Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
pitkin.eh.264335404001 (2005-2008)_EMAILS RE WELL
Page 1 of 1 Nancy Mackenzie To: Vicki Monge Subject: FW: 500 Jalanda Lane, RBR 12 LLC Vicki, The intent is to serve the wastewater by hooking up to Aspen Consolidated San District - So ACSD needs to sign off on that portion. Lots 1 and Lots 2 have a legal water supply in place per a April 8, 2005 letter from Patrick, Miller & Krope, Inc. So we are okay with even a full CO for those Lots I don't know anything about the water supply for the Open Space Lot, so if they ever come in which a building with plumbing, it would be a hold by us. Nancy From: Kristen Stroud Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 3:20 PM To: Nancy Mackenzie Subject: FW: 500 Jalanda Lane, RBR 12 LLC From: Vicki Monge Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 1:34 PM To: Kristen Stroud; Peg Mohr Subject: 500 Jalanda Lane, RBR 12 LLC Kristen and Peg, Are you okay with issuance of a Partial C.O. for this site? It will exclude the east wing. Parcel ID 2643 354 C4 002 Bldg permit #0004.2005.prbk Kristen, Nancy gave the okay on April 18, 2005, for the building permit to be issued. This home is on Lot 2. It looks like Lots 1 and 2 and the Open Space Lot all had water/well issues going. Thanks. Vicki 1/3/2008 jima@co.pitldn.co.us, victdm@co.pittdn.co.us, tonyf@co.pittdn.c, 05:20 PM 4/18/2005, Hurst Ranch To: jima@co.pitkin.co.us, vickim@co.pitkin.co.us, tonyf@co.pitkin.co.us From: Nancy MacKenzie <nancym@co.pitkin.co.us> Subject: Hurst Ranch Cc: Bcc: Attached: The water/well issue has been resolved and it is okay to issue all building permits for Lots 1, 2, aide_. nancy Printed for Nancy MacKenzie <nancym@co.pittdn.co.us> CKiley@designworkshop.com, 11:56 AM 4/11/2005, Hurst Ranch Page 1 of 1 To: nancym@ci.aspen.co.us Subject: Hurst Ranch X -Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5 September 26, 2003 From: CKiley@designworkshop.com Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:56:28 -0600 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ASPEN/Designworkshop(Release 6.5 1 September 26, 2003) at 04/11/2005 11:56:32 AM, Serialize complete at 04/11/2005 11:56:32 AM X -Spam: exempt X -MAIL -FROM: <ck:iley@designworkshop.com> X -SOURCE -IP: [216.237.77.71] X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Nancy, I checked the Hurst Ranch drawings and the barn on the open space parcel ('lot 0') does have a water line serving a sink and two hose bibs and the drains all connect to the sewer line. 7 Chris Chris Kiley DESIGNWORKSHOP 120 East Main St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 970 925-8354 phone 970 920-1387 facsimile ckiley@designworkshcp.com Printed for Nancy MacKenzie <nancym@co.pitkin.co.us> 4/11/2005 Jim Austin, 02:23 PM 4/12/2005 , Hurst Ranch X -Sender: jima@sam X -Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:23:43 -0600 To: nancym@co.pitkin.co.us From: Jim Austin <jima@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Hurst Ranch Cc: joannas@co.pitki.n.co.us X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Page 1 of 1 Nancy, I did let the garage oil the open space lot be issued. No water issues there. We still have on hold the big house on lot # 2, and on the Open Space Lot, the manager's residence, the CDU, and the barn w/ the 1/2 bath. I'm assuming that the well issue, the PM 10 issue, and the letter of intent from the ACSD are still ongoing. Give me a call on Wednesday. Thanks. Jim Printed for Nancy MacKenzie <nancym(aco.pitkin.co.us> 4/13/2005 Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Paul Smith * Chairman Frank Loushin Michael Kelly* Vice- Chair Roy Holloway John Keleher * .Sec/Treas Bruce Maiherly, Mgr April 5, 2005 Matt Langhorst High Country Engineering 1571 Blake Avenue Suite 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 811601 RE: -Hurst 'Ranch Application for Sanitary Sewer, Service Dear Matt, The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient wastewater collection and treatment capacity to serve this project. The applicant must adhere to the district's rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. There are downstream constraints in the Districts Outfall line that will be corrected through a system of proportionate impact fees. If the applicaiat proposes to serve the property with a main sanitary sewer line extension, the applicant will be required to complete a "Line Extension Request" to serve the property and execute a "Collection System Agreement, each of which will be reviewed by tiie district's board of directors at their next regularly scheduled meeting. Easements must be granted the District for the main line extension on standard District form. Additional access and sanitary sewer line easements will be required form the applicant to be able to serve this. property. Funds must be placed into escrow with the District to cover the construction observatiori expenses, the District's cost to televise the completed line extension, and the cost of the District's engineer to review an approve the plan and profile of the line extension. The above coarse of action will allow the newly installed sanitary sewer main line to be dedicated to the district for future ownership and maintenance. If, however the applicant. chooses to use the existing 4" CIP service line that currently serves the existing ranch property, the owner of the ranch will own and maintain the existing line and all sanitary sewer line extensions proposed to serve the additional development. The district would not recommend the use of the existing 4"CIP since the existing 4" CIP line has been know to fail in the past. 565 N. Mill St., Aspen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970)925-2537 A tap permit must be completed at our office when detailed plans become available. Fees will be estimated at that time. The total connection charges due the District must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Sincerely Thomas R. racewell Collection Systems Superintendent CC Bud Eylar, Pitkin County Engineer Kevin O'Connell, 68 West Engineering Bruce Matherly, District Manager Soladad Hurst, Owner i a 14 3 4 PATRICK, MILLER & KROPF, P.C. Attorneys at Law Kevin L. Patrick* Scott C. Miller Ramsey L. Kropf Paul L. Noto Madoline E.S. Wallace *licensed in CO, OK **licensed in AZ, CO, WY Main Office: 730 E. Durant Avenue Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 970.920.1028 Tel 970.925.6847 Fax Arizona Office: Camelback Esplanade I 2415 E. Camelback Road Suite 700 Phoenix, AZ 85016 480.921.4044 Tel 480.921.8688 Fax www.waterlaw.com April 8, 2005 Ms. Nancy MacKenzie Pitkin County Environmental Health Department Schultz Health and Human Services Building 0405 Castle Creek Road Aspen, CO 81611 VIA HAND DELIVERY RE: Building Permit Review for Lots 1 and 2, Red Butte Ranch (our file #702C) Dear Ms. MacKenzie: This firm represents RBR12, LLC; RBR345, LLC and Red Butte Ranch Homeowners Association in water matters. It has recently come to our attention that in your review of the building permit application for Lots 1 and 2 of Red Butte Ranch, certain questions have arisen regarding well permitting and the legal water supply for the Lots. Apparently there may be some confusion about the proposed water supply for Lots 1 and 2; we wish to clarify that it is proposed that the existing well will serve Lot 1, and a new well will be permitted and constructed to serve Lot 2. The former owners of Ranch decreed a plan for augmentation in Case No. 95CW366, which awarded a legal water supply for five wells (one well per lot). Pursuant to that Decree, Well Permit No. 050730-F was issued for the existing well on Lot 1, which will serve the existing and new structures on Lot 1. A well permit application will be submitted to the Division of Water Resources immediately for the Lot 2 well, which will serve the development on Lot 2. The State Engineer is re; '(-�c by state issue a well permit without condition for a t� well adjudicated under a decreed plan for augmentation. See C.R.S. § 37-92- 305(6)(a). Accordingly, there is a legal water supper in place for both the Lot 1 and of 2 Wells. Both wells will be connected to an underground water storage tank; this 1� s permissible under the Decree in Case No. 95CW366 and provides a measure of redundancy in the physical water supply for the lots. PATRICK, MILLER & KROPF, P.C. Ms. Nancy MacKenzi Page 2 April 8, 2005 We hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions. Very truly yours, PATRICK, MILLER & KROPF, P.C. A Professional Corporation By: aul L. Noto noto(a)ivaterlaw.com encl. cc: Herb Klein, Esq. Tom Zancanella, P.E. Mr. Chris Kiley CADocuments and Settings\nbmTocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKI F7\MacKenzie 4-8-05.doc APR, 4, 2005 12:02P� DESIGN WORKSHOP NO, 632 P. 2 l:orm No. OFFICE OF THE SATE ENC�INEER R�DO DIVISION OF WATER RESOUR cws-25 COLO CES y Ht b Contennla leg..1 113 Snermen SL, 0errYer, Celorade SU03 T (3133)866.3661 W@LL PERMIT NUMBER 8'76 Div. 5 WD 38 DES, BASIN MQ p ICANLot., 28leck: Filing: Suhdiv; R@D owl 1C RnNCK APPR WEL O ON PITKiN COUNTY NE tlA NW 114 Section 2 Township 10 S Range 85 W 81Xth P,M. ROB&RT C HuFtsi IST C/O PATRICK MILLER & KROPF PC 730 EA&T OU1�►NT, SUITE ZOQ 725 FI. {Tom North Section Une ASPEN. CO 81611- 2740 Ft. It= East 8eciion Line UTM cooRDINATE,C_ (870) 920-1028 _ .—I I Northing' Easting: .ERMIT TQ CQN51[sor"I In VX51,lik ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONOMONA OF APPROVAL I) This wail shall be used in tuoh a way as to cause no mateltal Injury to existing water rigMs. The iseutince of this permit does not ensure thall no Injury will OCOUr hlo knothor elevated water right or preclude another owner of a vested wader richt from naeking relief in a CMI court sctlan• nce with %he Water 2) The vonittr cdon f :hi ®reel shalled be In08 state eoerd of E�tamr o�u of w®ntte Welt,CemPlis Mstruoction tion apt Purtipaln tallt on, unless pproyal 0 Contractom In Accordance with Rule 1B. Use Of this well le Limited to 3) Approved ounsuant to CRS 37-82.602(3)(b)(1) For uses 138 de9aibed In CRS 97-92.80x(1}(f). monitoring water levels grid/Or water Quality sampling, s) Approved as a well en a residentlal aIle of 6.16 acre($) described as lot 3, Rod f3ut>g Ranch Subdivision, Pitkin Wtlnty. Qj Tells wall rnvat be 9elUlpped with ti tockino coo or Seal to Prevent well cont8mineitloh or pos5ible haZarder on an open well. The well must b9 kept capped and looked at all lamas except during 68mpling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measuMmOts and water quality analyese ehati be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the DivislOn Of WstV FRmsouneea uoen re"avt. 1) Upon coneltaslon of the monitoring program the watt owner shall Dlug this well in accordance with Rule 19 Of Me Water Well Constnrdion rtules. A Woll Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Civislon of W41e1' Resources within 61) trays Of DluQping- well permit numbec(a) and Hama of s plane wttro date, 6) the owner shall rt2irk the well in a congpteuou11 raqurfer es t►pp P and shall take necetae9ry means and precautions to preserve tit®se marltings. SI) Tells well must be con6lrueted by or under the superv(slon of a 1)eellsed well dialer Qrvariance request must be submitted n to the Water Wall C;onstrUctlon Rules. If non-standard construction Is anticipated, 0 3cenrd4nce with Rlule 18 and approved prior to well con5truclion. the individual 10) A Well Construction and Taal Report (Form GWS -31), including 11t 0"Ic log must be 5ubmtttoq by au7torized tD cons ruct Me well, For non•standsra construction, the report must Includean and Interval. drawl owing details such lis debth, casing, perforated zones, and a descri{+wn of the grouting type;K— 1—, 11) 111is well $Rail be c'eri mad not more than 200 feet from the locatlorn iipeoNled on this permlL NO'T'E: Pareal 11jelitifioatlon Number (PIN): 40-2043-354.Os•002 NOTE: Asseastir Tu Schedule Numb®r , 1ka1®a37 APPROVED OMW $�Is6npinaer _ �� 1��� fan ne_2i-2004 By04-21-TION ATE Ob -21. 