HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-08-05 Packet - Part 7-pgs-3000-3499 f 1
City ct�
Ukiah
J�
'1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, .,,,, ,rrr fill///✓rmoiiiaiaicviciiiiiiiiiiiiiimrmrriiiiiiiiiiaaiiiri annri rriiorar rrrrrv.
June 7, 2019
RoundValley Indian Tribes of the Round Valley Reservation
Jaynes Russ, President
77326 Covelo Road
Covelo , CA 95428
Subject: Request for Govern ment-to-Governmenti Bill
52 (AB-52)for City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Dear Sir or Madam,
s shown in the attached figure, the Ukiah Landfill is located approximately three miles east of
the City of Ukiah withinthe unincorporated area of MendocinoCounty, The Ukiah landfill is part
of a 2 .5®acre parcel of lard and has a physical address of 3100 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah,
California in the southeast % of Section 10, Township 15 north, Range 12 west, Mount Diablo
Base and Meridian. The property is further identified y Mendocino County Assessor's Parcel
Number 1 - -01. the overall purpose of the Proposed Project is to close the Ukiah Landfill in
accordance with the applicable regulatory standards. Specifically, the components and systems
required for closure of the landfill include the final cover and grading design o control
storm water, potential infiltration and accommodate future settlement, landfill slope stability,
construction quality assurance,drainage and erosion control systems, LFG control and monitoring
systems, roun at /s ace watedleachate monitoring systems, and site security.
The Native American Heritage Commission was contacted about the Proposed Project and
provided us with a list of Native American individuals and organizations that may have knowledge
of tribal and/or cultural resources in the ProjectArea as part of the AB52 requirements.As a result,
e are requesting that you please provide us with any information you may have about cultural
resources or sites in the project area so that we can determine ways to protect those sites,
including archeological sites and other locations of special value to Native Americans.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance, I look forward to your earliest possible reply. If
e do not receive a request from you (car your organization)within days, we will assume that
you do not want to have a formal consultation and agree that the Proposed Project wouldnot
have any impacts to known Tribal Cultural esources that you area are of. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me at 707-463-6755 or at jthiele@cityofukiah.com.
Sincerely,
p
Jarod Thiele
Public Works Management Analyst
300 Seminary Avenue e t.lkii h CIA 9 r48 2...m5400
Phoney (707)463-6 00 ° Fax:: (707)463-6204 ° www.cityrc)t'u.ukiah..a;om
Page 3000 of 4165
//i�D r rarzUum
I '�y
I J
---
June 7, 2019
Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians
Michael Knight, Chairperson
190 Sherwood ill Drive
Willits , CA 95490
Subject: Request for Govern me nt-to-GovernConsultation III
52 ® )for CityUkiah' it Closure Project
Dear Sir or Madam,
s shown in the attached i re, the Ukiah Landfill is located approximately three miles east o
the City of Ukiah within the unincorporated area of Mendocino County. The Ukiah landfill is part
of a 2 .5® c e parcel of land and has a physical address of 3100 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah,
California in the southeast 'e/4 of Section 10, Township 15 north, Range 12 west, Mount Diablo
Base and Meridian. The property is further identified by Mendocino CountyAssessor's Parcel
Number 17 -1 -01. the overall purpose of the Proposed Project is to close the Ukiah Landfill in
accordance with the applicable regulatory standards. Specifically, the components and systems
required for closure of the landfill include the final cover and gradingdesign to control
stor ,ater, potential infiltration and accommodate future settlement, landfill slope stability,
construction quality assurance,drainage and erosion control systems, LFG control and monitoring
systems, roun ater/su ace ter/leacha a monitoring systems, and site security.
The Native American Heritage Commission was contacted about the Proposed Project and
provided us with a list of Native American individuals and organizations that may have knowledge
of tribal and/or cultural resources in the Project Area as part of the AB52 requirements.As a result,
e are requesting that you please provide us with any information you may have about cultural
resources or sites in the project area so that we can determine ways to protect those sites,
including archeological sites and other locations of special value to Native Americans.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. I look forward o your earliest possible reply. I
e do not receive a request from you (or your organization) within 30 days, we will assume that
you do not want to have a formal consultation and agree that the Proposed Project would not
have any impacts to known Tribal Cultural Resources that you area are of. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me at 707-463-6755 or at jthiele@cityofukiah.com.
Sincerely,
d
°'
Jarod Thiele
Public Works Management Analyst
,. 4,�, ,A WdU//1d11WWI.UI!lM(!(!(ttllL
Pho!ine: (70)4 3,,,,6200 Fax.- ('70 )163,,,,6204°
Page 3001 of 4165
� T I�4 , IIY .....
I
} r
r
I
o. I�
I
1�
r qq
11 /
111
�w
„
t� r
I „
�t�{
1r
r
v` 7
� r n uNl v, 41
ri
,.,� t.'rl stt=Ifla r
117
'fir o.
k 8 y u F' ✓ ., I� �
A
k„ fir . I IC....
r „
II w". re, N
r s III I
Jry HV IT / 1 PM
f�
,. 0✓!PlfM1N6
Y 1
m 4;Y
u.
f h
kigih
t y""
r
5-
�M1IF
,ve
s
4;"
Springs
Springs
s f
r, I� rlii"Ir(ia;irr)
J, f
° r
w 4
LOCATION MAP FIGURE
w�ur�af���s ING 1-1
82',S`"suill.( "" CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL
>AN1AROSA,C"A9'.1404 UKIAH CALIFORNIA
I I..I:US/)544-0/84 02-907 1p
Page 3002 of 4165
ATTACHMENT 3
("-,ity, of Ukiall
u ..
� Illr
1 �
0
Y'.
4
1
1"
I'
V
,....e e. ®,.^u�' oi® ®ae mnmm rianuivirarmvrzn��rmmmnm. mmiv
SMB
E a RWrM'� yn' T A L
Table of Contents
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Chapter1 - Introduction..........................................................................................1-1
Chapter 2 - Comments Received.............................................................................2-1
Chapter 3 - Responses to Comments......................................................................3-1
Chapter 4 - Revisions to the Draft EIR.....................................................................4-1
Chapter5 -EIR Preparers...........................................................................................5-1
Appendices
Appendix A- Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan..............................................A-1
Appendix B - Engineered Alternatives Analysis................................................................B-1
Appendix C - Examples of Artificial Synthetic Turf Used at Landfills...........................C-1
Appendix D - Ukiah Landfill Monitoring Wells and Vichy Springs Resort..................D-1
April 2020 i-1
Page 3004 of 4165
Chapter 1 Introduction
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
On November 13, 2019,the City of Ukiah (City) released for public review the Draft Environmental
Impact Report (Draft EIR or DEIR) (State Clearinghouse Number: 2017022009) to provide the
public and responsible agencies with information about the potential environmental effects of the
City's proposed Landfill Closure Project(Project or Proposed Project). The City is the lead agency under
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has principal responsibility for approving the
Proposed Project.
1.1 Purpose of the Environmental Impact Report
The purpose of the EIR is to provide the public and responsible and trustee agencies with information about
the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Project. The Draft EIR was prepared in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000et seq.) of
1970 (as amended), and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14). As described in
CEQA guidelines Section 15121(a), an EIR is a public information document that assesses potential
environmental effects of the Proposed Project, and identifies mitigation measures and alternatives to the
Proposed Project that would reduce or avoid adverse environmental impacts. CEQA requires that state and
local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have
discretionary authority.
1.2 Public Review and Responses to Comments
In accordance with Sections 15087 and 15105 of the State CEQA Guidelines,the Draft EIR was circulated
for public review and comment to lead and responsible agencies, as well as members of the public, for 45-
days(November 13 through December 31,2019 and was then extended through January 9,2020). The City
also held a public meeting on December 18,2019 to receive comments on the Draft EIR.Written comment
letters received on the Draft EIR are provided in their entirety in Chapter 2,"Comments Received". Chapter
3 "Responses to Comments"provides responses to each of the comments received and are provided in this
document as part of the final environmental impact report (Final EIR). Although some of the comments
have resulted in changes to the text of the Draft EIR(see Chapter 4, "Revisions to the Draft EIR"),none of
the changes constitute "significant new information", which would require recirculation of the Draft EIR.
Significant new information is defined in Section 15088.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines as follows:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation
measure proposed to be implemented.
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation
measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.
(3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously
analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project's
proponents decline to adopt it.
(4) The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that
meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
April 2020 1-1
Page 3005 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Introduction
None of these circumstances has arisen from comments on the Draft EIR; therefore, recirculation is not
required. Copies of the Draft EIR and the Final EIR are available for review on line on the City's website
at and at the address below.
City of Ukiah, Public Works Administration
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
As required by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(b),the City has provided an electronic copy(through
the City's website; see prior discussion) to each public agency that submitted written comments on the
Draft EIR with written responses to that public agency's comments at least 10 days prior to certifying the
Final EIR.
1.3 Organization of the Responses to Comments
Chapter 2 of the Final PEIR consists of the written comments received on the Draft EIR, and presents
responses to environmental issues raised in the comments (as required by State CEQA Guidelines Section
15132). The focus of the responses to comments is on the disposition of significant environmental issues
that are raised in the comments, as required by Section 15088(c) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Each
comment letter has been given a letter designation in the order it was received and reproduced with
individual comments bracketed and numbered.Responses to the comments follow each letter.For example,
the response to the second comment of the first letter would be indicated as Response to Comment A-2. In
some instances, clarifications of the text of the Draft EIR may be required. In those cases, the text of the
Draft EIR is revised and the changes compiled in Chapter 4-Revisions to the Draft EIR. The text deletions
are shown in strikeout(&4ikeetft) and additions are shown in underline (underline).
1.4 Project Decision Process
This document and the Draft EIR together constitute the Final EIR, which will be considered by the City
prior to a decision on whether to approve the project.If deciding to approve the project,the City,as required
by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090,must first certify that the Final EIR was completed in compliance
with CEQA's requirements, was reviewed and considered by the City, and reflects the City's independent
judgment and analysis. The City would then be required to adopt Findings of Fact(a separate Document)
on the disposition of each significant environmental impact,as required by State CEQA Guidelines Section
15091.If significant and unavoidable impacts(those that cannot be mitigated to less than significant)would
result from the project and the City chooses to approve the project,the City would need to adopt a statement
of overriding considerations, pursuant to Section 15093, explaining the overriding factors that the City
deems allow the project to move forward. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is
required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(d), has been included as part of Appendix A of this Final
EIR.
April 2020 1_2
Page 3006 of 4165
Chapter 2 Comments Received
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
During the 45-day public review period (November 13 through December 31, 2019 and then extended
through January 9, 2020)the City received a total of four(4)comment letters on the Draft EIR and a letter
from the State of California's Governor's Office of Planning and Research (i.e. State Clearinghouse)
confirming the end of the 45-day public review period.The City also received verbal comments from Vichy
Springs resort at the Public Hearing which was held on December 18,2019 as well as two written comment
letters. In comparing the notes from that meeting and the written comments provided by Vichy Springs
Resort, it appears that all of the substantive elements of their verbal comments are covered by their written
comment letters. As a result,this Final EIR addresses all of their comments through their written comment
letters. The City has reviewed and considered all of the written comments received as follows in Table 2-1
below. The letters including the letter from the State Clearinghouse are attached.
RECEIVEDTABLE 2-1
AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS
Comment
Date Commenting Agency Letter
Christine Karl, Environmental Scientist
December 19, 2019 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery A
10011 Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Terri Cia, Engineering Geologist
January 9,2020 North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board B
5550 Skylane Boulevard, Suite A
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
Paul Stanton Kibel,Attorney for Vichy Springs Resort
January 9,2020 Water and Power Law Group C
57 Post Street, Suite 804
San Francisco, CA 94104
Gilbert Ashoff, President
January 9,2020 Vichy Springs Resort D
2605 Vichy Springs Road
Ukiah, CA 95482
April 2020 2-1
Page 3007 of 4165
Comment Letter A
California Environmental Protection Agency Gavin Newsom
afff aria Goven,mr.
Jared Blumenfeld
Secretary for-
CRIBecycleo Envir.onn')entaf Protection
Department of Scott imiithl'ine
Resources Recycling and ecove "all ecycfe Director
December 19, 2,01
Governor's Office of P6auvnirug,&Research
Jarod Thiele DEC 19 2019
City of Ukiah
gg Seminary Road 5"fAIG Cl.l , ltGl15E
Ukiah, CA 915482
hhie'he � t ofuk�ah-cLo°j
Subject: Chi INo'., 2017022009 - Draft Environmental Impact Report (IEII for the
Ukiah Landfill Closure Project, Facility No. 23-A A-00119, Mendocino Counter
Dear I' r4Thlele.
Thank you, for allowing the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle) to provide comments on the proposed project, GalRecycle staff offer the
following comments for this proposed project as pet of the California Environmental
Quality,Act ( E A) process, if the proposed project description below varies
substantially from the project as understood by CalRecycle as a responsible Agency,
Cal'Recycle staff requests clarifications of any comments or interpretations of the project
references be included in the Final Environmental Impact. Report.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is located at 3100 Vichy Springs Road Ukiah CA and is owned and
operated by the City of Ukiah. The landfill operated from 1955 to September 2001. Closure of
the Ukiah Landfill will be performed in accordance will applicable regulatory standards. The
components and: systems required for a landfill include final cover, and grading design to
control storm water, prevent infiltration„ and accommodate future settlement, landfill slope
stability, construction quality assurance, drainage and erosion control systems, landfill gas
(LFG) control and monitoring systems, ground water/surface water/leachate ma nit rring
systems, and site security.
COMMENTS
closure permit should be issued when the Final' EIR is certified to enable' the LEA to A-1
enforce the Final Closure host Closure Maintenance Flan.
10011 l ;street„ Sacramento, CA 95 14 - P.O. Boy 4025, aacramento, CA 95812
12
www,Cal ecycle.ca.gov - 9115j : 22-402
Page 3008 of 4165
Ukiah Landfill Closure Project
December 1"9, 2019
Solid Waste Regul'ato!y Oversight
The Mendocino County Department of Environmental Health, is the Local Enforcement Agency A-2
(LEA) and is responsible for providing regulatory oversight of solid waste handling activities,
including inspections. The contact person is Gary, Leonard at 707-234-6649 or
L.ec 2!-rqggLlit-Lido—cq-u-iLty--LD.g-
CONCLUSION
Call Recycle staff thanks the Lead Agency for the opportunity to review and comment on the
environmental document. CalRecycle may have further comments on the project as proposed A-3
copies, of the Final Environmental Impact Report, Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations if one is reqluired), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, public
Notices, and any Notices of Determination,
If the environmental document is adopted during a public hearing, CalRelcycle staff requests A-4
10 days advance notice of this hearing. If the document is adopted without a public hearing,
CalRecycle staff requests 10 days advance notification of the date of the adoption and
proposed project approval by the dlecision-makingi body.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 916,341.6305 or
e-mail meat Chiris,fine.KarILC iie_11[ggycl
Sincerely,
I'A
6� h 'stine Karl
Environmental Scientist
Permitting & Assistance Branch, North Section
Waste Permitting, Compliance & Mitigation Division
cc- Gary Leonard, Mendocino County Environmental Health Department
Page 3009 of 4165
�^' �^^', r�rxnaiusraPwN�nrzcw�
Comment Letter B �;
umauarc +twr w„ V a I»V`'Fi.wweiµiiih
N Irds
1 Cd.Idd(dl lH ri Pad 1 W19 &M1 IIfI'I
North Coast regional Water Quality Control Ooard
January O, 2020
Mr, Tire Eriiksen
Mr. Jarod Thiele
City of Ukiah Public Works Department
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 402-54010
teriksen cni ofukiah.cor ni
thiiele ciit ofukiah,conm
Fear Mr. Priksen and Mr. Thiele:
Subject.; State Clearinghouse Document
Draft EIP, Ukiah Landfill Closure Project
(SCSI# 0170 2009)
File: Ukiah, City of, Solid Waste Disposal Siite, 3100 Vichy Springs road,
Ukiah, CA Mendocino County; WDID No. 1'O75043 MENP
Geotracker I D L1 01008371863
The North Coast regional Water Oduality Control Board (Regional Water board) is a
responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (D A) and we
appreciate the opportunity to comment. Regional Water Board staff has received the
City of Ukiah's Draft Environmental (Impact Report (DIEIP) on November 18, 20119, titled,
"Ukiah Landfill Closure Project"' developed by SM13 Environmental, The Proposed
Project includes designs and plans to construct a landfill cap along i with a landfill gas
collection system and flare for the Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site (Site) located at
3100 "Vichy Springs Road in Mendociino County. The landfill f otpriint occupies
approximately 40 acres of the roughly 238 acre parcel within APN 173-130-01 outside
the Ukiah City limits. Through circulation of the DIPId , the City of Ukiah its providing
detailed information germane to our agency°s statutory responsibilities for permitting
considerations of the Proposed Project.
We have reviewed the DEI R for the Proposed Project and have the following permitting
comments and considerations:
1. Waste Discharge Requirements, Superior Alternative and eliminated alternatives: B-1
The City of Ukiah operates the Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal l Site under Waste
Discharge Requirements, Order No. R1- 00 -0061 issued by our agency.
Worim of L. Q ImmmIO, awiwWR 1 NIM711HAS Sr_ JmusIN, FU,i:auTIMF oui[Urfl
5�550 SVmym a e HMII., Basins A,Sa,nia Cosa,CA 95403 i mw WW.Wir terbmDa' s cma.gca>/m ,iwi!hicoast
Page 3010 of 4165
Mr, rip en and Mr, Thiele - 2 . January 9, 2020
Closure requirements within the exiting Order permit and provide for the use of a
prescriptive cap (compacted, clay liner) in accordance with Title 27, California
Code of Regulations J27, CCR). Order No, R1-2002,-0061 also has provisions
for use of an Engineered Alternative Design cap subject to various
demonstrations required under T27, CCR, Section 20:080(b) including
requirements,for economic cost analyses, demonstration, of equivalent protection,
infeasibility, unnecessary burden etc,
In, our February 27, 20118, project status review coirrespoindlen:ce with the City of
Ukiah we provided the followingi,
CEQA COMPLIANCE
We understand the City of Uldah has chosen to develop an Environmental
Impact Report to comply with CEQA and that one of the project
components will consider various closure design options. Please ensure,
that the analyses include review and consideration of a prescriptive cap,
which is contained within the exiting Waste Discharge Requirements,
Order No. Rl-2002-0061, along,with any other engineered alternative the
City of Ukiah is considering.
The DEIR proposes to construct a cap using a synthetic gleomembrane liner with
a turf and sand-based cover system as the Proposed Project and Superior
Alternative. The use of this Proposed Project design is,considered an Engineered
Alternative Design Linder T27, R.
Of concerns, the DEIR considers the Proposed Project turf cover design against a
Pilo Project Alternative opting for the Proposed Project desiign. As you are aware,
the No Project Alternative is not a viable regiullatory option, The Ukiah Solid
Waste Disposal Site is required to construction close in accordance with T27,
GCR and the No Project Alternative is not an alternative we can consider.
Further, based on a narrative discussion of potential impacts, maintenance
considerations and economic factors the D,EIR discusses, but dismisses and
eliminates both the prescriptive liner (compacted clay liner) Alternative, as well as
use of a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) Alternative, And yet, no, detailed economic
analyses are provided within the DEIR in support of the narrative discussions and
eliminated Alternatives. The DEIIR would be improved, enhanced and better
supportedl by including the economic cost analyses that supports each discussed
Alterative including those that have been dismissed and eliiminated.
Lastly, regarding the Proposed Project turf-based design, Regiilonal Water Board
staff has reviewed aind expressed concerns unique to a turf-based system with
the City of Ukiah representatives. Given the State of California's recent
experiences with catastrophic wildlaind fires which, resulted in significant
infrastructure loss and damiage, the Proposed Projects synthetic turf design has
an inherent surface-based vulnerability in this regard. Also, the surface-based
Page 3011 of 4165
Mr, Erik en and Mr, Thiele - 3 - January 9, 2020
turf system and underlying synthetic geomembrane liner have, a greater exposure
to ultraviolet light, weather/temperature impacts and potential degradation and
cracking over the buried type of liner systems,.
For these reasons we have requested the required financial assurance
mechanism to address a possible replacement scenario in the event the surface-
based liner systems fails. The Proposed Project description should adequately
reflect this.
2. Post-Closure Land Use B-2
The Project as proposed is to cap and close the site as an industrial facility while
maintaining engineered environmental controls, s,ystems, including active landfill
gas collection systems with a landfill gas flare in a manner secured from the
public.
In December of 2018 Regional Board staff commented on a City of Ukiiah
Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH # 2018102056) to develop the same parcel,
APN No 178-130-01 as a public park known as the Vichy Hills, Trail Project. We
wish to point out that the landfill des,igin and post-closure land use proposed
under this current DEIR and the, Final Closure and Postolosure Maintenance Plan
is to retain the site as,a closed industrial facility with site security, The DEIFY does
not address development olf the site as a park nor does it propose publlic uses or
any needed environmental safety concerns, considerations, safety factors or
mitigations that could result from public access. Should the City of Ukiah propose
future develolpment of the closed landfill site for public access all relative
permitting considerations,and any needed mitigations will need to be revisited
and/or re-permitted at that time in accordance with T2�7, CCR.
3. Water Quality Certification: B-3
The Proposed Project will iresult in placement of fill within jurisdictional waters
protected under Sections,401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act. Water Quality
Certification (401 Certification) permitting is required foir this,work. Regional
Board staff will continue to work with the City of Ukiah to address, permitting
requirements,and any needed miitigations for work within jurisdictjonall waters
requiring 401 Certification.
4. Construction Stoirmwater (permitting: B-4
Disturbed soils on the Project will exceed one-acre Mn area, therefore, this project
is requiired to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm
Water Associated with Construction Activity, Construction General Permit Order
No. 2009-00091-DWO (As amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 20,12-0006-DWQ),-.
https,://ww,w.waterboards.ca.go,v/water issues/prog)rams/storinwater/coast erm its
.shtmi.
Page 3012 of 4165
Mr, Erik en and Mr, Thiele - 4 - January 9, 2020
The Construction General Permit also Ireguilres,the development of a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP
Developer which must be implemented, monitored, and maintained.
We look forward to working closely with the City of Ukiah on this project. Please be,
aware that several departments,withiin our office may ultimately be involved in this
construction project and we would appreciate receiving two hard copies of all CE,QA
documents to assist with various department reviews,.
Should you have any questions,or concerns please feel free contact me at
707-576-2668 or Terri.0a@wat1erboards.ca_.qov
Sincerely,
DI Edly,,�igned
`V` iia
20.0 1,09
15,34.47-09'00'
Terri is
Engineering Geologist
20,0109-TAC-mc-Ukiah-HEIR
cc., Governor's Office of Planning and Research.,
State Clearinghouse state.cilearin hnu-,P.(5nn-
Ch�ariss,a Martinez, Charissa.Marti.ne _og,r.ca,.-cl2v
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Yountville:
Wesley Stokes, Wesley.Stokesgwfldlif�ca, oyy
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecyle).-
Richard Castle, Richard C,a!stle,P,1Ca,I,R,ecycIe.ca.ig2v
Jon Whitehall, ,Jon.Whitehi![@LqglRgEy!2!9 oa. ov
Michael Wochinick, Michael.WochnickB-CaLlRec y�clexa�, ov
City of Ukiah:
Rick Seanioir, cat ofukiah.coro
Michele Irace, mirage oat ofukiah.com
EB,A Wastechinologies:
Mike Diellmanowski, mde 11 ma nowski 0.e bagroup.com
Mendocino County Air Quality Management District:
Barbara Moed', mpqgmd@co.mendocino.ca.us
Page 3013 of 4165
Mr, Erik an and Mr, Thiele - 5 - January 9, 2020
�Mendocino County Health Department-LEA.
Trey Strickland, strucklttboo.menidocino,ca,us
SIMB Environmental.'
Steve, Brown, Steve Asmbenvironmenta Loom
SWRCB, Land Disposal Program,
Brianna St. Pierre, Brian na.St
Josh Mu;nini, Josh.Munn 0-wiateirbloads,ca ao:v
Vichy Springs Resort, Gilbert Ashoff, 2605 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
Page 3014 of 4165
Comment Letter C
WATER AND POWER
LAW GROUP PC
57 POST STREET,SUITE 804 OTHER OFFICES
SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94104 BERKELEY
(510)296-5588 WASHINGTON,D.C.
(866)407-8073(E-FAX)
Via Electronic Mail and United States Mail
January 9, 2020
Jarod Thiele, Management Analyst
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482-5400
i±tjele q) ukiah.coin
Re: Comments of Vichy Sprints Resort on Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)
Prepared by City of Ukiah for Landfill Closure Plan
Dear Mr. Thiele:
This comment letter is submitted on behalf of Vichy Springs Resort, which is located
immediately adjacent to the City of Ukiah landfill, and immediately adjacent to the site of the
landfill closure plan that is the subject of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (the "DEIR").
This comment letter follows up and expands upon issues that I raised in my oral testimony at the
December 17, 2019 hearing in Ukiah on the DEIR As I noted at the December 17, 2019 hearing, C-I
in addition to working as an environmental attorney with Water and Power Law Group, I am also
a professor of environmental law at Golden Gate University School of Law, where I teach a
course on California Environmental Law that provides extensive coverage of the California
Environmental Quality Act("CEQA").
1. INTRODUCTION—ENSURING THE LANDFILL CLOSURE IS DONE
CORRECTLY
For those us that work on issues related to compliance with CEQA, we are familiar with
the NIMBY dynamic (and by NIMBY I mean "Not In My Backyard'). The NIMBY dynamics is
where neighbors who are opposed to a particular project try to use the CEQA process and CEQA C-2
litigation to "stop" a project they do not want to go forward. It is important to highlight that this
NIMBY dynamic is not what is involved with the Vichy Springs Resort's concerns regarding the
proposed landfill closure project.
Page 3015 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 2
More specifically, Vichy Springs Resort is not trying to "stop" or"prevent" the City of
Ukiah from moving forward with its landfill closure plan. Quite to the contrary, for the past
decade, Vichy Springs Resort has consistently pressed the City to properly close the landfill.
While Vichy Springs Resort wants the landfill closure process to move forward, the Resort
believes this closure needs to take place in an environmentally responsible manner— so that this
closure does not leave a permanent visual eyesore on the landscape, so that this closure is
scheduled to reduce impacts on hikers and recreational users, and so that this closure does not
cause damage to the springs at the Resort.
Vichy Springs Resort's comments on the DEIR are therefore not about stopping the
landfill closure plan but about ensuring the landfill closure plan is done correctly.
In this letter, in addition to noting some of the more technical issues related to the DEIR,
Vichy Springs Resort also will address certain preliminary legal issues, particularly issues that
relate to the range of alternatives evaluated in the DEIR. More specifically, it is the view of
Vichy Springs Resort that the range of alternatives considered in the DEIR—which is really one
alternative—is violative of the requirements of CEQA.
II. PREVIOUS WRITTEN COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY VICHY SPRINGS
RESORT ON THE PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ON THE C-3
SCOPING DOCUMENT FOR THE EIR
In 2016, in connection with the Landfill Closure Project, the City of Ukiah initially
proposed to comply with CEQA not by preparing an Environmental Impact Report (an"EIR"),
but by preparing a Negative Declaration. After receiving written comments from Vichy Springs
Resort on the Negative Declaration in April 2016, the City of Ukiah decided to prepare an EIR.
In 2017, consistent with CEQA, the City of Ukiah then released a"Scoping Document"
that discussed the scope of issues to be addressed and excluded in the EIR that would be
prepared for the Landfill Closure Project. Again, Vichy Springs Resort submitted written
comments to the City of Ukiah expressing concern about the proposed scope of the EIR.
Page 3016 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 3
In the 2016 written comments Vichy Springs Resort submitted on the Negative
Declaration, and in the 2017 written comments Vichy Springs Resort submitted on the EIR
Scoping Document, the following concerns were identified.
First, Vichy Springs Resort expressed concern about the adverse visual impact of the
artificial synthetic cover that was proposed for the landfill. This artificial synthetic cover would
be situated on a highly visible hillside, and would clash with the natural surrounding vegetation.
For example, the proposed synthetic cover is green, and in late spring, summer, and early fall the
surrounding hillsides are brown. Vichy Springs Resort suggested the alternative of a clay cover C-3a
with natural vegetation on top —the cover used at most former landfill sites in California—be
evaluated. With this natural cover, the color and texture of the vegetation growing on top of the
landfill would be the same as the surrounding hillsides during all seasons, thereby reducing
adverse visual impacts.
Second, Vichy Springs Resort explained that there are extensive hiking trails on the
Vichy Springs property where guests come to enjoy the quiet and tranquility of the area. Vichy
Springs Resort's peak season for guests is late spring through early fall. The sound impacts
associated with the construction activities related to the landfill closure will be very noisy due to
trucks and equipment. This noise will ruin the quiet and tranquility for Vichy Springs Resort
guests using the hiking trails. Vichy Springs therefore proposed that the landfill closure C-3b
construction activities take place "off-season" or during hours of the day when there would be
fewer guests and/or less use of the hiking trails. In its previous comments on the Negative
Declaration and EIR Scoping Document, Vichy Springs Resort had also proposed other
measures to reduce the noise impacts on Resort guests, such as forgoing the use of back-up
beepers on trucks and equipment(and instead using additional construction staff to address
safety issues).
Third, Vichy Springs Resort noted that as part of the landfill closure process,
groundwater monitoring wells will be operated. Many years ago, right after the groundwater
monitoring wells were installed across the road from the Resort office, the springs at the resort C-3c
suffered a drastic reduction in pressure and temperature. As the name Vichy Springs Resort
Page 3017 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 4
suggests, a major reason guests come to the Resort is to enjoy the springs. Vichy Springs
therefore proposed that before operation of the existing wells was resumed, additional hydrology
studies were needed to ensure the wells would not again adversely impact the pressure, now and
temperature of the springs.
Vichy Springs Resort has raised these concerns consistently for many years, and
proposed specific feasible mitigation measures that would address these concerns. Vichy Springs
Resort therefore reasonably expected that these concerns would be meaningfully addressed and
considered as part of the EIR that was being prepared.
III. INADEQUATE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THE DEIR C-4
The DEIR for the landfill closure plan only considered two alternatives— (1)the
proposed landfill closure plan; and (2)the"no project" alternative (which was not having any
closure plan for the landfill). No other alternatives were considered. The limited alternatives
analysis in the DEIR is violative of CEQA's requirements for several reasons.
First, pursuant to CEQA Guideline 151526(d)(5), an EIR is required to select and discuss
a"reasonable range" of alternatives that is sufficient to foster public participation and"informed
decision-making." Pursuant to the California Supreme Court's 1988 decision in Laurel Heights
Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California, an EIR must discuss project
alternatives even if the project's significant environmental impacts will be avoided or reduced
through mitigation measures. In this way, under CEQA, the alternatives analysis required in an C-4
EIR is different from the alternative analysis required in a Negative Declaration. Pursuant to Cont'd
CEQA, a Negative Declaration is not required to evaluate alternatives to the proposed project if
it found that all significant environmental impacts have been reduced to a less than significant
level. With an EIR, however, CEQA requires the evaluation of a reasonable range of alternatives
even if the EIR asserts that all environmental impacts have been mitigated to a less than
significant level.
Second, under the particular circumstances concerning the City's landfill, the "no
project" alternative is in fact not an alternative at all because the California Health& Safety C-4
Cont d
Page 3018 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 5
Code requires the preparation and implementation of a landfill closure plan. This landfill closure
plan is not something that the City of Ukiah can decide to do or not do, it is something that the
law obligates the City of Ukiah to do. Under CEQA, the idea of the "no project" alternative
relates to voluntary projects that are not required, such as the construction of new homes. With a C-4
voluntary project such as a new residential project, the "no project" alternative (not doing the Cont'd
project)is in fact a viable alternative. In the case of landfill closure plan, however, the"no
project" alternative is in fact a"non-alternative" because the preparation and implementation of a
landfill closure plan is required by law.
The fact that the "No Project" alternative is in fact a"non-alternative" in this situation
was explicitly acknowledged in the DEIR for the landfill closure project. Section ES.8 of the
DEIR's Executive Summary concedes: "The No Project alternative would not meet any of the
goals and objectives of the Proposed Project. Under the No Project Alternative, the Ukiah C-4
Cont'd
Landfill would not be properly closed according to state and local regulations...Under the No
Action Alternative, the City would be potentially susceptible for a variety of water quality and
air quality violations and fines."
Third, CEQA Guideline 15126.6(e)(2)provides: "If the environmentally superior
alternative is the `no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior C-4
alternative among the other alternatives." (bold added.) This CEQA Guideline clearly Cont'd
anticipates that"other" alternatives will be considered in an EIR in addition to the "No Project"
alternative.
Finally, the Association of Environmental Professionals ("AEP") has provided the
following guidance in terms of CEQA alternative analysis: "It is generally uncommon...for an
EIR to evaluate only the No Project alternative. In such a case, the Lead Agency has the
relatively difficult legal burden of establishing that, given the circumstances at hand, no other C-4
feasible alternatives could satisfy the project objectives while resulting in fewer environmental
Cont'd
impacts than the proposed project." (2014 AEP CEQA Portal Topic Paper, p. 3). A copy of the
AEP CEQA Portal Topic paper is attached as Exhibit A to this letter.
Page 3019 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 6
Taken together, the fact that the DEIR for the City's landfill closure plan only considered
the "No Project" alternative (which as explained is really a non-alternative in this situation), and
considered no other alternatives, constitutes a black-letter violation of CEQA law. While there C-4
may be some room for disagreement about what constitutes a"reasonable range of alternatives,"
Cont'd
for a project such as the landfill closure project, it is clear that the consideration of no other
alternative other than the proposed project is not a"reasonable range" of alternatives in this
instance.
IV. FAILURE OF DEIR TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE OF NATURAL C-5
COVER VERSUS ARTIFICAL SYNTHETIC COVER
There are several flaws and defects in the section of the DEIR on"Aesthetic/Visual C-5a
Impacts" (Section 3) as it relates to the artificial synthetic cover.
First, the DEIR claims that the artificial synthetic green cover"is designed to look like an
irrigated agricultural field." The DEM states: "Olive green was chosen as the best color of the
three options (olive green, tan, or blend)in order to blend into the natural surrounding
environment. It was designed to blend into the olive-green grass in the winter or wet-season and
C-5b
look like an irrigated field in the summer dry months." This analysis is flawed, however, because
the surrounding hills around the landfill are not in fact irrigated in the summer and dry season,
and hence these surrounding hills are brown. The surrounding natural brown hills would
therefore present a strikingly un-natural contrast with the artificial synthetic green cover over the
landfill.
The sharp visual contrast between the proposed artificial monotone green cover and the
surrounding natural brown hillsides was made clear in the DEIR itself. More specifically, Figure
3.1-3 in the DEIR(titled `Simulated Aerial View of Post-Constructed Ukiah Landfill') depicts a C-5c
uniform synthetic monotone green cover set in the natural landscape of brown hillsides. As
Figure 3.1-3 of the DEIR illustrates, there is nothing about the proposed artificial cover that
"blends in" with its surroundings. To the contrary, the proposed artificial cover sticks out
visually like a giant artificial green thumb.
Page 3020 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 7
Not only are the hillsides surrounding the landfill site natural revegetation that changes
color and texture with the seasons of the year, there is presently natural vegetation on the landfill
itself that changes color and texture with the seasons of the year(and that blends in seamlessly
with the surrounding hillsides). For purposes of CEQA compliance, the natural vegetation that is
presently on the landfill constitutes the "baseline conditions" or"environmental setting" against C-5d
which a comparative evaluation of the visual impacts of the proposed monotone artificial
synthetic cover needs to be based. This aspect of CEQA compliance—comparison of the visual
impacts of the artificial cover against current natural vegetation conditions—is something that
Vichy Spring Resort has been highlighting for the City for many years. In its April 2016 letter to
the City regarding landfill closure plans and CEQA requirements, legal counsel for Vichy
Springs Resort explained:
In regard to the environmental setting (baseline conditions) against which scenic
impacts are evaluated, the Initial Study has not provided adequate or accurate
information about existing views. The Initial Study states that the "project site has
been significantly altered by past landfilling activities" but does not actually
provide any information about the current scenic conditions of the landfill property.
More specifically, the Initial Study does not acknowledge that, since the landfill
ceased operations in 2001, the area on top of the landfill has been naturally
revegetated with grasses that have allowed the landfill site to increasingly blend in
with its natural surroundings. The natural grass vegetation that has developed in the
project area over the past 15 years is depicted in the photograph attached as Exhibit
C to this letter.
As part of the Final Landfill Closure Plan, the natural grasses that have returned to
the landfill area since 2001 will be torn out and replaced with a "geosynthetic"
cover—more commonly known as"astroturf." The result will be a 40-acre patch of
geosynthetic astroturf in the middle of a natural grass landscape. The Initial Study
section on aesthetics provides no information about the visual aspects of the
proposed astroturf landfill cover to enable a determination to be made as to whether
the astroturf cover results in a potentially significant adverse scenic impact vis-a-
vis the existing natural grass conditions on the project site.
The missing aspects of the visual impact analysis in the 2016 CEQA Initial Study have
unfortunately been carried forward into the 2019 CEQA DEIR—namely a failure to provide an
accurate description and depiction of baseline visual conditions on the landfill site and to C-5e
compare those baseline visual conditions to the artificial synthetic cover being proposed. A
Page 3021 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 8
complete copy of Vichy Springs Resort's April 2016 letter to the City (including the photograph
showing the natural revegetation conditions existing at the landfill site)is attached as Exhibit B
to this letter.
Second, the DEIR contains claims that its impact analysis need not consider views of the
artificial synthetic cover from more than 1,000 feet away on the following theory: "As
demonstrated in Figure 3.1-2 [of the DEIR] anything over 1,000 feet is not considered to be a
`Known Observation Point' with a significant view." This 1,000-foot standard makes no sense
in terms of an enormous 40-acre swatch of uniform synthetic color in the context of extensive C-5f
natural hillsides. Clearly, this type of feature would be visible farther away than 1,000 feet. To
support reliance on this 1,000-foot standard, Figure 3.2-2 of the DEIR shows photographs of
man holding a sign (who becomes difficult to see 1,000 feet away). An individual person (six
feet high) bears absolutely no relation to a 40-square acre synthetic green cover on a hillside.
Third, the DEIR claims that there were no"Known Observation Points" of the location of
the landfill from either Vichy Springs Resort property or from any homes in the El Dorado
Estates development or Deerwood Park development or from nearby public roads. The absence
of any "Known Observation Points" was essential to the DEIR's determination that the proposed
monotone artificial synthetic cover would not result in any significant adverse visual/scenic
impacts. The DEIR's claims regarding the absence of"Known Observation Points," however, is
incorrect. Attached as Exhibit C to this letter are photographs taken from various trails on the C-5g
Vichy Spring Resort property, which have direct views of the landfill. Attached as Exhibit D to
this letter are photographs taken from the road is front of residences in El Dorado Estates, which
have direct views of the landfill. Attached as Exhibit E are photographs taken from residences in
the Deerwood Park development, which have with direct views of the landfill. Attached as
Exhibit F is a photograph taken from Vichy Spring Road, again with a direct view of the
landfill. These photographs were taken in late December 2019 and early January 2020 by Gilbert
Ashoff, owner of Vichy Springs Resort, with the areas where the landfill is located outlined in
blue. As such, contrary to the claims in the DEIR, there are in fact numerous "Known
Observation Points" of the landfill and the DEIR contains no analysis of how the views from
Page 3022 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 9
these locations would be adversely impacted by the proposed incompatible monotone artificial
synthetic cover.
