Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationSTEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Consulting Engineers and Scientists September 30, 1994 SRK Project No. 65701 Colorado Department of Health Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Grand Junction Regional Office 222 S. 6th Street, Rm. 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768 Attn: Ms. Donna Stoner - 2459-V445 RE: SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL - CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION APPLICATION Dear Ms. Stoner: On behalf of TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. (TADCO), Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. (SRK) is submitting this application for a certificate of designation for the above referenced site which is owned by the City of Glenwood Springs and operated by TADCO. This document is submitted to comply with the requirements of Subsection 1.3.3 of the newly promulgated Colorado Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities 6CCR 1007-2. As a result of the South. Canyon Facility having never been issued a certificate of designation, the intent of the attached Facility and Operations Plan is to satisfy the regulatory requirements of Subsection 1.3.3, and is intended to satisfy some additional provisions in Section 2 [Minimum Standards] and Section 3 [Standards for Solid Waste Disposal. Landfill Sites and Facilities] of these regulations. If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. Very truly yours, STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.), INC. David R. Gordon Project Engineer DRG:sI Enclosure cc: Tim Danner - TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. Mike Copp - City of Glenwood Springs Garfield County Commissioners Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. 3232 South Vance Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80227, U.S.A. Tel. (303) 985-1333 Facsimile (303) 985-9947 Other offices in. U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom and Africa FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATIONS PLAN SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared for: TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Prepared by: Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. 3232 South Vance Street Lakewood, Colorado 80227 SRK Job No. 65701 September 30, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 2.0 FACILITY IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION INFORMATION 2-1 2.1 Facility Identification 2-1 2.2 Location and Service Area 2-1 3.0 GENERAL SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY 3-1 4.0 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS AND SITE STANDARDS 4-1 4.1 Airports 4-1 4.2 Wetlands 4-1 4.3 Fault Lines .... 4-1 4.4 Seismic Impact Zones 4-1 4.5 Structural Integrity 4-2 4.6 Wind and Precipitation 4-2 4.7 Floodplains 4-2 4.8 Isolation of Waste 4-2 4.9 Waste Deposition into Surface or Ground Waters 4-3 5.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 5-1 5.1 General Conditions 5-1 5.2 Climatological Features 5-1 5.3 Geologic Setting 5-1 6.0 GENERAL OPERATIONS 6-1 6.1 General 6-1 6.2 Waste Acceptance Practices 6-1 6.2.1 Municipal Solid Waste , . , 6-1 6.2.2 Construction and Demolition Waste 6-1 6.2.3 Sewage Sludge and Septic Tank Pumpings 6-2 6.2.4 Recyclables 6-2 6.2.5 Miscellaneous Wastes 6-2 6.3 Facility Planned Use and Capacity 6-2 6.4 Site Personnel 6-3 6.5 Equipment ... 6-3 6.6 Structures 6-4 6.7 Site Security 6-4 6.8 Nuisance Conditions 6-5 6.8.1 Vector Control 6-5 6.8.2 Litter Control 6-5 6.8.3 Dust Control 6-5 6.8.4 Bird Control 6-5 6.9 Safety 6-6 6.9.1 Fire Protection 6-6 6.9.2 Training and First Aid 6-6 6.10 Phased Landfill Development 6-6 6.10.1 General 6-6 6.10.2 Phase 1 6-7 6.10.3 Phase 2 6-7 6.10.4 Phase 3 6-7 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 6.10.5 Phase 4 6-8 6.10.6 C&D Disposal Area 6-8 6.11 Surface Water Control Systems 6-8 6.12 Erosion and Sediment Control 6-9 6.13 Recordkeeping . , .. 6-10 6.14 Hazardous Waste Exclusion Plan 6-10 7.0 DESIGN CRITERIA 7-1 7.1 Base Liner System .. , , . 7-1 7.2 Cover Materials 7-1 7.2.1 Daily Cover 7-2 7.2.2 Intermediate Cover 7-2 7.2.3 Final Cover 7-2 7.3 Leachate Management 7-3 7.3.1 Leachate Disposal 74 7.3.2 Leachate Seeps 7-4 7.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program 7-5 8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 8-1 8.1 Ground Water Monitoring 8-1. 8.2 Surface Water Monitoring 8-3 8.3 Landfill Gas Monitoring 8-3 9.0 CONCEPTUAL CLOSUREIPOST CLOSURE PLAN 9-1 9.1 Introduction .. 9-1 9.2 Landfill Closure 9-1 9.2.1 Closure Requirements .... ....... 9-1 9.2.2 Closure Operations 9-1 9.3 Post -Closure 9-2 9.3.1 Post -Closure Care and Maintenance 9-3 9.3.2 Landfill Subsidence Monitoring , . 9-3 9.3.3 Ground Water Monitoring 9-3 9.3.4 Surface Water Monitoring 9-3 9.3.5 Explosive Gas Monitoring 94 9.3.6 Maintenance of Environmental Monitoring Systems 9-4 9.3.7 Post -Closure Landfill Use 9-4 10.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 10-1 u Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 7.1 Table 8.1 Table 9.1 Figure 2.1 Figure 4.1 Figure 5.1 Figure 7.1 Figure 7.2 Figure 8.1 Figure 9.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES Site Personnel Equipment List Summary of Required Test Methods and Minimum Testing Frequencies for Soils Current Surface Water and Ground Water Test Parameters Phasing Schedule LIST OF FIGURES Site Location Map Seismic Risk Map Surface Water Map Borrow Area Location Map Base Liner & Final Cover Details Environmental Monitoring Location Plan Final Cover Sequence Plan LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A SCL Documents, Correspondence and Miscellaneous Information Appendix B Soil Boring and Test Pit Logs Appendix C Laboratory and In-situ Testing Results Appendix C.1 Laboratory Test Results Appendix C.2 In -Situ Test Results Appendix D Ground Water Monitoring Correspondence and Data Appendix E Project Design Calculations Appendix F Closure and Post -Closure Cost Estimates Appendix G Landfill Design Plans South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 1.0 INTRODUCTION This document has been completed in support of an application for a Certificate of Designation (CD) for the South Canyon Landfill (SCL) with respect to provisions which are defined in the newly promulgated Colorado Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (6CCR 1007-2) (Regulations). The objective of this Facility Design and Operations Plan (Plan) is to describe the facility and present information concerning the facility's operations, maintenance and monitoring procedures. Filing of this application is in accordance with the RCRA Subtitle D regulations, Part 258 (Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills) and the Colorado Regulations. The following provides more detailed information concerning the site, in order to assist the Colorado Department of Health (Department) in making its determination. September 30, 1994 1-1 SRX Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 2.0 FACILITY IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION INFORMATION 2.1 Facility Identification The current owner of the South Canyon Landfill facility is the City of Glenwood Springs, with its offices at the following address: City of Glenwood Springs 806 Copper Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (303) 945-2575 City Manager: Mr. Mike Copp The current operator of the facility is TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc., with its office located at the site and a mailing address and contact name as follows: South Canyon Landfill P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-5375 Operating Manager: Mr. Tim Danner 2.2 Location and Service Area The South Canyon Landfill is located approximately 5 miles west of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, approximately one mile south of 1-70, along the west side of South Canyon Road. The only access to the site is via the landfill entrance road off of South Canyon Creek Road which enters the site at its southeast corner. A site location reap of the facility is provided in Figure 2.1. With regard to the facility's legal description, the site is contained in portions of Sections 2, 3, 10, and 11, Township 6 South, Range 90 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. This parcel of land in Garfield County is more particularly described as: Section 2: That portion of the SW 114SW lla lying southerly of the northerly line of the landfill access road. Section 3: SWv4SWii4; SE1/4SW1e4; Sit2SW1E4SEv4; S1t2SE1'4SEu4. Section 10: NInNEit4NWtf4; NinNWl/4NEt14; N12NE1r4NEu4.. September 30, 1994 2-1 SRX. Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan Section 11: That portion of the NIt2NW114NW114 lying southerly of the northerly line of the landfill access road and lying westerly of the westerly line of County Road 134. With easy access off of 1-70, the South Canyon Landfill (SCL) is suitably located to provide accessible waste disposal services. The facility currently provides waste management services to Glenwood Springs and surrounding communities, the eastern portion of Garfield County, as well as portions of Pitkin County. September 30, 1994 2-2 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 3.0 GENERAL SITE BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The landfill site covers an area approximately 30 acres in size which is only a portion of the overall parcel of land, as described above, which encompasses an area in excess of 500 acres. A study of the site was conducted for the City of Glenwood Springs by James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. (IMM) entitled South Carryon Landfill Planning and Operations Study dated March 1982. This earlier document has functioned as the facility's operating plan and reference to this study is included in this document. A copy of the study document is kept on file at the Department. A comprehensive review of all available City, County, and State records/files was completed with respect to the SCL site. Interviews with individuals who possessed some knowledge of the site were also conducted. The following is a summary of those findings with copies of pertinent documents included in Appendix A. The SCL facility has reportedly been in operation since the early 1950's. The landfill has always been owned by the City of Glenwood Springs, however, in 1971 an agreement was entered into between the City and Garfield County for joint operation of the landfill. Minutes taken from the meeting on Wednesday, June 2, 1971 at the Garfield County Commissioner's office reflect the resolution which was passed. A copy of this resolution is included in Appendix A. Original operations at the landfill included the trench fill method. Additional agreements were entered into between the City and County, with the County primarily operating the landfill until approximately 1980, when a new agreement (dated December 1, 1980) was signed in which operation of the landfill was returned to the City. In August 1982, the City entered into a lease agreement with TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. who has operated the facility since then. A subsequent lease agreement, dated April 1, 1989, was entered into between the City and TADCO. Past site inspections, conducted by Department personnel, which found the facility to be in general compliance with operational criteria, are included in Appendix A of this document. September 30, 1994 3-1 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 4.0 LOCATION RESTRICTIONS AND SITE STANDARDS In accordance with Section 3.1 of the Regulations, the following sections address the SCL's compliance with specific location restrictions and additional site standards. 4.1 Airports The closest airport to the landfill facility is the Glenwood Springs Municipal Airport which is approximately 7 miles to the south east, on the west side of State Highway 82. The fact that such a distance exists between the airport and the SCL indicates that operation of the landfill will not create or pose a bird hazard. According to the operator, the presence of birds at the site is a rare occurrence. Due to the fact that the site is not located within 5 miles of the nearest airport, there are no procedures for notification of the FAA. 4.2 'Wetlands The existing landfill is not located in any wetland areas. The site can be described as "mountain terrain" with a variety of vegetative species which are native to mountain areas. This includes the presence of deciduous vegetation and other forest varieties. 4.3 Fault Lines Based on a review of USGS Bulletin 43 -- Earthquake Potential in Colorado, A Preliminary Evaluation, by R. M. Kirkham and W. P. Rogers, 1981, the SCL is not located within 200 feet of a fault that has had a displacement in Holocene time. This reference discusses the nearest potentially active fault to be approximately 2.5 miles away from the site with a classification of Qpb (pre -Bull Lake glacial deposits). The relative age of the Bull Lake glacial deposits are associated with the Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period. 4.4 Seismic Impact Zones According to the seismic zone maps of the United States developed by Algermissen, presented by the Bureau of Reclamation (1987) and shown on Figure 4.1, the project site lies within Seismic Zone 1, characterized by maximum anticipated earthquake intensities of V and VI on the modified Mercalli intensity (MM) scale. Algermissen et al (1982) presented a preliminary seismic zoning study for the United States based on a probabilistic approach. This study has assigned a value of about 0.09g as the effective peak horizontal acceleration (EPHA) expected at the site with a 90 percent probability of not being exceeded in 250 years. For return periods of 50 and 10 years, the estimated EPHA values, 0.04g and <0.04g, respectively, reflect the same probability of nonexceedance. September 30, 1994 4-1 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan A review of the seismic 250 -year interval map entitled "Probabilistic Earthquake Acceleration and Velocity Maps for the United States and Puerto Rico" (Algermissen et al., 1991), for which an adapted reduction is provided in Figure 4.1, shows that the site is not located within an impact area. Since recent faulting in the vicinity of the SCL site appears to be limited in extent, the probability that an earthquake event will occur that would produce ground movement at the facility is relatively low. Due to the type of material underlying the site, seismic energy generated during an earthquake would likely be attenuated significantly, thus lowering peak acceleration values. 4.5 Structural Integrity Geologic mapping of the site and knowledge of the formation indicate the structural integrity of the SCL site. As a result of on-site soil conditions and on-site geologic features which do not show any significant potential for differential settlement, the SCL is located in a stable area. There is no apparent evidence of any movement, karst terrains, or poor foundation conditions in the vicinity of the landfill. 4.6 Wind and Precipitation As a result of the SCL being located in a canyon area with operations being conducted in the valley portion of the site, the site is naturally protected from prevailing winds. Design considerations, such as minimizing the amount of runoff generated upgradient of the site and diverting as much as possible to minimize contact with existing operations at the facility, are addressed in Section 7.0 of this document. A further description of area climatological factors and related operational issues (e.g., wind measuring devices) is given in Sections 5.2 and 6.13, respectively. 4.7 Floodplains The SCL is located remote from inland surface waters which have the potential for being inundated by a base flood. Therefore, the existing landfill is not located within a floodplain area. 4.8 Isolation of Waste Because the SCL site is located approximately 5 miles from Glenwood Springs and is located in a rural area with very few abutters (see Figure 2.1), it can be assumed that the facility provides adequate isolation from the public and environment. The nearest residences are approximately 3 miles south, west and east of the site. To the south, along South Canyon Creek Road, are three ranches which can be considered upgradient of the site. To the west and east are single family residential areas. A private gun club facility is located approximately 1.5 miles southeast of the site, on the east side of South Canyon Creek Road. However, the structure is not inhabited on a permanent basis. Waste handling and deposition procedures, as well as surface water management at the site, will help to minimize the potential generation of leachate within the landfilling areas. September 30, 1994 4-2 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 4.9 Waste Deposition into Surface or Ground Waters The method of landfilling at the site is one of deposition of the waste into a valley, or valley fill. Therefore, little excavating into the subsurface materials is required. This minimizes the potential for waste deposition into any ground waters. Additionally, the topography and surface water controls which are proposed at the facility will minimize the potential for deposition of waste in any surface waters. Further, operational controls will restrict waste deposition into ground water or surface water. September 30, 1994 4-3 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations pian 5.0 Slit, DESCRIPTION 5.1 General Conditions The landfill site is comprised of approximately 30 acres, of which approximately 22 acres have been landfilled to some extent. The base elevation of the landfill, at its south end is approximately 6250 feet above mean sea level (MSL), with current operations being conducted in the valley area at an approximate elevation of 6300 ft, as of April, 1994 (see Appendix G, Drawing 1 of Design Plans). The South Canyon Creek runs along the east perimeter of the site. Being located in a canyon, the site is predominantly bounded by mountainous features on the north, west and south sides. Horse Mountain, which has a peak elevation of 8269 ft, is located southwest of the site. The SCL has a recycling area located at the entrance to the landfill. The recycling center is available to all patrons of the landfill, and accepts items such as newspapers, glass, and aluminum. 5.2 Climatological Features The area features a climate which can best be described as alpine in nature, with very low humidity in the summer. Daytime temperatures in the Glenwood Springs area range from the 70's to 80's in the summer months and 30's to 40's in the winter. The average annual precipitation for the area is 16.5 inches. The average annual snowfall, in lower lying areas, is approximately 67 inches, with higher elevations receiving an additional 30 to 40 inches of snowfall. The average growing season is approximately 130 days. These estimates are based on information provided by the Glenwood Springs Chamber Resort Association. 5.3 Geologic Setting The "Preliminary Geologic Map of the Storm King Mountain Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado", USGS Open -File Report 93-320 indicates that the consolidated bedrock unit underlying the site is the Mancos Shale Formation. The Mancos Shale Foundation is described as Upper Cretaceous, "dominantly light -to -dark gray carbonaceous shale..." which is ..."about 5,500 feet thick." USGS mapping indicates that this unit strikes approximately north 52° west and dips 55° southwest in the landfill area. Based on geologic strike and dip measurements and the stratigraphic location of the site, an approximate 3,000 foot thickness of Mancos Shale is indicated underlying the landfill site. Subsurface investigation at the site indicates that this bedrock formation contains some fractures, but fracture patterns were not observed in site drill cores, test pits or bedrock outcrops. Site and area investigations completed by SRK (Appendix 13 contains drillhole and test pit logs) and others (James M. Montgomery, 1982 and USGS, 1993) indicate that relatively thin surficial deposits locally overlie the bedrock Mancos Shale. These unconsolidated surficial materials consist primarily of weathered, "re- worked" Mancos Shale sediments in thicknesses ranging from 0 to 30 feet. September 30, 1994 5-1 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan There are no recognizable, significant geologic hazards including slope stability, faulting, folding, rockfall, landslides, subsidence or erosion potential that can foreseeably affect the design and operation of the subject facility. 5.4 Hydrologic Setting Surface water features within 2 miles of the site are depicted on Figure 5.1, The major surface water features include the South Canyon Creek with is approximately 0.8 miles to the east; the Colorado River which is approximately 0.9 miles to the north; and Porter Reservoir which is approximately 1.8 miles to the south of the site. There are various other tributary creeks and streams within the 2 -mile radius which are also delineated on the figure. As Figure 5.1 indicates, the site is located well above the base floodplain of major area drainages. The site is underlain by the Cretaceous Mancos Shale Formation which serves as a aquitard in the region. Beneath the Mancos Shale Formation lies the Dakota Sandstone Formation which serves as an aquifer in the region. However, as stated in Section 5.3, there is greater than 3000 feet of Mancos Shale underlying the site. Further, there are no reported ground water wells within one -mile of the site boundaries. During past investigations, shallow ground water has been encountered at the site in six of the ten borings completed (i.e., 7 borings completed by SRK and 3 borings completed by Gormley). Refer to Appendix B for site boring logs and to Appendix G, Drawing 1 for locations of borings as well as test pits. This ground water generally occurs in the thin, unconsolidated surficial deposit overlying the Mancos Shale bedrock and in fractures in the upper weathered portion of the Mancos Shale. Ground water has been encountered at various depths ranging from approximately 15 to 42 feet. Given the inconsistency in depths to and occurrence of this shallow ground water, it is likely locally occurring in non -hydraulically connected perched ground water zones. Subsurface investigation at the property indicates that these zones may be confined to fracture zones less than 1 -foot in thickness. It is likely that the ground water flow direction within these surficial water bearing zones follows the local topography and is thus generally to the east at the site. However, additional proposed monitoring (Section 8.1) will aid in establishing the local ground water gradient. Packer testing to evaluate landfill subsurface permeabilities has been completed at five boreholes at the site (with two boreholes being tested across two intervals). Results of this testing is presented in two technical memorandums presented in Appendix C. Generally, packer testing indicates subsurface permeabilities in sediments beneath the site on the order of 1 x 10' cm/sec. Given that the site is underlain by the Mancos Shale aquitard and that surface water controls as well as leachate collection measures are included in the facility design, there is a very low potential for a significant impact from the facility to surface water or ground water quality. Although some shallow ground water exists beneath the site, investigation indicates it is locally occurring, Existing water quality data (Appendix D) September 30, 1994 5-2 SRI( Project No. 65741 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan downgradient from the facility, which has been operational for approximately 40 years, indicates water quality indicative of ground water contained in Shale deposits. Further, there are no potential users of this water within a i mile radius. September 30, 1994 5-3 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 6.0 GENERAL OPERATIONS 6.1 General The landfill is open to the public Monday through Friday from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm and on Saturdays from 8:30 am to 5:00 pm. A sign is posted at the entrance to the facility, stating the hours of operations as well as the types of waste which are accepted by the facility. 6.2 Waste Acceptance Practices The waste materials accepted at the SCL facility are specifically managed based on the type of waste. Because the primary form of industry in this area is tourism and some ranching, the generation of industrial wastes is very limited. The facility does not accept any hazardous, liquid (in the landfill area), or radioactive wastes at the site. Wastes which are accepted at the SCL facility include the following: • municipal solid waste (MSW) • construction and demolition waste (C&D) • sewage sludge and septic tank pumpings • recyclables • miscellaneous wastes A description of the procedure for managing these different waste streams is provided below. 6.2.1 Municipal Solid Waste Residential and commercial MSW disposed of at the landfill is transported directly to the active face which is currently being landfilled in the main canyon area. Here the wastes are spread in 8 to 10 ft thick lifts onto previously placed wastes. Compaction is currently accomplished by using a crawler -dozer and a recently purchased compactor (see Section 6.5). The slope of the active face is maintained at a minimum of 2 percent. At the end of each working day (or more frequently if conditions warrant), daily cover is placed over exposed waste (see Section 7.2.1). 6.2.2 Construction and Demolition Waste The SCL accepts C&D wastes for disposal. The C&D wastes are transported directly to the active face for C&D disposal, which is currently being landfilled east of the gate house along the north side of the access road (see Figure 2.1). Here the waste is spread onto previously placed wastes and compacted using the equipment listed in Section 6.5. September 30, 1994 6-1 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Plan 6.2.3 Sewage Sludge and Septic Tank Pumpings Sewage sludge and septic tanks pumpings are disposed of in the septage ponds located on the southern side of the landfill canyon, southeast of the landfill. There are currently four septage ponds being used, which are all located on the south side of the site (see Figure 2.1). The newest pond (Pond No. 4) , which is the eastern -most pond, was recently excavated in early 1994. This new pond has been designed to accept only liquids, while the older remaining ponds continue to accept liquids and solids. Records of septage received at the site are kept on a daily basis. For 1993, a total of 1,075,400 gallons of septage was accepted at the facility. Included in Appendix A is a list of the monthly volumes of septage material which has been received at the site since 1991. 6.2.4 Recyclables The SCL has a recyclables drop—off area for use by patrons of the facility. The drop-off area is located approximately 150 feet west of the gate house, on the north side of the access road. The drop -area consists of a Targe ramp which provides access to the large containers located on each side of the ramp. Materials collected at the drop-off area include glass, newspapers, and aluminum. Because the drop-off area is in close proximity to the attendant's trailer, it can be monitored constantly. When the containers are full, they are removed for processing and ensuing shipment to end users. Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI) is the party responsible for handling transportation of the recyclables and trailers. 6.2.5 Miscellaneous Wastes With regard to other waste streams, efforts have been taken to eliminate waste streams such as whole tires and white goods from disposal in the landfill. As of 1992, the facility no longer accepts whole tires; only cut-up or shredded tires are allowed to be disposed of at the site. However, a stockpile of tires exists along the southeast portion of the site containing tires mainly accumulated while the site was operated by the previous owner, i.e., the County. It has been estimated that the existing stockpile contains approximately 150,000 tires. Negotiations are currently underway for the shredding of a portion of the tires in the stockpile which will be hauled off-site for use in a Colorado Department of Transportation pilot project. Animal bodies are not accepted at the landfill, and efforts are underway to eliminate the landfilling of white goods which will be handled by a local scrap metal dealer. 6.3 Facility Planned Use and Capacity The SCL now provides regional waste disposal facilities for the recently closed Carbondale landfill, as well as other communities in Garfield and surrounding Counties, which in turn make it a strategically located facility with greater than twenty years of capacity. Based on the 1982 Study (James M. Montgomery), the expected life of the SCL was approximately 30 years (at that time). Current estimates of landfill capacity are in excess of 40 years (see Appendix D - Project Design Calculations). Recent discussions with the current operator indicate that an annual aggregate average of waste received was less than 70 tons per day in 1993, September 30, 1994 6-2 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan whereas the landfill capacity estimates are based on a daily intake of 90 tons per day. Included in Appendix A is a summary of historic intake quantities for solid and septic wastes accepted at the site over the past three years. 6.4 Site Personnel The SCL maintains a staff of three full-time personnel to operate the landfill. A list of these employees and a brief job description follows TABLE 6.1 SITE PERSONNEL SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL Position Description of Duties Operating Manager Responsible for the daily operations of the facility. Gate Attendant Responsible for screening, accepting waste, collecting tipping fees, directing incoming traffic, and maintaining daily logs for the landfill. Equipment Operator Responsible for screening, placement of the waste materials, operation of the heavy equipment for placement of the daily cover over the working face. This roster enables the landfill to operate and be maintained in compliance with all applicable regulations. It is the attendant's responsibility to attend the gate and intercept vehicles entering the landfill site. The attendant is also responsible for directing incoming traffic to an appropriate on-site destination (i.e., MSW, C&D, or septage pond disposal areas). The equipment operator is present at the working face to conduct and oversee the landfilling operations. The operating manager of the landfill is present on-site the majority of the time to oversee the overall operations of the facility. As referenced in Section 2.1, Mr. Danner is the operating manager. Mr. Danner has been involved in the waste disposal industry since 1973 and has been the operating manager of the South Canyon Facility since 1982. A member of SWANA (Solid Waste Association of North America) since 1992, Mr. Danner has attended various courses for certifications in the operation and management of MSW landfills. These courses have included topics such as waste screening, landfill gas management, RCRA Subtitle D regulations, ground water monitoring, and leachate management. 6.5 Equipment The SCL has a variety of equipment dedicated to the operation of the landfill. All of the equipment remains on the landfill site. A complete list of the equipment which is used at the landfill is presented in Table 6.2. September 30, 1994 6-3 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Plan TABLE 6.2 EQUIPMENT LIST SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL Description Make & Model Year Crawler -Dozer John Deere 850 1982 Bulldozer Caterpillar D8K 1975 Compactor Caterpillar 816B 1988 Motor Grader Austin Westin 300 Super 1970 Pickup Truck Ford F150 1990 Pickup Truck Ford 3/4 -ton 1984 Road Sander Swenson Spreader 1993 Water Tank 700 gallon — There is no sustained on-site source for water at the facility. Water is transported to the site and stored in the 700 gallon water tank which is mounted on a trailer. The water tank is always present on the site except for when it is being filled up. The water tank is filled approximately once every 3 weeks at a municipal water source in New Castle. 6.6 Structures There are currently three structures on the landfill property: an attendant's trailer, a storage garage, and a parts storage trailer. All three structures are in close proximity to each other, in the center portion of the site (see Appendix G, Drawing 1). The attendant's trailer (the gate house) is a 10 ft x 45 ft converted mobile home located at the entrance to the facility, in the center of the access road. From the gate house the attendant can secure access to the landfill, collect disposal fees, and provide direction and assistance to all vehicles entering the facility. The storage garage is a 45 ft x 60 ft, one-story, sheet metal structure located to the northwest of the gate house, which provides storage for various equipment, tools, and supplies associated with the landfill's operations. The parts storage trailer is an 8 ft x 40 ft semi -trailer located just north of the gate house, used to store additional parts and supplies. The on-site structures are approximately 300 feet from the MSW landfilling area and upgradient of the C&D disposal area. None of the structures have basements and both the gate house and the storage garage have power. The gate house is equipped with a telephone. 6.7 Site Security The natural topography and rugged terrain and vegetation which surround the site provides a natural barrier for entry to the site. Vehicle access to the facility is only available through the access road entrance at the September 30, 1994 6-4 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & (]pin one Plan southeast corner of the site. The presence of a steel post gate, at the entrance to the landfill site functions to prevent access by unauthorized vehicles after operating hours. The gate, gate house, and storage garage are locked after hours. 6.8 Nuisance Conditions 6.8.1 Vector Control The current waste handling procedures ensure that all waste is buried and covered by the end of each working day. Should vectors be observed at the facility, a contract extermination service will be retained to inspect and remedy the situation. 6.8.2 Litter Control Wind blown litter is a common problem at landfills. The level of effort needed to control this problem is dictated by weather conditions and wind directions. The natural characteristics of the valley landfill area aids in the control of wind blown litter. On particularly windy days, soil covering will be applied to the active face more frequently to reduce the blowing of papers deposited on the landfill. Also, the perimeter of the landfill and access roads leading to the landfill will be periodically policed to control litter. 6.8.3 Dust Control Due to the nature of landfilling operations, dust will be created during dry periods of the year. In recognition of this fact, the landfill operator will employ the following dust control techniques, as needed, to minimize dust migration from landfill operations. Soil Stabilization - Landfill areas which are inactive will be seeded to encourage growth of vegetation. Soil Stabilizers - Soil stabilizers (i.e., calcium chloride), will be used on landfill access roads, during dry periods, to minimize dust resulting from landfill traffic. 6.8.4 Bird Control In past years, birds have not been a problem at the SCL. The landfill operator will continue to control scavenging birds by the timely application of landfill covering materials, supplemented, if necessary, with other available bird control measures. As previously mentioned, the closest airport (Glenwood Springs Municipal Airport) is approximately 7 miles southeast of the site and operation of the landfill does not create a bird hazard. September 30, 1994 6-5 SRK Project o. 6 701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Pian 6.9 Safety 6.9.1 Fire Protection All reasonable precautions must be taken to prevent fire from breaking out in the landfill. This includes timely and proper covering of all disposed refuse, and an enforced ban on smoking within the landfill. Furthermore, all materials stored, stockpiled, held or accumulated anywhere on site must be kept in such a manner to prevent fire hazards. According to the operating manager, since he has been operating the landfill, waste at the facility is not routinely burned. At one point in time, the facility did burn brush but this practice is no longer performed. A hot load area is reserved, outside the limits of the active face of the landfill for the dumping of any incoming material that may be smoldering, smoking, or burning. In case fire breaks out within the landfill, or signs of a fire are observed, local fire fighting authorities must be alerted, and no refuse may be deposited in the burning area. The nearest manned fire department is located on Mel Ray Road in West Glenwood Springs, approximately three miles from the site. 6.9.2 Training and First Aid The SCL staff are familiar with safety issues and the equipment operator at the site is knowledgeable in safety practices that must be followed in the vicinity of heavy equipment. The gate attendant is a registered nurse and is CPR certified. A first aid supply kit is located in the attendant's trailer and at the storage garage. The numbers for emergency medical care and ambulances are posted at the site, adjacent to or near the first aid kits. 6.10 Phased Landfill Development 6.10.1 General The phase sequencing and location of landfilling operations is designed to bring Phase 1 of the landfill to final grade before Phases 2 through 4, allowing placement of final cover over portions (i.e., side slope areas) of the landfill while normal waste handling operations continue elsewhere. This is consistent with the practice of keeping the active part of the landfill as small as possible, and minimizing the exposure period of areas not yet capped with a final cover system. This will further promote the strategy for a phased installation of final cover. Of the various methods which can be used for landfilling, the method best suited for this site is the canyon/depression method. Filling of each lift of waste will start at the head (upgradient) end of the canyon and will end at the mouth (downgradient) end of the canyon area. This method of landfilling will prevent the accumulation of water behind the landfill and promote runoff for the site. Each phase will consist of September 30, 1994 6-6 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plein several lifts approximately 10 -feet in height. Proposed design elevations have been developed in accordance with the approximate elevations outlined in the .IMM report. Landfill capacity estimates for each phase are provided in Appendix E, Project Design Calculations, under the heading Phased Landfill Capacity Calculations. As part of preparing the landfill for its phased development, there are some important site preparation issues which need to be addressed first. These include, construction of the perimeter run-on control drainage swales, lining of the remaining base area of the landfill, and final cover application to previously completed areas of the landfill (see Appendix G, Drawing 2). More in-depth discussions concerning the surface water control features as well as installation of the base Iiner and final cover systems are provided in Sections 6.12 and 7.2, respectively. 610.2 Phase 1 In conjunction with completion of the site preparation design elements, landfilling operations for Phase 1 will continue over previously landfilled areas. Continued operations will involve landfilling along the southern portion of the site, until proposed elevations are attained. Proposed intermediate design elevations are designated on the design plans (Appendix G, Drawing 3). Operationally, landfilling will be conducted in a west to east general progression with placement of individual lifts in a north to south progression. Operations during this phase will allow the side slope of the landfill to attain an elevation of approximately 6340 feet before development of the initial bench area is realized. Estimated life in this phase of operations is approximately 10.2 years. 6.10.3 Phase 2 Once Phase 1 elevations have been reached, then landfilling in Phase 2 will be conducted in a similar manner as described for Phase 1. Concurrently, final cover installation over Phase 1 side slope areas which have reached final grades will also be performed. This includes installing all components of the final cover system as well as completion of all run-off control structures and erosion control berms. Based on current estimates of intake volumes, it is anticipated that operating in Phase 2 will allow for continued operations for approximately 9.6 years. Operating in this phase will take the side slope up to an approximate elevation of 6375 feet. 6.10.4 Phase 3 Similar to the previous phases, Phase 3 operations will continue with the placement of lifts of waste at the head (upgradient) end of the canyon and an overall progression down towards the mouth (downgradient) end of the canyon area. Landfilling in this phase will allow for the side slope elevation to reach 6405 feet before exhibiting the minimum 5% design slope which is provided along the top slope area of the landfill. Concurrent placement of final cover over completed side slope areas of Phase 2 will be executed, thereby September 30, 1994 6-7 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Pian minimi7ing the potential for infiltration. Landfill capacity for this phase is estimated to be approximately 11.8 years. 6.10.5 Phase 4 Phase 4 operations will be conducted in a similar manner as discussed for the previous three phases. Landfilling will be conducted over the formerly completed Phase 3 area, extending the side slope to an approximate elevation of 6430 feet. Operation during this phase will provide an estimated life of approximately 9.6 years. Once final elevations are attained, closure activities will involve closure of the remaining active areas of the proposed landfill area. Closure activities during this phase will include completion of the landfill access road and all remaining erosion control berms and swales. 