0 01 M118 ANddWOO CNV H1IWS t1d 8TZT89801-6 T9:58 h0®Znwn VANN ASSOCIATES Planning Consultants July 2, 1997 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Lee Cassin, Assistant Director Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Red Butte Ranch Subdivision/PUD PM10 Mitigation Dear Lee: Enclosed for your review are copies of my proposed PM10 mitigation plan for the Stein subdivision and Nancy MacKenzie's referral comments with respect thereto. As the enclosed discussion indicates, the Stein family proposes to require a cash contribution of $11,220.00 per lot from each of the eventual owners of the five lots in the Red Butte Ranch Subdivision and the two lots in the adjacent Stein Lot Split Subdivision prior to the issuance of individual building permits. The cash contribu- tion was calculated based on the same approach which I utilized in connection with the Benedict and Hardy Subdivisions. The funds are to be earmarked for trail easement acquisition and/or construction. As I pointed out in my detailed submission/final plat application, the proposed per lot mitigation requirement for the Stein subdivisions substantially exceeds the per lot mitigation requirements which were calculated and approved for both the Benedict and Hardy Subdivisions. Inasmuch as the per lot contribution requirements for these two subdivisions were determined to be adequate to mitigate the increase in PM10 which would potentially result from the vehicular trips generated by the new lots, it would appear logical that the substantially higher per lot contribution proposed by the Stein family would be more than adequate to mitigate the County's PM10 concerns. In her referral comments, Nancy states that "the details of the mitigation must be finalized and the cash contribution made before the final plat is recorded". I believe that the details have been finalized, that the contribution is more than adequate as proposed, and that payment need not be made until building permits issue. Clearly there is no adverse impact until the homes are constructed. As both the Stein subdivisions are proposed for estate planning purposes, there are no immediate plans for development. Please note that the Protective Covenants to be recorded concur - 230 East Hopkins Avenue • Aspen, Colorado 81611 • 970/925-6958 • Fax 970/920-9310 l�3 `� Ms. Lee Cassin July 2, 1997 Page 2 rent with the final plat require the payment of the required mitigation impact fee prior to the issuance of individual building permits. I would appreciate it if you would review the enclosed materials and give me a call to discuss the matter further. The application is scheduled for review by the P&Z on July 15, 1997. I would like to resolve any outstanding issues with the Environmental Health Department prior to review by the BOCC. Assuming you conclude that our proposed PM10 mitigation plan is acceptable, a revised referral comment to the Planning Office would be appreciated. Thanks for you assistance! Yours truly, )CIATES , AICP c:\bus\county.ItrVtr29195.Ic1 Conceptual Subdivision Conditions The Applicant's conceptual subdivision application was approved subject to 34 conditions (see Exhibit 7, BOCC Resolution No. 96-73). The conditions, and the detailed subdivision/final plat application's compliance therewith, are summarized below. 1. "The applicant shall submit a PM10 mitigation program at Detailed Submis- sion. The plan shall include documentation showing that the proposed control measures will fully mitigate or offset all PM10 increases caused by the project in the nonattainment area." The Applicant proposes to meet the requirements of this condition via a cash contribution to the County to be earmarked for future trail easement acquisition and/or construction. This approach was accepted by the County and endorsed by both Mark Fuller, the former head of the Pitkin County Open Space and Trails Program, and Lee Cassin of the Environmental Health Department in connection with both the Benedict Stillwater Ranch and Hardy Subdivisions. The amount of the Benedict and Hardy contributions was determined based on the linear footage of the properties' road frontage and the County's established easement acquisition cost of $10.50 per foot. Utilizing the same methodology, and a McLain Flats Road frontage of approximately 7,480 feet, easement acquisition would theoretically cost $78,540.00, or $15,708.00 each for the project's five free market dwelling units. Due to the length of the McLain Flats Road frontage, the per unit cost of mitigation for the Red Butte Ranch Subdivision substantially exceeds that of both the Benedict and Hardy Subdivisions which were $2,520.00 and $5,250.00, respectively. Given the substantial difference between these figures, and the easement acquisition cost per unit for the Red Butte Ranch Subdivision, we believe that it is reasonable to request that the proposed mitigation also accommodate the Applicant's two unit subdi`v'ision which is located across from the Ranch on the north side of McLain Flats Road. This project, which is referred to as the Stein Lot Split Subdivision, received conceptual subdivision approval from the BOCC on February 12, 1997. Condition #1 of the BOCC's approval resolution also requires the mitigation of potential PM10 impacts. Assuming that the proposed mitigation is adequate to accommodate both projects, the required cash contribution would be $11,220.00 per dwelling unit for each the two subdivisions' seven free market residences. Paragraph 8.(b) of the protective covenants requires that a contribution of $11,220.00 for each of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 to be made to the County prior to the issuance of their respective building permits. A similar requirement will be included within the protective covenants for the Stein Lot Split Subdivision to be submitted in Suzanne Wolff ch 12, 1997 connection with the Applicant's final plat application for the project. These contrib tions will substantially exceed the contributions of similar projects, and will facilitate the construction of new trails, the public's use of which will reduce both vehicular traffic and PM10 generation. 2. "The requirement for the submittal of a fugitive dust control plan at building permit application for each lot shall be incorporated in the Protective Cove- nants for the Subdivision." This condition is addressed in Paragraph 8.(d) of the Red Butte Ranch Subdivision/PUD's protective covenants (see Exhibit 9). 3. "Wood -burning devices shall be prohibited in the free market and deed restricted dwelling units." This condition is addressed in Paragraph 8.(a) of the protective covenants. 4. "Drainage plans shall be required at building permit application for each lot. Plans shall incorporate measures to eliminate drainage impacts (of new con- struction) to the steep slopes to the south of the building envelopes. On-site detention, temporary construction measures such as silt fencing and haybale detention areas, and final landscape design incorporating grassed sedimenta- tion basins shall be incorporated in the Plan to the extent required. Building envelopes shall be set back a minimum of 30' from the top of the slope, and temporary construction fencing shall be erected to establish and maintain that setback." This condition is addressed in Paragraph 9. of the protective covenants. As the accompanying final plat illustrates, all building envelopes have been setback thirty feet from the top of the slope. 5. "At Detailed Submission, the applicant shall provide a feasibility summary addressing the possibility of connecting to the Aspen Consolidated District line in the D&RG right-of-way." Section 3-110.50.B. of the Land Use Code requires all that development connect to a public sewage disposal system if located within the system's service area and service is available. While the Applicant's property is located within the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's (ACSD) boundaries, the proposed building enve- lopes are situated more than four hundred feet horizontally from the District's Roaring Fork outfall line which is located adjacent to the River and within the old D&RGW railroad right-of-way. The building envelopes are also separated from the line by the Roaring Fork River, a vertical elevation of approximately 190 feet, and slopes in excess of 65 percent. water are adequate. Without meeting these requirements a building permit cannot be issued. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-180 and 3-110.5: "It is the polio of the County to ensure that adequate sewage treatment facilities are available to serve existing and new developments. Public and private sewage disposal systems and connections to such systems shall comply with the sewage disposal guidelines of Pitkin County's Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulation." The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) has determined that the 5 lots are in the ACSD service district and that service is available. There may be other proposed developments in the general area that can share in the costs of extending sewer lines, and the Community Development Department may want to consider this area as a whole in planning for sewer line extensions. The applicant must agree to serve the project with public sew. er as provided by the ACSD but has failed to provided documentation "...that the applicant and the service agency are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development..." as defined in the Pitkin County Code, Title H, Land Use Code. A condition of approval for this application is that sewage treatment be provided by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, and the receipt of documentation "...that the applicant and the service agency are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development..." as defined in the Pitkin County Code, Title II, Land Use Code. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Sections 2-140 and 3-70.5 and 3-70.10: "It is the policy of the County to preserve and protect its present water resources, recognizing the County's semi -arid character and that significant transmountain and transbasin diversions and the vested rights of senior appropriators in the basin have materially curtailed the availability of an already scarce water resource. To this end it is the policy of the County that no land use be initiated which would adversely affect the quantity, quality, or accessibility of the County's water resources; or which would occur at the expense of established water -dependent agricultural activities; or which would result in increased salinization of water resources, loss of minimum stream flows, further destruction of wildlife habitat, or major expenditures to reacquire or redistribute major water resources. It is also the policy of the County to maintain a natural vegetative buffer along its surface waters such that the surface and groundwaters of the area are not encroached upon by land uses or other human activities which could cause deterioration of water quality or impair the natural treatment processes provided by meadows and wetlands." The Environmental Health Department is charged with preserving and protecting the quality of Pitkin County's water resources. Since a large percentage of the population is dependent upon water from wells, elimination of groundwater pollution, and protection of aquifers and their drainage areas are of utmost importance. Roofs and asphalt driveways can be nonpoint sources of water discharge which can contaminate water supplies. This Department recommends that nonpoint sources of discharge be retained on the property of origin which can be accomplished through landscaping, drainage patterns, detention ponds, and dry wells for water runoff from buildings. AIR QUALITY: Sections 2-130 and 3-602: Pitkin County Environmental Health Department 0405 Castle Creek Rd Suite 10, Aspen, CO 81611 FAFAX/MEMOIL ] TO: M4Sz1 �4 Phone: f.7-6 -/700 Fax Phone: CC: Date: Number of pages including cover sheet: FROM: Nancy MacKenzie Phone: 970-920-5076 Fax Phone: 970-920-5077 E-mail: nancymAci.aspen.co.us I REMARKS: ❑ Urgent ❑ For your review _ReplyASAP__ Please " ant "Only that development is permitted which will not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality." In order for the applicant to show that mitigation measures it proposes will be adequate to prevent significant increases in traffic or PM10 in the nonattainment area, the applicant needed to first determine the traffic and PM -10 increases the project will cause before mitigation measures are considered. Then, proposed mitigation measures have to be evaluated to ensure they will fully offset any increases in traffic or PM -10. A condition in the conceptual subdivision approval was that "prior to detailed submission, the applicant must provide a PM10 mitigation program containing specific, enforceable control measures. The plan must be approved by the Environmental Health Department. The plan must include documentation showing that the proposed measures will fully mitigate or offset all PM10 increases caused by the project in the nonattainment area." The applicant did not calculate the traffic and PM10 increases from the project, but this department has determined the traffic impacts using the standards in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report Fifth Edition. These trip generation rates are used for any traffic impact analysis to be submitted to Pitkin County (per "Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan"). The lot with the existing housing does not need to be included in any mitigation. The impact on PM10 would be from the new development - (4) new single family homes in this proposal and (2) new single family homes in the Stein Lot Split Subdivision. Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trig Generation Report Fifth Edition for trip generation rates for 6 single family homes, this Department has determined that 57.3 trips/ day or 8.02 Lbs of PM10/day must be mitigated. Possible mitigation methods are to pave unpaved parking lots to prevent mud -carryout onto adjacent roadways, construction of linked commuter bike paths, paving of alleys or road shoulders, winter maintenance of connecting bike paths, or measures that support or encourage use of mass transit or carpooling. The applicant has proposed a cash contribution to the County to be earmarked for trail easement acquisition and /or construction. The details of a mitigation plan that will either reduce 57 trips/day within the non -attainment area, or will remove 8 Lbs of PM10/day must be finalized and the cash contribution made before the final plat is recorded. A condition of approval is that the details of the mitigation must be finalized and the cash contribution made before the final plat is recorded. The Protective Covenants for Red Butte Ranch Subdivision/PUD adequately addresses a Fugitive Dust Plan and fireplace regulations. A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the fireplace/woodstove permit by the Environmental Health Department before the building permit can be issued. t aty .y -sem.. sew -�Z. •� e�...t 3y��]�',' .�T-�'. �''3.}``�,' f. ., MvV'Y..�iry 1. k � 11..1 { wt� i''. ?y / • t1 [�t i%�.",r --- Pitkin County Environmental Health MITIGATI Air Quality Mitigation Typical Worksheet last updated: ###### REDBUTTE TRAFFIC Trip generation rates VMT in # ea total trip VMT Total PM -10 unit of measur( VTD* NA area type Traffic Emissions Residential *may be reduced in certain cases) per unit unit (avg: can use spec Single family each 9.55 47.75 6 57.3 287 8.02 subtract 1.55 for 1/2 mi from transit, some for ski -in -ski -out Commercial V" TOTAL 47.75 6 57.3 287 8.02 POSSIBLE MITIGATION MEASURES construction/maintenzmce of linked commuter bike path e.g. avg bike route may get 75 trips/ day -10 in winter maintenance allows that, construction adds that may not need to maintain whole 1 -mi section close -in to get this ridership will a new 1/2 -mi section generate 57 more riders? will maintaining an average 1/2 -mi section allow 57 riders? each lot generates 16 trips/ day each lot to provide 11220 plowing hs trail will generate 16 trips/ day (walk+bike) 1/2 mi section 4750 2.4 years of plowing 1/2 mi section closer -in route would allow for more years, farther, fewer Page 1 cific) MITIGATI silt loadin€ new emiss old em fac ratio gm/ m2 lb/vmt Aspen 10.7 0.026 0.0961 0.27 Main 15.2 0.033 0.1061 0.31 82 Page 2 MAR, 24. 2005 3:48PM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO.519 P. 10 Forth No. OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER GWS -2k COLORADO DMSiON OF WATER RESOURCES - y 8.19 Centannlal Bldg., 1913 Sherman St, Deaver. Colotado 8=1 (303) e5easb1 APPLICANT ICANT RED B47TE RANCH 0/0 MA.RJORIE B STEIN PO BOX 1047 ASPEN CO 81612- (970)925-7210 PERMIT TO U:sE AN EXISTiNG WELL WELL PERMIT NUMBER ()50 730 - DIV, S CNTY, 49 WD 38 DES. BASIN MD .ot: 1 Block: Filina: Subdiv; RED BUTTE RANCH 1 EXST APPROVED WELL LOCATION PITWN COUNTY NIN 114 NE 114 Section 2 Twp 10 S RANGE 8S W 6th P.M. DISTANCES FROM SECTION LINES 1100 Ft. from North Section Line 2080 PL from East Section Line ISSUANCE OF THiS PIaRMiT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDRIONS OF APPROVAL 1) This well shell be used In such a way as to cause no material Injury to exlsting water rignts. The issuance of trio permit does not assure the applicant that no Injury will occur to another vested water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right tram seeking relief In a civil court action. 2) The construction of this well shall be in compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402.2, unless approval of a variance has boon grented by the Shue Board of Examinera of Water Well Constructlon and Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 18. 3) Approved pursuant to CRS 37.90-137(2) on the r ontlition that this we)[ is operated in accordance with the MM011e & Stein and Trust B under the will of henry L. Stein plan for wgmentation approved by the Division 5 Water Court In case no. SSCW366. It the well is not operated in accordance with the terms of said daaee. R will be subject to administration Including orders to cease pumping, 4) The use of ground water from this well is limited to ordinary household purposes inside amain ranch residence, a guest house, a gsrage wi';h apartment, end a ranch manager residence. The ground water shall not be used for irrigation or other purposes. 5) The maximum pumping rate shall not exceed 30 (3PM. 6) The maximum annual amount of ground water to be appmprlated shall not exoead 1.08 acre-foot 7) This well shall be I"ed at teat 6W feet from any e(1oting well that Is not owned by the applicant. H) This well 9h,9q De located not more than 200 feet from the location decreed for Fied Butte 9anCh Well No. 1 in case no. 95CW366 and the loanion specified on this permit 9) A 1018J0,119 !!low meter must be Installed On the well and maintained in good working order. Permanent records of all diversions must be n ilydalned by the well owner (recorded et lean annually) and submitted to the Division Engineer upon request. 10) The owner shall mark the well in @ Consplouous place with well pemlx number (5), name ofthe aquifer, and court case number(s) as approprlete. The owner shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 11) This permit has been approved for ground water to bo used inside a main ranch residence, a quest house, a garage with aparumanl, and a ranch manager (esldonce. The ground water withdrawn from this well may not be used for any other purposes. You are hefeby notliled that you have the 69111 to appeal the issuance of this permit, by filing a written request with this offlc9 within sooty i 60) days of the date of issuance, pursuant to the State Administrable Proceduree_Act. (See 6eCWn 24-4-104 through 106, C.R.S.;i. 12) The Issuene* of this permit cancels permit no. 207780. 4V *qq0 APPROVED A KJW �bG n r s D(PN� Receipt No. 04,*kW7�•�d DATE ISSUEo 0 C j 4 �O' � ATION DATE0Cl V4.190 MAR.24.2005 3:0M DESIGN WORKSHOP NO.519 P. 3 P.O. Box 1909 1005 Cooper Ave. Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Mr. Chris Kiley Design Workshop 120 East Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 Z-411MCARELiA Mio 455t" 0 4TM, INC. ENGINEERING COMSULT4141Y March 11, 2005 Revised March 23, 2005 RE: Red Butte Ranch Well #1 Pump Test Dear Chris: (970) 945-5700 (970) 945-1253 Fax As you are aware, a pump test was completed February 8, 2005 by Samuelson Pump Company on the Red Butte Ranch Well #1, in Red Butte Subdivision near Aspen. The test was conducted at a rate of approximately 20 gpm. The well was pumped for a continuous period of 24 hours. Red Butte Ranch Well #1 Red Butte Ranch Well #1 is located on a bench overlooking the Roaring Fork River, approximately two miles northwest of Aspen in Pitkin County, Colorado. According to the well permit (#50730-F, attached), the well is situated 1100 feet from the north section line and 2080 feet from the east section line of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 2, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6`" P. M. An approximate location of the well is shown on Figure 1. The well was estimated to have been drilled in June of 1975 and in 1998 it was permitted as an exempt domestic well under the permit number 207780. The well was then converted to a fee well under permit number 50730-F. There are no well construction reports that were found on file for this well. Pump Test The data recorded during the Samuelson Pump Company pump test and the subsequent recovery period are listed in the attached Table 1. The results of the pumping portion of the test are shown in a water level versus time plot in Figure 2. The recovery portion is shown as residual drawdown versus time in Figure 3. The data indicate that, at the end of 24 hours of pumping, the water level had stabilized and was beginning to show a slight recovery overnight. Because the water level in the well illustrated minimal drawdown it is likely the well can be pumped continuously for many days at the test rate of 20 gpm. It may be necessary to install a storage tank to handle peak demands for -the proposed development. MAR.24. 2006 3:46PM D FST GN KRKSHOP NO. 519 P. 4 Recovery data for the well following the pump test were collected for a 10 minute period. Figure 3 shows the well's recovery as residual drawdown. The graph shows that the well recovered normally. Waiter Quality Water samples were collected during the pump test and sent to Evergreen Analytical Laboratory for analysis. The lab tests included analyses for total coliform bacteria, various volatile and synthetic compounds, inorganic chemicals, radiological properties, nitrate/nitrite, total dissolved solids (TDS) and some of the physical properties of the water. All of the lab results have been received. From the lab results obtained from Evergreen Analytical, it was determined that the total coliform bacteria were found to be absent. The results from the volatile compounds were undetectable, except for methylene chloride which was found to be 1.2 micrograms per liter (Ng/1). All other potential contaminant analyses were well below the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) as established by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. The lab results (attached) indicated that the water quality from the Red Butte Ranch Well #1 is generally good. The only cause for concern would be the detection of methylene chloride. There is no established MCL for this contaminant and it is possible that its detection was caused by a sampling or laboratory error. At the low level of 1.2 pg/1 (1 pg/I = 1 part per billion) it is believed that the methylene chloride does not present an immediate threat to human health. However, at some point, it is recommended that the water be retested for methylene chloride. The results from the radiological testing are also attached. All of the radiological parameters that were tested yielded results that are below the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) as established by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Summary In summary it appears that, based on the pumping data, Red Butte Ranch Well #1 could provide an adequate physical volume of in-house water for four residences on Lots 1 and 2 and the open space parcel for Red Butte Ranch. A storage tank may be needed to supply peak demand:. The water level of the aquifer needs to be monitored over the long term. The well is located in such a position that it may be dependent upon irrigation water from the mesa to the east as its source of recharge. Continued irrigation of the historic field is recommended. The time period in which the well was tested should be near the lowest aquifer level. Other wells in this area have demonstrated seasonal fluctuations in water level and production. 2 MAR.24.2005 3:46PM DESIGN WORKSHOP If you have any questions, please call our office at (970) 945-5700. Very truly yours, Zancanella and Associates, Inc. T omas A. Za;ncanella, P.E. Bradley C.;k, Geologist Attachments cc: Kevin Patrick ZA24000124217 Hurst Propert)ARed Butte Well 1 Pump Test Rept revised.doc NO. 519 P. 5 MAR. 24. 2005 3:45PM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO.519 P. 2 Design Workshop, Inc. Landscape Architecture Land Planning Urban Design Strategic Services Transmittal To: Carla Block, Pitkin County Environmental Health Department; Jim Austin, Pitkin County Building Department From: Chris Kiley Date: March 24, 2005 Project Name: durst Ranch Project #: 3393 Subject: Well Pump Test Report - REVISED Copy To: Fred Smith The following items arc transmitted? Herewith lr— S^parate Cover r As Requested T— For Review r— For Files F For Approval 'j— For Information uantit : Description: 1 Hurst Ranch Well #1 Pump Test Report from Zancanella and Associates dated March 11, 2005. Revised March 23, 2005 Remarks: The Hurst Ranch Well #1 Pump Test Report has been revised by Zancanella and Associates to correct a text error — the original version incorrectly stated in the Summary section that the development would be served by both Well #1 and the original Red Butte Ranch well, when in fact Well #1 alone is sufficient to serve the development. Method of transmittal: DESIGNW4"R%JT7%.-SHOP Asheville • Aspen - Denver • Phoenix - Salt Lake City • Santa Fe - Tahoe - Santiago • Sao Paulo 120 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 • (tel) 970-925-8354 • (fax) 970-920-1387 www. designworkshop.com F TROJECTS A•L\3393-Hurst Rang A. General Administration\Cotzespondcnce\Pitkin County\TR_050324 PitCo_welI rest report revised.doc MAR,24.2005 3 45PM DESIGN WORKSHOP Design Workshop, Inc. Landscape Architecture Land Planning Urban D5sign Strategic Services NO. 519 P. 1 Facsimile Transmittal To: CAY4A From: Date: 0"� - V� • O Fax Number: '�TX • Sp77 Project Name: fvF�51- ?Af� Project #: Subject: Copy To: Number of Pages: (including this page) PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL This facsimile transmission (and/or accompanying documents) may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or the cntity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone to arrange for return of the documents DESIGNWORKSHOP Asheville • Aspen • Denver - Park City - Phoenix • Santa Fe • Tahoe - Santiago - Sao Paulo 120 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 • (tel) 970-925-8354 • (fax) 970-920-1387 www.designworkshop.com C DQcumewi and Settings\ludytDesktop\Facsimile Ttansmittal.doc MAR.24.2005 3:41IPM DESIGN WORKSHOP TABLE 1 Pump Test Data Well ID: Red Butte Ranch - Ranch House Well Job No.: 24217 Client: Hurst Test By: Samuelson Analysis i9y. TWz M.P. = Top of Casing NO. 519 P. 1 Q = 20 gpm r� n S.W.L. = 10.2 ft b= ft Time/Date on: 2/8/05 9*40 AM Time/Date off: 2/9/05 9:40 AM Test Length: 24:00;00 total ;ime 3/912005 Zancanella 3 Associates. Inc. Ranch House Well Pump Test As Figure 2 Pumping Test - 218/05 Red Butte Ranch - Ranch Nouse Well 1 10 inn Tlmw ImIn1 . ., 0 ti..