Fourth, Section 4.3 of the DEIR states that the document eliminated the natural cover
from further consideration as an alternative because it was not"feasible" in that natural covers
present an "unreasonably high risk" of slippage. Yet, the DEIR conveniently fails to disclose that
the use of natural covers for former landfills is the standard default approach used on the vast
majority of landfill sites around the State of California, and has been repeatedly approved by C-5h
state regulators as an appropriate cover. Hundreds of former landfills all over the state (many of
them on slopes)use natural covers. The DEIR's finding that such natural covers are not
"feasible" because it presents an "unreasonably high risk" of slippage is contradicted by the
widespread use of such natural covers throughout California. If natural covers presented such an
"unreasonably high risk" they would not have been adopted by state regulators as the standard
cover.
Title 27 of California Code of Regulations (27 CCR), section 21090, sets forth the
standard requirements for a landfill cover. Section 21090 provides that this cover shall contain a
top layer of soil at least 1 foot thick"capable of sustaining vegetation." Pursuant to this
regulation, the State of California therefore anticipates that a landfill cover that will allow for
natural revegetation is the standard approach, and that this approach is consistent with health and C-5i
safety concerns. The DEIR's finding that this standard approach is in fact not"feasible" is in
direct contradiction to the requirements of section 21090. While it is correct that in recent years a
few landfill covers have been permitted that deviate from the prescriptive natural revegetation
standards set forth in section 21090, the infrequent use of such alternative covers in no way
suggests that the standard cover with natural revegetation is somehow"unfeasible."
To highlight this point, Exhibit G to this letter is a 2015 article from Waste 360
magazine, titled"Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfall Cover." According to this
article, "Despite the availability of a number of alternative landfill capping methods, clay covers C-5i
Cont d
are still the go-to system in most areas of the country." This article continues: "Other capping
systems with man-made materials, such as high-density polyethylene (HDPE) have been tested,
Page 3023 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 10
but it is uncertain that these systems can match federal requirements that they provide the same
or better protective quality as clay." The DEIR's claim that the use of clay covers (with natural
vegetation above the clay cover)is not a"feasible" alternative ignores the widespread use and
regulatory/scientific acceptance of this landfill cover design.
Fifth, Section 4.3 of the DEIR claims that use of a natural cover is not"feasible" because
of the additional costs it would add to the landfill closure project. Yet this claim is contradicted
by information presented in the DEIR, in the table on page D-6 of the August 2015 Memo to city
C-5j
staff entitled"Engineered Alternative Analysis." This table of page D-6 of the memo indicates
that cost of the"synthetic cover" option would be $7,348,890 while the cost of the "natural
cover" option would be $7,768,500. So, according to the information presented in the DEIR,
although the natural cover would cost about$420,000 more, the cost of the two options are
comparable given the overall project costs involved.
On the question of"costs" associated with an alternative, and whether additional costs
render an "alternative" unfeasible, the California Court of Appeals 1988 decision in Citizens of
Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors is particularly worth noting. In Citizens of Goleta Valley,
the Court held that an environmentally superior alternative cannot be considered economically C-5j
unfeasible in the absence of evidence that the additional costs would be so severe that the project Cont'd
would not be economically viable. Clearly, no such showing can be made in this instance, where
the additional costs for the natural cover versus the artificial synthetic cover are relatively small
given the overall project budget(amounting to perhaps 5% of the total project costs).
V. FAILURE OF DEIR TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVE OF SCHEDULING
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITES TO AVOID ADVERSE NOISE IMPACTS ON C-6
RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
In its written comments on both the Negative Declaration and the EIR Scoping
Document, Vichy Springs Resort requested consideration of the alternative of scheduling the
landfill closure plan construction activities outside of the resort's peak season or during limited C-6a
hours during weekdays, to reduce noise impacts on the Resort's guests, particularly on persons
using the hiking trails in close proximity to the project site.
Page 3024 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 11
There are clearly feasible alternatives that could have been evaluated, that would reduce
the noise and recreational impacts of the project, yet the DEIR contains no analysis whatsoever
of the alternative of scheduling construction activities outside Vichy Springs Resort's peak C-6b
season or during limited hours of the day. The DEIR's defects in this regard relate both to its
failure to analyze impacts on"recreational resources" and the inadequacy of its analysis of
"noise impacts."
In terms of the DEIR's evaluation of project impacts on"recreational resources", there is
none. Section 1.3.2 of the DEIR, titled "Scope of this EIR," states the following: "Substantial
evidence exists to exclude the following identified resources from further analysis in the
EIR...Recreation. Because no residential development that would create a demand for parks and
recreational facilities in the County is proposed, the Proposed Project would not result in any
impact to those facilities. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required." While it may be true
the creation of new residential units can create additional demand for recreational resources, it C-6c
does not follow that a non-residential project(such as the City's landfill closure project) may not
create adverse environmental impacts (such as construction-related noise or degradation of
viewsheds) on existing recreational resources. The DEIR's claim that its elimination of
"recreational resources" from evaluation in the document is supported by "substantial evidence"
is therefore without merit. The only "evidence" relied upon for this elimination was the
observation that no additional demands on recreational resources would result because the
landfill closure project was not a residential project.
Section 3.8 of the DEIR, on noise impacts, focused on what are referred to as "sensitive
receptors." In terms of noise impacts on Vichy Springs Resort, the DEIR focuses exclusively on
the "cabins" where guests at the Resort are staying and sleeping. These are the only "sensitive C-6d
receptors" analyzed in regard to the project's noise impacts on the Resort. The DEIR states: "The
majority of construction activities would occur greater than 1,000 feet from the northernmost
cabin of Vichy Springs Resort. At this distance, maximum noise levels from construction (as
shown in Table 3.8)would be...considered less than significant."
Page 3025 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 12
Yet, unlike in a standard motel, guests at the Vichy Springs Resort do not just stay in
their cabin rooms. They come to enjoy the extensive outdoor recreational resources of the Resort,
the springs and the hiking trails. They walk fence lines, the creek, to a waterfall, to enjoy the
panoramic views of the surrounding hillsides (including views of the hillside where the landfill is C-6e
located). In fact, many guests of the Resort come just for the day and do not stay overnight at all.
And the Resort guests using the hiking trails at Vichy Springs Resort have ears. The quiet and
tranquility of the experience these guests seek on these hiking trails will be adversely impacted
by the truck and equipment noise associated with the landfill closure project. Yet, there is no
mention or evaluation of this in the DEIR.
The DEIR's approach to noise impacts and recreational resource impact analysis
resulting from landfill closure construction activities is inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines and
with the approach taken in other CEQA EIRs. More specifically, Appendix G to the CEQA
Guidelines sets forth a series of questions for lead agencies to ask to determine whether a
proposed project may or will have significant adverse environmental impacts. In terms of"noise
C-6f
impacts" of proposed project, Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines calls upon lead agencies to
evaluate and determine whether there would be "a substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?"
Significantly, this evaluation of whether a project will result in "substantial temporary or
periodic increases in ambient noise levels" is separate and distinct from Appendix G's
requirement that CEQA lead agencies also evaluate and determine whether"exposure of persons
to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies."
The City's DEIR for the landfill closure plan included analysis of whether construction
activities might violate local noise ordinance levels, but contained no analysis (which Appendix
G requires) of whether such construction activities would cause"substantial temporary or
periodic increases in ambient noise levels" (such as substantial increased ambient noise levels on C-6g
the recreational hiking trails on the Vichy Springs Property). The City DEIR improperly treated
these two required noise impact inquiries as if they were one and the same—as if the absence of
Page 3026 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 13
data showing a specific violation of a local noise ordinance somehow also established that the
C-6g
project would not result insubstantial increased ambient noise levels. But that is not what Cont'd
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides and requires.
An example of the approach to noise impact analysis that Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines provides can be found in the 2004 CEQA EIR prepared for the Los Angeles
International Airport Master Plan (the "LAX Master Plan EIR"). In Section 4.26.3 of the LAX
Master Plan EIR(a complete copy of Section 4.26.3 is included as Exhibit H to this letter), the
document discloses how it will approach CEQA thresholds of significance for evaluating project
impacts on recreational resources, explaining that in addition to looking at impacts related to C-6h
additional demand on recreational resources caused by potential project-related population
growth, the EIR will also evaluate the extent to which project activities such as construction
degrade recreational facilities or substantially and adversely alter recreational facilities. This
approach to CEQA thresholds of significance for impact on recreational resources can be
compared with the highly restrictive approach taken in the City's DEIR for the landfill closure
plan, which only considered whether the project would create additional "demand" for
recreational facilities.
Section 4.26.3 of the LAX Master Plan EIR then went on to evaluate project impacts on
eight(8) different recreation areas in the vicinity of the airport expansion project. For each of
these eight(8) different recreation areas, Section 4.26.3 of the LAX Master Plan EIR evaluated
the impacts of additional construction-related noise on the experience of users of these recreation
areas, to determine whether construction noise would result in significant degradation or
impairment of use of these different recreational resources. Section 4.26.3 of the LAX Master C-6h
Plan EIR considered how these noise impacts on recreation areas might be reduced under some Cont'd
of the alternatives considered in the EIR, including Alternative D which would reduce
construction hours to reduce construction-related noise impacts. The approach taken in the LAX
Master Plan EIR provides a template for how the City's DEIR for the landfill closure plan could
have and should have proceeded pursuant to CEQA—by identifying recreation areas in the
vicinity of the landfill closure project(including Vichy Springs Resort's hiking trails), by
Page 3027 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 14
evaluating the construction-related noise impacts of the landfill closure project on these C-6h
recreation areas, and by identifying feasible mitigation measures to reduce or avoid these Cont'd
construction-related noise impacts on recreational resources.
In addition to proposing changes in the season for construction activities, in its previous
comments on the Negative Declaration and the EIR Scoping Document, Vichy Springs Resort
had also proposed other measures to reduce noise impacts on guests. For example, Vichy Springs
Resort proposed that instead of the use of backup beepers on trucks and equipment(which can be
quite loud and noisy), additional construction staff could be used to address the safety concerns
that the backup beepers are meant to address. As another example, instead of scheduling
weekday construction activities from lam to 7pm, construction activities could be scheduled
either in the morning or the afternoon, so that guests at Vichy Springs Resort would be able to
use the hiking trails in either the morning or the afternoon without being subject to construction- C-6i
related noise from the adjacent property. These scheduling approaches to reducing construction
noise impacts on nearby recreation areas were considered in Alternative D in the LAX Master
Plan EIR discussed above (again highlighting the failure of the City's DEIR to consider a
reasonable range of alternatives). These other mitigation measures would all reduce the adverse
noise-related impacts on nearby recreational resources such as Vichy Springs Resort hiking
trails, yet none of these other proposed measures were either incorporated into the proposed
project or evaluated in the DEIR.
Is it possible that the use of additional construction staff in lieu of backup beepers might
result in some incremental additional costs for the landfill closure project? Yes, it is foreseeable
that this approach might result in some incremental additional project costs. However, as C-6i
discussed above (see discussion regarding 1988 Citizens of Goleta Valley case), the fact that an Cont'd
alternative or mitigation measure may involve some additional costs does not render the
alternative or mitigation measure economically unfeasible absent information demonstrating that
these additional costs are of such magnitude that the entire project would become financially
unviable.
Page 3028 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 15
Consider if there was a construction project(say construction of a new road) with noise
C-6j
impacts that took place in Yosemite National Park, in close proximity to hiking trails in the Park.
- And imagine if the environmental impact document for the Yosemite road-
building project eliminated consideration of impacts on recreational resources
based on the logic that the new road was not a residential project and therefore
did not create any new demand for parks and recreation.
- And imagine if an environmental impact document for the Yosemite road- C-6j
'd
building project was prepared that only considered the noise impacts on Cont
cabins many miles away down in Yosemite Valley, but completely ignored
the noise impacts of park visitors using Yosemite's hiking trails near the road-
building project.
- And imagine if an environmental impact document for the Yosemite road-
building project failed to evaluate the alternative of scheduling such road
construction at times of the year or hours of the day when there was more C-6j
limited use of these nearby hiking trails because there were less visitors to the Cont'd
Park or failed to consider alternatives to the use of truck/equipment backup
beepers to reduce construction-related noise impacts.
It seems clear that such a cramped and restrictive noise impact analysis— one that
completely ignored the impacts on Yosemite's recreational resources and on those persons using
Yosemite's hiking trails—would be legally inadequate. It also seems clear that the failure to
consider the alternative of scheduling such activities or conducting such activities in a manner to C-6j
avoid or lessen such impacts on recreational resources and hikers would also be inadequate. The Cont'd
same reasoning applies in the case of noise impacts on persons using the hiking trails at Vichy
Springs Resort. The complete disregard of these recreational resource impacts, and the failure to
consider these scheduling and operational alternatives, cannot be justified under CEQA.
Based on consultations with Alisto Engineering, a revised DEIR should be prepared that
includes noise impact modeling that considers the following: baseline noise levels on hiking C-6k
trails at Vichy Springs Resort property; increase in noise levels on hiking trails at Vichy Springs
Page 3029 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 16
Resort due to construction activities including but not limited to back-up truck/equipment
beepers used during construction; evaluation of whether increase in noise levels on such hiking
trails is significant when compared to baseline noise conditions; reductions in noise levels on C-6k
hiking trails at Vichy Springs Property that could be achieved by prohibiting use of backup Cont'd
beepers; additional costs associated with relying on additional construction staff versus use of
backup beepers.
VI. FAILURE TO ANALYZE THE IMPACT OF PROJECT GROUNDWATER
WELLS ON PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE OF THE SPRINGS AT C-7
VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Section 3.7 of the DEIR(on Hydrology) states that in 1994 the City of Ukiah
commissioned a study on the impacts of landfill groundwater wells on the springs at Vichy
Springs Resort. This study was prompted by the information provided to the City indicating that
the springs at Vichy Springs Resort experienced dramatic and severe reductions in pressure and
temperature when the landfill groundwater wells were installed. Damon Brown, the City's
engineer, was warned by Gilbert Ashoff(owner of Vichy Springs Resort)that drilling in the
vicinity of pressurized springs was dangerous and why so. The City ignored Ashoff's concerns
and commenced the well drilling with the result being the springs' now dropped by 50% and,
due to an adiabatic reaction, the springs' temperature dropped 20 degrees Fahrenheit.
Relying on this 1994 study, Section 3.7 of the DEIR determined that there was not the
potential for adverse impacts by the landfill closure project(which involved multiple
groundwater wells) on the springs of Vichy Springs Resort because the chemical constituents of
the water in the wells and in the spring water were different. This analysis of chemical
constituents (even if correct), however, does not address the alleged causes of the impact on the
springs, which was the wells' redirection of carbon dioxide ("CO2")that led to the pressure drop
and flow decrease. An analysis of the respective chemical constituents of well water and spring
water therefore does not address the problem involved, which is redirection of CO2, so therefore
does not provide any support for the finding that the groundwater wells associated with the
landfill do not have the potential to adversely impact the temperature and pressure of springs at
Vichy Springs Resort.
Page 3030 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 17
In its April 2016 letter to the City (which is part of the administrative record for these
CEQA proceedings), Vichy Springs Resort included as an attachment a letter from Al Sevilla of
Alisto Engineering that specifically addressed these concerns regarding the impact of the landfill
groundwater wells on the CO2 pressure for the springs at Vichy Springs Resort. This letter from
Alisto Engineering detailed the ways that the groundwater wells previously impacted CO2
pressure with resulting reductions in flow and temperature for the springs. The DEIR's
hydrology analysis is non-responsive to the technical analysis and information presented in the
previous letter from Alisto Engineering, focusing on chemical constituents of waters in the
springs and the groundwater wells rather than CO2 pressure interactions.
In its previous written comments on the Negative Declaration and the EIR Scoping
Document, Vichy Springs Resort requested that additional testing and modeling of CO2 pressure
and related adiabatic reactions (affecting temperature)be undertaken prior to committing to
renewed long-term operation of the groundwater wells as part of the post-closure plan for the
landfill. The DEIR ignored this recommendation, and it does not appear that testing or modeling
of CO2 pressure and related adiabatic reactions was done or is proposed to be done. As a result,
there is not substantial evidence to support the DEIR's determinations concerning the impact of
the groundwater wells on the springs at Vichy Springs Resort. As such, the analysis and findings
regarding this impact fail to satisfy CEQA.
More specifically, CEQA requires that the lead agency preparing the EIR provide an
adequate description of"baseline conditions" —the environmental setting at the time the EIR is
prepared. The EIR then must then compare the anticipated effects of a proposed project against
these baseline conditions. If the EIR has not done a credible analysis of the baseline conditions
regarding the hydrologic effect of the landfill closure groundwater wells on CO2 pressure for the
adjacent springs at Vichy Springs Resort, however, then there is no basis to evaluate the impact
of the continued operation of these groundwater wells on the springs. This is why Vichy Springs
Resort has repeatedly asserted that this testing and analysis of CO2 pressure needs to be done
before the groundwater wells are put back into operation, and this testing and analysis has yet to
be done.
Page 3031 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 18
It should also be noted that there have been repeated problems with the link the City
provided to the electronic copy of the DEIR, and these problems impacted the ability of Alisto
Engineering to prepare a supplemental opinion letter on the issue of CO2 pressure impacts on the
springs resulting from operation of the landfill groundwater wells. More specifically, in the
period from January 17, 2019 until after the New Year, Alisto Engineering tried multiple times
to open the DEIR link provided by the City but was unsuccessful (which delayed their review of
the portions of the DEIR dealing with this issue). The City was eventually able to resolve the
DEIR link the issue in early January 2020, but by that time Alisto Engineering no longer had
availability to provide supplemental review and comments.
VIL IN CONCLUSION— THE DEIR NEEDS TO BE REVISED AND C-g
RECIRCULATED PRIOR TO CERTIFICATION
Per the issues addressed above in this letter and in the exhibits to this letter, the following
have been established: that clay covers with natural vegetation on top is a feasible and commonly
used option for landfill covers; that there are numerous "known observation points" with direct
views of the landfill and the DEIR did not contain any analysis of adverse visual impacts from
these locations associated with the proposed artificial monotone cover; that the analysis of
construction noise impacts on existing recreation areas is standard practice in CEQA Ems and
was not undertaken in the City's DEIR for the landfill closure plan; and that the testing and
modeling of CO2 pressure impacts is needed to evaluate the impacts of project groundwater
wells on the springs at Vichy Springs Resort and that this CO2 pressure testing and modeling
were not done.
Beyond these more technical defects in the DEIR, however, there is the more glaring
fundamental legal defect of the failure of the DEIR to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives.
The alternatives analysis in the DEIR, being limited to the proposed project and the No Project
alternative (which as explained above is in fact a non-alternative because the City is legally
obligated to implement a landfill closure plan) is simply not allowed under CEQA.
Page 3032 of 4165
Letter to J. Thiele
January 9, 2020
Page 19
For these reasons, Vichy Springs Resort respectfully requests that a revised draft of the
DEIR be prepared that corrects these defects, and that this revised DEIR be recirculated for
public comment before being certified by the City of Ukiah.
Yours,
Paul Stanton Kibel
Water and Natural Resource Counsel
WATER AND POWER LAW GROUP, PC
ski-el
Attorney for VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Exhibit A: 2014 AEP CEQA Portal Topic Paper
Exhibit B: Vichy Springs Resort April 2016 Letter to City of Ukiah
Exhibit C: Photographs Showing Views of Landfill from Vichy Springs Resort
Exhibit D: Photographs Showing Views of Landfill from Residences in El Dorado Estates
Exhibit E: Photographs Showing Views of Landfill from Residences in Deerwood Park
Exhibit F: Photographs Showing Views of Landfill from Vichy Springs Road
Exhibit G: 2015 Article Clay Remains Top Choice for Landfall Covers
Exhibit H: Section 4.26.3 of 2004 LAX Master Plan EIR
Cc: Gilbert Ashoff, Vichy Springs Resort g1j !q.0
Dave Rapport, Acting City Attorney for City of Ukiah (dEgppon ),cat o�°ukn h.con )
Page 3033 of 4165
Lettelir to J Uhiiiiellle
Ja 01uu�111ii1 i 01,7 11 E Page 1 (`4'24,,
C E14A.- .
Nrta
CEQA Portal Topic Paper
Alternatives
What Are Alternatives?
Alternatives, in the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
are optional ways that the project proponent could achieve most of their
objectives, while also reducing or eliminating the environmental impacts of the
proposed project (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21002; see
also Friends of the Old Trees v. Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (1997)).
Alternatives typically involve changes to the location, scope, design, extent,
intensity, or method of construction or operation of the proposed project. The
Lead Agency is required to evaluate and compare the environmental impacts of
alternatives to the proposed project in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR),
though not at the same level of detail as the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(d)).
Why Are Project Alternatives Important?
A fundamental mandate of CEQA is that "public agencies should not approve
projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation
measures available which would substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects of the project" (PRC Sections 21002, 21081). Therefore,
as part of the decision making process for projects involving the preparation of an
EIR, governmental agencies are required under CEQA to consider alternatives to
proposed actions affecting the environment (PRC Section 21001(g)).
One of the purposes of an EIR is to identify alternatives to a proposed project
and evaluate the comparative merits of feasible alternatives (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(d)). By examining a range of alternatives, the Lead Agency can
demonstrate that it has taken a "hard look" at the project objectives to select
alternatives that allow for meaningful comparison (See Residents Ad Hoc
Stadium Committee v. Board of Trustees (1979)).
Courts have overturned many EIRs due to an improper or incomplete analysis of
alternatives (See Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association
of Governments (2017); North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Kawamura (2015);
Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013); Watsonville
Pilots Association v. City of Watsonville (2010).
Updated 4120118 1
Page 3034 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page (' 4,
�
ora CEQA Portal:Alternatives
An EIR can also be overturned if it analyzes a range of alternatives, but fails to
identify a preferred alternative as the project. A broad range of alternatives
without a stable project presents the public with a moving target and an obstacle
to informed participation. (See Washoe Meadows Community v. Department of
Parks & Recreation (2017)).
Is an Analysis of Alternatives Required in an IS/MND?
No, the purpose of an alternative analysis is to look at ways to avoid or reduce
the significant environmental impacts of a proposed project. Negative
Declarations (NDs) or Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs) are only prepared
for projects that are demonstrated not to have any significant environmental
impacts, or where mitigation can be adopted to reduce all significant impacts to a
less-than-significant level. Therefore, because projects supported by NDs or
MNDs have been determined to have no significant environmental impacts, no
analysis of alternatives is required in these documents.
However, although it is not required, a Lead Agency's consideration of
alternatives in support of an ND is not prohibited. An exploration and analysis of
alternatives to: a project; a specific aspect of a project with the most potential to
result in environmental impacts; or methods or technologies used in project
construction or operations (e.g., handling of contaminated sediments) may be
useful to minimize the environmental impacts of a proposed project, even where
such impacts are already less than significant. Such an exploration of
alternatives to the proposed project may also be helpful to the Lead Agency in
other ways, such as identifying alternative approaches, designs, or locations that
would reduce environmental effects or are more efficient, effective, or cost
effective.
Is an Analysis of Alternatives Required in an EIR?
Yes, an evaluation of alternatives is required in all EIRs. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(a) states:
"An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or
to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the
significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of
the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative
to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially
feasible alternatives that will foster informed decisionmaking and public
participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are
infeasible."
Updated 10118118 2
Page 3035 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page (' 4,
�
ora CEQA Portal:Alternatives
What Alternatives are Required in an EIR?
An EIR must always evaluate a "No Project" alternative (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(e)(1)). Evaluation of a No Project alternative compares impacts
of the proposed project with impacts that would occur if the proposed project
were not approved and implemented. Beyond evaluation of the No Project
alternative, CEQA requires that a "reasonable range" of alternatives be evaluated
in an EIR, but does not specify other alternatives that must be evaluated (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)).
How Do I Develop A Reasonable Range of Alternatives?
What is a "Reasonable Range" of Alternatives?
The EIR must always evaluate the No Project alternative as well as a
"reasonable range" of feasible "build" alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(e)). Apart from the analysis of the No Project alternative however, there
is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the "reasonable range" of
other alternatives to be discussed, other than the "rule of reason" (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) & (f); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board
of Supervisors (1990); Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the
University of California (1988)).
What constitutes a "reasonable range" of alternatives will vary with the facts of
each project and should be guided only by the purpose of offering substantial
environmental advantages over the project proposal which may be "feasibly
accomplished in a successful manner" considering the economic, environmental,
social and technological factors involved (See Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board
of Supervisors (1990) (citing PRC Sections 21002, 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines
Section 15364)).
An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(a); Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center v.
County of Siskiyou (2012)). The alternatives considered may include alternative
approaches, sites, or both (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a)).
Consistent with this rule of reason, it is generally uncommon (though not strictly
prohibited) for an EIR to evaluate only the No Project alternative. In such a case,
the Lead Agency has the relatively difficult legal burden of establishing that,
given the circumstances at hand, no other feasible alternatives could satisfy the
project objectives while resulting in fewer environmental impacts than the
proposed project (See Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center v. County of
Siskiyou (2012)).
How Do I Develop Alternatives?
Updated 10118118 3
Page 3036 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i ul� y� rC1111
Epp 0 �IN
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . P��� ge , (4 4,:!
a[ IMPort CEQA Portal:Alternatives
Because alternatives must meet most (though not all) of the project objectives,
one should begin with reviewing the project objectives (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(c); In re: Bay-Delta etc. (2008)). According to the CEQA Guidelines, "A
clearly written statement of objectives will help the Lead Agency develop a
reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR . . . ." (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15124(b)); see also Project Objectives Topic Paper).
Proper development and analysis of alternatives should also be tied closely to
the known or likely significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, as
the purpose of the alternatives is to reduce or eliminate these impacts. The
project setting can also influence the choice of alternatives (e.g., infill vs.
greenfield, site geotechnical constraints, slope, and presence of biological or
cultural resources). When developing the alternatives:
• Identify the known or likely significant construction or operational impacts
of the project;
• Focus on finding alternatives that avoid or minimize those significant
impacts;
• Consider offsite locations, when possible;
• Consider alternative site plans on the proposed site;
• Consider reductions in project size or intensity of uses;
• Consider alternative construction methods or materials;
• Consider alternative project operations; and
• Confirm whether each alternative meets most of the basic project
objectives.
How Do I Define The No Project Alternative?
The No Project alternative represents conditions in the study area in the absence
of approval of the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(1)).
The No Project Alternative must discuss current conditions as well as reasonably
foreseeable future conditions expected to occur if the project were not approved
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2)).
However, the analysis of the No Project alternative should not be confused with
comparison of the proposed project to Existing Conditions (the baseline for
determining the project's environmental impacts) (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(e)(1)). The purpose of describing and analyzing a No Project alternative
is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed
project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project (Id.). The analysis
of the No Project alternative, as with the analysis of other alternatives, is usually
a comparative or qualitative assessment (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(d)(e)).
Updated 10118118 4
Page 3037 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI r JJy 20112011N �I N
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . P��� ge (' 4,1111
a[ IM :!
Port CEQA Portal:Alternatives
The first step in the process is to establish the existing uses on the project site.
The No Project alternative often represents conditions on the project site at the
time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is
published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(e)(2)).
If the proposed project is not expected to be completed and operating for many
years, the next step is to determine what reasonably foreseeable changes to the
project site and environs are likely to occur unrelated to the proposed project.
This may include projects that have been approved, but not yet completed,
projects that have been proposed but have not yet been approved, and
infrastructure projects planned to be completed within the timeframe established
for the evaluation (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(C)).
The analysis of the impacts of the No Project alternative can be accomplished in
two general ways, depending on the nature of the proposed project:
1. When the project involves the revision of an existing land use or regulatory
plan, a policy, or ongoing operations, the No Project alternative will be
defined as the continuation into the future of the existing plan, policy, or
operation. The existing plan, policy, or operations should be assumed to
continue and to apply to other projects implemented during the timeframe
of the analysis. Thus, the projected impacts of the proposed plan or
alternative plans would be compared to the impacts that would occur
under the existing plan JCEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A)).
or,
2. If the project is a specific development project on identifiable property, the
No Project alternative should be defined as the conditions that would
occur if the proposed project were not implemented. The discussion
should compare the environmental effects of the property remaining in its
existing state against the environmental effects that would occur if the
project were approved and implemented. If disapproval of the project
under consideration would result in predictable actions by others, such as
the proposal of some other project, the consequences of these actions
should be discussed as part of the environmental effects of the No Project
alternative. In some circumstances, the failure to proceed with the
proposed project would not result in the preservation of existing
environmental conditions, but perhaps in another project being
implemented; the analysis in that case should identify the practical result
of the project's non-approval based on current plans and consistent with
available infrastructure and community services. However, the Lead
Agency is not required to speculate, or create and analyze a set of
Updated 10118118 5
Page 3038 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �IN
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . P��� ge � (' 4,:!
a[ IMor CEQA Portal:Alternatives
artificial assumptions about what would occur in the future, if it cannot
reasonably be known (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B)).
After defining the No Project alternative using one of these approaches, the Lead
Agency should proceed to analyze the impacts of the No Project alternative by
projecting what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future
if the project were not approved. This can often be done based on projections in
the Lead Agency's local planning documents (e.g., a General Plan or applicable
Specific Plan, and/or the CEQA documents prepared for those documents)
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(C)).
Do I Need to Consider Offsite Alternatives?
Offsite alternatives should be considered. Zoning, environmental conditions, and
availability are significant factors in evaluating an offsite alternative. To be
analyzed in the EIR, the offsite alternative must be "feasible", and it must be
possible for the project proponent to acquire the property. The proposed uses on
the property should either be consistent with the applicable general plan
designation for the property, or it should be reasonable to expect that a general
plan amendment would be successful. There may be situations, however, where
an offsite alternative is not feasible, for example, because the primary objective
of the project is a modification of an existing facility. (California Native Plant
Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009).
Do I Need to Consider Speculative Alternatives?
An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects cannot be reasonably
evaluated because insufficient detail regarding the alternative is available, and
whose implementation is remote and speculative (CEQA Guidelines Sections
15126.6(f)(3), 15145; see also Residents Ad Hoc Stadium Committee v. Board of
Trustees (1979), Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the
University of California (1993)).
Do I Need to Consider Alternatives Recommended by Others?
A Lead Agency should consider alternatives brought to its attention during the
public scoping process (in a draft EIR), or during the public review period (in a
final EIR), provided that the alternatives meet the above criteria (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(c)). While not required, alternatives brought to the
lead agency's attention after the public review period of an EIR may also be
considered (PRC Section 21091(d)(1) & (2); CEQA Guidelines Section
15162(a)(3)(C); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors
(1990)). In such circumstances, the lead agency may address the alternative by
means of administrative findings (see Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of
Supervisors (1990)).
Updated 10118118 6
Page 3039 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page (4 4,
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
However, Lead Agencies need not respond to late comments suggesting new
alternatives (PRC Section 21091(d)(1); CEQA Guidelines Section
15207). Indeed, a Lead Agency may properly reject alternatives raised after the
close of the public comment period; in such instances, the Lead Agency is not
required to provide reasons for rejecting those alternatives (see South County
Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada (2013)).
Are All Changes To A Project Considered Alternatives?
No, not all changes made to a project should be considered as separate
alternatives. For example, minor changes in methods used (or rejected) in
carrying out the project are typically not considered alternatives to the project
(Town of Atherton v. California High-Speed Rail Authority(2014)). However, a
number or group of such minor changes taken together, especially if they result
in changes to the types or intensity of environmental impacts, may be considered
an alternative.
May A Lead Agency Include Alternatives that Do Not Result in
Reduced Environmental Impacts?
Yes. While the analysis of an alternative that does not result in the reduction or
elimination of an environmental impact of the proposed project is allowable, it is
not a substitute for the consideration of other alternatives that reduce or eliminate
the project's impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a); Cleveland National
Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments (2017)).
What Must Be Included in an Analysis of Alternatives in an EIR?
Under CEQA, alternatives do not need to be described or analyzed at the same
level of detail as the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d)).
However, they need to be described in enough detail to allow a comparative
analysis of the alternatives against the proposed project (see Residents Ad Hoc
Stadium Committee v. Board of Trustees (1979). That is, it must be in sufficient
detail for the Lead Agency to differentiate the impacts between the alternatives
and to select the Environmentally Preferred Alternative (see Laurel Heights
Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988)).
The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be
discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by
the lead agency during the scoping process, but rejected as infeasible, and
briefly explain the reasons why these alternatives were rejected (see Alternatives
Considered but Rejected below for more detail). For an alternative suggested
during the public comment period on the draft EIR, the final EIR should either
analyze the suggested alternative at the appropriate level of detail, or explain that
Updated 10118118 7
Page 3040 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI�JJy rC201201 �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page 3 (' 4,
"0'1111
._J
ora CEQA Portal:Alternatives
the suggested alternative was considered but rejected from further analysis.
Additional information explaining the choice of alternatives may be included in
the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c).
The EIR may include a summary comparison table that lists each environmental
resource analyzed, the relative environmental impacts of each alternative with
respect to each resource, and how they compare to the impacts of the proposed
project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d)). The following are useful ways to
compare alternatives:
• Describe if impacts are greater, lesser, similar to the proposed project and
other alternatives;
• Summarize the overall environmental impacts of each alternative;
• Discuss the extent to which each alternative attains project objectives;
• Discuss any concerns with the feasibility of each alternative; and
• Most importantly, support any conclusions with evidence and include such
evidence in the administrative record.
The following is an abbreviated example of a summary table.
Topic Project No Project Alt 1 Alt 2
Air Quality S LTS SUI SUI
Noise LTS LTS LTSM LTS
Biology LTSM LTS LTSM LTS
Geology LTSM LTS LTSM LTSM
S=Significant Impact; SUI=Significant Unmitigated Impact; LTS=Less Than
Significant Impact; LTSM=Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation
Alternatives Considered but Rejected.
An analysis of alternatives in an EIR should include a list of alternatives
considered but rejected, and include an explanation of why alternatives were
rejected. (If this discussion is not included in an EIR, it must exist elsewhere in
the administrative record). The Lead Agency may, as part of the scoping
process, make an initial determination as to which alternatives are potentially
feasible and merit in-depth consideration, and which do not. (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(c)).
As noted above, remote or speculative alternatives need not be considered and
may be rejected from further evaluation.
Updated 10118118 8
Page 3041 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
Jaiui011i 1111" 1 012 �I ww �° Illl iiillll�uu , r . Page 9 (4'2 ,
0 Mpg,
1111
�
ora CEQA Portal:Alternatives
What Factors May be Considered in Determining the Feasibility of
Alternatives?
As statutorily defined, "`Feasible' means capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account
economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." (PRC Section
21061.1; see also CEQA Guidelines, Section 15364 [same definition but with
addition of "legal" factors].) "`[F]easibility' under CEQA encompasses `desirability'
to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant
economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." (City of Del Mar v.
City of San Diego (1982); Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Association. v. City of
Oakland (1993)).
The issue of whether an alternative is feasible arises at two different points in the
CEQA process: first, in the assessment of alternatives in the EIR; and second,
during the Lead Agency's consideration of whether to approve the project. The
standard for determining whether an alternative should be analyzed in an EIR is
whether the alternative is potentially feasible. Subsequently, the Lead Agency
must determine whether the alternatives included in the EIR are actually feasible,
based on the analysis in the EIR as well as factors external to the environmental
analysis, e.g., social or economic concerns (see California Native Plant Society V.
City of Santa Cruz (2009)).
While there is no bright line between these two assessments, generally the EIR
should refrain from reaching conclusions regarding actual feasibility and should
focus the analysis on whether an alternative is potentially feasible, and then
undertake the comparison of the environmental effects of the project and
alternatives.
Screening criteria may be developed to determine the feasibility of potential
alternatives. Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing
the feasibility of alternatives are:
• Site suitability for the proposed use(s);
• Economic viability;
• Availability of infrastructure to serve the site;
• General plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations;
• Jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact
should consider the regional context); and
Updated 10118118 9
Page 3042 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011I ui1 Jy P 201201 N �I ww E IIII iii llll�uu , r . Page 101 (m' 4,
1111
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
• Whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have
access to an alternative site (or the site is already owned by the
proponent)
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1); see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v.
Board of Supervisors (1990); Save Our Residential Environment v. City of West
Hollywood (1992).
By applying the criteria to each potential alternative, infeasible alternatives can
be screened out, and a reasonable range of feasible alternatives that meet most
of the project objectives and substantially avoid or lessen the proposed project's
significant environmental effects will result (see In re: Bay-Delta Programmatic
Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008)).
Under CEQA, an alternative may be eliminated for any of the following reasons:
• The alternative fails to meet most of the basic project objectives;
• The alternative is infeasible;
• The alternative does not avoid significant environmental impacts; or
• Implementation of the alternative is remote and speculative and the effects
cannot be reasonably ascertained.
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)).
Alternatives may not be rejected merely because they are beyond an agency's
authority, would require new legislation, or would be too expensive (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2)).
When economics is used as a factor to support a finding of infeasibility, the fact
that an alternative may be more expensive than the project does not necessarily
make it infeasible (see Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1988);
Association of Irritated Residents v. County of Madera (2003)). The Lead
Agency must support the finding with specific data that shows the additional cost
or lost profits are great enough to make it impractical to proceed with the project
(see Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1988)); Foundation for
San Francisco's Architectural Heritage v. City and County of San Francisco
(1980); San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of
San Francisco (2002)).
Identification of Environmentally Superior Alternative.
CEQA requires that EIRs identify the Environmentally Superior Alternative, and
discuss the facts that support that selection. (See PRC Section 21081.5; CEQA
Guidelines Sections 15091, 15126.6(e)(2)). The Lead Agency is not, however,
obligated to select the Environmentally Superior Alternative for implementation if
Updated 10118118 10
Page 3043 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI JJy� rC1111
Epp 0 �IN
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge I 1 (' 4,:!
a[ IMPort CEQA Portal:Alternatives
it would not accomplish the basic project objectives and/or is infeasible (see
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), (c) & (f)).
Selection of the Environmentally Superior Alternative may be difficult, especially
when the differences between the impacts of the alternatives involve trade-offs
between types of impacts (e.g., between impacts on traffic and impacts on
cultural resources, or between impacts on one species or habitat and impacts on
other species or habitats). As with other aspects of CEQA, an explanation of the
decision is often more important than the decision itself; as long as the
explanation in an EIR is supported with substantial evidence in the administrative
record, decisions by Lead Agencies are afforded deference by reviewing courts
(CEQA Guidelines Sections 15151, 15384).
In many cases, the No Project alternative would have the fewest or least intense
impacts. However, the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) states that
"If the environmentally superior alternative is the `no project' alternative, the EIR
shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other
alternatives".
Should the Lead Agency change its determine of the Environmentally Superior
Alternative after circulation of the draft EIR but before the EIR's certification by
the Lead Agency, and that newly identified Environmentally Superior Alternative
is not adopted as the proposed project, revisions to the draft EIR and
recirculation of same are likely required (CEQA Guidelines Section
15088.5(a)(3); South County Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada
(2013)). Arguably, recirculation is warranted even if the project proponent
accepts the newly identified Environmentally Superior Alternative, in order to
afford effective public comment on the Lead Agency's determinations (PRC
Section 21092.1; CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(a)(4); see also Vineyard
Area Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007)).
If the Lead Agency's determination of the Environmentally Superior Alternative
changes after certification of the EIR, but before approval of the project, the
proposed project likely requires CEQA to be re-opened and a subsequent or
supplemental EIR to be prepared (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(3)(C),
15163(a)(1)). Any subsequent EIR shall again be subject to the same public
notice and review provisions (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(d), 15072)).
However, "[o]nce a project has been approved, the Lead Agency's role in the
project approval is completed, unless further discretionary approval on that
project is required" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(c)). Therefore, if the Lead
Agency's determination of the Environmentally Superior Alternative changes after
the approval of the project, no additional CEQA review is required unless the
project is subject to additional discretionary approvals (CEQA Guidelines Section
15162(c)). In this case, the Lead Agency with jurisdiction over the next
discretionary approval shall conduct any additional CEQA review required.
Updated 10118118 11
Page 3044 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i ui Mpg,
rC1111
Epp 0 �IN
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge 1 (' 4,:!
a[ IMPort CEQA Portal:Alternatives
Analysis of Alternatives Under NEPA
While Lead Agencies under CEQA are not required to evaluate the
environmental impacts of alternatives to the same level of detail as the proposed
project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(d)), the National Environmental
Policy Act ("NEPA") requires a "co-equal" analysis of the alternatives (see 40
Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") Section 1502.14(b)). Stated differently,
under NEPA, the analysis of the impacts of alternatives must be at the same
level of detail as the analysis of impacts of the proposed action (NEPA's term for
the proposed project).