6.10.6 C&D Disposal Area Landfilling operations in the C&D disposal area will continue in a similar manner to that currently being conducted. Based on recent estimates (see Section 6.3), the total available volume which remains in this disposal area is approximately 139,300 cubic yards. Once final elevations have been reached, and the area has been reclaimed, subsequent deposition of C&D waste will be by landfilling in the MSW disposal area. 6.11 Surface Water Control Systems The proper and efficient management of surface water is an important aspect of landfill operations. Prior to landfilling in a new phase, the operator will implement all provisions necessary to prevent run-on or the mingling of contact (with refuse) and non -contact run-off. To date, no formal surface water management system has been implemented at the facility. The perimeter diversion swales, as presented in the operations plan (IMM report), have only been partially constructed if at all. All run-off from the site flows overland from higher elevations of the site to the lower elevation, predominantly in a west to east direction over the site, where it is discharged into the South Canyon Creek. The following surface water control system includes arrangements for the separate handling of contact and non -contact run-off, collection of side slope run-off by swales (on areas furnished with final cover), conveyance of top slope and side slope run-off to perimeter swales which in turn discharge into a system of drainage swales and riprap channels, before being released to the natural drainage system below the facility. All surface water control systems are sized to convey a 25 year storm event. Active Area. Run-9ff Active area run-off is the surface water run-off from an active portion of the landfill which has had no contact with solid wastes. This run-off is conveyed away from the active landfill face by grading the surfaces in the vicinity of the active face in a direction away from uncovered solid waste. Within the active areas in the September 30, 1994 6-8 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan central portion of the landfill, temporary surface swales will be constructed, as necessary, to allow non - contact run-off to move unimpeded around the perimeter of the landfill_ Side Slope Drainage For the most part, surface water run-off from side slopes not furnished with final cover will be directed, via sheet flow over the surfaces of the side slopes, to swales along the access road which discharge into the previously described surface water control features. As landfill operations get progressively higher, a quick growing vegetative cover will be placed over the side slopes to slow run-off and minimize erosion. In areas experiencing repeated erosion problems, hay bale berms will be installed perpendicular to the slope to further slow run-off. Top Slope Drainage Top slope areas in the active portion of the landfill will be graded to drain away from the active landfill face. Normally, a grade of two to five percent is adequate to ensure that ponding and infiltration of stormwater into the landfill is avoided. These areas will also be shaped and groomed to prevent the concentrated flow of run- off to one location. Top slope drainage will he directed via diversion berms to the perimeter of the landfill. Contact Run-off Contact run-off is run-off which has had direct contact with solid wastes. The surface immediately in front of the active face will be graded or berme to prevent this run-off from mixing with non -contact run-off. Run-off which has contacted wastes will be contained at the active face, and infiltrate through the landfill mass before being collected as leachate at the base of the landfill via the LCRS (see Section 7.3). Temporary drainage control berms, constructed from earthen materials, will be used to assure that this run-off is captured. These berms will be installed in front of the active face during inclement weather. Final Cover Drainage Top slope, as well as side slope, run-off will be collected by the use of diversion berms constructed at intervals across the top slope, and run-off drainage swales constructed along the access road. This stormwater will be directed to the perimeter run-on control swales and ultimately to the riprap channels which will channel the run-off to the base of the landfill prior to being discharged into the natural drainage system. Steep channel sections may be lined with riprap to minimize channel erosion and resulting sediment discharge. 6.12 Erosion and Sediment Control Proper grooming of landfill slopes, with particular attention to planting and maintenance of vegetative cover, is the most important aspect of erosion control on the landfill itself. The drainage system will consist of perimeter swales, diversion berms, and side slope riprap channels. These structures are designed to control and remove surface run—on from the site before discharging the run-off. The facility operator will maintain all erosion control structures, including periodic removal of sediment, so that they can carry out their function unimpeded. September 0, 1994 6-9 SRK Project Na . 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations. Plan 6.13 Recordkeeping Recordkeeping is conducted on-site by staff personnel to maintain an operating record of the facilities operations. Daily records of incoming waste volumes and types are kept by the gate attendant. A summary of monthly intakes since 1991 is provided in Appendix A. Also, records of temperature, snow fall and wind conditions are maintained by the landfill personnel. The landfill is equipped with a Turbo Meter wind speed indicator in the attendant's trailer to monitor wind conditions at the landfill, when needed. A random waste screening inspection program is also conducted at the site. Copies of the daily records and inspection record forms used at the SCL are included in Appendix A. Copies of the approved operations plan, any construction as-builts, or records of operational variances will all be maintained together in the site files for reference. Historical records of water monitoring results and gas monitoring results will be maintained in the operating records and upon receipt of a certificate of designation, a copy of this document will also be included in the site files. Additionally, reports or records of inspections conducted at the facility by the Department will be included as part of the operating record. 6.14 Hazardous Waste Exclusion Plan As described in Section 6.2, the SCL only accepts MSW, C&D debris, sewage sludge and septic tank pumpings, as well as recyclables and miscellaneous wastes. In accordance with Subsection 2.1.2 of the Regulations, the landfill shall not knowingly receive any hazardous waste, and therefore a hazardous waste exclusion plan will be implemented at the site to minimize the possibility of the delivery of hazardous wastes to the landfill. As part of the hazardous waste exclusion plan, precautions which will be implemented by landfill operations personnel will include: • Questioning waste transporters regarding the source of the wastes in their Ioad. If the wastes are from an industrial source, the load should be rejected unless documentation can be provided which states that no hazardous or excluded wastes are contained in the load. Even with appropriate documentation, random loads will be inspected. • Wastes which are in closed or sealed containers without appropriate documentation will not be accepted. • Containers bearing a hazardous waste or hazardous materials warning labels will not be accepted for disposal. Operations personnel at the active face will observe wastes as they are being unloaded and spread. Suspicious containers will be segregated, stored in polyethylene containers and removed from the landfill by a licensed hazardous waste transporter. Even if the transporter September 30. 1944 6-10 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan is still at the landfill and agrees to remove the wastes from the premises, operations personnel will report the incident to the local hazardous waste coordinator (usually the fire chief). • Uncontained suspicious wastes will be cordoned off to restrict access to the waste and will only be handled by licensed contractors. All incidents involving hazardous wastes must be immediately reported to the regional Colorado Department of Health (CDH) office. The telephone number for the regional office is (303) 248-7168. During hours when the regional CDH office is not open, incident reports should be directed to the Colorado State Police, telephone number (303) 945-6198. Records of all incidents must be maintained in the landfill operational log. Currently at the site, random waste screening is conducted 3 to 4 times a week. As mentioned in Section 6.13, records of the random waste screenings are maintained as part of the daily operating records. September 30, 1994 6-11. SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Dcaign & Operations Pian 7.0 DESIGN CRITERIA 7.1 Base Liner System With regard to liner design provisions, an alternative liner design (as specified in Subsection 3.2.5(C)(4)) will be installed at the SCL. The base liner system will consist of the natural lithologic "barrier", with an overlying recompacted barrier layer having a minimum thickness of 12 -inches and derived from available on-site materials. Consideration of this liner design has been previously presented to the Department in various correspondence. A copy of the most recent letter from the CDH concerning an alternative liner design, dated March 1, 1994, is included in Appendix A. Due to the method of landfilling (valley fill) which is being conducted at the SCL, the majority of the base area has already been covered by landfilling operations. Only a small portion of the proposed base area which is located on the northern end of the site, upgradient of current operations has not been covered with waste (see Appendix G, Drawing 2). This exposed base area, which is approximately 5 acres in size, will receive the liner system. Based on design calculations (see Appendix E, HELP Calculations), the steepness of the proposed side slopes, the characteristics of the subsurface materials, and the difficulty of providing uniform construction methods do not warrant the use of a liner system on the side slopes. The base liner system and final cover system (discussed below) were designed with the aid of the HELP model ( Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance), a computer program developed by the Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. EPA. The latest revision of the program, version 2.05 issued in September 1989, was utilized for design purposes. The HELP model was developed to facilitate estimation of the amounts of surface runoff, subsurface drainage, and leachate produced in a wide variety of landfill designs. The program models the effects of many hydrologic processes including precipitation, surface storage, runoff, infiltration, percolation, evapotranspiration, soil moisture storage, and lateral drainage. This provides the ability to model any discrete intermediate components of a landfill as well as a multi -layered cover system. The design storm used for this project was the 25 -year frequency, 24-hour duration rainfall, estimated at 3.2 inches of rain. Complete printouts of the results and input data, for both the base liner and final cover systems, are provided in Appendix E. 7.2 Cover Materials Materials to be used for daily, intermediate, and final cover over the proposed landfill area will be available on-site. The source for a portion of the required cover material will be the surficial alluvial material and the weathered bedrock, which can easily be excavated, along the perimeter of the valley area. Based an visual inspection and geologic investigations completed at the site, it is estimated that approximately 159,415 cubic yards of material are available in the existing landfill area (Borrow Areas 1 and 2). Soil balance calculations performed for the site, estimate a need for approximately 490,000 cubic yards of material. It is estimated that the additional requirements for suitable cover material are available on-site from Borrow Area 3, which is located in the adjacent valley area to the west of the proposed landfill (see Figure 7.1). Review of geologic September 30, 1994 7-1. SRK Project No, 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan mapping, visual inspection at the site, and the findings from Boring No. M-1 (see Appendix B) in this borrow area, affirm the adequacy of this borrow area. Although there appears to be sufficient borrow source areas on-site, there exists several off-site sources which could provide additional material, if needed. Material requirement estimates and available soil volume calculations are include in Appendix E, Material Balance Calculations. 7.2.1 Daily Cover Daily cover will be placed over ail exposed refuse and compacted to a six-inch thick layer at the end of the operating day. Daily cover material should be multi-purpose and serve to discourage fires, vectors, litter, odors, and other nuisance conditions that might develop. When circumstances such as adverse weather conditions or potential odor or vector problems warrant, more frequent applications of daily cover will be made, or a thicker layer applied. The source of landfill cover material is the lower lying ridges and fans of material around the periphery of the canyon area. Daily cover will consist of the surficial alluvial material and the excavatable, weathered bedrock. Gradation analysis of the alluvial material classifies the material as a black clayey silt material (see Appendix C.1 - Laboratory Test Results). Based on available estimates, there is sufficient daily cover material available on hand at the site to supply the needs of the landfill. 7.2.2 Intermediate Cover Intermediate cover will be placed, in addition to daily cover, in a six-inch layer over landfill areas that have not, or will not, be active for a given period of time. When landfill operations are relocated away from an area for a period of over 30 days, six -inches of intermediate cover will be placed. Intermediate cover has the added function of providing a seal over the landfill, promoting run-off, and deterring infiltration. To further discourage infiltration, all areas provided with intermediate cover should be graded to a minimum slope of five percent. Intermediate cover material to be used at the landfill will consist of on-site materials subjected to laboratory testing for verification of suitability. 7.2.3 Final Cover The purpose of the final cover is to divert precipitation from completed (final or temporary) landfill areas, facilitate the proper control of landfill gases, and to isolate landfill materials from the environment. It must also be capable of accommodating landfill subsidence without sacrificing its integrity, while withstanding environmental stress (i.e., temperature and the forces of rainfall runoff). The fmal cover to be installed over completed areas of the SCL will be multi -layered, incorporating the components required in the Colorado Regulations (Section 3.5.3). The final cover design is depicted in Figure 7.2 and will be comprised of the following layers, listed in order of placement: 1) Infiltration Layer: An eighteen -inch thick layer of low -permeability soil, with an in-place saturated hydraulic conductivity less than or equal to the permeability of the base liner system September 30, 1994 7-2 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Plan or natural subsoils present, or a permeability no greater than 1x103 cm/sec, whichever is less. The infiltration layer will be placed and compacted in a minimum of two, equal lifts. 2) Erosion Layer: A six-inch thick layer of soil material to provide support to the vegetative cover and protection from erosion. 7.3 Leachate Management The criteria for liner/design components (Subsection 3.2.5 (D)) include requirements for leachate management. However, a relatively small volume of Leachate is expected to be generated by the facility. This is a result of the following: • Procedures are in place to deny liquid wastes and sludges; • Surface water controls have been designed to direct water away from the working face and closed fill areas; • Operations will minimize the size of the working face; • Daily cover will be placed to inhibit precipitation from entering compacted refuse; and • The site's precipitation rate (approximately 16.5 inches per year) will result in a low potential for precipitation infiltration into closed fill areas as well as into refuse at the working face and areas covered with intermediate or daily cover. To manage potential leachate which may be generated at the site, the landfill will have a leachate collection and removal system (LCRS) that consists of a leachate collection trench installed along the downgradient toe of slope. The LCRS will be used to collect and convey leachate from the landfill. This leachate collection trench will be installed as part of the initial site preparation work to be completed at the site (see Appendix G, Drawing 2). Based on HELP model calculations, the LCRS system will prevent the build-up of a hydraulic head greater than 12 inches over the base of the landfill area. Assuming a "daily cover" scenario, an average annual total of 74,789 cubic feet of leachate is anticipated to percolate through the base of the landfill, and the peak daily head on the base of the landfill is estimated to be 1.5 inches (see HELP Calculations, Appendix E). Under the "final cover" scenario, these values are reduced to 50,306 cubic feet of Leachate and zero inches of head of over the base of the landfill. Provisions have also been made for proper management of leachate seeps which may occur from time to time (see Section 7.3.2). The leachate will be collected at the toe of the landfill slope in a trench. The LCRS will have the following components: a trench, crushed stone, geotextile fabric and perforated HDPE pipe. The trench will have dimensions of approximately 2 ft x 3 ft and will be excavated below grade and filled with crushed stone. The stone inside the trench will be enveloped by geotextile fabric, and a 6 -inch diameter perforated HDPE pipe September 30, 1994 7-3 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan will be installed at the base of the trench for conveyance of the leachate, Leachate will be dischargeu by the trench into a proposed evaporation pond at the southeast corner of the landfill area. The evaporation pond has been sized to handle the quantities of leachate which are likely to be generated in the initial years of operation (see Appendix E). As part of the operating activities, the evaporation pond will be inspected on a daily basis. The evaporation pond will he equipped with a submersible pump capable of pumping the accumulated leachate up to any one of the existing disposal ponds or into a tanker truck for haulage disposal off-site. Prior discussions between the operator and the Department revealed that either of these alternatives would be acceptable to the Department. 7.3,1 Leachate Disposal No on-site treatment for leachate generated at the landfill is available. As previously mentioned, when conditions warrant, the on-site leachate evaporation pond will be pumped as needed to prevent overflows. If necessary, the liquids will be pumped to utilize the available site capacity in the septage disposal ponds, or the facility has also allowed for the option of removing leachate from the site by a contract hauler. Regardless of which option is pursued, efforts will be implemented for the appropriate management of liquids at the site. 7,3.2 Leachate Seeps Occasionally, leachate seeps may develop on side slopes or at the toe of the landfill. All seeps must be repaired as quickly as possible so leachate does not impact surface water quality. It is recommended that one of the three repair alternatives described below be implemented, depending on the severity of the seep. Surface Seal - Seeps which are intermittent or simply result in stained soils may be effectively sealed by excavating soils saturated with leachate and replacing them with a low -permeability soil. The replacement soil should be compacted and should cover an area two to three times the size of the seep. Excavated soils which have been tainted by leachate must be disposed as a solid waste at the active face. Surface Seal with Stone Wick - Seeps which occur in previously landfilled areas may be managed by removing soils saturated with leachate to a depth where wastes are encountered. The excavation may then be filled with screened gravel and a 12 -inch thick surface seal made with a compacted low -permeability soil. The objective of this alternative is to encourage the leachate to move vertically down through the landfilled wastes for ultimate collection in the LCRS. Collection Trench - Some seeps may persist or may be Dirge enough to warrant the installation of a leachate collection trench similar to that described in Section 7.3. The trench should intersect the seep and provide a conduit of stone and perforated collection pipe to convey the leachate to the larger collection trench system, located at the toe of the main Landfill area, for ultimate discharge into the evaporation pond. This alternative, if deemed necessary, would require approval from the regional office of the CDH. September 30, 1994 7-4 SRK Project No 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Plan 7.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Program A Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program will be developed and implemented to encompass all construction/engineering activities to be conducted at the SCL facility. The program will be developed in accordance with the Regulations and will be submitted to the CDH, for approval, prior to the initiation of any construction activity. A summary of soil testing requirements for the base liner and final cover systems to be installed are summarized in Table 7.1. TABLE 7.1 SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TEST METHODS AND MINIMUM TESTING FREQUENCIES FOR SOILS Material Test Standard Min. Test Frequency Low Permeability Soil Barrier Grain Size ASTM D422 1 Test/2,500 cu. yds. Moisture/Density Curve ASTM D1557-78 1 Test/5,000 cu. yids. Lab Permeability ACOE EM1110-2-1906 1 Test/10,000 cu. yds. Field Density ASTM D2922-81 5 Tests/Acre/Lift Undisturbed Permeability ACOE EM1110-2-1906 1 Test/Acre/Lift SCL will hire an independent professional engineer who is knowledgeable and experienced with landfill design and construction methods, to oversee all construction activities and document compliance with all aspects of the QA/QC program. The professional engineer will be responsible for: • overseeing the installation of materials and their methods of installation; • verifying that all testing equipment is being properly operated and test data is accurate and complete; • certifying that all materials utilized and all construction methods adequately meet technical specifications and are in accordance with the design plans; • ensuring that all as -built plans accurately depict construction activities; and • documenting all QA/QC activities performed. Construction activities associated with the SCL facility will be conducted under the direction of individuals who possess adequate experience. The independent professional engineer will inspect all work associated with such construction activities to enforce compliance with the approved design plans and specifications. After September 30, 1994 7-5 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan completion of a construction project, a QA/QC certification report will be prepared, signed by a registered Colorado professional engineer, and submitted to the Department. The report will be complete with all documentation, test data, and as -built pians. September 30, 1994 7-6 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 8.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM The landfill operation is subject to the environmental monitoring requirements of the Colorado Regulations (6 CCR 1007-2) and Federal Subtitle D (40 CFR Part 258), and must therefore, operate and maintain a system to monitor the environment at and around the landfill. These regulations provide specific performance and design standards for monitoring potential impacts from the operations of a landfill. Included are requirements for monitoring ground water, surface water, and landfill gas. 8.1 Ground Water Monitoring A ground water monitoring system must (1) be capable of performing in a manner which allows for the collection of representative ground water samples and (2) contain a sufficient number of monitoring wells, appropriately placed so as to monitor ground water quality in the vicinity of the landfill. The existing ground water monitoring system includes 3 monitoring wells located as shown on Figure 8.1. Of the three existing monitoring wells at the site, installed in May 1989 by Gormley Consultants, Inc., only well SCL-M-2 has continually produced ground water. Well SCL-M-1 has always been dry during routine monitoring, and well SCL-M-3 has remained dry except for the May 1993 semi-annual monitoring event. Boring logs of these wells, as well as boring logs completed during the 1993 hydrogeologic investigation (SRK) are included in Appendix B. Proposed additional ground water monitoring wells at the site will further demonstrate compliance with Subsection 2.1.15. All wells will be completed to monitor the upper most water bearing zone encountered following construction specifications presented on Figure 8.2. Proposed well SCLM4 will be completed to provide background water quality at the site since existing well SCLM-1 has consistently been dry during past monitoring events. Proposed well SCLM-5 will be completed to provide an indication of water quality downgradient of the site septage ponds. Proposed well SCLM-6 will be completed to provide an indication of water quality immediately downgradient of landfilling activities. The locations of these proposed wells are shown on Figure 8.1 (Environmental Monitoring Location Plan). Ground water monitoring at the site will continue with the addition of proposed monitoring wells. Existing well SCLM-2 will serve as the point of compliance well. Following installation of the proposed wells, the monitoring frequency will increase to quarterly for a period of two years. At that time, monitoring frequency will be decreased to semi-annually through the landfill active life and closure period. Monitoring frequency will be decreased to annually (or Iess frequent at the authorization of CDH) during the post -closure period. Analytical parameters to be included in the ground water monitoring program will be consistent with the existing program and include those constituents listed in Table 8.1. Following the installation and elevation surveying of proposed monitoring wells, the site ground water monitoring will include the measurement and recording of water levels at each of the site wells. Following one year of monitoring, this water table elevation data will be evaluated to provide confirmation of the ground September 30, 1994 8-I SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan water gradient in the local upper most water bearing zone. If this data indicates that wells SCLM-2, SCLM- 4, SCLM-5, or SCLM-6 are not properly placed to serve monitoring purposes outlined previously, they will be replaced at the direction of CDH. As part of the ongoing ground water monitoring program, sampling and analysis documentation will be placed in the operating record consistent with Section B3 of the Colorado Solid Waste Regulations Appendix B. Specific statistical monitoring data evaluation techniques (as outlined in that same Section of Appendix B) will be established following three years of monitoring of the proposed monitoring system. The present ground water monitoring program at the SCL includes semi-annual testing, of those wells which produce samples, for the constituents listed in Table 8.1. TABLE 8.I. CURRENT SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER TEST PARAMETERS Alkalinity (as CaCO3)•Potassium Bicarbonate (as CaCO3) Sodium Carbonate (as CaCO3) Sulfate Calcium SAR in water Chloride Total Organic Halogens Conductivity (lab & field) Total Organic Carbon pH (lab & field) TDS Hardness (as CaCO3) Total Dissolved Solids Magnesium Cation -Anion Balance Nitrate Copper Nitrate/Nitrite (as N) Iron Nitrite as N Manganese Nitrate as NO3 Zinc Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl ; September 30, 1994 8-2 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & OperaionsPlan 8.2 Surface Water Monitoring The surface monitoring program was designed to monitor the quality of surface water flowing through or past the site. Currently, surface water samples are collected on a semi-annual basis from two surface water sampling points (SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG) and periodically from a weir (SCL-WEIR) which is located near the Iandfilling operations when flow exists. The current surface water sampling locations are shown on Figure 8.1. These samples are collected and analyzed in conjunction with the ground water sampling events. Analytical results of past sampling events are included in Appendix D of this document. Since all surface water sampling locations are within a small stream/ditch, the samples may be collected by hand using a dedicated sample bottle. Only bottles supplied by laboratories are used to collect surface water samples. Sample bottles or caps that are cracked or broken are not used. To properly obtain fresh representative samples, all samples must be collected from the center of the stream/ditch, and at mid depth of the flow. The sample container should be lowered into the water while still capped, uncapped under water to allow the sample bottle to fill, and then recapped before removal from the water. The mouth of the bottle is faced into the current, or toward the water surface, during collection of samples to ensure proper bottle filling and the collection of a fresh, representative sample. After collection of surface water samples, temperature, pH, and specific conductivity measurements are obtained in the same manner as for ground water sampling. The laboratory requires filtering only of the samples being submitted for dissolved metals analysis. 8.3 Landfill Gas Monitoring Pursuant to the Regulations (Section 2.3) landfill gas monitoring will be conducted at the SCL facility. As part of the explosive gases monitoring program, it is proposed that one explosive gas monitoring point will be installed between the solid waste disposal area and the site gatehouse/maintenance facilities to monitor for gases. The proposed location of this gas monitoring well is shown on Figure 8.1 with construction details shown on Figure 8.3. The gas monitoring point will be installed in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations. The landfill operator is in the process of purchasing a LANDTEC model GA -90 analyzer which will be used to monitor explosive gases at the proposed monitoring point. Landfill gas monitoring will be performed on a quarterly basis and maintained as part of the operating record. During monitoring events, if the concentrations of explosive gases exceeds 25% of the lower explosive limit (LEL) for individual components (or total LEL), the Department and local governing body will be notified, and within 7 days of the detection, documentation of the explosive gas labels detected and a description of the actions taken must be included in the operating records. Then, within the next 60 days of detection, an approved remediation plan will be implemented. This remediation plan will become a component of the facility's operating record. September 30, 1994 8-3 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 9.0 CONCEPTUAL CLOSURE/POST-CLOSURE PLAN 9.1 Introduction There are three primary purposes of landfill closure: (1) to reduce storm water infiltration into the landfill mass by promoting run-off and transpiration, thereby reducing or eliminating leachate generation; (2) to prevent the buildup and uncontrolled release of any gas which may be generated as a result of waste material decomposition within the landfill; and (3) to prevent exposure of waste matter to the environment and prevent contact with vectors. 9.2 Landfill Closure 9.2.1 Closure Requirements When the SCL facility ceases to accept waste under the conditions of its CD, closure of the landfill will be conducted in accordance with State and Federal regulations. In accordance with Sections 2.5 and 3.5 of the Colorado Regulations, landfill closure will be conducted in the following manner: 1) Submission of a written closure notification to the Department and Garfield County sixty days prior to the anticipated closure date. 2) Notification of the general public concerning the closure of the facility sixty days prior to the anticipated closure date. Such notification will be carried out by the posting of signs at the entrance to the landfill site. 3) Finishing the installation of the final cover (final cover will be placed over areas of the landfill as they reach final grade); completion of the permanent surface water diversion structures; and mitigation of any other needed controls that could pose a threat to the public health, safety and the environment. 4) Submittal of a Final Closure/Post-Closure Plan. 9.2.2 Closure Operations In order to satisfy the requirements for closure, numerous tasks will be performed at the SCL. Some of the tasks are continuations of the ongoing maintenance program at the landfill. The landfill's final cover will be constructed in four stages in order to reduce the amount of active areas exposed, and to enable the final cover to be placed sequentially. The sequencing of the landfill's final cover installation will coincide with that used in development of the landfill so as to cover completed areas as they reach final grade. The first area to be provided with final cover, Stage 1, will be the side slope area over the completed Phase 1 portion of the landfill. The next stages of the final cover effort, Stages 2 and 3, will be executed similarly to Stage 1, with September 30. 1994 9-1 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operation Plan final cover being installed over completed side slope areas of the respective phases. Once Phase 4 of the landfill's development has been completed, the last area of the landfill, Stage 4, will receive final cover. Closure of this area will cover the remaining side slope and top slope areas of the landfill. Final cover installation stages are depicted on the Final Cover Sequence Plan (Figure 9.1). Table 9.1 provides a preliminary schedule listing the various final cover stages, approximate acreage, estimated phase life, and the estimated completion date for final cover installation. TABLE 9.1 PHASING SCHEDULE SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL Stage Acres Estimated Phase Life Year of Estimated Final Cover Completion Stage 1: Phase 1 - side slope 5.93 10.2 yrs 2005 Stage 2: Phase 2 - side slope 1.73 9.6 yrs 2015 Stage 3: Phase 3 - side slope 2.78 11.8 yrs 2027 Stage 4: Phase 4 - side & top slopes 20.23 9.6 yrs 2037 As final cover phasing progresses, the final cover from each stage must be tied into the final cover of the previous stage. Such a procedure for sequentially tying in each additional stage provides for a continuous seal over the landfill's surface. During interim periods, before adjacent stages of the final cover system are joined, the edges of the final cover system will be temporarily delineated in an appropriate manner (e.g., haybales, plywood sheets or some other media). This will allow the edges to be more easily located in the future and will help to protect the edges of the final cover system from sustaining any damage. 9.3 Post -Closure When the landfill closure is accepted by the Department, the post -closure period will begin. The post -closure period will last a minimum of thirty years, during which time the landfill will be monitored for compliance with required safety, health and environmental standards to assure that it continues to present no threat to the public health, safety or environment. The facility owner/operator may petition the Department for a reduced post -closure monitoring period, if it is found that a shorter period is sufficient to protect human health and the environment. September 30, 1994 9-2 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan 9.3.1 Post -Closure Care and Maintenance Routine maintenance must be carried out on and around the closed landfill during the post -closure period, to assure continued integrity and proper functioning of all constructed features of the landfill closure. Maintenance is to include periodic inspection of the following: • The final cover system. • Landfill access roads. • Ground water and explosive gas monitoring wells. • The storm water management system; including swales, diversion berms, and drainage channels. • LCRS and leachate evaporation pond. If inspections reveal conditions that would compromise the purpose and function of any of these features, corrective actions will be undertaken for remediation of the conditions. On the landfill itself, corrective actions may include, as a minimum, reseeding and fertilizing bare spots in the vegetative cover, cleaning of swales and drainage channels, keeping the access roads passable, and repairing any breaches or areas of soil erosion in the final cover system. In addition, the perimeter swales, LCRS, and evaporation pond will be routinely cleared of sediments to assure their continued function in preventing any impact to surface or ground waters. 93.2 Landfill Subsidence Monitoring An elevation survey of the top surface of the landfill will be conducted on a semi-annual basis for the first two years following landfill closure. Thereafter, subsidence monitoring will be performed biannually, unless it is determined that more frequent monitoring is necessary. Landfill surfaces found to have a surface slope less than five percent, due to subsidence, will be filled and graded to attain the grades shown on the design plans. All areas disturbed while making slope repairs will be re -seeded to provide an adequate vegetative cover. 9.3.3 Ground Water Monitoring The ground water wells in use at the time of closure should be utilized for ground water monitoring during the post -closure period. Monitoring will be carried out on an annual frequency and the list of test parameters will be the same as presented in Table 8,1, unless site-specific variances are granted by the Department through the petition process, 9.3.4 Surface Water Monitoring The surface water monitoring program in effect at the time of closure will continue during the post -closure period. Monitoring will be carried out in conjunction with the ground water monitoring program. If September 30, 1994 9-3 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & Operations Plan contaminants reach certain threshold levels, re -sampling must be performed and a report submitted to the Department. Contaminant thresholds include state and federal drinking water standards or levels established by the facility's permit. Similar to ground water monitoring, unless otherwise directed by the Department, testing frequencies and the list of test parameters will be those presented in Table 8.1. 9.3.5 Explosive Gas Monitoring Landfill gas emissions and migration must be monitored on a semi-annual basis. As a minimum, the monitoring should be a continuation of the program used prior to closure. 9.3.6 Maintenance of Environmental Monitoring Systems All systems for monitoring ground water, surface water and landfill gases must be maintained in a condition suitable for collecting representative environmental samples. Monitoring locations must be maintained so they are readily accessible to sampling equipment and personnel responsible for collecting environmental samples. Damaged or destroyed environmental monitoring systems must be reported to the Department within 30 days of discovery of such damage. Repairs or replacement monitoring systems must be completed prior to the next scheduled sampling event. 93.7 Post -Closure Landfill Use Access to the landfill will be restricted after closure activities have been completed. At the present time, the City of Glenwood Springs has no planned use for the landfill, except to return it to its natural habitat and blend with the surroundings in the mountain habitat which is the South Canyon area. Any other use of the landfill will require the approval of the Department, and must satisfy any regulatory requirements. September 30, 1994 9-4 SRK Project No. 65701 South Canyon Landfill Facility Design & operations Plan 10.0 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE Financial assurance regulations require that the owner/operator provide proof of financial responsibility for their liability to close landfills, provide post -closure care, and provide corrective action for known releases. In accordance with landfill closure regulations, the owner/operator is required to estimate the cost of hiring a third party to close the largest area of the landfill that will require a final cover at any time during the active life of the landfill, in accordance with the closure plan. In order to generate financial assurance estimates for the SCL, engineering estimates were prepared to assess closure and post -closure at the site. These estimates are included in Appendix F. Once Department approval has been given concerning these cost estimates, the appropriate mechanism(s) and financial instrument will be instituted. Currently, the intent is to satisfy the requirements through a combination of the local government financial test, a surety bond, and a letter of credit. September 0, 1994 10-1 SRK Project o. 65701 Jia/RIU3 STEFFEN ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Fnglowirs & Stflontlsts PROJECT NO. I 65701 X' • 42 :to J+ i'": - A if . p .1:::-.-, 1/5.7,•,,..-. ---..• - ...4 .,..._ ... .t., L.:j7/4— i,..5Th --Approximate Area of Current .• .•,) , ./\MSW Landfillingr r „ %.,/ i s.lk --It , ---______.,--.--. % ' :(:) i / ) /_.--77..—`. . / cp . / i - - i i t • i ' - Approximate Area of Current C & D Landilllin ,.• \ --.1\ ; " '*1•( Ji.1 a6 • 1, Approximate Site I Location ° \ :01 7111 Existing Evaporation Ponds or Septic Waste f'i°),),) !...P...5 ', ....Q, : -__ /./4' -1/ 17 ". . • - -:' f,. -- (/.,..-..• •- , I %. \\k, I : • --` ....„ /- --• Porter /1..berietir r BASE MAP: USGS — STORM KING MOUNTAIN QUADRANGLE --7/ o!,• • • • g=1 PC15 J1 r: f SCALE 1:24.000 DAP, 5/94 RI VISION FIGURE 2.1 SITE LOCATION MAP ••- 1 • a•• 11 11• 1.. 1110• 11.• 110. 1011 101* 1•• •1• • 11• 1•• .1• ti SEISMIC RISK YAP OF THE YR#SED STATES 40111 •-11. ••=•.r roar I -N M.1 •.f..•- 414I•4I ••tI40414• =•T 44040 •11101140 1. •Ifs.1.•.• ells 1.•••.t•0/•1 1.11.4. 1t•s1•n 1a.• 1.1 1111 1.100.111.. V .ed 11 .1 11. 11.11..1..1.. 111.1 1-fM•...I• 40.01•: •.•nM•M.• t• 1.1•06111, VII .1 I•r •.•. •11.11.. 104111.••11•• •1•••40, .••f•••.••• 1• /.1•..11! 111 .1 be •,•. ••••t• 10111 4-Ts0•0 •e••• ef••tf 100. 110. 1 ••1•t./M• Ip r 1'\• pt..10.111 1r .0.1.1. e•10•100111 f., Fjl� •..•III.• *.•.111 t.t•s.111 s..1. 1111 T•a•• •..e 11•100111•10. ■.11•u• t••• 1101 110• 110• NOTE•. 