��..� I,vuu 10,000 100,000 2 4 8 8 10 Stella Water leve! a 10.18 ft � 12 0 = 20 m thra hoot tett . Sllght Reco7OY=&r-Nlg=hl- 14 d J en 16 3 18 20- 22 ' 24 26 28 30 319!2005 Zancanella S Aswlales, tnc. stench Nouse WeN Pump Tesixfs IMM Figure 3 Recovery Following 24 Hour Pumping Test • 219106 Red Butte Ranch - Ranch House Well Rarnvarw sba Residual i'1rsu.d.....-- ... ■r■M■+r yrq�l(yVYYI1 0 10 100 VC 1,000 10,000 400,000 d d � J U :a N C L LL 2 dmf LL S 3 j 4 ; ! W2005 tencanelle & Assocleles, Inc. Rlnoh House Well Pump Tsel.xfs MAR. 24. 2005 3:48PM DESIGN WORKSHOP MAR ;NO. 51915 P. 11 �. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment 4' Compliance Assurance & Data Management Unit Fr,", -RM, � RADIONUCLME ANALYSIS Colorado D r andksntoaaunr dEn iSampler: Please Complete a Separate Form for Tach Sample Are these results to be used to fulfill compliance monitoring requirements? YES ®or NO Q Is this a check or confirmation sample? ❑ YES ® NO PWSID: _ COUNTY Garfield DATE COLLECTED. 02 / 09 / 2005 SYSTEM NAME: Hurst Ranch SYSTEM MAILING ADDRESS: c/o Zancnneila & Assts.. 1005 Cooper Ave. Glenwood Springs CO 81601 SueendaryNPO Ban CRY STA"M 21p CONTACT PERSON: Bradley Peek PHONE: L 970) 945 5700 SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: Bradley Peek TIME COLLECj ED: 1000 MOM ENTRY PONT (Finished Water) SAMPLE ❑ SOURCE WATER (Raw Water) SAMPILE ❑ FOR ENTRY PONT SAMPLE PLEASE INDICATE: Chlorinated ❑ Other Treatment ❑ Finished — Not Treated (No chlorine or other treatment) ❑ STATE ENTRY POINTCODE: EP SOURCE(S) REPRESENTED: Hurst Railch Well ! DO SAir'IPLES NEED TO BE COMPOSIT ED BY THE LABORATORY? ! YES ❑ NO For Laboratory Use Onty Below This zine LABORATORY SAMPLE # B216/05-1 CLIENT NAME or ID# LABORATORY NAME: Hazen Research, Xnc- LAB PHONE # 303 279 4501 DATE RECEFVED IN LABORATORY- 02/11/2005 COMNQxrS: PARAMETER RESULT UNITS MCL STANDARD LAB MDL REGULATORY DATE METHOD MDL ANALYZED Gross Alpha 4.0.3.0 pCi/L 15 pCi/L EPA 900.0 1.9 pCi/L 3 pCi/L 03/02/2005 Radium 226 0.2.:0.3 pCi/LRa-226+228= SM 7500 -Ra 8 0.1 pCi/L 1 pCi/L 02/28/2005 5 Ci/L Radium ZZS 0.7� 0.7 pCi/L Ra -226+228= 5 Ci/L EPA Ra -OS 0.7 pCi/1. 1 p OIL 02123/2005 Uranium ug/L 30 4g/L ASTM D2907-91 pg/L 1 pg/L Screening 1.6;;2.2 pCi/L Trigger level = EPA 900.0 2.1 pCi/L 4 pCi/L 03/02/2005 Gross Beta50 Ci/L Total Solids 237 mg/L m� . 500 EPA 160.3 10 mg/L N/A 02/18/2005 Radon 93 t40 pCi/L SM 7500 -Rn B 1 14 pCi/L 02 /11/2005 Level — Non -enforceable Stnndard Laboratory Rcsults Reviewed & Approved by Title MAIL RESULTS TO: CDPHE, WQCD-CADM FAR: 303-78 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80246-1530 For 51we U c ONLY Compliance Alpha Combined Radium -226+228 Urn Date VAR, 24, 2003 3:40M DESIGN WORKSHOP j N0. 519 P. 11 1 d � t♦� i n d u s t r i a l LABORATORIES Industrial Laboratories is your Independent, third party analytical testing laboratory To: Evergreen Analytical TEST REP'PRT 4036 Y•oungfie:ld EV 1601 1, Date Received! 2/10/2005 Wheat Ridge CO 80033-3862 Date Reported 2/11/2005 Attn: Carl Smits PO Number: 3662 Note: Sample test procedures conform to EPA 40CFR141 requirements. Test Analysis Lab No. Sample Description Method Result Un}ts MDL Date/$y 050210018-OIA 05 -0924 -OIG Total Coliform Absent I GH SM 9223 2/10/2005 = Scope'Analysis # = Subco «acted Analysis MDL - M thod Detection Limit /f ND — Not elected at the Method Detection Limit U// '��✓ Page: t of 1 Department Manar 4046 Youngfield St. • EuRidge,Coloreco80033 ;303/ :i7 %ti9t (303',287-09A4 F x • www.industriallabs.ns* RSC@<p[ Or J�Jly;i; oar•,ieaS.iCknpwlCd;@, i�C :?r, -c and ,.•4:aln•, .,'•. 2 ��•v? ;d sitf�ane ACanpirr;!t�<<. ;hot 'hoy ,l•B par: Jf d•r. bidet This report is not to he eproduced in whale w in : Cvern; ng purposes withqut nvwrnin•t riot writtsr ),atiorizatipn. I MAR.24.2005 3:49PM DESIGN WORKSHOP 4036 YoungG�d Street.Evergreen Ridge, Analytical, 60033.3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Wcll Client Project ID: 24217 Date Collected: 2/9/2005 Date Received: 2/10/2005 Date Prepared: 2/17/2005 Date Analyzed: 2/17/2005 Percent Moisrure: NA Method: E524,2 Prep Method: SW5030A Analvres 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 1,1,2-Triehloroed me 1,1-Didiloroethcae 1, 2,4-Trichlorobe n2ene 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene j NO. 519 P. 13 Lab Work Ordo#: 05-0924 Lab Sample M: I 05-0924.OIA Sample Matrix: I Drinking Water Lab File ID: \VOA40217\1301013.D Method Blank: 88021705 Prep Factor: Dilution Factor: 1.000 1.00 VOLATILE COMPOUNDS 524.2 :AS Number Result 71-55-0 U 79-00-5 U 75-35-4 U 120-82-1 U 95-50.1 U Units: yeL LQL 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1,2-Diehloroethane 107-06.2 U 0.50 1,2-Dichloroprvpane 78.87-5 Ti 0.50 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 10646-7 U 0.50 Benzene 71-43.2 U 0.50 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5 U 0.50 Chlorobenzme 108-90.7 U 0.50 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 156-59-2 U 0.50 £thyllsomene 100-41-4 U 0.50 Methylene chloride 75-09-2 1.2 0.50 Styrene 100.42.5 U 0.50 Tetrachloroelhene 127.18-4 U 0.50 Toluene 108-88.3 U 0.50 tracts-1.2-Diehloroethene 156-60-5 U 0.50 Trichloroethene 79-01.6 U 0.50 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 U 0.50 Xylenes, Total I330-20.7 U 0.50 Surr: 1,2-Dichlorobenzcnad4 2199-69-1 95 QC Limits' 70.130 %REC Surr. 4-13romofiuorobenzene 460.00-4 84 OC Limits: 70.130 WUC �f- 1 Analyst Qualifiers: B - Artalyte detected in the associated Method Blank, value not subtracted from result E - Extrapolated value.Value exceeds calibration range H - Sample exceeded analytical holding tins I - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected. but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound araayzed for but not detected X - See case narrative * -Value exceeded the Maximum Corttamination Level (MCL) DeLnitions: NA - Not Applicable LQL - Lower Quantit"on Limit MDL - Method Detection Limit Surr - Surrogate Print�Date: 2/23/2005 rQ MAR.24.2005 Ii49PM DESIGN WORKSHOP N0. 519 P. 14 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Xoungrield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033=,3862 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order 05-0924 Client Project lA 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-OIR Date Collected: 2/9/05 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 2/10/05 Lab He ID: \GCMS20217UO01030D Date Prepared: 2/17/05 Method Blank: MB -6630 Date Analyzed: 2/18/05 Prep Factor: 0.001 Percent Moisture NA Dilution Factor: 1.00 Method: E525.2 ORGANIC COMPOUNDS 525.2 0.25 Prep Method: E525.2 1520-96-3 Units-• pg(L Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Alachlor 15972.60-8 U 0.25 Atrazine 1912-24-9 U 0.25 Benzo(a)pyrene 50-32-8 U 0.20 Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)adipam 103-23-1 U 0.50 Bis 2-ethvlhexvl)nhthalate 117-81-7 U 1.0 Simazine 122-34-9 U 0.25 Surr: Ferylenedl2 1520-96-3 84 QC Limits: 70-130 %REC Analyst Qua deur B - Analyte detected in the auociazed Method Blank. value not subtracted from result E - Exnpolated value. Value aatoccds calibration range H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time 1- rndicates an atimaud value when the compound is detec%4 but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See Cwc narrative . -Value exceeded the Maximum Comamumion Level (MCL) 2?;;L Approved DeSttitions. NA - Not Applicable LQL - sower Quantitation Lama MDL - Method Detection Limit Surr - Surrogate Pnnt Date: 2/1W5 MAR.24.2005 3:4�PM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO. 519 P. 15 I J o Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Youngfeld Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample Tb: 05-0924-01C Date Collected: 2/9/0.5 Sample Matrix: Drinldng Water Date Received: 2/10/D5 Lab File ID: ECD50214\026B2601 Date Prepared: 2/14/05 Method Blank: 1,.B-6606 Date Analyzed: 2/I4/05 Prep Factor: 0.057 Percent Moisture NA Dilution Factor,: 1.00 Method: E504.1 EDB/DBCP Prep Method: E504.1 Units: KV, Analytes CAS Number Result IMDL LQL 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 T) 0.02 0.05 1,2-Dibromoethane 4A)_ Analyst 106-93-4 Qualinerst B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank value not subtracted from result E - Extrapolated value.value exceeds calibration range H - Sample excoedad analytical holding time I - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - Ste ease narrative '-Value exceeded the Maxunum Contamination Level (MCL) U 0.01 0.05 Approved DennWons: NA -Not Applicable, LQL - Lower Quautitution Limit biDL - Method Detection Liout Surr - Sunogste Print Date: 2115105 MAR.24.2005 3:40M DESIGN WORKSHOP NO.519 P. 16 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Xoungrield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample M: Hum Ranch Well Lab Work Order 05-0924 Client Project ED. 24217 Lab Sample Yb: 05-0924-OID Date Collected: 21912005 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 2/10/2005 Lab File XD: ' ECD10215\011F Date Prepared: 2/15/2005 Method Blank: MB -6616 Date Analyzed: 2/15/2005 Prep Factor: 0.005 Percent Moisture NA Dilution Factor: 1.00 Method: E508 0.010 CHLORINATED PESTICIDES AND PCBS Prep Method: E508 1024-57-3 Units: µg/L Analytes 0.010 CAS Number Result MDL LQL Aldrin 309-00-2 U 0.010 0.010 g -BHC 58-89-9 U 0.010 0.010 a -Chlordane 5103-71-9 U 0.010 0.010 9 -Chlordane 5103-74-2 U 0.010 0.010 Dieldrin 60-57-1 U 0.010 0.010 Endrin 72-20-8 U '0.010 0.010 14CCPD 77-47-4 U 0.050 0.050 Heptachlor 76-44-8 U 0.010 0.010 Heptachlor epoxide 1024-57-3 U 0.010 0.010 Hexacitlorobenzene 118-74-1 U 0.010 0.010 Methoxychlor 7243-5 U 0.050 0.050 Toxaphene 8001-35-2 U 0.50 0.50 Chlordane 57-74-9 U 0.20 0.25 Aroclor 1016 12674-11-2 U 0.080 0.25 Aroclor 1221 11104-28-2 U 0.25 0.25 Aroclor 1232 11141-16-5 U 0.25 0.25 Aroclor 1242 53469-21-9 U '0.25 0.25 Aroclor 1248 12672-29-6 U 0.10 0.25 Aroclor 1254 Azoclor 1260 11097-69-1 11096-82-5 U U 0.10 0.20 0.25 0.25 PCBs, Total 1336-36-3 U 0.25 0.25 Surr- TCMX 877-09-8 67S QC Limits: 70-130 %RBC Surr- DCB 2051-24-3 89 QC Limits: 70-130 %REC Analyst Quntiflem B . Analyte datected in the associated Method Blank, value not subtracted from result E - Extrapolated valua.Value exceeds calibration range ii - Sample exceeded analytical holding rime 1- bndicxm an a t imated value when the compound is deterred, but is below the LQL S . Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detacted X - See case natrative *.Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Approved Detlnibiam: NA -Not Applicable LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit MDL - Method Detection Limit Surr - Surrogate Print Date: V17/2005 VAR, 24. 2005 3.49P'V DESIGN WORKSHOP NO. 519 P. 17 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Xoungfield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ED: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-OIE Date Collected: 2/9/05 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 21101,05 Lab File ID: ECD50211\075B7501 Date Prepared. 2/11:/05 Method Blank-, MB -6599 Date Analyzed: 2/12/05 Prep Factor: 0.100 Percent Moisture NA Dilution Factor: 1.00 Method: E515.4 CHLORINATED HERBICIDES Prep Method: E515A 'Units: µg/L Analytes CAS Number Restdt MDL LQL 2,4-D 94-75-7 U 0.37 1.1 Dicamba 1918-00-9 U 0.90 0.90 Dalapon 75-99-0 U 1.0 2.8 Dinoseb 88-85-7 U 0.40 3.6 Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 U 0,26 0.80 Picloram 1918-02-1 U 0.51 1.6 2,4,5 -TP (Silver) 93-72-1 U 0.20 0.80 Stun DCAA 19719-28-9 1I0 QC Limits: 70-130 °/oREC )K(k) Analyst Qualifiers: B - Analyte demeted in the usociatod Method Blank, value not subu=wd from rcauit E - Extrapolated valucNalue exceeds calibration range H - Sample executed analytiC.tl holding time I - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed fbr but not detected X - See case narrative • -value exceeded the Mw6mum Contamination Level (MCL) (-2- Approved Definitions: NA - Not Applicable LQL - Lowcr Quantitation Limit MDL - Method Detection Limit Surf - Surrogau Print Date: 2113/05 MAR.24.2005 3:50M DESIGN WORKSHOP NO. 519 P. 18 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Youngfield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order: 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-01 Date Collected. 2/9/0:5 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 2/10/05 CARBAMATES Method: E531.1 Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/23/05 Lab File TD: 6 Dilution Factor: 1 Date Analyzed: 2/23/05 Method Blank: MBLK Lab Fraction )<D: 05-0924-OIF Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units 3-Hydroxycarbofuran 16655-82-6 U 0.50 µg2 Aldicarb 116-06-3 U 0.50 pg/L Aldicarb sulfone 1646-88-4 U 0.50 µg2 Aldicarb sulfoxide 1646-87-3 U 0.50 µg2 Carbaryl 63-25-2 U 0.50 µg2 Carbofuran 1563-66-2 U 0.50 µg/L Methiocarb 2032-65-7 U 1.0 µg/L Methomyl 16752-77-5 U 0.50 µg/L Oxamyi 23135-22-0 U 0.50 µg/L Propoxur 114-26-1 U 0.50 µg2 11��_ Analyst Qualitterst B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank, value not subtracted from result Definitions: NA - Not Applicable E - Extrapolated value. Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Surr - surrogate J - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits 1.1- Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See case narrative • -Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date, 2124/05 MAR -24.2005 3:54PM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO. 519 P. 19 .:.'a Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 YoungReld Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303) 425-6021 Client Sample ID Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order 05-0924 Client Project ID 24217 Lab Sample 1D: 05-0924-OIH Date Collected: 2/9/05 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 2/10/05 Lab File JD: \GCMS202M3201032-D Date Prepared: 2/14/05 Method Blank: MB -6607 Date Analyzed: 2/15/05 Prep Factor: 0.100 Percent Moisture NA Dilution Factor: 1.00 Method: E548.1 ENDOTHALL 548.1 Prep Method: IE548-1 Units: Rg/L Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Endothall 145-73-3 U 40 r1lJC�L1., Analyst VApproved QuaIIScrs: 8 - Analytc duacud in the auociat ed Method Blank. value not subtracted from result DefuOons: NA - Not Applicable E - Extrapolaud value. Valuc cnmacds calibruion range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit H - Sample execoded analytical holding time MDL - Method Detection Limit J - Indicans an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL Surr - Surrogate S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See cast nafmve • -Vaiuc exceeded -he Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: 2115105 MAR.24.2005 3:50PM DESIGN WORKSHOP Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 'Youngfield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303)425-6021 No. 519 P. 20 Client Project ID 24217 Lab Order: 05-0924 Collection Date: 2/9/05 Date Received: 2/10/05 Units: ug/L Diquat Method: E549.2 Prep Method: E549.2 Date Date Lab ID Client M Matrix Prepared Analyzed Results LQL DF 05-0924-011 Burst kartch Well Drinking Water 2/14/05 2/15/05 U 1.0 1 Comments Analyst RA Approved ^Qualifiers: I - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL Definitions: DF - Dilution Factor U - Compound analyzed for but nor detected LQL -Lower Quantitation Limit X - See case narrative Print Date: 2/16/05 MAR, 24. 2005 3:50PM DESIGN WORKSHOP N0. 519 P. 21 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 'Youngffeld Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ID: Timst Ranch Well ,Lab Work Order: 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-01 Date Collected: 2/9/05 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received; 2/10/05 Method: E300 Date Prepared: 2/10/05 Date Analyzed: 2/10/05 Analytes Nitrite -N Nitrate -N Nitrite+Nitrate-N Sulfate ANIONS BY IC Method Blank: NM-RI5217 CAS Number 14808-79-8 Prep Method: Dilution Factor: 1 Analyst Approved Qualifiers: 5 - Analyte deteettA in the associated Method Blank• value not subtracted from result Definitions. NA- Not Applicable E - Extrapolated value.Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Surr - Surrogate 7 - Indicates an est:!mated value when the compound is dcwcwd, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See case narrative • -Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: 2/11/05 Lab Fraction ID: 05-0924-01 J Result LQL Units U 0.076 mg/L 0.569 0.056 tng/L 0.569 0.076 mgt 30.4 0.50 mg/L Analyst Approved Qualifiers: 5 - Analyte deteettA in the associated Method Blank• value not subtracted from result Definitions. NA- Not Applicable E - Extrapolated value.Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Surr - Surrogate 7 - Indicates an est:!mated value when the compound is dcwcwd, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See case narrative • -Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: 2/11/05 MAR. 24, 2005 315OPM DESIGN WORKSHOP N0. 519 P. 22 ..w t•ti, Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Youngfield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033,3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order: 05-0924 Client Project ID: 2421-7 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-01 Date Collected: 2/9/05 Sample Matrix: Driaking Water Date Received: 2/10/05 ALKALINITYMethod: SM2320B Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/15/05 Lab File ID: 7 Dilution Factor: 1 Date Analyzed: 2/15/05 Method Blank: MRLK Lab Fraction ID: 05-0924-OIN Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Total Alkalinity 180 5.0 mg/L CaCO3 TOTAL CYANIDE Method: SM4500-CN E Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/22/05 Lab File ID: 3 Dilution Factor: 1 Date Analyzed: 2/22/05 Method Blank: MBLK Lab Fraction ID: 05 -0924 -OIL Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Total Cyanide U 0.010 mpJL FLUORIDE Method: SM 4500-F C Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/18/05 Lab File ID: 14 Dilution Factor: I Date Analyzed: 2/18/05 Method Blank: MBLK Lab Fraction ID: 05.0924-OIK Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Fluoride 16984-48-8 0.40 0.40 MR/T. LANGELIER INDEX Method: SM2330B Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/23/05 Dilution Factor: 1 Date Analyzed: 2/23/05 Lab Fraction ID: 05-0924-OIN Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Langelier Index +0.083 li Analyst Approved Qualifiers- 8 - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank, value nor subwacted from result DeBnitions: NA- Not Applicable E - Extrapolated vallue.Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Surr - Surrogate J - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits V - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See cue narrative • -Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: 2/23/05 MAR.24.2005 3:5JPM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO.519 P. 23 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Youugfield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303)425-6021 Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order: 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-01 Date Collected: 219/01; Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Datc Received: 2/10/05 Method: E150.1 PH Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/10/05 Dilution Factor: I Date Analyzed: 2110105 Lab Fraction ID: 05-0924-OIN Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units PH 7.52 1.00 pH Units TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (TDS) Method; SM 2540C Prep Method: Date Prepared: 2/14/05 Lab File ID: 9 Dilution Factor: I Date Analyzed: 2/15/05 Method Blank: NMLK Lab Fraction LD: 05-0924-01N Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Total Dissolved Solids 250 10.0 mg/L Analyst Qmlirters-- B - Analyte detected in the associated Method Blank, value not subtracted from result Defisi ions: NA - Not Applicable E - Extrapolawd value.Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitation Limit Ii - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Surr - Surrogate - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside accepted limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X - See case narrati,•-e • -Value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: 2/23/05 MAR -24.2005 3:51PM DESIGN WORKSHOP NO. 519 P. 24 Evergreen Analytical, Inc. 4036 Youn,gtield Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-3862 (303) 425-6021 -— Client Sample ID: Hurst Ranch Well Lab Work Order: 05-0924 Client Project ID: 24217 Lab Sample ID: 05-0924-01 Date Collected: 2/9105 Sample Matrix: Drinking Water Date Received: 2/10/05 200.8 TOTAL RECOVERABLE METALS Method: E200.8 Prep Method: E200.8 _ Date Prepared: 2/14/05 Lab File ID: 050215A.BW2SMPL.D Dilution Factor: 1 Date Analyzed: 2/15/05 Method Blank: MB -6603 Lab )Fraction ID: 05-0924-01M Analytes CAS Number Result LQL T Units Antimony 7440-36-0 U 0.0050 mg/L Arsenic 7440-38-2 U 0.0020 mg/L Barium 7440-39-3 0.23 0.025 mg/L Beryllium 7440-41-7 U 0.00]0 mg/L Cadmium 7440.43-9 U 0.0010 mg/L Calcium 7440-70-2 56 0.40 mg/L. Chromium 7440-47-3 U 0.0060 mg/L Nickel 7440-02-0 U 0.060 m;/L Selenium 7782-49-2 U 0.0020 mg/L Sodium 7440-23-5 7.4 0.16 mg/L Thallium 7440-28-0 U 0,0010 mg/L Uranium 7440-61-1 0.0021 0.0010 mg/L MERCURY 245.1 DRINKING WATER Method: E245.1 Prep Method: E245.1 Date Prepared. 2/I 1/05 Lab File ID: _ 05021102 Dilution Factor: I Date Analyzed: 2/11/05 Method Blank: MB -6594 Lab Fraction ID: 05-0924-OIM Analytes CAS Number Result LQL Units Mercury 7439-97-6 U 0.00010 mg/L Analyst Approved Qualifiers: B - Analyte detected in the associated Method 61ank, value not subtracted from result Delmitioni: NA -Not Applicable E - Extrapolated volue.Value exceeds calibration range LQL - Lower Quantitution Limit H - Sample exceeded analytical holding time Star - Surrogute J - Indicates an estimated value when the compound is detected, but is below the LQL S - Spike Recovery outside occepxd limits U - Compound analyzed for but not detected X -See case narrative * -value exceeded the Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) Print Date: Z/18105 MEMORANDUM To: Ellen Sassano, Community Development Dept. From: Betsey Kipp, Environmental Health Dept. Date: March 29, 2005 Re: Red Butte Ranch Parcel 1 Subdivision Conceptual Parcel ID # 2643-354-00-001 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the details of the Red Butte Ranch Parcel 1 Subdivision Conceptual application under the authority of the Pitkin County Code,Title II, Land Use Code and has the following comments. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Sections 2-170 and 3-110.4: "It is the policy of the County to insure the availability of a water supply of adequate quality, quantity, pressure and dependability for fire protection and support of a proposed land use prior to approval of the use. The County shall require land uses to hook up to existing public systems if service is available." This Department. will need information on the quantity and the quality of water available once the wells have been drilled. This can be done by a water engineer's or well driller's report. This Department will need to determine that the wells for the two proposed parcels will provide enough domestic water for the main residence and a caretaker unit. The applicant must ensure that the water quality is acceptable by having a standard bacteriological water sample taken and the results submitted to this Department: before a permit for a sewage disposal system can be issued. Water bottles are available in this Department. Snowmass Water and Sanitation District or Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District can perform the laboratory test once the sample is delivered to their facility. The well must be drilled before the septic system is installed to assure that setback requirements from the well to the sewage disposal system can be maintained. Pitkin County Land Use Code requires that the well site be located within the building envelope. A condition of approval will be the receipt of information documenting that the location of the well(s) meet setback requirements and can be placed within the building envelope and that the quantity/quality of the well water is adequate. Without meeting these requirements a sewage disposal system permit and building permit can not be issued. SEWAGE TREATME14T AND COLLECTION: Sections 2-180 and 3-110.5: "It is the policy of the County to ensure that adequate sewage treatment facilities are available to serve existing and new developments. Public and private sewage disposal systems and connections to such systems shall comply with the sewage disposal guidelines of Pitkin County's Individual Sewage Disposal System Regulation." Lots in the McLain Flats area are served by individual sewage disposal systems. Although the possibility of connecting the homesites to the city's sewer system was explored, the report from Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. concluded that the closest connection point is 1/2 mile away near Stein Park and would not be financially feasible. Therefore, waste disposal must be handled by an individual sewage disposal system for the residences. All such systems installed within Pitkin County require septic permits issued by the Environmental Health Department, and must comply with the County's sewage disposal regulations. To receive a septic permit, the applicant will need to submit a septic permit application and appropriate fee with a completed Soil Data Form including percolation test results and profile hole information. It must be possible to design an adequate sewage disposal system before a building permit can be issued. The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department will design the system for the applicant as part of the permit fee, if an engineered system is not required. We will do a site visit, advise the applicant about the best location for the system and provide a system design. We will determine if an engineered system is needed based on soil test results. An engineered system is required if any one of the following conditions exists: a percolation rate faster than 5 mpi or slower than 60 mpi; maximum seasonal level of the groundwater table or bedrock less than four feet below the bottom of the proposed absorption system; or a slope in excess of 30%. Prior to initiating any tests at the site, the applicant should contact this office. The applicant will need to adhere to minimum horizontal setback requirements for placement of septic system components. The leach field will need to be! located a minimum of 100 feet from the applicant's well and from any neighboring wells. Setbacks from the irrigation ditches and the reservoir will have to be maintained. A complete list of required setbacks from the sewage disposal system will be provided by this Department. A property owner should be aware that a 5 -bedroom home with an attached caretaker unit and a living space in excess of 6000 square feet will require approximately 1710 square feet of leach field area. This is assuming a favorable percolation rate of 20 minutes per inch. Design of the home and placement on the lot should take this into consideration. Clarification <<lso needs to be made whether the sewage disposal system is required to be within the building envelope. A condition of approval will be the receipt and approval of the sewage disposal permit by the Environmental Health Department before a :building permit can be issued. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Sections 2-140 and 3-70.5 and 3-70.10: "It is the policy of the County to preserve and protect its present water resources, recognizing the County's semi -arid character and that significant transmountain and transbasin diversions and the vested rights of senior appropriators in the basin have materially curtailed the availability of an already scarce water resource. To this end it is the policy of the County that no land use be initiated which would adversely affect the quantity, quality, or accessibility of the County's water resources; or which would occur at the expense of established water -dependent agricultural activities; or which would result in increased salinization of water resources, loss of minimum stream flows, further destruction of wildlife habitat, or major expenditures to reacquire or redistribute major water resources. It is also the policy of the County to maintain a natural vegetative buffer along its surface waters such that the surface and groundwaters of the area are not encroached upon by land uses or other human activities which could cause deterioration of water quality or impair the natural treatment processes provided by meadows and wetlands." The Environmental Health Department is charged with preserving and protecting the quality of Pitkin County's water resources. Since a large percentage of the population is dependent upon water from wells, elimination of groundwater pollution, and protection of aquifers and their drainage areas are of utmost importance. Roofs and asphalt driveways can be nonpoint sources of water discharge which can contaminate water supplies. This Department recommends that nonpoint sources of discharge must be retained on the property of origin which can be accomplished through landscaping, drainage patterns, detention ponds, and dry wells for water runoff from buildings. Surface water and groundwater contamination can also be caused by inadequate setback distances from sewage disposal systems to proximate wells, rivers, creeks, ponds, and reservoirs. Minimum horizontal distances between components of a sewage disposal system and physical features must be in accordance with the Pitkin County Sewage Regulation. There is no condition of approval related to water quality. AIR QUALITY: Sections 2-130 and 3-602: "Only that development is permitted which will not contribute significantly to degradation of air quality." The report from Schmueser Gordon Meyer has indicated that the proposal for Parcel 1 will increase traffic volume 2.1% According to our calculations, 14 vehicle trips per day will have to be mitigated. The applicant is required to propose mitigation measures to offset that increase. A condition of approval should be: "prior to detailed submission, the applicant must provide a PMlo mitigation program containing specific, enforceable control measures. The plan must be approved by the Environmental Health Department. The plan must include documentation showing that the proposed measures will fully mitigate or offset all PMlo increases caused by the project in the nonattainment area." As the applicant has acknowledged, activities such as road building and landscaping will require a Fugitive Dust Plan. This plan would need to include, but is not limited to, fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. A condition should be approval by the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health DEspartment of the fugitive dust control plan, containing enough measures to ensure that dust does not become a nuisance or blow onto adjacent property. The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Environmental Health Department before the building permit will be issued. Metropolitan areas of Pitkin County which includes this site may have two devices: either two gas log fireplaces, two certified clean -burning woodstoves, or one of each. Each building may also have unlimited numbers of decorative gas appliances. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. No wood burning device may be installed in barns or agricultural buildings. A condition of approval for this application is the receipt and approval of the fireplace/woodstove permit by the Environmental Health Department before the building permit can be issued. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: Section 2-70: "It is the policy of the County to ensure that no use or development of land is permitted which is in violation of the laws of the County, the State of Colorado, or the United States of America." This Department: is not aware of any issues of concern regarding other environmental health laws. Information on Toxic Chemicals State of Wisconsin Also known as: Dichloromethane, Methane dichloride, Methylene dichloride Chemical reference number (CAS): 75-09-2 WHAT IS METHYLENE CHLORIDE? Methylene chloride is a clear, non-flammable liquid with a sweet, pleasant odor. It's primarily used as paint remover, industrial solvent, and grain fumigant. In the home, methylene chloride may be an ingredient in paint removers and in fire extinguishers. You may find methylene chloride (or one of the other names listed above) in the ingredient label of these products. Methylene chloride will not remain in the food chain; sunlight will break down the compound when released into the air. If methylene chloride is placed in a landfill or discharged to soil, it can seep into groundwater and contaminate nearby wells. HOW ARE PEOPLE EXPOSED TO METHYLENE CHLORIDE? Breathing: Most cases of human exposure to methylene chloride occur when people breathe vapors from paint strippers. Work only in well - ventilated areas if working with with methylene chloride. When household water becomes contaminated, people can inhale vapors while showering, laundering, and cooking. When methylene chloride is used near an open flame, poisonous "phosgene" gas can be created. Phosgene can cause permanent lung damage at low levels. Drinking/Eating: People can be exposed when they drink contaminated water or when they use it for preparing food. Touching: Methylene chloride can be absorbed through the skin, but this is a minor route of exposure. DO STANDARDS EXIST FOR REGULATING METHYLENE CHLORIDE? Water. The drinking water standards for methylene chloride is set at 5 parts per billion (ppb). We suggest you stop drinking water containing more than 5 ppb of methylene chloride. If levels of methylene chloride are high in your water (above 500 ppb), you may need to avoid washing, bathing, or using the water for other purposes. Contact your local public health agency for more information specific to your situation. Air: No standards exist for the amount of methylene chloride allowed in the air of homes. We use a formula to convert workplace limits to suggested home limits. Based on the formula, we recommend levels of methylene chloride in air be no higher than 0.5 part per million (ppm). Most people can't can smell methylene chloride until the level reaches 300 ppm. If you can smell the chemical, the level is too high to be safe. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources regulates the amount of methylene chloride that can be released by industries. WILL EXPOSURE TO METHYLENE CHLORIDE RESULT IN HARMFUL HEALTH EFFECTS? The following symptoms may occur immediately or shortly after exposure to levels of methylene chloride at or above 300 ppm in air: Increased levels of carbon monoxide in the blood which may cause fatigue, shortness of breath or chest pain; Drowsiness, headache, a feeling of being "drunk," and Eye, skin and lung irritation. These symptoms will disappear shortly after exposure stops. The following health effects can happen after several years of exposure to methylene chloride: Cancer. Laboratory animals have developed cancer after long-term exposures to methylene chloride. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers methylene chloride to be a "probable" human carcinogen. Reproductive Effects: Animal studies have shown no damage to reproductive systems or developing unborn babies. Organ Systems: Since methylene chloride changes to carbon monoxide in the body, it can damage the heart and nervous system. In general, chemicals affect the same organ systems in all people who are exposed. However, the seriousness of the effects may vary from person to person. A person's reaction depends on several things, including individual health, heredity, previous exposure to chemicals including medicines, and personal habits such as smoking or drinking. It is also important to consider the length of exposure to the chemical; the amount of chemical exposure; and whether the chemical was inhaled, touched, or eaten. CAN A MEDICAL TEST DETERMINE EXPOSURE TO METHYLENE CHLORIDE? Exposure to high levels of methylene chloride will temporarily increase carbon monoxide (carboxyhemoglobin) in the blood and may affect liver function. Levels of carboxyhemoglobin are usually higher in people who smoke. Methylene chloride can be measured in urine or exhaled breath shortly after exposure. Although the tests can be used to confirm exposure, they may not predict future health problems. Seek medical advice if you have any symptoms that you think may be related to chemical exposure. This fact sheet summarizes information about this chemical and is not a complete listing of all possible effects. It does not refer to work exposure or emergency situations. FOR MORE INFORMATION Poison Control Center, 800-815-8855 Your local public health agency Division of Public Health, BEH, 1 West Wilson Street, Rm. 150, Madison, WI 53701-2659, (608) 266-1120 or Internet: http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/eh DHFS Prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services Division of Public Health with funds from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (POH 4348 Revised 12/2000) jima@co.pitkin.co.us, Red Butte/Hurst con'd To: jima@co.pitkin.co.us From: Nancy MacKenzie <nancym@co.pitkin.co.us> Subject: Red Butte/Hurst con'd Cc: Bcc: Attached: Another requirement before issuance of a building permit: Sunny Vann agreed to a PM10 mitigation measure for these lots (letter I have dated July 2, 1997). A cash contribution of $11,200 per lot is required before issuance of the building permit. The funds are to be earmarked for trail easement acquisition &/or construction. - - -'y r• - ;ted � - - ••2 I 1 J' C40�,� Printed for Nancy MacKenzie <nancym@co.pitldn.co.us> Red Butte Ranch/Hurst development 2643-354-00-001 3/29/05 From Nancy MacKenzie Notes after reviewing water data. They want to build on Lots 1,2,3(open space lot). There is supposedly an existing sewer line they will hook up to and Well #1 is supposed to be adequate for the development SEWER: Need a letter of intent to serve from ACSD. Water: Well permit( 050730) is for four habitable buildings and only for inside use. How many lots/residences are to be served by this well? (main ranch residence, guest house, garage with apartment, ranch manager residence. ) sounds like the proposal is to use it for 2 lots and many residences How many taps on the well or people served? Should it be state permitted? 24 hour pump test — is this long enough Zancanella said that well might be recharged by the ranch irrigation of the historic field. What irrigation practices are planned. Keep in mind that some of the lots will have septic systems and cann't irrigated over those area. Zancanella recommends a storage tank to handle peak demands. Is this planned. Methylene chloride a possible concern. 