This usually means that each alternative must be defined at a comparable level
of detail. Section 1502.14 of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
Guidelines states that in the "Alternatives" section of an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), agencies shall "[d]evote substantial treatment to each
alternative considered in detail including the proposed action so that reviewers
may evaluate their comparative merits."
Whereas an analysis of alternatives is not required in an Initial Study under
CEQA, an alternatives analysis is required in initial Environmental Assessments
(EAs) . However, alternatives analyses in EAs are typically less rigorous than
those contained in EISs (Federal Highway Administration Alternatives Analysis
White Paper).
CEQ and the California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) have
jointly prepared the February 2014 guidance document NEPA and CEQA:
Integrating Federal and State Environmental Reviews (CEQA/NEPA Handbook).
The handbook provides practitioners with an overview of NEPA and CEQA as
well as suggestions for developing a single environmental review process that
can meet the requirements of both statutes.
Table 1 summarizes the requirements for the analysis of alternatives under each
type of environmental document under both CEQA and NEPA.
Table 1 —Alternatives Required In Each Type of Environmental Document
Document Type JAIternatives Required
CEQA
Categorical None
Exemption
Initial Study None
Environmental Reasonable range of alternatives, including those achieve
Impact Report would attain most of the basic project objectives while avoiding
Updated 10118118 12
Page 3045 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011I ui�J% rC1111
�11 �IN
E IIII iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge L (m' 4,:!
z[ IMPorta CEQA Portal:Alternatives
or reducing the environmental effects of the project. No-build
must be considered. Comparative analysis. Analysis at same
level of detail as proposed project not required.
NEPA
Categorical None
Exclusion
Environmental One build alternative is allowable, but for a complex or
Assessment controversial project, more than one alternative is advised. No-
Action alternative must be considered.
Environmental All reasonable alternatives including No-Action Alternative.
Impact Each alternative must be considered and discussed at an
Statement equal level of detail.
Alternatives in Joint CEQA/NEPA Documents
The typical rule when preparing a joint CEQA/NEPA document is that when there
is a difference between the requirements of the two laws, the Lead Agencies
should prepare the document using the more stringent requirements (see
CEQA/NEPA Handbook at 2, 20, 48). Because NEPA requires a more detailed
alternatives analysis, joint EIR/EIS documents should be developed in a manner
which satisfies NEPA requirements (40 C.F.R. Section 1502.14(b)).
Areas of Controversy Regarding Alternatives
Legal standards concerning alternatives analysis is one of the more settled areas
of CEQA law. The two key issues in most CEQA decisions considering the
adequacy of an EIR's analysis of alternatives are whether the EIR included a
"reasonable range" of alternatives, including for example an alternative project
site, and whether the level of detail of the alternatives analysis is sufficient.
There is not "bright-line" rule for either of these issues, and the results tend to be
fact-driven. It is critically important to not short-change the alternatives analysis
in the EIR, however, either in terms of the number of alternative considered or
the depth of analysis. The ultimate determination whether an alternative is
actually feasible should be made by the decision-making body as part of its
findings rather than in the EIR itself, which should present the information
regarding alternatives in a clear and impartial way.
Alternatives in the CEQA Statute
Alternatives are described in many, sections of CEQA (PRC Sections 21000 et.
seq.), including, but not limited to the following:
Updated 10118118 13
Page 3046 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011I ui�J rC1111
�11 � �I ww E IIII iii llll�uu , r . Page 14, (m' 4,
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
• § 21001(g) - Requires governmental agencies to consider alternatives to
proposed actions affecting the environment.
• § 21002 - Public agencies should not approve projects, as proposed, if
there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures available that would
substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts. Further states
that projects that have significant impacts on the environment may be
approved if alternatives are found to be infeasible.
• § 21002.1(a) - The purpose of an EIR is to identify the significant effects
on the environment of a project, to identify alternatives to the project, and
to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be mitigated
or avoided
• § 21002.1(e) - EIRs shall focus on the project's potentially significant
effects on the environment.
• § 21003.1(a) - Public comments on environmental documents should be
made as soon as possible to assist the Lead Agency in identifying
potential significant effects of a project, alternatives, and mitigation
measures which would substantially reduce the effects.
• § 21061 - The purpose of an EIR is to provide public agencies and the
public in general with detailed information about the effect which a
proposed project is likely to have on the environment; to list ways in which
the significant effects of such a project might be minimized, and to indicate
alternatives to such a project.
• § 21080.1(b) - The Lead Agency shall, upon the request of a potential
applicant, provide for consultation prior to the filing of the application
regarding the range of actions, potential alternatives, mitigation measures,
and any potential and significant effects on the environment of the project.
• § 21080.5(d)(2)(A) - Requires that an activity not be approved or adopted
pursuant to a certified regulatory program if there are feasible alternatives
or mitigation measures that would substantially lessen environmental
effects.
• § 21080.5(d)(3) - Requires environmental documents prepared pursuant
to a certified regulatory program to include a description of alternatives to
the proposed activity.
• § 21081 — In making findings regarding an EIR where more or more
significant environmental impacts were identified, the Lead Agency may
Updated 10118118 14
Page 3047 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i ui� r J Epp C
�I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge 1 (' 4,
"0'1111
._J
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
include information as to why alternatives to the project are infeasible.
• § 21081.5 - In making findings regarding an EIR, including where
alternatives are determined to be feasible, the Lead Agency must base its
conclusions on substantial evidence in the record.
• § 21083.8.1 - Pertains to EIRs for military base reuse plans, including
subsections regarding the analysis of alternatives.
• § 21091(d)(1) —The Lead Agency shall respond to comments received on
a CEQA document if those comments are received during the public
review period.
• § 21094 - Pertains to tiered EIRs and initial studies, including the analysis
of alternatives in these documents.
• § 21100(b)(4) - Requires that EIRs contain an analysis of alternatives to
the proposed project.
• § 21104(a) - Requires State Lead Agencies to provide for early
consultation while preparing an EIR to, among other things, identify
alternatives to the proposed project.
• § 21153 - Requires local Lead Agencies to consult with responsible and
trustee agencies prior to completing and EIR to, among other things,
identify alternatives to the proposed project.
• § 21154 -When local agencies prepare an EIR for a project required
pursuant to an order from a state agency, the alternatives to be analyzed
in the EIR shall not include those that are in conflict with the order.
Alternatives in the CEQA Guidelines
Alternatives are described in many, sections of the CEQA Guidelines, including,
but not limited to the following:
• § 15002(a)(3) - Provides that one of the basic purposes of CEQA is the
prevention or avoidance of avoidable significant damage to the
environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of feasible
alternatives or mitigation measures.
Updated 10118118 15
Page 3048 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI�JJy r 20112011N �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page 16 (' 4,
"0'1111
.-J
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
• § 15002(f) - Defines the EIR as the document by which a governmental
agency analyzes the effects of a proposed project and identifies
alternatives to the proposed project.
• § 15002(h)(4) - Identifies the selection of an alternative as a means of
protecting the environment.
• § 15004(b) - Prohibits the Lead Agency from taking actions that would,
among other things, limit the choice of alternatives, prior to completing
CEQA compliance.
• § 15021 - Prohibits a Lead Agency from approving a project when a
feasible alternative or mitigation measures exist that would lessen
significant environmental effects.
• § 15041(c) — For projects that include housing development, a Lead or
Responsible Agency shall not mitigate for significant environmental effects
by reducing the number of units, unless no feasible alternatives exists that
would provide comparable reductions in effects.
• § 15060.5 — The Lead Agency shall consult with the project sponsor prior
to the filing of a formal application to, among other things, identify potential
alternatives.
• § 15065(c)(2) -When making findings regarding an EIR, where significant
environmental effects remain after the adoption of mitigation measures,
the Lead Agency must make detailed findings, based on substantial
evidence, regarding the feasibility of alternatives that would avoid or
substantially lessen the effects.
• § 15082(b)(1)(A) - In preparing responses to a Notice of Preparation for an
EIR, Responsible and Trustee Agencies and OPR shall provide the Lead
Agency with information, including reasonable alternatives that should be
analyzed in the EIR.
• § 15083(a) - Suggests that scoping prior to preparation of an EIR can
assist Lead Agencies in identifying alternatives.
• § 15088.5(a) - Defines the presence of new information that may require
recirculation of an EIR prior to certification, to include the identification of a
new feasible alternative.
• § 15091(a)(3) - In making findings regarding an EIR where one or more
significant environmental impacts were identified, the Lead Agency may
Updated 10118118 16
Page 3049 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �I ww E Illl iii llll�uu , r . Page 1 (' 4,
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
include information as to why alternatives to the project are infeasible.
• § 15091(c) -Where it shares jurisdiction with another agency for an
alternative, the Lead Agency shall provide the specific reasons for
rejecting mitigation measures or alternatives in their findings.
• § 15096(d) - Comments of Responsible Agencies on EIRs should focus
their comments on, among other things, alternatives that the EIRs should
include.
• § 15096(g) - Responsible Agencies shall not approve a project if they find
that a feasible alternative is available that would avoid or substantially
lessen a significant environmental effect.
• § 15124(b) - Defines the relationship between alternatives and the project
objectives.
• § 15126.6 - Defines the general requirements of CEQA with regard to the
analysis of alternatives.
• §15126.6(f)(2) -Alternatives may not be rejected merely because they are
beyond an agency's authority, would require new legislation, or would be
too expensive.
• § 15145 - If the Lead Agency determines that an impact is too speculative,
it should indicate this and need not analyze that impact further.
• § 15151 - In evaluating the adequacy of an EIR, the courts have looked
not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort
at full disclosure.
• § 15162(a)(3)(C) - Subsequent CEQA documentation may be required if,
after an EIR has been certified or an ND adopted for a project, alternatives
previously found to be infeasible, are subsequently found to be feasible.
• § 15163(a)(1) —The Lead Agency or Responsible Agency may choose to
prepare a supplemental EIR if any of the conditions described in Section
15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR.
• § 15207 —The Lead Agency need not respond to late comments
(including suggested alternatives), but may do so.
• § 15364 - Defines the term "feasible" within CEQA.
Updated 10118118 17
Page 3050 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
Jaiui011i 1111" 1 0112 �I ww �° Illl iiillll�uu , r . Page 13 (4'24,
0 Mpg,
1111
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
• § 15384 - Defines the term "substantial evidence" within CEQA.
Important Cases
The following are important published cases involving issues related to
alternatives:
Los Angeles Conservancy v. City of West Hollywood(2017) 18 Cal.App.5th
1031: Court held that EIR's analysis of the conservation alternative was detailed
enough to permit informed decision making and public participation. Court found
that City was not required to prepare a "conceptual design" for the alternative.
Finally, Court stated that "[a]n agency's finding of infeasibility . . . is `entitled to
great deference' and `presumed correct"' in determining whether Lead Agency's
findings that an alternative is infeasible is supported by substantial evidence.
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of
Governments (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 413: EIR that included analysis of project
alternatives focused primarily on congestion relief was inadequate because it
failed to analyze an alternative that could significantly reduce total vehicle miles.
Washoe Meadows Community v. Department of Parks & Recreation (2017)
17 Cal.App.5th 277: Court found that the presentation of five very different
alternative projects in the EIR without a stable project description was an
obstacle to informed public participation, noting that a broad range of possible
projects presents the public with a moving target and requires a commenter to
offer input on a wide range of alternatives.
Pesticide Action Network America v. Department of Pesticide Regulation
(2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 478: Court held that Department "glaringly" failed to
address any feasible alternative to registering proposed new uses for two
pesticides as required by PRC Section 211( ).
Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach (2017) 2 Cal.5th 918:
EIR did not describe a range of reasonable alternatives where it failed to include
analysis of the Coastal Act's environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA)
requirements, including consideration of which project areas might qualify as
ESHA or potential impacts on ESHAs for a project in the coastal zone.
Bay Area Citizens v. Association of Bay Area Governments (2016) 248
Cal.App.4th 966: Court held that the "No Project" alternative appropriately
captured the continuation of existing regional policy. Court found that because
the plaintiff's proposed alternative double-counted statewide emissions mandates,
it was not feasible in light of the emission reduction requirements of SB 375.
Updated 10118118 18
Page 3051 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
J a iui 011I ui�J% r 0112 �I ww �° IIII iii llll�uu , r . Page 19 (4'2 ,
1111
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Kawamura (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 647: EIR
failed to analyze a control program as an alternative to eradication of light brown
apple moth. "Last-minute" adoption of a control program instead of eradication
did not cure errors in alternatives analysis, which did not include analysis of the
control program based on stated project objective to eradicate light brown apple
moth.
Town of Atherton v. California High-Speed Rail Authority(2014) 228
Cal.App.4th 314: Authority properly rejected alternatives proposed during public
review process because substantial evidence showed proposed alternatives
were substantially similar to alternatives considered in program EIR.
California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland(2014) 225
Cal.App.4th 173: City's findings that an alternative was environmentally inferior
to proposed project were not supported by analysis in EIR, which rejected the
alternative based on economic feasibility.
Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013) 213
Cal.App.4th 1277: EIR failed to discuss any feasible alternative, such as a
"limited-water alternative," which would "partially meet the project's objectives,"
and EIR lacked analysis supporting agencies' conclusion that the alternative
would not lessen or substantially avoid the significant impacts from the project.
South County Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada (2013) 221
Cal.App.4th 316: When EIR includes a reasonable range of alternatives, but
Lead Agency's staff suggests an additional alternative after release of the final
EIR and Lead Agency chooses not to recirculate the EIR with the staff alternative,
the agency is not required to make an express finding that the staff alternative is
infeasible before it can approve the revised project.
Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center v. County of Siskiyou (2012) 210
Cal.App.4th 184: Court upheld EIR's analysis of alternatives, where infeasible
alternatives were dismissed during scoping phase, finding challengers of EIR
failed to identify any potentially feasible alternative that could satisfy the project
objectives, and finding the EIR considered a "reasonable range" of alternatives
given the circumstances presented, despite the fact that the only alternative
considered in depth in the Draft EIR was the "No Project" alternative.
Watsonville Pilots Association v. City of Watsonville (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th
1059: EIR for update of City's General Plan should have considered a "reduced
development alternative." City's argument that it was not required to consider a
"reduced development alternative" because such an alternative did not meet
each of the 12 project objectives is contrary to requirement in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(b) that a feasible alternative be considered even if it "would
impede to some degree the attainment of project objectives." Further, City's
Updated 10118118 19
Page 3052 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011I ui1 Mpg,P 20112011 N �I ww E IIII iii llll�uu , r . Page �11 (m' 4,
1111
�
ora CEQA Portal:Alternatives
argument that the "No Project" alternative was in essence a "reduced
development alternative" was rejected since the "No Project" alternative achieved
none of the basic project objectives, and the fundamental role of the alternatives
analysis is to identify alternatives that achieve most of the project objectives
while also reducing the project's significant environmental effects.
Jones v. Regents of the University of California (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 818:
EIR for long-range plan for the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory included
a reasonable range of alternatives, including a "partial off-site alternative," and
did not need to consider a "full off-site alternative" where such alternative was
properly rejected because it failed to achieve a fundamental project objective.
California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th
947: EIR's alternatives analysis satisfied CEQA's informational mandates and
City's decisions concerning which alternatives to analyze were supported by
evidence in the administrative record. The alternatives selected need not satisfy
every key objective of the project, and ranking the relative importance of the
various objectives of the project is a policy decision entrusted to the city council.
When assessing feasibility in connection with the alternatives analysis in the EIR,
the question is whether the alternative is potentially feasible. When deciding on
project approval, the question is whether the alternatives are actually feasible.
Further, CEQA does not require an EIR to explore offsite project alternatives
every case. The requirement that an EIR describe alternatives to the proposed
project applies only to the project as a whole, not to the various facets of the
projects, such as grading and access road.
Finally, the court held that City's rejection of Environmentally Superior
alternatives as infeasible based on policy considerations — here, the City's
interest in promoting transportation alternatives as well as access to its open
space for persons with disabilities - was permissible under PRC Section
21081(a)(3).
In re: Bay-Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated
Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143: Finding Program EIS/R discussed a
reasonable range of alternatives to expansion of water storage facilities by dam
construction. Failure to include a reduced exports alternative was not an abuse
of discretion because CALFED properly applied the rule of reason when it
decided to consider in the PEIS/R only alternatives that had the potential to both
achieve ecosystem restoration goals and meet current and projected water
export demands, and that would provide balanced progress in all four of the
program areas.
Association of Irritated Residents v. County of Madera (2003) 107
Cal.App.4th 1383: Agency properly rejected reduced-herd size alternative as
Updated 10118118 20
Page 3053 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i ui r J 20112011N �I N
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge 1 (' 4,1111
z[ IM :!
Port CEQA Portal:Alternatives
infeasible where substantial evidence demonstrated alternative was economically
infeasible and would not achieve the basic objective of the project.
San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San
Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656: Appellants contention that EIR needed
to include analysis of economic feasibility of alternatives was found to be without
merit because it is the public agency, not the EIR, that bears responsibility for
making "findings" as to whether "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological,
or other considerations . . . make infeasible the mitigation measures or
alternatives identified in the [EIR]," or whether there are "specific overriding
economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project" that
"outweigh the significant effects on the environment."
Friends of the Old Trees v. Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (1997)
52 Cal.App.4th 1383: Defining alternative for the purposes of CEQA as "a
description of another activity of project that responds to the major environmental
issues identified during the planning process." Finding that Lead Agency's
review of timber harvest plan (THP) pursuant to certified regulatory program is
required to include analysis of alternatives, and inclusion of mitigation could not
substitute for discussing project alternatives.
Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of
California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112: Upholding Final EIR conclusion that potential
cumulative impacts from toxic air emissions were too "speculative" for evaluation.
Final EIR's response to comment expanding on discussion of the possible
environmental consequences of an alternative did not trigger recirculation
because substantial evidence supported Lead Agency's decision that there was
no new adverse environmental effect or new feasible alternative that was not
implemented by the project proponent.
Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Association. v. City of Oakland(1993) 23
Cal.App.4th 704: EIR that did not examine additional "decreased density
alternatives" satisfied the information goal of CEQA because the analysis of the
additional alternatives would not have eliminated the significant visual impacts
from the project. Further, City did not violate CEQA in concluding that a
decreased density alternative would be legally infeasible because it would be
prohibited by Government Code Section 65589.50), which prohibits a local
agency from requiring as a condition of approval that the project be developed at
a lower density unless the project would have a specific, adverse impact upon
the public health or safety that cannot be mitigated without lowering the density.
Save Our Residential Environment v. City of West Hollywood(1992) 9
Cal.App.4th 1745: Finding the extent to which alternatives must be considered in
an EIR is governed by a rule of reason, the ultimate objective being whether a
discussion of alternatives fosters informed decision-making and informed public
Updated 10118118 21
Page 3054 of 4165
cI to J U h iiiielll e
a iui 011i uI Mpg,rC1111
Epp 0 �IN
E Illl iii llll�uu , r . @��� ge (' 4,:!
a[ IMor CEQA Portal:Alternatives
participation. Because EIR stated that no other site was available for proposed
senior citizen housing development, and gave reasons for this conclusion, Court
held EIR was adequate. The purpose of CEQA was not to generate paperwork,
and EIR is not required to discuss infeasible alternatives.
Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553:
Finding EIR discussed a legally acceptable range of alternatives, that only
reasonable alternatives need be examined in EIR, and that the administrative
record substantially supported the conclusion that none of the additional sites
represented a feasible project alternative or merited extended discussion in EIR.
Although the alternatives were not barred from consideration simply because
they were submitted by the citizens' group after the expiration of the comment
period for EIR, the court held that the timing issue did justify the board's decision
to address the alternative sites by means of administrative findings, rather than
by commissioning yet another supplemental EIR.
The court held that the board properly relied on a local coastal program for
analysis and conclusions in determining the feasibility of additional sites, finding
no abuse of discretion in Lead Agency's finding of certain alternatives to be
infeasible, based upon inconsistent land-use designations. Lead Agency could
properly consider the fact that an alternative site was outside of that Lead
Agency's jurisdiction and whether or not a site was owned by the project
proponent, in making an assessment of feasibility.
Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1988) 197 Cal.App.3d
1167: Court held that the record failed to provide substantial evidence to support
a finding that a scaled-down project alternative was economically infeasible. The
fact that an alternative may be more expensive or less profitable is not sufficient
to show that the alternative is financially infeasible. What is required is evidence
that the additional costs or lost profitability are sufficiently severe as to render it
impractical to proceed with the project.
Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of
California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376: Under CEQA an EIR must include a
meaningful discussion of both project alternatives and mitigation measures. The
range of alternatives needing to be analyzed is subject to a rule of reason. Equal
level of detail not required in the analysis of alternatives, but is not prohibited. No
purpose can be served by requiring EIR to engage in sheer speculation as to
future environmental consequences.
Finding discussion of alternatives inadequate, where it identified three types of
alternatives (no project anywhere, alternative sites at the university's existing
campus, and alternative sites off-campus) but provided only one and one-half
pages of textual analysis. The discussion of project alternatives must contain
analysis sufficient to allow informed decision-making; conclusory comments in
Updated 10118118 22
Page 3055 of 4165
t cI to J Ulh iiiielll e
L a iui 011I ui�J% r 012 �I N
L° IIII iii llll�uu t, r . @��� ge L (4'2,1111
z[ IM :!
orCEQA Portal:Alternatives
support of environmental conclusions are generally insufficient. Lead Agency's
responsibility to discuss alternatives was not dependent upon a showing by
opponents of the relocation that feasible alternatives existed.
City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401: Court held
that City properly rejected project alternatives as infeasible, explaining that the
Lead Agency may reasonably rely on various "economic, environmental, social,
and technological" factors in evaluating the feasibility of project alternatives.
"Feasibility" under CEQA encompasses "desirability" to the extent that desirability
is based on a reasonable balancing of such factors.
Foundation for San Francisco's Architectural Heritage v. City and County
of San Francisco (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 893: Court held that Lead Agency
made adequate findings that project alternatives were infeasible given their
increased construction costs under PRC Section 21081.
Residents Ad Hoc Stadium Committee v. Board of Trustees (1979) 89
Cal.App.3d 274: Discussion of alternatives need not be exhaustive, and is
subject to a construction of reasonableness. It requires the production of
information sufficient to permit a reasonable choice of alternatives so far as
environmental effects are concerned. Alternatives discussion should support
Lead Agency's "hard look" at environmental consequences in recognition of the
factors described in CEQA.
There is no need for an extended discussion of speculative alternatives. Lead
Agency need not devote itself to an extended discussion of the environmental
impact of alternatives remote from reality such as those which are of speculative
feasibility or could only be implemented after significant changes in governmental
policy or legislation.
County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 185: E I R that
lacks a genuine "No Project" alternative or alternatives tied to a reasonably
conceived project fails to comply with CEQA's demand for meaningful
alternatives.
Related CEQA Portal Topics
• Project Purpose and Objectives (In process)
• Project Description
• Findings (To come)
Authors
Lennie Rae Cooke, VCS Environmental ® lrcooke@vcsenvironmental.com
Updated 10118118 23
Page 3056 of 4165
t t�'I to J
Jaiui011i 1111" 1 0112 �I ww EIlll iiillll�uut, r . Page 24, (4'2,
1111
�
Port a CEQA Portal:Alternatives
Craig Stevens, Stevens Consulting - craig@cdstevens.com
Reviewers
Ian Michael Forest, Southern California Edison Company - lan.Forrest@sce.com
Tina Thomas, Thomas Law Group - tthomas@thomaslaw.com
Amy Hiuera, Thomas Law Group®ahiguera@thomaslaw.com
Leslie Walker, Thomas Law Group - Iwalkerthomaslaw.com
Sources
Bass, Ronald E., et al., CEQA Deskbook, A Step-by-Step Guide on How to
Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (Solano Press Books, 3d
Ed. 2012)
CEQA Practicum: "Project Objectives, Alternatives Analysis, and CEQA
Findings," Presented By: Amanda K. Olekszulin Curtis E. Alling, AICP Ascent
Environmental, Inc., April 2013.
The White House Council on Environmental Quality and the California
Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2014. NEPA and CEQA:
Integrating Federal and State Environmental Reviews. Available at:
Iffff..1 ...// rrr.::. ..1 .!.::. «..:... lurch 3.
Legal Disclaimer:
7 he Al: P...tnpttnsore:f C` f A Poll al, this .7..6pi Paper, and other .7.6pi Papers an
information provided as pal of the C" f A Portal are riot intended ed as legal
advice. 1..tia information contained herein is being provided as a public service
and has been ttftfalned fl o/77 sources believed reliable. However, its
con-iplafariass cannot be guaranteed. ::.urtherl additional facts or fbfure
developments /77ay affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an
attorney.
Date Updated: 10/18/18
Updated 10118118 24
Page 3057 of 4165
[,(Aleii°� to J, UlUii ellle
Jaiivaiiaii 9, 201201 E x u 1) 1, B Page 1 (4,44,
WATER AND POWER
LAW GROUP PC
2140 SHATTUCK AVENUE,STE.801
BERKELEY,CA 947'04-1229
(510)296-5588
(866)407-8073(E-FAX)
April 8, 2016
Via Electronic Mail, Facsimile and Federal Express
Tim Eriksen, Director
City of Ukiah Department of Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482
iksenC._ii))c At!�o fu kk it a hn.c o imn..........................................
Facsimile: 707.463.6204
Jared Theile, Project Analyst
City of Ukiah Department of Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482
tilieie_L,.ci.IX2.1�ukiah.coin
Facsimile: 707.463.6204
Re: Vichy Springs Resort's Comments on Initial Study and Proposed Negative
Declaration for Final Closure Plan for the Ukiah Landfill
Dear Mr. Eriksen and Mr. Theile:
This law firm represents Vichy Springs Resort, which is a property and business located at 2605
Vichy Springs Road immediately adjacent to the proposed location of the City of Ukiah's
("City") Final Closure/Post-Closure Maintenance Plan for the Ukiah Landfill (`Final Landfill
Closure Plan"). The purpose of this letter is to provide comments on the Initial Study and
proposed Negative Declaration prepared by the City in connection with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA").
This letter follows up on the previous January 2015 letter submitted by this law firm on behalf of
Vichy Springs Resort to the City in conjunction with the landfill closure plan that was then under
development. A copy of this January 2015 letter with its original attachments is attached as
Exhibit A. In this January 2015 letter to the City, Vichy Springs Resort noted the aspects of the
landfill closure plan with the potential to have significant adverse environmental impacts, and
suggested ways to formulate the Final Landfill Closure Plan to reduce these impacts to less than
significant levels. Vichy Springs Resort raised these considerations early in the planning process
Page 3058 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiilllI) B Page 2 (`4'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 2
with the aim that appropriate environmental mitigation would be incorporated into the Final
Landfill Closure Plan such that preparation of an environmental impact report ("EIR")would not
be required.
As set forth below, most of the environmental concerns and recommendation presented in Vichy
Springs Resort's earlier January 2015 letter were unfortunately disregarded by the City in its
preparation of the Final Landfill Closure Plan and associated CEQA Initial Study. Due to the
failure to address these environmental concerns in these documents, there is not presently a
proper basis for adoption of a Negative Declaration to satisfy CEQA's requirements in
connection with the approval and implementation of the Final Landfill Closure Plan.
Moreover, as explained below, the City may not be the appropriate CEQA lead agency for this
project given that the discretionary approval of the project rests with the Mendocino County
Environmental Health Department which(along with the North Coast Regional Water Quality
Control Board) has ordered the City to prepare and implement a Final Landfill Closure Plan. The
City is therefore not making a discretionary decision to prepare and implement a landfill closure
plan; it is complying with a legal obligation to do so.
The underlying objective of Vichy Springs Resort is neither to halt or delay the implementation
of closure of the Ukiah landfill nor to require that an EIR be prepared in conjunction with the
approval of the landfill closure plan. Rather, Vichy Springs Resort's underlying objective is to
ensure that closure of the Ukiah landfill proceeds in a manner that does not result in significant
adverse environmental impacts. If the Final Landfill Closure Plan had addressed the
environmental concerns raised by Vichy Springs Resort back in January 2015 then the
preparation of an EIR would not now be required. It follows then that, going forward, the
necessity of preparing an EIR in in this instance can still be avoided if additional changes are
made to the Final Landfill Closure Plan to reduce the environmental impacts discussed herein to
a less than significant level.
L The City May Not Be the Proper CEQA Lead Amu for the Final Landfill
Closure Plan
CEQA's environmental impact assessment obligations apply only to "discretionary" projects.
CEQA Guideline 15357, Section 21065(c) of California Public Resource Code. An agency that
has a mandatory non-discretionary legal duty to undertake or carry out a particular project is, by
definition, not exercising discretion.
For any given discretionary project, the agency responsible for preparing the documentation
(whether it be an EIR or a Negative Declaration)to comply with CEQA is referred to as the
"lead agency." CEQA Guideline 15367 defines a"lead agency" as the "public agency which has
the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project."
Read together, the above CEQA provisions suggest that when one public agency is exercising its
discretion to propose a new project that it would carry out, and another public agency has
Page 3059 of 4165
1 e1 teiii°� 1:o J
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 fsIIIluiiiillll)uui. B Page 3 of44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 3
responsibility for discretionary approval of a voluntary project proposed by another public
agency, then the CEQA lead agency could either be the public agency carrying out the project or
the public agency that approves the project. This, however, is not the situation involved with the
closure plan for the Ukiah Landfill.
In the case of the Ukiah landfill, the Mendocino County Environmental Health Department and
the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board have both ordered the City to prepare
and implement a Final Landfill Closure Plan to avoid further violation of the California Health
and Safety Code. As such, although the Mendocino County Environmental Health Department
will exercise its discretion in its review and approval of the Final Landfill Closure Plan, the City
is not exercising discretion in its decision to proceed with the preparation and implementation of
a Final Landfill Closure Plan. The City has non-discretionary legal obligation to do so.
Due to the fact its decision to prepare and implement the Final Landfill Closure Plan is non-
discretionary, the City should not serve as the CEQA lead agency for this project. Rather, for
this project the CEQA lead agency should be the public agency that is exercising discretion in its
review and approval of the Final Landfill Closure Plan—the Mendocino County Environmental
Health Department.
IL Adoption of a Negative Declaration Is Improper Because There Is Not
Substantial Evidence to Support the Initial Study's Finding Regarding the
Absence of Potential Significant Adverse Environmental Effects
In determining whether CEQA requires preparation of an EIR instead of allowing adoption of a
Negative Declaration, the critical inquiry is whether the proposed project has been designed and
formulated to reduce the potential for adverse environmental impacts to below a level of
significance. If there remains a fair argument that the proposed project may have potential
significant environmental effects, CEQA requires preparation of an EIR instead of a Negative
Declaration. Section 21080(a), 21080(d) and 21100(a) of the California Public Resources Code;
Friends of&, treet v. City ofHayward, 106 Cal.3d 988 (1980). Moreover, CEQA requires that
all significant determinations and findings in Initial Studies (which are used to decide whether an
EIR or Negative Declaration will be adopted) must themselves be supported by substantial
evidence.
A. The Initial Study's Description of the Environmental Setting of the
Proiect Is Inaccurate Due to Its Failure to Describe Vichy Springs
Resort's Use on Lands Immediately Adiacent to the Proiect Site
CEQA Guideline 15125 is titled "Environmental Setting" and provides that CEQA
environmental documents such as Initial Studies and EIRs "must include a description of the
environment in the vicinity of the project as it exists before the commencement of the project."
The official discussion accompanying CEQA Guideline 15125 explains: "Because the concept of
significant effects on the environment focuses on changes in the environment, this section
requires [CEQA documents] to describe the environmental setting of the project so that the
changes can be seen in context." California court decisions have held that the failure to provide
Page 3060 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiivaiiaiiy 9, 201201 2sIIIIuiiiillll)uui. E Page 4, of44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 4
an adequate and accurate description of the environmental setting taints the remainder of the
CEQA significance and mitigation analysis due to the absence of proper baseline conditions
upon which the environmental impacts of the project and the sufficiency of the proposed
mitigation measures can be evaluated. San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v. County of
,Wnislaus, 27 Ca1.App.4th 713 (1994). As noted below, the description of the environmental
setting provided in the Initial Study for the Final Landfill Closure Project is inadequate and
inaccurate.
Pages 3-4 of the Initial Study section titled"Environmental Setting" states: "Land adjacent to the
landfill property is zoned primarily as rangeland and is used for grazing. Dwellings within 1,000
feet of the landfill property include a group of structures owned by the Vichy Spring Investment
Group that are located within 500 feet of the landfill's south property line..." Similarly, the
section of the Initial Study on "aesthetics" (which addresses scenic effects) states that"the
landfill property is surrounded by rural agricultural and undeveloped lands." The Vichy Springs
Resort parcel is rangeland but has a"resort overlay" zoning, and has been in continuous
operation since 1854.
This description of the environmental setting of the landfill site fails to take account of the Vichy
Springs Resort located immediately adjacent to the project site, which is a historic resort with
extensive grounds where day and overnight visitors come to enjoy the healthful spring-fed baths,
clear air, beautiful scenery and bucolic quiet of the location. The statement in the Initial Study
that there are a"group of structures owned by the Vichy Springs Investment Group" within 500
feet of the property line" provides no information whatsoever as to the particular uses of this
property, or how these particular uses might be impacted by adverse noise, dust, hydrologic and
scenic impacts associated with the proposed Final Landfill Closure Plan. Furthermore, when the
uses associated with the adjacent Vichy Springs Resort are taken into account, the Initial Study's
statement that the landfill project site is "surrounded by rural agricultural and undeveloped
lands" is plainly inaccurate, and misleadingly suggests the landfill closure activities will take
place in a remote, undeveloped, uninhabited area rather than right next door to an active, well-
established resort whose 50,000 visitors per year come for the clean air, quiet, natural hot
mineral spring water and beautiful views.
It should also be noted that the Initial Study inaccurately states that the Vichy Springs Resort
property is owned by the Vichy Springs Investment Group. In 1990, the Vichy Springs
Investment Group was dissolved and title to the Vichy Springs Resort property was conveyed to
Gilbert and Marjorie Ashoff(who remain the owners).
As explained further below, the failure of the Initial Study to take account of the adjacent uses by
Vichy Springs Resort in its description of the environmental setting for the Final Landfill
Closure Plan tainted the remainder of the Initial Study's analysis of potential noise, dust,
hydrologic and scenic impacts.
In addition to the omission of any discussion of the adjoining Vichy Springs Resort, there are
also certain other inaccuracies in the environmental setting sections of the Initial Study for the
Page 3061 of 4165
1 et teiii°� to J
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiilllI) E Page 5 oli'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 5
Final Landfill Closure Plan that should be noted. The Initial Study refers to the "Gun Club
Parcel" and alleges that this parcel was purchased by the City to create a buffer zone between the
Ukiah Landfill and future development. The Initial Study did not disclose that the use of the Gun
Club Parcel as a shooting range by a private club (that leases the property from the City)is now a
non-conforming use under the County Code, and that expansion of the private club's facilities
(including but not limited to unpermitted construction and/or renovation of new/old buildings
and new shooting ranges)in recent years may be inconsistent with this non-conforming use
status. The Initial Study also refers to the use of certain portions of the Ukiah landfill property as
a shooting range for City of Ukiah police department personnel. The Initial Study did not
disclose that utilization of the landfill property for this purpose is also a non-conforming use, and
that the use permit for these shooting range activities expired years ago when the City police
department discontinued its shooting activities on the site. As a result of the expiration of the use
permit, the recent resumption of shooting range activities on the landfill property may also be
unlawful.
B. There Is Not Substantial Evidence to Support the Initial Study's Finding
Regarding the Potential Impact of Construction-Related Fugitive Dust on
the Neighboring Vichy Springs Resort
The air quality section of the Initial Study acknowledges that the Mendocino County Air Quality
Management District("MCAQMD")is "currently defined as `non-attainment' for the PM10
(particulate matter) standard" and that a primary source of particulate matter is "fugitive dust."
The air quality section of the Initial Study also concedes: "It is noted that surface disturbances
from the proposed project may create dust that would require mitigation and control." The air
quality section further states (somewhat confusingly): "Thresholds [of significance for CEQA
purposes] for fugitive dust are set at 54 and 82 pounds per day for indirect emissions. No
emission thresholds are established for construction related fugitive dust emission which are set
at levels that are controllable with the implementation of best management practices." This
section is hard to follow, but it suggests the following: the area where the project is located is
already out of attainment for particular matter, that a primary source of particular matter is
fugitive dust, that the construction phase of the project may create dust, that the CEQA threshold
of significance for fugitive dust is 54 and 82 pounds per day for indirect emissions, and that there
may not be ways to bring project dust levels down below these thresholds of significance though
best management practices.
The Initial Study includes the following mitigation measures to address fugitive dust: MM 4.3-5
("All land clearing, grading or earth moving activities shall be suspended as necessary, based on
site conditions, to prevent excessive windblown dust when winds are expected to exceed 20
mph"); and MM 4.3-6 ("All inactive portions of the construction site shall be covered, seeded, or
watered until a suitable cover is established"). Winds in this area generally do not approach 20
miles per hour except during winter storms, when construction activities would likely be
suspended.
Page 3062 of 4165
l e1 teiii°� 1:o J
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiilllI) E Page 6 (`4'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 6
From a CEQA compliance standpoint, there are several shortcomings to the Initial Study's
analysis and mitigation of fugitive dust impacts, and its conclusory finding that the project will
not have the potential for significant air quality impacts.
First, CEQA requires that an Initial Study analyze the potential for significant"cumulative"
environmental impacts as well the potential for significant"project-specific" impacts. Section
21083(b) of the California Public Resources Code, CEQA Guideline 15065(c). CEQA Guideline
15065(c)provides that impacts are cumulatively significant when the following conditions exist:
"The project has possible effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.
As used in the subsection, `cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of an
individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of current projects and the effects of probable future projects." The Initial Study
confirms that the area where the landfill closure project is located is already "non-attainment" for
particulate matter, indicating already degraded local air quality conditions. Yet, the Initial Study
does not contain any cumulative impact analysis to evaluate whether the incremental fugitive
dust generated by landfill closure activities are considerable when considered in the context of
past, present and probable future activities that have, are and/or will contribute additional
particulate matter to air in the vicinity of the project.
Second, the Initial Study states the applicable CEQA threshold of significance for fugitive dust is
"54 and 82 pounds per day." Is the applicable CEQA fugitive dust threshold for the Ukiah
landfill closure project 54 pounds per day? 82 pounds per day? Somewhere in between 54 and 82
pounds per day? The Initial Study provides no clarification, so readers are not told what
threshold is being looked to for purposes of making a CEQA significance determination.
Third, although the Initial Study reveals that 3,500 cubic yards of soil will be imported during
the construction phase of the landfill closure project, the Initial Study does not provide a
quantified estimate of the amount(in terms of pounds) of fugitive dust that will be generated
daily during the six-month construction phase of the project. Without this quantified estimate, it
cannot be determined whether the project's fugitive dust violates the "54 and 82 pounds" daily
threshold for fugitive dust.
