment plans. General control methods for the species detected in the project area are provided for reference in Table 4. WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 15 August 2021 Table 4. General noxious weed control methods for species in the project area. Common Name* Scientific Name Type Control Methods Canada thistle B Cirsium arvense Perennial Cutting and mowing prior to seed set, continuously and annually indefinitely; cutting and mowing combined with herbicide; cutting, herbicide, and biological (recommended). Common burdockC Arctium minus Biennial Cut and bag seed-bearing plants from previous year, cut rosettes below soil surface with shovel or spade, cut or spot spray bolting plants; and spot spray rosettes and bolting plants annually. Common mulleinC Verbascum thapsus Biennial Tillage, mowing, cutting, hand grubbing prior to bolting. Herbicide treatment during rosette stage or bolting stage before flowering. HoundstongueB Cynoglossum officinale Biennial Early Spring tillage before weed emergence in the existing corridor to a depth of 2 to 4 inches. Herbicide application in Spring while plants are small and it the late fall, bagging the seed heads. Plumeless thistleB Carduus acanthoides Biennial Tillage or hand grubbing in the rosette to pre-flowering stages. Repeated mowing at bolting or early flowering. Seed head and rosette weevils, leaf feeding beetles. Herbicides in rosette stage. Russian knapweedB Acroptilon repens Perennial Early spring tillage at rosette stage. Herbicide applications in spring before the plant buds and in the late fall, bagging seed heads. Scotch thistleB Onopordum acanthium Biennial Tillage or hand grubbing in the rosette to pre-flowering stages. Repeated mowing at bolting or early flowering. Seed head and rosette weevils, leaf feeding beetles. Herbicides in rosette stage. Whitetop B Cardaria draba Perennial Mow and/or spray with herbicides; graze with sheep; and manage for native grasses. Bold = Garfield County List, *State List A, B, or C 4.6 Recommended Treatment Strategies The following treatment strategies are presented for reference. It is important to know whether the weed species being managed is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies that effectively control and eliminate the target. Treatment strategies vary depending on plant type, which are summarized in Tables 5 and 6. Herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be effectively employed. Table 5. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Target: Prevent Seed Production 1. Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. If flowers or seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads. 2. Cut roots with a spade 2”-3” below soil level. 3. Treat with herbicide in seedling, rosette or bolting stage, before flowering. WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 15 August 2021 Table 5. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Target: Prevent Seed Production 4. Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent flowering but can reduce total seed production. (Sirota 2004) Table 6. Treatment Strategies for Perennials Target: Deplete nutrient reserves in root system, prevent seed production 1. Allow plants to expend as much energy from root system as possible. Do not treat when first emerging in spring but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. If seeds develop cut and bag if possible. 2. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15 when natural precipitation is present). In 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 nutrients to roots rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present for a long period of time another season of seed production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will kill the following year’s shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time. 3. 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 appropriate, which is not necessarily convenient. 4. Tillage may or may not be effective or practical. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5 inch – 1.0 inch long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the weed patch. 5. 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) Some weeds, particularly annuals and biennials, can develop resistance to herbicides. The ability to quickly develop immunity to herbicides, especially when they are used incorrectly, makes it imperative to use the proper chemicals at the correct time in the specified concentration according to the product label. Excessive application, either in frequency or concentration, can result in top kill without significantly affecting the root system. Repeated excessive applications may result in resistant phenotypes. 