2013-05-29_HYDROLOGY - M1985112

• Permit No: M1985112
• IBM Index Class Name: HYDROLOGY
• Doc Date: 5/29/2013
• Doc Name: SWSP
• From: OSE
• To: Applegate Group, Inc.
• Permit Index Doc Type: Hydrology Report
• Email Name: PSH
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Table 1
2013 Water Balance
Loloff Pit Substitute Water Supply Plan
Date Revised: 5/16/2013
AG Job #: 07 -154
NOS
Unit Transit Loss =
0.25% per mile
(A) Monthly Evaporation rates from previous approvals.
City of Aurora Transit Distance =
Depletions
(B) Estimated exposed acreage
City of Aurora Total Transit Loss =
16-53%
(C) Monthly Evap rate (Col A) multiplied by current monthly exposed surface area (Col B).
Graham Ditch Transit Distance =
4 -3 miles
Re lacements
Graham Ditch Total Transit Loss =
1.08%
(E) Assuming 4% of water retained in product.
(F) No intermittent fill of pit because the pit is mined in a dewatered state
(G) Estimated water needed for dust control on -site.
(H) Total Consumptive Use (CU) is Col C +Cot E +Cot F +Cot G.
(1) CU amount is lagged back to river using a 6o day SDF factor. Lagged estimate includes past consumptive use at the Loloff Pit
(J) Lease from City of Aurora
(K) Credit from City of Aurora lease after transit loss is assessed
Graham
(L) Lease from Graham Ditch Company
(M) Credit from Graham Ditch Company lease after transit loss is assessed
(N) Lease from City of Greeley to provide effluent from Wastewater treatment plant which is right in the vicnity of Loloff therefore no transit loss is assessed.
Exposed
(0) Water Balance =(1) +(K) +(M) -(H)
On -site
City of
Ditch
Graham
Monthly Net
Water
Aggregate
Water
Water used
Aurora
City of
Company
Ditch
Evap
Surface Area
Evaporative
Production
Retained in
Intermittent
for Dust
Lagged
Lease
Aurora
Lease
Company
Greeley
Water
Month
(ft)
(acres)
Losses
(tons)
Product
Fill of Pit
Control
Total CU
Depletions
Amount
Lease Credit
Amount
Lease Credit
Lease
Balance
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(G)
(H)
(1)
(J)
(K)
(L)
(M)
(N)
(0)
Jan -13
0.08
17.2
1.38
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.38
2.60
3.3
2.72
0.12
Feb -13
0.11
17.2
1.89
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.89
2.40
3.1
2.55
0.14
Mar -13
0.14
17.2
2.41
o
0.00
0.00
0.07
2.48
2.45
3.1
2.62
0.17
Apr -13
0.23
17.2
3.96
0
0.00
0.00
0.30
4.26
2.81
2.9
2.87
0.06
May -13
0.30
17.2
5.16
0
0.00
0.00
0.30
5.46
3.47
3.9
3.86
0.39
Jun -13
0.44
17.2.
7.57
5,000
0.15
0.00
0.30
8.02
4.37
5.5
5.44
1.07
Jul -13
0.48
17.2
8.26
10,000
0.29
0.00
0.30
8.85
5.40
7.0
6.92
1.52
Aug -13
0.44
2.0
0.88
15,000
0.44
0.00
0.30
1.62
4.95
7.8
7.72
2.76
Sep -13
0.31
2.0
0 62
15,000
0.44
0.00
0.30
1.36
3.40
7.8
7.72
4.31
Oct -13
0.20
2.0
0.40
10,000
0.29
0.00
0.30
0.99
2.68
7.0
6.92
4.24
Nov -13
0.10
2.0
0.20
0
0.00
0.00
0.30
0.50
2.17
6.7
5.61
3.44
Dec -13
0.09
2.0
0.18
0
0.00
0.00
0.30
1 0.48
1.79
1 5.0
4.21
1
2.41
Total
2.92
32.90
S5,0OO
1.62
6.00
2.77
1 37.28
38.51
1 21.2
17.71
1 41.9
41.45
0.00
20.65
NOS
Unit Transit Loss =
0.25% per mile
(A) Monthly Evaporation rates from previous approvals.
City of Aurora Transit Distance =
66.1 miles
(B) Estimated exposed acreage
City of Aurora Total Transit Loss =
16-53%
(C) Monthly Evap rate (Col A) multiplied by current monthly exposed surface area (Col B).
Graham Ditch Transit Distance =
4 -3 miles
(D) Estimated production rate for 2010.
Graham Ditch Total Transit Loss =
1.08%
(E) Assuming 4% of water retained in product.
(F) No intermittent fill of pit because the pit is mined in a dewatered state
(G) Estimated water needed for dust control on -site.
(H) Total Consumptive Use (CU) is Col C +Cot E +Cot F +Cot G.
(1) CU amount is lagged back to river using a 6o day SDF factor. Lagged estimate includes past consumptive use at the Loloff Pit
(J) Lease from City of Aurora
(K) Credit from City of Aurora lease after transit loss is assessed
(L) Lease from Graham Ditch Company
(M) Credit from Graham Ditch Company lease after transit loss is assessed
(N) Lease from City of Greeley to provide effluent from Wastewater treatment plant which is right in the vicnity of Loloff therefore no transit loss is assessed.
(0) Water Balance =(1) +(K) +(M) -(H)