Fourth, NM 4.3-5 and MM 4.3-6 mitigation measures are worded in a way that suggests they
may be of limited effect. For example, there are no criteria in these mitigation measures for
determining what is meant by "as necessary, based on site conditions." As another example, the
obligation to cover or water areas only applies to "inactive portions" but there are no criteria for
determining which if any portion of the landfill area will be considered"inactive" during the
construction phase of work. Presumably, during the construction phase of the project, the entire
landfill might be deemed "active," rendering this mitigation measure entirely inapplicable to the
project. Furthermore, to the extent that these mitigation measures are intended to reduce
otherwise significant fugitive dust impacts to less than significant impacts, there is no analysis or
data to support the finding that these mitigation measures will achieve this result(and in fact
other parts of this section suggest that such best management practices will not bring dust levels
below significance levels). CEQA mitigation measures that are vague or undefined have been
Page 3063 of 4165
1 (�^;1leiii°� 1:o JI i°IlllUii e1111e
Jaiivaiiaiiy 9, 201201 2sIIIIuiiiillll)uui. B Page 2 (`4'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 7
held inadequate. San Franciscans for Reasonable Growth v. City& County of,San Francisco,
151 Ca1.App.3d 61 (1984); Kings County Farm Bureau v. City ofHanford, 221 Ca1.App.3d 692
(1990). As noted in §14.7 the CEB treatise Practice Under the California Environmental Quality
Act, "[A]gencies should be cautious about relying on vague, incomplete or untested mitigation
measures" because a court may find the CEQA document"inadequate if suggested mitigation
measures are so undefined that it is impossible to evaluate their effectiveness."
Fifth, CEQA Guideline 15126 states: "The discussion of mitigation measures shall distinguish
between measures which are proposed by the project proponents to be included in the project and
other measures that are not included but could be reasonably expected to reduce adverse impacts
if required as conditions of approving the project." The Initial Study does not indicate or discuss
whether MM 4.3-5 and MM 4.3-6 are included in the actual Final Landfill Closure Plan.
Finally, given the proximity of the landfill project site to the Vichy Springs Resort, there is no
analysis in the Initial Study of the levels of fugitive dust that would affect employees and visitors
at the resort, in particular visitors using the outdoor baths and extensive landscaped grounds. As
explained above, the absence of this analysis is due in part to the underlying failure of the Initial
Study to identify the Vichy Springs Resort in its description of the environmental setting for the
project.
C. There Is Not Substantial Evidence to Support the Initial Study's Finding
Regarding the Potential Impact of Construction-Related Noise on the
Neighboring Vichy Springs Resort
The Initial Study chapter on noise begins with a table, which asks whether the project would
result in a"substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project,"
The Initial Study chapter on noise states (in terms of threshold criteria) that the proposed project
would result in significant adverse noise impacts if: there is an increase of three decibels (dB)
which creates an area of noise/land use incompatibility; the proposed project generates noise that
would contribute to noise levels that exceed the State noise/land use compatibility guidelines
which allow for exterior noise levels up to 70 dB; the proposed project generates noise that
exceeds the thresholds prescribed in Appendix C of the Mendocino County Municipal Code
(Title 20). The Initial Study chapter on noise further states that, pursuant to Appendix C of the
County Municipal Code, the stationary noise standards for light and heavy industrial use are 70
and 75 dB and "these levels are not to be exceeded for more than 30 minutes in any hours
throughout an entire day."
The Initial Study chapter on noise states: "Noise generation from the proposed project would
result from construction activities including on-road trucking and from temporary operations
such as grading and excavation and work related to placement and construction of the final
cover."
Page 3064 of 4165
l e1 teiii°� 1:o JI 1°IlllUii e1111e
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiilllI) B Page 8 oii'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 8
In its analysis of whether the project would result in a"substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project" the
Initial Study chapter on noise states: "The proposed project will include the use of various types
and sizes of construction equipment...stationary equipment such as pile drivers,jackhammers,
pavement breakers, blasting operations, etc. produce variable and sporadic noise levels and often
produce impact-type noises...For impact equipment, the noise is produced by the impact of a
mass on a surface, typically repeating over time...Mobile equipment such as bulldozers,
excavators, scrapers, graders, etc. may operate in a cyclic fashion in which a period of full power
is followed by a period of reduced power."
The Initial Study chapter on noise states (again somewhat confusingly): "The noise levels for the
types of equipment expected to be used for the proposed project ranges from 60-90 decibels.
These noise levels exceed the levels as set forth in the Mendocino General Plan; however due to
the proximity of the project site in a rural area, with greater than 500 feet of separation to
residential properties, construction noise levels that exceed 70 dB could result in potential
impacts to residences and wildlife. However, maintaining separation from residences and noise-
sensitive biotic habitat, plus implementation of the standard measures identified at the end of this
section, will maintain construction equipment noise impacts at less than significant levels."
The Initial Study includes the following mitigation measures to address construction-related
noise impacts: MM 4.12-1 ("Construction activities shall comply with Mendocino County
conditions with respect to hours of lesser noise sensitivity") and MM 4.12-2 ("Noise generating
activities at the construction site or in areas adjacent to the construction site associated with the
project in any way should be restricted to the hours of 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through
Friday. No construction activities should occur on weekends or holidays").
From a CEQA compliance standpoint, there are several shortcomings to the Initial Study's
analysis and mitigation of construction-related noise impacts, and its conclusory finding that the
project will not have the potential for significant construction-related noise impacts.
First, the Initial Study concedes that the equipment used during the construction phase of the
landfill closure project will exceed the applicable 70 dB limit in the Mendocino County
Municipal Code. However, beyond this concession, the Initial Study does not include
quantitative analysis of which particular equipment used during the project will exceed the 70 dB
limit, which should serve as threshold for determining whether the noise generated constitutes a
significant adverse environmental impact. Without information as to which equipment exceeds
this threshold there is not substantial evidence upon which to find that such exceedances have
been mitigated/reduced to less than significant levels.
Second, the Initial Study notes provisions of the Mendocino County Municipal Code that
prohibit industrial noise levels about 75 dB for more than 30 minutes a day. The Initial Study,
however, does not then provide any quantitative information as to how many minutes/hours a
day there will be exceedances of this 75 dB level, which should serve as a threshold for
determining whether the noise generated constitutes a significant adverse environmental impact.
Page 3065 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiiruaiiauu 9, 201201 Ex uiiiilllI) B Page 9 oii'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 9
Without information as to how many minutes/hours a day there will be exceedances of this 75
dB level, there is not substantial evidence upon which to find that the periods of such
exceedances have been mitigated/reduced to less than significant levels.
Third, give the proximity of the landfill project site to the Vichy Springs Resort, there is no
analysis in the Initial Study of the construction-related noise impacts that would affect
employees and visitors at the resort. More specifically, there are overnight guests at Vichy
Springs Resort who come to vacation and frequently sleep in as late at 9:00/9:30 am (yet the
Initial Study indicates construction activities will begin on weekdays at 7:00 am). Beyond
interfering with the morning sleep of visitors to Vichy Springs Resort, there is also no analysis of
how daytime construction noise will adversely affect the experience of resort visitors using the
outdoor baths or enjoying the resort's extensive landscaped grounds. As explained above, the
absence of this analysis of noise impacts is due in part to the underlying failure of the Initial
Study to identify the Vichy Springs Resort in its description of the environmental setting for the
project. In particular, in its section on noise impacts, the Initial Study refers to "the proximity of
the project site in a rural area with greater than 500 feet of separation to residential properties" —
a description that inexplicably ignores the presence of the Vichy Springs Resort and the resort's
overnight visitors and day visitors that come for the quiet. These considerations are why, in its
previous January 2015 letter to the City (see Exhibit A), Vichy Springs Resort had
recommended a 9:00 am weekday start time for construction and a prohibition on construction
activities in the May through September peak season for Vichy Springs Resort.
Fourth, the Initial Study concedes that the proposed project would use"pile drivers,
jackhammers, pavement breakers, blasting operations, etc. produce variable and sporadic noise
levels and often produce impact-type noises...For impact equipment, the noise is produced by
the impact of a mass on a surface, typically repeating over time...Mobile equipment such as
bulldozers, excavators, scrapers, graders, etc. may operate in a cyclic fashion in which a period
of full power is followed by a period of reduced power." There is no analysis of these sporadic,
repetitive, cyclic noises on neighboring properties in general, and on the visitors to the Vichy
Springs Resort in particular.
Fifth, in addition to the operational noises related to construction equipment identified in the
Initial Study, there is also noise associated with the reverse beepers on trucks and vehicles that
will operate onsite. These are the loud beepers that go off whenever a construction truck or
vehicle moves in reverse. In its January 2015 letter, Vichy Springs Resort had recommended that
these reverse beepers be turned off/disabled to reduce noise impacts for resort visitors.
Sixth, as noted above, CEQA Guideline 15126 states: "The discussion of mitigation measures
shall distinguish between measures which are proposed by the project proponents to be included
in the project and other measures that are not included but could be reasonably expected to
reduce adverse impacts if required as conditions of approving the project." The Initial Study does
not indicate or discuss whether MM 4.12-1 and MM 4.12-2 are included in the actual Final
Landfill Closure Plan.
Page 3066 of 4165
l (�^;tleiii°� to J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . B Page 1011 of 44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 10
Finally, to the extent that mitigation measures MM 4.12-1 and MM 4.12-2 are intended to reduce
otherwise significant construction-related noise impacts to less than significant levels, there is no
analysis, data or other substantial evidence to support the finding that these mitigation measures
will achieve this result.
D. Due to the Lack of Any Analysis of the Impact of Proiect Groundwater
Wells on the Pressure and Temperature of Hydrologically Connected
Sprints Essential to the Vichy Sprints Resort, There Is Not Substantial
Evidence to Support the Initial Study's Finding Re2ardin2 the Potential
for Significant Adverse Hydrological Impacts
In the previous January 2015 letter submitted to the City on CEQA issues related to the closure
plans for the Ukiah Landfill (see Exhibit A), we explained that in March 1993, as part of efforts
to monitor the effect of the landfill on groundwater located beneath the site, the City installed
and began operation of a series of groundwater wells located close the property line with Vichy
Springs Resort. The wells installed and operated by the City in the 1993 resulted in a sudden and
severe decrease in the pressure and temperature of the springs utilized by the Vichy Springs
Resort. This decrease in the pressure and temperature of the spring water that serves Vichy
Springs Resort had a devastating impact on the resort's business. According to Gilbert Ashoff,
owner of the Vichy Springs Resort: "Under the direction of Damon Brown, testing wells were
drilled that immediately impacted the springs. Right after the landfill wells went in, there was a
20 degree Fahrenheit drop in mineral water temperature and we lost more than half of the
mineral water flow due to reduced pressure. It took more than a year for these temperature and
flow conditions to recover, and during that year the resort lost one-third of its business because
visitors come here for warm mineral waters, not cold mineral waters. The resort's long-term
reputation was also damaged for many years as a result of this situation."
As explained in the attached letter by Alisto Engineering's Al Sevilla, included as Exhibit B, the
presence and operation of these wells as part of the Final Landfill Closure Plan without adequate
study of subsurface conditions continues to pose a serious and substantial potential ongoing
threat to the pressure and temperature of the spring waters upon which the Vichy Springs Resort
relies. This threat relates to what is called an"adiabatic reaction" that occurs when a pressurized
underground fault(such as the one where the Vichy Springs mineral waters are located) is
connected to a non-pressurized underground fault(such as the one created by the landfill wells
installed by the City). In his letter attached as Exhibit B, Mr. Sevilla recommends that before
proceeding with the landfill closure plan there should be a thorough investigation of the potential
for the operation of the project wells to cause an adiabatic reaction in the pressurized mineral
waters that serve Vichy Springs Resort.
In its previous January 2015 letter, Vichy Springs Resort called upon the City (and other
agencies reviewing and approving the Ukiah landfill closure plan)to undertake a thorough
analysis of the hydrologic connections between the groundwater under the landfill and the
adjacent spring waters, and to determine the extent to which the continued operation of
groundwater wells may impact the pressure and temperature of the spring waters on the Vichy
Page 3067 of 4165
i (�^;tleiii°� to J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . E Page I 1 (`4,44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 11
Springs Resort's property. The January 2015 letter also asked the landfill closure plan to include
appropriate mitigation measures to address the potential impact identified in this analysis.
As detailed below, the spring water-related concerns and requests presented by Vichy Springs
Resort in its January 2015 letter were disregarded altogether in the Final Landfill Closure Plan
and Initial Study prepared by the City.
There is a section in the Initial Study (on pages 50-59) on "Hydrology and Water Quality." At
the beginning of this section, there is table which lists 16 different potential hydrological impacts
resulting from the landfill closure project(along with the City's determination of whether these
potential effects of these 16 listed impacts were found to be less than significant). Importantly,
the Initial Study's list of 16 potential hydrological impacts did not include any relating to
potential project impacts on adjacent spring waters, impacts on the water pressure in such spring
waters, or the impacts on the water temperature in such spring waters. As a result of these
omissions, the "Hydrology and Water Quality" section of the Initial Study contains no analysis
of these potential spring water impacts, no determinations of whether there is the potential for
significant adverse impacts on spring water, and no mitigation measures to address potential
impacts on spring waters.
As reflected in the attached letter by Al Sevilla of Alisto Engineering (see Exhibit B), and in the
information presented in Vichy Springs Resort's January 2015 letter(see Exhibit A), the
administrative record before the City presents a fair argument supported by expert opinion of the
potential of the project's groundwater wells to have significant adverse impacts on the spring
waters upon which Vichy Springs Resort relies. Under these circumstances, reliance on an Initial
Study (and the related adoption of a Negative Declaration)for the Final Landfill Closure Plan
that failed to identify, assess and properly mitigate these spring-related hydrologic impacts
would violate CEQA.
E. There Is Not Substantial Evidence to Support the Initial Study's Findings
Regarding the Potential for Significant Adverse Scenic Impacts of the
Proposed Cover for the Landfill
In its previous January 2015 letter to the City on CEQA issues, Vichy Springs Resort included an
attachment with a map showing those areas of the City's landfill property that are visible from
the grounds of the Vichy Springs Resort (see Exhibit A). This attachment/map was provided to
demonstrate that the property on which the landfill is located is visible from the Vichy Springs
Resort. In its January 2015 letter, to address concerns about adverse scenic impacts, Vichy
Springs Resort called for the articulation of objective revegetation benchmarks as part of a
revegetation plan and setting aside adequate long-term funding to ensure post-construction
revegetation occurs.
To provide a clearer sense of the current baseline scenic conditions of the landfill area, Vichy
Springs Resort has attached an early April 2016 color photograph of the landfill area(see
Exhibit C)which shows the natural grasses and green landscape that have developed on top of
the landfill since its stopped operating 15 years ago. Parts of the landfill area depicted the
Page 3068 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . E Page 12 (`4'44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 12
photograph attached as Exhibit C are visible from homes on Fawnwood Drive in Deerwood
Park and Ridgeview Drive in El Dorado Estates.
The aesthetics section of the Initial Study states: "The project site property consists of a 283.5
acre rural parcel of land of which approximately 40 acres of the property is occupied by the
landfill unit. The Ukiah Landfill began refuse disposal operations in 1955 and ceased operations
in 2001. As discussed herein the landfill property is surrounded by rural agriculture and
undeveloped lands...The project site property has been significantly altered by past landfilling
activities and is not considered to be a scenic or aesthetic resources in its altered conditions. The
proposed project includes the closure of the landfill that consists of the placement of final cover
material...The landfill surface will consist of a geosynthetic final cover layer...Proj ect
implementation will not result in any potentially significant visual impacts. Therefore, no
mitigation measures are required" (bold emphasis added).
From a CEQA compliance standpoint, there are several shortcomings to the Initial Study's
analysis of scenic impacts, and its finding that the project will not have the potential for
significant adverse scenic impacts.
First, in terms of scenic resources and impacts, the Initial Study's study description of the
environmental setting (baseline conditions)for the project is inaccurate. The Initial Study's claim
that"the landfill property is surrounded by rural agriculture and undeveloped lands" ignores the
presence of the Vichy Springs Resort located adjacent to the landfill site as well as the views of
the landfill site from several nearby residences and roads. The Initial Study makes no mention
that visitors at the Vichy Springs Resort, the people who live in these nearby residences, and the
neighborhood people who travel on the nearby public roads (in particular the public road that
goes right through the landfill property) all have views of the area where the landfill closure
project will take place.
Second, again in regards to the environmental setting (baseline conditions) against which scenic
impacts are evaluated, the Initial Study has not provided adequate or accurate information about
existing views. The Initial Study states that the "project site has been significantly altered by
past landfilling activities" but does not actually provide any information about the current scenic
conditions of the landfill property. More specifically, the Initial Study does not acknowledge
that, since the landfill ceased operations in 2001, the area on top of the landfill has been naturally
revegetated with grasses that have allowed the landfill site to increasingly blend in with its
natural surroundings. The natural grass vegetation that has developed in the project area over the
past 15 years is depicted in the photograph attached as Exhibit C to this letter. As part of the
Final Landfill Closure Plan, the natural grasses that have returned to the landfill area since 2001
will be torn out and replaced with a"geosynthetic" cover—more commonly known as
11astroturf." The result will be a 40-acre patch of geosynthetic astroturf in the middle of a natural
grass landscape. The Initial Study section on aesthetics provides no information about the visual
aspects of the proposed astroturf landfill cover to enable a determination to be made as to
whether the astroturf cover results in a potentially significant adverse scenic impact vis-a-vis the
existing natural grass conditions on the project site. For example, the natural grass of the
Page 3069 of 4165
1 e1 teiii°� 1:o JI 1°IlllUii e1111e
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . B Page 1,3 (`4,44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 13
surrounding hillsides will be brown in the summer/early fall while the 40-acre synthetic astroturf
landfill cover patch in this hillside landscape will be bright green during the summer/early fall.
Third, the Initial Study section on aesthetics confirms that the Policy RM-128 of the Resources
Management Element of the County's General Plan provides for protection of the County's
"natural landscapes." As noted above, the proposed Final Landfill Closure Plan calls for the
removal of natural grasses on the landfill site that would be replaced with a geosynthetic
astroturf cover. These changes are inconsistent with the protection of natural landscapes required
under the County's General Plan.
For the reasons noted above, from the information in the administrative record, there is a fair
argument that the proposed cover in the Final Landfill Closure Plan has the potential for
significant adverse scenic impacts. Such potential adverse scenic impacts could be mitigated
through the preparation and implementation of the revegetation plans focused on the restoration
of natural grasses rather than the installation of a synthetic cover. The cost of developing and
implementing a natural grass revegetation plan for the landfill cover may not be as inexpensive
as simply putting on a synthetic astroturf cover, but this revegetation option is the type of
feasible alternative and mitigation that must be considered under CEQA when there is the
potential for such significant adverse scenic impacts.
III. Conclusion
For the reasons set forth in this letter, as well as other information in the administrative record,
the Initial Study is legally inadequate and there is a fair argument that the proposed Final
Landfill Closure Plan has the potential for significant adverse air quality, noise, hydrologic and
scenic impacts. The adoption of a Negative Declaration based on the Initial Study would
therefore be unlawful under CEQA. Vichy Springs Resort therefore requests either that the plan
is modified so that the potential significant adverse environmental effects identified above are
reduced to a less than significant level, or in the alternative, that an EIR is prepared prior to
approval of the Final Landfill Closure Plan.
Yours,
Paul S. Kibel
WATER AND POWER LAW GROUP, PC
2140 Shattuck Ave., Ste. 801
Berkeley, CA 94704
(510) 296-5588
ski—be iril) r.1��rpo�
Attorney for VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Page 3070 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . B Page 14, of 44,
Tim Eriksen
April 8, 2016
Page 14
Exhibits: A—January 15, 2015 Letter from Vichy Springs Resort's Legal Counsel to
City on CEQA Landfill Closure Issues (with original attachments)
B —April 6, 2016 Letter from Al Sevilla of Alisto Engineering
C—April 2016 Baseline Photographs of Ukiah Landfill Area
Cc: Trey Strickland, Mendocino County Environmental Health Department
Terry Cia, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager for City of Ukiah
David J. Rapport (Rapport and Marston), City Attorney for City of Ukiah
Gilbert Ashoff, Vichy Springs Resort
Page 3071 of 4165
i e1telliu°r 1:o I
Jainuiairy 94 201,201, E xIIIIaiiillllr'wuu1, B page 1 (4,44,
Exhibit A
Page 3072 of 4165
I,etteii°� to J, UlUii e111e
Jaiivaiiaii 9, 201201 E x u B Page 16 (4'44,
WATER AND POWER
LAW GROUP PC
2140 SHATTUCK AVENUE,STE.901
BERKELEY,CA 94704-1229
(510)296-.5588
(866)407-8073 (E-FAX)
January 15, 2015
Via Electronic and First Class Mail
Jane Chambers, City Manager
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Tim Eriksen, Director and City Engineer
City of Ukiah Department of Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 94382
David J. Rapport, City Attorney
Rapport and Marston
405 W. Perkins Street
P.O. Box 488
Ukiah, CA 95482
Re: Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site, SWIS No. 23-AA-0019—CEQA Review of
Proposed Closure Plan
Dear Ms. Chambers, Mr. Eriksen, and Mr. Rapport:
This law firm represents Vichy Springs Resort ("Vichy Springs") located at 2605 Vichy
Springs Road in the County of Mendocino. This letter concerns the development and
implementation of a Closure Plan for the City of Ukiah's ("City")Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal
Site ("Ukiah Landfill") located at 3 100 Vichy Springs Road, which is adjacent to Vichy Springs.
This letter supplements the letter sent to the City by Gilbert Ashoff(the owner of Vichy Springs)
on October 22, 2014 (see Attachment 1).
Given its border with the Ukiah Landfill, Vichy Springs will be acutely and directly
impacted by activities and permanent features on the Ukiah Landfill site. Vichy Springs is
encouraged that, 14 years after the Ukiah Landfill stopped accepting garbage and solid waste
deliveries, the City appears finally to be moving ahead with the completion and implementation
of a Closure Plan. Vichy Springs intends to work closely and collaboratively with the City (and
with the other agencies involved in reviewing and approving the Closure Plan)to ensure that the
Page 3073 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiivaiiaiii 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiilllI) B Page 12 (`4'44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 2
Closure Plan is adequate and appropriately addresses several issues affecting Vichy Springs.
Addressing these issues early on will help ensure that implementation of the Closure Plan can
proceed expeditiously.
By this letter, Vichy Springs requests that the City's review of the Ukiah Landfill Closure
Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")properly mitigate the
adverse traffic, spring water, noise, dust, and scenic impacts on the neighboring Vichy Springs
property. As discussed below, if appropriate mitigation of such impacts is properly incorporated
into the Closure Plan, this should enable the City to comply with CEQA's environmental impact
assessment requirements via adoption of a Negative Declaration, rather than through preparation
of an environmental impact report("EIR"). Proceeding via a Negative Declaration, in turn,
would enable the City to put its resources into the actual implementation of the Closure Plan,
rather than into the preparation of an EIR.
IL CEQA Review of the Proposed Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan
In September 2014, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Regional
Water Board")issued an order to the City requiring the preparation and implementation of a
Closure Plan for the Ukiah Landfill (Attachment 2). The Mendocino County Environmental
Health Division also issued a notice requiring the City to finalize and implement a Closure Plan
for the Ukiah Landfill. In its September 2014 order to the City, the Regional Water Board
clarified that CEQA review would be required for all project components associated with the
approval of the Closure Plan. Some additional background information is useful to appreciate
the Regional Water Board's finding regarding the need for CEQA review in connection with the
Ukiah Landfill closure.
The City has been working on its plans for the closure of the Ukiah Landfill since the late
1990s. On July 20, 2000, before the City had finalized or obtained approval of a closure plan for
the Ukiah Landfill, the City issued a Notice of Determination for the"Ukiah Landfill Final
Closure and Post-closure Maintenance Plan" (Attachment 3), finding that the project would not
have a significant effect on the environment and adopting a Negative Declaration. For three
reasons, the July 2000 Negative Declaration does not satisfy the City's current CEQA
obligations in connection with the Closure Plan now being developed.
First, under CEQA, the time period in which to challenge an adopted Negative
Declaration does not begin to run until the underlying project(that is the subject of the Negative
Declaration) has first been approved. This is made clear in California Public Resources Code
sections 21167 and 21152 and CEQA Guideline section 15112, which all provide that the
limitations period to challenge an adopted Negative Declaration is contingent on the actual
approval of the project in question. Pursuant to these CEQA provisions, a challenge to a
Negative Declaration for a project that had not been approved would not be ripe (would be
premature). In the case of the Ukiah Landfill, as evidenced by the September 2014 Regional
Water Board order and the 2014 Mendocino County Environmental Health Division order, to
date the City's Closure Plan has never been finalized or approved. As such, the limitations
Page 3074 of 4165
l (�^;1leiii°� 1:o J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 2sIIIIuiiiillll)uui. B Page 18 (°4,44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 3
period to challenge the July 2000 Negative Declaration (before the Closure Plan was finalized
and approved) has not yet even begun to run.
Second, quite apart from the fact that the City's Closure Plan for the Ukiah Landfill has
never been finalized or approved, the scope of the Closure Plan being considered back in 2000 is
considerably different and more limited than the scope of the Closure Plan the Regional Water
Board called for in its September 2014 order to the City, particularly in regard to the rigor and
scope of CEQA analysis required for projects with water resource impacts. Additionally,
obligations under CEQA have changed since 2000. Pursuant to section 21166 of the California
Public Resources Code and CEQA Guideline section 15162, when there are significant changes
to a proposed project for which previous CEQA environmental review has taken place, CEQA
requires that"supplemental" environmental review take place (through either a supplemental
Negative Declaration or a supplemental EIR that assesses the impacts associated with these
project changes).
Finally, in adopting the prior negative declaration, the City did not provide notice to
Vichy Springs or an opportunity to comment as required by law. ,See Cal. Pub. Res. Code §
21092, CEQA Guidelines § 15072. Because Vichy Springs' property is contiguous with that of
the landfill, the City should have directly notified Vichy Springs of its adoption of a negative
declaration. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21092(b)(3)(C). This notice was not provided prior to
adoption of the negative declaration.
Going forward, in terms of whether CEQA requires preparation of an EIR instead of
allowing adoption of a Negative Declaration, the critical inquiry is whether the proposed project
has been designed and formulated to reduce all adverse environmental impacts to below a level
of significance. If there remains a fair argument that there is substantial evidence that the
proposed project may have significant environmental impacts, then CEQA requires the
preparation of an EIR instead of a Negative Declaration. Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§ 21080(a),
21080(d), 21100(a); Friends ofB Street v. City ofHayward, 106 Ca1.App.3d 988 (1980). For the
City to lawfully meet its CEQA obligation by adopting a Negative Declaration for its proposed
Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan, the City will therefore need to design and formulate the Closure
Plan so that there is not a fair argument that there is substantial evidence that the plan could have
significant environmental effects. The points below will help the City to prepare a Closure Plan
that would allow for the adoption of a Negative Declaration.
II. Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan Impacts of Concern to Vichy Springs
Vichy Springs is a natural warm mineral springs resort located in the County of
Mendocino. It has operated uninterrupted since 1854. The first accommodations buildings were
constructed in 1852 and are the oldest standing structures in Mendocino County. The pool at
Vichy Springs is the oldest pool in California north of San Francisco. It is designated by
Mendocino County as a cultural and historical resource and by California as a historical
landmark. Vichy Springs offers the only naturally warm and carbonated "Vichy" mineral baths
in North America.
Page 3075 of 4165
i (�^;tleiii°� to J
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201201 f xIIIIuiiiillll)uu . L Page 19 of 44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 4
The entrance to the Ukiah Landfill adjoins Vichy Springs. Its entrance is approximately
200 feet from Vichy Springs, and the farthest point of Ukiah Landfill is approximately a half-
mile from Vichy Springs. We attach a series of maps (Attachments 4—7)to show the relative
locations of Vichy Springs and the Ukiah Landfill and to serve as a point of reference for the
concerns discussed below.
A. Spring Water Impacts on Vichy Springs
As the name "Vichy Springs Resort" suggests, the reputation of the resort is tied to its
steady supply of high quality natural warm and carbonated mineral spring water. The
opportunity to bathe in this water is one of the primary reasons people come to stay at the resort.
Reductions in the supply, quality, or temperature of this "Vichy" water, therefore, have a direct
impact on the resort's operations and economic viability.
On March 15, 1993, as part of its effort to monitor the effects of the Landfill on
groundwater beneath the site, the City installed a series of monitoring wells, on property later
acquired by the City, that were close to the property line with Vichy Springs, against the wishes
of Vichy Springs. The installation of the monitoring wells caused the pressure of the springs at
Vichy Springs to drop from 65 gallons per minute to 30 gallons per minute. The pressure
remained at 30 gallons per minute for two months before gradually climbing back to 65. The
monitoring wells also caused the temperature of the spring water to drop from 900 to 720
Fahrenheit. Over two months it slowly recovered to 800, taking a year to fully recover to 900.
There is a fragile pressure zone where the Vichy Springs water originates that the monitoring
wells damaged. The locations of the monitoring wells and fragile mineral springs are shown in
Attachment 4. The drop in pressure and temperature adversely affected the business of Vichy
Springs, which, as noted above, relies on consistent, warm spring water for its guests. It took
approximately one year for the pressure and temperature of the springs to return to normal levels.
The experience in the early 1990s confirms the connection between groundwater on the
Ukiah Landfill property and the springs on the Vichy Springs' property. Given this
phenomenon, the operation of any groundwater monitoring or treatment wells as part of the
Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan has the potential to interfere with the supply and temperature of the
spring water on Vichy Springs' site. Any contamination that leaks from the Ukiah Landfill into
groundwater beneath it, and any drilling that creates pathways for these contaminants, also has
the potential to contaminate the spring water on the Vichy Springs property.
In light of these circumstances, Vichy Springs requests that the City (and other agencies
reviewing the Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan) undertake comprehensive and thorough analysis of
the hydrologic connections between the groundwater under the landfill and the adjacent spring
waters. Vichy Springs further requests comprehensive and thorough analysis of the extent to
which the installation and operation of groundwater wells and the remedy for the landfill itself
(e.g., lining/encasement) may impact the supply, temperature, and quality of spring waters on the
adjacent Vichy Springs property. The final Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan should then include
appropriate mitigation measures to address potential impacts identified in this analysis.
Page 3076 of 4165
l et teiii°� to J
Jaiivaiiaiii 9, 201201 2 xIIIIuiiiillNuu . L Page 2011 (`4'44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 5
B. Noise Impacts on Vichy Springs
Vichy Springs' guests expect quiet, rest, and relaxation when visiting the resort. Given
that peaceful tranquility is an essential reason for why guests visit, Vichy Springs is a
particularly noise-sensitive area. We anticipate that implementation of the landfill closure will
require the use of heavy equipment, the noise of which could disturb guests of Vichy Springs and
adversely affect their experience while visiting. Guest sleeping areas are shown on the map in
Attachment 5.
To address these concerns, Vichy Springs requests that City (and other agencies
reviewing the Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan) undertake comprehensive and thorough technical
analysis of the noise impacts of closure plan implementation on guests and visitors to the
adjacent Vichy Springs, with particular attention to the effects of construction equipment on
Vichy Springs guests that are using the mineral baths and swimming pool, hiking or walking the
700-acre reserve land, or staying overnight. This analysis should include detailed information
about the noise levels and noise types associated with landfill closure activities, the proximity of
the sources of these noises to the baths and sleeping quarters at Vichy Springs, and an
assessment of how these noises/noise levels are likely to impact persons using the baths or
sleeping overnight(from 9 pm to 9 am). The final Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan should then
include appropriate mitigation measure to address potential impacts identified in this analysis.
These appropriate mitigation measures may include the following: (1)prohibiting the use of
heavy-equipment back-up beepers; (2)restricting the idling of trucks and other heavy-
equipment; (3) scheduling work outside of the Vichy Springs' peak season which is from May
through September; (4)limiting closure plan activities that will be audible at Vichy Springs,
including delivery and pick-up by heavy trucks, to weekdays between 9:00 am and 5:00 pm and
prohibit such work on weekends.
C. Dust Impacts on Vichy Sprints
The use of heavy equipment and other construction activities (e.g., soil excavation and
stockpiling) may disturb dirt and dust, which could then travel to and affect air quality at Vichy
Springs. The airborne dust and dirt could adversely impact the experience of visitors to the
resort (especially swimming pool and mineral bath usage) and could also contaminate the
mineral springs. The landfill and the dump borrow area are both areas of concern for dust and are
indicated on the map in Attachment 6.
To address these concerns, Vichy Springs requests that the City (and other agencies
reviewing the Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan) undertake comprehensive and thorough analysis of
the dust(airborne particulate matter)impacts of closure plan implementation on guests and
visitors to the adjacent Vichy Springs, with particular attention to the effects on mineral pool
quality, persons using the swimming pools and baths, and guests hiking on the 700-acre reserve.
The final Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan should then include appropriate mitigation measures to
address potential impacts identified in this analysis. These appropriate mitigation measures may
include: (1) limiting or prohibiting excavation and other dust-inducing activities in areas in close
Page 3077 of 4165
l (�^;tleiii°� to J
Jaiivaiiaiiy 9, 201201 2sIIIIuiiiillll)uui. B Page 31 (`4'44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 6
proximity to the property line with Vichy Springs; and (2)the use of water and tarps to prevent
dust on the Ukiah Landfill site from drifting onto the Vichy Springs property.
D. Scenic and Visual Impacts on Vichy Sprints
Vichy Springs resort is known for its bucolic grounds, scenery, and surrounding vistas. If
the proposed landfill plan results in an adjacent property of barren and unvegetated land, this
may result in an eyesore for guests and visitors to the resort (as well as for the larger surrounding
community). CEQA requires assessment of project impacts on viewsheds. Quail Botanical
Gardens Foundation v. City ofEncintas, 29 Ca1.App.4th 1597, 1604-05 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994).
The viewshed is indicated on the map in Attachment 7 with a long arrow and extends to the
southeast property line.
To address these concerns, Vichy Springs requests that the City (and other agencies
reviewing the Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan) undertake comprehensive and thorough analysis of
the scenic and visual impacts of closure plan implementation on guests and visitors to the
adjacent Vichy Springs, with particular attention to the extent to which existing vegetated areas
(with trees, grasses, plants, bushes, flowers)will be adversely impacted and the extent to which
the closure plans includes detailed plans to revegetate disturbed areas. A starting point for this
analysis should be a detailed inventory and description of current baseline scenic conditions and
views onto the landfill property from Vichy Springs and other nearby locations. The final Ukiah
Landfill Closure Plan should then include appropriate mitigation measure to address potential
impacts identified in this analysis. These appropriate mitigation measures may include: (1)
limiting or prohibiting disturbance of existing vegetated areas of the landfill site visible from
Vichy Springs; (2) articulating objective revegetation benchmarks as part of a revegetation plan;
and (3) setting aside of adequate long-term funding to ensure post-construction revegetation
occurs.
III. Conclusion
We look forward to working with the City to ensure that the Landfill Closure Plan
complies with CEQA and avoids impacts to Vichy Springs and its guests. Pursuant to CEQA
Guideline section 15063, it is Vichy Springs' expectation that the City's decision about whether
to proceed with a Negative Declaration or an EIR in this instance will be based on the
information and analysis set forth in an Initial Study. As the California Court of Appeal clarified
in Citizens Association for,Sensible Development ofBishop Area v. County oflnyo, an Initial
Study must"disclose the data or evidence upon which the persons conducting the study relied.
Mere conclusions simply provide no vehicle for judicial review." 171 Ca1.App.3d 151, 171 (Cal.
Ct. App. 1985). In the unfortunate event that the environmental impacts noted in this letter are
not mitigated to a level that is less than significant, Vichy Springs will insist upon compliance
with CEQA's obligation to prepare an EIR prior to project approval.
By this letter, and as required by Section 21092 of the California Public Resources Code
and CEQA Guidelines Section 15072, Vichy Springs requests that it be notified in writing of the
release of any scoping documents or drafts associated with any Initial Study, Negative
Page 3078 of 4165
1:o J
Jaiiivaii ii 9, 201201 f xllllullllllll)llll , B Page 22 (mlar 44,
Jane Chambers
January 15, 2015
Page 7
Declaration, or EIR pertaining to the Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan. Vichy Springs also requests
that a copy of this letter and its attachments be placed in the administrative record of the City and
all other agencies (including the Regional Water Board and the Mendocino County
Environmental Health Division) involved in preparing, reviewing, or approving the Ukiah
Landfill Closure Plan. Please feel free to contact us if you would like to discuss these issues
further.
Respectfully submitted,
Paul S. Kibel
Nicholas Niiro
WATER AND POWER LAW GROUP PC
2140 Shattuck Ave., Ste. 801
Berkeley, CA 94708
(510) 296-5588
pskibel �,waterpowerlaw.com
noun o(&w tei owerfaw.com
Attorneys for VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Attachments: 1. Letter from Vichy Springs to City of Ukiah(October 22, 2014)
2. Letter from North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board to City of
Ukiah (September 2, 2014)
3. Notice of Determination for Ukiah Landfill Closure Plan (July 20, 2000)
4. Map of Spring Water Impacts Vichy Springs
5. Map of Noise Impacts on Vichy Springs
6. Map of Dust Impacts on Vichy Springs
7. Map of Scenic and Visual Impacts on Vichy Springs
Cc:
Douglas Crane, Mayor of Ukiah
Ukiah City Council
Andy Marino, California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
Trey Strickland, Mendocino County Environmental Health
Terry Cia, Regional Water Quality Control Board
Page 3079 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201,201, E xIllluiiiillNuu1, B Page 13 ol'44,
Attachment 1
Page 3080 of 4165
Lettelir to J, Uh�iellle
Jainuiairy 9, 201201 E x iillN i�1, B Page 24, (4'44,
Vichy Spfings
Wssort
2605 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-462-9515 * 707-462-9516 (fax)
nM�y�.yjch s�rin �s-com�
October 22, 2012
Ms.Jane Chambers
City Manager
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
REF: Dump CEQA
Dear Ms. Chambers and To Whom it May Concern:
It has come to our attention the City of Ukiah has a planned project on the adjacent Dump property next
to the historic Vichy Springs Resort. I bring this to your attention as this resort is in a quiet neighborhood
except fort e unregulated and obnoxious gun club also located on city property.
This letter is to request formal notification under CEQA oft e project planned for the "Dump" property,
We are aware of the recorded notice of determination one in 2000 where Vichy Springs Resort was not
given notice nor were any other neighbors, We are also aware the project has substantially changed and
will impact our resort operations that are 24 hours per day. Our guests sleep until 9am regularly as they
are on vacation.
Our request is that the CEQA document that will be prepared for the changed new project(the dump
closed in 2001 thirteen years ago) regarding applicable soil cover movement,gas plan and well drilling
and final closure include protections for our unique Mineral Springs, the guests of our resort and the
peaceful operation of our resort.
Page 3081 of 4165
f etteli° to J l°IllIUiiiielllle
Jainuiairy 9, 201201 E x lltllllllllr'wIiI1, B Page 25 r4ar44,
Our concerns include but not limited t :
o construction before 9am or after 5pm.
o back-up beepers.
Dust control at all times, i.e., zero dust,
o visible change o the view shed of the historic resort i.e.,trees, ground or vegetation.
Emergency contact telephone number should an issue arise. If subsequent action does not occur please
provide the contact and phone number of that person's supervisor.
Traffic on Vichy rims read be limited to : 0 arm to 5:30 pm and no heavy trucks or equipment
delivery or pickup other than after 9arn or before 5pm,
Can you also please provide us with a copy of the C QA6 document that led tot e notice of
determination.
Sincerely, r
�s
Gilbert Ashoff
Proprietor
CC:
Trey Strickland
County Local Enforcement Agency
860 N BushStreet
Ukiah, CA,95482
Terry Cia
State Water Board
5550 Skyland Blvd Ste
Santa Rosa, CA 940
Any Marino
Cal Recycle
1001 l Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Legal Counsel
Ater Power and Law Group
140 Shattuck Ave Ste 80
Berkeley,CA 94704
Attn: RichardRoos-Collins
Page 3082 of 4165
Lettelir to J'' Uhiiic111c
Jainuiairy 9, 201201 E xIlll iiiillll B Page 26 (4'44,
Passalacqua, Mazzoni, Gladden, Lopez and Maralglia
1201 Vine Street#200
Healdsburg, CA 95448
Attm Lourdes Lopez
Page 3083 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201,201, E xIllluiiiillNuu1, B Page 27 o l'44,
Attachment 2
Page 3084 of 4165
e1leIIV°� 1,(`r i 1 Illh01i1ifllc
Jaiirrruaii 9, 21:12011 E IIIIriiiillllmuul, B page 2; ol'44
■IIAI� . �1 �"V7ma it Ri d �' V a.ar..Jk.