4.7 Noxious Weed Management – Best Management Practices Construction: The following practices should be adopted for any construction project to reduce the costs of noxious weed control and aid in prevention efforts. The practices include: • Prior to delivery to the site, equipment should be cleaned of soils remaining from previous construction sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. • Equipment and material handling should be done on established sites to reduce the area and extent of soil compaction. • In all cases, temporary disturbance should be kept to an absolute minimum. • Top soil, where present, should be segregated from deeper soils and replaced as top soil on the final grade, a process known as live topsoil handling. • If stored longer than one growing season, topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with non-invasive sterile hybrid grasses. WestWater Engineering Page 11 of 15 August 2021 • Wetland vegetation, if encountered, should be live handled like sod, temporarily watered if necessary, and placed over excavated sub-soil relative to the position from which the wetland sod was removed. • Cut-off collars should be placed on all wetland and stream crossings to prevent back washing (seed vector) and to ensure that soil moisture conditions are not impacted after construction so that native plants can re-establish from the existing seed bank. • If working in weed infested sites, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed-bearing soils and vegetative debris prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. • After construction, disturbed areas outside the footprint of the development should be immediately reseeded with an appropriate seed mix. Herbicides: Many of the listed noxious weed species in Colorado can be controlled with commercially available herbicides. Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre-bud stage after germination or in the spring of the second year. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to desirable grass species. It is important that applicators adhere to concentrations specified on herbicide containers. Herbicides generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Herbicide failures are frequently related to high concentrations that result in top kill before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through the nutrient translocation process. If directed on the herbicide label, a surfactant or other adjuvant should be added to the tank. Grazing: In the event grazing is allowed in the project area, it should be deferred in reclaimed areas until revegetation of desirable species has been successfully established and seeded plants have had opportunity to reproduce. Monitoring: Areas where noxious weed infestations are identified and treated should be inspected over time to ensure that control methods are working to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. The sites should be monitored until the infestations are eliminated. These inspections can then be used to prioritize future weed control efforts. 4.8 Commercial Applicator Recommendations A certified commercial pesticide applicator licensed in rangeland and/or right-of-way/industrial weed control (depending on site characteristics) is a necessary choice for herbicide control efforts. An applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with tough noxious weeds. In addition, the purchase and use of restricted use herbicides requires a Colorado pesticide applicator license. 4.0 REFERENCES Ackerfield, J. 2015. Flora of Colorado. Botanical Research Institute of Texas, Fort Worth, Texas. Barrow, J. R., and Bobby D. McCaslin. 1995. Role of microbes in resource management in arid ecosystems. In: Barrow, J. R., E. D. McArthur, R. E. Sosebee, and Tausch, R. J., comps. 1996. Proceedings: shrubland ecosystem dynamics in a changing environment. General Technical Report, INT-GTR-338, Ogden, Utah: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Resource Station, 275 pp. BLM. 2013. Revised Revegetation Seed Mix Menus, CRVFO Energy Team. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office. Silt, Colorado. WestWater Engineering Page 12 of 15 August 2021 CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D’Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial. Garfield County. 2016. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Adopted by Board of County Commissioners Feb. 16, 2016. Garfield County. 2021. Vegetation Management Section – Noxious Weed List. Available online: http://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/noxious-weed-list.aspx. Rifle, CO. Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington. NRCS. 2021. Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Perry, L.G., D.M. Blumenthal, T.A. Monaco, M.W. Paschke, and E.F. Redente. 2010. Immobilizing nitrogen to control plant invasion. Oecologia: 163:12-24. Sirota, Judith M. 2004. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. Colorado State University, Cooperative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado. URL: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/Weeds/weedmgmt.html State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Denver, 78 pp. Weber, William A., and Ronald C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope. Fourth Edition, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee and R. Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West – 9th edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming, Laramie. WestWater Engineering Page 13 of 12 WestWater Engineering Appendix A-1 May 2018 WestWater Engineering Appendix A-2 May 2018 RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement Project – Phase 4 Addendum to PDPA-09-21-8858 This addendum is being provided to address the comments provided in the County’s NTC letter, dated September 23, 2021. The information provided below is in the same order of the issues listed in the letter: 1. Please provide the legal description associated with the RMNG easements contained in the application. The attached Land Use Change Permit Application Form has been updated to include the legal descriptions as noted on RMNG’s executed easements (reception #243291, #243290, #243289, and #243293). Additionally, included in this addendum packet is the Pipeline Easement Plat, created by RMNG’s surveyor, True North Colorado. 2. The submitted Site Plan does not meet the requirements of Section 4-203.D. Some of the stated requirements are not appropriate for this application. However, some are necessary and missing. Please include the following on the Site Plan: a. RMNG easement’s legal description and boundary survey data, bearings and distances. (Section 4- 203.D.1. & 2.) Please refer to the attached exhibit from True North and updated Site Plan. b. Significant on-site features including water bodies, wetlands, ditches (Section 4-203.D. 4. & 6.) Please refer to the attached updated Site Plan. Additional information on these features is provided in item #3 below of this addendum. c. Identify other utility easement’s location, dimensions, and infrastructure within RMNG’s easements. (Section 4-203.D. 7.) Please refer to the attached updated Site Plan. Through 811 line locates, the following utilities were identified to be within or cross RMNG’s pipeline easements: overhead power lines, underground telephone, and Black Hills Energy’s distribution pipeline. 3. Please clarify the response to Section 9-102.K as it relates to wetlands, the Nationwide Permit, the size and location of the wetlands within RMNG’s easements. Approximately 14,678 sq ft (0.34 ac) is estimated to be wetlands within RMNG’s 50-ft wide ROW and are all associated with Cattle Creek. The approximate boundary of the wetlands, as depicted on the attached updated Site Plan, was determined based on field conditions and aerial interpretation. Since this segment of the pipeline alignment is designated to be bored, a field delineation of the exact boundaries was not performed. No machinery will track through the ROW along this bored segment of the project therefore no surface disturbance is expected to occur in any of the Creek’s wetlands within or adjacent to RMNG’s ROW. The subject landowner has authorized RMNG and its contractor to utilize their exiting interior 2-track road and bridge around and over the Creek, as depicted on the Site Plan. Please note: during the process of the bore, a person will walk through the wetlands within the ROW to track the location of the bore head to confirm the bore path is remaining within the staked ROW limits. 4. Authority Issues: a. Please submit a recorded copy of the Statement of Authority. Please see attached recorded copy of the Statement of Authority. b. Please provide executed copies of the Surface Use Agreements. RMNG respectfully requests this be a condition of approval as we are still in the process of finalizing agreements on those affected parties where additional workspace is needed outside of the existing ROW. RMNG will provide copies of the fully executed, recorded Memorandum of Surface Use Agreements once received and prior to construction activities commencing in Spring of 2022. RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement Project – Phase 4 Addendum to PDPA-09-21-8858 Page | 2 5. Please provide greater details of the Temporary Workspace Areas such as fuels, materials and equipment, timing, duration and reclamation. Since the initial submittal of the application packet for this pipeline replacement project, several adjustments have been made on the proposed temporary workspace areas (TWAs) located outside of RMNG’s existing ROW. Please refer to the updated Site Plan attached to this addendum. NOTE: All TWAs will be used throughout the course of the overall construction timeframe provided (April to November). A specific length of time for use cannot be provided at this time for these locations as it is dependent on many factors, including but not limited to: primary