1 MAP ADAPTED FROM ALGERMISSEN; MAP FROM DESIGN OF SMALL DAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, 1987. 1/• • • T a1• 11- 1 • '400"-143RIC STEFI EN ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) (;11r1suiiing Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO. 65701 R[VISIOON A FIGURE 4.1 SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL SEISMIC RISK MAP OF THE UNITED STATES Alaska I Eck I ri liffil"""111frid 41' mir Explanation S- Caao+u - Florirwuit rccelecauon eepressed at a proccot of gravity The xhado l area generally iodic -ace wear where MSWLE owner/openings mux comply with U demon Lk requuen ensa in 40 CFR 25a.14. JSTEFFEN ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO. 65701 DATE 8/94 REVISION A FIGURE 4.2 SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL SEISMIC IMPACT ZONES NM MI MEI MO IM NMI Mil INN MI 1 4 NMI/ 1 FSM SOURCE - EPA SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY CRITERIA TECHNICAL MANUAL, NOVEMBER 1993 FIGURE 5.1 SURFACE WATER MAP 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 BASE MAP: USGS - STORM KING MOUNTAIN QUADRANGLE SCALE 1:24.000 Iti k___7.aigh 'STEFFEN ROBERTSON K1RSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO. 65701 DATE 9/94 REVISION 0 FIGURE 7.1 BORROW AREA LOCATION MAP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 / j f f f f f/✓/ f ✓%f f'/ f ///f�12RECOMPACTEp' LOW PERMEABILITY SOIL UNER (KO x10-5 cm/sec)/ \/1\���;;;;;;;‘;;;:\e: .*AN/‘/,‘* !\//\\//\/ I KN SS IN ESS OF 70 FE 4\�� -sr-wr \ Sr- (Kslxl0cm/sec}\/`\•N, /•'*%% ''/ ��!///1\ <\✓\\\k44\, 4 .4-4 AS S. BASE LINER DETAIL NOT TO SCALE VEGETATIVE GROWTH 5.07E SLOPE (MIN.) FINAL COVER DETAIL NOT TO SCALE STEFFEN ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO. 65701 DATE 9/94 REVISION A FIGURE 7,2 BASE LINER AND FINAL COVER DETAILS ''J sr 6aoo p �it,..-,, Z Approximate Area'" ---,-,•--1-1--''..-,-,-‘,,,_, eaceT• of Current MSW Landfilling 4 `w�� i�� ! /y��1 t r �l` e ;Gate House Approximate Area of Current /j C & D'Landfilling r y'I r. ..,,,,,s.,\, t\ �`r }I �� u l 1J1 1. ,�r, �q� 1 , �-• SCLM-3 =- 6,; ___= =SCLM-6 r isc'L-scc-u. ij =\1363 'R• rC' `yi Approximate Site Location • Existing Eva▪ poration Ponds for Septic Waste I +,�.`� Bei. South Canyon Creek Road •�,r� y i- r !� c *Via: _ [ , I LEGEND ■ EXISTING SURFACE WATER MONITORING POINT i EXISTING GROUND WATER MONITORING POINT Gl PROPOSED GROUND WATER MONITORING POINT • PROPOSED EXPLOSIVE GAS MONITORING POINT MASE MAP: USGS - STORM KING MOUNTAIN QUADRANGLE I SCALE 1.24,000 STEFFEN ROBERTSON KtRSTPN Consulting Engineers P. r;annlis1 PROJECT NO. 65701 ()ATE 9/94 I(1VISION FIGURE 8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATION PLAN 1 SECURE WELLHEAD COVER CONCRETE AROUND CASING TO COVER CEMENT -BENTONITE GROUT SEAL VARIES 2' 36 611 PVC CAP 6° STEEL CASING 1'-6" - F MINIMUM 5.0' OF WELL SCREEN ABOVE AND 10.01 OF WELL SCREEN BELOW ENCOUNTERED WATER TABLE 10' ALL WELL COMPONENTS MAY BE PVC, STAINLESS STEEL OR TEFLON. ALL JOINTS TO BE FLUSH - THREADED, NO PVC ADHESIVES. r 6• CEMENT/BENTONITE GROUT BENTONITE CLAY SEAL OR EQUIVALENT SAND PACK FILTER MATERIAL TO EXTEND 1.0' ABOVE WELL SCREEN MINIMUM 2.0"x15.0' WELL SCREEN, PREFERRED SLOT SIZE -0.01' (10 SLOT) NOT Td SCALE STEFFEN ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO. DATE REVISION 65701 _ 9/94 A FIGURE 8.2 GROUND WATER MONITORING WELL DETAIL N BORE HOLE DEPTH VARIES La La cc— . - 4'-6' DIA. ALUMINUM CASING WITH LOCKING LID - SAMPLE PORT CONFIGURATION 1/4' DRAIN HOLE • CONCRETE AROUND CASING TO COVER CEMENT -BENTONITE GROUT SEAL 1/4" PEA GRAVEL CEMENT -BENTONITE GROUT SEAL -- CLAY OR CLEAN BACKFILL 1' SCH. 40 PVC PROBE FILTER PACK (SAND) '-‘,0111311,11( STEFFEN ROBERTSON KIESTEN (11.5. ] Consulting Engineers 6 Scientists PROJECT NO. 65701 DATE RfVISiON 9/94 A 4' 1/8' TO 3/16" TYPICAL DIA. 1' SCH. 40 PVC PROBE PERFORATED OR SLOTTED PIPE 1' SCH. 40 PVC END CAP GRAVEL PACK 6' PEA GRAVEL PERFORATION DETAIL NOT TO SCALE r FIGURE 8.3 EXPLOSIVE GAS MONITORING WELL DETAIL SCALE IN FEET STEFF£N ROBERTSON KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT NO, 65701 DATE 9/94 REVISION A FIGURE 9.1 FINAL COVER SEQUENCE PLAN SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL APPENDIX A SCL DOCUMENTS, CORRESPONDENCE AND MISC. INFORMATION Historical Documents • June 2, 1971 - Resolution regarding SCL • December 1, 1980 - Agreement between Garfield County and City of Glenwood Springs • April 1, 1989 - South Canyon Landfill Lease Agreement Inspection Reports « CDH letter dated September 1, 1987 • CDH letter dated September 22, 1992 • CDH letter dated August 4, 1993 Correspondence • CDH letter dated September 29, 1989 regarding acceptance of monitoring well installation, surface water sampling points, and sample QA/QC plan. • CDH letter dated February 28, 1992 regarding monitoring frequency approval. • CDH letter dated March 1, 1994 regarding alternative liner design. Miscellaneous Information • Solid and Septic Waste Intake Quantities • SCL Recordkeeping Forms M&4 LW ,Veeuy Disaoieu 214u. od Administrative 6620.79 Wednesday, June 2, 1971 The board met in regular session Wednesday June 2, 1971 at 10:00 o'clock A. M. there being present Chairman, Lynn Hill, Commissioners. trete ,attovo. E.L. Busby County Attorney Gerald Harcert and Clerk Ella Stephens. ' Ed Graves appeared before the board to discuss Regional Planning. The board decided to take this matter under edvisememt. No appointments were made. Robert Downs met with the board to report the hiring of Delores Salvucci as a new employee under the reappraisal program. Mr. Downs also reported that he was resigning to take a permanent position. This will be discussed further during a special meeting the 9th of June when Max Arnold is present. Leo Swartzendruber appeared before the board and presented some vouchers. honey due the Mt.View Nursing Home after our county audit was made. Al Axtell and Allen Thulson met with the board to discuss the City and County sanitary land fill at South Canyon. After considerable discussion the following resolution was introduced, duly seconded and unanimously adopted. r1ESeb13TIeN WIER£AS,the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, is the owner in fee simple of a certain parcel of of land located in the south Canon area of Garfield County, Colorado, which has for many years been utilized as a dump, and WIEEREAS,because of legislation passed by the State of Colorado requiring that aLL dumping of refuse and other trash be accomplished by sanitary Landfill, or in some other like fashion, it is now necessary that the dump facilities above identified be converted to a sanitary landfill, and WHEREAS, the County of Garfield is presently in the process of opening a sanitary landfill operation in the Rifle area of Garfield County and has explored the possibilities of opening a sanitary landfill operation in the area of Cattle Creek in Garfield County, `Colorado, which latter operation would be conducted jointly with the City of Glenwood Springs and the Town of Carbondale, and Wt1EREAS,it now appears that a sanitary landfill will not be established in the mediate future at the Cattle Creek site. end that at the present time, the most economical and feasible operation for a sanitary landfill would be upon the lands of the City of Glenwood Springs above identified in the South Canon area of Garfield Count), and WHEREAS, because of the unknown costs involved and other possible problems which have come to light, it is the desire of the County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, to enter into a temporary agreement with the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, concerning the joint operation of a sanitary landfill at the South Canon area in Garfield County, Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that commencing with the year 1971 the County of Garfield shall operate jointly with the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, a sanitary landfill on lands owned by the City of Glenwood Springs at South Canon, Garfield County, Colorado, the said operation to be conducted in conformity with the following, to -wit: 1. The sanitary landfill will be located upon lands now owned by the City of Glenwood Springs and no charge or rental will be made to the County Commissioners for such u'se as they shall make of the same. 2. That the County of Garfield shall provide at no expense to the City of Glenwood Springs, such excavating equipment (in addition to the jointly owned equipment referred to below) as is necessary to complete the excavation of two trenches (one of which is now in existence) 800 feet in length, 20 feet in width and 12 feet in depth, such excavation to be accomplished in conformity with the present excavation as has heretofore been accomplished and now completed by the said County. 3. That the bulldozer described as heretofore j;.rintLy purchased by the County and the City shall stand in the name of the County of Garfield but that the ownership thereof shall be joint with the City of Glenwood Springs. .4, That the salary and all other costs and expenses incurred by reason ofthe operation of the equipment aforesaid shall be borne jointly between the County of Garfield and the City of Glenwood Sppin s. 5. That all other expenses, costs and other expenditures not hereinabove identified shall be borne jointly between the County of Garfield and the City of Glenwood Springs and that an accounting thereof shall be accomplished at such periodic intervals as shall be determined between the Board of County Commissioners and the City Council and at the termination of this agreement. and further that no such expenses and costs of a substantial nature shall be incurred by either of the parties without the con- currence of the ocher. Be it 'further resolved that the joint operation, the subject of this Resolution, shall terminate upon the exhaustion of both trenches by the filling therof as a sanitary landfill. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the effective date.herof shall commence upon approval of this Resolution by the City Council of The City of Clenwood Springs, Colorado. A Letter was received from Martin Dumont, Charles Whiting. It was found that this raise this raise was made by E. L. Busby and secondee A n.tfrinn fnr-..�— ing the raise in salary for budget. A motion to approve ously passed. A C :i E C ': C T TRIS AG & E:IENT is made and entered into effective this 1st day of December. 1980, between the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County (County) and the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, (City). 1. RECITALS. In order to interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the County and the City agree to the truth and accuracy of the following: a) The City owns a solid waste disposal site and facility located in the South Canyon Creek drainage of Garfield County (South Canyon Landfill) which is open to the public in general, to the City, and to the County, and fees are assessed for its use according to a published schedule; b) Due to access problems to the South Canyon Landfill, County, in the recent past has operated the South Canyon Landfill under contractual agreement with the City and is'presently operating the South Canyon Landfill; c) The County and the City have been advised by the State of Colorado that the Department of Health (State) is of the opinion that the present operation of the South Canyon Landfill does not comply with State standards relating to landfill operations, and both the City and the County desire that the landfill be operated to the satisfaction of the State, regardless of whether the regulation upon which the State relies are applicable to South Canyon Landfill; d) The County and the City desire that agreement be reached for the sharing of expenses necessary to bring the operation of the South Canyon Landfill into compliance with the regulations of t State, and, upon such compliance, for the return of the operation of the South Canyon Landfill to the City. -1- COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. The County and the City agree that efforts shall be undertaken immediately to bring the operation of the South Canyon Landfill into compliance with the regulations of the State, and that all costs incurred in such efforts shall be borne equally by the County and the City. The County and the City shall cooperate with the State in order to develop a plan of compliance and shall effect that plan of compliance either through labor and equipment supplied jointly or, by agreement, through contractual services of a third party. The County and City agree that they may provide services in lieu of cash which shall be credited in accordance with the actual cost to the entity providing such services. 3. CONTINUED OPERATION During the compliance effort, except as otherwise provided herein, the County shall continue to operate the South Canyon Landfill in a manner which will permit the City to use the Landfill during daylight hours, Monday through Saturaday, inclusive, for the transportation, dumping, and disposal of refuse, trash, and solid waste by means of vehicles, motor vehicles, compacting vehicles and transfer stations, in such quantities as may be necessary to serve the needs of the City, and the County shall itself use the South Canyon Landfill in order to transport, dump, and dispose of trash, refuse and solid waste in such quantities as may be necessary to meet the needs of the County. The County may provide regulations and hours concerning use by the public in general of the South Canyon Landfill and the County may retain fees and receipt charged. The County may not increase the schedule of charges from their present level without the prior written permission of the City. 4. DIVISION OF COSTS. The County and the City shall equally share the cost of operations of the South Canyon Landfill, as well as the compliance costs described above. The County shall provide the City :with a written statement of costs associated with the operation and and compliance measures at the South Cannon Landfill beginning upon the effective dace of this agreement. which shall be reduced by the total amount of fees and receipts received by the County as a result of such operations. The County shall provide the City with a written statement of such net costs, and the City shall pay, within 30 days, one-half of the amount of such costs. less any of its own expenditures directly associated with the operation or compliance effort at the South Canyon Landfill. The County and City agree that before any costs can be assessed to the City by the County for the Landfill operation during the term of this agreement other than normal operating costs that the County shall receive the approval of the City for the items for which the costs are to be incurred. The County agrees that they will pay any and all costs for compliance measures at the South Canyon Landfill for purposes of providing septic system disposal as such costs are a result of users within the County and not within the City. 5. JOINT USE OF EQUIPMENT. The City and the County shall continue to jointly own the International Crawler historically used for the South Canyon Landfill, and shall share equally the costs associated with the maintenance, repair, and operation of such equipment. The County shall have exclusive use of this equipment so long as it operates the South Canyon Landfill including use for necessary maintenance and repair and maintenance of County facilities and roads in South Canyon. 6. TERMINATION OF JOINT OPERATION. The County and the City desire that the operation of the South Canyon Landfill be returned to City upon the restoration of landfill operations to compliance with the requirements of landfill operations of the State, but in any event no later than the 30th day of June, 1981. Accordingly, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 County and the City shall, prior to such date, take all steps riecessary for the return of the operation of the land fill to the City on such date, and the County's operation and responsibility for the South Canyon Landfill shall cease on such date, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Upon termination, the City may pay the County one-half of the value of the International Crawler which total value is agreed to be $40,000.00 and assume full ownership of that equipment. or may continue to own that equipment jointly with the County, but assume sole responsibility for its maintenance, repair, and operation, and, upon its sale, divide equally the proceeds of such sale with the County. EXECUTED by the respective political subdivisions of the State of Colorado, effective the 1st day of December. 1980. CITY OF GLEU WOOD SPRIINGS 'et zCG77.- j 4 c Marian I. Smith, Mayor ATTEST Bo Stan+erter Finance Director APPROVED AS TO FORM Mere it_. F inn Cit ana rl C1 ries H. Willman City Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF G .FIELD COUNTY C aizman ATTEST Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM Art A p ana p County Attorney SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE AGREEMENT is entered into by and between the CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO (Lessor, hereinafter referred to as "City"), and TADCO DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, INC. (Lessee), to be effective April 1, 1989 no matter what date actually signed by the parties. WITNESSETH: The City for and in consideration of the rents reserved herein and of the public benefits derived by the City as a result of the keeping of the covenants, agreements and conditions contained herein on the part of the Lessee, does hereby grant a lease to the Lessee for the following described property: A tract of land in Township 6 South, Range 90 West of the 6th P.M. more particularly described as follows: A parcel of land situate in Sections 2, 3, 10 and 11, Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the 6th P.M., Garfield County, Colorado, described as follows: Section 2: That portion of the SW1/4SW1/4 lying southerly of the northerly line of the landfill access road. Section 3: SW4SW1/4; SELSWI; S1SWZSE1/4; S'SEltSE:. Section 10: NIINEkNW' ; N' NW1/4NE1/4; NINE1/4NE11.. Section 11: That portion of the NNW'-LNWk lying southerly of the northerly line of the landfill access road and lying westerly of the westerly line of County Road 134. The above—described parcel of land contains 197 acres, more or less. I. Use of Premises. The leased premises shall be used by the Lessee exclusively for the operation and maintenance of a municipal landfill according to the terms and conditions set forth herein. Lessee shall make the landfill available to the general public and shall accept garbage, trash, rubbish, and septic sludge materials, except car bodies or portions thereof and substances which are considered to be unacceptable at this municipal landfill site in accordance with State and Federal laws, and shall charge a fee therefor in accordance with paragraph VI of this lease. No other use of the leased premises shall be permitted without the prior written approval of the City Council of the City, and no person shall reside on the leased premises. II. Term. This lease shall be for a term of ten (10) years effective April 1, 1989 through March 31, 1999, unless earlier terminated as set forth herein. III. Rental. A. Lessee shall pay to the City a rent equal to five percent (5%) of the Lessee's gross revenues as defined herein. Rents shall be due and payable quarterly on April 20, July 20, October 20, and January 20 of each year based. upon gross revenue realized by the Lessee during the preceding quarter. In remitting rent to the City, Lessee shall also submit a report of gross revenue during the preceding quarter, itemized as follows: commercial, non-commercial, septic, recycling, and other. B. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "gross revenue" shall mean all revenues derived directly or indirectly by the Lessee from or in connection with the operation of the municipal landfill pursuant to this lease. Such revenues shall include but not be limited to all revenues derived by the Lessee from dump fees and any and all revenues which may be derived by the Lessee from salvaging and recycling operations at the landfill. C. Lessee shall maintain full and complete records of all revenues realized by Lessee pursuant to this lease. The City shall be permitted to inspect and audit such records upon request at any time during the term of this lease and for six months after the termination of this lease. IV. Management, Operations, Maintenance and Security. A. Disclaimer. Management, operation, maintenance and security of the leased premises, including the provision of utility services thereto, shall be the exclusive responsibility of the Lessee and shall be performed at Lessee's sole cost and expense. Nothing in this lease shall be construed to impose management, operation, utility, maintenance or security obligations upon the City either pertaining to the leased premises specifically or to the City -owned South Canyon property in general, and nothing herein shall constitute a call or a claim upon any future budget or appropriation of the City. The City shall not be liable for any loss or damages suffered by the Lessee arising from Lessee's use of the leased premises. B. Montgomery Operations Plan. Lessee shall operate and maintain the landfill in compliance with the operations plan set forth in Chapter 7 of the report entitled South Canyon Landfill Planning and Operation Study, March 1982 as prepared by James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. C. Hours of Operation. The Lessee shall maintain the following minimum hours of operation at the landfill: 9:00 to 5:00 - Monday through Saturday, except holidays. During the period from April 15 to October 1 of each year, Lessee shall also open the landfill for one-half CO day on Sundays. D. Compliance with Laws. Lessee shall manage, operate, and maintain the landfill in compliance with any and all Federal, State, County and local laws and regulations applicable to municipal landfills, including ordinances duly adopted by the City. In the event that any such law or regulation conflicts with any provision of the Montgomery Operations Plan or any provision of this lease, then the stricter requirement shall control. Lessee shall promptly notify the City of any complaint, citation, order or similar notice of non-compliance issued by any regulatory agency in regards to the landfill. 2 E. Capability to Perform. Lessee covenants that Lessee has procured and shall continue to maintain sufficient equipment, material, personnel, expertise and other resources as necessary to carry out the management and operational requirements set forth herein. V. Capital Improvements. A. Ground water Monitoring Wells. On or before June 1, 1989, Lessee shall, at Lessee's sole cost and expense, install ground water monitoring wells and commence a program of ground water monitoring and leachate control as required in the letter from the Colorado Department of Health dated July 13, 1988. Lessee shall also rectify any and all other specific problems identified by the State Inspector in said letter. B. Additional Capital Improvements. In the event that any additional capital improvements are required for the landfill operation upon the leased premises during the term of this lease pursuant to any Federal, State, or local law or regulation, the cost of such capital improvement shall be apportioned between the Lessee and the City as set forth herein. For purposes of this paragraph, "capital improvement" shall mean an actual improvement to the real property, the useful life of which shall extend beyond the term of this lease. In apportioning the cost of any such improvement, the parties shall consider the value of the improvement to the Lessee during the remaining term of the lease and the residual value of the improvement to the City upon the expiration of the lease. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall be construed to require the City to participate in the cost of any of the following: any ongoing improvement to the property which is required as a part of normal landfill operations as set forth in the Montgomery Operations Plan; the cost of constructing or maintaining any capital improvement heretofore required of the Lessee pursuant to the Management -Lease Agreement dated September 2, 1982; or any capital improvement, the need for which has been specifically precipitated by any act or omission of the Lessee in violation of any Federal, State or local law or regulation. VI. Landfill Rates. A. Rate Schedule. Except as specifically provided in subsection "C" hereof, Lessee shall be permitted to charge the following maximum rates for dumping at the municipal landfill: Solid Waste $3.00 per cubic yard Septic/sludge Wastes (per 1,000 gallons) $35.00 B. Rate Adjustments. The foregoing rate schedule shall not be modified without the prior written consent of the City. A rate increase shall not be granted any more than once in any twelve month period. In requesting a rate adjustment, the Lessee shall supply to the City Council of the City a full written report disclosing current operating expenses and revenues at the landfill and an analysis of such expenses and revenues in relation to historical conditions. To the extent the Lessee demonstrates increased costs or expenses associated with the landfill operation which are not offset by current revenues, the City shall grant a rate increase in an amount sufficient to defray such additional costs or expenses. 3 C. Exemption for Commercial Haulers. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, Lessee may charge commercial haulers rates for usage of the municipal landfill to be set at Lessee's discretion. For purposes of this section, "commercial hauler" means any person who is engaged in an ongoing business of collecting and transporting waste materials or who is otherwise transporting solid wastes or septic/sludge waste for hire. The Lessee may enter into contracts with commercial haulers to establish rates to be charged; however, any such contractual rates shall be made available uniformly to all commercial haulers similarly situated. Lessee is strictly prohibited from entering into any exclusive contracts with any commercial hauler, from discriminating against any commercial hauler, or from engaging in any other practice which would tend to place any commercial hauler at a competitive disadvantage with any other commercial hauler similarly situated. Lessee shall promptly notify the City of any contracts or agreements establishing rates with commercial haulers. VII. City Dumping. Lessee shall permit the City to dump City -generated solid waste in the landfill free of charge. For purposes of this section, "City -generated solid waste" shall include the following: solid waste collected from City property by City crews and delivered to the landfill in City vehicles; solid waste collected and delivered by City crews in City vehicles in the course of the City's annual Spring Cleanup; and solid wastes collected and delivered by any third party on behalf of the City in conjunction with any contract for free trash collection services. The City shall promptly notify the Lessee of any such contracts with third parties for the free hauling of City -generated wastes. The term "City -generated solid waste" expressly excludes: any solid wastes collected and delivered from any private domestic or commercial sources in the event the City resumes a regular program of trash collection service; and any solid waste collected and delivered by any third party on behalf of the City for which the City is paying. Any dumping of City -generated waste at the landfill shall occur only during the Lessee's normal operating hours, and shall be subject to the Lessee's normal operating rules and procedures. VIII. Salvaging and Recycling. Lessee shall be permitted to salvage and recycle materials from the landfill. Any revenues realized by the Lessee from recycling activity shall be included in gross revenues as set forth in paragraph III above. The Lessee shall not permit any other person to enter or utilize the landfill for purposes of scavenging or salvaging materials. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as guaranteeing the delivery of salvageable or recyclable materials to the landfill. The City reserves the right to cooperate or participate with third parties in recycling programs or activities within the City. IX. Record Keeping and Inspections. Lessee shall maintain full and complete records of landfill operations in accordance with the recommendations contained in Chapter 7 of the Montgomery Operations Plan, and shall make such records available for the inspection of the City upon request. The City also reserves the right to enter and inspect the leased premises in order to monitor and insure compliance with the terms and 4 conditions of this lease and any and all requirements of applicable Federal, State, and local laws. Bonding and Insurance. A. Performance Bond. Lessee shall maintain at all times during the term of this lease a performance bond in the amount of $20,000.00 to secure the full,. true and faithful performance of all the terms, obligations and conditions of this lease on the part of Lessee. Lessee shall present to the City said bond together with certificates from the surety, showing the payment in full for such bond annually during the term of this lease agreement. B. Insurance. Lessee agrees to procure and maintain, at its own cost, a policy or policies of insurance sufficient to insure against all obligations assumed by the Lessee pursuant to this lease. Such insurance shall be in amounts of coverage not less than that obtained and carried by the City of Glenwood Springs in its insurance policies pursuant to the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act. The insurance policies procured by the Lessee shall be endorsed to include the City and the City's officers and employees as additional insureds. Every policy required above shall be primary insurance, and any insurance carried by the City, its officers, or its employees, or carried by or provided through any self-insurance pool of the City, shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by the Lessee. A certificate of insurance provided by the Lessee shall be completed by the Lessee's insurance agent as evidence that a policy providing the required coverages is in full force and effect, and shall be reviewed and approved by the City as a condition of this lease. No other form of certificate shall be used. The certificate shall identify this lease and shall provide that the coverages afforded under the policies shall not be cancelled, terminated or materially changed until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the City. A certified copy of any policy shall be provided to the City at the City's request. The parties hereto understand and agree that the parties are relying on, and do not waive or intend to waive bar an provision of this contract the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. 24-10-101 et seq., as amended, or otherwise available to the parties, their officers, or their employees. XI. Indemnification and Hold Harmless Aj reement. Lessee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, insurers, and self --insurance pool, from and against all liability, claims, and demands, on account of injury, loss, or damage, of any kind whatsoever, which arise out of or are in any matter connected with this lease, if such injury, loss, or damage is or is claimed to be caused in whole or in part by the act, omission, or other fault of the Lessee, or any officer or employee of the Lessee. Lessee agrees to investigate, handle, respond to, and to provide defense for any such liability, claims, or demands at the sole expense of Lessee, and agrees to bear all other costs and expenses related thereto, including court costs and attorney's fees, whether or not any such liability, claims, or demands alleged are groundless, false, or fraudulent. XII. Responsibilities to Public. Lessee acknowledges and agrees that the operation of the municipal landfill is a public service and agrees to treat and deal with the general public in a courteous manner and to do its utmost to serve the public well, faithfully and courteously. XIII. Non -Discrimination. Lessee hereby covenants and agrees that the leased premises and the facilities thereon shall be open to the general public and available for public use without discrimination against any person as to race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. Furthermore, in connection with any employment or subcontracting pursuant to this lease, Lessee shall not discriminate against any person on account of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. XIV. Non --Exclusivity. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to grant to the Lessee an exclusive right, privilege or franchise to operate a municipal landfill on. behalf of the City. The City reserves the right to permit or otherwise participate in the establishment of other landfills. The City has not adopted and shall not adopt any law or regulation requiring the dumping of waste materials at the leased premises. XV. Default and Termination. A. If the City determines that Lessee is in default of any term or condition of this lease it shall give the Lessee written notice of the reasons for such default and Lessee shall have sixty (60) days from the date of such notice to cure the default. If Lessee fails to cure the default to the satisfaction of the City within said sixty day period, the City may terminate this lease effective immediately upon delivery of written notice of termination to the Lessee. In the event of termination, Lessee shall remit to the City any rental due and payable to the City pursuant to paragraph III hereof through the date of termination. B. Upon any expiration or termination of this lease, Lessee shall, within sixty (60) days, remove any and all equipment and other personal property of the Lessee located upon the leased premises. If Lessee fails to remove said property within said sixty day period, said property shall become the property of the City. C. Upon expiration or termination of this lease, Lessee shall return the landfill to the City in full compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local laws and in compliance with the operational requirements of this lease. XVI. Assignment and Subleasing. Lessee's rights under this lease shall not be assigned nor shall any portion of the leased premises be subleased by the Lessee without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 6 XVII. Quiet Enjoyment. Lessee, upon payment of the rents provided herein and upon observation of all covenants, warranties, agreements, and conditions of this lease shall have the right to the exclusive possession and enjoyment of the leased premises during the term of this lease. In this connection, it is understood that fee simple title to the property is presently vested in the City, subject to easements, reservations and covenants of record. XVIII. Notice. Every notice or other communication required by this lease shall be delivered in writing to the following addresses unless a new address is provided by written notice: To the Lessee: To the Lessor: TADCO DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, Inc. P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO. 81602 City Manager, City of Glenwood Springs, CO. 806 Cooper Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO. 81601 XIX. Prior Lease. On and after the effective date hereof, this lease shall replace and supercede the Management -Lease Agreement between the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado and TADCO and Timothy Danner dated September 2, 1982, and the former Management -Lease Agreement shall thenceforth be null and void and of no further force and effect. XX. Partial Invalidity. If any of the terms, covenants, conditions or provisions of this lease shall for any reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the lease shall not be affected thereby and each remaining term, covenant, condition and provision of this lease shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law unless the invalidity of a provision defeats the purpose of this lease. XXI. Non -Waiver. Any indulgence granted by the City to the Lessee as to the performance of any portion of this lease and any waiver by the City as to Lessee's performance or non-performance of any part of this lease shall not be deemed or considered to be an indulgence or waiver of any other part of this lease by any subsequent non-performance by the Lessee. XII. Binder. All of the covenants, conditions and agreements contained in this lease shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the respective parties as well as their successors in interest of any kind. 7 1 1 XXIII. Entire Agreement. 11 This lease is the entire agreement between the parties and shall not be modified or cancelled except in writing signed by the parties hereto. 11 XXIV. Paragraph Titles. Paragraph titles of this lease are for convenience only and are not to be used to construe or interpret this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement to be effective April 1, 1989. 1 1 ATTEST: ' ity Clerk 1 1 ATTEST: yr Se `retary 1 1 LESSOR: City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, By: ee(c7 &�` 77 Ted O'Leary, Mayor f LESSEE: TADCO DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, Inc. By: 8 c) Timoth n+er, President STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 fast 11th Avenue Denver. Colorado 80220 Phone (303) 320-8333 September 1, 1987 South Canyon Landfill P.Q. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Attn: Mr. Tim Danner Re: Solid Waste Landfill Inspection Dear Mr. Danner: Roy Romer Governor Thomas M. Vernon. M.D. Executive Director On June 16, 1987, a representative of this Division performed an inspection of the South Canyon site in Garfield County, Colorado. The purpose of this inspection was to assess the compliance of this facility with the minimum standards of the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act Title 30, Article 20 part 1, C.R.S. 1982, as amended and with the Department Regulations promulgated thereunder. A copy of the field inspection report is enclosed for your reference. Any violations cited by subsection may be referenced in the regulations which you received at the time of the inspection. 1. This facility does not have groundwater/explosive gas monitoring wells or a sampling program, in violation of subsection 2.2.3. of the Regulations. 2. The surface water diversion ditch on the north side was not complete at the time of inspection, in violation of subsection 2.2.2. of the Regulations. 3. Leachate was observed emanating from the toe of the fill along rhe southern side, in violation of subsection 2.1.4 of the Regulations. This problem might be alleviated by identifying the source of water, possibly a spring or springs below this portion of the landfill, and diverting this water around the landfill. The outlined issues of concern must be addressed in order to protect the local public health and environment. This Division requests that a response be submitted within 45 days of receipt of this letter regarding the issues of concern. Mr. Tim Danner Page Two September 1, 1987 I would be glad to discuss specific details with you concerning the site. Please contact me at 331-4806 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Wynn Eakins Geologist Land Pollution Control Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division WE:clb/1644 cc: Garfield County Commissioners Mike Copp, Glenwood Springs City Manager Iris Sherman, Garfield County Sanitarian SOLID WASTE FACILITY INSPECTION (Landfills) County Facility f, Location DATE • -L, '741 'Al „ -7 Located in Incorporated Area Current Operator . ... /.) Mailing Address of Operator ; ,.. --,., r ie__ CurrentOwner (If different) - , Mailing Address of Owner a aaasaaaaasa Wfs................. (All items checked must be explaind in supplemental report) I. Public Health and/or Environmental Hazards A. Public Health and/or Environmental Hazards B. Evidence of Potential for (Serious) Surface Water Pollution C. Evidence of Potential for (Serious) Groundwater Pollution D. Surface Diversion/Containment Facilities Inadequate or not Maintained E. Landfill Gas Migration Concerns F. Sludge or Septic Pumpings Disposal on Site (Unauthorized) G. Operating Records not Maintained on Site H. Non—Compliance with Approved Design and Operation I. Other --- II. Minimum Standards, CRS 30, 20-110 A. Odors and/or Vectors Present B. Inadequate and/or Irregular Cover C. Inadequate Fencing (to control access and windblown debris) D. Burning apparent E. Not Designated and/or Improperly Zoned. III. Remarks i. .a . . ar7c=.saaa a==.r>.asass aGf:afaaaaea aaaa=aaaaaa a= a aaaa (Name) PRESENT AT INSPECTION (Representing) .; /' 1/ Inspection Engineer/Geologist e; - r 'a(YELLOW COPY OPERATOR) (PINK COPY- Y) OLORADO I)EPARTMENT F H E A LT H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ROY ROMER Governor PATRICIA A. NOLAN, MD, MPH Executive Director Grand Junction Regional Office 222 S. 6th Street, Room 232 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2768 Telefax Number. (303) 248.7198 September 22, 1992 Mr. Tim Danner Tadco Disposal System Inc. P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: South Canyon Landfill inspection. Dear Mr. Danner: On August 24, 1992 a representative of this Division performed an inspection of the South Canyon Landfill. The purpose of this inspection was to assess the compliance of this facility with the minimum standards of the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act Title 30, Article 20 part 1, C.R.S., as amended and with the Department Regulations promulgated thereunder. A copy of the field inspection report is enclosed for your reference. Any violations cited by subsection may be referenced in the regulations. No violations were noted. However, the following areas of concern were observed. 1. Although surface diversion exists around the facility the potential for contamination reaching South Canyon Creek still remains. The seep from the toe of the earlier fill area may reach the creek during heavy rainfall or rapid spring runoff. 