Water Boards
North Coast Regional Water Ouaility Control board
5epternber 2, 2,014
'rim Eriksen
Director of,public Works
00 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482-5400
Dear Mr. Eriksen;.
Subject: Final.Closure flans for the Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site
File: Ukiah,,City of,Solid"waste Disposal Site, Mendocino County
WDID No., 1137SO430ME.N
This letter is a follow-up to our July 2,4, 2014 conference call to discuss the status of final
Closure Plans for the City of Ukiah Solid waste Disposal site located at the end of Vichy
Springs ,load in Ukiah. 'Phis Better also confirms our support for the request made by
California Department of Resources recycling and Recovery(Cal-recycle) and Mendocino
County Environmental Health, local Enforcement Agency staff that you amend the Joint
'technical Document JI D with all relevant changes and resubmit the revised J"TD for the
proposed landfill Closure as an updated stand-alone project. The JI'D amendments are
necessary for us to move toward permitting this project for construction in 201.5. We loop
forward to working closely with the City of Ukiah iah on the proposed closure project for the
Ukiah Solid Waste Disposal Site,
Regional Water Board staff have reviewed the City of Ukialr's Closure flans several tittles,
along with various documents relevant to amending a Report ofWaste Discharge R WD� .
With the submittal of the following items discurssed!during our conference call, Regional
Water Board staff expect to be male to find tine project plans sufficiently complete to begin
our process ofdrafting tentative Waste Discharge e Requirements WDRs)i.
1) An updated construction schedule for° th(!; 015 season.
2) All proposed changes and updates to the landfill gas collection system design,
operations plans and cost estimates.
Updated financial assurance package with adequate coverages..
Jo4*J VV..Go,o IIRFTT,014uF, f MATrHIAS 51 n.OHN,MXUIRVE q',rFF9CFR
566,D Skyla-r,WvaS..'uh,,A,Banana Rosa,CA 0$403 I mwaw"u wae,ert� arua ra.,aynvtrrurrtPoaSdaxY'wfi,
Page 3085 of 4165
I,Ole III°� 1,( J, T 0 1i1 ifllc
201201 r B Se1)letntV er fRA#149 (4'44
4) Updated C QA review for all project components submitted within the JTD and
ROW Da
We understand that the City of Ukiah is working on the above-mentioned items and
anticipates submitting the required updates within the coming month. We look forward to
receiving your updates and to working closely with you on, updating the WDRs for closure
of this landfil).
Please call me at(707') 576-2668 if I can assist or if you should have any questions or
concerns.
incer
r
rerri Cia
Engineering Geologist
140902 SAC e fJi k iahswds
cc:
Rick Seanor,City of Ukiah, 300 SemiDary Avenue, Ukiah,CA 95482- 00
Damon Brown, EBA Wastechnologies, 825 Sonoma Avenue, Santa Rosa,CA 95404
'Frey Strickland, Phil Chou, Mendocino County Health Department-LEA,
501 Low Gap Road, Room 1326, Ukiah, CA 95482
Gilbert Ashoff, Vichy Springs Resort, 2605 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, CA 9548�2
cc: via emaid
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery(Cal Recyle):
Andy Marino (An-dy.,M-aeiji D@Ca R c yc azov)
J-&_-J-Q
Michael Wochnick(.Mkb.agI�W9-c-hIIigk@CalRea
Garth Adams (IQLthAd�, �' �e -.-ragQv)
Richard Castle bid .le �,I e —ImaaQv-)
Page 3086 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201,201, E xIIIIuiiiillNuu1, B page 01, o l,44,
Attachment 3
Page 3087 of 4165
m t°IIIIulliiiif^;IIII ^
9 0112011 E xIIIIu iiiillll t uu f. B Pal0
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION'
TO., Office of Planning FROM City of Uki �
and Research Civic Cent t ripy to f Do t.tti rz ,?c; rjb
14001 1O�Ih Street, RM 121 300 Semi�n ��:
r (,I)/2 0 0:0 ad?i 2()0)
�� l j ru: f.tt�l C'ou,ttvby t.r.te iec:w .tfrxt e71
Sacramento, CA 0 814 Ukiah, i w,,
Mendocino County Clerk
Courthouse
Ukiah, CA 95482 DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING
Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance w►1th Section 211018 c r 21^152 of the Public Resources Code
Ukiah lWandf"'l Final Closure an t Pastclosrrre i t an Piam
Project Title
200052074 -- Cluar es m a 7 7 13-5' �
State Ctearingliouse Number Lead,Agency Contact Person Telephone
Thp.pmooi is locatedi al 31 V`ch S s fioad la fut oclno Cou t
Project Location(include county)
The project entails the closure and postclosure maintenance of the Ukiah Class ill municipal solid wvaste landfill. Final closure of the
landfill will entall the construction of a final cover over the entire landfill surface. Elements of the closure construction operations will
include the following tasks:1)clearing and stripping of existing vegetation from the landfill surface designated to receive final cover;
2),placing and compacting foundation layer material over the entire landfill surface,followed by a'i-foot of low permeability layer maternal
and 1-foot of vegetative layer material, )hydroseeding the vegetative layer with,native grasses;4)reclaiming existing and,proposer)
on-site borrow areas;5),construction of drainage system componien�ts;5)planing aggregate base rock over portions of existing perimeter
roadways;7),removing existing structures from the sate;and 8)Installing fencing for site security.
Project Descript! n }�
This Is to advise that the C T'Y t'FI 1AFI adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration on 4WyJ_R,2t70g and ties made the following
determinations regarding the above described project:
I
I The project'wlli,,,_„�will not have a significant effect on the environment.
2. X A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA,.
3. litigation measures were K were not—made a condition of the approval of the protect,
4, A statement of Overriding Considerations was vies not adopted for this project,
5`. Findings were Y were not made pursuant to the provisions of CE�OA.
The Mitigated Negative 1) clarati'on is available to the General Public,and may be examined at the u7i yh a � i a�rtm nt�, lily
f Oklah Civic e G1 emin v n kiah .
� rw
Charley p. July 20 Pl'pnnir c Dir.; tort vier r al Co u'd"npta�r
Si tur Crate Title
Page 3088 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Attachment 4
Page 3089 of 4165
Jaluniuuauu 9, 201,201, E xIIIIaiiiillllr'wuu1, B page 3 ol,44,
//� �� 1 �' �/ �, r � / 1)r� �hl nI��I�S IIIIIIIIIIIIIIVINy� r!. ➢...
CD
i P4
l /
I,
14 1,
r� /I
�h /,� 1, ��r/ „ riiii �/ � �j I (Ili it°✓I�� �u �
��I�Po01 III I�.f I.
u Po
V a
IIIIIIW �'�i PI
I
I�° I
I .'" � Y I III I`I IIIp�Y SI�lill�fu
I
I ISl�lll � /r r
/
hl 11� �� r / 1 �� f � ✓ �� ,
Ir r
/
EI
Vlu: ICI it .
11 Iul I III ouuul„
�puM
Page 3090 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiuruauuauu 9, 201,201, E xIllluiiiillNuu1, B page 4, o l,44,
Attachment 5
Page 3091 of 4165
I x1.te r 1:o v rhiiiic1k
JmnmuT 1, 021) POiiillllr'wuR IB Page 35 orwi,
/l' j"' jr� ��° �' � 88 V'1, ud IIu i� uy �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIII I li, """
uuuu
o
r
I
J �
u I
h �I � Vu ''V�d V"IIII Pii
IIyJ rf
r
i
r,Ia
�til I i iuuuuuuuiuli, ��umquugl Ir
Page 3092 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiiiiruaiiiiai 9, 201,201, t"xIllluiiiilllN 1, B Page '36 ol'44,,
Attachment 6
Page 3093 of 4165
J a Iurwlw!i uu a uu 9, 201,201, E xIIII a iiiillll r'w uu 1, B Page 37 (`m' '4 4,
1 �
�I ,� am�yaaa r
I
��4P r' Ill
,
n
r�
r ri,r'
Ja
.
y �
.liy y
r
I ��nm�imaDln
Page 3094 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I
Jaiiiiruaiiiiai 9, 201,201, t"xIllluiiiilllN 1, B page ol,44,,
Attachment 7
Page 3095 of 4165
I x1.te r 1:o v rhiiiic1k
JmnmuT 1, 021) POOR IB Page 39 ormi,
IT
%��➢Vy% �i ,/ ri 1 � °
r �lldlmll�Il I i f { � �
1 uum pV
I „
I �
14�III ��II'" ill
itlj,' Ylull�� >
r
I� l
II ...
Page 3096 c9 4165
i e1telliu°r 1:o I
Jainuiairy 9, 201,201, E xIllluiiiillllr'wuu1, B page 401, ol,44,
Exhibit B
Page 3097 of 4165
1'etteiir00 � Uh�Ie��e
Jainuiairy 9 201201 E x I k 11, B ]Page 4,1of 44'
N/40&1� AUSTO ENGNEERING GROUP
April G, 2OlG
Mr. Gilbert Ashoff
Vichy Springs Resort
2GO5 Vichy Springs Road
Ukiah, CA9548
Subject: City ofUkiah Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Landfill Closure and Post
Closure Maintenance Plan
Dear Mr. Ashoff:
As requested, | reviewed the Initial Study Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Proposed Final Closure and Post-Closure Maintenance Plan for the Ukiah Landfill, prepared for
the City of Ukiah dated January 2OlG. My review of the Initial Study focused onthe
environmental impact analysis of the landfill closure and maintenance plan on geology and soils
and hydrology and water quality issues.
Following are issues and concerns regarding the scope of the environmental analysis and
findings, which should be addressed before finalizing the mitigated negative declaration and
during the implementation and maintenance of the closure and post closure plan:
• There was no discussion as the geology and hydrogeo|ogy of the landfill site and
surrounding areas, and relationship to the potential source and quality of spring water
at the nearby Vichy Spring.
• The environmental analysis on hydrology and water quality did not address impact on
groundwater and/or spring water quality and any hydrogeologic con nection/relationshi p
between the water bearing zones beneath the landfill and the source of Vichy Spring
water.
• The analysis also did not indicate if water quality analysis/study has been performed to
compare the quality of groundwater beneath the landfill and the spring water.
Unless the following studies or investigations have already been performed, the City should
complete them at the minimum before issuing the final mitigated negative declaration and
implementing the closure and post-closure maintenance plan:
• Conduct a detailed geologic study and mapping of the landfill and surrounding areas
including Vichy Spring.
• As part of the mitigation measure, conduct a water quality study to establish the
"signature" constituentsoftheVichySpringsvvaterconoparedtothegroundvvateratthe
landfill and include these constituents in the compliance monitoring program.
2787N.MAIN STREET,SUITE 2DQ,VVALNUT[REEK,CA94597-(925)279-5DQQ�FAX(925)279-5DQ1
CALIFORNIA CONTRACTOR LICENSE NO. A-652544
Page 3098of4105
1 e1teiiu° 1:o J Ulhiiiie1111e
Jaiunuuuauu 2 9, 201201 E xIlllriiiillllr'wuu . B Page 42 (°4'44,
Mr. Gilbert Ashoff
April 6, 2016
Page 2
• Evaluate both the soil characteristics and water quality during any intrusive activities of
the subsurface to ensure no impact or breach into the source formation of Vichy Spring
water, if any.
Sincerely,
ALISTO ENGINEERING GROUP
Al Sevilla, P.E.
Principal
Cc:
Paul Stanton Kibel
Water and Power Law Group PC
2140 Shattuck Avenue, Ste. 801
Berkeley, CA 94704-1229
Page 3099 of 4165
i e1telliu°r 1:o I
Jainuiairy 9, 201,201, E xIllluiiiillllr'wuu1, B page 4,3 ol,44,
Exhibit C
Page 3100 of 4165
Le1telliu°r 1:o I Ulhiiiic1111c
J a iun i uu a uu 9, 201,201, E xIIII'u iiiillN uu 1, B page 44, o 1,44,
i
e
o.
fj
u
i
1�
I
i
y
�l
Page 3101 of 4165
Exhibit C
Page 3102 of 4165
LO
Y)C i
O
r
�� rr
`TJ
Cd
Cd
Cd
�4,'JAIL",
i
�r °1�"l'uu'uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu��ViiV�
�Y
IIIII I iiuuuuuuuuuuuuuu YYYI IIIIIIIIII mpu uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu i
� u RI Q��rVu a VVVVV VVVV�u f�� �i
h� I��IIII.
ry
� II,�I IIIIIIIIIIII� tl°�r
m
������ ����Illlllllllllllllllllplllllllllllllllllllluuuuuuuulll „��iilllll
LO
IIIWIIIWIUIomumu
uuuuuuuuu IVI p
f ��l �� i f 'i ' I �um�iYuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu q �
II�I�i�l�llllllllllllllit�� �� % �i d� 0
VVVVV uuuuuV'V'Vuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuu'u'uV�� ��j���� � C)
y l I pll�l r
'20 8
/
i
� J
%!f r
u
�� � il�uuIIIIII!
YI
/ to lullulru °���o
j
1,
l
,��, �,�I uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuulJJ ���
T,J f'
I '
m III
(e
f
„I
Y
r I II
1 : IVI Y
I I
,
Y
J
0
42 !I ull
r
,e.
f
yn
u
u I
I ,
f �;
LO
LO
0
J '/r r / / j � ✓,
r
r
1 2r�
"ra � 111
4I
r
n
T
/ f
r
r
i
i Q r
li it
M
� k
I
ID r i
y ry
!
wow
� W
� r
Jv
r
r
wn
10
mmmx, %
�! 1
3
r
a;
d
ViT� f Ir i,
I�
!1 1
l/ I
t IY
I'
/
i
r li
i
/ �ra
r
r
/1 ,I
f /P
III wfr o
1
LO
�✓ dr J ke j� 0 7n. '� I '➢ 1 I � '" �' r �
o
r �1J ✓r��A.l� ✓ r J �,i r iY hls yy O
as 1 r4y / J✓r �,. r J 1/ +r'r1 �'
r
JdN ��l� r lil r
� � I
I
w JII" uVl i
r
err
J
///I J�` r� �i rr �✓r r.
I�h li'uuuuuuuuGV
� �lilililil�ilililililililililililililililililililililililililili����Vuuuuuuu�V �i � r r ��`��'
1 wo;
tN
14
f O
/C fyy�Pw
1
s
� / r
w� Jae r d J
v�
uti�m ry"S J� �y`r`r � Nyr (fl�W
ri
ISllp � u I I ul � i
�. �`�" Ills I � i" �i"Y,ur� ✓,�'`. ,�,
LO
00 O
r � �
n�
t
fps �ti p` J
G a�¢
i
u
Exhibit D
Page 3109 of 4165
LO
m
�
III
r `
`,J
u
p; uuuuuuuul 91
�I
'% tYVi i
I I
r1�/ �/ /1✓rly rl�,. /�i,,4 / I (err ! t /� /j ,
r,
wow
LO
0
co
' 0
r 1
7�
i
Mod
I
r
i T
i
/ !
i o
k,HHT
Prof /
vuvuW
I ,,,
^ � -� ,�fe�ai vvA� �l, di�dl
Exhibit E
Page 3112 of 4165
LO
M
f
M
Rpm
1
f O
I u I r�M
r
>�� I
/ r J
2
LO
o
" M,
m
I j �
I
l
/1
" � c
,
r
r
'I
ITS
i��� 1J1j
T
Cd
Cd
Cd
r i„w
���III III IL
J i ,III
Exhibit F
Page 3115 of 4165
LO
M
(3)
rams
r � �
n
t
fps �ti p` J
G a�¢
i
Cd
Cd
Cd
I
LO
Ali
r ✓ rrlr V %f� I(`P� w �� /
6r /i�✓ ed/ yUgrl �V� ! /✓i / r"
/✓ r, , m� 9_. i�'rr F iq 17)J�flr %nk 1f i r f�i r� M
�r� � � �� ✓€ d �Jr✓lihi� r ��� / �rpr , a �
ii r � r �>✓/ f % !UJ.oj^� �����r r � � oaf r ny�rr
I /t% fl /.. �" D j��prfi� ,w r G `i'/s'i� W/a ai✓r�Au4�lRlI �" V ,
�, lr � fed i W/r/,r/!'. .9'Ur Ir' Y�aOyr d'a r � �!w'I rr/ ✓w
f 1 � ➢ '' �n w 1 m P ri l� a wYr N"Y i it F✓ f!
' I �'�w�PP' P u�✓r/0 r ll J Y r
i r J a J
�� � b / ! "T V� f rl� ,;PdH' ;�d�%�✓ �''r r�ll�i i� Pub�N➢ 'W
Y
w, � �1 '!ly✓y�/ �r � ii � Pi 4V�r r �h r �(�/ uJ��t 1P/�/ � �J ��/
fir c!1/�j�/'0 rr✓v;w�Cl. i r�'�rvrr r �f( ✓iti/wir�+ n,�i P+>^ ,�„�/ � � �id c
rr.„.. rP.; r �f✓��� I Jr�,�,rUr>'' °� ,� I/r/ r � �"r r� r�, `
r
➢', r r �� r 1 �����✓,,,,/r i V, %� v rur�1J I m awe r r �' �'�
,'rye.':,,ro �5r'Ti' r� /re , i �r �lw�'' ✓/ yr ro r / �/� �i �/'Pr 9 r r
'� :✓ � � � l �I^I F �"'rDyr rur f n �1 7 P � 7r�f / /�%r r � Gl� i U�l�� �r u r �r Y �� / r✓ r(� '
u �
✓r, ✓ JN I ,/q aT�� YV"f w!rNY r °'rwU/r��;i�✓ '" m![d%AU'o' �J I'�V'�u `dt� � r Pu
I `�✓tnw " r�b �i! .g m I (' f��/� U y �I � I ✓,,��� II ��bl�w ray U>� ��11 �✓ ' ��r�r
NP�,aJa! IUb & ( W �? ➢ iMt`P'w"''ti
r i Per ��t!v'dui` ..IIF✓� ^➢�1 r lr m rt r + r
^ h ii �Ilyf,:: " lr„ ✓✓ri /.u°Pier w"➢..Prnr ! 'P '�J / "V n `�W :
`�dr 1 � 4�r 1fw( i✓m r r✓r
r„.,°"iIP* �✓A7 ii Ni a �l , I W'/'!�r�,lH ' ' f/ ✓�6 '" G r ✓'�urs�,
„ i, Y M1 I rd f Y .�Av ?bi'r' `` � r>'✓,l+ r ��dr YV�"�,, '�' ;, %/�
V
oly� rye-, o � , !� Pr D ��f `"� Y�'�ik„ r r�9dy�*�✓y�rllydv�f Y rew��'Y�'���J� ������ � �
vu Ifr � Il rvVrrr rb�P /✓ '�/l 7w� ! "'r r+v"°'jiflVY"`KIM
/
1 1 r' fr ➢ 4/ fj f�✓J��✓� .;frl rf Ul //rirf 8°,w
v
,,I N", ,, r� r tiu� 1 rr UII rll ?✓ /&'4 4 � U r �r a f
ry
I
i
0
�" by„-, ��ly r�r ✓ t, ,� ✓/r;k /��x�r t ���
„ a ilk )� Ir �qV�` �4 Val i err� ��✓/�i✓�f wow'wN�n r✓ :� w rf. it /... y /�/ ///,
,
V""" >� 1/r ✓'iti f l � A� N 7i / ✓ f r✓����✓�Af
I
�oiP 7
� la"',tw r � r"' �'� � r�w�✓rc�f�y�//yirU�
61' i II III„
I
i I
4
y �� fU�filp�✓/ ��` ii 'r� ���/����r�/err
II . � Il�uil' �,lllj
I
ItIiIVI ' I"I^il I
V�
hj III i
rrr
rrkm,rj lyl r /✓ l ), rr Yr f � � a � r t"Vy r � ! r W y
f ' r�IL>✓,,,, J !fV/ Ilrr ✓ /� l,/ u,'f i" r a /C ��/r/�
l� r/�„✓ // ri/rr ✓/ I rrk� ru�rJ � fr6i/j�l
.n. ;rr ,,;Y '�"" ,,r Jj r01r1� (� �', �r �/r Jr� r✓✓,✓ if�� ri D��
%,ll r/ // l�,l,✓` /1/ ✓pail ✓ �' r a;w7`"t< li;l r JG �✓ r f /Y%sir t r4 rPaa/,al d � Ur r
L � '�:, ii�l�� l w I 9'•✓ii%/ ��r N��//i'.r!j r ��IZ k / /r� �� ���d��y'Il ^"C f 1�/ ��.
! r „�y; � l °/ /ri /r/ / %�1,/ � � r� ka��I/ U ��y� ✓ ���1� ��
u
� J
� i � "' , ( f //i�i✓a rr rNr ( lU r r �/ ;,r!R u , //r
rl r //U, //ni��ilr r ti I r/� �,'9'i rMz'�� rJ a!✓ %1 / 1 rl
✓i ai rr� ➢ /r / a jN %1✓ ,ZM
/:I P , ,n / r �r .qry ✓
AIM,
r � " , / r /i/ ,rr �il rvr fi^ r Gl ✓ rr
WINDvl r,
om
!re
P y� r➢rl �y
� ��. � '� Il, � �� 1 r/ sr r/! % % �� 7✓� o,l l� Pi I� ;,a �✓
n n � �d ��r�/ � /+1��r d (� �+rr �P� r ��r➢uiry�
1 yr f( e l �P IVi S
r/ / /r �/ ✓ ✓ �/�r � 1�J r W�
/// o✓ v / / r/ r rr 1 � rl! �N k /
' ; �� � //��✓ /r d✓�l � /��i�flirJi�Y'�j7 aV�% l��r i�� r;r "w r ✓ V r,,'r 7 y/ r ,p s /ONYX :.
//
,,+'�" � ����)r/�/r1 ,�,`�i�r�/ii= yr¢H� ad�rrn,�' a ' % � f � ➢la
r
r
'' a drp, %/�/iir , /ii /�/ �✓rt`Vtr/� r✓��i % ,-Ui- �a r
" / ii rulr,rr���� ���� j1�'1 r��fN�l� If i�U :✓ Fr U /r� rr�✓i
� � `�;� !UJYl�%��r r��/ %, /i /��{'I��1���✓/i�K 1 j �,�1�� rUr��j
% %�//i /��/mar➢✓�r/iJ�ff�� � �r�"0/ a ��� ��/i/
C µ.
al r1,4 61649Vd669114�/� / n/��%r ✓/H �+� r rf �c �� / /rp(//
f//I !P. w/��/f,/� r id /i'fT V✓/ � ,4
Of
�� � ����'! � /%�//� �l r, /�iii9✓/ , env r „
i
i/,/,ol DIP Iwo' T
LO
0
00
� r
if f lrfr c i
m
av P
r
r
a,J
Cd
wal
l
i/
a
f Iti4 '
� e
r i
l
i
r'
r
f�
1
r
� «
r�1
p,
f�„ I
i
i
LO
// gar uy 0
%f
r
M
Fr
���i/ ✓rio J Ir�r�� J�r r �, �+�( J
Exhibit G
Page 3120 of 4165
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page I of f
was tel' .co iii
.........................................................................................................................
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final
Landfill Cover
Rachae/ Zimlich ( Aug 11, 2015
18-22 minutes
The waste and recycling industry kicked off the new year with a full
plate, and industry experts project 2020 could be a transformative
one.
The industry continues to respond to the cyclical impact of ip fi ii a"s
III iil iil III Swg and subsequent volatility in recycling markets. Plus,
talk of an economic slowdown and the potential for new legislation
and regulation in an election year, the impacts of increased merger
and acquisition activity and heightened awareness of "forever
chemicals" and their potential ramifications for waste management
remain top of mind for industry stakeholders this year.
In this two-part series, industry experts discuss emerging trends
and their outlook for 2020.
Recycling Markets: Domestic, China and
Southeast Asia
From a recycling perspective, 2018 started off unstable due to the
implementation of China's import ban. But 2019 wasn't much better.
"When you have something bad, the only thing you can do is try to
Page 3121 of 4165
1 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page of f
predict something more cheerful, so we, along with a lot of other
people, said 2019 will be better. And 2019 was worse," says nine
� iiiiiliii , vice president of technical and regulatory affairs for the
National Waste & Recycling Association (NWRA). "Commodity
prices did not recover; prices for everything went down, with the
exception of plastics."
Germain projects that in 2020, metals prices will stabilize; however,
her outlook for cardboard remains bleak.
"Even if CIhIiIna 06Igy§ pIIIi ih PQ!i III III] fIIn aIHI illb II., fiber permits are
still expected to be reduced. Because of that, we expect commodity
prices to remain in the doldrums, and we are hoping that they won't
get any worse," she says. "But it's going to be another challenging
year from a commodities pricing perspective."
�,.a�,,. ' ✓i r w� �,�Vw� � � �., .� �� any �� ���
w
s
V °� wr 1�kr�Yu,7N0 QP�"I
� "fir i�✓ + fi�w�^Y,� � �r(��y��✓✓ �� iw '" �'
"' ti� iwrY�ul�(�X'PrI�INNI��,�i'm✓�sw^�'rnri✓Jl u4�i
p wW�rf;ice"PO�Yh�IYJif 1 � �I f
r r✓; �� r�✓vF�y�jN✓ y✓r�i1'r�i��r�(� hr � 6'i �I i ,
mil m✓a� � 7ii ���'r ii� tlYf�3i4����� r
�i ��)� �IP�i�rr rIlIODP
Longtime industry veteran and Waste360 columnist Qiaz 1 liilllllp
'.qts . . will be another challenging year for recyclers,
with paper markets remaining flat throughout the year. There are,
however, some glimmers of hope of rising prices later in the year.
Page 3122 of 4165
2 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page of f
The III: II. tt IIIln ustI lii s Ill IiiIIIIII IiI p Ill : fgplp, QIl DI 0 gnpdin October
2019 and will process 180,000 tons of mixed paper in its first year
of operation. That will steadily increase to 360,000 tons in 10 years,
says Miller.
"That's the start of the market for mixed paper, but it's not enough
to buoy markets," he explains.
Two new paper mills are expected to open at the end of 2020 or in
early 2021—the Green Bay Packaging mill in Wisconsin and the
g III ..liiill III::: il. . .iii ii f-n lll..ls have been
Cascades mill in Virginia. Three new m
opaque about when those mills will be fully operational in terms of
g nuu ....!!I L.!II:xed....III .. :III . ..!!!, according to Miller, making it difficult to predict
what impact they'll have.
"I think markets will stay relatively flat through 2020. Maybe, at the
end of 2020 and early 2021 , we'll start seeing things get better for
mixed paper," Miller projects. "Corrugated will pretty much stay the
way it is."
"I don't expect China to ban the imports of all recyclables," he adds.
"The paper mills depend too much on it. I am more inclined to think
they will ban waste but continue to accept raw materials."
Plastic markets, however, are a little harder to predict. With a surge
in new virgin resin capacity coming online, prices for those resins
are likely to drop and depress recycled resin prices, says Miller.
"Many . .lii ..sg'ng 111 ii ids announced aggressive goals for the use of
recycled plastic," he explains. "2020 will test their willingness to
1 11 ease II., !p flitgllgt even if it means paying more for raw
materials. I think it's clearly time for them to step up and start
buying now."
a. 'loY'IP II9 'IYIiI,�' ifin ! "d �7f4";,
Page 3123 of 4165
3 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J Ulhiiiie1111e
Jainuiairy 9, 301201 E xIIII iiiillNuui,G A, 1
w���i of ✓�`i���� a� /o� i
p UY 0. a 'ill� � 4i ✓� 1jI�1 ✓ �� l 1 �u�, // //0 Y �l
/fir �� n� ✓4�, „9 � �� � �„� °� i ✓�
r
1
/�✓ �✓ � �: � � �r// ,awl / H,✓ YW �,`
r � 91 f � 1 � ' )� /a�� tix � ,� �, „,✓, �� Gil u"r' �,,.
✓
�, ¢ � I e ✓ �° fti� /� 0 �
a
i
oWW�J1iu`�Iy1�i„�, ,� / i y✓1� >r>t %-`"nd�l p � C/ / i "%�I o� � ��
Irf IIP U � rv"p n✓'1�° !J� ��
///�%� " �yfDti✓ +�v�rfwu ti J d a y >A9� 1J1�`lr�,�� �✓'� ��' ✓�
gal
S
�9
i
Robin Weiner, president of the Institute of Scrap Recycling
Industries (ISRI), anticipates that there will be a continued trend of
seeking new global and domestic recycling markets.
"There has been a significant amount of investment in the U.S. in
the past year, and I would imagine that we would continue to see
that—with investment on both the consumption side and within
recycling itself," explains Weiner. "This will be an expansion for
existing facilities as well as greenfield operations. We're excited
about that because the greater market improvements we see, the
stronger the business will be. And we will be pushing for any
opportunity to strengthen market demand in recycled content and
ISRI also expects continued challenges for international recycling
markets.
"The liissue of lii p ! [ §j['igtiigns is being discussed in a lot of
Page 3124 of 4165
4 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page 5 of f
different markets, and we are being very III ..ii!: .. . :�:.!!I: . ......IIIJII IlLind. .Jp` . . ..IIL ,
IIIApjpysli Iid qflig c,oulllat hies discussing the difference between
legitimate scrap trade and waste that has been iil..IlHegpIIII Ill fil.11l .11l . . .,"
says Weiner. "I think one of our biggest challenges going forward is
helping importing countries understand the difference. That
continues to be a big focus for us."
David Biderman, executive director and CEO for the Solid Waste
Association of North America (SWANA), notes that in 2020, the
industry will continue to respond to the evolving impact of Ilh.I..ip .. :""s
III1,111 .�iii f III III SwoIII d oIn IIIoc,aIII ., III iii III . u III., . III. III s.
.............................................................................................................................................................................................. ......................... ....IIL................. ...................................
"The liilna a u11. t rne6a n 11.11.,a,five that recycling was in some sort of
lina,fiil ip III r ii fil iil " appears to have been effectively rebutted, as new
domestic capacity coming online and reductions in contamination
levels reported throughout the United States had led to a reduction
in the pace of local governments suspending curbside collection,"
explains Biderman. "In addition, EPA [the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency] announced at the III iii III: ecyg!p§ III::: III III:::
Suirgrnf4 in November 2019 that it would be proposing national
recycling goals this year, and I expect that, together with
implementation of the EPA Recycling Framework released at the
ARD Summit, will encourage local governments to continue with
their recycling programs."
Bryan Staley, president and CEO of the Environmental Research &
Education Foundation (EREF), expects to see more nuanced
conversations happening around recycling and sustainable
materials management.
"I think some of the issues with the domestic recycling markets and
China's National Sword have really put the spotlight on recycling
Page 3125 of 4165
5 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page 6 of f
and asking some hard questions that I don't think have been asked
in the past," he says. "I think the industry has the opportunity to
lead that conversation."
"I think recycling markets will improve, but I think it will be slow,"
adds Staley. "In order to strengthen domestic markets and recycling
overall, the best feedstock is going to result in the best end
materials and end markets. And that doesn't seem to be happening
right now."
Economic Outlook, Legislation and
Regulation
Another top trend to watch in 2020 is the overall health of the
economy. The industry also is watching certain legislative and
regulatory activity but doesn't expect too much to pass in the
upcoming presidential election year.
"Later this year or in 2021 , there could be a sufficient cooldown for
the economy that will impact the industry; we don't know yet,"
explains Staley. "With various geopolitical things happening, you
never know how that will affect the economy—good or bad."
� of
Page 3126 of 4165
6 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J Ulhiiiie1111e
aiiiivaiiauu 91, 21)21 E uiiiilllN 1,G Plurt�i1 of 1
Biderman points out that if the U.S. and Canadian economies
continue to hum along at the 2 to 2.5 percent growth range, there
will be plenty of waste and recyclables to go around. However,
2019 was the 10th consecutive year of economic growth following
the 2008-09 Great Recession, and eventually, the tide will turn, he
says.
"Solid waste owners, local governments and others interested in
the overall health of the industry should keep a close eye on GDP
[gross domestic product] numbers, as they will determine whether
the United States or Canada will have a record-breaking 11 th
consecutive year of economic growth, or if a long-predicted
economic downtown is at hand in either late 2020 or 2021 ," says
Biderman.
In terms of legislation for 2020, Jim Riley, chief counsel and senior
vice president of government affairs for NWRA, says a couple
things immediately come to mind.
NWRA has been lobbying to gettax extgidg s ii.giewed since the
expired at the end of 2017. NWRA also had its eye on a fbdg aall
stii u tuii. II[)ii IIII—both for su�uii... ii. iii �� ii. . lii iii and a broad)
.................................................................................................................. ..........................................................................................IIL........................................................ Y
defined infrastructure measure that would encompass domestic
recycling infrastructure capabilities.
In addition, NWRA ended 2019 on a high note. In November, the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced it
would . [ ili]a III1,11I III RA i hog s of s ii,.. lii Ilh.....11lQ5 iii j.� iin
................................. ...........................................IIL.............................
exclusively for its members. The exemption eliminates the need for
NWRA member companies to use ..IILeq lip::: ..lil ..11lc LoggIILIng.... '.. : ..!!Lc,es
ELL IIL in their trucks.
Page 3127 of 4165
7 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
Jahn uiai f 9, 201201 E xIIII iiillllr'wuui, G Page 8 of 18
"Congress will not be in session very much next year. We already
looked at the 2020 calendar and calculated back in terms of how
many days they are going to be there," explains Riley. "One of the
reasons we do that is because of the rulemaking underway from
the U.S. Department of Transportation in terms of hours of service.
We already have our III,III::::::III L... ? p!D.Ip.!.!il. ..n, which is good for five years.
But there are some broader hours of service changes that FMCSA
is trying to make. And if a Democrat were to win the White House
and had control of both the House and Senate after the 2020
election, they could invoke the Congressional Review Act (CRA).
That gives them so many days to go back and basically repeal any
kind of new rules implemented by the various agencies."
"That's why it's so important that NWRA got its exemption for
member companies," he adds.
Kirk Sander, NWRA's chief of staff and vice president of safety and
standards, explains it's hard to say how the CRA play would impact
the industry.
"We will just be watching if the change is in the next five years. We
don't think it'll change much, but we haven't seen the final rule," he
says. "The same thing goes for FMCSA's entry-level driver training.
Indications are there will be pushback, but nothing is official until it's
in the [Federal] Register."
Typically, not much is accomplished during a presidential election
year, but Riley says he wouldn't rule out passage of a highway bill,
which would be separate from the bigger, broader infrastructure
package. Riley adds that NWRA has had conversations with people
on both sides of the aisle to ensure the passage of a surface
transportation infrastructure bill.
Page 3128 of 4165
8 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
aiin uiai f 9, 201201 E xIlll iiillllr'wuu , G Page 9 of f
"Aside from that, we made sure that domestic recycling
infrastructure was included in any broader package," he says.
As for recycling, NWRA doesn't anticipate much regulatory activity
from the federal government, but Germain projects there will likely
be movement put forth at the state level. Congress may also pass
either the III III III III (Realizing the Economic Opportunities and
Value of Expanding Recycling) or the III IIIQ it Q III III (Recycling
Enhancements to Collection and Yield through Consumer Learning
and Education) Acts, which provide financial support to local
government recycling efforts.
Sander says the industry will continue tracking III .. :2ve Qvg IIIaws and
whether a measure will expand to all vulnerable road workers,
including those in waste and recycling.
In addition to the RECOVER and RECYCLE Acts, Miller projects
that Congress will pass the Save..... ! ..i Seas , which expands the
2018 law.
At the local level, New York City will start the implementation of its
fIIntI. v III sl4l coIrnIrneIl li4I ste zolneQ s stpT this year, with
a request for proposal (RFP) likely to be issued by June, notes
Biderman.
"Although the changes aren't expected to be fully finalized until
2022 at the earliest, the specter of CWZ, also known as
`franchising,' will likely impact the hyper-competitive New York City
market, as some carters go out of business and others battle for
advantage in this large, important market," he says.
Mergers and Acquisitions
Another key area to watch is the pace of acquisitions, which has
Page 3129 of 4165
9 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page 1011 of f
been accelerating over the past few years and has industrywide
ramifications. The biggest merger to keep an eye on this year is
Waste III III . III � IIIa t'°§ f f liisl4i iign IIIi III::: lii�� � III (ADS).
...................................................................................... ................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................................................IIL................................ � )
� Y
r
I�IIICII
t
1
W,/ 0
"Acquisitions like the Waste Management/Advanced deal have
major ripple effects throughout the industry on the OEM [original
equipment manufacturer] side and even on the competitor side and
for haulers as well," explains Staley. "That has impacts on the trade
associations and on EREF as an organization."
In June 2019 s voted t fIIL... g
t: the merger
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .....
agreement with Waste Management. The transaction is expected to
close by the first quarter of 2020.
"Large national companies, regional players and private equity are
all aggressively buying companies, and I expect this will continue in
2020," says Biderman. "The pending acquisition of Advanced
Page 3130 of 4165
10 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
aiin uiai f 9, 201201 E xIIII iiillllr'wuui, G Page I I of f
Disposal by Waste Management is expected to result in the
divesture of solid waste assets (e.g., disposal facilities and
collection) in several markets, which will create additional
opportunities for companies to grow. The possibility of a Democrat
being elected in November 2020, and a potential subsequent
increase in the capital gains or federal income tax rates, may fuel
even more deals, at higher multiples, as Election Day nears."
PFAS and Waste Management
Issues surrounding per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
—known as "forever chemicals"—really began to gpIIL.in.....lp..! ..Illllliil
teInfii lln in 2019 with movies like "Dark Waters" and the Netflix
............................................................
documentary, .f .III . ......III : ..!!LIIL.................. ......IIKnow.. ............ EREF, which has released an
III III::III: tgI pjllng III III:: 5 predicts PFAS will be in the
crosshairs of the industry for the foreseeable future.
EREF is working on funding for three new contracts to studyIII III
fiiin I iind ililplll III iat . EREF's goal is to get a better understanding of
PFAS and their impacts on the industry in order to answer looming
questions.
"There are still a lot of questions that need to be answered,"
stresses Staley. "I've had conversations with folks who suggest that
the answers are in on PFAS, and I disagree with that. There's still a
lot of scientific research that is necessary to understand the actual
health implications on low-level exposures that we are seeing in our
everyday lives."
Page 3131 of 4165
11 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J Ulhiiiie1111e
J� 01' ,;. E x]II�i�llN ii i ��r �"'��t�����, � tA
k
Although the House of Representatives passed a bill that included
language designating PFAS compounds as hazardous substances
under Su erfund and directing III III set iii li iii u iii iin t iii lii iin iit
III : . ..III for PFAS under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the language
was dropped from the Ill1,111 tiigna� II Aqflig izqt�iqnt due to
opposition in the Senate.
"SWANA expects this bill to re-emerge this month in the House, but
it will likely have difficulty getting traction in the Republican-
controlled Senate," explains Biderman. "Also, EPA is expected to
finalize a regulatory determination for certain PFAS compounds this
year, and states are aggressively moving forward to fill the void
created by federal inaction. Several northeastern and midwestern
states have issued or are proposing PFAS standards for drinking
water. SWANA is closely monitoring PFAS issues and is developing
new resources for members to help them address rising concerns
over PFAS in leachate."
Safety & Technology
At the end of 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor
Statistics released its 2018 National Census of Fatal Occupational
Injuries, which revealed an liiingi.ease ii rite IIIIIIeqtliiqn fatalJii�les.
Page 3132 of 4165
12 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
u ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llll r'w uu i, G Page C3 of f
As safety remains top of mind for industry associations, NWRA is
working on an RFP for a 10-year review of safety data on the
industry and figuring out where the gaps are, explains Sander. "We
are going to announce that winner early in 2020 and our selection
on that. So, starting that process and hopefully getting preliminary
data in 2020 is exciting for me," he says.
In addition, Biderman says he hopes the joint SWAIII1,111AL..........::::..III111 III ............
IIIIIL.III.. .lice with the U.S. Occupational Safety & Health Administration
will help reduce the frequency of fatalities, accidents and injuries in
the sector.