contractor’s and subcontractors’ schedules, weather, and progress of construction activities. There are now a total of 6 TWAs proposed outside of RMNG’s ROW. Please refer to the updated Site Plan. Their sizes, locations, and uses are as follows: Earthman property (PIN: 239117101008) TWA #1: 2,100 sq ft. Immediately west of Buck Point Rd and north of Panorama Drive, this TWA is approximately 56’ at its widest point and 68’ along the longest edge. This TWA will be used solely as an access point for equipment to the pipeline ROW. The traffic control plan submitted with the approved Garfield County R&B Utility Permits will be implemented at this location. Once all construction activities are completed, this area will be restored in accordance with landowner preferences, as outlined in an executed SUA. TWA #2: 5,000 sq ft (50’ x 100’). Located immediately west of the pipeline ROW, this area will be utilized only during boring operations to allow for the staging of boring equipment (drill rig, flatbed trailer with bags for drill mud, drill mud return pit, frac tanks, pickup trucks, and water truck). Once all construction activities are completed, this area will be restored in accordance with landowner preferences, as outlined in an executed SUA. Quarter Circle 8 property (PIN 239109200235) TWA #1: 1,250 sq ft (25’ x 50’). Southern most TWA on this property which will be used solely for equipment travel access to pipeline ROW. Once all construction activities are completed, this area will be restored in accordance with landowner preferences, as outlined in an executed SUA. TWA #2: 5,000 sq ft (50’ x 100’). Located immediately west of the pipeline ROW, this area will be utilized only during boring operations to allow for the staging of boring equipment (drill rig, mud return, frac tanks, pic up trucks, and water truck). Once all construction activities are completed, this area will be restored in accordance with landowner preferences, as outlined in an executed SUA. TWA #3: 1,250 sq ft. Located immediately east of Quarter Circle’s western gate, this TWA is approximately 15’ at the widest point and 75’ along the longest edge. This TWA would be utilized solely as a temporary access point to and from CR 122 into landowner’s property and onto landowner’s existing interior 2-track road in order to eliminate impacts to the landowner’s pasture. Once all construction activities are completed, this area will be restored in accordance with landowner preferences, as outlined in an executed SUA. TWA #4: 320 sq ft. Located immediately west of Quarter Circle’s western gate, this TWA is at the landowner’s request and is approximately 10’ at its widest point by 45’ along the longest edge. The landowner has requested this improvement be permanent for their long-term use, however, at this time, Garfield County R&B has only authorized RMNG to install this widening as temporary solely for construction equipment access. The landowner will coordinate with Garfield County R&B on this matter RMNG Cottonwood Pass Pipeline Replacement Project – Phase 4 Addendum to PDPA-09-21-8858 Page | 3 to resolve and RMNG will comply with the final decision made for this location. The area will be restored and reclaimed back to pre-construction conditions unless Garfield County R&B confirms the widening can remain as a permanent improvement. 6. Please address Section 9-102.L.5., revegetation security. Through this LUR review process, once a determination has been made on required amount for the revegetation security, a bond will be submitted to Steve Anthony, Garfield County’s Vegetation Manager. RMNG’s understanding is the amount will be based on the total proposed disturbance area within Garfield County, which is anticipated to be 345,120sq ft (7.92 ac). Township 7 South, Range 87 West:East ½ Section 4, NW ¼ NW ¼ Section 3; SE ¼ SE ¼ Section 8; SW ¼ NW ¼ Section 9; and N ½ Section 17 PANORAMA RANCHESHOMESTEAD10DAVID THIELPARCEL NO. 239117101010HOMESTEAD8CYNTHIA EARTHMANPARCEL NO. 239117101008HOMESTEAD11KIRBY HOPARCEL NO. 239117101011COTTONWOOD PASSPHASE 1 BLOCKVALVEHOMESTEAD12LUCAS RAINSPARCEL NO. 239117101058HOMESTEAD2DONALD HEYDENBERKPARCEL NO. 239117101002HOMESTEAD53HANS BRUCKERPARCEL NO. 239117101066EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN44° 11' 11"E463.54'N56° 17' 24"E404.73'N47° 13' 33"E154.70'N44° 04' 45"E941.69'N53° 12' 25"E212.92'N31° 11' 37"E1048.73'POINT OFBEGINNINGEXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE(TIE) N81°40'03"E 823.47'FOUND NO.5 REBARS0° 16' 12"W 732.29'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S45° 01' 47"W345.48'BUCK POINT ROAD60' R.O.W.PANORAMA LOOP DRIVE60' R.O.W.25'25'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S54° 44' 47"W368.48'S31° 36' 47"W316.04'SECTION 8SECTION 1750' RMNG EASEMENTBUCK POINT ROAD60' R.O.W.ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2021DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET1 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.PIPELINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTIONSURVEYOR'S STATEMENTI, RODNEY P. KISER, DO HEREBY STATE THAT THIS EASEMENT PLAT WAS PREPARED BY TRUE NORTH COLORADO,LLC. FOR BLACK HILLS ENERGY, THAT SAID PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION ANDRESPONSIBLE CHARGE AND THAT IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE.50' PIPELINE EASEMENTA 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTIONS 4, 8, 9 & 17, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 OF THE 6THPRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, LYING TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THEFOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE;BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCK POINT ROAD ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT OFPANORAMA RANCHES RECORDED OCTOBER 10, 1979 AS RECEPTION NO. 298382, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OFCOLORADO WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HOMESTEAD 10 OF SAID PANORAMA RANCHES BEARS N81°40'03"E ADISTANCE O 823.47 FEET AND ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HERON BEING RELATED THERETO; THENCE LEAVING SAIDRIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES;1.) N44°11'11"E A DISTANCE OF 463.54 FEET;2.) THENCE N47°13'33"E A DISTANCE OF 154.70 FEET;3.) THENCE N44°04'45"E A DISTANCE OF 941.69 FEET;4.) THENCE N56°17'24"E A DISTANCE OF 404.73 FEET;5.) THENCE N53°12'25"E A DISTANCE OF 212.92 FEET;6.) THENCE N31°11'37"E A DISTANCE OF 1048.73 FEET;7.) THENCE N18°10'32"E A DISTANCE OF 899.96 FEET TO A POINT WHENCE THE SOUTH 16TH (1/16) CORNER OF SAIDSECTIONS 8 & 9 (A FOUND REBAR & 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710) BEARS S09°11'54"W A DISTANCE OF 175.90 FEET;8.) THENCE N20°53'34"E A DISTANCE OF 945.98 FEET;9.) THENCE N19°05'32"E A DISTANCE OF 241.19 FEET;10.) THENCE N27°20'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1754.09 FEET;11.) THENCE N27°38'53"E A DISTANCE OF 492.14 FEET;12.) THENCE N20°55'19"E A DISTANCE OF 320.21 FEET;13.) THENCE N31°39'45"E A DISTANCE OF 525.56 FEET;14.) THENCE N26°22'46"E A DISTANCE OF 109.04 FEET;15.) THENCE N27°17'20"E A DISTANCE OF 1424.11 FEET;16.) THENCE N27°18'26"E A DISTANCE OF 781.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE COUNTY LINE COMMON TOEAGLE AND GARFIELD COUNTIES WHENCE THE EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5 PLEASANT VALLEY RANCH ACCORDING TOTHE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED APRIL 22, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 625692 (A FOUND REBAR & 1-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710 30' WITNESS CORNER) BEARS N28°03'53"E A DISTANCE OF 1420.43 FEET. SAID CENTERLINE BEING A 4 INCHDIAMETER STEEL GAS LINE IN PLACE.THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE TRIMMED OR EXTENDED AT THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAIDBUCK POINT ROAD AND AT SAID COUNTY LINE.SAID STRIP OF LAND CONTAINS 535,908 SQ. FT OR 12.302 ACRES AND HAS AN OVERALL CENTERLINE LENGTH OF 21,590 LFMORE OR LESS. EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN31° 11' 37"E1048.73'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S31° 36' 47"W316.04'SECTION 8SECTION 1725'25'TURNBERRY RANCH, LLCPARCEL NO.239108400261SECTION 8 SECTION 9 SOUTH 1/16TH SECTIONS 8 & 9 FOUND 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710S9° 11' 54"W175.90'(TIE)N18° 10' 32"E899.96'N20° 53' 34"E945.98'EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE25'25'SORLI, CATHERINE MCNULTY &MCNULTY, MARGPARCEL NO. 239109300271HOME RANGE LLCPARCEL NO. 23910930029050' RMNG EASEMENT50' RMNG EASEMENTROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2021DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET2 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 25'25'SECTION 8SECTION 9 TURNBERRY RANCH, LLCPARCEL NO. 239108400261SORLI, CATHERINE MCNULTY &MCNULTY, MARGPARCEL NO. 239109300271N19° 05' 32"E241.19'N27° 20' 57"E1754.09'25'QUARTER CIRCLE 8 LLLPPARCEL NO. 239109200235EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENT50' RMNG EASEMENTROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2021DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET3 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. QUARTER CIRCLE 8 LLLPPARCEL NO. 23910920023525'50' RMNG EASEMENTEXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN27° 38' 53"E492.14'N20° 55' 19"E320.21'N31° 39' 45"E525.56'N26° 22' 46"E109.04'N27° 17' 20"E1424.11'COUNTY ROAD 122X BAR RANCH LLCPARCEL NO. 239104300265SECTION 4SECTION 9PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2021DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET4 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. N27° 18' 26"E781.95'N27° 17' 20"E1424.11'X BAR RANCH LLCPARCEL NO. 239104300265MISSOURI HEIGHTS CONSULTING LTDPARCEL NO. 239104300266WRIGHT LAROSE, LORRIEPARCEL NO. 239104300263PURPLE ORGANIZATION INCPARCEL NO. 239104400298EAGLE COUNTYGARFIELD COUNTYPOINT OFTERMINUS25'50' RMNG EASEMENT25'EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN2 8 ° 0 3 ' 5 6 " E 14 2 0 . 