1.2 micrograms per liter which is above the MCL maximum contaminant levels. Wisc suggest you stop drinking water containing more than 5 ppb. If above 500 ppm should wash or bath with the water. What is the conversion from microgram/liter to ppb?? Air Mitigation requirement met? P.O. 6`ox 1908 -- �� (970) 945-5700 1005 Cooper Ave. (970) 945-1253 Pax Glenwood 81602 ings 7ZZ4NCANI5LLA 4Nn 4550llnw S, INC. EMCINEEnING CONSULT4NT5 June 8, 2004 PROJECT # CF# lr'QA tO' KEY: H%PC Lv-, , lDr' Mr. Kevin L. Patrick Patrick, Miller & Kropf, P. C. 730 E. Durant Street, Suite 200 Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Hurst Well Pump Test Dear Kevin: .As you are aware, a pump test was completed May 19, 2004 by .Aqua Tec on the Hurst Well, Lot 2, Red Butte Subdivision near Aspen. The test was conducted at a rate of approximately 15 gpm. The well was pumped for a continuous period of 6 hours, as was requested in your letter of May 4, 2004, Hurst Well The Hurst Well is located on a bench overlooking he Roaring Fork River, approximately two miles northwest of Aspen in Pitkin County, Colorado. According to the well permit (#256576, attached), the well is situated 750 feet from the north section line and 2740 feet from the east section line of Section 2, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6`h P. M. The approximate location of the well is plotted on the attached Figure 1. The well was drilled by Shelton Drilling Corporation to a total depth of 140 feet and was completed on May 6, 2004. We have attached a graphical representation of the well as Figure 2, based on the driller's well completion report_ The well was drilled near the Roaring Fork River. It encountered boulders and sand lenses (Quaternary alluvial sediments) to a depth of 60 feet. There were approximately 10 feet of clays and cobbles between 60 and 70 feet depth, which represent a mixture of weathered Mancos Shale and alluvial sediments. The bottom portion of the well, between 70 feet and 140 feet consisted of the Cretaceous Mancos Shale. The perforated casing, which allows groundwater to flow into the well, was placed at a depth of 54 -- 74 feet, partially in the alluvial materials and partially in the weathered and unweathered Mancos Shale. Pump Test The data recorded during the Aqua Tec pump test and the subsequent recovery period are listed in the attached Table 1. The results of the pumping portion of the test are shown in a Z6 39vd ANHd^100 CNV HlIHS yd 2TZT8539-6 T9:90 beat/ZT/ZT water level versus time plot in Figure 3. The recovery portion is shown as residual drawdown versus time in Figure 4. The data indicate that, at the end of 6 hours of pumping, the water level had not stabilized and was continuing to draw down slowly with pumping. By projecting the line of the curve (Figure 1), it can be seen that, if the water level continues to draw down at the same slope, the water level would remain above the pump intake even after 100 days of continuous pumping. The data indicates that it is likely the well can be pumped continuously for many days at the test rate of 15 gpm. It may be necessary to install a storage tank to supply peak demand periods for a luxury home. Recovery data for the well following the pump test were collected for a 60 minute period. A follow-up well sounding was also taken approximately five days after pumping stopped. Figure 4 shows the well's recovery as residual drawdown. The graph shows that the well did not recover normally, which means that the well did not recover at the same rate that it was pumped. The abnormal recovery curve could indicate that the water was being mined from the aquifer. The well's perforations are placed above the level of the river, suggesting that the well is probably recharged by water imported for irrigation on the mesa to the northeast. Seasonal water level variations may result from this scenario. Such fluctuations cannot be estimated from the available pump test data. The well was constructed with the perforated casing partially in the Cretaceous Mancos Shale and partially in the clays overlying the Mancos. We have had experience in the past where the water level in a Mancos Shale aquifer was drawn down faster than the aquifer was able to be replenished or recharged on an annual basis. This well and other nearby wells could lower the level of the aquifer over a period of years. We recommend regular well soundings to regulate aquifer withdrawals, thereby annual recharge can be matched to the annual withdrawal from the system. Long term water withdrawals may result in a lowering of the aquifer's static water level and may effectively "mine" the aquifer. Quarterly water level soundings of the well on a regular basis would provide critical data with respect to aquifer performance and how rigorously water diversions need to be regulated. Water Quality Water samples were collected during the pump test and sent to National Testing Labs in Ohio for analysis. The tests performed were for coliform bacteria, a suite of inorganic elements, nitrate/nitrite, various organic compounds and other physical parameters of the water. Results of these analyses are attached. The results indicate that, for all the parameters tested, none of the elements and compounds were above the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLS) as established by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. However, the test for Coliform Bacteria resulted in a "Presence" reading. This means that coliform bacteria were found in the sample tested. This is not an unusual occurrence for a new well. Normally it requires that the well be disinfected and retested for coliform bacteria prior to human consumption. Pa 60 3Jyd ANydbJ00 QNV HlIHS VA 2TZT2580_G T5:50 b00Z/ZT/ZT The result of the iron analysis gave a reading of 0.44 milligrams per liter (mg/1). The recommended maximum level is 0.3 mg/I. The 0.3 mg/I level is not an MCL, but is a guideline established by the EPA for contaminants that are not known to have unfavorable health effects, but may have cosmetic or aesthetic effects (primarily staining for fixtures in this case). The lab results also state that the water's hardness is 160 mgll, which is above the suggested limit of 100 mg/I. The 160 mg/I level is not especially high for this portion of Colorado, but water softening may be desirable. Summary In summary it appears that, based on the pumping data, the well could provide an adequate physical volume of water, for a single family residence with proper management. The maximum pumping rate under the current permit is 15 gpm. A storage tank may be needed to supply peak demands. The water level of the aquifer needs to be monitored quarterly over the long term to ensure that the well will continue to supply water at an adequate rate. From all the water quality analyses performed, with the exception of coliform bacteria, the analyses show that the water can be safely used for drinking. If you have any questions, please call our office at (970) 945-5700. Very truly yours, Zancanella and Associates, Inc. Thomas A. Zancanella, P.E. Bradley C. 06k, Geologist Attachments Z.\240=24917 Hurst We11TumpTes1Rpt.dcc 3 VO 39vi ANyd OO QNH HlIHS y3 8ZZZ8500�)6 T5:50 b00Z/ZT/ZZ 1�85VVIR84W icg2Q t�w IL Scala in Fret PROJECT LOCATION MAP LE: OATS: SHC7-- 1 2000' MAY 24, 2004 1 QG 1 WN BY: CHKO BY; APPD B1' ORAVANG: BCP BCP TAZ LQTWQ.d-9 HURST FIGURE N0. WC. POST OFFKX 9001 1900 - 10Z CWPOk AWR" o.&+ VRDNGA QM01AW MW (iM) W-5700 59 39yd ANydHOO GNv HlIHS -VA 8TUT8589-6 4217 TS:59 b09Z/ZT/ZT GROUND - LEVEL 0�4I I I • �� 0 ,.0 TOTAL DEPTH 140' FIGURE NO. LOT #2 WELL HURST WELL DETAIL2 NOT TO SCAtE DA SHEET Y Z+ .OD4 OF t ZANCANELLA AND .4SSaCl4TCS INC. DRAWN 9Y: CAKD BY_ APRD U'r PLAN N0. CAITU N ,N L por °m per too " iom vamAVENUE R0tCT; 24Z17 BC? ecp TAZ a�lom wosrr. arnaAoo moot f»ol 011-»o0 90 39yd ANVJV100 QNH Hi RIS -Vd 8TZT8520L6 TS:S0 b00Z/ZT/ZT CEMENT 10'40' 0' TO 74' 9' HOLE DIAMETER STATIC WATER LEVEL 44.4' " EN MAY 19, 2004 10 -1' TO 54' 0.240 WALL 7' PLAIN STEEL CSG .0 54' TO 74' 0.240 WALL 7' STEEL PERF CSG 0- 74' TO 140' 0.250 WALL 5.5' PVC CSG 0 74' TO 140' 6.5' HOLE DIAMETER 0 ,.0 TOTAL DEPTH 140' FIGURE NO. LOT #2 WELL HURST WELL DETAIL2 NOT TO SCAtE DA SHEET Y Z+ .OD4 OF t ZANCANELLA AND .4SSaCl4TCS INC. DRAWN 9Y: CAKD BY_ APRD U'r PLAN N0. CAITU N ,N L por °m per too " iom vamAVENUE R0tCT; 24Z17 BC? ecp TAZ a�lom wosrr. arnaAoo moot f»ol 011-»o0 90 39yd ANVJV100 QNH Hi RIS -Vd 8TZT8520L6 TS:S0 b00Z/ZT/ZT TABLE 1 Pump Test Data Well ID: Lot 2, Red Butte Job No.: 24217 Client: Hurst Test By: Aqua Tec Analysis 6y: BCP M.P. = Top of Casing Q = 15 Opm r- Q m) ft S,W.L, = 44.4 ft b 5.0 ft Time/Date on: 5/19/04 12:00 PM Time/Date off: 5/19/04 6:00 PM 44 Test Length: 6:00:00 total time TIME Tlme minutes) W.L. Measurement fast) (inches) Orawdown (feet) Q m) t. (minutes) th, 5!19/04 12:00 PM 0 44 5.0 SWL 0 5/19,04 12:01 PM 1 44 8.0 0.25 18 5/19/04 12:02 PM 2 44 8.0 0.25 10" 5/19/04 12:03 PPI 3 44 8.0 0.25 15 5/•19/04 12:04 PM 4 44 9.0 0.33 '16 5/19/04 12:05 PM 5 44 9.0 0.33 16 5/19104 12:06 PM 6 44 9.0 0.33 16 5119104 12:06 PM 8 44 10.0 0.42 16.5 54'19104 12:10 PM 10 44 10.0 0.42 14-5 5/19/04 12:12 PM 12 44 10.0 0.42 15,5 5119/04 12:15 PM 15 44 10.0 1 0.42 16 5/19/04 12.20 PM 20 44 10.0 0,42 15.8 5/19104 12:30 PM 30 44 10.0 0.42 15.2 5/19/04 12:40 PM 40 44 11.0 0.50 14,8 5/19/04 12:50 Pfvt 50 44 11.5 0.54 15.5 5/19/04 1:00 PRI 60 45 0.0 0.58 15.5 5/19(04 1:30 PM 90 45 0.0 0.58 15.3 5/19/04 2'00 PM 120 45 1.0 0.67 15.3 5/19/04 4:00 PM 240 45 3.0 0.83 15.4 5/19/04 6:00 PM 360 45 4.5 0.96 15.4 5/19104 6;01 PM 361 45 4.5 0.96 Stopped Pumping I 1 I 361 5/19/04 6:02 PM 362 45 2.5 0.79 0 21 181 5/19/04 6:03 PM 363 45 2.0 0.75 0 31 121 5/19/04 6:04 Ptvl 364 45 2.0 0.75 0 41 91 5i l9/04 6:05 PM 365 45 1.3 0.73 0 5 73 5/19/04 6:06 PM 366 45 1.8 0.73 0 1 6 of 5il9/04 6:08 PM 368 45 1.5 0.71 0 8 46 5/19/04 6:10 PM 370 45 1.0 0.67 0 10 37 5119104 6:12 PM 372 45 0.0 0.58 0 12 31 5/19/04 6;15 PNI 375 45 0.0 0.58 0 15 25 5/19/04 6:20 PM 380 45 0.0 0.58 0 20 19 5/19/04 6:30 PM 390 44 11.8 0.56 0 30 13 5119/04 6;40 PM 400 44 11,5 0.54 0 40 10 5/19/04 6;50 PM 410 44 11,3 0.52 0 50 8 5/19104 7:00 PM 420 44 11.0 0.50 0 60 7 5/24104 12:00 PM 7200 44 10.0 0.42 0 6340 1 6/1/2004 7aocanella d AssocfacaE. Inc. Loi 2 Well Pump TesLxl3 '839VJ ?�,N�dtJ00 QNB HlIbJS "-dSTZZ3ySi��6 T5 59 b00Z;'Zt;'ZT I i I o � N :4b". I w _ •�i . W � O � N 4 O O 0 C II d J QI u w f (D co v u Ua.i ` a c 0 _c / CL cmm u u N � o a cn O o o O o o p o f0 I� oS Q� O r N co le (q) IOAO-1 JOIeM 80 30vd ANVAAOD (INV HlIbdS yA 8TZT8980-6 TS :90 b00Z/ZTI'ZT I cn O o o O o o p o f0 I� oS Q� O r N co le (q) IOAO-1 JOIeM 80 30vd ANVAAOD (INV HlIbdS yA 8TZT8980-6 TS :90 b00Z/ZTI'ZT I m M w c� <s n CID N ,--I CO LO CO CZ) LO in CZ) CD CD N N N Aj Y al w (n 2.00 I_ 0 I- iL w Q! 3.00 W1 F2004 5.00 1 10 Figure 4 Recovery Following B Hour Pumping Test - 5/19104 Red Butte - Lot #2 Well Recovery as Residual Drawdown 100 tit' 1.000 Zancana!la & Associa!es, !r!c.. 10,000 100,000 Lot 2 Weir rump i esi.xis Fo�rn No. OFFICE OF THE FATE ENGINEER GWS -25 COLORADO 3DIVISION OrWATERoRESOURCES (303)866-3581 AP PL I CANT WELL FERMIT NUM13EFZ 256576 DIV. 5 WD 38 DES. BASIN ry 1) Lot: 2 51ock: Filing: Subdiv: RED ROBERT C HURST C/O PATRICK MILLER & KROPF PC 730 EAST DURANT, SUITE 200 ASPEN, CO 81611 - LI BUTTE RANCH APPROVED WELL LOCATION PITKIN COUNTY NE 1/4 NW 1,4 Section 2 Township 10 S Range 85 W Sixth P.M. DISTANCES PROM SECTION LINP-S 725 Ft. from North Section Une 2740 Ft. from East Section Line UTM COORDINATE (970) 920-1028 Northing: Easting_ DERMIT TO CONSTRUG`C A WELL 168UANCE OF THIS PERMIT DOES NOT CONFER A WATER RIGHT CONDITION5 OF APPROVE 1) This well shall be used in such;3 way au to cause no materlal injury to existing water rights. The issuance of this permit does not ensure that no Injury will occur to another reatea water right or preclude another owner of a vested water right from seeking relief in a civet court a don - 2) The construction of this well shall be In compliance with the Water Well Construction Rules 2 CCR 402.2, unless approval of a varianco has been granted by the Stats eoerd or Examiners of `Nater Welt Conatruction erd Pump Installation Contractors in accordance with Rule 10. 3) approved pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(3)(b)(1) for uses as described In CRS 37-92-802(1)(f). Use of this well (s limited to monitoring water levels and/or water quality sampling. 4) Approved as a well on a residenttal site of 6.15 acre(s) described es lot 2, Red Butte Ranch Subdivision, Pitkin GDonty. s) This well must be equipped with a locking cup or seal to prevent well contamination or possible hazards as an open well. The well must be kept capped and locked at all times except during sampling or measuring. 6) Records of water level measurements and water quality anelysee shall be maintained by the well owner and submitted to the Dlvielon of Weter Resources upon request. 7) Upon conclusion of the monitoring program the well owner shall plug this well in accordance with Rule 16 01 the Water Well Constnrction Rules. A Well Abandonment Report must be completed and submitted to the Division of Water Resources within 60 days of plugging. 8) Theowner shall mark the well in a conspicuous place with,Well permit numbers) and name of aquifer as appropriate, and shall take necessary means and precautions to preserve these markings. 9) This well must De =nbtructed by or under the supervision of a licensed well ariller or other aumorized Individual according to the Were( Well Construction Rules. If non-standard construction is anticipated, a variance request must be submitted in accordance with Rule 18 and approved prior to well construction. 