At the end of 2019, III1,11I Ill IIIs II.6�eased ma best:: p[ggj. iices ggl��de for
materials recovery facilities and temp workers. Sander adds that
IIII4IIh uii 11n io1n lbattg §pfoly will also be a continuing safety trend.
i
f`
1
!/r
ISRI also projects that the a u III liissue of IlJ,flll liiuulll liign IIbattg Hies gid
fi es will continue to be a huge issue for ISRI moving forward and
for all in the stream—whether it's residential, commercial or
industrial. Weiner points out that the waste stream will now include
larger ELD batteries and those from electric vehicles, as well as
Page 3133 of 4165
13 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
a iin ui a i f 9, 201201 E xIIII iii llN uu i, G Page 14, of f
smaller lithium-ion batteries.
"Both are causing safety and fire risks," she says. "We are being
very proactive to try and address the issue from both a policy
perspective and operational perspective."
EREF is also looking to mandate some work in 2020 to drill down
fatality statistics.
When it comes to technology, Arnold Bowers, business solutions
IIdirector at I nssli . I anticipates that
bigger, bolder technology solutions will eventually relieve the
pressure of municipalities and communities having to enforce
plastics bans and legislation. He points to renewed IIL.nves,ti'n ..ip fill
III ..,ni .il 111 IlliiHng as an efficient way for bottlers to recapture
plastic.
Bowers also points out that the Ill flllliif Il., .tiign of IIIInt II IInet of ...I...IIl IiiIIn .
III has been a longstanding expansion in the industry. Prior to his
work at ENGIE Impact, Bowers worked with an IoT company that
builds and supports smart bins.
r
a i
U1
�r. r
f
,
dr
Y � ( � ✓ r
1
I
J
J
J / J
J J /J J J
/
J
r ,
r
r /
/ r r
/y
r / r / r
I r /
/
r r'/ y r
G
r /
/
r u � /
( r! /
r / r
f f /
J
r/
/
f /
/ / r
l
/
/
/ I 1
/
rrr
/
/
r �
r /
r �
r f�4 d
r
f
l l i, l, Y
� f
�k
/
I IIII II II���IIIIIIIIIIIIIII���I�I���IIIII�(f�lll(If�II II IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII I����l,,r�r»r,��� �fffffffffffff ff��ll(�(�� �III IIII�������I�I�II�I�IIIIIII��II�I�II III I ��IIIIIIIIIIII �I� III
"There are all these new kinds of monitoring technologies growing,
Page 3134 of 4165
14 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Clay Remains a Top Choice for Final Landfill Cover about:reader?url=https://www.waste360.com/closure/clay-remains-top-c...
f ett uu° to J f°Ilhiiiie1111e
aiin uiai f 9, 201201 E xIIII iiillllr'wuui, G Page 15 of f
and we are piloting these technologies today to figure out if there is
a one size fits all or if there will be different technologies for these
sorts of things," says Bowers.
Technologies include cameras revealing material in a bin, which
can help combat contamination. Others are more sonar based and
provide more feedback of how full a bin is.
"All this data is closed loop, and it's from the point of generation,
whether it be a bin, at a park, on a college campus or industrial
setting, where that bin is being monitored and that data is being
sent back to a system that someone is watching," says Bowers.
"Then, resources can be deployed more on-demand rather than the
old, historical routing and collection loops. Using the IoT and
monitoring technology allows us to conserve our resources as we
go out and move materials."
Bowers also broached the idea of building an "Uber for waste"
concept, where trucks are deployed only when bins are full.
"Maybe in the future of waste that could be possible, but the model
that collection is built on today is not really prepared for that Uber-
type situation," he says. "But I think we're prepared for that IoT data
to feed back into our collection and help us address and adjust
where we can focus our attention. The expansion of all our
technology and focus today, in my view, will impact the waste
business tremendously over the next decade."
Part two of this series will highlight the industry's goals for 2020.
Page 3135 of 4165
15 of 15 1/8/2020,5:40 PM
Exhibit H
Page 3136 of 4165
Lel'teiir 1'o J'' Uhiiieelle
Jainuiairy 9, 20112011 E xIIIIaiiiillllbuul. I I page I of 14,
4 26.3 i arlks arid (QEQA)
4 26 3 1 1 rvtlrod tji cb!()lri
Fhiu Igbaairlks arid irecira afloirii airi4ly§is focuses ori llhiu Igbablairiifl4l for llhiu IMasteir IPIlaaira afteirriabives to cireate oir
exaceirbate defidieridies liira Igbu.allblkc Igbaairlks arid irecira afloirii aireas thirough Iricireased deiriniarid for fadflIkfies,
acqUi§ifloirii, coristirucUoirii acflMifles, oir afteirafloirii of ex�isfiiriig fadflIkfies, ('.oiriichj§ioiriis ireglaairalliiragl the
§igiriilific,airiice of krinipacts pirov ided krii thlis secfloirii Taira, stiNcfly for the purposes of (1EQA, Fechirii�icall Repoirt.
16, Public Services Technical Reports, corit,.firis detaflIed kriffoirrinafloirii ori IbaseEkriie coirii6floirils airild
regUlafloiriis irellated to Igbaairlks arid irecira afiori, Sectiori 4,8, Department of Transporta lion Act, Section 4(f)
addiresses Igbaalairiifi4l liirinilgbaacts ori Igbu.allblkc Igbaairlla arid irecira afior4l fadflIkfies as irealu.aliira d Iby Secfloirii 4(1) of the
US, Depairtirinierit of If irairispoirtafloirii Act, WNich Irichides airii assess irini eirii t of acqUi§ifloirii, I access, arid
otheir liira6irect effects, Ilirinilpacts ori Ilblillaewaays aire airi4lyzed liiru Sectiori 4,2, 1 and Use arid uiru Secfloirii 4,14,
Coastal Zone Mana(lement and Coastal Barriers, Direct arid liir116irect girowth liira the vlbkriility of IAX arid
ellsewheire liira the ireglioirii assodiated With the IMasteir IRlaairu woUld allso iresu.alll iiira Iricireased deiriniarid for Igbaairlks
arid ireciraafloiri4l fadflIhifies, Poteiriifi4l liiraaluiract liirul1luaarices ori pairk deiriniarid, such as those assodiated With
riew eirinilgbllabye Ihiaau sehoNs that coUld Ilan, gerierated off of the alkrpoirt, aire addiressed iiira Secfloirii 4,5,
Induced Socio-Economic Impacts (Growlth Inducement), arid uiru subsecfloirii 4,26,37, Cumulative Impacts,
4 26 3 2 arig mqu�i,o qo,Ii,o gy
Fo assess llhia Igbaala iriifl,,.fl duirect effects of the piroposed IMaasteir IPllaairu afteirriabives assodiated With Igbhila.alicaall
chariges liira the eiriMiroiriiirinierit arid Iricireases liiru deiriniarid for Igbu.allblkc pairk arid irecira afior4l fadflIkfies, 1996
baseEkriie coirii6fioiriis weire coirinipaired With coirii6floiriis expected With liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of the t4o Acfloirii/t4o
�Piroject Afteirriafive arid fouir Ilbu.alillul afteirriafives, C.hairacteiNzafloirii of the eiriMkroiriiirinieiriitall Ilbaasa Ekriie Irichided as
6scus§ioirii of pairKlairiid de6cafloirii/fee oir6riarices, desciNpfioiriis of pairk arid irecira afior4l facflkfies atairild
adjacerit to II AX, arid as suiriniriniairy of the suffidiericy of ex�isfliriig pairkllairiids liira irinieefirig useir deiriniarids,
hriffoirrinafloirii was obta�kriied firoirini pairk arid recireafloirii ageridies WiUNirii the study airea,
rhea, Igbaairlks arid irecira afiori study airea Ihiaas Ibeeirii defiried to Iricoirpoirate aireas liiriniirinie6aalally suirrouirii6rig the
I� ff lrbirablgbairty Igbaalairiifl4lHly affected Iby 61rect liirinilpacts (e,g,, acqu�i§ifloirii) oir Iricireased deiriniarid for fadiEity use
assodiated With liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of the lrbirablgbabsed IMaasteir IPllaairu Ilbu.alillal afteirriafives, Fhe study airea liirilch.aala.
the II ff Irairualraairty, the southeirri Igbabirllliabira of the coiriniirinuiriility of Westchester, the airea Ibetweeiril the westeirril
alkrpoirt Ilbabu.airualaairy arid the IPaaa,lil1ic Oceari, the airea adjacerit to the southeirri Ilbabu.airualaairy of the alkrpoirt, airild
the airea to the east of the alkrpoirt that Irichides Igbaairlks adjacerit to the lrblrablgbabsed II AX Expiressway, Fhe
puUkc pairk arid irecira afloiri4l facflkfies Withlkrii the study airea aire showirii liira 111iguireF4 26 3 1, IPu.allblkc IPaairlks
arid Il ecireafloirii I:acflkfles Withlkrii Study Airea, Pairks arid irecira afloirii aireas out§ide of UNis study airea
poteiriifi4lHly affected Iby iri bise aire Iderifified arid addiressed liiru Sectiori 4,8, Department of Ti'ansportation
Act' Section 4(f), Fhe Irbirliiririaair4 Irbu.allblkc pairk arid recireafloirii Irbirova ideirs wfthlkrii the pairks arid recireafloirii study
airea aire the C.ourity of Il os Airiigelles arid the difies of II os Airiigelles, El Segurido, arid Ilirug111a wood, Direct
arid uirualuira ct girowth liira the vua,lkriifty of Il AX arid ellsewheire liiru llhia ireglliabiru associated With the IMasteir IRaairu
woUld allso iresu.alll iiira Iricireased deiriniarid for lrbairlks arid irecira afloirii, Poteiriifl4l liirinilgbaacts aire addiressed liira
Sectiori 4,5, Induced Socio-Economic Impacts (Growlth Inducement), arid subsecfloirii 42637,
Cumulative Impacts,
hrinipacts ori Igbu.allblkc Igbaairlks arid irecira afloirii aireas weire deteiririniuiriied Iby evahiabirig whin their the IMasteir IPllaairu
buflId afteirriafives woUld cireate oir exaceirbate defidieiriicuies liira Igbu.allblkc pairk arid irecireaalliabiri4l fadflIhifies thirough
Iricireased deiriniarid, oir whetheir coristirucUoirii acbMifies, acqUi§ifioirii, oir afteirafloirii of as fadflIfty woUld
§igiriilificairiifly coirinipiroiriniuise Its use oir cireate the rieed for mew Igbu.allblkc Igbaairlks arid irecireaalliabiri4l fadflIkfies.
Assessirinierit of deiriniarid for Igbu.allblkc pairk oir irecira afloiri4l fadflIkfies Is Ibased ori Iricireases liira eirinlplloyees,
alkrpoirt useirs, oir chariges liira Igbablgbu.allaalliabiru iresu.alluiragl 61recfly firoirini lrbirabla ct dev6lopirinierit, arid whetheir such
deiriniarid woUld corif1kct With staridairds estaUkshed liira appEicaUle Igbllaairiis arid oir6riarices,
4 26 3 3
rhea, QUkrinby Act, a secfloirii of the (41kfoiririilia Sub6Mi§iori Il ap Act adopted Iby the (41kfoiririiva State
I� eg�is�latuire, eirinipoweirs �loca�l goveirriirinierits to requlkre a piropeirty owrier oir devellqpeir to de6cate larid for
puUkc pairk oir irecira afloiri4l use oir to pay as pairk airiid fee, ('.oiriniirinuirii�ifies With pairk airiid de6cafloirii oir
"QUkrinby" oir6iriiairiices Ihiaave the aUflIfty, thirough fees oir Ilaairual de6cafloiriis, to keep 1paace With Iricireases liira
deiriniarid for Igbu.allblkc pairk arid recireafloiri4l facflkfies gerierated firoirini re§iderifi4l deve�lqpirinieiriit, ldeiriiflfylkriig
III Os Aingedles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1663 IL.. IIMIasteir 111 Ilairl 111::lirlall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3137 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o J., Uhiiie111e
J a iiii u a iiiia iiii��y 91, 21)21) 11 Page 2 of 14,
4.26.3 "Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
juirisdictioins that have such oirdiinainces fin Ifbllace Is dire cUly ire�levairiit to assessiing the effects of the IMasteir
Rlain oin such juirisdictioins.
Withiin the study area, the C.ouinty of II os Airiige� les aind the C.ity of II os Airiige� les cuirreinfly have devellqpeir
fees fin Ifbllace foir pairkllairiid devellqpirineiriit oir frinpiroveirineint,
Pairks aind Irecireatiolru aireas withiin the study airea Iraingfu fin size froirin Iless thain two acires to oveir2()()
acires, [ acfllifies aind services Iraingfu froirin IlaIrudscaIped Ipassive Irecireatioin aireas to Ipairlks with IgbaIIII fieNs,
teininis courts, gyrininasiurins, aind swiriniriniing pods, Juirisdictioins rinay augirineint their parks aind recireatioiri4l
fadfllities avafllaUle to the geinei4l puUlic �by shaired use airiraingeirineints with Iloca l schod distiricts airild pirivate
einfifies, F`dble F4 26 3 1, IPu.ulfbllic IPairlks aind Ig ecireatioin Aireas Withiin Study Area, Illists fhiu Ipairlks airild
recireatioin airea s aind their juirisdictioins aind sizes withiin fhiu Ifba irks aind recireatioin study area,
dLfle 26 3 1
)uidLfllIc I�)aiirks airid Aiireas IffIllfidiriI SlAidy aiirea
Mairne J ul Ii!A!I!ctill Olin slize !Nres)
a slhivvaaaaab lairlk C'.111y of inglewood 1 3
('airll ll lllellsoin Youllii lairlk C'.111y of II os Ainigelks 70
sidoire 11:3 Dockwelleir S11:all:e 11:3eaclhi S11:all:e of California 288
limpeiriall Sll:irillp Cilly of II II Segundo 74
Soull:lIii ll:�ay ll:�,Icyclle 11 raill ('.ounilly of ILaas AinigellEs 'AW
Visl:a dell IIMair lairlk Cilly of II os Ainigelks 1 8
Wesl:clhEsl:eir(:,,ollf Couirse ('.1111:y of II os Ainigelks 690
Wesl:clhesl:eir II::lairlk lRecirealJoin Ceinill:eir Cilly of II os Ainigelks 220
rotaiii
Soull:lIii ll:�,ay ll:ilia yclle 11 raill!is coinill:alinied willilin Dockwelleir S11:all:e 11:3,eaclhi
Sourca lflcll:�Seirvius Coirlpoirallion,2000
Pairks aind Irecireatioin Igbllairus, Iru gUlatioins, aind fa dfllities foir each juirisdictioin Ilocated withiin the study airea
aire described Ibe�low,
Stilte of
Isidoire IB, Dockweflleir State Ihgeach (Dockweflleir State Beach) Is the oiriOly ; tat Ipairlk oir Ireciru atioiri4l fadfllity
withiin the study area ocated diredly west of II AX, Dockweflleir State Beach Is Iriniailrutailred Iby the II os
Airiige�les C.ouinty Depairtirineint of Beaches aind f lairboirs, Dodkweflleir State Beach Is 4,05 1 loing aind
appiroxiirinateIly 550 feet wide oveir rinuch of Its leingth, eincoirinpassiing 288 acires, Fhe rinaiin beach eintiraince
Is Roca ted at the westeirin eind of Illrinilgbu iri4l f Ihiglhway, Muftiplle If edestiriain eintiries aind restirooirins, pairkiing
�lots, aind coincessioin stainds aire spiread out a�loiriig Its leingth to accoirinirinodate beach visitoirs aIloiriig the
oceainfroint, Fheire aire also showeirs, Igbllaygflrou.ulrud aind vdHeybafll fadfllities, aind fire Ipits oin the Ibeauch, Fhe
six Igba irkiing hots Igblrovide a total of 1,523 Ipairlkilrugf spaces, Dockweflleir State Ihgeach had ain atteindaince of
2,993,330 li in 199 7�
92M.O."It'll 2! 6,ggg��es
Fhe C.ouinty of II os Airiigelles Iriniailrutailrus a Igblicydlu tirafll that traverses Dockweflleir State Beach, Fhe South
�Bay Ihfucydlu IFirafll Iruulrs a loiriig Sainta IMoinica IBay froirin Foinraince C.ouinty Beach to WfllHl IRogeirs State Beach,
with beinchies aind bicydle racks a�loiriig Its path, It Is rinaiintaiined Iby the �� os Airiigelles C.ouinty Depairtirineint of
PuUlic Works, with the exceptioin of a shoirt. sectioin Igbetweeiru C.Uveir BoUlevaird aind flhiu IMairlilra dell IRey
eintiraince chairiiiriiell, which Is undeir the cointirdl of the II os Airiige� les C.ouinty IDu pairtirineint of Beaches aind
f lairboirs, lin uiriiiincoirpoirated aireas of os Airiigeles C.ouinty, deve�lqpeir fees for pairk�lairiid krinpiroveirineint oir
devellqpirineiriit aire required foir iresideiriiti4l deve�lqpirineiriits of Irinibblru thain oine unit; I fees airu lilrinilgbosed foir
coirinirineird4l oir iindustiri4l Igblrojects,
III os Aingelles III Irteirin atill oirla III Allirlpoid: 4 1664 IL.. Illyllluusteir 111DIllairl 111::111inall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3138 of 4165
I x1.Wuir 1:o v rhik1k
Jaiirui�iuuai 9, 201,201, EA�iiiillllMI 11 Page 3 or f i
,
17
,i
„A
ft
s
J�
e,m y, _ ��lyl�a'✓irmaar m�e�mmrm'�,_ .�,,�zu� .r ,i„m i,,.", ,r,,,�,U
I
I i
spy fJirylry �
/ f ,i vve�xwrcv,2�"" `-rm'uw �NpAM
, w
r�
v
'I
0
dor"' 7J"
P l
z
r
d
7
vc
.. luu4ldN vp�
Y
{; p0V ,
1 k
I� V
N �wwmm f
l
`
.
r
W
I ;
Et
t
r
Page 3139 of 4165
Le1 telliir 1:o I Ulhiiiic1111c
J a iilru aliliailil 91, 2111 ��.
and Recival "
11 os Aingelles 111 Allirlipoilt 4 1666 111.. III1°'liiurm 111 Illlllllil1113/llllllllillllll"
Page 3140 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o J, Uhiiic111c
Jainiiiiiairy 9. 20112011 E x uiiiillllIIIIf. I 1 1,
4.26.3 Parks and Recivall0ii (CE
9,111�1,lltlll 211! A011,2122
Fhe C.ity of I� os Airiige�les Zoiniing C.ode (Sectioin 17,12) requires that a peirceintage (0,9 to ,duxpeirceint.) of
the giross airea of a resideinti,,.fl subdivisioin Ibe dedicated foir Ipairlk aind Irecirr atioiri4l uses, oir a fee rinay Ibe
paid fin Illin u of Ipairlk dedicatioin. IPa irkllairiid dedicatioin oir Igbayinneint of fees Is Inot required foir iriioirii iresideirilti4l
deveIlqpirineiriit fin the city,
Fhe C.ity of II os Airiigelles C.oirinirinuinity IRlain Staindairds caIHl foir a riniiniinnuirin of two acires of Inn ighborhood
pairk aind two acares of coirinirinuinity pairk peir 1,000 popUlatioin, Accoirdiing to the C.ity's PuUlic Recireatioin
Rlain,989 ineighborhood recireatioin sites seirve resideints of aIHl ages withiin a radius of appiroxiirinate�ly oiriie
haff I Fhe optirinuirin site woUld Ibe 5 to 10 acires aind Igblrovlide space aind fa dfllities foir outdoor airild
iindooir recireatioiri4l activities, C.oirinirinuinity Irecirr atioin sites woUld Ibe 15 to 20 acires aind seirve Iresideints of
a�Hl ages with a Ibiroad iinteirest rainge fin seve14l suirrouindiing ineighborhoods withiin a two.irinflle Iradiu s,
�Based oin these adopted staindairds, the C'.ity of II os Aingekis Is deficierit fin pairKlairiid: I airea of the city Is
(( )Fhe city has ain ov&41H deficie ricy of 1 1,404 a cires
adequate�ly served Iby recireatioin aind pairk fadfllifies,')""
of ineighborhood aind coirinirinuinity pairKlairiid,`)`),
lin the C.ity of II os Airiigelles, oin aind adjaceint to II AX piropeirty, theire aire fouir Ipairlks, totaEiing appiroxiirinate�ly
100 acires, IilrucIlu.idilrugg the 69 acire Westchester Goff C.ouirse, I'm of these Ipairlks, Westchester IPairlk
Recireatioin C.einteir aind Vista de l IMair IPairlk, afire Ilocated iirinirinediate�ly adjaceint to the II....AX piropeirty, Fhe
Westchester IPairlk Ig ecireatioin C.einteir Is a 22.acire Ipairlk with rinainy fadfllities, Iilrucllu.idilrugg teininis, liba sketbafll,
aind voflleybaIHl courts, basebaIHl fieNs, chiflIdirein's Igbllay aind Igblicinic aireas, a swiriniriniing poo�l, aind a coirinirinuinity
buflIdiing. Vista de l IMair IPairlk Is a 1 8.acire Ipassive, IlaIrurgscaIped Ipairlk with Ipiciric taUles aind a tot Ilot Ilocated
east of Vista de l IMair BoUlevaird, inext to the Ih II Segundo Dlue IBu.rffnrfly f IlaIfblitat IRestoiratinblru Area, Phan,
Westchester Goff C.ouirse aind C.aid IE, hfieIlsoirii Youth IPairlk afire Ilocated oin II AX piropeirty, FheWestchesteir
Goff C.ouirse, a Igbu.slfbllic fadfllity Ileased Iby II NNA, Is withiin the IgblrUblgbUbsed Westchester ou.rflhisid Igblrrbgr ct area,
C.aid Ih , IhfieIlseirii Youth IPairlk, a Igblrivate fadfllity Ileased Iby II NNA, Is oin the in o I east coirineir of the IIAX
piropeirty, Fhe Ipairlk occupies appiroxiirinatelly sevein acires, aind Iilruclluides a socceir fieN aind two basebaIHl
diairinoinds that aire used foir oirgainized youth spoirts,
Withiin the Westchesteir/Rlaya der l IRey coirinirinuinities, the pairkllairiid acireage fin coirinbiriatioin with the
Westchester Goff C.ouirse cu irlreinfll Igblrovides appiroxiirinate�ly 2,3 acires of pairkllairiid Ipeir 1,000 Igbrblgbu.sllatinblru.
�Based oin the city's adopted staindairds, this Is a deficit of appiroxiirinate�ly 1 7 acires Ipeir 1,000 Igbnblgbu.sllatinblru oir
appiroxiirinate�ly 82 acires,
9 IIt ,,1111,11111111Y 2!
Fhe C.ity of El Segundo's pairk aind recireatioin iinveintoiry tota�ls appiroxiirinate ly 213 acires, iinchidiing pirivate
recireatioiri4l fadfllities, C.ity Igbu.slfblllic Ipairlk aind Irecirr atioiri4l facfllities total 91 acires, Iilrur hidiing teen Igbuslgblllic Ipairlks,
thiree schoo�l sites, a utfllity tirainsirinissioin coinridoir, a goff diriviing Irainggn , a Irecirr atioiri4l fadfllity, aind a Ifbn ach
a irea,
El Segundo's Geiriiei4l IRlain Opein Space aind Ig ecireatioin Bleirineint sets forth a staindaird IpairKlaind ratio of
5 acires Ipeir 1,000 Igbrblgbu.sllatioiru, Fhe C'.ity of E] Segundo, with a Ira tio of 57 acires Ipeir 1,000 Igbnblgbusllatioin, Is
cuirreinfly rineetiing Its adopted staindaird Although the C.ity of El Segundo does not have deveIlqpeir fees
foir pairKlaind krinpiroveirineint oir deveIlqpirineiriit, the city has adopted s tainda ew irds foir in iriioirii iresideiriiti4l
deveIlqpirineiriit to pirovide recireatioiri4l fadfllifies foir the dayflirine eirinplloyee pqrmflatioirii,'''"
Fhe oiriflly C.ity of IEl Segundo Ipairlk withiin the Ipairlks aind Irecirn atioin study airea Is lirinpeiri4l Strip, a 7,35.acire
passive opein space coinridoir coinsistiing of cuftivated Ilawin, tirees, aind Ifbeinclhes, which seirve to Igburffeir the
city froirin II AX, Fhis opein space coinridoir Is oin the southeirin Ifbou.slrudairy of II. Ifbetweein lirinpeiri4l f highway,
lirinpeiri4l Aveirime, f liIHlcirest Stireet, aind C.einteir Street, IC his airea Is firequeinfly used Iby the Igbu.slfblllic to observe
lairl:of IiIiie c'.Illy of os Ainqgdles ::lulbllc l ere cirealljoaria ::111ain,a poirlJoini of Ilhe Service Sysll:eims 11::Aemeinill:of Ilhe Los Ainigelks Clleinieirall
::111ainerrata ,'RRIMMiry 1979, 1 IIV 4
Cilltarara
y of Los Ainigelks, ::lulbllc lRecirealljoin ::111ain :Rejpg[l:, RRinivairy 1979, 1 III/3
Cilly of Los Ainigelks, ll::::,os Ainlgg��g�§��'.11lmlde Clleinieirall ::111ain l::iraimewoirlk I)iraff llJllRd RRinivairy 19, 1995
991 Cilly of Los Ainigelks, llos Ainlgg��g�§��'.11lmlde Clleinieirall ::111ain l::iraimewoirlk I)iraff ll��Jll::Rd RRinivairy 19, 1995
992 ll::aulk,Jilim, IlireclIoir, lRecirealJoin aind ::lairlks l�)ejpairl:i[neinl:, C'.111y ofllf�11 SEquindo, LellIlIer, RRinivairy 23, 1998
993 ll::aulk,Jilim, IlireclIoir, lRecirealJoin aind ::lairlks l�)ejpairl:i[neinl:, C'.111y of1f]Segundo, LellIlIer, RRinivairy 23, 1998
III os Aingelles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1667 IL.. IIMIrrsu,ruur 111DIllairl 111::111inall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3141 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o J'' Uhiiiellle
J a iiii u a ia 3 "iiii�� 91, 21 fil 21 fil 11 Pag e 6 of 14,
4.26. y Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
airciraft activities at II AX aind take fin Ilrbrugf irainge views of Sainta Il oinica IBay aind aireas of the Il os Airiiger les
basiin,
9,11�,lltlll 2!!29,��M221(111111
Fhe C.ity of Iliriigllewood Ihas tein Ipairlks with a totall of 86,6 acires, Ashwood IPairlk, a 1 3 acire Iparlk Ilocated
for tweein 11 405 aind Ash Aveirime, Is the oiriOly Clity of Iliriigllewood Irbrbrlk oir recireatioin airea withiin the study
area, Ashwood IPmilk cointaiins a wadiing Igbrbrbll, Iba sketbalHl court, voflleybafll couirt, teininis couirt, aind picinic
994
area, Fhe �liriig�lewood staindaird foir pairks Is oine acire peir 1,000 resideints,'' Fhe cuirreint ratio Is 0,8 acires
of pairKlaind peir 1,000 resideints, a deficit of 0,2 acires peir 1,000 resideints,99.j Fheire Is I deve�lqpeir fee
pirogirairin foir city Iparlk rfever lqpirineiriit,
4 26 3 4III IIII IIIr IIII IIII f &I IllrI
4 26 3 4 1 GMAIII IIII IIIr IIII IIIIof
A siginificaint krinpact oin pairks aind recireatioin air woUld occuir If the direct aind iindirect chainges fin the
einviroinirineint that rinay Ibe caused Iby the Ipairtlir,u.bllar Itbu.bullrf afteirinative woUld poteiriiti4lHly Iresu.btt fin oine oir Irinlrblrr
of these coinditioins:
* DirecHy geineirate a substainti4l iincirease fin tlhr Igbrblgbu.bllatlirblru of the Irbrrbject afire that cireates oir
exaceirbates deficiericies fin IparlKlaind as deteirinniined Iby the appllicaUle oirdiinainces aind/or adopted
staindairds,
* DirecHy resufts fin the ineed foir inew pairks oir recireatioiri4l fadfllifies due to degiradatioin oir acquisitioin of
pairKlaind oir substainti,,.flHly afters existiing Ipairlks oir Irecireatlirblrurbll fadfllities so that litwoUld decirease the
use of the Iparlk oir Irecireatlirblri4l faciEity.
Fhese thireshoNs airy utfllized Ibecabu.se they addiress the coinceirins foir Ipairlks aind Irecireatlirblru airy as
poteiriifi4lHly direcHy affected Iby the Irbrrblgbrbsed I steir IRlain Itbu.blillrf afteirinatives, Fhe first thireshoN Is a
rinodificatioin of a thireshoN fin the Diraft II..A, C ()A I Ih ireslhoMs GUde, which states that the "deirinlairild foir
recireatioin aind Iparlk seirvices ainficipated at the flirine of Irblroject buflIdout" Ibe "coirinpaired to the expected
�leve� l of service avafllaUle,"''`" Illru the folHlowiiriig airi4lysis, deirinaind Is Ibased oin whetheir the Ipu.altblllic Ipairlk oir
recireatioiri4l fadfllities woUld seirve the suirrouindiing Igbrblgbu.bllatlirblru as deteirinniined through adopted oirdiinainces
aind staindairds, Assessirineint of deirinaind foir recireatioiri4l fadfllities Is Ibased oin iincireases fin eirinplloyees,
airpoirt useirs oir chainges fin Igbrblgbu.bllatlirblru resuftiing dirt cHy froirin Irblroject deve�lqpirineiriit, Fhe secoind thireshoN
was derived froirin Appeindix G of the State ("EQA GuideEiiriies, which states that a Irblroject woUld Ihave a
siginificaint krinpact oin pairks If It resufts fin the "ineed foir inew oir physicaflly afteired" fadfllities aind/oir resuRs fin
1'substairiiti4l Igblhysir a l deteirioiratioin of the fadfllity," Physica l deteirioiratioin fin this airi4lysis lilrur,llu.ides
acquisitioin, decireased access, oir a chainge fin the use of a Irbrbrlk oir recireatioiri4l facfllity,
4 26 3 4 2 1°° �deraIl Staridards
Fhe I Airpoo Naindbook does Inot Irequ.blilrr that this eiriiviiroiriiirineiriitall topic Ibe addiressed;
therefore, 1 fede14l staindairds applly to the folHlowiiriig airii,,.flysis, Eiriiviiroiriiirineiriita l effects oin Igba irks aind otheir
resources associated with acquisitioin, I access, aind otheir lilrurfulrect effects aire, however, addressed
puirsuaint to fede14l staindairds fin Sectioin 4,8, IC:epairuirTieiv of I irainspoioa6oin Ac'J, Sec'Jbin 4(f),
994 ::laircells, Loirl, ::111ainining limainiageir, (�'.Illy of inglewood, LellIlIer, Rmivairy 20, 1998
99�j C'.111y of inglewood, C'.oiinimunilly IlDevellopmeinill:aind 11�ouslinig 1Dejpairl:i[nelnl:' opefl!
IlDeceimbEff 1995
996
C'.111y of Los AinigellEs, IlDirafll:11.A ('JQA 11 hiresholds(:,"ylde,, SeclJoin J 4 lRecirealJoin aind lairlks,J 4 3, 114, 1998
III os Aingelles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1668 111 AX Masteir 111DIllairl 111::111inall Illlllllil1113/IIIIIIIIiIIIIIIR
Page 3142 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o I, Uhiiiclllc
Jainiiiiiairy 9. 20112011 E x u N I I Paixtll� 7 1,
4.26.3 Parks and Recivall0ii (CE
4 26 IIIa s eIllr I I a r i C n n t n e r I s
t4o Masteir IRlrblru coirinirinitirineints foir Ipairlks aind recireatioin airy Irbrrblgbrb,ed, f Iloweveir, the fdHowiing IMasteir IRlrblru
coirinirinitirineints froirin otheir eiriiviiroiriiirineiriitall discipEiines afire ire�levairiit to this airi4lysis,
* I It I Coirinipl ittill City of I os Aingeles F"irainspoirtatioin Eleirinieint Bicycle IIPllain (Alteirinatives A,
�IB, aind C)
* I It I �5 Coirinipl ittill City of I os Aingeles F"irainspoirtatioin Eleirinieint Bicycle IIPllain (Alteirinative I))
* S F .18 Coinstiructioin F"iraffic Mainageirinieint Plain (Alteirinatives A, ��B, C, aind I))
Fhe above coirinirinitirineints airy Ipirovided fin their einflirety fin C.hapteir 5, *iroini'TieiV�.d AcJbin Ig^Ilaiir,
4 26 3 6
4 26 3 6 1 III ctk)Ir,WW) i Iro, ect Altenriative
0
Fhe t4o Actioirii/h,W IPiroject Afteirinative (described fin C,hapteir 3, AReiriim.&ves) cointaiins various features that
airy especiaflly Ipeirlrlilrurint to the airi4lysis of Ipairlks aind Irecirr atioin lilrinilgbaucts, Soirine of these features airy
increases fin passeingeir activity aind piropeirty acquisitioin, Fhe t4o Actioirii/h,W PirojectAfteirinative woUld not
resuft fin ainy Igblhysir a l afteiratioin to C.aid IC hfiellsoirii Youth Pairk,
Seiiwliice
Afthough Irbrrbjr,cted iincireases fin Igba,w, eingeirs rinay lilrur,lrease deirinaind foir Igbu.bUllic Irbrbrlk aind Irecireatirblru airy as
due to Irbrbssulgbllr dayflirine oir Ilu.blrur,lhglilrinir use Iby visitoirs to the airpoirt, ainy iincirease Is expected to Ibe sirin4IL
I�:uirllheiririnoire, theire woUld Ibe a Iredu.br tioin fin deirinaind froirin eirinplloyirineiriit with a Irbrrbjected dediine fin oirii�
airport. eirinplloyees under the t4o Actioirii/h,W IProjecg Afteirinative, IMoireoveir, theire woUld Ibe reduced Ilrbr,rbll
deirinaind oin pairks associated with the oingoiiing voh,fintairy ire locatioirii of 4,987 resideints undeir II.. NA'
existiing Aircraft t4oise Mitigatioin Pirogirairin (AINHP) (see Sectioin 44,2, �Rebcla.&oin of �Re§deiilcles oir
BU§inesses), Fheire airy I puUlic Ipairlks withiin the II MNAM,HP acquisitioin aireas,
AX Moiirrfl[IIs kle
Appiroxiirinatelly 4. Irinfiilllllirblru squaire feet (M&I) of coirinirineird4l aind ireseairclhi/(Ievellolr)irinierug uses woUld Ibe
coinstiructed oin 358 acires undeir the II AX t4oirthside piroject, Afthough I iresideiriifi4l uses aire piroposed,
the IILAX Noird'i `:glide Dev6opi'TieiV FlirqjecJ ��DHR indicated that the pirojectwoUld iincirease the use of
puUlic Iparlks aind recireatioiri4l fadfllifies fin the Westchesteir/Rlaya de l IRey afire due to dayflirine oir Ilu.blrur,lhhlilrinir
eirinplloyee use, C.oinsisteint with the coindlu sir ins fin the IILAX Noird'i `glide Dev6opi'TieiV IFlirgJecJ
ideiriitall lilrur ireases fin dayfirine eirinp�loyee deirinaind foir puUlic pairks aind recireatioiri4l ftacfllifieswoUld Ibe
iriniiriiiirin4l aind deirinaind woUld Ibe offset Iby the coinstiructioin of a 2,3 irinflle bikeway,9W
Coiin'flhineiinfiill Gly
At IbuiilNou.rg, appiroxiirinatelly 31 IC IC of the C.ointiinenitro 1 C.ity site woUld Ibe deve�lqped with off1ice aind retaid
uses, t4o iresideiriiti4l uses aind I associated Iparlk aind Irecirrabhlirblru deirinaind woUld Iresu.bllg froirin the
deve�lqpirinerug of the C.oinflineintal1 C.ity site under the t4o Actioin/t4o IPiroject Afteirinative, I uirltheiririnoire, the
C.oinflineintal1 C.ity Irbrrbjr ct iindludes a pirqposa�l foir a 1 9 acire Iparlk, referred to as the C.eiriiti4l Gireeirii,`'`'' fin the
ceinteir of the piroposed buflIding toweirs to seirve eirinplloyees aind visitoirs, Fhe Coin6ineiiv�.d C��y ��DHR did not
iindlude ain airi4lysis of Iparlks aind Irecirr atioiri4l fadfllities as the CoiiViineiiva.d Cy Ilrrli6Q.nll SWdydeteirinniined that
krinpacts woUld Irurbg Ibe siginificaint,
C.111y of IlLos Ainigelks, IlDelpairl:i[neinill:of Allirlpoirls, ll::Jiniall llil�gpacll: :Rejpg[�: LAX I Side IlDevellojpfEIa fl! I IIV
102,Alpirill 1993
tarara
C'.111y of Il..os Ainigelks, IlDirafll: llilnjpga l: lReR21q II: 111IR 1 407 82 SUll Oinllljinlenlal a:o'll,y lKro 111111 29,Au gusll:1984
III os Aingelles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 160 IL.. Illylllasteir 111DIllairl 111::111ina11 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3143 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o J., Uhiiiellle
J a iiii u a ia3 " 91, 21 fil 21 fil 11 pag e 8 ol, 14,
4.26. y Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
CoinstirrUctbin
C.oinstiructioin of the II AX If iolrlrhsid Irblrojecf rinay teirinpoirairflly lirinilrbrblir access to Westchester IParlk Ig ecireatioin
C.einteir (via II lilruc6llru BoUlevaird), f Iloweveir, afteirinate routes or detouirs woUld Ibe Ipirovided If access Is
krinpaired as Ipairlr of the staindaird Irbllrbrurulirugf aind eiriiviiroiriiirineiriitall irevl w Irblrrbcrsses,
4 26 3 6 2 III Rtji lri III Irth
Afteirinative A (described fin C.hapteir 3, AReiriim.&ves) cointaiins various features that airy esped4lHly Ipeirlrlilrurint
to the airi4lysis of Ipairlks aind Irecireatirblru lilrinilrbacts, Soirine of these features airy iincireases fin eirinplloyees,
coinstiructioin, aind Irblrrblrbrirty acquisitioin.
Afthough airpoirt. activity aind the Iruu.blrinilfbeir of Ipasseing eirs aind eirinplloyees fin the study afire woUld lilrilcirr ase
betweein 1996 aind 2015, 1 iresideiriifi4l rfever lqpirineiriit oir acquisitioin of Irbrbrlk oir Irecireatirblrurbll fadfllities Is
piroposed, Both the Westchester Goff C.ouirse aind C.aid E, hfie�lsoirii You Pairk woUld be expainded, Fhe
nilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of Afteirinative A woUld liiriivollve acquisitioin aind the ire�locafioirii of 84 Iresideinflirbll units aind
irellocatioirii of 172 resideints, Vairious tirainspoirtatioin lirinilpiroveirineints Ifbothi oin aind off the airpoirt. Irblrrblrbrirty
woUld Ibe lirinilrblleirineiriited with Afteirinative A, soirine of which woUld lbe adjaceint to Ipairlks aind Irecireatirblrurbll
fadfllifies,
SeiirrVliiqe
Without ainy Iresideinflirbll deve�lqpirineiriit Irbrolrbrbsed, lilrcireases fin oin 4irpoirlt eirinplloyirineiriit aind Irbysseingeirs,
coirinpaired to libasr,llulrur coinditioins, woUld lilrcirease deirinaind foir Ipairlks aind Irecirr,atirblrurbll fadfllities due to
dayflirine oir Ilu.inchtirine use, f Iloweveir, this lilrcirease Is Irurbf expected to lbe substaintiaL Deirinaind foir Irbrbrlk oir
recireatioiri4l facfllity use froirin Irbrbsseingeirs Is Irurbf coinsideired siginificaint as Irinost visitoirs to the airpoirt. airy
focused oin airriviing oir depairtiing diirecHy froirin the lilrinilrinir diate area, Whflle theire woUld Ibe airil estirinlated
iincirease fin oin
� aip p ' 4 iindivi641s corinpared to baseEkne coinditioins, It Is doubtfifl,
base oin fieN observatiori,�)X9that a rineariiiingfUl Iruu.blrinilfbeir of these inew eirinplloyees woUld firequerit off
airpoirt. Iparlks at Ilu.rlruclhiflilrine such that deirinaind woUld Irbllace coinstiraiints oin these fadfllities, Due to tirinle
kirinitatioins, It Is expected that such use woUld Inot Ilulfrlly uiriivollve active spoirts oir Irequ.blilrr Irecireatirblrurbll
fadfllities, As a resuft, ulrinilpacts oin Ipairlks aind Irecireatirblri4l fact pities due to iincireases fin oin airpoirt.
eirinplloyirineiriit woUld Jibe (less thain siginificairilt.