2. The working face of the fill appea-ed to be large the day of the inspection. This area should ae kept as small as reasonably posible. ncerely, Donna Foster Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division :df cc: Garfield County Commissioners File GAR SOU File ed on recyckd pier County Facility Location Current Operator SOLID WASTE FACILITY INSPECTION (Landfills) DAVE .2--621-117. Located in . In orporaGed Area Mailing Address of Operator - ,/; o, e,„ , Current Owner (If different) *7---(4,c,--„ > : Mailing Address of Owner r 7 ) ill-. I': r r 't%i l,i e1 1 -4 J'I ", '- -' /C 4 ..1 (Ail items checked must be explaind in supplemental report) I. Public Health and/or Environmental Hazards A. Public Health and/or Environmental Hazards y B. Evidence of Potential for (Serious-) Surface Water Pollution C. Evidence of Potential for (Serious) Groundwater Pollution D. Surface Diversioa/Containment Facilities Inadequate or not Maintained E. Landfill Gas Migration Concerns F. Sludge or Septic Pumpings Disposal on Site G. Operating Records not Maintained on Site H. Noor Compliande with Approved Design and Operation I. Other unauthorized). II. Minimum A. B. C. D.. E. Standards, CRS 30. 20-110 III. Remarks Odors and/or Vectors Present Inadequate and/or Irregular Cover Inadequate Fencing (to control access and windblown debris) Burning apparent Not Designated and/or Improperly Zoned tic ,1i t t .a,� ti.+ i7� + +. t..( 74:/;t( r ri; A'Y\o c. t.C;L ( f . t-..\ 11 1 E 1C1 t (Name) `tea L 7 Lr PRESENT AT INSPECTION Inspection Engineer/Geologist (Representing) (WHITE COPY -FILE) (YELLOW COPY OPERATOR) (PINK COPY -COUNTY) STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado Grand Junction Regional Office 222 5. 6th Street, Rm. 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768 FAX: (3031 248-7198 August 4, 1993 Mr. Tim Danner Tadco Disposal System Inc. P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: South Canyon Landfill Inspection Dear Mr. Danner: Roy Romer Governor Patricia A. Nolan. MD, MPH Executive Director On May 20, 1993 a representative of this Division performed an inspection of the South Canyon Landfill. The purpose of this inspection was to assess the compliance of this facility with the minimum standards of the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act Title 30, Article 20 part 1, C.R.S., as amended and with the Department Regulations promulgated thereunder. A copy of the field inspection report is enclosed for your reference. Any violations cited by subsection may be referenced in the regulations. The result of this inspection indicates that this facility is in non-compliance with the Department regulations referenced above on the date of inspection. The specific items of non-compliance are listed. 1. Run-off water from melting snows, heavy rains and from a seep that leaches through a historical part of the landfill was observed in channels making their way to South Canyon Creek. This is in violation of sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.2 of the solid waste regulations as well as and State of Colorado WaterQuality Regulations which require a discharge permit. Additionally, the following issues of concern were noted and should be addressed in order to comply with Subtitle D regulations. 1. The working face of the fill appeared to be large the day of the inspection making the daily cover requirement difficult to achieve. This area should be kept as small as reasonably possible. 2. The facility does not have a wind measuring device or utilize a National Weather Service Office to determine wind speeds. Permed r+n Recycled Pape. Mr. Tim Danner August 4, 1993 Page 2 3. The facility does not currently monitor for methane gas. 4. Operating Records including gas monitoring,operational variances, special waste plan, site safety plan and a Certificate o escg a not available. All operating records should be maintained and kept on site. The outlined issues of concern must be addressed in order to protect the local public and environment. This Division requests that a response be submitted within 45 days of receipt of this letter regarding the issues of concern. I,would be glad to discuss specific details with you concerning the site. Please contact me at 248-7168 if you have any giestions or concerns. Sincerely, l`7 Donna Stoner Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division :ds cc: Nike Copp, City Manager Glenwood Springs SW GAR SOU File 1 ILORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and iilronment of the people of Colorado Cher Cfcck Dr. S. Laboratory Bullding viva, Colorado 8022 2-1530 4210 E. 11th Avenue Phone (303) 692-2000 Denver, Colorado 80220.3746 1 (303) 691-1700 1 STATE OF COLOFADO_ SOLID WASTE SITE AND FACILITY INSPECTION Date I FACILITY NAME &t,4_11__L FACILITY 1 LOCA ON:`'� I SITE DESCRIPTION: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Roy Romer 0-yver nor Farkia A Nolan, MD, MEM Ezecufive (*Wu' ane____224cicii_ COUNTYr- LOCATION: Twu: Rng: Sec: HSRF FACILITY: YES NO OWNER Name C -i -t! Address t City State Zip Phone ( ) - OPERATOR Name Address City Phone (03) - C) WASTE TYPES: Municipal y Commercialt' Industrial , Special A (So: 1 s) Putrescible Inert ) Ash Scrap Tire x Construction & Demolition Debris >( Other MINIMUM STANDARDS Prevents obnoxious odors /No Prevents fire, rodents, insect breeding and infestation W/No Adequate Intermediate Cover in. (.Mil . 12 in. /No Adequate Daily Cover es/No Alternate Daily Cover 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 JSPOSAI, AREA OPERATIONS Minimize nuisance conditions _ No Compaction to most dense volume , No Equipment type �]-g 1,-17. Q s - , 0�r s/No Waste distributed in the smallest area Ye Working face size7, ftp ft. x 10 ft. Restricted unloading area or traffic flow Ye Nn Prevent windblown debris No Windblown Debris Collection Frequency -P Wind Measuring Device On-site Yes Off-site Yes r\ Natio al eathe Service Office Fencing _- Construction Type Prevents waste material and debris from escaping Lack of debris accumulation along - Yes No No No Unauthorized public access without operator su )ervislot + , Na Access controlled by: Fence Gate Prevent Water/Wind erosion. tj,,,, cAo d Yes/ Provide Dust Control Yes Orderliness - Yes/No SURFACE WATER Controls for run-on Diversion of water from the working face Pro�s�x��4urfya`ca water`�cir�1.`nage�nc� ponding) ''i1 -,b z �.c� , v -e (Z Va.{� GROUND WATER/EXPL S VE GAS ONITORII G Upgradient well Downgradient well Monitor wells properly maintained Sampling and analysis Frequency Li r. Tested by EPA W-846 47 ' S Statistical Method C ,r\ c j�a�lS t - Methane Monitoring P Mite /24 ! Facility structures Site Boundary BURNING v -i r -r, Approved incineration No Open Burning Required Burning Permit NUMBER 1 REMARKS: 1 Date 1 I OPERATING RECORDS Waste volumes/types Water monitoring Gas monitoring Approved operational plan Ici .a. -'N fl\o a Construction as-builts =��n 0 fe.fa '.orQ Training program @, Special waste plan , ; rte' Special waste records - 6.l l -._- Site safety plan o c� �ra.•a� ?►1a 1 1 1 1 r Operational variancesN }�a. Yes No Location X c s�- -�-g Certificate of Designation icict s rc - Vq, SLUDGE, RADIOACTIVE, AND HAZARDOUS WASTE 1 Radiation detection device No Radioactive material accepted 1 Hazardous Waste Screening s gr Records if hazardous waste has bieeo received INo unauthorized waste -water or septic sludge accepted COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATIONS _ Yes/No 1 REMA KS: • . rs Anne 1► ti, t 1i l► 11 cw No ,li..tg• ./No Yes 1 1 PRESENT AT INSPECTION NAME REPRESENTING TITLE PHONE 0k-\ 7)4Ne-- I___ -. ,otie.- 1_t [ 1"-r,, - v La r%? 1 h canon J xJ 1 4 r R Y\ \ (so v-1 1 1 1 1 1N ECTOR A STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 4210 East 11th Avenue Denver. Colo,ado 80220 Phone (303) 320-8333 September 29. 1989 Marian S. Fournier Condor Geotechnical Services, Inc. 10790 West 50th Ave., Suite 200 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-6716 Re: Monitoring -Well Installation Sampling QA/QC South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County Dear Ms. Fournier: The Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division has reviewed your August 11, 1989 submittal,regarding the above captioned subject. The Division finds that the issued of monitoring well installation, surface water sampling paints, and a sample QA/QC plan have been sufficiently addressed in the submittal. gin. I( urn ,.r Cr..VP1101 Shomis M. Vernon, M,L). Eaeculn.e Lhrectur Please keep this Division apprised of all monitoring analyses. I may be ontacted at (303) 331-4830 if you have any questions regarding this atter or Department regulations. cerely ‘,06-51. Austin N. Buckingham Geologist Solid Waste and Incident Management Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division ANB/jw/5245K cc: Garfield County Board of Commissioners M. Copp, Glenwood Springs City Manager K. Kadles, Glenwood Springs City Manager I. Sherman, Garfield County Sanitarian T. Danner, South Canyon Landfill 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, Colorado 80220-3716 Phone (303) 320-8333 Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Telefax Number: (303) 331-4401 Telefax Numbers: Main Building/Denver (303) 322-9076 Ptarmigan Place/Denver (303) 320-1529 First National Bank Building/Denver (303) 355.5559 Grand Junction Office (303) 248-7198 ILE P A R! M E Iw 7 Pueblo Office F A H E A LT H - - (719) 543-8441 February 28, 1992 Wayne Goin Minion Hydrologic P.Q. Box 3043 Glenwood springs, CO 81602 RE: Monitoring Frequency South Canyon Landfill Garfield County Dear Mr. Goin: ROY ROMER Governor JOEL KOHN Interim Executive Director The Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division (the Division) of the Colorado Department of Health has reviewed your most recent ground water analyses submittal (dated January 16, 1992). Based on the data recently provided and based on the historical data for the site, the Division concurs that it is acceptable to reduce the monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually for the South Canyon Landfill site. Though Volatile Organic Compound analysis is not required at this time, it may be required if the Total Organic Halogens become elevated. Now that eight baseline sample events have been collected, statistical analyses must be performed on the data as per Section 2.23 of the Solid Waste Regulations. Pian on providing the statistical analyses along with the data in the regularly scheduled sample reports. lease contact me at this office if you have any additional questions. Sincerely, Austin N. Buckingham Geologist Solid Waste and Incident Management Seen n Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado Grand function Regional Office 222 S. 6th Street, Rm. 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768 FAX: (303) 248-7198 March 1, 1994 Mr. Tim Danner Tadco Disposal System Inc. P.U. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: South Canyon Landfill - SRK February 25, 1994 Letter Concerning Alternative Liner Design Dear Mr. Danner: Roy Romer Governor Patricia A. Nolan, MO, MPH Executive Direcior The Colorado Department of Health, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division (The Division) received a letter on February 25, 1994 from Steffen Robertson and Kirsten proposing an alternative liner design as specified in subsection 3.2.5(C)(4). As stated in The Division's letter of February 1, 1994 an alternative design may be appropriate for the existing conditions at this facility. This liner design along with the additional requested groundwater information will be evaluated when presented for review. f you have any questions regarding this letter or this site feel tee to call me at ( 03) 248-7168. Sncerely, onna Stoner, Industrial Hygienist Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division :ds cc: Mike Copp, City Manager Glenwood. Springs Chris Daily, City Attorney Glenwood Springs David Gordon, Steffen Robertson and Kirsten SW GAR SOU [� 7C Printed nri Renrlyd Puff( LANDFILL MONTHLY REVIEW SHEET IN CUBIC YARDS 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 JAN 4049 3634 3346 6216 FEB ^_4284 _3775 4593 6532 2673 !_5784 MAR 4443 8980 APR 6006 6317 5534 _8956 MAY 6934 _6138 6282 10705 JUNE _5173 5902 7042 _11731 JULY 6129 '_7231 _8581 -10419 AUG 5387 _5785 8868 SEPT _5183 5431 _10255 OCT _5894 !_5014 8750 ! NOV 4538 _3708 _7894 DEC 3766 4167 ,7383 TOTAL 61686 61699 83140 SEPTIC REVIEW IN GALLONS JAN _32600 _61000_ 57400 _68900_ FEB 53000~_ 36800 _- 41400 73200 MAR _- 45700 �49500� 76600 _108500 APR 86400 _58600_ 80600 91600 MAY '_86500__ _77900 114600 -_85500-_ JUNE _66900 _87200!_ _95300 _112400_ JULY 116500~ _93900_ _97900 _106800, AUG 101100 1 80700 36700 SEPT - 77100!_ T78900� 132500 OCT 110100 103900!_ _93300 NOV 67000 79000_ 72500 DEC - 34300~ !81500 76600 TOTAL 877200 888900 1075400 DATE COMPANY NAME TRUCK # DRIVERS NAME SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL INSPECTION RECORD TIME DRIVERS SIGNATURE INSPECTORS NAME TYPE OF TRASH. RES. COM. CONST. OTHER REMARKS. SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL DAILY RECORDS DATE TYPE OF WASTE RECEIVED. WORK DONE TODAY. WEATHER CONDITION. TEMP. REMARKS. DATE TYPE OF WASTE RECEIVED WORK DONE TODAY WEATHER CONDITION TEMP. REMARKS DATE TYPE OF WASTE RECEIVED WORK DONE TODAY WEATHER CONDITION TEMP REMARKS. APPENDIX B SOIL BORING AND TEST PIT LOGS • 1989 Gormley Boring Logs (M-1, M-2 and M-3) • 1993 SRK Boring Logs (B-1, B-2, and B-3) • 1994 SRK Test Pit Logs (TP -1 through TP -8) • 1994 SRK Boring Logs (B4 through B-7) JRMLEY CONSULTANTS INC. DATE B E R9 DATE FINISHED: r/23199 GROUND SURFACE EL. 6 4165. 6469,20x • BORING NO AI Avkf 13Ze East of • - FIELD ENGINEER: J. GL, sr.& — b#* C o r k e r (.)t.. -zi, .) %P./ -if Dr zecrech .3 i I 5 ii FO U.) L Deem ( CdisiAt4 E•;43FenE•;430,Ls ,,,-7,, law' • -=' 0 ec a • DESCRIPTION • to u 0 PENETRATION RESISTANCE Mows PER FOOT) 10 30 50 WATER CONTE, (PERCENT) 20 40 /0 20 ZS- 30 3S- 17,0 qt acie AL . cAp. sraLeAsw,„ ! . Kiii i Itieheos F , dry- 11'541. b, •...m. claw . . I 1 Poq.L4N9 ,! Cc/A 64.151ii! ' .--•,.. I S 6( /I) ...'--7 CP" l'k C,/j- in i kovt itd.“...$ Fwi sleshitv .o.'3+ brow— clay urxrilA - I-LEK A :. ENToitirr- ; . t...- 1/0CIE,43 teiy top !at bo./.. cloy .,.. S ift - PA CK — — -.;:, . - - E ii_or7 7 Lettt ... 5,4fEe,j—:: - - ..= • *54 ....,,,i- up -L., plelh.c. L rintsel ON , 4,644.1cos . ect ---• 6ACk 7:::71.:) irldil Ti. —"WELL -1116FiLE .-1 CASING bErilr si /0.10 s14ND — PACK — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .ARMLEY CONSULTANTS INC. DATE BEGAN: ��� ,�A DATE FINISHED: 52 ,' �p BORING NO. 01-� / , $o ' 4e .f Sec 'etwHer GROUND SURFACE El.: ro 9.5-0 NUi'ii, NW .11 S'Ct;+,0% , TdSS R 9Dco bE PIN (FEET) /o 1s 20 25 30 3S Portiom CEMi ui GcouT DESCRIPTION D,R+. LAss, rxBAJ5, woo,a h14 N C0 3 FM J 142,1 bRr Liw4r.Wind w CLAg SAO i`oHE LFKS =w.•,/Sc dth.,e 'ee,cre'1`aiis iw 69.1 /i$ktbfDWM cI (K.,,„) 017' 4ST,C CL# gf4Sy D41401141- Ks d [fi.r n t :"1 Sha[E , G-sf wafer,•? `., FALL t Wtz L FR °F,LE 1.14 -RD Letts, vE +VT.H1N .p.e i SHALE/cot y ,Vett y WET ADO'E FIELD ENGINEER: J. Gust.k PENETRATION RESISTANCE (BLOWS PER FOOT) 10 30 SO WATER CONTEF (PERCENT) 20 40 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 JRMLEY CONSULTANTS INC. DATE BEGAN: S 2 85 DATE FINISHED: CA7/8.1 GROUND SURFACE EL , 4/ 0C/ 4/W-bX) ©1 BORING NO. ►4I-3 1275' Edit C r(,4dfrfer Corse,— S W o 4 S C, of Sect 3, T6S, JIQ 7 olu FIELD ENGINEER: ` CrYStk. Demi (FEET) casf� ,,1 tcTAL • J a DESCRIPTION ur u p, PENETRATION RESISTANCE (BLOWS PER FOOT) 10 30 50 WATER C{iW?E1 (PERCENT) 20 40 /0 /g SCS 2S 3 0 3S Yd CCc� Ac/01740' AP G" slr0i CAS1U(T __.4;§__� e _ _ r OR+, -LT UN CLAY 1 l I k\N ' k.-_,1 / 0 . w b1 - St H T 6+%415 T CLL PoATLAH D ��r CFIt+EIJT GRoo r —47,4 sotto --71 PVC rhsdo Q HARD Bot4Lb e. SRA/ ar-A, Tx PtUL-TS =,�yy 1)4014.5LI CiNTL 9 multi CLAY 1erf) rtion 8014.PEIL—DRi CfAITRA 11 e _ ...°- - y.. = _—_ tr. gRown tRy CLAY - ..I. f- = • ,.z......, --t.= SAND: PACK $Ahbs-to kt CE3 ( IP. OCki plc BROWw Si.r4HTLy NvPST ct,.9, 4.41114RD BIACIf Ads C4R,4.'I L SioSTgr�— v" ?vC vita-- $rF� J—:', — _ c r. 81041.4 bR y To sLIG, )4 Tl.y dims CL 11 Lu/ 1h th c,„ 5 rivd /Sd , k — \......: f (c ` � . �J NO tMR0 6DULbER. FAL( — dth1 L T.D.VE�l, bpi T. aRo:.au CLi4 j 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 31:TIPT+ ROFERTSaK r Kiltrimi (LJ S) FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE / OF 2 Can.Jung E,rye+sr+ a.! S ...,.,1. PROJECT NAME: 50i.' k C,Pnl.,p.ti L—I- PROJECT NO.: 457,f)f BORING NUMBER 8, 1 COORDINATES OR LOCATION LOGGED SY: 3-4. APPROVED SY: K.,If e SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH: / {ENCOUNTERED/ DEPTH: /5.5 /STATIC/ - DRILLING METHOD ill.-.- Aa+e-y HOLE / r, DIAMETER Lv FLUID USED A/6m DATE STARTED: f COMPLETED: 9/ i f I 3 i HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY NOTES f ti F w 0 UJ UJ'' ''co J R 1L] .0 t V' 41 uai w w a2 t n 'C 0 J "� cr= d 1- WW CC J ul O a DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION � ce/1 ,n5+dilec _0 - _ _ — la .. L e ,LreJ Clo"3y3T0 a/sil le Cw.rdt, J SL5dai-lX $ 0jSit - e.. taw, .- hei.... A]o : w3J'nr.. 1 t e— 57`).5'.1-5 G 0— - r —2 ~ LE – - -30 " L _ i Grp skzie Jd'e.? I sithty mmo_;y!- •++adevo.1- 1� 1, E - i... TI, dry IL.,,r,� .er rile- nC1 LS.ecl ',�h�e ee c;re to J q`7 ,gyp /S re •t I v&v�.? •'Chi. a by I.I 0 id. 4 , 4eviat I cleft- N o#e : f4 i #e..pfect '10 p,.s ik 4 sLe/1, tuLe 90 ,,. was Lir, 1,,,/e -¢-o st., j., 1ror.rv.a4':a -. — ti _,— _ — _ _ NOTES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 37:17"1 ROVERTSON k rEN [u,S i FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE &OF Go..4u,, Eirgrusare s,■ ia...+rr■ _ _ -- PROJECT NAME: 5. C2 o., Lk- PROJECT NO.: 657 3 ( LOGGED 8Y: a..+cra APPROVED BY: KK e 1f BORING i NUMBER L P COORDINATES OR LOCATION SURF=ACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH �r 1 (ENCOUNTEREDI DEPTH: 1 5. ? (STAT+CD pRILL1NG THOLE / /� MET CO A ✓• r-oDrfy DIAMETER Ca FLUID USED NON e STARTED: DATECOMPLETED: �. HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY NOTES RECOVERY LENGTH 1%I PROFILE x r 4 SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL BLOW COUNT DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY 0 70 - I ' 5ka,le .s 2Love TO Joo -l-- 0_, r foo NOTES d 4= rrurri,Fa STIt'[sa K i lC1 trrEY4 i i:. S 0011 .n. FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGEOF PROJECT NAME: 5au+k Cav`ya, LF PROJECT NO.: 6,57 01 LOGGED BY: Dv • APPROVED BY: K ,c 11 BORING 3 NUM[jER COORDINATES OR LOCATION SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH IENCOUNTEREDI DEPT»Ao i€ (STATIC! C$ ILLING METHOD f4;• P01 ay. HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: HOLE / /f DIAMETER Co FLUID USEDl? DATE STARTETE COMPLETED: Vi SAFETY NOTES 1 W J Q > wCC J W a. 22 47 L4 a u. 0 CC 0 DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY No UJe)/ .I s+,lle d 0- 1 ! Cr=y ,.e�}Ie.�el c1a.Js�a.e J )e sl:�l, r y,•a SH71e kard c4 -y Cxclylr J i fi —ID eedvc-4:o►. o clv5f 4d i ;k5 dr;1(;h3 �20 YO. 3o -Pi- NOTES F% NOTES 0-1 STLrTLM ACJ eatTSO N 1r PC1;5 Di (li S C* .etrq &pnwrm aril Sc.r.ir1I FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE 0 PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NO.. So`J+i� Can�y.r 6.5701 LF $ORING NUM6ER 3 3 SURFACE ELEVATION LOGGED BY: o APPROVED BY: Kue) i COORDINATES OR LOCATION G WL DEPTH DEPTH:%tcHe (ENCOUNTERED) (STATIC) °BILLING METHOD " HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: HOLE 01* 4ETER p 1 FLUID ,ry + USED / UOhe DATE STARTED; COMPLETED: /0 //&",/3 SAFETY NOTES DESCRIPTION -10 — 2c —30 ,_ray s1p ie 1 ard J.2%, Me 3 forrKT �•'thrfaq G clizrrtes 2.me ;.J. teci 4y filum o.r-1 c��yf re�vc�:ae der c iVm, I 33' ..n.•:jj 7..e" ;..J; ;eJ Jay iy-e.qp e.rJ d..sf dV.r.9 d.--.7/ 475 TD .4 Cf WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY Ato toe Z s±,//ec NOTES Pa CkY,forri, 33.5'- )0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'I 0 1401 1 1 1 1 1 srzrl*Err >xosrarsax & Ktleinti (u.s.) FIELD DRILLING LOG eon.ulRing Engn+a.w and src�r+rlre. PAGE OF PROJECT NAME: Seo 41. '(4"yon 1-6....(C;11 PROJECT NO.: 4,S 70 1 BORING NUMBER 111 - LI COORDINATES OR LOCATION LOGGED BY: A 0 + APPROVED BY: SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH M% (ENCOUNTERED) DEPTH: Aii9 (STATIC) DRILL/NG.„,HOLE METHOD j, r- �2o4-arr x , DIAMETER $. j FLUIDSTARTED: USED rfr� I" DATE COMPLETEDt s/t, fyy HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: A i�sa,/ SAFETY NOTES 4- eVe / j DEPTH f 1 SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL BLOW COUNT RECOVERY LENGTH (%) PROFILE DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY —0 — ._ J..,4-P,.tw r ilc,�-J 4-a vk'1 1>a.cl 0-- -- /] Tcs4 — it rue. 1 a.. — PPc l.-4 r T.,1-— I 1 – NOTES TtAc,1 0,..c. in 3f lb, s C0.. 1. 4. A a4 PPcL r- TPs4±i : 30 "h,s -4-c 3S I locis q l till i -v aq l l 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 `T ROBERTSON & STENand Se{entta(u S•) Ca+auith En YrNrr� t� FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE OF PROJECT NAME: 'c. Cc.ny., L eA.•••1: 1--. i l PROJECT NO.: BORING.,,,COORDINATES NUMBER ". OR LOCATION LOGGED BY: APPROVED BY:1 SURFACE ELEVATION ,IJ/4 ` GWL DEPTH: f l (ENCOUNTERED} DEPTH: is.,' 6 (STATIC) DRILLINGn METHOD Lora f IC© rcy HOLE DIAMETER FLUID JJ USED et)/k) STARTED:412/ / Ia ,,.. DATE COMPLETED: HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY ) NOTES (-ewe I Li DEPTH 1 1 SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL )- z J 0 3 O m RECOVERY LENGTH MI w cc i. DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY �° _ _ _ — — — _ – – – --PPx' – ' – _ 141,4` �1a 30% 11 // el, ilk'la✓tt 4-0 bll,- ,„ed s1:f. i 0,. i e. , 61,. b✓., b1'L, ).0,,cli r• 11 / . /%: 4. v. 7.tl:d T go f ewc ✓./s erose, py j eolc cultc..eoyS le.4,s 0— _ — _ /g } +1 tau,'Iy i,.s. - R.clw,- Tea+ —. (41)4041 "ie 24,1s 4.1,.r Tes i _ Toilirre4.1 1, tilhooaen6c4} – --' _ NOTES �j �{ t f { s,L, . 0 s• ;AUL"(10,41 fAJ2 A.p �1h XiiC+a75 yetdrt.S -,4. tv] AuCi'!` J � peter. Tes{S in:1-ia fly cd-te -e1ed ._27'� 4 3a'bjs 04 21.814_0 kG,f v's Poet' Core. 5 e. f caner 411+ov ho(..4' d JG 4-e f.raC1 Llre 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I0' 1 1 1 1 FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE OF Canwultl,+q Engrain". «n 1.1r t..-*,ats PROJECT NAME: S.Canftn Caned* ••. BORING. COORDINATES PROJECT NO.: , s-70 I NUMBER Y OR LOCATION See F...5 ur LOGGED BY: 110 SURFACE GWL DEPTH (ENCOUNTERED} APPROVED BY: ELEVATION DEPTH:a s r(,s,,,,,) (STATIC} {TRILLING,r� -<�'_E FLUID DATE STARTED: -Tito /9V METHOD ;r I Ca •)-6.,,,i i Di wETER /. f ,.USED /VI COMPLETED: 5/1A /94 HAZARDOUS// SAFETY WASTE REMARKS: N/4 NOTES a-- eYel AO DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION c SUMMARY c _ ) Gly la i# e O l k 1 5 J 4 i, _ . ea.e.u.s Irv, se s, [-�..e..;L-E5��'tt i - r biF _ - -.) Fay:er tl�,5, — :lt:Fep siti(Fruit-):� �1r4.� = = :.x 1 r4 -{d, alk _ �. '.' •: C i ) PGi)1 u, t ()o c tee r T -t 54- Irvine vwl� � _ - 1 {{ (2111-33 - - _ _. �?.. . I. S..S .) F," 4 v r - - t — + ) �T cif ]1. 1" 1 2. ` — J --- in.Cer�tr sM — — — _ NOTES`ro#tI Oe elk = t{Yb .-od.,cII, eI PkcScer- Teak Qg'b,i 4-c . rbS5. ROBERTSON DEPTH t i SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL BLOW COUNT RECOVERY LENGTH t%t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13c, 1 1140 1 1 1 1 STUTEN ROBERTSON x x a(U.S.) Cc,latling Eng-wa end Scientists FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE OF PROJECT NAME: S, C4 4've 1 L../pt PROJECT NO.: G s 70 1 BOR$NG NUMBER 8-7 COORDINATES OR LOCATION $f,. F;, ape LOGGED BY: ry10 APPROVED BY: SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH (ENCOUNTERED( DEPTH: (STATIC) DRILLING/� METHOD i r I2d�sf 1' HOLE i, DIAMETER (. S USED USED DATE STARTED:.0%3 Ify COMPLETED: 5hs fgy HATAADOUS %/ WASTE REMARKS; It/ /I SAFETY / NOTES eve / 1 DEPTH ( SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL BLOW COUNT RECOVERY LENGTH VA) PROFILE DESCRIPTION WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY I-0 - —, - - - ,-- - — - - - - - - r - Ci4Y, 01 6rq , moiSfi 5;141, eAYe1. s!14 -f- }e, si ;44, 1-t o 5'C-lirlin5 11- , mCiSt Lir. i3rn rntd.SA-cif ff-- — F 1 v f e f i; 0: 4�;e u(L re tov.a' C��in+�5 e 0 f..c..w� .1- 71 "S I-14 r e k32-33') (6,f,pet'e'1{ /h4n[oi (8tr.ete) 1-4,-e...;-,;411 fyy') 1-1""4 1 Lilac ii) � F e.cleeeL Tt s 2n r v� 1 0- — - - - — NOTES 1;4. t oec4. t s..7 'by., CQmelrik-Fd IAAcL r:t{31653 }O ysr'b5s. APPENDIX C LABORATORY AND IN-SITU TEST RESULTS Appendix C.1 - Laboratory Test Results Appendix C.2 - In-situ Test Results + Technical Memorandum Dated November 12, 1993 * Technical Memorandum Dated June 29, 1994 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDIX C.1 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL SRK #65701 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS GRADATION ATTERBERG LIMITS MODIFIED PROCTOR SAMPLE NO. NATURAL MOISTURE t%) GRAVEL (%) SAND WO SILT/CLAY (%) LL (%) PI (%) MAX, DRY DENSITY (pcf) OPT. MOIS CONTENT (%) SPECIFIC GRAVITY Gs PERM. k (cm/sec) DESCRIPTION (USCS) TP -1 13.6 0.0 4.9 95.1 32 14 127.4 9.2 2.75 7.7E-0 6 LEAN CLAY (CLI TP -3 13.0 0,0 5,2 94.8 SILT/CLAY (MUCL) TP -5 11.4 0.0 13.9 86.1 30 13 127.3 9.3 2.67 2.5E-07 LEAN CLAY (CL) TP -6 12.7 0.0 3.4 96.6 S1LT/CLAY (ML/CL) TP -7/8 17.4 0.0 6.7 93.3 35 16 120.9 11.0 2.70 1.3E-07 LEAN CLAY (CO Steffen Robertson & Kirsten — O NM = NM NM i N INIII I IM M M ON N — — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project Sample No. Depth Sample Type CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST FLEXIBLE WALL (ASTM D 5084) S. Canyon Landfill TP -1 NJA Remolded INITIAL SAMPLE DATA Sample Dia (cm) Init. Ht. (cm) Init. Vol (cm"3) Init. Sample Wet Wt. (g) Init. Moisture Content CONSOLIDATION DATA Back Pressure (psi) Confining Pressure (psi) Volume Change (cc) FINAL SAMPLE DATA Final Wet Wt. + Pan (g) Final Dry Wt. + Pan (g) Pan Wt. Only (g) Final Moisture Content 7.26 8.05 333.24 677.50 10.6% 40.0 5.0 6.00 961.30 838.40 226.00 20.1% TEST DATA Elapsed Head Burrette Tail Burrette Time (min) Reading (cm) Reading (cm) 60.20 10.80 10.00 57.70 13.30 57.70 13.30 10.00 55.40 15.60 55.40 15.60 10.00 53.50 17.60 53.50 17.60 10.00 51.60 19.80 51.60 19.80 15.00 49.20 22.60 49.20 22.60 20.00 46.20 25.70 46.20 25.70 10.00 44.80 27.10 Steffen Robertson & Kirsten Project No. 65701 Tested By TM Checked By TM Date 4/29/94 Specific Gravity Assumed? Init. Void Ratio Init. Dry Density (pcf) Initial Calculated Saturation Final Area (cm " 2) Height Change (cm) Final Ht. (cm) Final Void Ratio Final Volume (cm"3) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Calculated Saturation 2.75 No 0.496 114.7 58.9% 40.91 0.05 8.00 0.469 327.24 116.8 100.0% Flow, Q Avg. Total Avg. Total Permeability (cm' 3) Head (psi} Head (ern) k (cm/sec) 3.20 1.70 119.54 2.94 1.62 113.92 2.50 1.56 109.70 2.62 1.49 104.78 3.33 1.41 99.15 3.90 1.29 90.71 1.79 1.16 81.57 Average 8.7E-06 8.4E-06 7.4E-06 8.2E-06 7.3E-06 7.0E-06 7.2E-06 7.7E-06 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project Sample No. Depth Sample Type CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST FLEXIBLE WALL (ASTM D 5084) S. Canyon Landfill TP -5 N/A Remolded INITIAL SAMPLE DATA Sample Dia (cm) Init. Ht. (cm) Init. Vol (cm'3) Init. Sample Wet Wt. (g) Init. Moisture Content CONSOLIDATION DATA Back Pressure (psi) Confining Pressure (psi) Volume Change (cc) FINAL SAMPLE DATA Final Wet Wt. + Pan (g) Final Dry Wt. + Pan (g) Pan Wt. Only (g) Final Moisture Content 7.29 7.48 312.64 678.50 10.8% 35.0 5.0 -15.30 926.40 820.60 208.40 17.3% TEST DATA Elapsed Head Burrette Tail Burrette Time (min) Reading (cm) Reading (cm) 31.20 9.70 85.00 30.50 10.60 30.50 10.60 71.00 29.90 11.20 29.90 11.20 107.00 28.90 12.10 28.90 12.10 81.00 28.20 12.80 28.20 12.80 87.00 27.50 13.50 Steffen Robertson & Kirsten Flow, 0 (cm"3) 1.02 0.77 1.22 0.90 0.90 Project No. 65701 Tested By TM Checked By TM Date 5/4/94 Specific Gravity Assumed? Init. Void Ratio Init. Dry Density (pcf) Initial Calculated Saturation Final Area (cm ^2) Height Change (cm) Final Ht. (cm) Final Void Ratio Final Volume (cm"3) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Calculated Saturation 2.67 No 0.364 122.2 79.5% 43.15 -0.12 7.60 0.430 327.94 116.5 100.0% Avg. Total Avg. Total Permeability Head (psi) Head (cm) k (cm/sec) 1.90 133.82 2.6E-07 1.90 133.26 1.88 132.34 1.88 132.06 1.87 131.36 Average 2.4E-07 2.5E-07 2.5E-07 2.3E-07 2.5E-07 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project Sample No. Depth Sample Type CONSTANT HEAD PERMEABILITY TEST FLEXIBLE WALL (ASTM D 5084) S. Canyon Landfill TP -7/8 N/A Remolded INITIAL SAMPLE DATA Sample Dia (cm) Init. Ht. (cm) Init. Vol (cm'3) Init. Sample Wet Wt. (g) Init. Moisture Content CONSOLIDATION DATA Back Pressure (psi) Confining Pressure (psi) Volume Change (cc) FINAL SAMPLE DATA Final Wet Wt. + Pan (g) Final Dry Wt. + Pan (g) Pan Wt. Only (g) Final Moisture Content 7.33 7.50 316.06 649.40 12.1% 35.0 5.0 10.00 931.80 805.80 226.60 21.8% TEST DATA Elapsed Head Burrette Tail Burrette Time (min) Reading (cm) Reading (cm) 40.30 1.90 20.00 40.20 2.20 40.20 2.20 60.00 39.80 2.70 39.80 2.70 66.00 39.40 3.20 39.40 3.20 914.00 34.40 8.50 34.40 8.50 60.00 34.10 8.80 34.10 8.80 60.00 33.80 9.10 Steffen Robertson & Kirsten Project No. 65701 Tested By TM Checked By TM Date 5/2/94 Specific Gravity Assumed? Init. Void Ratio Init. Dry Density (pcf) Initial Calculated Saturation Final Area (cm2) Height Change (cm) Final Ht. (cm) Final Void Ratio Final Volume (cm -.3) Final Dry Density (pcf) Final Calculated Saturation 2.70 No 0.473 114.4 69.1 % 42.90 -0.10 7.60 0.519 326.06 110.9 100.0% Flow, 0 Avg. Total Avg. Total Permeability (cm .3) Head (psi) Head (cm) k (cm/sec) 0.26 2.84 199.50 1.9E-07 0.58 2.83 0.58 2.82 6.59 2.82 0.38 2.81 0.38 2.78 199.15 198.09 198.02 197.25 195.63 Average 1.4E-07 1 .3E-07 1.1E-07 9.6E-08 9.7E-08 1.3E-07 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION •- f N ® l9 is 'Si: 1 CEJ ® m m m I ... r"r S m w. TEST REPORT a51 � 61 i w :r w PERCENT FINER R] u] -11 cn m -,1 CO W 61 0 6l 6i 0 ® ® t9 m T 200 100 10.0 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE •- mm Testi +3" % GRAVEL ',. SAND % FINES • 4 0.0 0.0 4.9 95.1 LL PI D85 D60 D50 B30 D15 D10 Cc Cu • 32 14 0.01 0.002 0.0014 0.0013 0.36 7.1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO • LEAN CLAY CL Project No.: 65701 Project: S. CANYON LANDFILL • Location: TP -1''L475.1 Date: April 29. 1994 Remarks: Figure No GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U_S_l INC_ Consulting Engineers and Scientists 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT Y. L C ,. C C51 m ,•• •� T N W m W W m T m 100 ..0 m 64 .-" .." m ... m r*,...4144440.....1.0.:10.1.46.44s.'ss'usssssss\si\Nsisiv 90 80 70 W Z H 60 z 50 W u LJ 40 30 20 10 200 100 10.0 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm Test a +3' '. GRAVEL _ % SAND % FINES • 5 0.0 0.0 13.9 86.1 LL PI D85 D60 D50 D80 D15 D10 Cc Cu • 30 13 0.01 0.003 r MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO • LEAN CLAY CL Project No.: 65701 Project: S. CANYON LANDFILL • Location: TP-S'L475.1 Date: April 29, 1994 Remarks: Ftgure No GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC. Consulting Engineers and Scientists 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION Y ca co CD 100 w (71;a: .d m a r Y • + TEST REPORT ea v 0 ;V • i PERCENT PLNER N W .. VI m W LD • y •. t 200 106 10.0 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm Test % +3" Z GRAVEL_ % SAND _ % FINES • 6 0.0 _ 0.0 5.2 94.0 ■ 7 0.0 0.0 3.4 96.6 LL PI D95 D60 D50 D30 D15 D10 C, C, 0 • MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USC5 AASHTO • SILT/CLAY • SILT/CLAY ML/CL ML/CL Project No.: 65701 Project: S. CANYON LANDFILL • Location: TP -3/L475.1 A Location: TP -6/L475.1 Date: April 29, 1994. Remarks: MOISTURE CONTENT 13.6% MQISTURE CONTENT 12.7: Figure No GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC_ Consulting Engineers and Scientists 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION 1000 m c4 .1 .4 m .. m a + t TEST REPORT ♦ 4 t t 90 - - .44'411imumlibl\s\ 80 •• W70 I--4 60 1- Z50 wV w 40 90 20 10 - - 0 200 100 10.0 1.0 0.1 GRAIN SIZE - mm 0.01 0.001 Test % +3" s GRAVEL :' SAND ✓ FINES - • 1 0.0 0.0 6.7 93.3 LL PI D85 D80 , D50 D30 D15 D10 Cc Cu • 35 16 0.00 0.002 1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AA51-lTO • LEAN CLAY 1 CL Project No.: 65701 Project: S. CANYON LANDFILL • Location; TP7/8, L475.1 Date: April 29. 1994 Remarks: Figure No GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC_ Consulting Engineers and Scientists PROCTOR TEST REPORT Project Na.: 65701 Project: South Canyon Landfill Location: TP -1'L475.1 Elev'Depth: Remarks: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Date: April 2E, 19E'; Description: Clay, sli. slit, grey- brn. Classifications: USCS: CL PASHTO: Nat. Moist. . Sp.G. = 2.75 Liquid Limit = 92 Plasticity Index = 14 %> No.4 = 0% 110 130 120 o_ 110 Dry dens 1 ty , 100 90 80 TEST RESULTS Maximum dry density . 127.4 pcf Optimum moisture = 9.2 % 14. Ns„ "Modified" Proctor ASTM D 1557 Method A DAV for 70 0 5 10 15 20 25 BO 35 Water content, % STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC. Figure No. PROCTOR TEST REPORT Project No.: 65701 Project: South Canyon Landfill Location: TP -5/L175.1 Elev/Depth: Remarks: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Date: April 26, 1994 Description: Clay, sli. sandy, gray-- brn. Classifications: USCS: CL AASHTO: Nat. Moist. = % Sp.G. = 2.67 Liquid Limit = 30 Plasticity Index = 13 > No . 4 = 0%. .< No .200 = 86.1% 140 130 120 Q 110 Dry density led 90 BO 72 TEST RESULTS Maximum dry density = 127.3 pcf Optimum moisture . 9.3 Y. 'Modified' Proctor ASTM D 1557 Method R ZAV for Sp.G.. 2.9 2.7 2.6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Water content, "/. STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC. Figure No. PROCTOR TEST REPORT Project No.: 65701 Project: South Canyon Landfill Location: TP -7/8/L.175.1 Eley/Depth; Remarks: MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Date: Rpr i l 26, 199 Description: Clay, s1i. silty, grey- brn. Classifications: USCS: CL PASHTO: Nat. Moist_ _ ✓ Sp.G. = Liquid Limit = 35 Plasticity Index = 16 .> No.4 = 0: 110 130 120 o_ 110 c 100 L ra 90 90 TEST RESULTS Maximum dry density . 120.9 pcf Optimum moisture = 11.0 '/. "Modified" Proctor ASTM D 1557 Method A ZAV for Sp.G.= 2.8 2.7 2.6 70 0 5 10 15 20 25 Water content, X STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC. 30 35 Figure No z w rte" gi S 8 8& S W n M M I5 L 8 3 s $ t N Y w ppw s230� FwG'8'S c7=r1`-� • wr- r r P Ln P P P P is . Q 2 i P`.. ri t & % E.. P PPPP aqt— g n ✓ • P a,c:t eM & AMB O rt: 1.1.N Yrs r r tflinnlid a • eameammaece e mmanaannanan A PC % MA LAM 10 r cuMuLAT14E FLOW (cty 0 0 $ 8 8 8 8 0 PERMEABILITY {cm/sec} O RT m m St b g 2� a ALlll9V V4E1 d BACK PRESSURE PERMEABILITY IIJt Y TESI' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PROCTOR TEST REPORT 130 T I 125 IIIIIIIII 1 -n 20 115 L P 110 t 105 18 11 12 13 14 15 16 Water content, X 'Standard' Proctor, ASTM D 698, Method A Elev/ Depth Classi+ication Nat. Moist. Sp.P. LL PI : > No.4 % C No.200 USCS AASHTO 0-16FT * x 11.1 TEST RESULTS MATERIAL DESCRIPTIOON Optimum moisture = 13.2 : Maximum dry density = 118.8 pc+ BLACK CLAY WITH * SAND/SILT *. Project No.: 65701 * Project: S.CANYON LANDFILL/TADCO/L475.0 A Location: 83/L475.0 * Date: September 15, 1993 * Remarks: * Figure No. * PROCTOR TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN <U.S.) INC. Consulting Engineers and Scientists APPENDIX C.2 IN-SITU TEST RESULTS FFOBN ID 7100r ConsulSTEtingEN EngineersRandERTSOScientistsAKIRSTEN TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Tim DannerITADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. FROM: Gregory W. Knell DATE: November 12, 1993 RE: SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (SRK PROJECT NO. 65701) INTRODUCTION Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. (SRK) at the direction of TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. (TADCO) has completed a hydrogeologic investigation at the South Canyon Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Facility to determine subsurface characteristics. This investigation has been conducted to ensure landfill lateral expansion compliance with the requirements of Sections 2.1.1.5 and 3.2.5 of the Colorado Solid Waste Regulations (6 CCR 1007-2). Initial drilling activities were completed on September 1, 1993, including two borings, B1 and B2, advanced with the collection of subsurface samples for geotechnical laboratory evaluation. On October 16, 1993, a third boring, B3, was advanced and a packer test completed in the borehole. A qualified SRK professional geologist was present at the site to supervise drilling operations and for the logging of boreholes (drill logs are attached as Appendix A). Boring BI was centrally located in the area of proposed future operations, B2 was located downslope of the main waste disposal area, and B3 was subsequently located near Bl. Borehole B1 was drilled to a depth of 100 ft below ground surface (bgs), B2 was drilled to a depth of 35 ft bgs, and B3 was drilled to a depth of 40 ft bgs. The boreholes were advanced with an air rotary drill rig to penetrate the underlying dense Mancos Shale Formation. Investigation plans initially included the completion of a falling head permeability test in boring B 1 with boring B2 completed to demonstrate the relative homogeneity of the formation across the landfill site. Since perched groundwater was encountered in B1 is was reasoned that such a test would only demonstrate the hydraulic conductivity of the water bearing zone; that is, the alluvial/bedrock contact. Therefore, a drill rig equipped with apparatus necessary to conduct Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. 3232 South Vance Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80227, U.S.A. TeL (303) 985-1333 Facsimile (303) 985-9947 Other offices in: U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom and Africa STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 2 a packer test in boring B1 was remobilized to the site. Since boring -wall "sloughing" had occurred in BI prior to the test, a new borehole, B3, was drilled for packer testing. GEOTECHNICAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS During subsurface investigation at the site on September 1, 1993, a total of five bulk samples were collected for geotechnical testing and analysis. Of these samples, three of them (samples S2, S3 and S4) were collected from boring BI, sample Si was collected from boring B2, and sample S5 was an undisturbed sample of the Mancos formation which was attained from an on- site formation. The bulk samples (S1 -S4) were collected from the drill cuttings during drilling operations in an effort to delineate any differences in the subsurface material. The sampled material is uniform and consistent in gradation with the primary difference being the moisture content of the material. This indicates that testing completed is representative of site conditions. The approximate depths of the three samples collected f-om boring BI are as follows. Sample S3 represented material from a depth of 0 to 16 feet, :sample S4 represented material from a depth of 35 to 50 feet, and sample S2 represented material from a depth of 65 to 80 feet below the ground surface. All three samples were very similar in physical characteristics with the primary difference being sample S4 (35'-50') possessed a much higher moisture content as a result of the material being in contact with perched ground water. The sample collected from boring B2, sample S 1, was uniform along the entire de )th of the boring and resembled the S3 material with respect to gradation and moisture cortent. Sample S5 was retained as a representative undisturbed sample of the Mancos formation. The sample was collected from an outcrop, just upslope from boring B1. Attempts were made to collect undisturbed samples from each of the boreholes. However, due to the formation density, efforts to retreive a sample were unsuccessful; that is the drill rig was unable to physically push a sampler into the hard shale of the Mancos formation. Laboratory tests conducted on the samples consisted of moisture content, density, and permeability testing. Moisture content testing was performed on the drill cuttings (S1) and the the undisturbed sample (S5). This testing was completed to compare moisture content values from the drill cuttings and undisturbed formation material. Average moisture content exhibited from samples S1 and S5 is 7.1 percent and 2.3 percent, respectively. Density testing was performed on sample S3 (0'-16') to determine its optimum moisture content and maximum dry density. A standard proctor (ASTM D-698-78) was performed on the material which provided a value of 118.8 pcf for maximum dry density and 13.2 percent as an optimal moisture content. This information was then used to conduct a permeability test on a reconstituted sample (flexible STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND K1RSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 3 wall permeability test). The test results indicated that the material possesses a hydraulic conductivity of 6.49 x 104 cm/sec, The results of all laboratory test results which were performed are attached as Appendix C. Based on laboratory testing which was conducted, the following are interpretations concerning material properties. Efforts to compare the moisture content and other visual characteristics of undisturbed versus disturbed samples of the Mancos shale formation show little correlation. The undisturbed shale formation was observed to be significantly more dense. Consequently, it is impossible to recreate insitu conditions in the laboratory and therefore it is nessary to conduct insitu permeability testing to adequately assess the insitu hydraulic conductivity of the material. However, surficial on-site materials (i.e., weathered bedrock encountered in thicknesses up to 16 feet in the proposed disposal area) can be recompacted to attain a saturated hydraulic conductivity in the range of 6 x 104 cm/sec. PACKER TEST Packer Test introduction The packer test was completed following procedures outlined in the U.S. Department of Commerce publication PB -272 452, "Field Permeability Test Methods with Applications to Solution Mining". A single packer test was completed in the bottom, approximately 6.5 feet of borehole number B3, Very dusty drilling conditions indicated unsaturated conditions. Therefore the "Unlined Test Section With Single Packer" analysis method was used. This analysis method is outlined on attached Figure 8-5 (see Appendix B) from the packer test reference document. The formula K = ?