4 3 'EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5,PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHFOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1-1/2"ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710(30' WITNESS CORNER)PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHPLEASANT VALLEY RANCHROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DATE: OCTOBER 11, 2021DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET5 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. Black Hills EnergyTM PIPELINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION 50' PIPELINE EASEMENT A 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTIONS 4, 8, 9 & 17, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, LYING TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE; BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCK POINT ROAD ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT OF PANORAMA RANCHES RECORDED OCTOBER 10, 1979 AS RECEPTION NO. 298382, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HOMESTEAD 10 OF SAID PANORAMA RANCHES BEARS N81°40'03"E A DISTANCE O 823.47 FEET AND ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HERON BEING RELATED THERETO; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES; 1.) N44°11'11"E A DISTANCE OF 463.54 FEET; 2.) THENCE N47°13'33"E A DISTANCE OF 154.70 FEET; 3.) THENCE N44°04'45"E A DISTANCE OF 941.69 FEET; 4.) THENCE N56°17'24"E A DISTANCE OF 404.73 FEET; 5.) THENCE N53°12'25"E A DISTANCE OF 212.92 FEET; 6.) THENCE N31°11'37"E A DISTANCE OF 1048.73 FEET; 7.) THENCE N18°10'32"E A DISTANCE OF 899.96 FEET TO A POINT WHENCE THE SOUTH 16TH (1/16) CORNER OF SAID SECTIONS 8 & 9 (A FOUND REBAR & 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710) BEARS S09°11'54"W A DISTANCE OF 175.90 FEET; 8.) THENCE N20°53'34"E A DISTANCE OF 945.98 FEET; 9.) THENCE N19°05'32"E A DISTANCE OF 241.19 FEET; 10.) THENCE N27°20'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1754.09 FEET; 11.) THENCE N27°38'53"E A DISTANCE OF 492.14 FEET; 12.) THENCE N20°55'19"E A DISTANCE OF 320.21 FEET; 13.) THENCE N31°39'45"E A DISTANCE OF 525.56 FEET; 14.) THENCE N26°22'46"E A DISTANCE OF 109.04 FEET; 15.) THENCE N27°17'20"E A DISTANCE OF 1424.11 FEET; 16.) THENCE N27°18'26"E A DISTANCE OF 781.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE COUNTY LINE COMMON TO EAGLE AND GARFIELD COUNTIES WHENCE THE EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5 PLEASANT VALLEY RANCH ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED APRIL 22, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 625692 (A FOUND REBAR & 1-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS15710 30' WITNESS CORNER) BEARS N28°03'53"E A DISTANCE OF 1420.43 FEET. SAID CENTERLINE BEING A 4 INCH DIAMETER STEEL GAS LINE IN PLACE. THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE TRIMMED OR EXTENDED AT THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID BUCK POINT ROAD AND AT SAID COUNTY LINE. SAID STRIP OF LAND CONTAINS 535,908 SQ. FT OR 12.302 ACRES AND HAS AN OVERALL CENTERLINE LENGTH OF 21,590 LF MORE OR LESS. COTTONWOOD PASSPHASE 1 BLOCK VALVEEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINEEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINEFOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS544725'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS544725'25'SOUTH 1/16TH SECTIONS 8 & 9 FOUND 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710EXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENTPER EASEMENT DOCUMENTRECORDED APRIL 29, 1969RECEPTION NO. 24228925'25'25'25'25'Black Hills EnergyTM 25'25'50' RMNG EASEMENTPER EASEMENT DOCUMENTRECORDED APRIL 29, 1969RECEPTION NO. 24229025'EXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENTEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE25'50' RMNG EASEMENT25'25'25'25'Black Hills EnergyTM PANORAMA RANCHESHOMESTEAD10DAVID THIELPARCEL NO. 239117101010HOMESTEAD8CYNTHIA EARTHMANPARCEL NO. 239117101008HOMESTEAD11KIRBY HOPARCEL NO. 239117101011COTTONWOOD PASSPHASE 1 BLOCKVALVEHOMESTEAD12LUCAS RAINSPARCEL NO. 239117101058HOMESTEAD2DONALD HEYDENBERKPARCEL NO. 239117101002HOMESTEAD53HANS BRUCKERPARCEL NO. 239117101066EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN44° 11' 11"E463.54'N56° 17' 24"E404.73'N47° 13' 33"E154.70'N44° 04' 45"E941.69'N53° 12' 25"E212.92'N31° 11' 37"E1048.73'POINT OFBEGINNINGEXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE(TIE) N81°40'03"E 823.47'FOUND NO.5 REBARS0° 16' 12"W 732.29'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S45° 01' 47"W345.48'BUCK POINT ROAD60' R.O.W.PANORAMA LOOP DRIVE60' R.O.W.25'25'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S54° 44' 47"W368.48'S31° 36' 47"W316.04'SECTION 8SECTION 1750' RMNG EASEMENTBUCK POINT ROAD60' R.O.W.ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET1 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.PIPELINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTIONSURVEYOR'S STATEMENTI, RODNEY P. KISER, DO HEREBY STATE THAT THIS EASEMENT PLAT WAS PREPARED BY TRUE NORTH COLORADO,LLC. FOR BLACK HILLS ENERGY, THAT SAID PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION ANDRESPONSIBLE CHARGE AND THAT IT IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE.50' PIPELINE EASEMENTA 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTIONS 4, 8, 9 & 17, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 OF THE 6THPRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, LYING TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THEFOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE;BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCK POINT ROAD ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT OFPANORAMA RANCHES RECORDED OCTOBER 10, 1979 AS RECEPTION NO. 298382, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OFCOLORADO WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HOMESTEAD 10 OF SAID PANORAMA RANCHES BEARS N81°40'03"E ADISTANCE O 823.47 FEET AND ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HERON BEING RELATED THERETO; THENCE LEAVING SAIDRIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES;1.) N44°11'11"E A DISTANCE OF 463.54 FEET;2.) THENCE N47°13'33"E A DISTANCE OF 154.70 FEET;3.) THENCE N44°04'45"E A DISTANCE OF 941.69 FEET;4.) THENCE N56°17'24"E A DISTANCE OF 404.73 FEET;5.) THENCE N53°12'25"E A DISTANCE OF 212.92 FEET;6.) THENCE N31°11'37"E A DISTANCE OF 1048.73 FEET;7.) THENCE N18°10'32"E A DISTANCE OF 899.96 FEET TO A POINT WHENCE THE SOUTH 16TH (1/16) CORNER OF SAIDSECTIONS 8 & 9 (A FOUND REBAR & 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710) BEARS S09°11'54"W A DISTANCE OF 175.90 FEET;8.) THENCE N20°53'34"E A DISTANCE OF 945.98 FEET;9.) THENCE N19°05'32"E A DISTANCE OF 241.19 FEET;10.) THENCE N27°20'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1754.09 FEET;11.) THENCE N27°38'53"E A DISTANCE OF 492.14 FEET;12.) THENCE N20°55'19"E A DISTANCE OF 320.21 FEET;13.) THENCE N31°39'45"E A DISTANCE OF 525.56 FEET;14.) THENCE N26°22'46"E A DISTANCE OF 109.04 FEET;15.) THENCE N27°17'20"E A DISTANCE OF 1424.11 FEET;16.) THENCE N27°18'26"E A DISTANCE OF 781.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE COUNTY LINE COMMON TOEAGLE AND GARFIELD COUNTIES WHENCE THE EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5 PLEASANT VALLEY RANCH ACCORDING TOTHE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED APRIL 22, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 625692 (A FOUND REBAR & 1-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710 30' WITNESS CORNER) BEARS N28°03'53"E A DISTANCE OF 1420.43 FEET. SAID CENTERLINE BEING A 4 INCHDIAMETER STEEL GAS LINE IN PLACE.THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE TRIMMED OR EXTENDED AT THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAIDBUCK POINT ROAD AND AT SAID COUNTY LINE.SAID STRIP OF LAND CONTAINS 535,908 SQ. FT OR 12.302 ACRES WITH AN OVERALL CENTERLINE LENGTH OF 10,721 LFMORE OR LESS.DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2021 EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN31° 11' 37"E1048.73'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR &1-1/4" RED PLASTIC CAPLS5447S31° 36' 47"W316.04'SECTION 8SECTION 1725'25'TURNBERRY RANCH, LLCPARCEL NO.239108400261SECTION 8 SECTION 9 SOUTH 1/16TH SECTIONS 8 & 9 FOUND 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710S9° 11' 54"W175.90'(TIE)N18° 10' 32"E899.96'N20° 53' 34"E945.98'EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE25'25'SORLI, CATHERINE MCNULTY &MCNULTY, MARGPARCEL NO. 239109300271HOME RANGE LLCPARCEL NO. 23910930029050' RMNG EASEMENT50' RMNG EASEMENTROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET2 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2021 25'25'SECTION 8SECTION 9 TURNBERRY RANCH, LLCPARCEL NO. 239108400261SORLI, CATHERINE MCNULTY &MCNULTY, MARGPARCEL NO. 239109300271N19° 05' 32"E241.19'N27° 20' 57"E1754.09'25'QUARTER CIRCLE 8 LLLPPARCEL NO. 239109200235EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENT50' RMNG EASEMENTROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET3 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2021 QUARTER CIRCLE 8 LLLPPARCEL NO. 23910920023525'50' RMNG EASEMENTEXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN27° 38' 53"E492.14'N20° 55' 19"E320.21'N31° 39' 45"E525.56'N26° 22' 46"E109.04'N27° 17' 20"E1424.11'COUNTY ROAD 122X BAR RANCH LLCPARCEL NO. 239104300265SECTION 4SECTION 9PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET4 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2021 N27° 18' 26"E781.95'N27° 17' 20"E1424.11'X BAR RANCH LLCPARCEL NO. 239104300265MISSOURI HEIGHTS CONSULTING LTDPARCEL NO. 239104300266WRIGHT LAROSE, LORRIEPARCEL NO. 239104300263PURPLE ORGANIZATION INCPARCEL NO. 239104400298EAGLE COUNTYGARFIELD COUNTYPOINT OFTERMINUS25'50' RMNG EASEMENT25'EXISTING RMNG 4"GAS LINEN2 8 ° 0 3 ' 5 6 " E 14 2 0 . 