Acceptiing that theire woUld lbe soirine liincireased deirinaind foir Iparlk aind Irecireatirblrurbll fadfllifies, such ulrilcireases
woUld Ibe Irinirblrr thain offset Iby Irbrolrbosed iincireases fin Irbrbrlk aind Irecirr,atirblrurbll fadfllities aind the reduced Iloca l
deirinafind associated with resideinti,.fl acquisitioin By 2015, C.aid IE, If fiellsoirii You IParlk woUld Ibe expairilded
�by 5 acires to appiroxiirinate�ly 12 acires, Fhe expainded park woUld cointirime to be used foir oirgainized you
spoirts oir otheir active Irecireatirblri4l activities, Additioiri4l pirqposa�ls foir inew Irbrbrlk aind Irecireatirblri4l fadfllifies
airy desciribed Ibe�low undeir Westchester Southside IPiroject,
Fhe reduced deirinaind foir Iloca�l Irbu.blfblllic Irbrbrlk aind Irecireatirblrurbll fadHities woUld coinrespoind to the Ilaind
acquisitioin Irbrolrbrbsed undeir Afteirinative A, which woUld liiriivollve the ire�locatioirii of 84 Iresidr inti,,.fl units with
ain estirinated Irbrblrbu.bllrbflirblru of 172, As pirevious�ly stated foir the If Actioin/t4o IPiroject Afteirinative, Iloca�l
deirinaind woUld also Ibe reduced with the irellocafioirii of 4,987 resideints, lilrurfr,lrbr,lrurfrint froirin the IMasteir IRlairu,
undeir I1 NNA's existiing acquisitioin Ipirog irairini.
lirinpeiri4l f highway woUld Ibe lirinilpiroved Iby 2005; however, Illrinilrbriri4l Strip woUld Inot Ibe afteired with
liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of ainy of the afteirinatives, I�:�uirllheiririnoire, theire woUld Ibe I chainges oir access coirilstirairilts
posed to the Westchester IParlk Ig ecireatioin C.einteir, Vista dell IMair IPairlk, Dockweflleir State Beach, oir the
South IBay Bicyclle IFirrblill. Effects oin Ipairlks aind Irecirratioiri4l fadfllities associated with the II AX Expiressway
aind State IRou te 1 krinpiroveirineints undeir Afteirinative A afire described fin Appeindix IK, SUpp eii,Tiein��.fll
.WflUL&0111 foir Il..AX .xpiressway and S .Re IfROLfle I IllrTiproverTleiiVs,
As fuirtheir described fin Sectioin 4 8, DepairuirTieiv of I irainspoiN�.&oin Ac,J, SecJbin 4(f), withiin the Sectioiril 4(f)
study area, pairk use woUld not �be siginificainHy krinpacted Iby I As fuirtheir described fin Sectioin 4,14,
Coas .fll Zoine II lama geii,TieiiV and Coa sup .fll 1Bairlrlieirs, undeir Afteirinatives A, IB, aind C., libicycllr access to
999 lEdd olbseirvallioin of 1pairlla use liini Ilh ILAX viclinilly was coindmIlIed lby ::l('.11R SeirvicEs C'.oirlpoiralJoin oin SelplIembeir 5,2000,
1 1200 aind 200 1 in
III os Aingelles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1670 111 A IIMIaaa teir 111DIllairl 111::111inall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3144 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o I, Uhiiie111e
Jainiiiiiairy 9. 201,201, E xIllluiuillNuuf. 11 1,
4.26.3 Parks and Rectvatioii (CE
Dockweflleir State Beach via Ilirinilgbu iri4l IV Ihighway aind Westchester IPairlkway woUld Ibe teirinpoirairflly liirinilpaiired
with deve�lqpirineiriit of the iruirugg iroad, IC Iloweveir, liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of IIMasteir IRlain C.oirinirinitirineint II U3, C.oirinplly
with C.ity of II os Airiige�les IC irainspoirtatioin IBleirinibint Bicyc�le Rlain (A Ifs irinatives A, IB, aind C.), woUld einsuire
that irew bicyclle laines woUld Ibe pirovided a�loiriig lirinpeiri4l IV highway aind iincoirpoiratioin of bik Ipah irufo the
Westchester Southside deve�lqpirineiriit woUld irimauirufaliiru aind liirinilgbirove access Igbetweeiru SepUlveda BoUlevaird
aind Dockweflleir State Beach a�loiriig the inoirlrlhi side of IC...AK
Westdhiesteiirr Souflhislkle
�By 2015, the Westchester Sou.bfhsid Irbirrbgu ct woUld Ibe Ifbu.blilf out with 2,62 M&I�:: of offiice, Ihiotell, iretafll,
restauiraint, rind busiriess Ipairlk uses, Westchester Southside does snot liirur,lhide resideinfi,,.fl deve�lqpirineiriit
aind, therefore, woUld Ihiave oiriOly Illiirinuited liircirr,ased deirinaind foir Ipairlks aind irecireatioiri4l fadfllities froirin
dayflirine oir Ilu. inchfirine eirinplloyee use, Deve�lqpirineiriit of Westchester Sou.bfhsid liirur,lluides expainsioiril of the
existiing Westchester Goff C.ouirse Iby appiroxiirinate�ly 6 acires aind woUld liirur,lhide 3 inew Ihiolles, Withiin the
reirinaiiniing 91 acires of Irblrolgbosed opein space, Irbr,destirliain aind Igblilke paths airy Irblrolgbosed a�loiriig gireeiribeks
aind theire Is Ig oteiriiti4l foir deve� lqpirineiriit of a Igbu.blfblllic Ipairlk aind/oir otheir irecireatioiri4l faciEities, Fhese
piroposed pairk liirinigbiroveirinirints woUld iincirease the capacity of pairk aind irecireatioiri4l fadfllities aind irinloire
thain offset the Illiirinuited iircirr;as liiru deirinaind expected froirin dayflirine eirinplloyee aind visitoir use, As a iresu.blf,
krinpacts froirin Westchester Southside oin Ipairlks aind irecireatioiru airy coinsideired to Ibe Ile thain siginificairilt,
lin coinchisioin, afthough Afteirinative A woUld iincirease pairk aind recireatioiri4l facfllity use with irilew
eirinplloyees aind visitoirs to the airea, this deirinaind Is root coinsideired to lbe substainti,,.fl aind Is irurbf expected to
have ain adverse effect oin Ipairlk aind irecireatioiri4l fadfllities. I uirltheiririnoire, uirur,iru ases liiru deirinairild woUld Ibe
rinoire thain offset thirough inew aind expainded pairk aind recireatioiri4l fadfllities piroposed foir C.aid E, hfi6lsoirii
You IPairlk, the Westchester Goff C.ouirse, aind otheir auras withiin Westchester Southside, As a iresu.blf,
poteiriifi4l liirinilgbacts to Ipairlk irecireatioiri4l fadfllities woUld Ibe Mess Irhain siginificaint. Poteiriifi4l liirinilgbacts
associated with Afteirinative A afire coinsisteint with those of the If Actioirii/h,W IPiroject Afteirinative; afthough
Afteirinative A woUld, liiru coirinpairisoin, blabvib rinrir airk airineinifies thirough the expainsioin of C.aid E, hfiellsoirii
Youth IPairlk aind the Westchester Goff(".ouirse,
Coluny tirrUctbin
C.oinstiructioin activities woUld occuir thiroughout the airpoirt. viciinity oin ain oingoiing basis thirough 2015.
C.oinstiructioin of tirainspoirtatioin fadfllities aind otheir liirinilgbiroveirinir ints liiru Igbiroxiirinilif4 to Ipairlk aind irecireatioiri4l
fadfllifies afire irurbf expected to irestirict. access to airea Ipairlks aind irecireatioiru aireas, IgbossiUle exceptioin
woUld Ibe coinstiructioin associated with the expainsioin of C.aid C: Iffuellsoirii YouthIC" airk; afthough, It Is
expected that I1 NNA woUld flirine the coinstiructioin of these liirinilgbiroveirinir,irufs so they woUld irinuiiruliirin4lll4 uirufeirfeire
with you sports, As described uiru Sectioin 4,1, 1N6ise, coinstiructioin iruoise krinpacts woUld occuir at Ilirinilgbu iri4l
Strip,just south of Ilirinpeiri4l IV Ihigghway liiru the C.ity of El Segundo, IC Iloweveir, Ilirinilgbu iri4l Strip serves as a Ifbubffeir
betweein the airpoirt. aind the C.ity of El Segundo aind rinuch of Its use Is foir viewiing airciraft, I�::uirltlhleiririnloire,
coinstiructioin iruoise at Ilirinilgbu iri4l Strip woUld Ibe teirinpoirairy, Fheirefoire, coinstiructioin iruoise krinpacts at
lirinpeiri4l Strip ire�lafive to pairk use afire coinsideired �less thain siginificaint, C.oinstiructioin oftheWestchesteir
Southside Deve�lqpirineiriit irinay teirinpoirairflly liirinilpaiir access to Westchester IPairlk Ig ecireatioin C.einteir (via
I� iico�lirii BoUlevaird), IC Iloweveir, liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of ICMasteir IPIkain C.oirinirinitirineint SIF18, C.oinstiructioin Firaffic
Mainageirineint IRlain (Afteirinatives A, IB, C., aind ID) woUld einsuire that aIlge irirat irou tes oir detouirs woUld Ibe
pirovided If access Is liirinilpaiired, I�::uirltheiririnoire, as the focus of coinstiructioin woUld Ibe Ilairgelly oin airpoirf
piropeirty aind withiin liiriniiriniediafelly adjaceint acquisitioin auras, theire woUld Ibe I siginificaint uirinilpacts oin Vista
de l IMair Pairk, Dodkweilleir State Beach, oir the South IC ay Bicyc�le Firafll, (See Sectioin 4,20, ConsUrUCJb11
Tipar.'Js, foir additioiri4l iinforrinlatioiril)
4 26 3 6 3 B Added IRtjiIriway Sotit[l
With liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of Afteirinative IB, ICMasteir IRlain features liirufllu ericiing deirinaind foir Ipairlks aind irecireatioiri4l
fadfllities woUld Ibe sirinfllair to Afteirinative A, with I acquisitioin of Ipairlkrlairiid, irellocatioirii of the sairinle 84
resideinti,,.fl units, aind equiva leiriit expainsioin of irecireatioiri4l fadfllifies,
III os Aingelles III Allirlipoild: 4 1671 IL.. IIMIam teir lll lllallrl 111::111ina11 111:11"::,i1113/111:11"::,illllll::t
Page 3145 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o J'' Uhiiiellle
J a iiii u a iiiia iiii��y 91, 21 fil 21 fil 11 page 1011 of 14,
4.26.3 "Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
Seiiwliice
lincireases liiru oin airpoirit. eirinplloyirineiriit aind pirqposa�ls foir 11 acires of inew aind expainded Irbrbrlk faciEifies (Le,,
C.aid Ih , Iffirllsoirii You IParlk aind Westchester Goff C.ouirse) woUld Ibe equivalleiriit to those described foir
Afteirinative A, irellative to fhir Ifbrbsr,lllirur coinditioins, C.oinsisteint with coinchisioins foir Afteirinative A, liirinilrbacts
oin Irbrbrlk aind irecirr atioiri4l fadfllities woUld Ibe coinsideired Iless thain siginificaint, with iirur,lirfririitall iincireases liiru
deirinaind froirin eirinplloyees aind visitoirs irinirbirr thain offset Iby inew aind expainded irecireatirbiri4l fadfllities,
Afteirinative �B woUld pirovide gireateir pairk aind recireatioiri4l airineinities thain the t4o Actioirii/t4o IPiroject
Afteirinative,
As fuirtheir described uiru Sectioin 4 8, Depairui'Tieiiv of I irainspoiN�.&oin Ac'J, Sec'Jbin 4(f), withiin the Sectioin 4(f)
study airea, I Ipairlks woUld lbe siginificainfly lirinilrbacted Iby I Ilirinilrbacts oin bikeways, as fuirtheir discussed
iin Sectioin 4,14, Coas .fll Zoine IMainageirTieiv and Coas�a.fll Bairirleirs, woUld Ibe avoided thirough
�iirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of IMasteir IRlain C.oirinirinitirineint II U 3 aind liincorlfbrbratirbru of a Ifbike path lirufrb the Westchester
Southside deve�lqpirineiriit,
Westdhiesteiirr Souflhis� kle
Fhe Westchester Southside rfever lqpirineiriit pirqposa�l's effects oin Ipairlks aind recireatioiri4l fadfllities woUld Ibe
equivalleiriit to those described for Afteirinative A, C.oinsisteint with coinchisioins foir Afteirinative A, Ifbrrblfbr sed
park liiririlfbirr veirineints woUld iiirur,irr ase the capacity of Irbrbrlk aind irecireatirbiri4l fadfllities aind irinirbirr thairil offset
the Iluriniufr d uirur,irease iin deirinaind expected froirin dayflirine eirinplloyee aind visitor use, As a iresu.rff, liirinilrbacts
froirin Westchester Southside oin Ipairlks aind irecireatirbiru airy coinsideired to Ibe Iless thain siginificaint.
Coluny tirrUctbin
lirinpacts to pairks aind recireatioin aireas resuftiing froirin coinstiructioin activities woUld lbe sirinfllair to Afteirinlative
k Fheirefoire, as described foir Afteirinative A, liirinilrbacts due to coinstiructioin airy coinsideired Iless thain
siginific,aint,
4 26 3 6 4 IIII ) If"' tjl rlway
With liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of Afteirinative C., IMasteir IRlrbiru features lirufllubrriciing deirinaind foir Ipairlks aind irecirr atioiri4l
fadfllities woUld Ibe sirinfllair to Afteirinatives A aind IB with the Irbrliirinarfr diffeireince focusiing oin chairilges liiru oiril
airport. eirinplloyees, aind acquisitioin activities, aind the Irbrrbrrlislirbru of Iparlk aind recireatioiri4l airineirilitieswoUld
�be equ.blivar leiriit.
their thain the diffeireince uiru oin airpoirt. eirinplloyirineiriit, theire aire I otheir coirinpoineints undeir Afteirinative
that woUld chainge Irbirr viouslly lideinfuf1ied effects oin Iparlk aind irecirr atioiri4l fadfllities, Fhe pirqposa�ls foir inew
aind expainded Ipairlk fadfllities liiru this afteirinative aire the sairine as described above undeir Afteirinative A,
Seiiwliice
Fheire woUld Ibe ain liincrease of 6,421 oin airpoirt. eirinplloyees coirinpaired to Ifbrbsr,lliirur coinditioins aind the
sairine f/ iresidrints woUld Ibe irellocated under Afteirinative C. Fhis inet liirur,irr,ase iin deirinaind (coirinpaired to
baseEkne coinditioins) woUld not afteir the coinchisioins reached undeir Afteirinatives A aind IB regairdiing
krinpacts oin Iparlk aind irecireatirbiri4l fadfllities,
As pirevious�ly stated, the liirur,irr,ase iin deirinaind oin Iparlk aind recireatioiri4l fadfllifies associated with
eirinplloyees aind visitors Is not expected to Ibe substainti4l, aind with the Irbrrblrbrbsed inew aind expainded
fadfllities, liirinilrbrcts woUld Ibe Iless thain siginificaint.
C.oirinpaired to the If Orb Acfioirii/t4o IPiroject Afteirinative, Afteirinative C. woUld Ihiave rinoire Ifbeirur fid4l effects with
gireateir Irbirrbrrusioin of irecireatirbiri4l airineinities,
As fuirtheir described uiru Sectioin 4 8, Depairui'Tieiiv of I irainspoiN�.&oin Ac , SecJbin 4(f), withiin the Sectioiril 4(f)
study area, Iparlk use woUld not lbe siginificainfly lirrilrbacted Iby I lirinpacts oin bikeways, as fuirtheir
discussed lira Sectioin 4,14, Coas .fll Zoine IIMainageirTieiv and Coas .fll 1Barriierra, woUld Ibe avoided thirough
�iirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of IMasteir IRlain C.oirinirinitirineint II U 3 aind liincorlrbrbratirbru of a Ifbike path lirufrb the Westchester
Southside deve�lqpirineiriit,
III OS Alingelles III linteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1672 111 A IIMIasteir lll�)lllallrl 111::111ina11 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3146 of 4165
Lelleiir l'o I, Uhiiie111e
Jainuiairy 9, 20112011 E xIIII uiuillll I I pa ge 1 1,
4.26.3 Parks and Rem �E
Westdhlesteirr Souflhlslkle
Fhe Westchester Southside dever lqpirineint pirqposall's effects oin Ipairlks aind Irecireatiolr4l fadfllities woUld Ibe
equiva leint to those described for Afteirinatives A aind IB, C.oinsisteint with coinchisioins for AIfs irinatives A aind
�B, piroposed Ipairlk lilrinilgblroveirinirints woUld fricirease the capacity of Ipairlk aind Irecireatiolr4l fadflIfties aind innoire
thain offset the Illilrinuited fricirease fin deirinaind expected froirin dayflinne eirinplloyee aind visitoir use, As a Iresu.blf,
krinpacts froirin Westchester Southside oin Igbablrlks aind recireatioin aireas aire coinsideired to Ibe Iless thain
siginific,aint,
CoinstirrUctbin
linnipacts to pairks aind recireatioin aireas resuftirig froirin coinstiructioin activities woUld Ibe sirinfl1air to
Afteirinatives A aind IB, Fheirefoire, as described for Afteirinatives A aind IB, 6lrinilgbacts due to coinstiructioin aire
coinsideired Mess thain siginificaint,
4 26 3 6 5 Erflhariced Safety arid Sectji rilty i)IIarl
A coirinpllete desciriptioin of the fadflhities associated with Afteirinative ID Is Igblrovided fin C.hapteir 3, AReirna6ves,
Fhe features of Afteirinative ID that airy Ire,levairuf to the airi4lysis of Ipairlks aind Irecirr atioin aire suirinirinairized
heireiin, Under Afteirinative ID, I resideinfl4l deve�lqpirineint oir acquisitioin of Ipairlk oir recireation4l fadflhities Is
piroposed, he stchester Goff C.ouirse woUld Ibe expainded Iby 6 acires, with the addifloin of 3 iolles,
Afteirinative ID does Inot lrblrolgbose acquisitioin oir Irellocafliolru of Irr,sideiruces,r�"�) Under Afteirinative ID, I
chainges to C.aid IE, Igfur llsoin You IPairlk woUld occuir,
Seiwliiqe
Afthough I resideinfl4l deve�lqpirineint Is Igblrolgbosed, knicireases fin Igbas, eingeir activity Irinay fricirease deirinaind
for lrba irks aind Irecirr afloin, f Iloweveir, deirinaind froirin Igbasseingeirs Is Inot coinsideired substainfl4l as Irinost
visitoirs to the airpoirt. airy focused oin airriviing oir depairtirig direcHy froirin the lilrinilrinir,diate area, Illru additiorl,
this fricirease Is expected to Ibe offset Iby a decirease of 9,261 oin airpoirt. eirinplloyees that woUld occuir undeir
Afteirinative ID, [ uirtheiririnoire, expainsioin of the Westchester Goff C.ouirse aind Igblrovisiolru of a bikeway
aind otheir Irecireabfliolr4l airineinities withiin II AX t4oirthside woUld offset the Ig oteinfl4l deirinaind for Ipairlks aind
recireatioin that coUld occuir froirin Igbasseingeirs, II oca�l deirinaind woUld aIlso Ibe Iredu.ced with the re�locafloin of
4,987 Iresideints, iindepeindeint froirin the IMasteir IRlain, undeir II NNA's existirig acquisitioin Irblrogglrairlri. As a
resuft, lilrinilgbacts oin Ipairlks aind Irecireation4l faciEifles due to chainges fin Ipasseingeir activitywoUld Ibe Iless
thain siginificaint,
Access fib Igbu.blfblkc Igba irks oir Irecireafloin aireas withiin the study area woUld Inot Ibe lilrinilpailred with
liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of Afteirinative ID, As described fin Sectioin 4,14, Coas .fll Zone IlManagei'Tieiv and Coas fll
Bairirleirs, Afteirinative ID woUld Inot lilrulhiulfblif bicyclle access to Dockweflleir State Ihgeachi, [:uirtheiririnoire,
liirinilr)lleirinieiriitatlioirii of IMasteir IRIain C.oirininnitirineint II U 5, C.oirinplly with C.ity of II os Aingelles IC'ir,,.iiriislr)oirlratlioiriI
Bleirineint BicycIle IRlain (A Ifs irinative ID), as fuirtheir described fin Sectioin 4,2, II and Use (subsectioin 4,2,5),
woUld suppoirlh iincoirpoiratioin of bicyc�le Irbaths aind Ilalrues as Ipairlr of the IMasteir IRlain dircitflatioin systeirin.
As fuirtheir described fin Sectioin 4 8, Depairu'Tieiv of I ranspoNa.&on Ac'J, Sec'Jbn 4(f), withiin the Sectioin 4(f)
study area, Ipairlk use woUld Inot Ibe siginificainfly lilrinilpacted Iby Irur ise,
1000 All:lhouglhi inio Ira slid e in Ja 11 acquisilJoin!is proposed undeir All:e rina Jve 11), if suirface 111raalnlaapoirllaallliabinl irill:11plJoin measure IIMIIM S 11 13,
('.ireal:e A I fnii:eirciliainige al:11 405 and Lennox 11:3,oulevaird(All:e rina Jve 11)), recoi[raneindling a inew inil:eirclhainige al:11 405 and
Lennox Ilbaau levaird!is canried foirwaird, !III:!is possible :Ihal:9 ll:o 12 1 may ineed ll:o I acquired Also, if A1`,J1M11 and
acquisilJoin foir MainclhEsl:eir Square caninioll:I coi[riplell:ed lby :1he Jime :1he Masl:eir 11::Ilain!is approved,Illlroa,C'.111y of IL.absAingelEswI1111
use :Ilie mosil:approlpiriall:e and jpiracl:lcall measums avallable(e a.,volwnil:airy acquisilJoin, easling,and/oir 1p lbllllccoinidE�i[r�ini�Rll:lloini)
ll:o einsure :Ihal: :1he dEslginal:ed aireas aire vacal:ed consisl:einill:w1111h the Cons1suclJoin Sequencing 11Ilain 111 measums would
I avallable ll:o I any ineeded acquisilJoin :Ihal:caninioll:I olbl:alined :Ihirouglhi inegoll:11alJoins 11 hils would I Illlroau Case foir :1he
ma�oirlly of Illl e Ibuilld all:eirinal:IvEs(11 e ,All:eirinal:IvEs 11:3, C,and 11)), Illl e only excelplJoin I All:eirinal:lve A wheire inio inew
1001 developmenill:w111:1hilin Mainclhesl:eir Square!is proposed
111 decline in eirliplopneinill: in spill:e of incireasling avialJoin ad:11villy reflecl:s piroducl:11villy incireasEs(11 e , piroducling moire
econoi[rilic oulpul:I workeir w111:1hilin mainufacluirling iilnlabus,alislEs Ira lal:ed ll:o II AX :Ihal:would oulpace incireases ulnl eimployi[neinill)
III os Aingeilles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlport 4 1673 IL..AX III 111DIlain 111::1111rlall IIIliiiiil1113blllliiiiilllllIR
Page 3147 of 4165
Lelleillir l'o I, Uhiiiellle
J a iiii u a iiiia iiii��y 91, 21)21) 11 Page 12 of 14,
4.26.3 "Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
AX Moiirrfl[IIs�kle
Sirinfllair to the No Actioirii/t4o Piroject Afteirinative, appiroxiirinatelly 4 5 M&I of coirinirineird4l aind
ireseaircIhi/(Ievellolr)irinieiriit uses woUld Ibe coinstiructed oiril 340 acires undeir the IAX t4oirthside Irblrrbfr ct,
Afthough I iresideiriiti4l uses aire Irbrrblrbr sed, the Il.AX \Joiol'l &de Dev6opi'TieiV lFlirgjen,U DHR ururflir,ated
that flhir Irblrrbfr ct woUld liincrr,ase the use of Irbu.blfbllic Irbaablrlks aind recur atioiri4l faciEities fin the Westchesteir/Rlaya
dell IRey as due to dayflirine oir Ilu.blrur,hifulrinir eirinplloyee use, C.oinsisteint with the coinchisioins fin the Il.AX
\JoirUh &de Dev6opi'TieiV lilirgjec'J IHR, lilrur,urfrlrufall lilrur,lrrasrs fin dayflirine eirinplloyeedeirinairiid foir Irbu.blfblllir,
pairks aind recireatioiri4l fadfllities woUld �be iriniiriiiirin4l aind deirinaind woUld �be offset �by the coinstiructioin ofa
2,3 irinflle bikeway,1002 Deirinaind woUld a lso Ibe offset Iby a 6 as expainsioin of the Westchester Goff
C.ouirse, As a Iresu.blff, lirinilfbructs oin Irbaablrlks aind recireatioiri4l fadfllities froirin deve�lqpirine rut ofIIAX Noirthside
woUld Ibe (less thain siginificaint,
Coluny tirrUctbin
Fhe exteint aind duiratioin of coinstiructioin woUld Ibe reduced undeir Afteirinative ID whein coirinpaired to the
otheir Ifbu.blillrf afteirinatives, C.oinstiructioin of tirainspoirtatioin fadfllifies aind otheir frinpiroveirineints fin Ipiroxiinnity to
park aind recireatioiri4l fadfllifies aire Irurbf expected to restrict access to airea Ipairlks aind recireatioin aireas,
iguire As showin fin IV lit
I 4��� 1 10, Poteinfi,.fl C,oinstiruc tioin tois liri 4e npacts � Aft eirinative ID, fin Sectioin 4,1, N6se
(subsectioin 4,1 6,43), coinstiructioin Inoisr lilrinilfbructs woUld occuir at a sirin4lHl Irbrblrlrlirblru of Illrinilrbriri4l Strip, just
south of Illrinilrbriri4l f Ihighiway fin the C.ity of El Segundo, f Iloweveir, Illrinilrbriri4l Strip serves as a Ifbu.bffeir Ifbetweein
the airpoirt. aind the C.ity of El Segundo aind rinuch of Its use Is foir viewiing airciraft, ratheir thain quiet
activities, I uirllheiririnoire, coinstiructioin Iruoise at Ilrinilfbriri4l Strip woUld Ibe teirinpoirairy as irild addifive to a
cuirreinfly noisy einviroinirineint, Fheirefoire, coinstiructioin Iruoise krinpacts at Illrinilrbriri4l Strip irellafive to Irbaabrlk use
airy coinsideired (less thain siginificaint.
C.oinstiructioin of the II AX If Urblrlrhislirfr Irblrojecf rinay teirinpoirairflly lirinilrbaablir access to Westchester IPaabrlk IRedit atioin
C.einteir (via II liiriico�lirii BoUlevaird), Howeveir, Masteir IPIlaablru C.oirinirinitirineint Sf'.18, C.oinstiructioin Firaffic
Mainageirineint IRlain (Afteirinatives A, IB, C., aind ID), woUld Ifblrrbrrurfr afteirinate routes oir detouirs lifaccess Is
li rin pa�i ired, Fheirefoire, Irbrbfririifi4l lilrinilfbructs to the Westchiesteir IPaabrlk IRecireatioin C.einteir woUld Ibe Iless thairil
siginificaint,
As the focus of coinstiructioin woUld �be �lairge ly oin airpoirt. piropeirty aind withiin iirinirinediatelly adjaceint
acquisitioin areas, theire woUld Ibe I siginificaint lilrinilrbaa cts oin Vista de lIC' air IPaablrlk, Dockweflleir State Beach,
oir the South IC-:ay BicycIle Firafll (see Sectioin 4,20, ConsurUCJb11 II Tipar.'Js (subsectioin 4,20,63), foir
additioiri4l iinfoirinnatioin),
4 26 3 7
Whein coinsideiriing cuirimflative lilrinilrbrcts to Irbablrlks aind Irecireatioin associated with the t4o Acfioirii/t4o IPiroject
Afteirinative aind Afteirinatives A, IB, C., oir ID, fin coirinbiriatioin with otheir Ir ast, Ifblreseint, aind Irblrrblfbalfbllr futuire
projects, as discussed undeir subsectioin 4,26,;pro 3, Affeced Bas6hiile, theire
airy deficiericies fin IrbaabrlKlaabrurf irellative to coirinirinuinity goa�ls fin the C.ities of Il os Airiigelles aind Iliriigllewood as irild a
suirphis of Iparlkrlaa iriid fin the C.ity of ICE II Segundo, Under base�liiriie coinditioins, theire are 76 acres ofpairk�lairild
oin IC Ifbrrblfbrirty Ifbr,tweeiru the 69 acire Westchester Goff C.ouirse aind the 7 as C.aid E, Ihfiellsoirii Youth
Park, Beyoind the Iparlks aind recireatioin study area, the C.ity of II os Airiige�les has ain oveirafll deficit of
pairKlaind, aind the supplly of Irbaabrlkrlaa iriid varies froirin suirphis to deficit coinditioins fin otheirjuirisdictioirils fin the
regioin,
4 26 3 7 1 III ctk)Ir,WW) i Iroject Altenriative
Under the t4o Actioirii/t4o IPiroject Afteirinative, theire woUld Ibe a Iredu.br,flirblru fin direct eirinplloyirineiriit geineirated
�by IC AX due to lilrur,lrr,ases fin workeir Irblrrbrfu.br tivity with advainces fin techiriiollogy as irinoing affected ulrurfu.asflries,
As a Iresu.blff, eirinilr)lloyirinieiriit related deirinaind foir Iparlkrlaa iriid woUld decrease, Whflle Irbasseingeir activitywoUld
iincirease, associated use of (loam l Ipairlks aind recireatioin aireas Iby visitors to II AX Is expected to Ibe sirin4IL
Fhe acquisitioin of Irbrrblrbr irties aind irellocafioirii of 4,987 resideints froirin the Mainchesteir Squaire airild Beffoird
aireas woUld substairiiti4lHly Iredu.ce Ilocall ineighborhood deirinaind foir pairk�lairiid, Fhis deirinaind woUld shift to
1002
C.111y of Los Ainigelks, 1)ejpairl:i[neinl:of Allirlpoirls, ll::Jiniall llil�gpacll: :Rejpg[�:11 AX I Side ll)evellojpfEIa fl! III/102,
Alpirill 1993
III os Aingelles III inteirin atill oina III Allirlpoid: 4 1674 IL.. IIMIasteir 11I)IIIalin 111::111inall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3148 of 4165
Lelleillir I'o J'' Uhiiie111e
Jainiiiiiairy 9. 20112011 E x u N 1, 11 palytll 13 Ob 1,
4.26.3 Parks and Rectvalia'(CE
otheir juirisdictioins, which irinay oir irinay irurbf Ibe faced with IpairKlairurf deficiericies, C.oinsideiriing the above aind
the If Actioirii/t4o IPiroject Afteirinative's Irbirovisioiru of a 2,3 irinflle fblilk Ipathi withiin the II AX If oirlrhisid Irbiroject
aind a 1 9...acire Ipairlk withiin the ('.ointiineinta�l C.ity site, the t4o Actioirii/h,W IPiroject Afteirinative's liiririlrbacts oin
pairKlaind woUld Ibe offset oir iriniiriiiirin4l, aind woUld snot cointiribute coinsideiraUly to cuirimflative effects
associated with otheir Iloca�l aind regioin,.fl Irbirojects,
4 26 3 7 2 A, B, arld C
As pirevious�ly discussed undeir subsectioin 4,26,33, Affeced 4as6hiile,
iincireases liiru deirinaind foir pairkllairiid associated with inew eirinplloyees aind visitoirs at II AX woUld lbe sirin4H,
aind woUld Ibe iriroire thain offset thirough inew aind expainded Ipairlk aind irecireatlioiri4l ftacfllities Irbirrblrbr sed foir
C.aid IE, Iffiellsoirs Youth IPairlk, the It Goff C.ouirse, aind aireas withiin the It Southside
deve�lqpirineiriit,
Afthough direct krinpacts oin pairk�lairiid woUld �be �less thain siginificaint undeir Afteirinatives A, IB, aind C
iincireases liiru eirinplloyirineiriit geineirated Iby these afteirinatives woUld liirusfuirecHy iresu.rff liiru iruu Ihiou.rsehibblNs that
pK gon Dependiing oin the afteirinative, �� A �irelated iincirease iincoUld iincirease deirinaind foir
popUlatioin associated with liircireuses liiru direct eirinplloyirineiriit coUld irairge froirin 38,017 to 86,806 withirl the
fiive cou.riruf iregioiru. Fhis Irbsblrbu.sllatuoiru liircirs,ase, which irepireseints Hess thain 1 to appiroxiirinatelly Ipeirceint of
forecasted Irbsblrbu.sllaturbiru girowth foir the iregioiru froirin 1996 to 2015, woUld geineirate deirinaind foir 114 to 258
acires of IpairKlairud. Withiin a tein irinflle iradiu s of II AX, Irbsblrbu.sllatlioiru girowth associated with ire w eirinplloyirineiriit at
�� AX woUld irepireseirut appiroxiirinate1ly 3 to 5 Ipeirceint of forecasted girowth, geineirafling deirinaind foir 21 to 40
acires of pairkllairiid. Fhiu Ir oteiriiti4l iiirrilrbacts associated with these iiircireases airy difficuft to Irbiredis t, afthough
ut lis clleair that a Ilairge poirtioin of this deirinaind woUld Ibe offset liiru aireas wheire pairkllairiid dedicatioin fee
oirdiinainces airy liiru Irbllace, liirus,llu.sdliiruff the C.ouinty aind C.ity of Il os Airiiges les aind iruu.sirireirou s otheirjuirisdictioins,
Withiin a tein iririlillu iradiu s of II AX, oiriflly two out of 16 juirisdictioins, the cities of C.oiriniptoin aind IV Ilawthoiriruu ,
repireseinfling Ile thain 5 Ipeirceint of the airea, do snot have pairkllairiid dedicatioin fee oirdiinainces airild airy also
deficierit iin pairKlaind, [���uirltheiririnoire, the sirin4lHl iincirease iin girowth that irini�ig�hitoccujirwlitlhiliirii thesejuirisdictioins
woUld oiriflly tirairiisllate to deirinaind foir IpairKlairud Iheiru Irbirovisioirs foir IpairKlairud airy snot liirur,lluided with irilew
housiing oir thirough eiriiviiroiriiirineiriita�l reviu ireqsirerneints
,
lieu the irinoiru liiririiririediate II....AX viciinity lit lis expected that liirudu peindeint Irbirojecf effects oin pairkllairiid woUld Ibe
kirinited, [:oir uirustairce, the IRlaya Vista Irbirojecf, oine of the few Ilairge aireas avafllaUle liiru the vicirlity foir
iresideiriiti4l deve�lqpirineiriit, his subject to IpairKlairud dedicatioin oir fees to offset Irbiroject deirinaind, aind woUld irilot
cointiribute to Ilos,alEized cuirinUlative effects, Fhe Ifbu.rliff out inatuire of the suirrouindiing coirinirinuinities uis such
that irus iresideinfi,.fl deve�lqpirineiriit oppoirtuinities woUld Ibe Illiirinited to sirin4lHl liirsf1illll Irbirojects,
As AIfs irinative A, IB, oir C.'s cointiributioin to deirinaind foir pairkllairiid woUld Ibe uirurfuirect, veiry sirin4H, aind a�lirinlost
eiriifiirelly coveired Iby IpairKlairud des icatioin fees oir sped4l taxes, aind the deirinaind froirin irehated Irbirojecf.
woUld �be sirinfllaidy offset thirough deve�lqpirineiriit fees, cuirinUlative hrinpacts oin pairKlaind aire coinsideired Iless
thain thain
4 26 3 7 3 Illy Erflhariced Safety arid SectjiIrilty
Sirinfllair to the If Actioirii/h,W IPiroject Afteirinative, eirinplloyirineiriit ire�lated deirinaind foir IpairKlairud woUld decirease
due to a iredu.ra tioin liiru direct eirinplloyirineiriit geineirated Iby II AX, Whflle passeingeir activity woUld liircirs,ase, use
of Iloca�l Ipairlk aind irecireatlioiru aireas Iby visitoirs to II AX uis expected to Ibe sirin4lHl aind woUld Ibe offset Iby
piroposed irecireatlioiri4l fadfllity liirrilrbiroveiririrints, Fhe acquisitioin of iresideiriiti4l Irbirolpeirlties aind irellocatioirii of
4,987 iresideints froirin tlhiu IMaincheMu ir Squaire aind ICffs ffoird aireas woUld also substairiiti4lHly iredu ce locM
deirinaind foir pairkllairiid, Fheirefoire, flhiu Ir oteiriifi4l iiirrilpacts of Afteirinative ID oin Ipairlks aind irecireatlioiru woUld Ibe
fiflHly offset aind Hess thain siginificaint, aind woUld snot cointiribute to cuirinUlative effects associated with otheir
loc,,.fl oir iregioiri4l Irbirojects,
4 6,3 8III eastjiIres
Afteirinatives A, IB, C., aind ID woUld snot Ihiave a siginificaint liiririlpact oin Ipairlks aind irecireatlioiru, therefore, ino
tigatioin lis irequ.rliired,
III os Aingelles III linteirlin atill Olina III Allirlipoild: 4 W76 III IIMIasteir lll Illallrl 111::111inall 1111111i 1113/1111111i III IR
Page 3149 of 4165
Lettellir to I, Uhiiic111c
J a iiii u a iiiia iiii��y 91, 21)21) Ex�h���N�N, 11 page 14, ol, 14,
4.26.3 "Pai*� and Recivalion (CE."QA)
Fhis Ipage iin tee nfloiri4lHly lef Ulaink,
III os Aingelles III Allirlipoilt 4 167 IL..AX 111::111ina11 111:11"::,i1113/111:11"::,illllll::t
Page 3150 of 4165
Comment Letter D
VichySprings
Resort
2605 Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-462-9515 * 707-462-9516 (fax)
;,m�mc�;msm�m°mn smcom�m
January 9, 2020
Mr.Jared Thiel
Public Works
Ukiah, CA 95482
Dear Jared,
Please find my observations, critiques and requests attached relative to the DEIR for the closure of the
Ukiah Landfill.
It turns out Al Sevilla, Alisto Engineering, was unable to open and review the DEIR with the addresses
given although we did utilize some of his comments.
He will be available again in a few weeks and thereafter.We feel the DEIR is defective and should be
modified and recirculated with the adjustments, omissions and factual corrections it may yield a good
result.
Thank you,
Gilbert Ashoff
President
Vichy Springs Resort, Inc
Page 3151 of 4165
January 9, 2020
Page 10 E5.2 3rd Paragraph
Land adjacent to land fill property is zoned primarily as range land and is used for grazing.
a) This is not true
b) Only land north is used for grazing majority is not. Resort is zoned commercial Resort (overlay D-1
zoning) property west is zoned residential.
c) Resort building this is true, but the dump can be seen from many locations on the Resort
property.
Page 14 E5.2 2nd paragraph
The Concerns were not expressed by non-existent (1990)Vichy Springs Investment Group. Concerns are
D-2
from 166-year-old Vichy Springs Resort.The resort adjoins the dump property(not 500 feet from the
southern property line).