` FH c is used to calculate hydraulic conductivity. The following values are used in the calculations to determine the hydraulic conductivity (K): • L (length of test section) = 6.5 feet (constant throughout test) • L, (packer length) = 3.5 feet (constant throughout test) • r,, (borehole radius) = 0.25 feet (constant throughout test) • 11,1„„ (elevation head) = 40 feet (constant throughout test) • H (pumps head) varies through the test segments • HL (friction loss) are considered negligible (0) based on the packer test reference (see STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND K4RSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 4 discussion below) • He = H,1, , + Racy - HL; NC vanes through test segments • Q, (flow) varies through the test segments • F = Cu • ra, where Cu = fct (M,N) L =. .16 (constant throughout the test) >_ 40 H H_ C r since He varies through test segments so does N values of Cu are derived from attached Figure 8-9 (see Appendix B) from the packer test reference document. It should be noted that the determination that HL (pipe head loss or friction loss) is negligible for the packer test is provided in the reference sited. A graphical representation of this condition is shown on Figure 7-5 of the reference. Basically, at very low flows, such as those produced during the subject test, friction losses are not measurable. The reference document has three criteria for determining if the subject analysis is valid. Bach of these three criteria are evaluated as follows: ■ L>10ra, 6.5 feet > 2.5 feet; therefore, valid • L.p 710 r9, 3.5 feet > 2.5 feet; therefore, valid 2'rrwL +,7]-(r.,)2 .0006ft Msec 0.1 fps 27x(.25)(6.51)+1r(.25)2 (using highest flow recorded during test) 50.1 fps .0001 fps 0.1 fps; therefore, valid. STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 5 Packer Test Completion Table 1 shows flow measurements, time, and pump head measurements recorded in the field. while the packer test was being conducted. Each segment of the test is evaluated independently and conclusions drawn from segment results. Segment 1 If no flow actually occurred (as recorded) the formation's hydraulic conductivity is indicated as infinitely small. However, the measurement of flow in the test is a function of the instrumentation (i.e. the flow meter). Since the flow meter used is calibrated to 0.1 gallons, gallons can be measured to the nearest 0.05 gallon accurately. Therefore, it is possible a volume of approximately 0.025 gallons could have flowed into the test section without being measured during the packer test segment. This unmeasurable flow could indicate a hydraulic conductivity of 9x104 cm/sec using the standard packer test mathematical analysis. However, a very conservative test analysis has been completed by assuming that the flow during this test segment is, at most, less than the minimum measurable flow rate of 0.05 gallons per the 15 minute test segment. Calculations are as follows: • • CZ, 15min .05gals - .0033gpm = 7.43x10 Eft 31sec H = (70(2.31A) +40ft = 56.17ft • F " C. . run where Cu = fct (M, N) • M L -.16 Hee, N = H` _ 56.17 = 224.7 V .25 w using Figure 8-9 (attached) of the reference document, Cu = 90 F = (90)(25) =22.5 ft 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 6 A __ - 7.43,x10 Eft 31sec 1 cm _ 1.8x10 'cm/sec FH (22.5)(56.17') .0328ft Therefore, segment number 1 of the packer test indicates a hydraulic conductivity of less than 1.8 x 10-' cm/sec. TABLE 1 SOUTH CANYON PACKER TEST FIELD MEASUREMENTS Flow Meter Reading Time (minutes) Gauge Readings (psi) Test Segment No. 8337.0 0 7 8337.0 5 7 1 8337.0 10 7 8337.0 15 7 8337.0 20 10 8337.0 25 10 2 8337.0 30 10 8337.0 35 20 8338.9 40 20 3 8340.9 45 20 8342.6 50 20 8343.1 56 10 8343.3 60 10 4 8343.5 65 10 8343.5 70 7 5 8343.5 75 7 STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 7 Segment 2 During segment 2 no flow was measurable. Using the same conservative approach as in the analysis of segment 1 the following results are calculated: ■ • 0,45gals _ 7.43x10 15mins sec H = (1002.31-) + 40ft = 63.1ft 141 • F = Cu . r,,,, where C. = fct (M,N) • • • M = L' =.16 c 611 - 252.4 N = _.25 w using fig 8-9; Cu = 100, therefore F = 25 _C _ 7.43r1Q 6�ft 3Isec x 1cm - 1.4 x 1Q 'cm/sec FHS (22.5)(63.1) .0328ft Therefore, segment number 2 of the packer test indicates a hydraulic conductivity of less than 1.4 x 10' cm/sec. STEFFEN ROBERTSON ANO KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 8 Segment 3 During segment number 3, flows were measured and the following calculations indicate a hydraulic conductivity (K) value: • • ` 8342.6-8337gallons _ .28 ,m = .0006ft3/sec 20min H = (20*)(2' ft) + 40ft = 86.26 • F = C' • r,4, where Cu = fct (2lff,N) • M =-1=" - .16 H Z, N = 86.2 - 345 .25 Using figure 8-9; C„ = 125, therefore, F = 31.25 ft K = .0006 x 1• - 6.8 x 10 cmisec (31.25)(86.2) .0328 • K = 6.8 x 10-6 cm/sec STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KbRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 9 Segment 4 The packer test procedure calls for conducting test segments as the head pressures are decreased (as well as when head pressures are being increased as in previous segments). In this segment using the same pump head as segment number 2, flow was measured. Hydraulic conductivity value (K) and calculations are as follows: • 8343.5-8342.6gallons _ .06gpm = .0001 ft 31sec 15minr = (14)(2.31ftliIr) = +40ft = 63.1ft • F = Cu • rw, where CL fct(M,N) (F value is the same as segment 2) F 25 ft .0001 1 4 • K = F1-1, _ (25)(63.1) .0328 - 2.3 x 10 • K = 2.3 x 10- cm/sec STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 10 Segment 5 During segment 5 of the packer test no flow was measured. Therefore, using the same conservative approach as in the analysis of segments 1 and 2, the following results are calculated: Q� _ 0.O5galr • - .005 ,m = 1.1x10 sft 31sec IOrnin = As in Segment 1; HH = 56.176 • F=As in Segment I; F = 22.5ft • _ 1.1 xl f s 1 2.7x10 7cm/sec FHS (22.5)(56.17) .0328 Therefore segment five indicates a hydraulic conductivity of less than 2.7 x 10' cm/sec. Packer Test Interpretations During the first two segments of the test (with 7 psi and 10 psi pump head) no flow could be recorded with the instrumentation used. During the third segment the pump head was increased to 20 psi (and, in fact, the pressure gauge was observed to oscillate up to 22 psi at times). The third segment produced flows after the first five minutes of the test which resulted in a calculated permeability of 6.8 x 10-6 cm/sec. On the fourth segment the head pressure was reduced to the same pressure as in segment two. During the fourth segment, flows were measured even though there were no measurable flows during the second segment. This indicates that pressures exerted during the third segment of the test, fractured the formation causing a loss of water to fractures in the fourth segment. This further indicates the measurement of an "artificial permeability" in both the third and fourth segment. STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND K1RSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 11 In conclusion, the packer test conservatively indicates the Mancos Shale has an inplace hydraulic conductivity of less that 2.3 x 10-6 cm/sec, based on Segment 4 of the test. Since the results of the test indicate that the formation was hydraulically fractured during the third segment of the test, the hydraulic conductivity indicated in Segment 4 is an artificially high value. We can then definitely conclude that the actual hydraulic conductivity is less than that measured in the fourth segment of the test. RESEARCH As part of the hydrogeologic investigation, SRK reviewed recent U.S.G.S. geologic mapping of the area; specifically U.S.G.S. Open -Fill Report 93-320, "Preliminary Geologic Map of the Storm King Mountain Quadrangle, Garfield County, Colorado". The report describes the Mancos Shale as Upper Cretaceous, "dominantly light -to -dark -gray carbonaceous shale..." which is "... about 5,500 feet thick". Based on a strike and dip measurement recorded in the area of the landfill and presented on the U.S.G.S. map, the Mancos Shale is likely striking approximately north 52° west and dipping 55° to the southwest in the landfill area. Given the stratigraphic location of the landfill within the formation (based on the formation strike measured) and a formation dip of 55°, there is an approximate 3000 foot thickness of Mancos Shale indicated underlying the landfill. CONCLUSIONS Based on the findings of our hydrogeologic investigation, we believe site subsurface characteristics are adequate to comply with "barrier layer" requirements outlined in the Colorado Solid Waste Regulations Subsection 3.2.5 (C)(1) "Natural Ethology with recompaction". This subsection specifies and adequate barrier layer may consist of a minimum 20 ft thickness of materials having a hydraulic conductivity of less than or equal to 1 x 10 cm/sec with the upper 12 inches recompacted to attain a hydraulic conductivity of less than or equal to 1 x 10-" cm/sec. Packer testing indicates a 104 cm/sec magnitude insitu permeability within the Mancos Shale. USGS mapping indicates an approximate 3000 ft thickness of this formation underlying the landfill. Further, geotechnical laboratory testing indicates that weathered Mancos Shale can be recompacted at an optimum moisture content to reach a permeability of approximately 6.5 x 10-' cm/sec. It is our professional judgement that so long as all waste disposal is completed on top of the Mancos Shale bedrock and a one foot -thick recompacted layer of locally available weathered STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN Mr. Tim Danner November 12, 1993 Page 12 Mancos Shale material is placed at the base of the disposal areas, the intent of Colorado Solid Waste Regulation 3.2.5 (C)(1) is being met. The proper placement of a recompacted one foot - thick layer of clay rich material available at the site, underlain by thounsands of feet of relatively impermeable Mancos Shale (hydraulic conductivity of 106 cm/sec magnitude) will provide a suitable liner system for the landfill facility. GK:Ip Attachments STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIFISTEN APPENDIX A BOREHOLE LITHOLOGIC LOGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TrErn:reWifnR EERTs q ON it ! N tv_S.l C-0nFJ►pwrr� v,f tl,rea FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE l OF 2 PROJECT NAME: 5ouf4. (. b e1,, L+-- PROJECT NO.: 6570 [ BORING NUMBER 8 I f COORDINATES OR LOCATION 1. LOGGED BY: Quc e. APPROVED BY: pc"„e, 11 SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH:/ (ENCOUNTERED] DEPTH: 1_,. D (STATIC) DRILLING METHOD A;r 14r,+ -y HOLE ,,, DIAMETER (v FLUID USED /4✓esn c DATE STARTED: COMPLETED: 9 ! 7 HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY NOTES a w 0 SAMPLE TYPE AND NUMBER SAMPLE DEPTH INTERVAL • BLOW COUNT . RECOVERY LENGTH I%i I W w 0 SUMMARY a DESCRIPTION _ WELL Aja CONSTRUCTION cue It ;, ,s+j/eci —t3 — — .., `.10l ~ r 1iwere) G)a s nxe.5n e 5yla) s1,yl,P/ ne,s i.- : w.cr @k ce Lir, le ,..I a1- tae.1renk 'e 5.Y 0___ - — — — _ _ — — - - - — D — — — — —3) .� —SID — _ - -- Gre sk zie,ie./r- Jo SAyW A1_:. .a ),+ Air — w'� r �14If41 N0 .Iev, .1-e. . popv, e v vai,-;,• 4,'8+^11 •'r� i; x,a 1F 4- © -��,�` f c1e ft1 /Ue3e : A -I - -)e74, i +4 p�:1. A. s 4 a limy fL,be @ y®, J Y; n LoRsff L) able -f-o sv 3/, ly 'Ts,cF;Lie{` cov&e "fp 10usk 50""plc "tJGe ;$. in 11-e-- Co v', a -1-:. L, NOTES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 SrcrrLrr Itl BERTSON it »r'tx (u.s.) Caraulttey Enpnw■ aid Eden tie• FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE OF PROJECT NAME: S. C?h PROJECT NO.: /6 57 o� L F 3) ( )I - BORING NUMBER I SURFACE ELEVATION COORDINATES OR LOCATION GWL DEPTH t (ENCOUNTERED) DEPTH: J j. , (STATIC) LOGGED BY: 3.jrd APPROVED BY: K DRILLING METHOD /CUP"' fl''' I HOLE #, DIAMETER [;�jr FLUID USED ./VNI e DATE STARTED: COMPLETED: HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY NOTES --•0-uj s o CC u�= e i 0< ♦ 2 a J et .. z J N a 0 U z 0 m s �cc tt _ u4 I- > w U" a -- DESCRIPTION WELL SUMMARY '6a _ - _ —gee r-• r .._ 9a _ _ (l w ,3 S,�t. zde .s Z Iaove 0-- r r _ L E NOTES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TTITTEN Roaxxrsax & Iez— 74 (la.s.) FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE OF / PROJECT NAME: S¢u+k Cavr" 1`F PROJECT NO.: eri, '%Q i BORING NUMBER / Z COORDINATES OR LOCATION LOGGED BY: 130 1" APPROVED BY: Ki•+cH SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH: (ENCOUNTERED} DEPTHVVone (STATIC} s DRILLING METHOD Po d+'Y HOLE /t DIAMETERR FLUID USED t"s,h e' DATE STARTED: Vi1573 COMPLETED: HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS: SAFETY NOTES _ 14. Y 03 J �'` i W J w II J c7 m Q 01 W DESCRIPTION WELL CONS O S RUCTION Na W&/ I,s+.,irec —[1 C-1 ` C .-ay We7fxe..Cd 4Jay5+4 .eJJP)e asrr'jD.M+'y n,srs} p— -- _ — ' I C) _ '—.2O _ i_3p1 &r. j 3 21CI 1ta7rJ) cs�ry exccr -••.•r37- 2.eahe5 a`a'f' is. -td. m.;Ir'' 2ahe. 95 1iwJ,, tc.?4ed Y@ehoe-f oy. pT e�LI.T 4/p.4,to d ;i( Kj TD- 304 f — NOTES 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 s7 czi, [ao$rsrrsar+ k tl (U.S.) FIELD DRILLING LOG PAGE / OF PROJECT NAME: Soul+, CaKr " U F PROJECT NO.: 6,. 5 70 f BORINGCOORDINATES NUMBER 8 3 OR LOCATION LOGGED BY: Born APPROVED BY: K',i4e) 1 SURFACE ELEVATION GWL DEPTH i, (ENCOUNTERED) OEPTH:,'VO It a (STATIC) DRILLINGHOLE METHOD Ah- I'�otdr" y� / Jf DIAMETER % FLUIO USED / V[)f�E? DATE STARTED: ) COMPLETED: / 0/1/12/1 93 HAZARDOUS WASTE REMARKS; SAFETY NOTES - LL, I a e LIJ } m w D a i <2 s r Ct.J W '1: W cc „1 'Az D U 3 m O 3 r U z �i 4Y ¢ a - OESCRIPTIC]N r WELL CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY ��,l l�E/s,r No Wl 1h Ia/Iea —0 0- .6' G. -.,a9 tor- ii..ec)slie,%Jol 1st.:1 4_f�j ,.,.rst p_ _ - - - 4- - —JL — —20 , --3D —`ID r - 1 • .g - 7C, jI•Q ,.,s kal�@ry�)1 aalr� pY ) Ho r -1? °d by .�P°r4.-�, yrsaZ.S'i" zone a� rK.�.t? e dc, #" re.,/,€_4:., dir>4+g ,4i,.. 0"., " .7 :l,e:C..zreJ :7 aM or.1 3� ' "M.:St 2e4t r 3 % Lio Cf E NOTES,,.. 1 1 m' cker ICSt per.car,n,a 3 . S L/8 r STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN - APPENDIX B PACKER TEST REFERENCE FIGURES (From "Field Permeability Test Methods with Applications to Solution Mining", U.S. Department of Commerce publication PB -272-542) 103 - L V y FI I w 21 • 6• 4 • • O m HJ 3 3 = = % 7 r P i r —w13 6 • 4 O — C v it 3 3 - V 6 • C SV N O •• c U 0 r O • 4 16 L1 14 44 a • — O L 4 6 O 0 • C r 6 4 y • • x'4 116 1. ele 7 s 0 C C 0 M q{ u O 4.1 a ) k 4 ®w j v DI=Y x:6� • O C i Wg } 47. I ■y r •.r O 6.1 • • • 7 4 • O ` RRR111 2 x YZ • • i 4 L w u • 3 w s r z s u Y• 0 .R .• v1 G 4' 6~ - 0: 0 6' 4. y C' ti a •. V O +y 1+' e. ' >.4.1 t' .•F 4 - J- 4 • 5•r a e��a•�a•.� 11 T o � � V �•� r g s - • w i �Ixu =V16V u r • • • o iC 6 9d 3 7 N ty 4 i le'C. t • r i a6 • 4 Cf: 6 1. a c r xu C V3 t ■ w i 4.M p •.41 av u.—s x"I 6 u 0 01 4o • a r a .r3 x s i • ♦ + M r 6 O • Y .} e K f • 1 '! • ` r Ir. (634 a". 6f 3 k 5 3 N ZW -=16* 4 r .4 • • O R 7 7 Figure 8-5 r i •000r 2000 1000 700 200 100 70 •s0 - 107 - 6116611 19tVWHniiiigilaggEMMinn .1;ffigiumill maws 5 5777= 11144.11414==441110: CZ! II Ir 4.4APACIZ".414 ullillIRg�llllllllllll 111 flt1UfI HIliWl i'r 111111lr".r±'stf'.+t��'# fi#1 +'— I NII :. ,I'� _._ .�00 �'' IMMAH1111111111114thEll 111110111 == r !I + .7JAISAH :OE MP i IN iNJy .Y.....1iii 01=13/..:17' ...a« ".�.'.�"'r.'ii'.r—« ar �w.ww.w...�r�ailuwr mauffill r." L/H L/H ELM - °L/H - 131--771./H - -L/H - 'TN - 10 3 7 d1- r . 1.0 0.90 0.75' 0.6.- 0.5 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 .:1a `-a- r �. 11+1�yMrrr.a�1� h5!ii; a..#i �w11.r1rrrenlxR>�>11e a" mann PEZIEMINNAMMIENCRUIMUNINNIMINE -= BEEEnaMEF= wo.0 OHM w. rMY.. rrMNMtMrwrrar. tatarA- M.atmesimourns NM NW ME NNtt�rt-p.M.mMOM 7tH#70.77 t(ft1111NnW ammo SIpY�M.. \.ltgE-stm..M tMt. 2 3 4 5 c 7 3 10 20 40 70 104 000 400 700 1000 a020 3000 H/r or H/re packer tests LIHeIev for Figure 8-9 Cu VALUES FOR USER CONSTANT HEAD TEST ANALYSIS (USSR, G-97) STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KRISTEN APPENDIX C GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORTS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PROCTOR TEST REPORT 4 -Fin ens i t y, R c f Iti) N 17- n 115 L.A - I 110 fit 1 ! r 05 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Water content, `r: "Standard" Proctor, ASTM D 698, Method A Elev.' Depth Classification Nat. Moist. $p"e' LL PI r.' > No.4 % C No.200 USCS AASHTO 0-16FT 3E x 11.1 r TEST RESULTS - - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Optimum moisture = 13.2 'r' Maximum dry density = 118.8 pc+ BLACK CLAY WITH h SAND/SILT m Project No.: 65?01 x Project: S.CANYON LANDFILL'TADCO'L4?5.0 x Location: S3'L4?5.0 Date: September 15, 1993 m Remarks: Figure No. '� PROCTOR TEST REPORT STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN (U.S.) INC. Consulting Engineers and Scientists - IMO NM N MB r r- I- INN MI N ■■r N En- r MEI HACK PR PE RM EA MIMI' TEST 'PROJECT: - SOL TTI ICANYl1N LAN DIAL 1. 'Rel] ECT Ha: 65701 A8 No.: 1.475.0 AMPLE DESCRIPTION: 13 AMPLE Na: 13 REA: 41.16 66 -2 'ERMFAMEIER Na: CELL No 3 DIAMETER: Lbs inr HRIALWC• 128% (EIGHT. 10033 as µSOLIDS: T. (IF SOIL 633.7 'THAL MIC: DRY SOL IDS: 754826 gun 1[3TR1 V[1L 112931 ed"3 I3RY DEHSrEY: 174.386 PCP 13ACKPRESSURE SATURATION DATA DATE (MM/D TIME (Wm) CILANGE IN CELL PRESS. (poi) CHANGE IN PORE PRESS (p.1) 'R. PARA. METER 17.Sep 1:41 5.83 5.72 096 FLOW VS TIME PERMEABILITY - - - 4.,09001 IA FEMITMEIJIMIIINOPIIIMEMEWITIElen 30.00 u 'Ll 20.00 1 E D1000 - _ -:06,....r.6.= cc U1 4017 0 20 - 40 60 C06,,41x-ATNVE 60 (T11ouNe14iI 100 TIME 120 (..c) 140 100 180 1E -or EL 0 20 40 00 60 100 TIME (sec) (Thousand') 120 140 160 100 1+- INFLOW OUT FLOW 1 HEALS TANK -- TAIL TANK 1 HACK PRESSURE PER MFAIR LrrrnEST DATA DAIS: IDDAA1M) TIME (hn) ELAPSED TIME (sec) CUM. TIME Ix e) WATER LEVEL HEAD TANK leen) WATER LEVEL TML TANK {cni STATIC 1 HEAD DIF?. {cmi INCREMENTAL FLOW QUANTITY CUMMIJLXIWVE FLOW QUANTITY INCREMENTAL FLOW RATE APPLJEDPRESS. , PRESS. DIFF. (Psi) TOTAL HEAD (emHlO) PERMEABILITY IiYD. GRAD, (Ij IIE MD TANK (cc) TAIL TANK (cc) HEAD TANK (cc) TAIL. TANK (Oc) BEAD TANK (Bdi c) TAIL TANK 1'x/ 1 IIEAD TANK (psi) TAIL TANK (psi) 1IEAD TANK (coon) TAIL TANK io.o c) 24 Sep 24 Sep 20 -Sep 20 Sep 20.Scp 20 -Sep 20-Scp 20.1ep 20Scp 20 Sep SO -Sep 21•Sep 22 .Sep 9.3 1000 1040 11.1 11.50 11.00 11.60 11.67 1467 15.76 1671 7.91 7,70 0 1000 2160 1000 1440 1000 2160 3852 3600 3996 3600 30272 140111 1800 3960 5760 7204 9000 11160 15012 11612 22406 26208 60620 164320 11.00 7450 69.60 69.25 60.90 6445 67.95 47.10 64.20 65.40 4.60 SS 00 4600 19.30 20.00 24.60 11.00 I1.35 21.80 2240 13.30 14,10 25.40 23.10 34.90 43.80 5050 4920 4423 4735 4145 41.55 4100 4110 4046 3860 2410 220 063 009 470 0.44 037 063 1.48 1.14 1.01 1.01 13.19 23. 16 463 0 76 051 444 057 076 1.14 101 1.14 101 1271 1102 1363 132 222 166 323 3.07 4.95 609 7.10 812 2029 31.70 063 1.39 1.90 2.35 7:92 316 4-02 5.63 497 7-99 1953 308.1 352E-04 4.110:04 3.87E-8; 300E-04 317E-04 2940.-04 190E.-44 3.17E-04 254E-04 267E-04 2770-04 1.680.-04 332E44 3.52E41 192E414 3.08E-04 117E.04 3.52E-4 L96E04 2.42F-04 2660.84 2.82E434 1.160.04 1.63E-04 83 83 63 83 13 03 63 83 83 03 63 03 63 82 12 82 62 02 02 82 62 82 02 62 12 02 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _1 12004 119 54 11&59 117.09 11699 115.08 114.14 11244 11071 104.14 4444 7254 1105P-07 1300E.07 7,964E.07 6373E07 46050.47 61740.07 1976E-07 44130.07 5.564&07 6294E-07 41000.47 5.657E07 7.105E-07 7.113E-07 S. 792E47 4373E.07 6445E-07 7.4090.07 4327E.07 41090.07 6717E-07 4194E-07 5.012'E-07 3.474E-07 11.4 11.91 11.22 11.75 11.64 11.55 11.38 11.21 11.4 1018 9.01 7.23 .. AVG: 4.49E07 STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND KIRSTEN nr101. Consulting Engineers and Scientists TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: File FROM: John DeAngelis Date: June 29, 1994 SUBJECT SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL 1.0 INTRODUCTION Additional subsurface investigation was conducted May 10 through May 13, 1994, which included the completion of borings numbered B4, B5, B6, and B7. These borings are generally located within the area of proposed future landfill operations (see Appendix G, Drawing 1). Previous subsurface investigations conducted by SRK at the TADCO site include the drilling of borings numbered B 1, B2, and B3. The locations of these test borings are also presented in Appendix G, Drawing 1. 2.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION A qualified SRK geologist was present to supervise drilling operations and the logging of the borings. The drill logs are included in Appendix B of this document. The borings were advanced with an air rotary drill rig to penetrate the underlying dense Mancos Shale Formation. As indicated on the field drilling log for boring 85, coring equipment was used to obtain core samples of the Mancos Shale. Due to poor sample recovery, however, coring equipment was not utilized at any other boring locations. The general lithology at borings numbered 134, 85, B6, and B7 is summarized as follows: Weathered Mancos Shale bedrock is present at the ground surface at borings numbered B4 and 86, as indicated by nearby outcrops and drilling conditions near the ground surface. Competent Mancos Shale is located approximately 18 feet beneath the ground surface (bgs) at boring B4, and at approximately 23 feet bgs at boring 86. Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.). Inc. 3232 South Vance Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80227, U.S.A. Tei. (303) 985-1333 Facsimile (303) 985-9947 Other offices in: U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom and Africa STEFFEN ROBERTSON AND K1RSTEN Weathered Mancos clay is present from 0 to 10 feet bgs at borings numbered B5 and B7. This material consists of medium stiff, moist to very moist silty clay, and is underlain by weathered Mancos bedrock, ranging from 10 to 20 feet in thickness at borings B5 and B7, respectively. Groundwater was encountered in all four of the borings. Static water levels ranged from approximately 20 feet bgs at B4, 15 feet bgs at B5, 21 feet bgs at B6, and 30 feet bgs at B7. Locally occurring shallow groundwater is generally encountered in the weathered Mancos directly above competent Mancos Shale. 2.1 PACKER TESTING 2.1.1 Packer Test Introduction Packer testing was completed following procedures outlined in the U.S. Department of Commerce publication PB -272 452, "Field Permeability Test Methods with Applications to Solution Mining". Packer test methodology and calculations for determining hydraulic conductivity are followed as specifically outlined in SRK Technical Memorandum "South Canyon Landfill Subsurface Conditions", dated November 12, 1993. It should be noted that, as opposed to the single packer method used in the investigation completed in October 1993 (borings numbered B1, B2, and B3), two packers were used for the recent investigation completed in May, 1994 (borings numbered B4, B5, B6, and B7). Therefore, the "Unlined Test Section With Two Packers" analysis method was used as outlined on the attached Figure 8-5 from the above referenced packer test document. 2.1.2 Packer Test Data The packer test field measurements and calculated hydraulic conductivity for each test segment within the test borings completed are summarized as follows: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 1 SOUTH CANYON PACKER TEST FIELD MEASUREMENTS Boring No. & Depth Interval (ft.) Flow Meter Reading (gal.) Time (minutes) Gauge Reading (psi) Calculated Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec) B-4 (30'-35') 583.90 0 10 584.55 5 10 585.20 10 10 1.0 x 10-5 587.80 15 15 590.50 20 15 593.50 25 15 596.10 30 15 598.60 35 15 601.00 40 15 2.8 x 10`5 601.80 45 10 602.00 50 10 602.90 55 10 1.0 x 10"5 604.30 60 5 605.29 65 5 606.20 70 5 1.9 x 10-5 8-4 (24'-29') 619.95 0 5 620.20 5 5 620.38 10 5 620.50 15 5 4.0 x 10' TABLE 1 (Continued) SOUTH CANYON PACKER TEST F1ELD MEASUREMENTS Boring No. & Depth Interval (ft.) Flow Meter Reading (gal.) Time (minutes) Gauge Reading (psi) Calculated Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec) B-4 (24'-29') continued 623.00 625.80 628.50 631.20 633.50 635.90 638.30 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 3.3 x 10`3 641.50 645.00 648.30 654.80 657.90 661.00 55 60 65 70 75 80 15 15 15 15 15 15 3.4 x 1+0-5 663.60 665.60 668.20 670.50 672.50 85 90 95 100 105 10 10 10 10 10 3.0 x 10-5 674.00 674.90 676.00 110 115 120 5 5 5 2.1 x 10=5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 1 (Continued) SOUTH CANYON PACKER TEST FIELD MEASUREMENTS Boring No. & Depth Interval (ft.) Flow Meter Reading (gal.) Time (minutes) Gauge Reading (psi) Calculated Hydraulic Conductivity (cm/sec) B-6 (28'-33') 704.80 0 5 707.80 5 5 710.50 10 5 712.00 15 5 713.65 20 5 715.35 25 5 3.6 x 10-5 718.60 30 10 721.85 35 10 725.50 40 10 728.30 45 10 731.50 50 10 734.70 55 10 3.9 x 10-5 738.40 60 15 742.52 65 15 745.92 70 15 748.85 75 15 751.45 80 15 753.97 85 15 2.5 x 105 756.40 90 10 758.85 95 10 761.25 100 10 3.8 x 10-5 762.88 105 5 763.80 110 5 765.92 115 5 2.6 x 10-5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TABLE 1 (Continued) SOUTHT CANYON PACKER TEST FIELD MEASUREMENTS Calculated Boring No. & Hydraulic Depth Interval Flow Meter Gauge Reading Conductivity (ft.) Reading (gal.) Time (minutes) (psi) (cmisec) B-7(43'-48') 775.00 0 5 780.50 5 5 785.80 10 5 791.10 15 5 796.40 20 5 801.50 25 5 6.4 x 10 s 808.90 30 10 815.90 35 10 822.88 40 10 829.80 45 10 836.75 50 10 6.3 x 10-5 847.00 55 15 856.75 60 15 866.60 65 15 876.52 70 15 886.45 75 15 896.40 80 15 6.9 x 10-5 - 103 - Test Sectio c SIL' : aS `P Q Ai, �; ~ff ti aca _..= 1' ",,. u 0. + ti ♦+ .. 4 371 id .5- 0 15 1 1 r Nr JP L Y — iMliGn ••777.,111 a r- � r � S Pa Y 1 s x 1 L i s c _ N L + 1.1 7 .. V X L 5 MV.. S U T II r. 1 1. ■ 4 • O CO • te u� AP GO +-rY 70 % a • 50w .. T N. r4 ■ TV C L 0 ra A. Y 5.. x 'a[ L L L A W u V V . C vc s c �t a N C Ll C. .. r 1 s nL 5. • F 1i L rr Y..... O e c x 0as CG L. 0 . ••• c s i Y 1. D .r'�T BX ' V ..+ ] 1Y S U;'. NCZ i J HNJ 00 V S ! T L. •P 4 4 4 i9 u• 7 oa CL 2 4 w Ld4 ••4 A NS M 'UVi=u01. 8. ■ • V L LI y } T W T x E. 4 Lk- tY u L 6 N — V Q L 4 J 6 'f — bis b. _�►r 0 q • a 0 «a a 0 o E 1 LI 6 OC G.L. x .. J ul v a c V 4 S S L 4a V c • • 0 • , •77 r• C _... .,a u Xsc w i AL LV Y a. _ 4 W 8 A o n o a Mfr AI cif ■i F` 1 u 1.4 tyi L w j•r J} v ..! p 7 • 4v S s L U p w ■ w o • u3 . x y A.. • y 0 N • 4.1 =u — x E W N. Jos" xV Li u' X 4 71 V V' aa2 = i^ L 3 7 pr 1. } y Figure APPENDIX D GROUND WATER MONITORING CORRESPONDENCE AND DATA • Minion Hydrologic correspondence dated January 14, 1991 concerning ground water monitoring network • Minion Hydrologic correspondence dated January 14, 1991 concerning September 1990 water quality analyses • Minion Hydrologic correspondence dated January 16, 1992 concerning November 1991 water quality analyses • Minion Hydrologic correspondence dated November 8, 1993 concerning May 1993 water quality analyses • Minion Hydrologic correspondence dated January 5, 1994 concerning November 1993 TPH analyses • Water Analysis Report concerning November 11, 1993 sampling event • Water Analysis Report concerning May 25, 1993 sampling event "PNA MINION HYDROLOGIC P.O. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-0484 January 14, 1991 Ms. Austin Buckingham Geologist Solid Waste and Incident Management Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Colorado Department of Health 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, CO 80220 Re: South Canyon Landfill - Monitoring Network Dear Austin: Pursuant to our recent telecons, this letter report discusses a revised monitoring network for the South Canyon Landfill, locat- ed in Garfield County, Colorado. The proposed monitoring net- work is shown on attached figure 1. The monitoring/sampling lo- cations have remained the same except for the surface water sam- pling locations on South Canyon Creek. The sampling procedures will remain the same as proposed by Condor Geotechnical Services Inc. in their South Canyon Landfill monitoring outline, except for some of the laboratory analytical procedures. A table show- ing the methods currently used by ACZ Laboratories, Inc. to ana- lyze the samples is attached to this letter report. The monitoring well locations at the South Canyon Landfill cor- respond to the 3 locations mentioned in your October 14, 1988 letter to Mr. Tim Danner. The monitoring wells were installed by Condor Geotechnical Services, Inc. under the direction of Gormley Engineering Associates in May 1989. Since the inception of the Landfill ground water monitoring, on- ly the downgradient well, SCL-M-2, has been sampled. This moni- toring location has been sampled by both Condor Geotechnical and Minion Hydrologic. Site SCL-M-2 corresponds with previous sam- ples labeled SCLF-M2. Monitoring wells SCL-M-1 and SCL-M-3 have been dry since the beginning of the Landfill monitoring. Review of the completion/geologic logs for the 3 wells show well completion depths (as measured from ground surface) of 36 feet for SCL-M-1, 23 feet for SCL-M-2, and 32 feet for SCL-M-3. Re- cent well depth measurements taken during the September 1990 sampling show well completion depths (as measured from the top of the surface casing) of 36.6 feet for SCL-M-1, 25.1 feet for SCL-M-2, and 35.4 feet for SCL-M-3. These field measurements do not differ appreciably from the measurements recorded by Con- dor Geotechnical in their July and December 1989 field notes. Minion Hydrologic will continue to measure well depths during each sampling to determine if there has been "silting -in" of any Austin Buckingham January 14, 1991 page 2 of the wells. Review of the well completion/geologic logs also indicates well SCL-M-3 may be two feet short of fully penetrating the surficial aquifer. This is apparently due to the presence of a hard boulder which is deposited on top of the Mancos Shale Formation. The surface water sampling sites at the South Canyon Landfill consist of two sites on South Canyon Creek, and the weir loca- tion. Surface sample SCL-SCC-UG has been sampled during the Landfill monitoring by both Condor Geotechnical and Minion Hy- drologic. Site SCL-SCC-UG corresponds with previous samples la- beled SCLF-CRK, CRK-1, and CRK. The downgradient South Canyon Creek sample has never been taken due to lack of surface flows from the Landfill into South Canyon Creek. Proposed future surface water sampling on South Canyon Creek consists of a further upgradient sampling location, SCL-SCC-UG2, and the downgradient sampling location, SCL-SCC-DG. Both sample locations will be sampled during each monitoring visit to deter- mine potential groundwater influence from the Landfill on South Canyon Creek. Monitoring site SCL-SCC-UG will not be sampled. If direct surface flow from the Landfill into South Canyon Creek is encountered during the monitoring, the surface flow from the Landfill will also be sampled. Since the occurrence of direct surface flow from the Landfill into South Canyon Creek will be a sporadic event, and the location of such a flow has not been de- termined at this time, a monitoring location has not been in- cluded on figure 1. The remaining surface water sampling site, SCL-WEIR, will be monitored during each site visit. If flow is present, the dis- charge will be monitored and water quality samples taken. The weir site was designed to measure flows from the spring area lo- cated on the south side of the Landfill road, south of the cur- rent solid waste fill operation. This site has not been sampled to date due to lack of flow. During the sampling sessions, a field reconnaissance of the Landfill will be performed. If substantial surface flows are observed in the area between the current solid waste fill opera- tion (west) and the old landfill operation (east) water quality samples will be taken. Regarding future laboratory analyses, cation -anion balance in- formation will be provided with all laboratory sample results. These data are available beginning with the September 1990 labo- ratory analyses, and will be forwarded to you along with the re- mainder of the laboratory results and field monitoring data. Austin Buckingham January 14, 1991 page 3 Austin, please inform me if the revised monitoring network plan is acceptable. Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC by //..rCALr Wane E. Goin Hydrogeologist cc: Tim Danner =ski fete,, T. 6 5 J N SCALE 1:24,000 670 SCL-M-1 c N SOUTH CANYON CREEK r� ti /7;'‘'.' rr', ._:'‘';. FIGURE 1 SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL MONITORING NETWORK ..r ▪ - MONITORING WELLS ► - SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITES • - PAST SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITE ACZ Laboratories, Inc. South Canyon Landfill Groundwater Monitoring Parameters & Methods PARAMETER METHOD Alkalinity (includes CO3,HCO3,OH) EPA 310.1 Calcium, dissolved EPA 200.7 Carbon, Total Organic EPA 415.1 Chloride EPA 325.2 Conductivity @ 25C EPA 120.1 Magnesium, dissolved EPA 200.7 Nitrate/Nitrite as N EPA 353.2 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl USGS 1-2552-78 pH EPA 150.1 Potassium, dissolved EPA 200.7 Sodium, dissolved EPA 200.7 Sulfate EPA 375.3 Solids, total dissolved EPA 160.1 Total Organic Halogens ASTM D808 Copper, dissolved EPA 200.7 Iron, dissolved EPA 200.7 Manganese, dissolved EPA 200.7 Zinc, dissolved EPA 200.7 N,IINI[]N H4'DROL+C]GIC P.O. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-0484 January 14, 1991 Ms. Austin Buckingham Geologist Solid Waste and Incident Management Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Colorado Department of Health 4210 East llth Avenue Denver, CO 80220 Re: South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County September 1990 Laboratory Water Quality Analyses Dear Austin: Attached for your review are the results from the September 18- 19, 1990 water quality sampling at the South Canyon Landfill, located in. Garfield County, Colorado. Copies of the field notes taken during the site sampling are also attached. The potential Landfill sample sites are shown on attached fig- ure 1. The downgradient well, SCL-M-2, was the only well which had water in the casing. The creek sample, SCL-SCC-UG, was taken upstream of the culvert under the entrance road to the Landfill. There was no surface water entering South Canyon Creek from the Landfill during the September sampling dates. Preliminary review of the laboratory results shows a total or- ganic halogens value for well SCL-M-2 of 35 micrograms/liter as Cl. This is a substantial reduction from the 15,600 micrograms /liter as Cl value obtained during the June 1990 sampling. The well was bailed several times during the September sampling to assure a valid sample. Bailing times and volumes are shown on the attached field notes. Surface sample SCL-SCC-UG total organic halogens values for the June and September sampling dates were 23 and 31 micrograms/ liter as Cl, respectively. As discussed during our October 15, 1990 telecon, the magnesium level in the well sample was high at 625 mg/1. Previous sam- pling of well SCL-M-2 shows a range of Mg values of 350 mg/1 to 610 mg/l. These values exceed the recommended limit of 125 mg/ 1 which was established by the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water standards (non -mandatory). Review of the SCL-M-2 sample results also shows high levels for other constituents common in shale deposits. The deposits com- prising the surficial aquifer at the South Canyon Landfill con- Austin Buckingham January 14, 1991 page 2 sist primarily of Mancos Shale fragments. Assuming a low per- meability in the surficial aquifer, long retention times in the weathered shale may partly explain the increase in the amount of these constituents in the local groundwater. The South Canyon Landfill monitoring results will be summarized in the form of tables sometime later this year, preferably af- ter at least two sample sets have been obtained under the re- vised monitoring network. Austin, if you have any questions or comments please call. Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC by Wane E. Goin Hydrogeologist cc: Tim Danner 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 I'ACZ LABORATORIES INC DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 1 10/02/90 Water Analysis Report 15:13 1 Page 1 3555555....5==5-5=55 ....=IM LS.=t=5.5==5=5 Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.Q. Bax 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Attn. : Mr. Tim Danner .3= iii- ... Project : 90-02 Sample ID: SCL-M-2 Lab No. :•90-WI/07159 Sample Date Time: 09/19/90 Comp. Date Received: 09/20/90 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 660. mg/I Bicarbonate as CaCO3 660 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Total Organic Halogens 35. ug/1 as C1 Carbon, total organic 43. mg/1 Chloride 220. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 570. mg/1 pH (lab) 7.7 units Hardness as CaCO3 3988, mg/l Magnesium, dissolved 625. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved -.02 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N -.02 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 6.4 mg/1 Oil and Grease - 2. mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 27. mg/l SAR in water 3.99 Sodium; -dissolved 572. mg/1 Sulfate - 3671. mg/1 Solids, total dissolved 6372. mg/1 Anions (sum) 96.45 meq/1 Cations*(sum) 105.62 meq/1 Cation -Anion Balance 4.54 % Capper, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved .05 mg/I Manganese, dissolved .15 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved .49 mg/1 Remarks: Lab Filtration Required On Two Sub -Samples; Note: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than Frank E. Polniek, Inargan'c -b Su•ervisor 1. < 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 saaaaa a s a. JR a o a w-a=aaarasa=aaa=a=.= =a a=a a a==a =s=s=aa sa .a=- 1 ALZ LABORATORIES INC DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 1 10/02/90 Water Analysis Report 15:12 1 Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Attn. : Mr. Tim Danner Project : 90-02 Sample ID: SCL-SCC-UG Sample Date Time: 09/18/90 12:50 Parameters Page 1 =aaa =Ma Lab No. : 90-WI/07125 Date Received: 09/19/90 Alkalinity as CaCD3 760. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 623 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 137 mg/1 Hydroxide as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Total Organic Halogens 31. ug/1 Carbon, total organic 14. mg/1 Chloride 45. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 27. mg/1 pH (lab) 9.1 Hardness as CaCO3 178. units mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 27. mg/1 Nitrate -as N, dissolved .13 rng/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as,N .12 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl .7 mg/1 Oil and Grease 10. mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 4. mg/1 SAR in -water 12.23 Sodium, dissolved 371. mg/I Sulfate ` 161. mg/1 Solids„ -total dissolved 1160. mg/1 Anions -(surd 19.84 meq/1 Cations -(sum) 19.99 meq/1 Cation -Anion Balance .38 % Copper, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved .35 mg/I Manganese, dissolved -.01 mg/1 -.01 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved Remarks: Lab Filtration Required On Two Sub -Samples. Note: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than Frank E. Polniak,' Inorganic Lab Supervisor as CI MINION HYDROLOGIC P. O. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-0484 January 16, 1992. Ms. Austin Buckingham Geologist Solid Waste and Incident Management Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Colorado Department of Health 4210 East 11th Avenue Denver, CO 80220 Re: South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County - November 1991 Labo- ratory Water Quality Analyses Dear Austin: Attached for your review are the results from the November 7, 1991 water quality sampling at the South Canyon Landfill, located in Garfield County, Colorado. Copies of the field notes taken during the site sampling are also attached. The potential Landfill sample sites are shown on attached figure 1. The downgradient well, SCL-M-2, was the only well which had water in the casing. The creek samples, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC- DG, were taken upgradient and downgradient of the mouth of the alluvial canyon in which the Landfill is located. There was no surface water entering South Canyon Creek from the Landfill site during the November 7, 1991 sampling date. Preliminary review of the laboratory results shows a total or- ganic halogens value for well SCL-M-2 of 21 micrograms/liter as Cl. Approximately 4.5 well volumes were bailed prior to sam- pling the well. Bailing times and volumes are shown on the at- tached field notes. The total organic halogens values for sam- ple sites SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG were 5 micrograms/liter as 01 and 22 micrograms/liter as CL, respectively. The water quality analyses for the 2 surface water sampling sites, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG, indicates both a slight in- crease and decrease in the amount of several constituents in the downgradient sample. The most notable increases in the down - gradient sample were in carbonate as CaCO3 (64 mg/1), hardness as CaCO3 (45 mg/1), and total dissolved solids (60 mg/1). The November 7, 1991 water quality sampling is the third sam- pling date under the revised monitoring network (as described in correspondence dated January 14, 1991). Previous sample dates during 1991 include April 24 and August 6, 1991. Water quality sampling under the old monitoring network (figure 1) was per- formed by Minion. Hydrologic on June 14 and September 18, 1990, Ms. Austin Buckingham January 16, 1992 page 2 and by Condor Geotechnical three times prior to April 1990. Austin, after you have the opportunity to review the existing monitoring data, I would like to discuss the potential of chang- ing the South Canyon Landfill monitoring frequency from quarter- ly to semi-annually in 1992. I will be in touch during early February. If you have any questions please call. Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC by Wrne E. Goin Hydrogeologist 90-02 cc: Tim Danner 32 T. 5 5 T. T. 6 S SCALE 1:24,000 7i, SCL- 5CC—UG s SCL—M-1 F,1 orse J9 e ?wnt0 in SCL— SCC—UG2 :as , ROrf erl/,• ;s!'Y"E�uPt-t�oif a<' iv^r- FIGURE 1 SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL MONITORING NETWORK • - MONITORING WELLS 11. - SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITES • - PAST SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITE W E -- C 3 2. U J _J L) U_ 2: C1 C_ !'1) J LIJ C] GJ 0) 0• C+. J u+ C3 rN w, 4C4 eq r4 0, -. p,` - LJ ri 0) E (w, C3 U 1) 0♦ w• ♦ 0 C3 ,--1 0 0 � . .4 .4.__1 .-4 0 . r r 44 .41 ..1 %. w .41.-q - ww ♦. ♦ w ♦ +� r ♦� a ♦� ♦ ... ♦ ♦% ♦ w or IT \, w e w ♦• 3 " IT 01 IT IT 0)1 IT E= IT CT 01 IT I31 •31 I` ST IT IT I71 IT I3 I3 IT I]' 01 [T 1] I: is ii E? E E ] L E L Ei E: E :J E± E= E E 3 E E ?: E E E E r-1 U C 0, .' a) 1... U 4, (3 • 0 0 0 0: t) 2. 0) C) C4 NO J+ UN 0+ r-1 4 r -I r4 0 IJ J C) r4 C) UN +1) Mt Ca 0) U+ C) 9 b c) 1) 4, (3 0 I'1 1 !1) 0) 4 U+ C) 03 UN 0) ,0 0) I\ 07 0) UN U+ U+ CJ 1 1 • t) J 0 'H) M1 rot C.1 r4 C: +13 0+ C v] 4 13+ r4 r4 •.4 UN UN r4 r4 C1 � E+, '`{ .-4 0 n r, 0 :> L 1) t? 13 1) L s 0 44 C) 0 i 4, •1) E: 1) rt (3 • 1': _ 0) C4 (_ 13 4+ (3 CU C) 1) 13 13 1: 13 0 r~ '1 0. 0 U (3 U 1'i L t) .0 r, ❑ C} .. U ,' :> 1) :' C • •• U 0 •.4 L3 0• M,I, M1 j4 13 .--• .e: r4 r* 1) a4 U U 13 0 4, J u• rt M1 C1 I: 0 0 1) 0 0 0 01 13 U IT 0 13 " 1.1 0 (.3 13 n/ 1) L3 :> 0 0 0 ••-+ :) 0 1) C > 0 C U� C 0 '•4 rt L3 13 0 0 (T us, 1,1 — 0 0 0 :i 1) 0 -a 0 13 -• 0 0 1] IT IT 0, t] L) :> L3 1-C4 0 I) • r4 ..., 1) 9 .4 0 •-4 0 0 ' 13 1: _J t: 1. (3 13 13 0 IL3 0 I) U 13 r. 0 :' -0 T, r3 :) 13 t) 13 1) 1) 0 -.r, t) U Li GJ (3 t] 41 (3 t] -. E13 -4 o 0 0 C _ I71 C Cd L I: 0 C4 C) 11 f) t) - U ... -' •.. " 44 %P. I) .