10) A Well Conutruction and Test Report (Form GWS -31), including Iitrrologlc tog must be submitted by the %ndtvtdu;il authorized to construct the well. For non-standard construction, the report must Include an as -built drawing showing detoils such as depth, casing, perforated Zones, and a description of the grouLlncg type and interval. 11) This well shall be constructed not more than 200 feet from the iocatlon specified on mis permiu NOTE: Parcel ldeilt ficatlon Number (PIN)_ 40-2843-354-04-002 ���� NOTE: A8r63BorTax t3chedule Number, R015337 FDM PROVED W Sbtd Engineer By Race;nt No. @501846 DATE ISSUED -21-200 XPIRATION DATC 04 -Z1 -200E 0T 0911d ANV&100 QNH HlIHS VH 2TZT^05°0_6 T5:59 b99Z/ZT/ZT WELL CONSTRUCTION D TEST REPORT i DEFICE USt? ONLY STATE OF COLORADO, OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER I. WELL PERMIT NUMBER 256576 2 Owner Name(s)- Robert Hurst Mailing Address: 950 5th Avenue City, State, Zip: Now York, NY 10019 Phone 9 APPROVAL 9 OW\31.91-03 3' WELL LOCATION AS DRILLED DISTANCES FROM SEC. LINES NE 1/4 NW 1/4. Sec: 2 Twp: YO S Range: 85 W 570 ft. from North Sec, lira and 2580 ft. from East Sec. line OR Northing; Eaeting: sLmoivlSION: Red Butte Ranch LOT: Z BLOCK' FILING (UMT); STREET ADDRESS AT LOCATION A. GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION tt. DRILLING METHOD Air Rotary DATE COM-PLETED: 5/6/2004 TOTAL DEPTH: 140 DEPTH COMPLET1014' 140 5- GEOLOGIC LOG 6.14OLEDIAMETER(in) FROM (0) TO (n) Depth Tye of Material (Size. Color, and Type) 9.0 0 74 000-060 Boulders,Sand Lenses 6.5 7d 140 060-070 Clave Cobble9 070.140 Mancos Shale 7, PLAIN CASING OD (m) loud W 5 F To (R) 7.0 steel 1 0.240 •1 zs s.3 PVC 0.1-,50 74 140 PERI'. CASING : Scroa+ Slot 8iac 7.0 Steel 0.240 1 54 74, S. Filter Pack 9. Packer Plactmeat Water Located: 55 _ 70 Material Typu l Size : Depth ' Fcmarks Interval 10, GROTTfING RECORD material Aniourtt DcnaLLY i lmerval Pw�IIroci � Cement 5 sks 1 6 al/sk 10 -40 --Poured l Amr- Used : 4 Oz. t 11. DISINFECTION Type HTH 12. WELL TEST DATA : O Check Box 1f Test 'Data Is Submitted On Supplemental TESTING METHOD = Air Comprwsar Static Level: 49 ft. Date/TnneMeasured 5/6/2004 Production Rate 15 gpm Pumping Level Total ft. Date/Time Measured 5/6/.004 Tcst Lvng1h : 2 hours Teat Remarks : Seen 3a.) -A (13)(4) CTO tFw twY 1 hzw ro csatera mi4c hve n auar coat ne, r�ecoOt yid teat ry arc uw to my zw-w ' (Nuutw tom �Wg of fdya witctnaw 13 - anrURsPirpm irk dw W.4nd aF, WU a= �I�:1 mu icr �..�.) CONTRACTOR Shelton Dnlliug Carp. Phone! ( 109 927-1182 Mailing Address : P_O- Box 1059 BS5ult, Cu, 81621 Lic, Na. 1095 Name / Title (Please Type or Print) Signature Datta 5111/2004 Wayne Shelton / Presiden-t TT 30~d ANyd1,400 (IN" HiIHS Hd 8TZT8580: 6 T5:59 t700Z/ZT;r7T o.rE c0utn EU DAT1 WED D.'rt oyyV LE rEp s11910a ./20/04 06/02/o4 rj 'L, sty CvoE 620120 LUSioMEM 110,FE061:^u ED BUTTE LOT �2 conraminant. SP$N, CO Bacteria results may be invalid DeoLEH'n00HE55 lack of QUA:TECYSTEMS, INC. information or because the sample .O.88 exceeded LENPRING, CO 81602- holding time. ID: WELL WATER lx"illi L e�vra*w-S 2,--, Oi4� 624/Sfin .LINA' F:41J DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS RESULTS NOTE: The NCL (Maximum Contaminant Level► or ran established guideline has been exceeded for this conraminant. Bacteria results may be invalid due to lack of collection information or because the sample has exceeded the 30 -hour holding time. "ND" This contaminant was not detected enc or above our stated detection level. "plBS" No bacteria submitted. "NBR" No Bacteria Required. P" = PRESENCE "A" c ABSENCE "EP. - E. COLI PRESENCE SNA" "EA" � E. COLI ABSENCE Not Andlyzed Analysis Performed ; MCL Det_ Level ------------------------------------------------------------- (m3/l); Level ; Detected Total coliform ------------------------------------------ P P P EA Inor�anic chemicals - metals: ------------------------------------------------- Aluminum 0.2 0.1 ND Arsenic 0,05 0.010 ND Barium 2 0.30 ND Cadmium 0.005 0.002 ND Calcium --- 2 47 Chromium 0.1 0.010 NO Cupper 1.3 0.004 ND Iron 0.3 0.020 0,445 Lead 0.015 O.UO2 ND Magnesium --- 0,10 ll Manganese 0.05 0.004 0.0]0 Mercury 0.002 0.001 ND Nickel --- 0.02 ND Selenium 0.05 0.020 ND Silvcr 0.1 0.002 ND Sodium --- 1 6 Zinc — ----------------------------------------------------- 5 0.004 ND Inorganic chemjcalS - other, and ----------------------------------------------- physical fdC[OrS: Alkalinity (Total as CaCO)) --- 20 It0 Chloride 250 5.0 ND Fluoride 4 0.5 ND Hardnems (Suggested limit a 100) 10 1600 Nitrate a& N 10 0.5 ND Nitrice as N ] 0.5 NO PH (Standard Units) 6.5-8.5 --- .7.6 Sulfate 2.50 5.0 (4 Total Dissolved Solids 50o 20 1'0 Turbidity (Turbidity Unics) ------------------------------------------------ 1.0 0.2 0.8 Organie chemicals - trihalemathanes: ------------------------------------------------------------ Bromodichlorometha•nc --- .002 NL Bromoform --- 0.004 ND Chloroform --- 0..003 ND Dibromochloromethane --- 0.004 ND Total THMS 0.080 0.002 ND ZT 39Vd ANV6100 (INV HIIIAS rd 8TZT8580:'G T5:50 VOOZ/ZT/ZT pege Analysis performed 2. Sample code: 620120 NCL ;Detection; --_-------- ----_________------- (m/J) i Lvc---- Level ;Detecte,7 1,1,1,2 -Tetrachloroethane ________- - --- - 0,002 - - NO 1.1,1-Trichloroethsne 0.2 0,001 ND 1,1,2,2-Tacrachloroethane --- 0.002 ND 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 0.005 0,002 ND 1,1-Oichlorocthane --- 0.002 ND l,1-Dichloroethene 0.007 0.001 140 1,1-Dichloropropene --- 0.002 HD 1,2,3-Trichiorobenzene --- 0.002 ND 1,2,3-Trichloropropane --- 0,002 ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.07 0,002 NO 1.2 -Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0,001 ND 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005 0.001 ND 102-Dichloropropane 0.005 0.00, ND 1,3 -Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.001 NO 1,3-Dichloropropane --- 0.002 ND 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 0.075 0.001 ND 2,2-Dichlofop ropane --- 0.002 ND 2-chiorotoluene --- 0.001 ND 4-Chlorotoluene --- 0.00t ND Benzene 0.005 0.001 ND Bromebanzene --- 0.002 ND Hromomethanc --- 0.002 ND Carbon Tetrachloride 0.005 0.001 NO Chlorob"nzene 0.1 0.001 ND Chloroethane --- 0.002 ND Chloromethane --- 0,002 NO cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.07 0.002 NO ci5-1,3-1)ichloropropene --- 0.002 ND Dibromochloropropane (DBC?) --- 0.001 NO Dibromomethane --- 0.002 ND DichlOF00ifluoromethane --- 0.002 NO Dichloromethane 0.005 0.002 ND Ethylbenzene 0.7 0,001 ND Ethylenedibrom►de (EDB) --- 0.001 ND NCthy1-Tert-9utyl-Ether --- 0.004 ND Styrene 0.1 0.001 NO Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 0.005 0.002 ND Toluene 1 0.001 ND Trans-1,2-Dichlorocthenc 0.1 0.002 NO trana-1.3-Dichloropropene --- 0.002 ND Trichiorocthcne (TCE) 0.005 0.001 ND Trichlorofluoromethane --- 0.002 ND Vinyl Chloride 0.002 0.001 ND XyIant: - t0 0.001 ND ---------------------------------------- OrgsniC chemicals - ydsticides, ------------------------- herbicides and PCBs ---------------------------------- 2.4-U 0.07 0,010 ND Alachlor 0.002 (11001 NO Aldrin --- 0.002 ND Atrazine 0.003 0.002 ND Chlordane 0.002 0.001 ND Dichloran --- 0.002 ND Dieldrin --- 0.001 NO Endrin 0.002 0.0001 ND Heptachlor 0.0004 0.0004 ND Heptachlor Zpoxide 0.0002 0.0001 NO Hexachlorobenzenc 0.001 0.0005 ND tiexachlorocyclopentadiene 0.05 0.001 NO Lindane 0.0002 o.000q_ NO Methoxychlor 0.04 0.002 ND PCBS 0.0005 0.0005 ND Pentachloronitrobenze-ne --- 0.002 ND Silvex(2,4,5-TP) 0.0; 0,005 ND Simazine 0.004 0,002 ND Toxaphene 0.003 0.001 ND Trifluralin --- 0.002 ND We eartrfy that the analyses performed for this report ata accurate, and that the laboratory rests Were eurrducred Uy methods approved by the U.S. Environmental protection .agency or variations of thew EP -1 rarihvds, ihz>'c rest re6ulis rrr intended to be used for infnrnmtionpl purposes only and stay not be used fur rN�rrlafrrril �unrVtiulrC�. ✓ � JC�S�fii� ,.Ir.JLGCti7f'QT�PE/�'''<l .L?� "n O0 L TEVIwk L.WR.ITOWE. LTD, ET Med ANH&100 QNC HiRAS td 2TZT852K,'6 TS:59 beez!zT ZT DATE COLLECTED DATE RECEIVED OATE COLEECTED SAWLE 000 5/19/04 5/20/04 06/02/04 620120 OUBTOMER ADORess ED BUTTE LOT #2 SPEN, CO DEa�rF AODwtSs QUA TECSYSTEMS, INC. O. BOX 488 LENWOOD SPRING, CO 81602- / L L.ABf7iPA%LUf�/F'r LYL? 5555 d✓J.�6»i) d/Y19� FJc•.:i:/ cidv%�i�D Oh'tla 7 /9 X20/-s.�� DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS RESULTS ID: WELI WATER NOTE: ' The 'MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) or an established guideline has been exceeded for this contaminant. Bacteria results may be invalid due to lack of collection information or beoau4e the sample has Exceeded the 30 -hour ljoldirL$ time. "ND" This contaminant was not detected at or above our stated detection level. "NBS" No bacteria submitted. "NBR" No Bacteria Required. "P" = PRESENCE "A" = ABSENCE "EP" = E. COLI PRESENCE "EA" = E. COLI ABSENCE "NAI" Not Analyzed �nalysis Performed MCL Det. Level 1(nig/1); Level ; Detected ----------------------------------------------------------- Total coliform P P Y EA _-------------------------------------------------------- Inorganic chemicals - metals: Aluminum 0.2 0.1 ND Arsenic 0.05 0.010 ND Barium 2 0,30 ND Cadmium 0.005 0.002 ND Ca l c i'um --- 2 47 Chromium 0.1 0.010 ND Copper 1.3 0.004 ND Iron 0.3 0.020 0.44* lead 0,015 0.002 ND Magnesium --- 0.10 11 Manganese 0.05 0.004 0.010 Mercury 0.002 0.001 ND Nickel --- 0.02 ND Selenium 0.05 0.020 ND Silver 0.1 0.002 ND Sodium --- 1 6 Zinc 5 0.004 ND Inorganic chemicals - other, and physical - factors: ------------------------------------------------------------ AlLalinity (Total as CaCO3) --- 20 160 Chloride 250 5.0 ND Fluoride 4 0.5 ND Hardness (suggested limit = 100) 10 1604; 14itrate as N 10 0.5 ND Nitrite as N 1 0.5 ND pH (Standard Units) 6.5-8.5 --- 716 Sulfate 250 S.0 14 Total Dissolved Solids 500 20 170 Turbidity (Turbidity Units) 1-0 0.1 0.8 Organic chemicals - trihalomethanes. ------------------------------------ Bromodichloromethane --- 0.002 ND Bromo'form --- 0.004 ND Chloroform --- 0.002 ND DibromochloromcthanG --- 0.004 ND Total THMs 0.080 0,002 ND ------------------------------------------------------------- bZ 397d AN"d1,100 (IN" HlIV6 yd OTZTSS80�6 Z5:5© b©9Z;'ZZ;'ZT page 2. Sample code: 620120 Analysis performcs0 ; MCL ;Detection; Level (ms/1) ; Level ;Detected ___--------------------------------------------------------- 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane --- 0.002 ND 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane 0.2 0.001 ND 1,1,2,2 -Tetrachloroethane --- 0.002 ND 1,1,2 -Trichloroethane 0.003 01003 ND 1,1-Dichloroathane --- 0.002 ND 1,1-Dichloroethene 0.007 0.001 ND 1,1-Dichloropvopene --- 0.002 ND 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene --- 0.002 ND 1,2,3-Trichlovopropane --- 0.002 ND 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.07 0.002 ND 1,2-Dichlorobenzcna 0.6 0.001 Nb 1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005 0.001 ND 1,2-Dichluropropane 0.005 0.002 ND 1,3-1]ichlorobanzene 0.6 0.001 ND 1,3-Dichloropropane --- 0.002 ND 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 0.075 0.001 ND 2,2-Dichluropropane --- 0.002 ND 2-Chlorotoluene --- 0.001 ND 4-Chloro'toluene --- 0.001 ND Benzene O.00S 0.001 ND Bromobenzene --- 0.002 ND Bromomethane --- 0.002 ND Carbon Tetrachloride 0.005 0.001 ND Chloroben2ene 0.1 0.001 ND Chloroethane --- 0.002 ND Chloromethane --- 0.OD2 ND cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 0.07 0.002 Nle cis-1,3-Dichloropropene --- 0.002) ND Dibrocnochloropropane (DBCP) --- 0.001 ND Dibromomethane --- 0.002 ND Dichlorodifluoromethane --- 0.002 ND Dichloromethane 0.005 0.002 ND Ethylbenzene 0.7 0.001 ND Ethylenedibromide (EDB) --- 0.001 ND Mathyl-'Pert-Butyl-Ether --- 0.004 ND styrene 0.1 0.001 ND Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 0.005 0.003 ND Toluene 1 0.001 ND 'Trans-1,2-1)'ichloroethene 0.1 0.002 ND Crane-1,3-Dichloropropene --- 0.002 ND Trichloroethene (TCE) 0.005 0.001 ND Trichlorofluoromethane --- 0.002 ND Vinyl Chloride 0.002 0.001 ND Xylznu 10 0.001 ND ------------------------------------------------------------ Organic chemicals - pesticides, herbicides and PCBs ---------- 2,4-D 0.07 -- ----------- 0.010 ND Alachlor 0.002 0.001 ND Aldrin --- 0.002 ND Atrazine 0.003 0.002 ND Chlordane 0.002 0.001 ND Dichloran --- 0.002 ND Dieldrin ---- 0.001 ND Endrin 0-002 0.0001 ND Heptachlor 0.0004 0.0004 ND 1leptachlor 'Epoxide 0.0002 0.0001 ND Hexachlorobeniene 0.001 0.0005 ND llexachlorocyclopentadiene 0.05 0.001 ND Lindane. 0.0002 0.0002 ND Methoxychlor 0.04 0.002 ND PCBs 0.000S 0.0005 ND Pentachloronitrobenzene --- 0.002 ND Silvex(2,4,5-TP) 0.05 0.005 ND Simazine 0.004 0.002 ND Toxaphene 0.003 0.001 ND Trifluralin --- 0.002 ND M certify that the analyses perfortned fur this report are accurate, and that the laboratory tests were conducted by methods approved by the U.S, Euvirorrrnental Protection Agenal or variations of these EPA methods. These test results erre intended to be used for injbrmational purposes only and may not be used for rebulcctory compliance. NATIONALT"TINO LA00FATORIE8 LTO. p1Ev. 1'x-07 5T 39Vd ANVA100 QNy H1IHS Hd T5:S0 V00Z/ZTi'ZT