4 3 'EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5,PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHFOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1-1/2"ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710(30' WITNESS CORNER)PLEASANT VALLEY RANCHPLEASANT VALLEY RANCHROCKY MOUNTAIN NATURAL GAS 4" GAS PIPELINESECTIONS 4, 8 , 9 & 17 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADOPIPELINE EASEMENT PLAT TRUE NORTH COLORADO LLC.A LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANYP.O. BOX 614 - 386 MAIN STREET UNIT 3NEW CASTLE, COLORADO 81647(970) 984-0474www.truenorthcolorado.comPROJECT NO: 2021-341DRAWNLDVSURVEYEDLDVSHEET5 OF 5TRUENORTHA LAND SURVEYING AND MAPPING COMPANY100'50'200'SCALE: 1" = 100'N0NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANYLEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREEYEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANYACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORETHAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 2021 Black Hills EnergyTM PIPELINE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION 50' PIPELINE EASEMENT A 50 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND SITUATED IN SECTIONS 4, 8, 9 & 17, TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 87 OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO, LYING TWENTY FIVE (25) FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE; BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF BUCK POINT ROAD ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT OF PANORAMA RANCHES RECORDED OCTOBER 10, 1979 AS RECEPTION NO. 298382, COUNTY OF GARFIELD, STATE OF COLORADO WHENCE THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF HOMESTEAD 10 OF SAID PANORAMA RANCHES BEARS N81°40'03"E A DISTANCE O 823.47 FEET AND ALL BEARINGS CONTAINED HERON BEING RELATED THERETO; THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE THE FOLLOWING SIXTEEN (16) COURSES; 1.) N44°11'11"E A DISTANCE OF 463.54 FEET; 2.) THENCE N47°13'33"E A DISTANCE OF 154.70 FEET; 3.) THENCE N44°04'45"E A DISTANCE OF 941.69 FEET; 4.) THENCE N56°17'24"E A DISTANCE OF 404.73 FEET; 5.) THENCE N53°12'25"E A DISTANCE OF 212.92 FEET; 6.) THENCE N31°11'37"E A DISTANCE OF 1048.73 FEET; 7.) THENCE N18°10'32"E A DISTANCE OF 899.96 FEET TO A POINT WHENCE THE SOUTH 16TH (1/16) CORNER OF SAID SECTIONS 8 & 9 (A FOUND REBAR & 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS 15710) BEARS S09°11'54"W A DISTANCE OF 175.90 FEET; 8.) THENCE N20°53'34"E A DISTANCE OF 945.98 FEET; 9.) THENCE N19°05'32"E A DISTANCE OF 241.19 FEET; 10.) THENCE N27°20'57"E A DISTANCE OF 1754.09 FEET; 11.) THENCE N27°38'53"E A DISTANCE OF 492.14 FEET; 12.) THENCE N20°55'19"E A DISTANCE OF 320.21 FEET; 13.) THENCE N31°39'45"E A DISTANCE OF 525.56 FEET; 14.) THENCE N26°22'46"E A DISTANCE OF 109.04 FEET; 15.) THENCE N27°17'20"E A DISTANCE OF 1424.11 FEET; 16.) THENCE N27°18'26"E A DISTANCE OF 781.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF TERMINUS ON THE COUNTY LINE COMMON TO EAGLE AND GARFIELD COUNTIES WHENCE THE EASTERLY CORNER OF TRACT 5 PLEASANT VALLEY RANCH ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED APRIL 22, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 625692 (A FOUND REBAR & 1-1/2" ALUMINUM CAP LS15710 30' WITNESS CORNER) BEARS N28°03'53"E A DISTANCE OF 1420.43 FEET. SAID CENTERLINE BEING A 4 INCH DIAMETER STEEL GAS LINE IN PLACE. THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND ARE TO BE TRIMMED OR EXTENDED AT THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID BUCK POINT ROAD AND AT SAID COUNTY LINE. SAID STRIP OF LAND CONTAINS 535,908 SQ. FT OR 12.302 ACRES WITH AN OVERALL CENTERLINE LENGTH OF 10,721 LF MORE OR LESS. COTTONWOOD PASSPHASE 1 BLOCK VALVEEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINEEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINEFOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS544725'25'25'FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS5447FOUND NO.5 REBAR & 1-1/4"RED PLASTIC CAP LS544725'25'SOUTH 1/16TH SECTIONS 8 & 9 FOUND 2-1/2" ALUMINUM CAPLS15710EXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENTPER EASEMENT DOCUMENTRECORDED APRIL 29, 1969RECEPTION NO. 24228925'25'25'25'25'Black Hills EnergyTM 25'25'50' RMNG EASEMENTPER EASEMENT DOCUMENTRECORDED APRIL 29, 1969RECEPTION NO. 24229025'EXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE50' RMNG EASEMENTEXISTING RMNG 4" GAS LINE25'50' RMNG EASEMENT25'25'25'25'Black Hills EnergyTM