--• 0 J', 0 :> .w ) 0 L 0 C4 (3. C L (3 °. 0 13 t) 0 13 s: L Z 0 13 L t) 0 •i4 r, E C 1) r-• 13 -. Z. 0 :>, ' F () 0 13 :) rt 0 • .. f) 4, 4, 0 41 44 0 t) 4, C ( :3 0 0 0 0 4, C C 0 X. r-$ :>. •••• 13 �• 0 !3 -. I0 0 •, 4v�4 0 '3 ::7 0 • 0 �v" (3 0 1C^I� • + r] X 3 J. IJ 4• .3 0 44 :> Ei 0 Z 13 ^ E: •3 0 4, Ir t7 ,� C L) O 0 t! L y1 U 0 0 E= 'J •• C -.44 0 .,. t) :) '. C r` J 3 t. v C •" 0 •., 44 .. -. 01 0 C U) 0 (: 0 E +) ^13 4• 0 ." 0 U 13 (3 .0 -, U ., 0 t) ^13 13 1) 0 1: 3 1-3 0 E 1) :3 C C •-4 0 0 (3 4, 44 4. (31 13 0 C E 4+ 0 0 C I: L C 03 4J • I= ••. _J ... .4 I. " I) 0 L 0 C U 0 0 ... I3 ." ty -.4 0 0 13 r4 C I)' 0 U " 0 ^ U.. U ., i0 U • C L3 1-- 0(3 0 1) 13 0 1) 13 C I. L L 1. v t) .., u- -.4 00 •.4 •-4 O. C IT 0 :> C 0 . a' L ••" 0) c 0 ^• t. t- -- C L (31 44 44 44 4-. " 0: 13 r4 ..-. 44 .., 44 44 E1 OCCO •-^ --- U) [L (.] = E: 0 - ,., r) 0 13 .0 t3 n r) •., .. .• •., 0: 0 c: c) 3 1) 0 C 0 13 0 L (3 •-4 3 4, 0 .. .. .. .. � �W C0)UL3L3I;.3.L}J:I. 2: a:2: s: (ILL 11)U)C1)U)h C:LlL3LJ-.1;I♦J I- (3 0. CP --, 0 •• (3 • t) 4, t) is W 4, t) U 0 0 - 0 1- C 11. (1 0 13 C ij 4, 0 E: E E 4, '3 .. 13 4, (_ 0 0 13 I) L UC CO. WO) 0 s: U. L U 0. I NM IMO IMM ill ME Eli IMI Nil OM I 11E1 INN NM I AC?. LABORATORIES INC iC DATA M eN ICEMEN T iYS,e Ei i 1 I 12/05/91 LANDFILL GR O NDWATER nmnLYs I s REPORT 14:35 1 J i Pogo 1 Clicnt : South Canyon Landfill ddreso : F.D. Box 422 Glenwood Spr ingo, CO 81602 Attn. : Mr. .]im Danncr Project : Minion Hydrologic .90 02 Sample: 10: SOL SCC DC Lab Na.: 91 W1/09712 av a £.ump 1c Datc Tlmc: 11/07./91 14:35 Data Rcccivcd: 11/02/91 Para,mc.t.ro Alkalinity as CaCO3 52S. :s -.y.-'1 S l ca rbcna t :: az C CD3 4!//:a ' l Calcium, di000lvcd 43. mg/1 Carbanatc an CaCO3 92. mg/1 Carbon, total organic 14. µy+'1 Ch l or idc 22. mg/ 1 Conductivity @ 25C 1250. i:rr:hoo•'cm Hardncoo ao CaCO3 443. µy'1 f agnc . i um, d i o:.c l vad 33. mg/1 lel i t r ata ao N, d :....:,o i cd . A i mg/1 Hitratc/Nitrite as N.10 -g/1 Nl tri tc. ao N, d:zaolvcd .02 mg/1 Nitrcgcr., total Kjeldahl .c mg/1 p'`1 (lab) 2.4 ..,. . i t o Pctaz.c.ium, dl ool•.:cd 6. mg/1 cAR 1:1 avatar 6. n -fl Sodium, d l : oo 1 -.c d 221. mg/ I Sulfate. 142. mg/1 Sol ivo, total dissolved 858. mg/1 Anions Total Organic H.1c;c r 22. ug/1 a:.. CI l im on a (: um) 14.33 ii mcg/1 Cations (oum) 14.74 ncy/1 Cation Anion Balance. 1.41 % Ccpper, d l aoc l•.:cd . 01 mg/ 1 Iron, d i soo 1 vcd .36 mg/ 1 Mangancz.c, d i oo0 1 ::cd - . 01 mg/ 1 Zinc, d i.:azo lvcd -.01 mg /1 'Pc,R.arko: Two Fi l trot iano Rcqu ircd. Natc: Hcgat ivc oign 1' as dcnatco that the 1' ...a1Lc Frank E. Painj,ak, inorganic Su crvioor 4dizi,—I/° is lcsz than n as : els Lf e,u-(1 C U.-: 1 �l 1 NL 12/05/91 LANDFILL Clicnt ^ddrea:, nttn. Frojcct Sample 1D: £.:mp1c Dat CROUN0Wr TER n".nLYE 1'C REPORT 14:35 I South Canyon Landfill P.O. eox 422 Clcnuaad Spring:., CO 81402 Mr. Jim Danncr !Minion Hydrologic 90 02 SCL M 2 c Ti.v.c: 11.Er7 91 16:10 V V ParamctC. n Alkalinity a.: C:.CO3 Si carbanatc a:, CaCO3 Calcium, dionolvcd Ca rt3Cn, t c as CaCO3 Carton, total organic Ch for idc Conductivity @ 25',- Hardnonn an Cur.../ iiiagncs i um, d L Z. C 1 vcd H.itrotc an N, dizzo1 cd Nitratc/Nitritc as M Mitritc a:, H, diz o1vcd Nitrogen, total Kjcldahl pH (fah) P..Itanniusm, d•ooc1wcd c w R in s.,: a t c r Sodium, dic,Jo1vcd Su l fat c dolidc,, total Total Organic nn ion. (;um) Cations (num) Cation --onion Balance Copper, d inno1vcd Iron, di:,:..olvcd Mangano c, din ol::cd Zinc, di:d:,olvcd di;, ,clvcd Ha 1 cgcnz Re.mar ka.: Two Filtration;, Rcquircd. Hotc: Hcgat ivc ;, ign Pagc 1 Lau Mo. : 91 T"1 1/09719 Dc Rccc i Ycd: 11/08/ 1 7S0. 720 464. '1A0= 56;7. nm 4.34 F o 2 3 U L u . 6588. 21. 101.94 95.95 00 .01 . 04 n ▪ ''1 " " dcnotco that the valuc i`, 1c.c:, than: Frank E. Po lniak, Inorganic L 1- Sup r:: is or mg/1 mg/1 mg r1 mg/1 ng/1 mg/ 1 urh .,,fcm mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/ 1 mg/1 unite mg/1 mg/ 1 mg/1 mg/1 ug/1 uo CI mcq/ 1 mcg/1 mg/ 1 mg/1 mg/1 mg/1 -ii. �0 X . V a. P la -6' :12):1 ] vi --1:i• ' V y�t pryer rn " -1{ I In ,e UR V� N 1i 1 '' ` iX>a+g iV1 I ' t �gl k 171 l S w t■ t'L 1 U • i -1 to y� 41 • 0' ��. ?' [qf ( "1 C ' , J � { u o ' I 'U. CJI wh "4 iI 0.,, ,. ` �� 9 F 1 —4 qJ �Iy a. u -j � 1 1 t1 ISI 1 I 1 I �t _ �yfix7 7E J,y s^a r+ rK -F .35.Ct t Y• • .t?„1- • ' ' •-•soss- • s;•;;;;;`,..'''s.-.;. Ws' ' ' - • ' sss • • r: - • " ;QS , 111111111111111111116 a -1— - kri• - 1 r 3 - . • ' -1.........07 . , = L.-_ , .._ - .....• _3 • - V ! . NI ..xV. ...z -1/4. '5! ,.... . -•-•..% _I 1 •• 1 •••• 4-I thti t..1 1 ' i w. I_ 0" ri E.' -C7.1. %) .,.r u VI I "4eisn k_ - • kj ,•,,,s. . .. _. • . ...- -.*. . -.00. /3 b - - I i • v tl --I I i al . ...g n %.01 13 a. •-7,, o $ i.:-.0 '1, :13 ? U ) ...v ) .1 ,0 isig i u '": I j 1 ! In ii -D -,,z, 11 e is -1-- 3 1 ! rtn , 1 5' k•L .... 3 7 J L.....".0) • tr). I rz. I i s'. k I-1 r• . "•-•-•. .03 ' .1 ti ss 11 t I • t. -D e41 Z'l z• Gil J 2 ; r --71.. I r--"•• N... a -1— - kri• - 1 r 3 1111111 1=1 MI =I ION um on im am Er ccgracg. iftt ACZ�;tl Oreo ,it :.1FROM'. t1 W'aetr f4Yo2o is Laborstorles, inc. pia. 7;7, D t rter• /1 OSx 3 ' 3 30400 Downhill Drive 6/o 5c„ -tin G,.,7e4-1 1.�,n.!-; Steamboat Springs, CO 80487 00. 86x 6f -Z 2 - �' `^' CO f i �o z (303) 879-6590 (800) 334-5493 G I e,1..ti'cacd , Co e 1 ec ..,,,-1,-,35 PROJECT NO. NUMBER OF CONTAINERS /'� ANALYSES REQUESTED Pfeose cc; 19, -or SAMPLERS: (Signature) Cont -e5 res 'rice . .....".e.i;REMARKS SAM LE IDENTIFICATION DATE TIME SAMPLE TYPE 56I- - R ' V Jq 1 i CCS dr,c 5 }} r i r A2c,'el e" xs slece-i-y - ale., bol inropfe_-- no c ,J,„6..t niodiA Jsci, - Sc - UG '/A f 134-0 kora - ri's -. id-'er�r3cr'd 05 - •. .. 6)/P Z'-{ holes) - per cxr�i shown ova L -cJect Iisc- L - 5CC - OG `V?f ?( if35.d -.id-clack/ recess,-, 6,94 al - ben, --5) - per!1^n 5 rt on c1 -1 /1'54- 5C L - (rt - z 7-1111 ! (kD w7.drp 5 -M.c.,- eac .. as nrlCe5 a- 6-74 Z 5 4 5 SI'�01-4- h 01 r' Q� fr'r 11.-4.- 1$'UJ i r L RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) DATE TIME t RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE TIME COMMENT don,Pre' '1"i.""'fie , .net „,, i. II II ! C. • Cr;'?111y�` t I�1! (/ r i'/ f`I -" 1 htrtsrGc� r rr i ...„---------0-1-1:7--- Samples Receivedin - Good Condition METHOD OF SHIPMENT: FED X UPS '✓ BUS HAND -DELIVERY aOTHER �4c MINION HYDROLOGIC P. Q. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-0484 February 6, 1993 Ms. Donna Foster HM S,WMD/SWIM Colorado Department of Health 222 S. 6th Street Room 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Re: South Canyon Landfill., Garfield County - October 1992 Laboratory Water Quality Analyses Dear Donna: Attached for your review are the results from the October 22, 1992 water quality sampling at the South Canyon Landfill, located in Garfield County, Colorado. Copies of the field notes taken during the site sampling are also attached. The potential Landfill sample sites are shown on figure 1 attached to the September 8, 1992 correspondence. The down - gradient well, SCL-M-2, was the only well which had water in the casing. The creek samples, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG, were taken upgradient and downgradient of the mouth of the alluvial canyon in which the Landfill is located. There was no surface water entering South Canyon Creek from the Landfill site during the October 22, 1992 sampling date. Preliminary review of the laboratory results shows a total or- ganic halogens value for well SCL-M-2 of 1350 ug/1 as Cl. Approximately 3.4 well volumes were bailed over a 3 -hour period prior to sampling the well. All ground water withdraw- als were turbid after the initial bailer penetration. Bailing times and volumes are shown on the attached field notes. The water quality analyses for the 2 surface water sampling sites, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG, indicates the water quality at both locations was similar during the October 22, 1992 sampling date. The total organic halogens values for sample sites SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG were 96 ug/1 as Cl and 56 ug/1 as Cl, respectively. Donna, 1 will be out of the country until mid- to late April. The next Landfill sampling date will be in early May 1993. I will be in touch during that time period to discuss the statistical analyses mentioned in the September 8, 1992 correspondence. Donna Faster February 6, 1993 page 2 Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC by f/ Wajrie E. Goin Hydrogealogist 90-02 cc: Tim Danner I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11/09/92 Analysis Report 09:02 1 aaaaaaaaaas+raaassasaa a aaaaaaaa aaxua:�aa_a _flaaaasaa� Page 1 Client : South Cany=on Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Slogs, CO 81602 Attn. . Mr. Tim Danner Project : Mln ian 90-02 Samole Matrix: Samo1e ID: SCL-M-2 Lab No. : 92-WI/09462 Sample Date Time: 10'22/92 17:0ll Date Received: 10/23/92 'Pema rk ;: Note: Negative sion "-" denotes that the value is less than Scott Habermeli l , Oua I i r. y Assurance O F icerrj T'. Frank E. Pn In iak . Inaraan is Laboratory Supervisarf-T' Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 1720. mg/I Bicarbonate as CaCO3 1720 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/I Calcium, dissolved 834. mg/1 Chloride 250. mg/1 Conductivity p 25C 5550. umhas✓cm pH flab) 8.0 units Hardness as CaCO3 4504. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 590. mg/1 Nitrate as N. dissolved .20 mg/1 N itrate/Nitrite as N 0.20 mg/l N itrite .as N. dissolved -0.01 mg/1 N itrogen, total Kjeldahl 2.6 mg/1 Pora±Rium, dissolved 24. mg/1 Solium. dissolved 528. mg/15��1 Fate 40111. mg/1 Total Organic Halogens 1350. ug/1 as Cl Carbon, total organic 9. mg/1 TOS Ratio fgray.✓caic.) .88 Sr:l:rs. total dissolved 6394. mg/1 Cation -Arian Balance-=c.8t1 Caoaef, dissolved -0.01 rng✓I Iron, dissolved 9.98 mg✓1 Manganese, dissolved 0.55 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.49 mg/1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 11/i09/92 C1 irtnt Address Analysts Resort - - � - 3 3 i a = 3 = ; ^+ .: = 3=133-3 a = 3211=33333.11 South Canyon Landfill P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 Attn. : Mr, Tim Danner Project : Minion 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-SCC-Uc2 Sample Dare Time: 10/22/92 14:50 Remarks: INate: Neaarive si+In "-" denotes that the value is less than Scott HabermehI.. Duality Assurance Officer/SW. Ilrrar0. E. Po In tak , Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor 0/; Parameters Page 1 09:02 V Lab No. : 92-W1/08463 Date Received: 10/23/92 Alkalinity as CaCO3 666. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCC3 558 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 108 mg/1 Hhdroxide as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 29 . mgil Chloride 23. mg/1 Conductivity @ 25C1260. umhos/ cm pH (lab) 9.0 units Hardness as CaCO3 175. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 25. mg/1 Narrate as N. dissolved .05 mg/!. Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.06 mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 0.01 mg/1 Nitrogen, total K+eldahl 0.3 mg/1 Pnrasstum, dissolved 4. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 279. mg/1 Sulfate 128. mg/1 Total Organic Halogens 96. ug/1 as CI Carbon, total organic 4. mg/1 TDS Patio (Qray./calc..)- .97 Solids. total dissolved 900. mg/1 Cation -Anion Balance -2.37 'X Copper, dissolved --i).01 mg/I Iron. dissolved 0.13 mg/ I Maris anese , dissolved 0.01 mg/1 Zinc. dissolved -0.01 mg/1 1 1 1 1 „ < 11 1 11/09/92 as n a re a s s= a= a aan Analysis Report 09:02 1 Page 1 ay Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 Attn. . fir. Tim Danner Project : union 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-SCC-DG Lab No. : 92-W1/08464 Sample Date Time: 10/22/92 15:45 Date Received: 10/23/92 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 646. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 546 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 100 mg/1 Hydroxide as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 34. mg/1 Chloride 24. mg/1 Conductivity [ 25C 1320. umhos/cm pH (lab) 9.0 units Hardness as CaCO3 216. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 32. mg/1 Nitrate as M, disolved .06 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as.N 0.0? mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved 0.01 mg/I Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 0.4 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 5. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 282. mg/1 Sulfate 183. mg/1 Total Organic Halogens 56. ug/1 as CI Carbon, total organic 4. mg/1 TOS Patio toray. /ca lc. } .9: Solids, total dissolved 954. mg/1 Catton -Anion Balance -1.69 Copoar, , dissolved -0.01 mrd/1 Iron, dissolved 0.15 mg/1 Manganese, dtssalved 0.01 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Remarks: Note: Neoattve sign 11_11 denotes that the value is less than Scott Habcrmeh l , Quality Assurance Off Icer,4 4. Frank E. Folntak, Inorganic Laborator SupervisarIK . MINION HYDROLOGIC P O. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945-0484 8 November 1993 Ms. Donna Foster HM&W-MD/SWIM Colorado Department of Health 222 S. 6th Street Room 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Re: South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County - May 1993 Labora- tory Water Quality Analyses Dear Donna: Attached for your review are the results from the May 12-13, 1993 water quality sampling at the South Canyon Landfill, lo- cated in Garfield County, Colorado. Copies of the field notes taken during the site sampling are shown in attached Appendix I. The results of the laboratory analyses are shown in at- tached Appendix II. The potential Landfill sample sites are shown on figure 1. The downgradient well (SCL-M-2) and the middle well (SCL-M-3) both had ground water in the casing. Prior to the May 12, 1993 sampling date, ground water had not been encountered in well SCL-M-3. No ground water was present in the upgradient well SCL-M-1. The creek samples, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG, were taken up - gradient and downgradient of the mouth of the alluvial canyon in which the Landfill is located. During the May 12-13, 1993 sampling date, surface discharge was also present at the SCL- WEIR sample site and at the confluence of the Landfill site with South Canyon Creek (SCL-TRIS-SCC). Well SCL-M-3 contained approximately 6.87 feet of ground water in the casing on May 12, 1993. Approximately 3.2 well volumes (14.3 gallons) were bailed prior to sampling SCL-M-3. Well SCL-M--2 contained approximately 20.1 feet of ground water in the well casing. Approximately 3.4 well volumes (45 gallons) were bailed prior to sampling SCL-M-2. As mentioned previous- ly, this was the first time ground water was encountered in well SCL-M-3. Review of past sampling dates from June 14, 1990 through October 22, 1992 showed the previous maximum amount of ground water measured in well SCL-M-2 was 7.27 feet on April 24, 1991. Preliminary review of the laboratory results shows a total or- ganic halogens value for well SCL-M-3 of 28 ug/1 as Cl. The Ms. Donna Foster South Canyon Landfill 8 November 1993 page 3 total organic halogens value for well SCL--M-2 was 42 ug/1 as Cl. Specifics related to the May 12-13, 1993 ground water sam- pling are shown on the field notes in Appendix I. The SCL-WEIR sample site was sampled on May 12, 1993. Dis- charge measurements showed an approximate flow of 6.8 gpm at the weir Location (figure 1). Sample SCL-TRIS-SCC was taken on May 13, 1993, at a location approximately 80 feet upstream of the confluence of the South Canyon Landfill surface drain- age with South Canyon Creek (figure 1). Field measurements at the SCL-TRIB-SCC sample site showed an approximate discharge of 18.8 gpm. The water quality analyses for the 2 South Canyon Creek sam- pling sites, SCL-SCC-UG2 and SCL-SCC-DG, indicates the water quality at both locations was similar during the May 12, 1993 sampling date. The total organic halogens value for sample sites SCL-SCC-i3G2 and SCL-SCC-DG were 12 ug/1 as C1 and 7 ug/1 as Cl, respectively, The total organic halogens value for sample site SCL-WEIR was 390 ug/1 as Cl, the total organic halogens value for sample site SCL-TRIB-SCC was 110 ug/1 as Cl. Review of the field notes indicates an approximate discharge in South Canyon Creek of greater than 8 cfs on May 12, 1993. Stream gage measurements of South Canyon Creek downgradient of the SCL-SCC-DG sample site on June 3, 1993 showed a discharge of 6.4 cfs. The discharge in South Canyon Creek on June 3 was significantly less than the flow observed on May 12. Based on visual comparison, the surface discharge in South Canyon Creek on May 12-13, 1993 was probably in the 12 cfs range. SE0 Watertalk data showed a discharge value for the Colorado River below the confluence with the Roaring Fork River of 16,200 cfs on June 3, 1993. Donna, the next South Canyon Landfill monitoring date will be during the week of November 15-19, 1993. Statistical analyses of the sample data will be submitted with the results of the November sampling. If you have any questions please call. Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC by 90-02 cc: Tina Danner ne E. Goin Hydrogeologist APPENDIX I SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL MAY 12-13, 1993 FIELD NOTES I 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 i 5 p~ • i i c S tt i �_.-- t.. D :MI a" A , _'L 1 4 1 p� U Nal E _ �C L1 4 I� a 6 1t..0 C M q ;1 t ,-/ --� V \-, {LI u • r - - -• EES C --...I * t f " ' m 4 a tZ. I • _U Va ! " Cr '4 a • . I ...b11 D' Q'� • ".lit -A� - 9-pr.e a 1 {n a ° to M 4 I _7:t z _ .l 3 ' er I. ..1...i-. %1 I S I �" 7� - . . 4 i_ Q,-- I E' , kr) KZi.d`' •yI • °4� jury 1 � 1 x 1 5 p~ • i i c tt —s v t.. D a" , _'L 1 4 1 p� U • E _ �C L1 4 I� a 6 1t..0 C M q ;1 t ,-/ --� V \-, {LI u 6 Lam, * f _U g C " Q Cr '4 a • u E. -•. t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i 1 4 M4L 1.nuvr.rz4 14e1.4 I 1 05/28/93 i Analysis Report 14:33 nasa alta=== r======== is 1.1 - F. ==c==== _= _ = =-==- ==t= Client : South Canyon Landfill 'Address P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Mr. Jim Donner "Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 1 =______=- Sample ID: SCL-M-3 Lab No. : 93-W1/04645 Sample Date Time: 05/12/93 15:08 Date Received: 05/13/93 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 1132. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 1132 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 422. mg/1 Chloride 90. mg/1 Conductivity f 25C 9670. umhos/crn Total Organic Halogens 29. ug/1 as Cl Carbon, total organic 12. mg/1 SFR in water- 6.04 pH (lab) 2.1 units Hardness as CaCO3 6180. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 1250. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 13.33 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 13.4 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 1. mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 26. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 1080. mg/1 Sulfate 7326. mg/1 TDS Ratio tgray./talc.) 1.03 Solids, total dissolved 11210. mg/1 Cation -Anion Balance 2.06 X Copper, dissolved -0.02 mg/1 Iran, dissolved -0.04 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.05 mg/1 Zino, dissolved 0.16 mg/1 IIR emarks: Note: Negative sign 11 11 denotes that the value is less than icott Habermehl, Quality Assurance Officer Irank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1"9 L.L L r-a04Jr, j -i r LJr. i c.III 1 r1�. vrr . r -i .r +r �r ru+r.r •.�� . , . 05/28/93 Analysis Report 1 14.33 1 Client : South Canyon Landfill IlAddress : P.C. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Mt tn. : Mr. T. Danner, cc: Mr. W. Goin 'Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-M-2 Sample Date Time: 05/13/93 15:55 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 724. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 724 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 435. mg/1. Chloride 171. mg/1 Conductivity 25C 4510. umhos/cm Total Organic Halogens 42. ug/I as Cl Carbon, total organic 12. mg/1 SAR in water 4.26 pH (lab) 7.0 units Hardness as CaCO3 3388.. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 561. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved .06 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.08 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 0.9 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 25. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 563. mg/1 Sulfate 3754. mg/1 TDS Ratio (gray./caic.) 1.08 Solids, total dissolved 6362. mg/I Cation --Anion Balance -2.58 ' Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/I Iron, dissolved 1.22 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 3.49 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11Remarks: Note: Negative sign " denotes that the value is less than 11Scott Habermehl, Quality Assurance Officer 41vr #24 ;rank C. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor/ Page Lab No. : 93-WI/04718 Date Received: 05/14/93 1 1 1 1 1 1 Il 05/28/93 Analysis Report 14:34 1 .a,....:page Client : South Canyon Landfill iddress : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 A,cn. : Mr. Jim Donner 1rroject : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 ample Matrix: 1 Sample ID: SCL-SCC-UG2 Lab No. : 93-WI/04646 Sample Date Time: 05/12/93 14:10 Date Received: 05/13/93 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 90. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 90. mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 23. mg/1 Chloride 2. mg/1 Conductivity R 25C 268. umhos/cm Total Organic Halogens 12. ug/1 as C1 Carbon, total organic 9. mg/1 SAR in water .71 pH (lab) 7.9 units Hardness as CaCO3 86. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 7. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved .07 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.07 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 1.1 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 3. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 15. mg/1 Sulfate 41. mg/1 TDS Ratio (gran./calc.) 1.15 Solids, total dissolved 164. mg/1 Cation --Anion Balance -5.02 % Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 1.19 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.20 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IF ema rks : Note: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than "<" Icott Habermehl, Quality Assurance Officer rek E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor/,41 .r 1 1 1 1 1 1 ACZ LABORATORIES INC DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 I1 05/27/93 Analysis Report 17.05 I =_=M,MMv Page 1 "Client :South Canyon LandFill 'dress : P.Q. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 UA t t n : Mr. .dim Donner Project Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-SCC-DG Lab No. 93-131/04647 Sample Date Time: 05/12/93 16:10 Date Received: 0/13/93 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 92. mg/1 III Bicarbonate as CaCO3 92. mg/l Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 32. mg/1 I Chloride 2. mg/l Conductivity @ 25C 191. umbos/cm Total Organic Halogens 7. ug/1 as CI I Carbon, total organic 9. mg/1 SAR in water .64 pH (lab) 7.8 units Hardness as CaCO3 121. mg/1 I Magnesium, dissolved 10. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved .Q9 m9/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.09 mg/1 I Nitrite as N, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 1.5 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 3. mg/1 I Sodium, dissolved 16. mg/1 Sulfate 54. m'9/ l TDS Ratio (gray./caIc.) .98 Solids, total dissolved 166. mg/1 1 Cation -Anion Balance 2.73 Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 1.86 mg/1 I Manganese, dissolved 0.38 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 Remarks: dote: Negative sign denotes that the value is less than "t" Scott Wade rmeh 1, Qua l i t y Assurance Off i ce 7f- "rank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor 1 1 1 1 1 k5 1[05/28/93 Analysis Report 14:33 1 e==�a��ax�e�_ x r=__== Page 1 ==_=-=.=- 'lient : South Canyon LandFill dress : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 1, : Mr. T. Danner, cc: Mr. W. Gain •o;ect : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-TRIO-SCC Lab No. : 93-W1/04719 mete Date Time: 05/13/93 16:34 Date Received: 05/14/93 ir Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 598. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 598 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 330. mg/1 Chloride 147. mg/1 Conductivity @ 25C 9870. umhos/cm Total Organic Halogens 110. ug/1 as CI Carbon, total organic 40. mg/I SAR in water 5.09 pH (lab) 8.2 units Hardness as CaCO3 4773. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 963. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 10.10 mg/1. Nitrate/Nitrite as N 11.8 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved 1.7 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 10.3 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 45. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 800. mg/L Sulfate 6116. mg/1 "IDS Ratio (gray./talc.) 1.01 Solids, total dissolved 8842. mg/1 Cation -Anion Balance -4.58 X 1 Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved -0.02 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.04 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 1 1 1 1 1 1 "marks: Jote: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than •ott Habermehl, Quality Assurance Off icer ^56�%L =rank C. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor/ '' 1 1 1 1 1 II ( 105/28/93 Analysis Report Page 1 14:34 i �s�.z���,�r.= - .- =at.. Client : South Canyon Landfill •ddres5 : P.U. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 r._tn. : Mr. Jim Donner Iroject : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 ample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-WEIR Lab No. : 93-WI✓04648 ample Date Time: 05/12/93 11:50 Date Received: 05/13/93 1rParameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 1362. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 1382 mg/1 I Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mg/l Calcium, dissolved 271. mg/1 Chloride 346. mg/1 I Conductivity @ 25C 5820. umhas/cm Total Organic Halogens 390. ug/I as CI Carbon, total organic 178. mg/1 I SAR in water 5.47 PH (lab) 7.9 units Hardness as CaCI3 3174. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 609. mg/1 I Nitrate as N, dissolved -.02 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite es N -0.02 mg/1 Nitrite as N, disaalved -0.01 mg/1 I Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 51. mg/l Potassium, dissolved 149. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 700. mg/1 I Sulfate 3260. mg/1 TDS Ratio (gray./calc.) 1.04 Solids, total dissolved 6244. mg/1 Cation -Anion Balance -3.74 % 1 Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 1.05 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.23 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.08 mg/1 Lemarks: Note: Negative sign "--" denotes that the value is less than "<"11 cott Habermehl, Quality Assurance Of f icer,%,' --j/-10-71 rank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor / 1 1 1 1 1 MINION HYDROLOGIC R O. Box 3043 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 (303) 945.0484 Ms. Donna Foster HM&WMD/SWIM Colorado Department of Health 222 S. 6th Street Room 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501 Re: 5 January 1994 South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County - November 1993 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Analysis Dear Donna: Attached for your review are the results of the November 22, 1993 TPH sampling at the South Canyon Landfill, located in Gar- field County, Colorado. The location of the TPH sample site is shown on attached figure 1. The TPH samples were taken from run-off present below the area of soil placement, as per instructions from Tim Danner. The run-off discharge on the sample date was approximately 1 to 2 gallons per minute (gpm). The run-off discharge dissipated in the ditch located on the north side of the Landfill access road a short distance below the sample site. The results of the laboratory analysis are shown in attached Appendix I. Review of the laboratory results indicates there were no TPH detected in the samples. Donna, your input is needed regarding the following items: 1) The recommended sampling frequency for TPH at the South Can- yon Landfill (SCL) sample site described above. 2) The potential for SCL to continue accepting diesel contamin- ated soil. 3) The potential for SCL to begin accepting gasoline contamin- ated soil. Please call if you have any questions. Very Truly Yours, MINION HYDROLOGIC cc: Tim Danner by "7 Wyne E. Gain Hydrogeologist • 1 T. 5 S T. 6 S SCALE :24,000 '\ - 54'00_. -1 _ (" "9 5 — -s. L �1` 9i. SCL- SCC-DG SCL-M-1. rS SCL- SCC-UG Horse. jr4in 1 SCL- SCC-UG2 1 °f } 79.1 APPROXIMAT SITE LOCATION SOUTH CANYON CREEK 1/77 F t ; „Porter--„/ f ,CaeCl+ptT-r MINION HYDROLOGIC 4 1 : r •:o 66X4 f • . l FIGURE 1 SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL MONITORING NETWORK • — MONITORING WELLS 1 — SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITES ■ -- PAST SURFACE WATER SAMPLING SITE APPENDIX I SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL LABORATORY ANALYSIS - NOVEMBER 22, 1993 TPH SAMPLING ACZ Laboratories, Inc ORGANICS ANALYSIS REPORT Client: South. Canyon Landfill Lab Sample ID: 701-3732 Client Project No: 90-02 Lab File ID: 1214R059 Sample ID: SCL-HC1 Date Received: 11122193 Matrix: Water Date Extracted: 11129/93 Sample Date: 11122/93 Date Analyzed: 12/14/93 Report Date: 12/20/93 Dilution Factor: 1 Method ID: TPH by Modified 8015, GC/FID Concentration Units: mg/L Hydrocarbon Scan COMPOUND CONCENTRATION MOL Q Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C8 - C30+) 0.2 U Compound ID: Q FORMAT: COMMENTS: APPROVED: "U" indicates compound was not detected "J" indicates compound detected < MDL (Method Detection Limit) "B" indicates compound was found in daily calibration blank Organic Laboratory Supervisor ACZ Laboratories, Inc. 30400 Downhill Or. Steamboat Springs. CO 80487 (800) 334-5493 Page 1 FAX: (3431 879-2215 t (CZ LABORATORIES INC 12/20/93 =74.4 - Water Analysis Report UATA MF NACErIENT SYS1 Er1 1 17:07 1 a - - Page r 1 iont . South Car' yon Landfill Fr i dd,es. . P.O. Bo:.: 422 E D Glenwood Slags., ° -IE 81A,02 rn Mr. T. Danner, r W. Coin L 1\\J --oir..t . Minion Hy rologic 90 02 :amp 1e Matrix: arta lc- ID: SCL-LF Lab No. S;Jmda le Date Time: 11/21/93 14:30 Date Pece i 'ed: 11/23/93 Paramoter-r. Alt=.,a1 ini t.*.a as CaCO3 _'.. ry:i;: t Bicarbonate a CaCO3 2. rr.:�.-1 . Carbonate •3s Ca= 0. r,,,-,. 1 Calciurn, dissolved -1.. m9/1 Chloride -1. mg/1 Conductivity fil 25C 3. urrhos.'cm pH (lab) 6.0 wilts Hardnes_. as CaCO3 -7. mq`l Magnesium, dissolved -1. 7,1'.'-' l Nitrate ars N, dissolved -.02 l Nitrate/Nitrite a- N -0.02 mg/'. Nitrite c.s l -I, dissolved -0.01 miifi Nitrate as NO3 -.1 rrig/1 Nitrogen, total 1<Jeld.-hl -0.1 my/1 Potassium, dissolved -1. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved -1. m,21 Sul fate -2. rRgi"l Total IOrcianic Halogen. 9q.u.�-'1 c. Cl Carbon, total organic -1. rrRr�.�l Tt?' Ratio (gray. /r.a lc..) 1. 1?t Solids total d:=..ol ed 2. •1 Cation -Anion e. I'r.c... 0.00 ev �a�.?er, r+tn =sl,_•r; •:f - '�.it; rs 9„ 1 Iron, dissolved -.02 rot 1 Manganese, d i a.so k:ad -0.01 rr,•7'' I Zinc, dissolved -0.01 ta:_`•"1 ,-2te: Negative s i:;r, _ it donoto5 that ncc value is less t` n =:rot t Habermeh i , Project Manage . IFr-ar;l: E. Polniak, fnorganic Laboratory ':amupervior• LABORATORIES INC DATA Mfrtlr=iCF.riEP1T SYSTEM 1 12 '70/93 Water Analysis Report 17:0? 1 =ECM - - - - - - - = - == Page i:' l i.:.nt : 5:iuth Canyon Land i l 1 S,.;o,.er._ . R.O. E.c 422 Glenwood Epgs. , CO E102 Iii! tr>. : rir. T. 0:.nrier, cc: W. Goin Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: •=-rmple ID: .Sal l..-11.2 Lab No. : '-i3-6:1/11907le. Date Time: 11'22/93 10:45 'Date Rcce i c d 11. 23 93 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Par•amr to+r n1::alinity as CaCO3 -.9 7. rirq 1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 692 my• l Carbonate as CaCO3 0. mo , -1 Calcium, dissolved 4F2. mr.L=1 Chloride :35. mg/1 Crjnduc t i vi t y [rJ 25C 6440. rrmhes.'cm pH (lab) 6.9 units Hardness as CaCO3 3475. mo/1 Magnesium, dissolved 512. my ' 1 Mit- to as H, dissolved 1.23 mo,'l Nitrate/Nitrite as I'e 1.24 mq. l Nitrite as N, dissolved 0.1=1 my_, '1 Nitrate as NO3 5.= mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjeldahl 1.6 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 27. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 552. mg/1 Sulfate 3746. mg l SOP in water 4.12 Total Organic Halogens '.'1. uo•-I-"Js C1 1..firl}r}r-r, to •i1 oryanie r�. ni.:' FOS Ratio : ra`f ✓c.-lc.'i 1.02 Solids, total dissolved G1 8. rRir ' I Cation -Anion Balance 2.38 % Copper, dissolved -0.01 mu/1 Iron, dissolved -0.02 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 1.20 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved 0.72 mg•`l II -marks: J . ite: 1.=t: a s gn "- " denote' that the value i less than 'i " -:.cDt t Haber -mein 1 , Pro iec't Manager/54. I` Via::: E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratort Supervisor40 1 1 1 1 a'arCZ LABORATORIES INC 1.2/20/93 - yr C41TA r1ArtAGEr,ENT SYSTEn 1 Water Analysis Report 17:08 1 sss=spa-_ia�a^•as=»= ---mss-ter+= l�agre 1 IIL,liont : South Canyon L..andf i l 1 1-;d ets, . P.O. Sr; 422 Glenwood Segs., CO 81602 11. tn. : Mr. T. Danner, cc: W. Goin P_-o;er-t . Minion Hydrologic 90-02 ':rot c 11.3 t r i x: 1 _ Time:.•a 1r=- ID: St'L-E�..'C L� , l a`. N . : ' : Ioa.'1 jt.? rr.rle Foote Time11.22/93 11.15 I:_ate 1-ecei .d: 11.-Z3'93 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Parameters AIis3l ini tV as '=0007 ,,18, mg- Bir_arbonate as C.ac..0-i -.'-» m.::.1 Carbonate as CaCO3 :.4. mc./1 Calcium, dIssolve.d 4;7:_ m+_p'1 Chloride °9. mrd•' I Conductivity(lab) [ 25C 1428. um/105/cm 1 pH 1 •ab i 8.4 ursi?s Hardness as CaCO3 284. rm.:. 1 Magnesium, d issc, i +••ri -10. m: -a Nitrates~ a.-. t-1, dissok,cd 0.27 m. -1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.27 m7'1 Nitrite as 1•1, dissolved -0.01 mr..'i Nitrate as NO3 1.2 mg/1 Nitrogen, total Kjrldohl 0.'1 m_1/1 Potassium, dissol•.ed 4. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 24".i. ria.1 Sulfate 2c.,9, rtes' SAP in -s.7tr-,r 6.4n Tc ` a 1 I]r:;.._: i _ H.y l 7 • t.i `3 ` 1 •-i T. I. Carton, or•t. r, is - mo A TDS Ratio Fgray./ca1o. i . .0 Solids, total dissolved S86. T7ufl Cation -Anion Ballance .70 to Copper, dissolved -0.01 n,r: 1 Iron, dissolved 0.02 mn ° 1 Manganese, dissolved -.01 nr.,'1 Zinc, dissolved -0.01 mr.1. l I narks. Mcrat i»» ' s irn 1 1 1 1 dr not. _ that the value is less ta•, , Haber•moh l , Project Manager/jam./, -giant: E. Potnial:, Inorganic Laboratory Superviso • ! i'AF L(:E!_1PI'IT!OP i Ec, I I•!!_ 11:>/20/93 Client . .. dri_ ss Water ilnalysis. Report South Lantjan Landfill P.O. E: 422 Glenwood Spgs. , CO 81602 tt . Mr. T. Danner cc: W. Grin 'ro ,ect . Minion Hydrologic logic 90-102 -,.arr .le Matrix: jmr 1r IC,: CC. _c -a:: -;le Date Timc 11/22/9 11:4n Alka1init as CO3JC P.1c,3rbon:,te a, CaCM3 Carbonate'. as CaCO3 Calcium, dissolved Chlrride. 25C pH (lab) (('''` l Hardno�•as .3s Ca' -O Magnesium. Nitrate as 1.11tr•ate/Nit Nitrite a1 Nitrate as t'i : t r' g r,• , i , t Potassium, Dnl Fi Mr Nr E mE! 1 c -,Y TFM 1?:08 l reset rr� i -rte-. Pagr P•-:ramc teres N, dissolved rite as N N, dissolved NO3 atal ij. 1dahl dissolved ri s o 1ved Irl a 1 Otla l i e Halogens ' 1 Carbon, total org.oinie TDS Patio ;gray./calc.l Solids, t:: -sal dissolved Cation -Anion Balance Copper, l.ii` =c lvei Iron, dissolved I`!.angane sd . dissolved Zinc, dissolved L. r_. 1 3 • -,, • 114 : L.1itr_• Pet—. _ . _d. 11-r23/u+ 522. 40. 30. 4'. 1 11.37 0.37 -0.01 1.6 0.4 5. f 7,G 6. 4. 13 4. 1.=+9 -0.01 -.02 0.02 -0.01 ']:at _ Neat ive 11r_in rl_lr denotes that the value 1s ism a ttf.lro t H.3bermeh 1, Pro }Act Manager/ -5- , r -;r.`: E. Fr Iniak, lnorq,,nic Laboratory Supervi or,/# rl;g� ' l r, I.c . 1 rr ' ' 1 mo/1 umha: 'crli units rn•; ' 1 ma/1 mo/1 mg/1 n:1.'1 mg/1 m.1/1 r1:'J . i y .as CI m= 'l mg/ 1 ma/ 1 rxlq_ 1 11 l if STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado Grand Junction Regional Office 222 S. 6th Street, Rm. 232 Grand Junction, CO 81501-2768 FAX: (3031248-7198 January 19, 1994 Mr. Tim Danner, Operating Manager P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 Roy Romer Governor Patricia A. Nolan. MD, MPH Executive Director RE: South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons TPH Analysis Dear Mr. Danner: The data supplied in the January 5, 1994 letter from Mr. Wayne Goin of Minion Hydrology for the above referenced facility has been reviewed by our office. The letter provided TPH results from a November 22, 1993 sampling event and requested a recommended sampling frequency for TPH in the future. TPH should be added to the current semi --annual monitoring program.. Additionally, the letter questioned the future potential of accepting gasoline contaminated soils in addition to the currently accepted diesel contaminated soils at South Canyon Landfill. Our file indicates that gasoline contaminated soils have been disposed of that facility. Diesel and gasoline contaminated soils are typically treated the same and reviewed for typical criteria prior to disposal. If you have any further questions, please contact me at 248-7168. Sincerely, Donna Stoner, Industrial Hygienist Hazardous Materials and Waste Management. Division :ds cc: Mr. Wayne Goin, Minon Hydrology Mr. Michael Copp, Glenwood Springs City Manager SW GAR SOU File ne nld in Revyg ltd &WI`r 1 2 LABORATORIES INC .,6/27/94 Water Analysis Report j======00=============.000 ======00==_===========000 Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 Attn. : Tim Danner Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-M-2 Sample Date Time: 05/25/94 13:15 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 334. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 334 mg/L Carbonate as CaCO3 0 mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 425. mg/1 Chloride 212. mg/1 Conductivity C 25C 6430. umhos/cm pH (lab) 7.5 units Hardness as CaCO3 3252. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 534. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 1.27 mg/l Nitrate/Nitrite as N 1.27 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 24. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 511. mg/1 Sulfate 3718. mg/1 SAR in water 3,94 Carbon, total organic 9. mg/1 TDS Ratio (gran./calc.) 1.13 Solids, dissolved (calc) 5600. mg/1 Solids, total dissolved 6330. mg/1 Anions (sum) 90.69 rneq/1 Cations (sum) 88.15 meq/1 Cation -Anion Balance -1.42 G Capper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 0.16 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.74 mg/l Zinc, dissolved .02 mg/1 DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 12:53 1 Page 1 Lab No. : 94-W1/04655 Date Received: 05/26/94 Remarks: Note: Negative sign 11-1' denotes that the value is less than Scott Habermehl, Project Manager Frank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor 11 <11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 LABORATORIES INC J6/27/94 Water Analysis Report - Page 1 DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 12:53 1 1.M= Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 Attn. : Tim Danner Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-SCC-UG2 Lab No. : 94-W1/04656 Sample Date Time: 05/25/94 14:55 Date Received: 05/26/94 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 315. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 285 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 30. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 38. mg/1 Chloride 9. mg/1 Conductivity @ 25C 729. umhcs/cm pH (lab) 8.6 units Hardness as CaCO3 173. mg/1 Magnesium, dissolved 19. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 0.10 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.10 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 4. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 96. mg/1 Sulfate 95. mg/1 SAR in water 3.21 Carbon, total organic 5. mg/1 TBS Ratio (gray./calc.) .99 Solids,, dissolved (calc) 458. mg/ 1 Solids, total dissolved 452. mg/1 Anions (sum) 8.55 meq/1 Cations (sum) 7.79 meq/1 Cation -Anion Balance -4.65 Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 0.02 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved -.01 mg/1 Remarks: Note: Negative sign "-11 denotes that the value is less than Scott Habermehl, Project Manager Frank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor S 41 ( 11 1 vZ LABORATORIES INC DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 1 J6/27/94 Water Analysis Report 12:53 I Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 Attn. : Tim Danner Project : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: Sample ID: SCL-Weir Sample Date Time: 05/25/94 13:40 Parameters Alkalinity as CaCO3 322. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 322 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 0 mq/1 Calcium, dissolved 317. mg/1 Chloride 107. mg/1 Conductivity @ 25C 9480. urnhos/cm pH (lab) 8.2 units Hardness as CaCO3 4913. mq/l Magnesium, dissolved 1005. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 1.09 mg/1 Nitrate/Nitrite as N 1.48 mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved 0.39 mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 40. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 1030. mq/1 Sulfate 7162. mg/1 SAP in water 6.47 Carbon, total organic 31. mg/1 TDS Ratio (gray./calc.) 1.08 Solids, dissolved (talc) 9814. mg/1 Solids, total dissolved 10974. mg/1 Anions (sum) 159..84 meq/1 Cations (sum)144.62 meq/l Cation -Anion Balance -5.00 Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 Iron, dissolved 0.35 mg/1 Manganese, dissolved -0.05 mg/1 Zinc, dissolved -0.01 m9/1 Page 1 Lab No. : 94-W1/0457 Date Received: 05/26/94 Remarks: Note: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than "<" Scott Habermehl, Project Manager Frank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor L. i�4 I;Z LABORATORIES INC DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM I J6/27/94 Water Analysis Report 12:54 I Page 1 Client : South Canyon Landfill Address : P.O. Sox 422 Glenwood Spgs, CO 81602 ,Attn. : Tim Danner roject : Minion Hydrologic 90-02 Sample Matrix: amp 1 e ID: SSL -SCC -DG Lab No. : 94-WI/04652 Sample Date Time: 05/25/94 15:20 Date Received: 05/26/94 Parameters I Alkalinity as CaCO3 345. mg/1 Bicarbonate as CaCD3 315 mg/1 Carbonate as CaCO3 30. mg/1 Calcium, dissolved 50. mg/1 IChloride 12, mg/1 Conductivity 25C 441. umhos/cm pH (lab) 8.6 units I Hardness as CaCO3 256. mg/l Magnesium, dissolved 32. mg/1 Nitrate as N, dissolved 0.08 mg/1 II Nitrate/Nitrite as N 0.08 -0.01mg/1 Nitrite as N, dissolved mg/1 Potassium, dissolved 4. mg/1 Sodium, dissolved 113. mg/1 I Sulfate 181. mg/ 1 SAR in water 3.11 Carbon, total organic 6. mg/1 I TDS Ratio (gray./calc.) .90 Solids, dissolved (Calc) 607. mg. '1 Solids, total dissolved 548. mg/1 Anions (sum)11.04 meq/1 Cations (sum) 10.20 meq/I Cation -Arian Balance -3.95 % Copper, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 I Iron, dissolved 0.02 -mg/1 Manganese, dissolved 0.01 mg/I Zinc, dissolved -0.01 mg/1 emarks: ote: Negative sign "-" denotes that the value is less than "<" .Cott Habermehl, Project Manager /C4. rank E. Polniak, Inorganic Laboratory Supervisor 1 1 1 1 Client: Client Project No: Sample ID: Matrix: Sample Date: Report Date: ACZ Laboratories, Inc ORGANICS ANALYSIS REPORT South Canyon Landfill 90-02,A 5CL-HC1 Water 5/25/94 6/6/94 Method ID: TPH by Modified 8015, GC/FID Hydrocarbon Scan COMPOUND Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (C8 - C30+) Compound ID: 0 FORMAT: COMMENTS: APPROVED: Lab Sample ID: L1.944-01 Lab File ID: 0527F008 Date Received: 5126194 Date Extracted: 5/27194 Date Analyzed: 5/27/94 Dilution Factor: 1 Concentration Units: mg/L CONCENTRATION MDL 0 "U" indicates compound was not detected "J" indicates compound detected < MDL (Method Detection Limit) "8" indicates compound was found in daily calibration blank IcaP Organic Laboratory Supervisor ACZ Laboratories, Inc. 30400 Downhill D. Steamboat Springs, Co 80487 0.2 U (800) 334-5493 Page 1 FAX: (303) 879-2216 ACZ Laboratories, Inc VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS REPORT Client: South Canyon Landfill Lab Sample ID: L1944-02 Client Project No: 90-02,A GC File ID: 40527-03 Sample ID: 5CL-HC2 Date Received: 5/26/94 Matrix: Water Date Analyzed: 5/27/94 Sample Date: 5/25/94 Dilution Factor: 1 Report Date: 6/6/94 Method ID: Volatile Hydrocarbons by 8015M Concentration Units: mg/I GC/FID Purge and Trap COMPOUND CONCENTRATION MDL Q FORMAT: COMMENTS: APPROVED: Hydrocarbons (C6 to C10 range) 0.02 U "U" indicates compound was not detected "J" indicates compound detected e MDL (Method Detection Limit) "6" indicates compound was found in daily calibration blank Org c Laboratory Supervisor ACZ Laboratories, Inc. 30400 Downhill Dr. Steamboat Springs, CD 80487 (8001 334-5493 Page 1 FAX: (3031 879-2216 ACZ Laboratories, Inc VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS REPORT Client: South Canyon Landfill Lab Sample ID: L1944-03 Client Project No: 90-02,A GC File ID: 40527-04 Sample ID: TRIP BLANK Date Received: 5/27/94 Matrix: Water Date Analyzed: 5/27/94 Sample Date: 5/20/94 Dilution Factor: 1 Report Date: 6/6/94 Method ID: Volatile Hydrocarbons by 8015M GC/FID Purge and Trap COMPOUND Concentration Units: mg/I CONCENTRATION MDL 0 0 FORMAT: COMMENTS: APPROVED: Hydrocarbons (C6 to C10 range) 0.02 U "U" indicates compound was not detected "J" indicates compound detected < MDL (Method Detection Limit) "B" indicates compound was found in daily calibration blank Organ( .oratory Supervisor ACZ Laboratories, Inc. 30400 Downhill Dr. Steamboat Springs, CO 80487 (8001 334-5493 Page 1 FAX: (3031879-2216 APPENDIX E PROJECT DESIGN CALCULATIONS • HELP Calculations • Phased Landfill Capacity Calculations • Material Balance Calculations • Surface Water Management System Calculations • Evaporation Pond Volume Calculations S'I'EE E %\ ROBERTSON K!RS'l'[s (U.S.) Consulting Engineers 8 Scientists PROJECT: coaT// 4-,1, $17.4./ 4 ,✓y 6L< NO. c7,10% CALCULATED BY: Ae 6* DATE: 74r CHECKED BY: DATE:. SHEET / OF L/ pe/,0/0af C 77e rQr-/4,a4.. '7 e4/ -/L r c. f e-e'�.. ' T/,e"4/1 k4 /o J.$ C€47E 5is7 so'7 '& G -47,7".0% L „ 672 Tye I/�,eva s - Sc 's4 -,e /a; iv/7'/ch/ ? 7/7/ CarrAr/WJE.- "��/L f �srf , �i rr�f� '°F/.rf.9G came Co4'A/ T/r/ i/ � ' 77/ z G , 4€447z- 7-"-e 770;=, ' /5 /%,G':?/.J 7 G%/V' ��f,4e. 6Zb:5 /2, 7 /, /T. Tense , ''L,',,V=-©A--, ,14/41 CH-9`g.fi` C 7e-A'I S 7 r,wod : T// / ,c,L 77e..62' ��p� .��t/.4G .s/ - .Gr.�. .¢�" cam' 73' s F r,,k— HYdwaz6 6-, :p,F /s . /17/7.,,,,e67 £.14 7O-,747:, -pmoi►', ' .vGy h'EGf' .=dam' T- 9� tJ ,Arz /.v,�� T f t/ Q..4v".:-977G..4! r.e 4e -W IIif q 72 -/E --„ti _'o/G�/ ,vim* CsEJ c 4/ �!/�,/.t�'4G Com/ s� r/z.¢ 7-e-5 s� F- � .5* Tom' T/ ., cv 49'.74 6.//:,.5v045. so�L /s 7-e4 CL/.%aG G' 6-/G.r0- 1. 7: G', .G' r/v' / ca 14-W/C1-/ ---*-7421/ /..✓G* L ypdfs- , STEFF EN ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: Fav', (4,64174/ r� gf"JLG No. 6...4-7,0./ CALCULATED BY: t�"` DATE: 9y CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET Z OF i) /9'6:4✓t/ rra v�yG f -- /10,/, g -c -/,i9/,17/ G/ ,UAL !� 6 / 7,€ G'e✓.e0 40.C.' 5/, //I/GS, ca i' .e.r ,','JT .¢s` A -OL L ,0:/-g-/— ,. F - /, /7 %i 3/ -4 " 4413 'v ` /, a7 /tf /. zd 3- -- ,/. 2 L 5 — / 9 / P — 4 / SfJf/ieC�: C[/,47.4eTEs ac T}r r 5-7:17-07f3 Ko //r/D--f/1 ivG7. -..4 1/©, / f /Y.P, G,4 TT/ -7--a," = 3 9- 5 7 3 a 6'&0441/-r/6' S sd— _ /362'.f / ( /37 rry ©1K 7-40, Z 6 y' rte• ,�} Gr/Y rW %a 5O/L /,4-/,‘/7— , ' ,40,ea6-.e/t% , i #'4Y T chid: .acT�,�/ST/mss Gf-' E � �..r�G 'Er -°.$7'170674W/ /,//i 7-a 67,14/. re/&"---oL ram• -. THS /°,e4 -7,..9-.€,k s t'�vs/d I� /,t/ r, -44'4 L YS'& ---.S" 7: E /.r/"V " -,-3;1-el,/,e .44 aG 7// i/LGr0' -`76�, z iri e9r/Tf�r"T i i i S'I'EFF EN ROBERTSON & KFUSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: s vTf/ cfir�i'�� �' :+� ia NO. 07fl% CALCULATED BY: DATE: _ .9/(4 CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET 5 OF it pe : /p/ 74Tr, (17,13 .4..) 4 ez- rke G.1/4,e J Er/-4pa T, 'A`NSP1 •9, /�.�t/ pr, Cal. ' r/or/ 10,47,14 /4/, f/ / ,404 6:Awry") e✓• /'Q,e 4 /''yam 1,, 6 4-779 V CO IF L.9iri',,aF^/L fia .49) -a ----„e "Cr�li /, 7 .3 6 Sipa 5; c h F•9.d� T s'®/L 7 X7 TrP c®ve7-///7).' y'ee7, ?Fovea , PFPAr'L7 (Iaws) -71k 49 € T FE,CGoi-4.7/:0,1/ "'MIST /‘ 1.0 x /p"G 1 1 1 STI FFEN ROBERTSON & KIRS7•EN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: SvuTrY rrvi'r'.>v 1•f-vpF7l4. NO. Fj„4-7©� CALCULATED BY: DATE: 44_75, CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET 9 ppEc/p1TA 7/8A' 043 - t -e a ea c,e TE -A74 s -a ay ,ec 4;,44fTi©,,r✓' (z 45- -e,-;-&,) '9.¢X /-474/, L .�6 J ? /.ve l -.�C_7= /. 0 1.1,E©4w /fr•-• 2 O /4/ // E ' l� 74'tzE:e ` /. 0 (fooR 6,4 ss) 7-874/7/1Z- k'i. '', — / 0 (` vize 6-4'4f5) L' d �AJ�T S©/L Te*Xrae HYF,,eA,L /c Cove/4T/x;',.7 - viz rf4:44 F Co 44 MA/ ae-F4UI T /o'* VERT/e:44- P "ecv7/4 1, r7 x /!J -4 // f coo 7,ri✓ ar p —T /o - - vex 77c g4 r�-,ec-0,,47;r4/ vb--F47dcr /o -9 440 & /1 /,o- TPT/.f'k-- c 4,A,---..&17 if q 1 44'46' f ' ' /G, r7' s 4.,/G. 6'9/ a. jz Y cal/ .,e of / W W/sr 20' r .-„/A"TC/&A� LITHGGUG» c,e TE -A74 s -a ay ,ec 4;,44fTi©,,r✓' (z 45- -e,-;-&,) '9.¢X /-474/, L .�6 J ? /.ve l -.�C_7= /. 0 1.1,E©4w /fr•-• 2 O /4/ // E ' l� 74'tzE:e ` /. 0 (fooR 6,4 ss) 7-874/7/1Z- k'i. '', — / 0 (` vize 6-4'4f5) L' d �AJ�T S©/L Te*Xrae HYF,,eA,L /c Cove/4T/x;',.7 - viz rf4:44 F Co 44 MA/ ae-F4UI T /o'* VERT/e:44- P "ecv7/4 1, r7 x /!J -4 // f coo 7,ri✓ ar p —T /o - - vex 77c g4 r�-,ec-0,,47;r4/ vb--F47dcr /o -9 440 *********************** rpt****************************** r*************** *********************************************************************** SCL DAILY COVER - UNLINED 8-5-94 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** BARE GROUND LAYER 1 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS = 6.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.4640 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3104 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.1875 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT - 0.3104 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY 0.000064000000 CM/SEC LAYER 2 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS - 960.00 INCHES POROSITY 0.5200 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY 0.2942 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.1400 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.2942 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY = 0.000199999980 CM/SEC LAYER 3 BARRIER SOIL LINER THICKNESS = 240.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.4300 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3663 VOL/VOL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 TOTALS 1 WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY = 0.2802 VOL/VOL 0.4300 VOL/VOL 0.000001000000 CM/SEC GENERAL SIMULATION DATA SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER TOTAL AREA OF COVER EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH POTENTIAL RUNOFF FRACTION UPPER LIMIT VEG. STORAGE INITIAL VEG. STORAGE INITIAL SNOW WATER CONTENT INITIAL TOTAL WATER STORAGE IN SOIL AND WASTE LAYERS = 94.41 1336000. SQ FT 14.00 INCHES 1.000000 6.9440 INCHES 2.5840 INCHES 0.7032 INCHES 387.4944 INCHES SOIL WATER CONTENT INITIALIZED BY PROGRAM. CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA SYNTHETIC RAINFALL WITH SYNTHETIC SOLAR RADIATION FOR DENVER DAILY TEMPERATURES AND COLORADO MAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEX START OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) = 0.00 139 269 NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURES, DEGREES FAHRENHEIT JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP 29.50 73.30 33.60 71.40 38.00 62.60 APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 47.40 51.90 57.20 38.70 67.00 32.60 *****,****** r********************************************************* AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 PRECIPITATION JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 2.13 1.40 1.08 1.52 STD. DEVIATIONS 1.18 0.60 1.34 1.68 1.58 1.62 0.61 0.90 1.61 1.46 1.21 1.20 1.14 0.71 RUNOFF TOTALS 0.63 0.82 1.05 1.08 0.57 0.60 0.282 0.127 0.041 0.094 0.075 0.122 0.044 0.079 0.151 0.269 0.083 0.067 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.300 0.234 0.053 0.109 0.144 0.212 0.072 0.079 0.184 0.294 0.088 0.087 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION TOTALS 1.069 1.733 1.562 1.592 1.723 1.365 0.915 1.400 1.434 1.129 0.998 0.796 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.317 0.579 0.643 0.716 1.081 0.695 0.580 0.975 0.811 0.587 0.553 0.348 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 3 TOTALS 0.0871 0.3689 0.1493 0.0148 0.0070 0.0027 0.0011 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0006 0.0399 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.1865 0.3542 0.1835 0.0184 0.0101 0.0055 0.0033 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001 0.0018 0.1174 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 (INCHES) (CU. FT.) PERCENT PRECIPITATION 17.83 ( 3.438) 1985296. 100.00 RUNOFF 1.433 ( 0.707) 159510. 8.03 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 15.717 ( 2.636) 1749778. 88.14 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 3 0.6718 ( 0.7325) 74789. 3.77 CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE 0.011 ( 0.664) 1219. 0.06 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 PRECIPITATION RUNOFF (INCHES) (CU. FT.) 1.63 181473.3 0.636 70839.6 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 3 HEAD ON LAYER 3 SNOW WATER 0.0342 1.5 1.64 3811.3 183076.1 MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.3674 MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.1600 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 10 LAYER 1 2 SNOW WATER (INCHES) (VOL/VOL) 1.93 281.59 103.20 0.00 0.3223 0.2933 0.4300 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** SCL FINAL COVER - UNLINED 8-5-94 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** POOR GRASS LAYER 1 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS = 6.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.5010 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.2837 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.1353 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.2837 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY = 0.000342000014 CM/SEC LAYER 2 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS - 18.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.4300 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3663 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.2802 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.3663 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY = 0.000001000000 CM/SEC LAYER 3 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS = 6.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.4640 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3104 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY LAYER 4 - 0.1875 VOL/VOL 0.3104 VOL/VOL 0.000064000000 CM/SEC VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER 960.00 INCHES 0.5200 VOL/VOL 0.2942 VOL/VOL = 0.1400 VOL/VOL 0.2942 VOL/VOL 0.000199999980 CM/'SEC THICKNESS POROSITY FIELD CAPACITY WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY LAYER 5 BARRIER SOIL LINER 240.00 INCHES 0.4300 VOL/VOL 0.3663 VOL/VOL 0.2802 VOL/VOL 0.4300 VOL/VOL 0.000001000000 CM/SEC THICKNESS POROSITY FIELD CAPACITY WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY GENERAL SIMULATION DATA SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER TOTAL AREA OF COVER EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH UPPER LIMIT VEG. STORAGE INITIAL VEG. STORAGE INITIAL SNOW WATER CONTENT INITIAL TOTAL WATER STORAGE IN SOIL AND WASTE LAYERS 87.21 = 1336000. SQ FT 20.00 INCHES 9.0260 INCHES = 5.0303 INCHES = 0.7093 INCHES 395.7900 INCHES SOIL WATER CONTENT INITIALIZED BY PROGRAM. CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA SYNTHETIC RAINFALL WITH SYNTHETIC SOLAR RADIATION FOR DENVER IMUM LEAF AREA INDEX DAILY TEMPERATURES AND COLORADO = 1.00 1 1 JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IEVAPOTRANSPIRATION 1 1 TOTALS 0.0508 0.0796 0.1230 0.0562 0.0352 0.0253 0.0206 0.0166 0.0134 0.0118 0.0101 0.0093 1 START OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) - 139 END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) -- 269 NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURES, DEGREES FAHRENHEIT 29.50 33.60 38.00 47.40 57.20 67.00 73.30 71.40 62.60 51.90 38.70 32.60 *********************************************************************** AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 PRECIPITATION TOTALS STD. DEVIATIONS RUNOFF JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 2.13 1.40 1.08 1.52 1.34 1.68 1.58 1.62 1.61 1.46 1.21 1.20 1.18' 0.60 0.61 0.90 1.14 0.71 0.63 0.82 1.05 1.08 0.57 0.60 TOTALS 0.108 0.061 0.000 0.004 0.005 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.034 0.001 0.005 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.242 0.151 0.001 0.012 0.015 0.050 0.001 0.000 0.022 0.062 0.002 0.011 TOTALS 1.055 1.773 1.574 1.733 1.730 1.686 1.607 1.535 1.436 1.099 1.111 0.804 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.254 0.469 0.693 0.866 1.132 0.735 0.721 0.826 0.919 0.608 0.644 0.326 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 1 1 1 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.1330 0.2257 0.2427 0.1013 0.0552 0.0355 0.0265 0.0196 0.0145 0.0119 0.0095 0.0082 ********************************************************************* *********************************************************************** AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 1 (INCHES) (CU. FT.) PERCENT PRECIPITATION 17.83 ( 3.438) 1985296. 100.00 RUNOFF 0.246 ( 0.301) 27335. 1.38 I EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 17.144 ( 2.827) 1908715. 96.14 IIPERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 0.4518 ( 0.7949) 50306. 2.53 CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE -0.010 ( 1.255) -1060. -0.05 I*********************************************************************** 1 *********************************************************************** IPEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 (INCHES) (CU. FT.) PRECIPITATION 1.63 181473.3 IRUNOFF 0.464 51712.9 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 0.0300 3339.3 1 HEAD ON LAYER 5 0.0 SNOW WATER 1.64 183076.2 MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.4342 1 MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.2364 *********************************************************************** 1 *********************************************************************** FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 10 LAYER (INCHES) (VOL/VOL) 111 1 1.58 0.2638 2 5.72 0.3177 3 1.57 0.2625 4 282.43 0.2942 5 103.20 0.4300 SNOW WATER 0.00 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** SCL FINAL COVER - UNLINED 8-5-94 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** POOR GRASS LAYER VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS = 6.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.5010 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.2837 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.1353 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.2837 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY = 0.000342000014 CM/SEC LAYER 2 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS = 18.00 INCHES POROSITY 0.4300 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3663 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT = 0.2802 VOL/VOL INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT s 0.3663 VOL/VOL SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY - 0.000001000000 CM/SEC LAYER 3 VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER THICKNESS 6.00 INCHES POROSITY = 0.4640 VOL/VOL FIELD CAPACITY = 0.3104 VOL/VOL WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY LAYER 4 0.1875 VOL/VOL = 0.3104 VOL/VOL 0.000064000000 CM/SEC VERTICAL PERCOLATION THICKNESS POROSITY FIELD CAPACITY WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY LAYER 5 LAYER 960.00 INCHES 0.5200 VOL/VOL 0.2942 VOL/VOL 0.1400 VOL/VOL 0.2942 VOL/VOL 0.000199999980 CM/SEC BARRIER SOIL LINER = 240.00 INCHES 0.4300 VOL/VOL = 0.3663 VOL/VOL 0.2802 VOL/VOL 0.4300 VOL/VOL 0.000001000000 CM/SEC THICKNESS POROSITY FIELD CAPACITY WILTING POINT INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY GENERAL SIMULATION DATA SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER TOTAL AREA OF COVER EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH UPPER LIMIT VEG. STORAGE INITIAL VEG. STORAGE INITIAL SNOW WATER CONTENT INITIAL TOTAL WATER STORAGE IN SOIL AND WASTE LAYERS 87.21 1336000. SQ FT 20.00 INCHES 9.0260 INCHES 5.0303 INCHES 0.7093 INCHES 395.7900 INCHES SOIL WATER CONTENT INITIALIZED BY PROGRAM. CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA SYNTHETIC RAINFALL WITH SYNTHETIC SOLAR RADIATION FOR DENVER MAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEX DAILY TEMPERATURES AND COLORADO = 1.00 1 1 JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/ SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 1 1 AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 START OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) = 139 END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE) - 269 NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURES, DEGREES FAHRENHEIT 29.50 33.60 73.30 71.40 38.00 47.40 62.60 51.90 57.20 67.00 38.70 32.60 ********************************************************************* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PRECIPITATION TOTALS STD. DEVIATIONS JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC 2.13 1.08 1.18 0.63 1.40 1.52 0.60 0.82 1.34 1.68 1.58 1.62 0.61 0.90 1.05 1.08 1.61 1.46 1.21 1.20 1.14 0.71 0.57 0.60 RUNOFF TOTALS 0.108 0.061 0.000 0.004 0.005 0.018 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.034 0.001 0.005 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.242 0.151 0.001 0.012 0.015 0.050 0.001 0.000 0.022 0.062 0.002 0.011 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION TOTALS 1.055 1.773 1.574 1.733 1.730 1.686 1.607 1.535 1.436 1.099 1.111 0.804 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.254 0.469 0.693 0.866 1.132 0.735 0.721 0.826 0.919 0.608 0.644 0.326 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 TOTALS 0.0508 0.0796 0.1230 0.0562 0.0352 0.0253 0.0206 0.0166 0.0134 0.0118 0.0101 0.0093 STD. DEVIATIONS 0.1330 0.2257 0.2427 0.1013 0.0552 0.0355 0.0265 0.0196 0.0145 0.0119 0.0095 0.0082 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 II (INCHES) (CU. FT.) PERCENT 1 PRECIPITATION 17.83 ( 3.438) 1985296. 100.00 IRUNOFF 0.246 ( 0.301) 27335. 1.38 EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 17.144 ( 2.827) 1908715. 96.14 I PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 0.4518 ( 0.7949) 50306. 2.53 CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE -0.010 ( 1.255) -1060. -0.05 II*********************************************************************** 1 *********************************************************************** PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 10 I(INCHES) (CU. FT.) PRECIPITATION 1.63 181473.3 1 RUNOFF 0.464 51712.9 PERCOLATION FROM LAYER 5 0.0300 3339.3 IHEAD ON LAYER 5 0.0 ISNOW WATER 1.64 183076.2 MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.4342 U MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL) 0.2364 I********************************************************,tit************* 1 *********************************************************************** 1 FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 10 1 LAYER (INCHES) (VOL/VOL) 1 1.58 0.2638 I2 5.72 0.3177 3 1.57 0.2625 1 4 282.43 0.2942 II 5 103.20 0.4300 SNOW WATER 0.00 *********************************************************************** *********************************************************************** 1 I' STEFFEN ROBERTSON 4Y KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: fa; ,' c,1...r',.#' 441 CALCULATED BY: of4 Nd. r „ 7pf DATE: F 3-97 CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET / OF / • z.4,'/z C/mac/ T y' F/4/14 co -,a 7727:1‘‘ Y,f%L, .¢d/ ,/l. /tip / "45---s 2 "we- 3 ,%? ;L rz7re2s ii -V2,,,948 c.e `fil "z5/ 6/ iif, 65-7 fill/ 95-z zz I r140 c.Y fy /3/ G.Y, (S5 2) (8<J�7P) (larz75-) 9ii, 9k, 4,Y 5131,n99. c Y, 4 ?it/ z ez 60 ; 6,7 /7 9 67 7 'PI/ 0r2) e.Y, (PfLiGz/) (Jaz., 9G.,/), 0 i 095) 4 3 t 1-3 z c, K. SA/G5- 2z/ 5 2, 72' 4,/e, S7z 17 335-5- c.� x. 6, 7-77c. x X. 6 3 if X.63 Xr yfri z73 689 7Z' '5 2bod, OBO 3/1 725 264 30f , // - 7.PcPiotf -..7. 70 Tia - 9a - r0 9© z 06 3 lasiS 2, do fa 3, 5'5-/ 2#9z r 300 0.4rf r, .. 3e O -; 3a0 —3a6' 4V. z Yes /.7. Z Ye5- `i. 6 "S /1. e? Ke - 9, + ' Y,e5 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1 i i i STEFFEN ROBERTSON & KIRSTE (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: 5o4,77/ C4i7 ' e -'.l, LN©. $-F '/ CALCULATED BY: DATE: d= 3_ 9f - CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET / OF Z #9-srvA7f T/a.//S : 0 k" .�.e A Tri „O's- z/4/C = f► c g 43 P/w,474, COE7-9 51re p,Pg-? _- z 6 Z v�r9s s /-9 = 30 G7 T© 7;1 _ 3 P, z9 yc. 0.4/L Y 74' 7,&—., ', C 0 VE/7 7 (-4Air-.A7,4zL ) ( 4;3r. 6d 2)(/ Fr)(ziew-9 Ve L = F, o'd c t' I7vz Cov,+r/%,''T�� = _79, 3 ,c.) (Itc,5-642) ( FT) VFc = /z3/ ScP/ C' F i- . co reE 5--9 /Ye rf Tor -oz ..11/41/L 1 .E'er F/Aziz C ova,€ i ar71 09Z c. z, aryl $412 ,x r / 7 � r = 35`ffcP c.�' Tal Z .7f7:.e/ &-9 4/4ij f7$ Veey y� lv & 7- /2 3;, $ / 3 5' . ?P, " qd?7/ % i✓% C, r STEFI'EN ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers 8 Scientists PROJECT: 5Oij, q c.f/e/g/ 44 A.471-1- NO. X570/ CALCULATED BY: 4€ DATE: CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET 2 OF 2_ I I (go,e,eaR,/ 19aede� •9.e d4 ! %G' O Z !1 Q') c, t; 1 a7 Pea/COW 4.e 4 a CC' � ��.� l oSoap = //f. 2 79 carr Aggein/ ,ee-; 3 ; �3 za/od95-,0 Os') = 3 ; 9ij C. a7 T077•04 - q T—,e 44- L 74- 44/ s -i' //qD©o 3 V 4i, 5.1/ �r /#1L sr, fil£),/.17g-/r-/e77- 11.- 4144 / g-, /'/, Att S Pim :57) dFIc-/ 1- 141? ,P5-? cy «d71/414,.4.- /Q, 7/0 c -Y. U5 ET its 144 1.1/C /TA' B C�4/$t 1 4Trd/ L3,4 5 1a a 7?/ Fac T 7W$' T IT i767$ o T 72/2 /4V72' :o /r,, -q' 7704./'q v'Y 5w LL r q c TO FZ arrrJis' /' g � q rte, 4,74 A6Vic,�-/ C©U7/ vG "Ale- OF . r te%AL �,vYn�t� ,erE' F,e'A7 2a -Jo STEL FEN ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.),17! Consulting Engineers & Scientists HAi c IrAICANOUC CALC5,, PROJECT: Sayri.k 04,340,3 LANsonu_ CALCULATED BY:Ci CHECKED BY: NO. 65701 DATE: 09tzc g'{ DATE: SHEET I OF I Au- cF l {E FAC€. wpt CoSTITCL F` I _. -, cake 's t c cL Bubo [ E TD -11-1E. � RR 5 "1. ER. ME ih1CS^ AKER, 1HE-- 25 -% - Flax s-rO t-% Er -v- Hca Com. 3.Z In r9/(Z`1 Fig. sty LA -NNS gam► 11.110-CATC4tl 3i Ams 1 QJ ,rri- EPak :i. `CATCwezT (. ASS IGKOD A (L)JE NUMB CCW) EA -Er) CINJ SLE FO Lc.DLOING ASS ]tom CORWE. NUt t c k) 03FSCOLTIOG wott'iu zi APFA) C+Q (L.AraOnu .4 DAlci coNieejy. CIQ CLANZFlt_L L)/'` F IKAL r5t7_ + VEcEirri ct,3): kiE A ‘, PNC P K`tDe-RULiC LC TI -i 044+r- L (ENGTO RzzlIm1 E-- - CAI -COMELY; 3T' CHAs.3 ft K' 3 Ckl FCR a t -t B- CATOAllErsZT Lh3AZ p, T CZ 1 lE P 1, 5 L.7At_ 7 + "IO2r--uN PtP Fu J6 Fest WAS-Trt. cuk.nFe Fargici,13ktP 1-t,rcAzicr--1*)Hs U HAAr.J r i'iOgAPH GehiCgi TtC1•.J METHOD. WE PEAK_ FCotAXS L LEE 'll-kE]J USED 7 € IALUATE VIZI►.) CF . .EAC+E WATER DIN E,'Stc't.] ST \]CiU?Z5. �i4E P CGRAM� +ou31—tAER WAS t EV AGNATE H" tefkuUC CONv elevocE cPutrei c14,0,3rJZ.s Af11.7 DFiASTE comPuTE R-cw PTI AN1D \les: l' -1Es Ltikr. NGS cQo -noKJ. 11.3 m is bTuDy"; -The FOU-ou3rk CC-FiCtE1.s15 (7/L) t. t . t* (G-LJr.Jt C ts.= O.O2 7Z( .O-LuJ (j:0.0-15 \14C vWHt S C'rt"FFicieti F Ai FECI" Fir AMt VE1.00� t l t til -WAr CtW3IJa. C ICtet Tic� �?"rttE Ft nt7 -THE F F(0.) "+JE ZXS 'f. !ISE t cF 5t pP.Af) FC -THE PLR.FCEE Rao V ST 1 70 REEL z_E C HrWINIEL rx . AU— CF 71-1z Pia:Pa:ED P L T Co'F . L z �D t►,>� L6Pa-V�o ' taw . OLTTFOr l ": 5 ATTR HED M MI M O II=1— MN OM = M M E = MIM M En M 1 NI/ A ‘:-OrpOe 1 0 Y oY / .11. ---4,-,' -,„....1 .,.,., / 1\ .-..,.., C. .,„,.. ,.._,,,. � l ,.' 25cFS cam RI � P-LNNE? Nop swAL C rte° CP5 •••••• \IN:4 1400 • RIK AP -LINED DROP !3y CFS Lines co ANwN Et Cge "40 N.\ F4O lt, 2/2-24 Ste. 11111111111 STEFFEN ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT:S CAisicio LAMLE ILL_ NO. 6570 I CALCULATED BY: CHECKED BY: DATE: 8/0q(39 DATE: SHEET OF3 1\1E. DINERaw Q CAPPOT1 REG:0 tt DNE c .a - � ISL . I% crs 135 cis. alao yr .�� FT ?L= 0.02 1.25% c►. cFs Z5cFs (la) Fr is Opp 1.05 Fr*c. STEFFEN ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: 1.5s4a1 LAk.tFILL NO. CALCULATED DATE: 8/66 CHECKED BY: DATE: r 1 SHEET 2 OF 3 OE DINEe,t4- cit,..1 1_14,1151u_ 1 1 1 71Y0.025(.S LINED) 2. aOFE= 8.?5Z ec►-ri862.RFs 09E6.ti = 2H cF5 cls D - 0.65 FT \J = 935 Fr* = 204 — 35%) [ kgtes3 O ffAcsri =1151 Cj5 (@3%5to ) OCZMID CFS .�,���� 1.MFr (Q) R- .rOF (& 35') 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STEiJ•'FE N ROIiERTSO` & KIRSTFN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists irmgroo PROJECT: S CA1,4`101,1 LAt%IttFILL.,. CALCULATED BY: DATE: 02 CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET 3 OF a/ = C..61% al 915 cis .Z5 Fr �0.B TM 1 1 1 1 1 1 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: NE DIVERSION Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Discharge Computed Results: Depth Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number 3.00:1 (H: V) 1.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0100 ft/ft 135.00 cfs 3.06 ft 7.21 fps 18.72 sf 12.24 ft 14.00 ft 3.09 ft 0.0094 ft/ft 1.03 (flow is Supercritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S. CANYON LANDFILL Description: NE DIVERSION Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Z -Left 3.00 Z -Right 1.00 Mannings 'n 0.045 Channel Depth 3.00 "Variable Input Data Channel Slope Page 1 of 3 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0.0100 0.0500 0.0010 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Z -Left Z -Right (H:V) (H:V) VARIABLE Mannings Channel fni Slope ft/ft Page 2 of 3 COMPUTED COMPUTED Channel Channel Velocity Depth Discharge (fps) ft cfs 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00_ 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.0100 0.0110 0.0120 0.0130 0.0140 0.0150 0.0160 0.0170 0.0180 0.0190 0.0200 0.0210 0.0220 0.0230 ,0.0240 0.0250 0.0260 0.0270 0.0280 0.0290 0.0300 0.0310 0.0320 0.0330 0.0340 0.0350 0.0360 0.0370 0.0380 0.0390 0.0400 0.0410 0.0420 0.0430 0.0440 0.0450 0.0460 0.0470 0.0480 0.0490 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 71.20 74.68 78.00 81.18 84.25 87.20 90.06 92.84 95.53 98.14 100.69 103.18 105.61 107.98 110.31 112.58 114.81 117.00 119.14 121.25 123.33 125.36 127.37 129.34 131.29 133.21 135.10 136.96 138.80 140.61 142.40 144.17 145.92 147.65 149.35 151.04 152.71 154.36 156.00 157.61 3.96 4.15 4.33 4.51 4.68 4.84 5.00 5.16 5.31 5.45 5.59 5.73 5.87 6.00 6.13 6.25 6.38 6.50 6.62 6.74 6.85 6.96 7.08 7.19 7.29 7.40 7.51 7.61 7.71 7.81 7.91 8.01 8.11 8.20 8.30 8.39 8.48 8.58 8.67 8.76 MllJlt-t t -t Fri ?..€33.0lP- Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 3.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Z -Left (H:V) Z -Right (H:V) VARIABLE Mannings Channel Channel 'n' Slope Depth ftift ft Page 3 of 3 COMPUTED COMPUTED Channel Velocity Discharge (fps) cfs 1.00 0.045 0.0500 3.00 159.21 8.85 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Description: DIVERSION BERM ON 5% LANDFILL SURFACE Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Z -Left 20.00 Z -Right...... ..... 2.00 Mannings 'n' 0.025 Channel Slope 0.0160 Variable Input Data Channel Depth Page 1 of 2 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0.10 2.00 0.10 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 2 of 2 1 1 VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge (fps) 1 ft/ft ft cfs 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.10 0.11 1.01 I 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.20 0.71 1.61 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.30 2.08 2.11 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.40 4.49 2.55 I 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.50 8.14 2.96 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.60 13.24 3.34 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.70 19.97 3.70 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.80 28.51 4.05 I 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 0.90 39.03 4.38 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.00 51.69 4.70 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.10 66.65 5.01 I 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.20 84.06 5.31 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.30 104.06 5.60 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.40 126.80 5.88 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.50 152.41 6.16 I20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.60 181.03 6.43 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.70 212.79 6.69 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.80 247.83 6.95 I 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 1.90 286.27 7.21 20.00 2.00 0.025 0.0160 2.00 328.23 7.46 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Description: ACCESS ROAD - DIVERSION DITCH Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Bottom Width 2.00 Z -Left 2.00 Z -Right 4.00 Mannings 'n'....... 0.025 Channel Slope 0.0875 "Variable Input Data Channel Depth Page 1 of 2 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0..10 2.00 0.10 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Bottom Z -Left Z -Right Width (H:V) (H:V) ft Mannings f n f Page 2 of 2 VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Channel Channel Channel Velocity Slope Depth Discharge fps ft/ft ft cfs 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.0875 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 0.80 2.68 5.62 9.67 14.93 21.47 29.41 38.81 49.79 62.41 76.77 92.95 111.03 131.10 153.22 177.48 203.96 232.73 263.86 297.42 3.46 5.16 6.46 7.56 8.53 9.42 10.25 11.03 11.77 12.48 13.17 13.83 14.48 15.10 15.71 16.31 16.90 17.47 18.04 18.59 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 1 of 3 1 Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL IDescription: NE DIVERSION - LINED CHANNEL ISolve For Discharge Given Constant Data; IBottom Width 6.00 Z -Left 2.00 Z -Right 2.00 I Mannings 'n' 0.045 Channel Slope 0.2000 IVariable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By Channel Depth 0.,10 5.00 0.10 Il 1 1 1 1 1 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 2 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Bottom Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity Width (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge fps ft ft/ft ft cfs 1 1 1 1 1 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.10 2.20 2.30 2.40 2.50 2.60 2.70 2.80 2.90 3.00 3.10 3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 3.90 4.00 1.92 3.10 6.15 4.81 12.21 6.16 19.92 7.32 29.22 8.35 40.06 9.27 52.43 10.12 66.32 10.91 81.75 11.65 98.73 12.34 117.27 13.00 137.41 13.63 159.15 14.23 182.52 14.82 207.57 15.38 234.30 15.92 262.74 16.44 292.94 16.95 324.91 17.45 358.69 17.93 394.31 18.41 431.79 18.87 471.16 19.33 512.46 19.77 555.72 20.21 600.96 20.64 648.22 21.06 697.52 21.48 748.90 21.88 802.38 22.29 858.00 22.69 915.78 23.08 975.75 23.47 1037.94 23.85 1102.39 24.23 1169.12 24.60 1238.15 24.97 1309.53 25.34 1383.27 25.70 1459.40 26.06 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 3 of 3 1 ' VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Bottom Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity Width (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge fps ft ft/ft ft cfs 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.10 1537.96 26.42 I 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.20 1618.97 26.77 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.30 1702.46 27.12 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.40 1788.45 27.46 U 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.50 1876.99 27.81 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.60 1968.08 28.15 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.70 2061.76 28.49 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.80 2158.07 28.82 I 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 4.90 2257.01 29.15 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 5.00 2358.63 29.48 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.2000 5.10 2462.95 29.81 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Description: NE DIVERSION - LINED CHANNEL Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Bottom Width 6.00 Z -Left 2.00 Z -Right 2.00 Mannings 'n' 0.045 Channel Slope0.3500 Variable Input Data Channel Depth Page 1 of 3 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0,10 5.00 0.10 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 ' VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Bottom Z -Left Z --Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity Width (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge fps ft ft/ft ft cfs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 2 of 3 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.10 2.54 4.10 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.20 8.14 6.36 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.30 16.15 8.15 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.40 26.35 9.69 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.50 38.65 11.04 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.60 52.99 12.27 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.70 69.35 13.39 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.80 87.73 14.43 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.90 108.15 15.41 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.00 130.61 16.33 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.10 155.14 17.20 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.20 181.77 18.03 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.30 210.53 18.83 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.40 241.46 19.60 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.50 274.58 20.34 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.60 309.94 21.06 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.70 347.58 21.75 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.80 387.52 22.43 6.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 1.90 429.82 23.08 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.00 474.50 23.73 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.10 521.62 24.35 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.20 571.20 24.96 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.30 623.29 25.57 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.40 677.92 26.15 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.50 735.15 26.73 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.60 795.00 27.30 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.70 857.51 27.86 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.80 922.73 28.41 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 2.90 990.70 28.95 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.00 1061.45 29.48 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.10 1135.02 30.01 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.20 1211.46 30.53 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.30 1290.79 31.04 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.40 1373.07 31.55 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.50 1458.32 32.05 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.60 1546.60 32.55 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.70 1637.92 33.04 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.80 1732.34 33.52 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 3.90 1829.89 34.00 6 00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 4.00 1930.61 34.48 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Page 3 of 3 VARIABLE COMPUTE❑ COMPUTED Bottom Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity Width (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge fps ft ft/ft ft cfs 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 0.045 0.3500 4.10 2034.53 34.95 4.20 2141.70 35.41 4.30 2252.14 35.87 4.40 2365.90 36.33 4.50 2483.02 36.79 4.60 2603.53 37.24 4.70 2727.46 37.68 4.80 2854.85 38.13 4.90 2985.75 38.57 5.00 3120.18 39.00 5.10 3258.18 39.44 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Trapezoidal Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Description: ROADSIDE DITCH - SITE RUNOFF Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Bottom Width 5.00 Z -Left 2.00 Z -Right 2.00 Mannings 'n'0.045 Channel Slope 0.0667 Variable Input Data Channel Depth Page 1 of 2 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0.25 5.00 0.25 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 2 of 2 1 ' VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Bottom Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity Width (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge fps ft ft/ft ft cfs 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 0.25 4.33 3.15 I 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 0.50 14.23 4.74 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 0.75 29.03 5.96 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 1.00 48.80 6.97 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 1.25 73.71 7.86 I5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 1.50 104.03 8.67 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 1.75 140.03 9.41 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 2.00 182.00 10.11 I 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 2.25 230.21 10.77 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 2.50 284.96 11.40 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 2.75 346.53 12.00 I 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 3.00 415.20 12.58 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 3.25 491.25 13.14 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 3.50 574.96 13.69 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 3.75 666.59 14.22 1 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 4.00 766.41 14.74 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 4.25 874.69 15.2.5 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 4.50 991.68 15.74 11 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 4.75 1117.64 16.23 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.045 0.0667 5.00 1252.81 16.70 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 I ******************************************************* * * * HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEMS * * I **************************************************** * * * PROGRAM - WASHED * 1 * * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * I * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS * * AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS* * * ******************************************************* 1 II COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS :SRK ENGINEER • PEK DATE 08 -AUG -94 I CLIENT • PROJECT DESCRIPTION S. CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME . NE DIVERSION ITHE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-NE,IN * THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH I5 NOT STORED 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT NE DIVERSION *************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS RAINFALL (mm.) 86.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 I-- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 1 RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE 1 1 1 **** ****************************** r*********** ***************** SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT CATCH 1 ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED MAP PARAMETERS : 80.00 HAANS AREA (ha.) 7.46 HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) . 465.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 38.10 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) 5.00 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (mm.) .• 480.00 TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA • 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 **************************************************************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .4 .5 .9 12.0 * 1.1 .4 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 14.0 * .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 22.0 * .0 .0 :0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 23.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 12.70 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .05 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 39.99 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.98 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = 1.16 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED 1 '**************************************************************** SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT CATCH 2 **************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER . 80.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAME'T'ERS AREA (ha.) : 4.14 1 HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 396.00 PERCENT FOREST ( ) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 1 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) . .00 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE () 44.80 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) : 5.40 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) . 335.00 II TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 1 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED 1 ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** 1 TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 D.5 **************************************************************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 II 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 II 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .2 .3 .5 1 12.0 * .6 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .0 .0 .0 .0 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 . 0 . 0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.0 * .0 .0 I INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 12.70 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED _ .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 39.99 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 1.65 thousand cu.m. 11 PEAK RUNOFF RATE _ .64 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ****************************************************************3 SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT CATCH3 ****************************************************************i RAINFALL PARAMETERS I SCS CURVE NUMBER y 80.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS IMAP PARAMETERS AREA (ha.) . 4.11 I HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 556.00 PERCENT FOREST () .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 II PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 27.90 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) .01 I CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) .00 TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA : 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 I AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR : 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED 1 1 1 1 1 ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.( ***************************************************************************: .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 12.0 * .6 .2 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.0 * .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED VOLUME OF RUNOFF PEAK RUNOFF RATE TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF . 0 .0 .0 .0 ,( . 0 .0 .0 .0 ,( .0 .0 .0 .0 ,( .0 .0 .0 .0 .( . 0 .0 .0 .0 .( . 0 .0 .0 .0 .( . 0 .0 .0 .0 .c . 0 .0 .0 .0 .( . 0 .0 .0 .0 .( .0 .0 .0 .0 .( . 0 .0 .0 .0 ,[ .1 .1 .2 .3 .z . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 12.70 . 00 .05 39.99 1.64 . 64 12.05 mm. hours. hours. mm. thousand cu.m. cu. m./sec. hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED NE DIVERSION TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED VOLUME OF RUNOFF PEAK RUNOFF RATE TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES 15.71 39.99 6.28 2.38 12.05 .10 153 ha. mm. thousand cu.m. cu. m./sec. hours. hours. STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 9 1.2 2.0 2.4 . 2 .2 .2 .2 . 2 .2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 ` .1 .1 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 . 0 . 6 .2 . 1 . 1 .1 .1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 .1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .1 . 2 . 2 . 1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 . 0 . 0 ( . 0 . 0 .0 . 0 . 1 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 0 .0 ( . 0 .0 . 0 .2 .2 . 2 . 1 .1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Description: NE DIVERSION DITCH Solve For Discharge Given Constant Data; Z -Left 3.00 Z -Right 1.00 Mannings 'n' 0.025 Variable Input Data Channel Slope Channel Depth Page 1 of 4 Minimum Maximum Increment By 0.0100 0.25 0.0500 4.00 0.0100 0.25 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 2 of 4 1 IIVARIABLE VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity (H:V) (H:V) "n' Slope Depth Discharge (fps) 1----ft/ft ft +cfs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.0100 0.0200 0.0300 0.0400 0.0500 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.17 0.24 0.29 0.34 0.38 1.08 1.52 1.87 2.16 2.41 3.18 4.50 5.51 6.36 7.11 6.85 9.68 11.86 13.69 15.31 12.41 17.55 21.50 24.83 27.76 20.18 28.55 34.96 40.37 45.13 30.45 43.06 52.74 60.89 68.08 43.47 61.48 75.29 86.94 97.2.0 1.36 1.92 2.35 2.72 3.04 2.16 3.05 3.73 4.31 4.82 2.83 4.00 4.89 5.65 6.32 3.42 4.84 5.93 6.85 7.65 3.97 5.62 6.88 7.94 8.88 4.49 6.34 7.77 8.97 10.03 4.97 7.03 8.61 9.94 11.12 5.43 7.68 9.41 10.87 12.15 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad. Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 Page 3 of 4 1 1 VARIABLE VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED Z -Left Z -Right Mannings Channel Channel Channel Velocity (H:V) (H:V) 'n' Slope Depth Discharge (fps) 1 ft/ft ft cfs 3 00 ■ 3.00 ■ 3.00 3.00 1 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 I 3.00 3.00 3.00 I 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1 3.00 3.00 3.00 1 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 1 1 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 0.025 0.0100 0.025 0.0200 0.025 0.0300 0.025 0.0400 0.025 0.0500 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.75 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 59.51 84.16 103.08 119.02 133.07 78.82 111.46 136.51 157.63 176.24 101.62 143.72 176.02 203.25 227.24 128.16 181.25 221.99 256.33 286.58 158.66 224.38 274.80 317.32 354.77 193.33 273.40 334.85 386.65 432.29 232.38 328.63 402.49 464.75 519.61 276.02 390.35 478.07 552.03 617.19 5.88 8.31 10.18 11.76 13.14 6.31 8.92 10.92 12.61 14.10 6.72 9.50 11.64 13.44 15.02 7.12 10.07 12.33 14.24 15.92 7.51 10.62 13.01 15.02 16.79 7.89 11.16 13.67 15.78 17.64 8.26 11.68 14.31 16.52 18.47 8.63 12.20 14.94 17.25 19.29 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 1 ******************************************************* * * HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEMS * I * * ******************************************************* * * 1 II * PROGRAM - WASHED * * * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * I * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS* * AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * II******************************************************* 1 COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER . PEK DATE 08 -AUG -94 I CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION S CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME . LANDFILL I THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-LL1.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 *************************************************************** * WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL I*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS III RAINFALL (mm.) . 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 I -- will default to the SCS method : TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF.10 IIRAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE. ***************************************************************** 11 SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LOWER LANDFILL ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER 82.80 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) . 4.66 I HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 335.0(3 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 I OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 7.30 CHANNEL SLOPE ($) .01 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) . .00 I TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHEDAN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 IIAREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 11 THERE I5 NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED 1 ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** 1 TIME * 0.00.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.c ***************************************************************************i .Q * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 C 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * . 0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .c I 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .c 9.0 * .0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 II 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .2 .4 .E 12.0 * .7 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * . 0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 . 0 . 0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * . 0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 .0 . 0 . 0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 21.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 10.55 man. I ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 41.01 mm. II VOLUME OF RUNOFF PEAK RUNOFF RATE 1.91 thousand cu.rn. .73 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. 1 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED 1 1 1 1 1 1 STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED r 4.66 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 41.01 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 1.91 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .73 cu. m./sec. D:14 TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH = .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 132 STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .3 .4 .7 .7 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 ..0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 ******************************************************* * * * HYDROLOGICAL S Y S T EMS * ******************************************************* * * PROGRAM - WASHED * * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * ******************************************************* COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER PEK DATE 05 -AUG -94 CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION S CA NYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME LANDFILL THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-BERM.I THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 11 *************************************************************** * WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL *************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS RAINFALL) (mm. 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 II -- will default to the SCS method . TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 IIRAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE ******************************************** ********************* SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT UPPER LANDFILL ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS ' SCS CURVE NUMBER 94.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) 3.28 1 HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 381.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 1 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) : .00 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 2.40 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) 1.25 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) .• 122.00 I TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA : 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 1 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.5 ***************************************************************************f .0 * 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 1 .2 .4 .6 12.0 * .7 .5 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION 3.24 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .08 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 64.83 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.13 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .70 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 3.28 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 64.83 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF -- 2.13 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .70 cu. m.jsec.r). TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH = .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 165 ******* STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .o .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .4 .4 .6 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .( . 0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .c .0 .+( . 7 .2 . 1 .1 . 0 .c . 0 .c . 0 .c . 0 .c .0 .c .0 .c . 0 .c ******************************************************* * * HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEMS * * * ******************************************************* * * * * * PROGRAM - WASHED * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS * AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * * ******************************************************* COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER PEK DATE • 05 -AUG -94 CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION S CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME LANDFILL THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-B2.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL '*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS 1 RAINFALL (man.) 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) . .00 I -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF : .10 I RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED ***************************,******************* ***************/ 1 :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL ****************************************************************/ RAINFALL PARAMETERS t SCS CURVE NUMBER UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED MAP PARAMETERS 1 . 94.00 . HAANS AREA (ha.) . 3.45 1 HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 450.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 IOVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 2.30 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) 1.50 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) 99.00 I TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 1 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 *********** 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 **************************************************************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .2 .4 .5 12.0 * .7 .6 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 3.24 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH .09 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 64.39 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.22 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .72 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 3.45 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 64.39 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.22 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .72 cu. m./sec. Q. t. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH = .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 168 STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .o . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .o .0 .0 .o .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .3 .4 .6 .7 .3 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 ..1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 '******************************************************* * * * HYDROLOGICAL D R O L O G I C A L S Y S T E M S * I * * ******************************************************* * * * PROGRAM - WASHED * II * * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * t * * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS* AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * 1 ******************************************************* ICOMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER PEK DATE 05 -AUG -94 I CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION • S CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME LANDFILL THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-133.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL I*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS IRAINFALL mm. 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) . .00 -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 IRAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE ***************************************************************** SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER 94.00 : UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) 4.49 I HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) : 571.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) . .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 1 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 1.60 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) .01 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) .00 I TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** I TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 *********************************************,****************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 il 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .2 .4 .6 12.0 * .8 .8 .5.2.1.1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 14.0 * .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 • 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 II 22.0 * .0 .0 .0 I INITIAL ABSTRACTION3.24 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED .00 hours. TIME TO PEAR OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .14 hours. I THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 64.00 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF2.87 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .85 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.10 hours. 1 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL I TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 4.49 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED 64.00 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.87 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .85 cu. m. ]sec. ©'-U- II TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.10 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 181 1 ******* STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* I.o .0 .0 .o .0 .0 .a .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .© .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I ,o .a .a .a .0 ,0 .a .0 .0 .0 .a .o .a .o .o .a .o .a .o .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 II .0 .0 .a .0 .o .o .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 ,o . .1 .1 .2 .4 .6 .8 .8 .5 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 ,.1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 I .o .o .o .a .a .o .o .a .a .0 .o .o .a .a .0 .o .a .o .a .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11 .a .a .o .a .0 .a .0 .o .0 .0 . a .a .o .o .a .a .0 .a .a .o . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .a .0 .0 .o ,0 .a .a .0 .0 .a .a .o .o .o .a .o .a .0 .0 . 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ******************************************************* * * * HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEMS * ******************************************************* * * * PROGRAM -- WASHED * * * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS * AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * ******************************************************* COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS ENGINEER DATE CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION MAJOR WATERSHED NAME • • • M • SRK PEK 48 -AUG -94 S CANYON LANDFILL LANDFILL THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-B4.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL 1*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS 1 RAINFALL (mm.) . 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 1 -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 1 RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE ***************************************************************** SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LOWER LANDFILL t**************************r************************err*********** RAINFALL PARAMETERS 1 SCS CURVE NUMBER : 94.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) 3.08 I HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) . 320.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 1 OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 8.60 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) .01 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) .00 I TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 1 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED 1 1 1 ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 ******************, ****** r******************************* r****************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .3 .4 .6 12.0 * .7 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 13.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 3.24 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 65.42 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF - 2.01 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .67 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 3.08 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 65.42 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 2.01 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .67 cu. m. /sec. 0,3-4 TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH = .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 162 STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .4 .4 .6 .7 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 ..0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 I ******************************************************* * * * H Y D R O LOG I CAL SYSTEMS * I * * **************************************************** * * * PROGRAM -- WASHED * I ** * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * I * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS * * AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * '******************************************************* II COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER PEK DATE 08-AUG-94 I CLIENT PROJECT DESCRIPTION S CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME : LANDFILL 1 THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-ED.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL I*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS IRAINFALL (mm.) 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 I -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE ***************************************************************** I SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT EASTERN SURROUNDING ***************************************************************** IRAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER 80.00 1 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) 3.67 II HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 396.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .• .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) . .00 I OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 12.30 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) .01 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (i.) .00 111 TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 IAREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 **************************************************************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .2 .2 .4 12.0 * .5 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 13.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 14.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 12.70 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .00 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 36.05 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 1.32 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE _ .52 cu. m./sec.. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 3.67 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 36.05 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 1.32 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .52 cu. m./sec.O,q TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH = .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 107 STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .2 .3 .5 .5 .1 .1 .1 .1 .0 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 ******************************************************* * HYDROLOGICAL S Y S T EMS * * ******************************************************* * * * PROGRAM - WASHED * * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * ******************************************************* COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRX ENGINEER •• PER DATE 08 -AUG -94 CLIENT • PROJECT DESCRIPTION S CANYON LANDFILL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME • LANDFILL THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-UD1.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT LANDFILL ************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS RAINFALL mm. 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) .00 -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE ***************************************************************** 11 SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT ABOVE LANDFILL ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS SCS CURVE NUMBER 80.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) . .70 II HYDRAULIC LENGTH {m.} 137.00 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 II OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) . 24.40 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) : .01 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) • . .00 II TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHED :AN UNLINED CHANNEL CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS : 1.00 1 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED 1 1 ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 ********************************************************* .0 * .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 12.0 * .1 .0 *********** 0.7 0.8 0.9 ***************** . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 12.70 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .0 .0 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .05 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 36.05 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = .25 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = .10 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED LANDFILL TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED VOLUME OF RUNOFF PEAK RUNOFF RATE TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES . 0 . 0 . 70 36.05 . 25 . 10 12.05 . 10 15 ha. mm. thousand cu.m. cu. m./sec. 0.03 hours. hours. STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . o .0 .0 . 0 .1 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 I ******************************************************* * * * HYDROLOGICAL SYSTEMS * * * I ******************************************************* * * * PROGRAM - WASHED * I ** * WATERSHED MODELLING * * * I * PROGRAM TO DETERMINE RUNOFF HYDROGRAPHS* AND SEDIMENTGRAPHS FOR SMALL CATCHMENTS * * * ******************************************************* 1 II COMPANY DOING ANALYSIS : SRK ENGINEER PEK DATE 26 -AUG -94 II CLIENT• PROJECT DESCRIPTION SOUTH CANYON LANDFIL MAJOR WATERSHED NAME UPPER EAST SIDE 1 THE INPUT DATA FILE IS :SCL-C1.IN THE FLOOD HYDROGRAPH AND SEDIMENTGRAPH IS NOT STORED 1 1 *************************************************************** WATERSHED CONDITIONS AT UPPER EAST SIDE 1*************************************************************** GLOBAL PARAMETERS IRAINFALL (mm.) . 81.28 INITIAL ABSTRACTION (mm.) . .00 II -- will default to the SCS method TIME INCREMENT OF HYDROGRAPH FROM START OF RUNOFF .10 1 RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION SELECTED :SCS TYPE 2 CURVE *******************************,********************************* SUBWATERSHED CONDITIONS AT UPPER ***************************************************************** RAINFALL PARAMETERS ' SCS CURVE NUMBER 80.00 UNIT HYDROGRAPH SELECTED HAANS MAP PARAMETERS 1 AREA (ha.) : 12.85 1 HYDRAULIC LENGTH (m.) 558.77 PERCENT FOREST (%) .00 PERCENT AGRICULTURE (%) .00 PERCENT GRASSLAND (%) .00 I OVERLAND FLOW SLOPE (%) 9.73 CHANNEL SLOPE (%) : 5.00 CHANNEL LENGTH FROM SUBWATERSHED (m.) . 330.00 11 TYPE OF CHANNEL FROM SUBWATERSHEDA NATURAL STREAM CORRECTION FACTOR FOR IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.00 CORRECTION FACTOR FOR CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS :. 1.00 11 AREAL REDUCTION FACTOR • 1.00 1 SEDIMENT PARAMETERS 1 THERE IS NO SEDIMENT DATA FOR THIS SUBWATERSHED ********** STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RAINFALL *********** TIME * 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 **************************************************************************** .0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 2.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 5.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 8.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 11.0 * .0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .1 .2 .5 .8 1.3 12.0 * 1.7 .8 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 13.0 * .2 .2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 14.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 15.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 16.0 * .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 17.0 * .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 18.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 21.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 22.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 23.0 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 INITIAL ABSTRACTION = 12.70 mm. ROUTED FLOW TIME FROM THE SUBWATERSHED = .05 hours. TIME TO PEAK OF UNIT HYDROGRAPH = .06 hours. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED = 36.20 mm VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 4.65 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE = 1.80 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.05 hours. THERE IS NO SEDIMENT CONTAINED IN THE STORM RUNOFF FROM THIS WATERSHED STORM HYDROGRAPH FOR WATERSHED UPPER EAST SIDE TOTAL AREA OF THE WATERSHED = 12.85 ha. THE DEPTH OF WATER ON WATERSHED -- 36.20 mm. VOLUME OF RUNOFF = 4.65 thousand cu.m. PEAK RUNOFF RATE - 1.80 cu. m./sec. TIME TO PEAK RUNOFF = 12.10 hours. TIME INCREMENT OF NEW HYDROGRAPH - .10 hours. NUMBER OF RUNOFF VALUES = 150 STORM HYDROGRAPH GENERATED FROM START OF RUNOFF ******* . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .1 .1 .2 .2 .7 .9 1.6 1.8 .3 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 .2 . 2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 . 1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 . 0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 1 STEFFEN ROBERTSON & MASTEN (U.S.) r 1 f Consulting Engineers. 8 Scientists PROJECT: H CA14y00 +idu-ILL NO. (t7c� CALCULATED BY: ( DATE: of z j`i/ CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET 1 OF 10 RT 'WE PCAD 120' AT- Ur R1 P- CEL rca4 1 C.F5 a,thiz) _ l , Lio'S FT C.x O . cS F T/FT V = 3.(9 Fr/i7 —1 ,I, 2/ [ 20 LA.; 0.01-5 3 CSS ae.,, VGIS CFS fid= 1.5 - COS FT/fir Cm,o) 00,0 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE- Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Mannings n Channel Slope Discharge Computed Results: Depth velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number AT AD 30.00:1 (H:V) 30.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft. 300.00 cfs 1.65 ft 3.69 fps 81.30 sf 98.77 ft 98.83 ft 1.44 ft 0.0102 ft/ft 0.72 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE-AT A) Solve For Discharge Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Depth Computed Results: Discharge Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number 30.00:1 (H:V) 30.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ftjft 2.00 ft 504.18 cfs 4.20 fps 120.00 sf 120.00 ft 120.07 ft 1.77 ft. 0.0095 ft/ft 0.74 (flow is Subcritical) 3 cc 10 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE - AT Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Discharge Computed Results: Depth Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number RLP P C-- O ttrVC. FtAr 20.00:1 (H:V) 20.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 165.00 cfs 1.53 ft 3.52 fps 46.93 sf 61.28 ft 61.35 ft 1.33 ft 0.0104 ft/ft 0.71 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 �5of10 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE -kr+i Solve For Discharge Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Depth Computed Results: Discharge Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number (WM') C_ : G t`,_1 '-LE PCirS 20.00:1 (H:V) 20.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 2.00 ft 335.9E cfs 4.20 fps 80.00 sf 80.00 ft 80.10 ft 1.77 ft 0.0095 ft/ft 0.74 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 i i s ri• FFEN loin:RTsON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT:-x0114CotssicD LA+,3oFtu, NO. (.09 ,0 CALCULATED BY: DATE: 81(91 CHECKED BY: DATE: j SHEET (0 OF IO L,g-*) r- L Accc sf rUM r ' Qt.,Av. C Arai' z' CFS (u P e✓c. /too) to cFs c.cc ss- r ul+1 doef3a i -09 r- T < I , S Pr S= c..0 r;f'Fr �! 2.36 FT*, rj= _ RUNb SI E — AP -EA 12o' t 50 30 Q � crs 09,60 ^FS Qviit, .625 FT O. C5 FT/FT �1 T 349 v.00cir/FT .. Pr/cc,. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: UPPER EAST SIDE ROAD Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope.. Right Side Slope. Manning's n Channel Slope Discharge Computed Results: Depth Velocity.. FlowArea Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number SWALE 20.00:1 (H:V) 20.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 63.00 cfs 1.07 ft 2.76 fps 22.80 sf 42.71 ft 42.76 ft 0.91 ft 0.0119 ft/ft 0.67 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: UPPER EAST SIDE ROAD Solve For Discharge Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Depth Computed Results: Discharge Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number SWALE 20.00:1 (H:V) 20.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 1.50 ft 156.00 cfs 3.47 fps 45.00 sf 60.00 ft 60.07 ft 1.30 ft 0.0105 ft/ft 0.71 (flow is Subcritical) fBof10 Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 cz, 9.0F 10 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE Solve For Discharge Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope Depth Computed Results: Discharge Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width. Wetted Perimeter. Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number -- TO SEPTAGE POND AREA 30.00:1 (}1:V) 30.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 2.00 ft 504.18 cfs 4.20 fps 120.00 sf 120.00 ft 120.07 ft 1.77 ft 0.0095 ft/ft 0.74 (flow is Subcritical) Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 Triangular Channel Analysis & Design Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: S CANYON LANDFILL Comment: LOWER ROAD SWALE Solve For Depth Given Input Data: Left Side Slope Right Side Slope Manning's n Channel Slope. Discharge Computed Results: Depth Velocity Flow Area Flow Top Width Wetted Perimeter Critical Depth Critical Slope Froude Number - TO SEPTAGE POND AREA 30.00:1 (H:V) 30.00:1 (H:V) 0.025 0.0050 ft/ft 235.00 cfs 1.50 ft 3.47 fps 67.69 sf 90.13 ft 90.18 ft 1.31 ft 0.0105 ft/ft 0.71 (flow is Subcriticai) p) R0OFlO Open Channel Flow Module, Version 3.16 (c) 1990 Haestad Methods, Inc. * 37 Brookside Rd * Waterbury, Ct 06708 1 S'ITTF :\ ROBERTSON & KIRSTEN (U.S.) Consulting Engineers & Scientists PROJECT: , ' 44,4/47, LA 1,�/l y NO. 6s-7 / CALCULATED BY: g DATE; CHECKED BY: DATE: SHEET / OF / ✓ P' 4' T/dam Fa:4/2;1 //az ez -4= zs//' r,F, ,4 r.= 75,, 16 a "CF 1dl/./L, V egro /6L = 6/yO eGz . 6 /7d (z.c ,dl%; - /5; Z-4,42 to 2 f //6(9., //a �. r�C/P, Mec f%L C�GrrA7 I/5CEF.4;E- 0 3 F-2-7 ,> 4- 7t 7,7 / 2 ciF) erx,e-f- 49., 1 -0Z - /l r ( s //a "z) ( /z �~ v6�%,.e� rs� ram L�Li� 7 7cP. c.„4--, . (,A., C xo*--,IL r' eke" cow fe--,e,447/rf�; TNJ5 v4 L Z."%r" /5 iF 5-5 1... -..KE 0 7"p 4re" a" jig 0 (/49I 3/6 7";41:e /if -s-v; ,c/c/E''r G /F4CI T%" 727 . 4/AZ /,vr4 T,fr', '/M$ T4' rzecr Coe,./, 7z 6- ©lc- Y ,et //e/ sU�s r �. ,r »' 1 S, x cess APPENDIX F CLOSURE AND POST -CLOSURE COST ESTIMATES SOUTH CANYON LANDFILL CLOSURE AND POST -CLOSURE CARE COST ESTIMATES Prepared for: TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 422 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602 Prepared by: Steffen Robertson and Kirsten (U.S.), Inc. 3232 South Vance Street Lakewood, Colorado 80227 SRK Project No. 65701 September 30, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 FACILITY DATA SUMMARY ..... 1 3.0 SUMMARY OF COST ESTIMATE 2 4.0 CLOSURE COST ESTIMATE 1 5.0 POST -CLOSURE CARE COST ESTIMATE .. 4 South Canyon Landfill Closure & Post -Closure Care Cost Estimates 1.0 INTRODUCTION The following provides engineering cost estimates for the closure and post -closure care of the South Canyon Landfill (SCL) which is owned by the City of Glenwood Springs and operated by TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. The landfill facility is located approximately 5 miles west of the City of Glenwood Springs off of Interstate 1-70. These estimates have been generated in accordance with the financial assurance regulations of the Colorado Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (6 CCR 1007-2). The cost estimate assumes a post -closure period of 30 years and is based on the final cover details illustrated in the document entitled Facility Design and Operations Plan, South Canyon Landfill, Garfield County, Colorado by Steffen Robertson and Kirsten, Inc. (SRK), dated September, 1994. This document describes the final cover system which will be installed over completed portions of the landfill. The final cover system is comprised of the installation of an 18 -inch (1.5 -ft.) thick layer of material over completed areas of the landfill which will be overlain with a 6 -inch layer of vegetative support material. 2.0 FACILITY DATA SUMMARY Owner/Operator .• City of Glenwood Springs/TADCO Disposal Systems, Inc. Location . 5 miles west of the City of Glenwood Springs Legal Description Portions of Sections 2,3,4,9,10, and 11, Township 6 South, Range 90 West of the 6th P.M. Total Area 500 Acres Site Volume/Day .• < 80 tons per day September 30, 1994 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Closure & Post -Closure Care Cost Estimates 3.0 SUMMARY OF COST ESTIMATE CLOSURE COSTS • Final Cover $187,532 • Soil Testing & QA/QC Inspections $22,055 • Surface Water Controls $2,800 • Survey of Certification $4,000 • Administration $8,800 Total Closure Costs $225,187 POST -CLOSURE COSTS • Surface Maintenance $90,000 • Environmental Monitoring $100,000 • LCRS O&M Costs $119,760 • Facility Inspections $30,000 Total Post -Closure Costs $339,760 TOTAL COSTS $558,947 Note: 1) The above costs are basad on a post -closure period of 30 years. 2) The cost estimates are based on closure of the largest portion of the site at any one point in time, which for the SCL would be the Stage 4 area, are described in the SCL's Facility Design and Operationns Plan. This stage encompasses an area of approximately 20.23 acres. September 30, 1994 2 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill Closure & Post -Closure Care Cost Estimates 4.0 CLOSURE COST ESTIMATE Final Cover* $ 16,184 $ 24,478 $ 146,870 • Vegetative Cover (seed, labor and equipment) - $800/AC x 20.23 AC = Cost to Spread and Grade Vegetative Cover Soil - (0.50 Fr x 881,219 SF)/ 27 CF/CY x $1.50/CY = • Cost to Spread and Grade Low Permeability Barrier Soil - ((1.50 FT x 881,219 SF)/ 27 CF/CY) x $3.00/CY — Final Cover Costs $187,532 Soil Testing & QA/AC Inspections $16,055 $ 4,400 $ 1,600 • Soil Testing = • QA/QC Inspections - 80 hours @ $55 = - Expenses = Total Soil Testing and QA/QC Costs $22,055 Surface Water Controls*** $2,800 • Cost to Install Diversion Berms Along Top Slope (2800 LF x $1.00/LF) Survey and Certification. $4,000 • Cost to Survey the Closed Areas and Submit a Site Plan of the Closure Administration $8,800 • 5% of Total TOTAL CLOSURE COSTS $225,187 Assumptions: ** The total surface arca to receive closure is approximately 20.23 acres. The 18 -inch low permeability soil layer is placed in two 9 -inch lifts. All other surface water control appurtenances will have been previously installed under site preparation conditions. September 30, 1994 3 SRK Project No. 65701 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 South Canyon Landfill. Closure & Pot -Closure Care Colt Estimates 5.0 POST -CLOSURE CARE COST ESTIMATE Surface Maintenance $90,000 • Replace Soil Which Has Eroded or Settled and Regrade Surface - $3,000/YR x 30 YRS Environmental Monitoring+ Number of Ground Water Monitoring Wells 6 Number of Surface Water Monitoring Points .• 3 Number of Explosive Gas Monitoring Wells . 1 Post -Closure Sampling Frequency: - GW & SW = Semi -Annually - Explosive Gas = Quarterly Sampling & Analysis Costs: • Years 1-10 (Semi -Annually): - $2,500 per event x 2 events/YR x 10 YRS = $ 50,000 • Years 11-30 (Annually): - $2,500 per event x 1 event/YR x 20 YRS = $ 50,000 Total Environmental Monitoring Costs $ 100,000 LCRS O&M Costs Based on the HELP model, the estimated average annual leachate generation rate for the "final cover" scenario is approximately 50,306 CF. For cost estimate purposes it bas been assumed that the maximum amount of leachate which would be pumped on a yearly basis would be approximately 20,000 CF, Pumping Cost: $.02/GAL (20,000 CF) (7.48 GAL/CF) ($.02/GAL)(30 YRS) = $89,760 O&M Cost: Pond Maintenance ($1,000Iyr) (30 yrs) _ $30,000 Total LCRS O&M Costs $119,760 Facility Inspections + + • Cost of annual landfill inspections - $1,000/YR x 30 YRS $30,000 TOTAL POST CLOSURE COSTS $339,760 Assumptions: + Monitoring is completed semi-annually until year 11; and annually for remainder of post -closure period. Explosive gas monitoring is conducted on a quarterly basis during pre -closure and semi-annually during post - closure in conjunction with ground water and surface water monitoring events. + + Landfill is inspected once a year. September 30, 1994 4 SRK Project No. 65701 APPENDIX G LANDFILL DESIGN PLANS + Drawings 1 through 9