Page 15 E5.6
"Alternatives considered but eliminated. Compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay liners with natural D-3
vegetation."This is the standard for closure why not studied so City Council is informed?
Page 16 E5.7 Table E5.1
Impact 3.1—1
Many neighbors either look directly at the dump from their house or see it several times per day when D-4
they drive by. Residents,tourists who use Vichy Springs Road will see the dump. It will be bright and
very ugly in late spring, summer and fall.
Page 19 E5.7 Table E5.1
Impact 3.1—3
Of course,this ugly cover will impact a historical resource the Resort. View shed from trails and guests D-5
walking or driving on Vichy springs Road will experience the blight.
Page 3152 of 4165
Page 21 E5.7 Table E5.1
Impact 3.7—2
This project has already damaged substantially the fragile pressurized springs at Vichy. Continued drilling D-6
may further impact the pressure zone from which they originate. Study is needed by pressure zone
experts.
Table E5.1
Impact 3.8—1
There is zero noise at Vichy Springs at night. 7 am start will severely impact sleeping conditions.At 8 am
D-7
added to the unpermitted unregulated Gun Club will be a dramatic increase. All day it will impact
walkers and hikers at the Resort.
Page 23 E5.8
No valid alternatives including the standard clay cover were included in this DEIR therefore this section D-g
is simply false.
Page 39 2.3.2
The proposal is for gradient no steeper than 2:1 which means the dump is less than 2:1 in most of its
area. Further the synthetic cover"will essentially eliminate the discharge of sediment" which is a natural
occurrence. No place is it mentioned the effect of a forty-acre impermeable barrier on stream flows D-9
already under cutting the downstream areas especially west of Redemeyer Road to the Russian River.
How will this be mitigated? It would not happen with a natural cover allowing water to penetrate.
Page 46 2.3.3 Third Paragraph
Hours are simply incompatible with a quiet Resort a few 100 feet away—when an environment is quiet
any noise carries and is noticeable. D-10
We have proposed previously a gam start and no back up beepers (this has applications and OSHA
allows it).
Saturdays are the Resort's busiest day. Request no Saturdays.
Page 51 Chapter Three 3.0.3
Project area is not within and around the City of Oxnard! D-11
Page 3153 of 4165
Seems this is not an original DEIR(see future references)
Page 53 3.0.6
The referred to "reasonable range of alternatives" is not included in this DEIR D-12
Page 54 3.1.1
Visual quality and visual sensitivity.
It seems neither of these were addressed not mitigated in this DEIR D-13
Page 57 3.1.2.2
Existing visual proposed project site.This again purposely misrepresents adjacent property as zoned
rangeland and used for grazing. Property south, east and west of the dump is not used for grazing land. D-14
Page 62 3.1.4.3 Impacts and mitigation measures
The 2' x 3' sign is slightly smaller than the 40 acres that will be seen from Vichy Springs Road and the
hiking property at Vichy Springs. Completely a misrepresentation. Needs to reflect what 40 acres looks D-15
like from 1,000 feet.
Page 65
The "Green Blob" photo is self-explanatory. It is gross, unappealing and not acceptable next to a 165- D-16
year-old State Landmark.
Page 66 3.1 Aesthetics
D-17
False statements as follows:
a) The landfill is visible from the landfill gate. One looks directly at it.
b) Vichy Springs Resort from its property sees the same as a) above sees it from a great percentage
of their property.
c) The author did not hike all around the property or he would have seen the dump easily from
many vantage points.
d) His comment "no visual sighting" is simply untrue. Photos will be presented by our legal counsel
demonstrating 4-5 areas of over 100 where the dump can be seen in all its glory.
e) 40 acres are easily seen from 1,000 feet away, another untruth.
Page 3154 of 4165
Page 72 Photo
The boundary line is misrepresented it is approximately where the 50' plus elevation barrier is. See D-18
fence line located which means the gate and dump are visible from the Vichy Springs property.
Page 73 Photo
The arrow points at the visible dump. Please correct this error/misrepresentation. D-19
Page 84 3.2.2.5
Once again,the land use west, south and east is misrepresented to soften impacts. It is not used for D-20
grazing but for a private resort, a private gun range and residential.
Page 102 3.3.2.3 Wildlife Movement
No mention of the huge quality of wild boar weighing up to 400 pounds or large elk at 650 pounds that D-21
graze and root(boar)the area and what that will do to plastic astroturf cover vs. clay.
133 3.4.2 Key Concepts
Historic resource one again this cracker jack box DEIR refers to "Ventura County Historical Landmarks, or D-22
City of Oxnard points of interest." Really? May want to use another or a freshly created DEIR. Please
correct this
Page 136 3.4 Cultural . . . .
Vichy Springs did not begin in 1888 but in 1852-1854 as Day's Soda Springs. William Doolan renamed it
Doolan's Ukiah Vichy Springs after selling the lands of Cayetano Juarez to the squatters on Juarez's D-23
Ukiah Valley Mexican Land Grant in about 1866. He acquired Vichy from Juarez. Day was a squatter.
Page 139 3.4.3.6 Project Site Setting
The author correctly elicits Vichy Springs is a California State Landmark on page 136.Then, in the second
paragraph, misrepresents "just outside the project area Vichy Springs resort established in 1857
D-24
(remember he said 1888 on page 136) is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (National Park
Service 1985) It is not true. He then blanket states "the proposed project is not located in Vichy Springs
Resort property(true) and would not involve any activities that would affect this historical place and/or
Page 3155 of 4165
buildings. He ignores all our comments especially the delicate pressure zone of the only springs of their
type in North or South America. Really? Needs study, analysis and mitigation measures.
Page 140 3.4.4.2
"CEQA requires that lead agencies determine weather their projects may cause a substantial adverse D-25
change to a historical resource."
Where is this shown, studied? Please study, indicate impacts and show mitigations.
Page 144 3.4.5.2 Approach to Analysis
Two places in paragraph 2 the author mentions .25-mile radius then 1/8-mile radius and again the 1857 D-26
date (1854) and the National Register—(not true). What does this actually prove? Please expand show
study, results and any mitigations.
Page 187 3.7 Hydrology
2"d paragraph last sentence this describes the main vent of water called Vichy Springs.The pressure D-27
zone extends 1/3 mile east to the base of the Mayacamas Mountains and west to the subdivision all
along the Sulphur Creek. Free CO2 is seen all along this line.
Page 189 3.7 Hydrology
Top of the page it mentions volatile organic compounds (vocs)found in 90-8 and 92.4. It states,
"generally consistent with historical conditions and do not appear related to the landfill." Based on D-28
what?These are not normally found in shallow ground water. Please provide a study or documentation
to back up this blanket statement and mitigations.
Pages 189-190 Same for Tables 3.7.2
Please provide background study for these assumptions and any mitigations to prevent this from D-29
spreading to neighboring lands and water sources.
Pages 190-191
This is addressed in our legal counsel's report. Is this just a magical coincidence drilling in the pressure
zone of Vichy springs and its results?This needs to be studied by on expert who understands pressure D-30
zones not simply hydrology as that is not the issue.
Pages 199 3.7
Page 3156 of 4165
The mitigated negative declaration does not apply to a plastic cover. It applies to a clay cover. Please D-31
readdress this issue.
Page 205 3.7.3
This project already illegally (with no Fish and Game permit) moved the steam channel and flow,from its
natural channel, north to create a larger base for garbage.This needs to be studied and approved by D-32
Fish and Game, meaning what long term affects has the improper realigning of the stream had on the
environment. What affects has dumping garbage in a streambed had and is having on the environment.
Page 222 3.8.4.3 Noise
Sleeping guests will not appreciate 7am trucking and construction noise. An easy mitigation would be a D-33
gam start and no back up beepers.This is a big deal. For the historical use of Vichy Springs.
Page 223 3.8 Noise
The noise at 7am (City's ordinance,the DER report is in the county at a quiet location) is simply
incompatible and is an impact that requires mitigation. Please study, show impacts and mitigation D-34
measures to zero out the problem that will be existing.
Page 227 Chapter 4 Alternatives
Please see our legal council's report on the lack of alternatives. D-35
Page 257 2.9.1
This states gas well probes will extend 250 feet below surface.This may cause, once again, upset of D-36
Vichy Springs' pressure zone and needs study and mitigation measures.
Page 706 Section 01800 Health and Safety
There is nothing in his section that addresses the lack of safety for workers behind the hugely increased D-37
unpermitted use of the City owned privately operated Gun Club.
Old-time workers at the Dump will attest to the then,from a club with a fraction of today's use, bullets
and ricochets flying around as they worked directly in the line of firing from the Gun Club.This needs to
be studied and mitigated.
Page 3157 of 4165
Note this northerly trajectory of bullets affects all activities including residences and ranchland north
and east of the Gun Range.Vichy Springs can provide names of people who have experienced this past
and present.
Nowhere could be found safety and mitigation measures should the well drilling affect the spring waters
at Vichy Springs.The springs should be monitored and drilling immediately stopped should pressure be D-38
encountered (pressure sensitive instruments should be used when drilling) and remediation
immediately implemented. Drilling close to springs like Vichy is prohibited in enlightened parts of
Europe.
This is extremely important and is a formal request.
Pages 1014& 1015 Post closure Cost
This should be done with clay cover for comparison and evaluation by public—This is a major defect in D-39
the DEIR.
Page 1039 2.2
Tis is a huge misrepresentation. It makes the gun range,which is adjacent(not 2000 feet away)to the
"Waste Management" and is south not northeast. Once again land surrounding is not primarily used for D-40
grazing but resort, gun range and residential homes.There are also homes on the only area north and
northeast of dump used for grazing.
Please correct all of these inferences and stop misrepresenting them.
Page 1056(20) section d
This is simply false. It is in an urban area with 100's of homes and a resort within 1,000 to 4,000 feet D-41
with sewer,water, gas and electricity, hardly rural.
Please correct, address, impacts and mitigations with the correction in all of the following pages and
other locations.
Page 1111(75) section c second paragraph
Stream bed alteration agreement should include a clearance for the illegal diverting of tributary and
burying the original stream bed with garbage.This is imperative as the new permit should not be issued D-42
without the previous alteration being studied, certified and accepted as having no impact on the
environment.
Page 3158 of 4165
Page 1113 5.0 conclusions 5.1 c
This is simply is not true. It will have adverse impact on human beings.The transfer from bucolic D-43
grasslands to ugly plastic is huge.
Please address impacts, alternatives and mitigations.
Page 1114 c Less than significant impact
D-44
The first sentence is a statistical impossibility.
Please see comments and requests herein and those of our legal counsel. There are significant impacts
address them please.
Page 12811.1
See previously mentioned concerns related to the second sentence.This creek was moved illegally now D-45
is the time to address it.
Page 1344 site characteristics Gen. Desc.
2"d paragraph again repeats misinformation Vichy Springs Investment Group (does not now exist (since D-46
1990). First mention of home(s) 900 feet west of landfill.This was not included in impacts before and it
is addressed in our legal counsel's report with photos, as are homes (several) in El Dorado Estates that
look directly at the dump.
Pages 1411, 1413, 1414 Mendocino County, CA .........Part of Trinity County, CA
D-47
Again,the cracker jack box DEIR appears. May want to correct this.
Thank you,
Gilbert Ashoff
President
Vichy Springs Resort, Inc
Page 3159 of 4165
Chapter 3 Responses to Comments
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
This chapter evaluates and provides responses to the comments received on the 2019 Public Draft EIR
(DEIR) during the 45-day public review period (November 13 through December 31, 2019 and then
extended through January 9, 2020). The City also received verbal comments from Vichy Springs resort at
the Public Hearing which was held on December 18, 2019 as well as four written comment letters. In
comparing the notes from that meeting and the written comments provided by Vichy Springs Resort, it
appears that all of the substantive elements of their verbal comments are covered by their written comment
letters. The City has reviewed and considered all of the comments received and provides a response to each
of those comments as provided for below.
COMMENT LETTER A—CALRECYCLE
Response to Comment A-1. Thank you for your letter and the information regarding that a closure permit
should be issued when the Final EIR is certified to enable the Lead Environmental Agency(LEA)to enforce
the Final Closure Post Closure Maintenance Plan.
Response to Comment A-2. The City acknowledges that the Mendocino County Department of
Environmental Health is the Local Enforcement Agency(LEA)and is responsible for providing regulatory
oversight of solid waste handling activities,including inspections. The City looks forward to working with
the Mendocino County Department of Health on this Project.
Response to Comment A-3. The City understands that CalRecycle may have further comments on the
Proposed Project. Please feel free to continue to contact Jarod Thiele at 707-463-6755 or by e-mail at
jh.i,gp. ..( )cn� ofuikiah.com.
Response to Comment A-4. As required by the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),the City
will provide CalRecycle and all other commenting agencies with a minimum of 10-days advance
notification of the time, date, and location of the adoption of the Proposed Project by the City Council,
along with an electronic copy of the Final EIR,which includes responses to comments received.
COMMENT LETTER B—NORTH COAST REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Response to Comment B-1. The comment is correct in that the City is proposing to use an engineered
alternative design cap rather than a prescriptive compacted clay layer cover for the closure of the Ukiah
landfill pursuant to the provisions Order No. R1-002-0061 and Title 27 of the California Code of
Regulations (T27 CCR), §20080(b). The City agrees that the No Project Alternative is not a viable
regulatory alternative that can legally be implemented as the Ukiah Landfill is required to be closed in
accordance with T27 CCR. Please be advised that the City has revised Chapter 4 — Alternatives in the
DEIR to expand on the evaluation of the clay layer/natural cover alternative. Specifically, the City has
moved the clay layer/natural cover alternative from Section 4.4 -Alternatives Considered and Eliminated
to Section 4.3 - Alternatives Carried Forward. Please see Chapter 4— Revision to the DEIR(of this Final
EIR)for changes to the DEIR.
The City's selection of the Proposed Project- including the use of engineered alternative design cap cover
and the ClosureTurf®product as the artificial synthetic turf cover was evaluated by EBA Engineering
in a Joint Technical Document ("JTD") Addendum No. 2, submitted to the Local Enforcement
Agency ("LEA") on August 14, 2015 (See Appendix B to this Final EIR) as environmentally and
functionally superior to the prescriptive compacted clay liner (CCL) cover. EBA proposed ClosureTurf®
after evaluating other alternatives,including the prescriptive clay cover and other traditional geomembranes
April 2020 3-1
Page 3160 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
and geosynthetic clay liners (GCLs), as well as a rock-armored surface in lieu of a vegetative soil cover to
address the susceptibility of soil creep and veneer failures on the steep slopes.
Findings from the aforementioned research concluded that a GCL final cover system represented a suitable
alternative. Based on this finding, the City proceeded with the submittal of an engineered alternative
analysis (EAA) on March 11, 2003 to the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB),
California Integrated Waste Management Board (now CalRecycle), and the Mendocino County
Environmental Health Department (LEA). The EAA was prepared in accordance with Title 27 of the
California Code of Regulations (27CCR), §20080(b) and included comparisons of pertinent properties
related to physical, mechanical, and hydraulic conductivity characteristics, construction/installation, and
other miscellaneous performance features, as well as an economic analysis. Conclusions from the EAA
demonstrated that the proposed GCL alternative met or exceeded the performance criteria addressed by the
prescriptive standard and would result in a reduced economic commitment of tax payers' dollars on the
order of$461,000. This same EAA was included in the January 2008 Joint Technical Document QTD)
requested by the RWQCB.
In 2015, the final cover design was reviewed once again to consider the potential application of the
ClosureTurf® product. Whereas the GCL final cover system was demonstrated to be an appropriate
upgrade to the prescriptive standard, the stability characteristics of the system only marginally exceeded
the minimum design standards. Further research by EBA of the ClosureTurf®final cover system revealed
that the use of this product would provide significantly higher stability characteristics than the GCL and
other geosynthetic products. It would also offer a number of other advantages as compared to the GCL and
the prescriptive CCL standard. These advantages include the following:
Performance
• ClosureTurf® exhibits substantially lower infiltration rates as compared to the prescriptive CCL
standard and offers more efficient removal of moisture above the low-hydraulic conductivity layer
(LHCL) component, thereby reducing the amount of potential infiltration into the waste
management unit(WMU).
• The engineered turf component eliminates the potential for soil creep and veneer failures resulting
from saturation of the vegetative soil cover that is a required component of the prescriptive Subtitle
D final cover and other traditional geosynthetic cover systems. This potential is exacerbated by the
very steep slopes that exist at the Ukiah Landfill.
• The drainage aspects of the ClosureTurf®are designed to allow rainfall to penetrate rapidly through
the sand infill layer and into the structured drain liner below which has a very high transmissivity
for subsequent conveyance of the water off of the liner system. The sand infill has been
demonstrated to handle over six inches per hour of rainfall intensity without erosion when applied
on three horizontals to one vertical(3H:IV)slopes. Such rainfall energy conditions on a traditional
vegetative soil cover would likely result in significant erosional damage.
• The drainage aspects of the ClosureTurf®promote very"clean"and low turbidity stormwater run-
off, which represents a beneficial feature since the collected run-off is subsequently discharged to
the ephemeral creek that borders the northern boundary of the WMU. Achieving comparable
stormwater run-off quality from a traditional vegetative soil cover would be difficult. It should be
noted that the unnamed creek is a tributary to the Russian River which is listed as impaired for
excessive sediment pursuant to 303d of the Federal Clean Water Act.
• ClosureTurf® is designed to provide weathering resistance and geomembrane protection when
exposed to extreme heat and ultra-violet (UV) exposure. Based on results of independent, real-
world weathering tests and data from existing projects, ClosureTurf® can provide decades of
April 2020 3-2
Page 3161 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
reliable performance beyond the standard 30-year postclosure maintenance period.
• ClosureTurf®has been tested for wind uplift resistance and demonstrated no uplift when exposed
to 120 miles per hour wind. As such,the ClosureTurf® can withstand most wind conditions that
could realistically be encountered at the site.
Installation
• ClosureTurf®deployment is very straightforward,both from a placement and seaming standpoint.
Furthermore, heavy equipment requirements for ClosureTurf® deployment are limited primarily
to a rubber-tire forklift or equivalent. Conversely, CCL construction is very labor intensive with
substantial reliance on heavy equipment(i.e., scrapers, dozers, compactors, etc.).
• Less construction quality assurance (CQA) is required for ClosureTurf®due to the consistency of
the materials and manufacturing process. CQA testing for a CCL, in turn, is more extensive and
occurs at a higher frequency to verify the consistency of borrow source materials and the
contractor's ability to achieve moisture content, compaction, and hydraulic conductivity during
construction.
• Installation of a sealed, double-ring infiltrometer (SDRI) is required to test the field permeability
of CCLs,which is costly and time consuming. Such a provision is not required for ClosureTurf®.
• In comparison to other geosynthetic liner systems, ClosureTurf® is slightly more labor intensive
due to the placement of the sand infill layer. However,this increased labor is more than offset by
the elimination of the vegetative soil layer. Similar to the CCL construction, construction of a
vegetative soil layer is also very labor intensive with substantial reliance on heavy equipment. In
addition, in the case of the GCL final cover system that was previously proposed for the landfill,
the gas relief layer material and labor requirements are significantly greater as compared to the
ClosureTurf®.Thus,the ClosureTurf®final cover system installation represents the least intensive
approach from an installation standpoint.
Maintenance
• ClosureTurf®offers a significant maintenance advantage over a prescriptive Subtitle D final cover
and any other traditional geosynthetic cover systems that require a vegetative soil cover.In essence,
vegetative soil covers often require regular maintenance related to the repair of erosional damage,
installation of erosion control measures(i.e., silt fences,hay bales,wattles,etc.), slope repairs,and
revegetation. Erosion from the vegetative soil cover also causes siltation of drainage ditches and
culverts that require subsequent repair. Such provisions are not required with the ClosureTurf®
product,thereby providing a significant cost savings over the course of the postclosure maintenance
period.
Based on the aforementioned considerations, the City proceeded with the submittal of a second EEA to
demonstrate equivalency to the prescriptive standard and to meet the criteria specified in 27CCR,
§20080(b). As required in 27CCR, an economic analysis was included that compared the closure
construction costs for ClosureTurf® versus the GCL final cover system. Note that this cost comparison
focused on the GCL scenario since it was previously demonstrated as part of the March 2003 EEA that the
GCL was more economical than the prescriptive standard. The results of the comparison revealed that the
construction cost for ClosureTurf®was approximately $420,000 less than the GCL final cover system. In
addition, the 30-year postclosure maintenance costs associated with ClosureTurf® were estimated to be
approximately$277,000 less than any final cover system that requires an erosion-resistant layer comprised
of a vegetative soil cover. Thus,the overall cost savings resulting from replacing the previously proposed
April 2020 3-3
Page 3162 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
GCL final cover system with ClosureTurf®is approximately$697,000. This EEA was included as part of
a Final Closure Submittal Package issued to the RWQCB, CalRecycle, and LEA on August 14, 2015.
After the aforementioned submittal, two additional versions of the FCPMP were prepared in March and
May, 2016 at the request of CalRecycle. The content of these versions was similar to the information
contained in the August 2015 submittal, with modifications pertaining to formatting issues and
incorporating miscellaneous comments issued by the various regulatory agencies. However, following
submittal of the May 2016 FCPMP and prior to regulatory approval of the design, a prolonged period of
negotiations occurred that focused on the thickness of the foundation layer (1-foot versus 2 feet) and
geomembrane liner (50 mil versus 60 mil). In a meeting with the RWQCB on October 11, 2018, an
agreement was reached on both issues (2 feet foundation layer and 50 mil geomembrane liner), as well as
a provision to address a possible replacement scenario as part of financial assurance.
After the final negotiations and agreements reached during the October 11, 2018 meeting with RWQCB
staff, the City was directed by CalRecycle, LEA, and RWQCB to proceed with updating the FCPMP for
the ClosureTurf®final cover system design by April 30, 2019. The City met this deadline. That directive
confirms that each agency was satisfied with the previous EEA demonstrations and the corresponding
conclusions that the ClosureTurf® final cover system as proposed is adequately protective of the
environment.
As demonstrated above, EBA has evaluated potential alternatives multiple times over the course of this
project under the regulatory framework of 27CCR and the various regulatory agencies. The scope of the
analyses performed complied with 27CCR, §20080(b) which requires that the proposed engineered
alternative be consistent with the performance goal addressed by the prescriptive standard and afford
equivalent protection against water quality impairment, while also demonstrating that the construction of
the prescriptive standard is unreasonably and unnecessarily burdensome and will cost substantially more
than the proposed alternative. While these analyses have been performed and subsequently approved by
the regulatory agencies, including the RWQCB and are part of the administrative record and now contained
as part of the Final EIR.
In its evaluation,EBA found that the low hydraulic conductivity layer (LHCL) geomembrane component
of the ClosureTurf® system is fully protected from ultra-violet (UV) degradation and other
environmental stresses by the engineered turf and specified infill. WatershedGeo (ClosureTurf®
manufacturer) has completed extensive testing that shows the protective turf cover with sand infill will last
longer than 100 years. This testing has been conducted at third-party laboratories and the results have been
audited by other third parties.(See Appendix B.) As such,the design-life of the engineered turf layer ensures
that the LHCL geomembrane component will remain covered for that period.
The City also shares concerns about catastrophic wildfires and its potential to adversely impact the landfill
cover. As such and as standard City practice, the City has addressed the maintenance and replacement
costs and values in the Final Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plan (FCPMP) and will take out
adequate insurance policy(s)to cover the costs for replacement in the event of a catastrophic event such as
a wildfire.
Response to Comment B-2. The comment is correct in that in 2018, the City had proposed to develop
portions of the same parcel APN No. 178-130-01 as a public park known as the Vichy Hills Trail Project.
However, according to the City Public Works Director, the City has dropped/abandoned that Proposed
Project due to environmental and public safety concerns that could result from allowing public access. As
a result, the Proposed Vichy Hills Trail Project is cancelled/abandoned and the City property will remain
closed to public access.That project is no longer a probable future project that requires further consideration
in this EIR.
April 2020 3-4
Page 3163 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment B-3. The City looks forward to continue to work with the Regional Board to
address the permitting requirements and mitigation measures for work in the jurisdictional water requiring
401 Certification.
Response to Comment B-4. The City acknowledges that disturbed soils on the Proposed Project will
exceed 1 acre in area and thus will require to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of
Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity, Construction General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-
DWQ (As amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ). In addition, the City acknowledges that
the Construction General Permit also requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP)by a certified SWPPP Developer which must be implemented, monitored, and maintained. The
City looks forward to working closely with the various departments within the Regional Board on this
Project.
COMMENT LETTER C—WATER AND POWER LAW GROUP/VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Response to Comment C-1. Thank you for your comment letter and similar oral comments at the
December 17, 2019 Public Hearing in Ukiah, California on the DEIR.
Response to Comment C-2. Comments noted. The City appreciates Vichy Springs Resort's assertion that
its comments on the DEIR are not about stopping the Landfill Closure Plan, but instead are more about
ensuring that the Landfill Closure Plan is done correctly. Specifically,the City intends to close the Ukiah
Landfill in an environmentally responsible and safe manner so that the Proposed Project will not cause any
significant environmental and/or physical impacts to the Vichy Springs Resort including its guests,hikers,
and recreational users.
Response to Comment C-3. The City acknowledges that Vichy Springs has previously provided written
comments on the 2016 IS/MND and the 2017 Notice of Preparation to prepare an EIR (i.e. "Scoping
Document") that discussed the scope of the issues to be addressed and excluded in the EIR that would be
prepared for the Landfill Closure Project. The City responds to these comments in its responses to
Comments C-3a to C-3c, below.
Response to Comment C-3a. The City disagrees that the Proposed Project's artificial synthetic cover
would have an adverse visual impact. Figure 2-2 in the DEIR provides two recent examples of artificial
synthetic turf covers being successfully used for landfill closures and which look very natural and blends
well into the surrounding natural environment. The City's proposed artificial synthetic turf cover would
look very similar and would be designed to fit into the surrounding environment. The City agrees that the
artificial synthetic turf cover will not change color with the change of seasons. However, there are many
instances throughout Northern California where there are green grass/vegetation features contrasted by or
along-side brown hills in the late summer early fall timeframe. This phenomenon occurs naturally around
water features such as rivers, lakes, streams, creeks, marshes, wetlands, etc. as well as manmade features
through irrigation practices. These instances create contrast in the landscape and are not considered to have
a significant adverse aesthetic impact(s). Further,the proposed artificial synthetic turf cover is designed to
look like natural grass and the technology has improved so that it is almost impossible to tell the difference
unless you are standing on the artificial synthetic turf. As an example, see the picture below of an artificial
baseball field where the entire infield (including home plate area and base paths) is made out of artificial
turf. The outfield is natural grass and the pitcher's mound is dirt/clay. This picture was taken from on the
field near the backstop, where the outfield grass is approximately I I0-feet away. From that distance, it is
virtually impossible to tell the difference between the artificial turf and the outfield grass. Certainly, at any
partial views from of over 500-feet away, it would be difficult or impossible to tell the difference between
artificial synthetic turf and real/natural grass. As a result,the City proposed the olive-green color option as
the olive-green color would blend into the natural surrounding environment the best. Also, as described in
Section 2-Project Description, a sand layer will be put on top of the turf to serve as a ballast and help hold
April 2020 3-5
Page 3164 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
the turf down. This sand ballast will be a soft tanibrown color and will help dampen any harsh olive-green
color contrast concerns and will help to make the artificial synthetic turf look even more natural. Please
refer to Chapter 4 of this Final EIR for additional documentation and photos describing how and why the
Proposed Project would not have a significant visual impact on the Vichy Springs Resort. In short,it is the
City's determination that the Proposed Project's artificial synthetic turf would not have an adverse aesthetic
impact on any viewshed. Further, the fact that the City has not received ay other comments from other
potential sensitive receptors, further supports that the proposed Project would not have any significant
adverse aesthetic impacts.
rr ° i� era tip, 'y�ex
Example of Artificial Turf Infield and Natural Grass Outfield
McBean Baseball Field,Lincoln, CA
Response to Comment C-3b. The City acknowledges that Vichy Springs Resort has explained numerous
times that there are extensive hiking trails on the Vichy Springs property where guests come to enjoy the
quiet and tranquility of the area. However, as disclosed in the DEIR and discussed more fully in Response
to Comment C-6e below, the proposed construction activities would not provide a significant source of
noise that would exceed the Mendocino County noise ordinance and would not ruin the "quiet and
tranquility"for Vichy Springs Resort guests staying overnight and/or using the hiking trails.
Once constructed,the Proposed Project would not have any activities that would make any noise that could
be heard by Vichy Springs Resort's guests and hiking trail users,except for the basic ongoing maintenance
and inspection activities that currently exists and which are well within the Mendocino County noise
ordinance restrictions. As a result,the Proposed Project would not have any adverse noise effects on Vichy
Springs Resort, its guests, and/or hiking trail users. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.
Further, the City would certainly not condone or advise its contractors to remove their back-up beepers.
Please see response to Comment C-61.
Response to Comment C-3c. The City agrees that for many years Vichy Springs Resort has raised
concerns that the City's existing groundwater monitoring wells impact Vichy Spring Resort's spring water.
Please see response to Comment C-7 that addresses this concern.
April 2020 3-6
Page 3165 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment C-4. The City respectfully disagrees that the DEIR did not consider the Compacted
Clay and/or GeoSynthetic Clay Covers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative. The DEIR did in fact
"consider"and "evaluate"numerous alternatives, including the clay layer/natural cover alternative. Under
CEQA, alternatives can be "eliminated from further consideration" based on rationale provided for
elimination of the alternative. This in and of itself is an "evaluation". Further, CEQA,unlike NEPA,does
not require that alternative discussions be presented in/at the same level of detail as the assessment of the
Proposed Project.
As disclosed in Section 4.3 of the DEIR, the clay layer/natural cover alternative was eliminated due to a
variety of technical and environmental concerns including, site suitability, increased costs from both a
construction and maintenance perspective, and increased environmental impacts to air quality, biological
resources, water quality, noise, and traffic, among others. Even though the clay layer/natural cover
alternative was eliminated, it has been adequately "considered" and "evaluated". Also, please refer to
Appendix B of this Final EIR for specifics and history of how the City has further considered the clay
layer/natural cover alternative through the years.
Nevertheless,in an attempt to help resolve this issue,the City has revised Chapter 4—Alternatives to move
the clay layer/natural cover alternative to be included in the DEIR as an alternative carried forward instead
of being eliminated. Specifically,the City has moved the clay layer/natural cover alternative as a Section
4.4 -Alternatives Considered and Eliminated and moved it to Section 4.3 -Alternatives Carried Forward.
Please see Chapter 4—Revision to the DEIR(of this Final EIR). Specifically,the City has expanded on its
evaluation of the clay layer/natural cover alternative in the DEIR. However,the conclusion is the same in
that the clay layer/natural cover alternative would have increased environmental impacts to air quality,
biological resources,water quality,noise, and traffic,among others than the Proposed Project.
Response to Comment C-5. See responses to C-5a to C-5j below.
Response to Comment C-5a. The City respectfully disagrees with the comment that the DEIR has several
flaws and defects in Section 3.1 —Aesthetics/Visual Resources as it relates to the artificial synthetic cover.
Please see responses to C-5b through C-5j below.
Response to Comment C-5b. The comment is correct in that the City did in fact choose the "olive-green"
color as the best color option to blend into the natural surrounding environment. It was selected to blend
into the olive-green grass in the winter or wet-season and look like an irrigated field in the summer dry
months. This is not a flawed concept because it is very common to find irrigated fields, pastures,
agricultural crops, golf courses, and landscape designs using grass adjacent to the natural brown/tan
hillsides throughout Northern California in the summer or dry months. This is common place throughout
Northern California and specifically in the Ukiah area and therefore does not present an uncommon
contrast. For example, the DEIR provided a comparison of the Proposed Project's proposed olive-green
color scheme blends in with other local irrigated areas such as the Ukiah Valley Golf Course and the local
surrounding areas. Please see Chapter 4 of this Final EIR for additional photos and analysis of the aesthetic
features of the Proposed Project. Further, Vichy Springs Resort itself has a relatively large grass area that
is kept green all year long, due in part,because it provides it guests with a natural, aesthetically appealing,
contrast to the natural brown/tan landscape surrounding the resort. Color contrasts in natural green and
brown/tan contrasts are prevalent throughout northern California and is not considered to be a significant
environmental impact. The City has used the CEQA guidelines in the DEIR for establishing the
environmental standards for evaluating whether a change to the physical environment is significant and
adverse. The City's DEIR(and as revised through this Final EIR) concluded that the color contrast in the
dry season would not be a significant environmental impact and/or would impact a designated view by
Mendocino County. Please see comments C-3 and C-3a above as well as C-5c through C-5j below.
April 2020 3-7
Page 3166 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
The City has only received comments from Vichy Springs Resort expressing these concerns. The comment
also does not provide any evidence such as pictures or testimony from technical experts that it would be a
significant environmental impact and or that a view to the Ukiah Landfill is considered by Mendocino
County as a scenic resource of significance.
Response to Comment C-5c. Please see response to comment C-5b above. The proposed olive-green
artificial turf cover will look like real or natural grass. Please see and revisit Figure 2-2 as real-life examples
of it being used on existing landfills and how well they look like real or natural grass. The proposed olive-
green artificial turf cover will appear to be an area of irrigated land. Please see Chapter 4 of this Final EIR
for additional photos and analysis of the aesthetic features of the Proposed Project.
Response to Comment C-5d. Please see response to comment C-5a and C-5b above. The overall comment
correctly points out that the existing vegetation on the surface of the landfill and on the surrounding land
represents the baseline or existing environmental condition. The City agrees that the EIR must evaluate the
impact of the Proposed Project on existing conditions. As such,the DEIR acknowledged that the Proposed
Project cover will change the existing condition from the natural vegetation to an artificial synthetic turf
cover and provided several examples in the DEIR of how that would look in comparison to the existing
conditions.
As discussed above, the proposed artificial/synthetic turf cover is designed to and will blend into the
surrounding area as an irrigated grass field,which is very common throughout Northern California and the
surrounding Ukiah region. The Aesthetic Chapter 3.1 includes Figure 3.1-1 (page 3.1-6) of the DEIR that
shows a 2018 view of the landfill (the existing condition on the day of the aerial photo). The baseline
condition changes from season to season,but the landfill will always stand out from the surrounding area,
because the landfill is the largest continuous area in this viewshed with no trees.The existing landfill already
is distinct from the existing natural landscape as it is a landfill with waste underneath the existing vegetation
and there are no trees on top of the landfill. As a result,the 40-acre area of the closed landfill will always
be in contrast to the surrounding natural environment(with sparse or dense stands of trees) — even with a
clay/natural cover. The DEIR provides several examples of how the Proposed Project would compare and
contrast with the existing conditions. Specifically, the DEIR shows recent examples of where artificial
synthetic turf is being successfully used. For instance, and as provided in Figure 2-2 of the DEIR,
artificial/synthetic turf covers have been and are being successfully used for landfill covers and provide a
very natural, aesthetically appealing, looking cover. The City maintains that the Proposed Project's
proposed artificial/synthetic turf cover would look very similar to the two artificial/synthetic covered
landfills examples provided in the DEIR(see Figure 2-2).
Please see Chapter 4 of this Final EIR for additional photos and analysis of the aesthetic features of the
Proposed Project. As explained in response to comments C-3, C-.3a, and C-5b above as well as in Section
3.1 of the DEIR and as revised in this Final EIR, the City has determined that the change is not
environmentally significant and provides substantial evidence that it does not at other landfills and would
not adversely affect Vichy Springs Resort. Further,the comments from Vichy Springs Resort contain the
only opinion and/or evidence received by the City during the several public comment periods over the years
that the color contrast between the Proposed Project and surrounding land during the dry season should be
considered environmentally significant. Further, the comment does not provide any evidence other than
Vichy Springs Resort's opinion to support this claim.
Response to Comment C-5e. Please see response to Comment C-5d regarding baseline conditions and
response to Comment C-5b regarding evaluation of the future visual landscape to the surrounding areas.
Response to Comment C-5L As discussed in the DEIR,the primary purpose of the 1,000-foot example is
to provide some context to the reader as to what can reasonably be seen by the naked eye from within and
up to 1,000-feet away. Further,the demonstration shows how,even without obstruction, objects are harder
April 2020 3-8
Page 3167 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
and harder to see or notice as one moves farther and farther away. Views of the proposed artificial turf
cover from over 500-feet away would look like a natural olive-green grass or irrigated field off in the
distance that is aesthetically appealing against a brown/tan natural hillside environment.The City maintains
that the Proposed artificial synthetic turf will not result in significant adverse visual impacts based on the
applicable CEQA standards and thresholds of significance as well as the environmental setting.
Response to Comment C-5g. Thank you for the photographs attached as Exhibits C-F to your comments.
However,these photos do not change the determination that the impact to viewshed is not environmentally
significant. Also,the DEIR does in fact consider potential views from houses in the El Dorado Estates and
Deerwood Park. These are referred to as Key Observation Points (KOPs) F and G in Table 3.1-1 in the
DEIR,and which are almost 2,000-feet away. The author of that section did not have access to the balconies
of private individual homes with the partial views of the landfill area. The author did not find any public
vantage point where the landfill area could be readily seen. However, it should be pointed out that these
residents all received notification ofthis DEIR and none have expressed concerns with the Proposed Project,
including concerns with the color contrast of an olive-green artificial/synthetic turf cover with the natural
surroundings and environment. As a result, the City has received only one opinion that the Proposed
Project would have an adverse viewshed impact from distant private property from over 2,000-feet
away and no evidence that viewsheds from public property to which the public has access would be
adversely affected.
Response to Comment C-5h. Please refer to responses to comment C-4 above.
Response to Comment C-5i. The City agrees that the prescriptive natural cover has been the standard for
numerous years. However, as pointed out in the DEIR, there is growing concerns and evidence that the
prescriptive natural cover does not perform as well on steep slopes like the slopes at the Ukiah Landfill and
an engineered alternative is the preferred alternative in this situation. The engineered alternative cover
meets Title 27 requirements, and is conditionally approved by all of the necessary regulatory agencies,
including Cal Recycle. Please see Response to Comment C-2 above and Appendices B and C of examples
where artificial synthetic turf covers are being successfully used over the prescriptive clay natural cover.
The advantages of an artificial synthetic turf landfill cover system over traditional clay cover layer/natural
vegetation cover system include the following:
• Long Life. Durable,high-strength system components ensure a long-life(100-year design life) of
protection against operational and natural forces while maintaining a natural looking appearance
with less maintenance than will likely be required for the prescriptive clay cover or a different
artificial cover.
• Soil Cover Savings.Eliminates the need for high maintenance vegetative soil covers and increases
weather resistance. Since final cover soils are challenging to locate and expensive to place in the
final stages of the landfill's lifespan,the resulting savings can be significant.
• Environmentally Friendly. The system is better for landfills in sensitive areas like the Ukiah
Landfill where soil erosion and sedimentation are a major concern due to steep canyon slopes. Soil
loss is non-existent during operations and post-closure. Eliminates the need for borrow sources,
and siltation ponds can be converted to simple stormwater retention ponds. As a direct result,
associated environmental construction impacts are much easier to manage.
• Slope Stability. While a prescriptive clay cover in pristine condition is the most stable landfill
cover,it is possible that over time,the clay cover will desiccate and become less stable. Moreover,
with the landfill's steep slopes, failures over time are likely. When those failures occur, less
material will be required to repair the damage to the ClosureTurf®cover and the repair will require
less heavy equipment with less cost and less risk of damage caused by the equipment. Soil stability
April 2020 3-9
Page 3168 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
problems either rain/storm events, through earthquake, and/or gas pressure buildup is reduced.
• Weather Resistant. The components of an artificial synthetic cover system work in conjunction
to seal the waste mass from the destructive forces of high rainfall intensities and hurricane force
winds.
• Reduced Wildlife Impacts.By reducing organic matter and food sources,fewer animals,including
birds,are attracted to the site. This is important at landfills located in coastal areas or near airports.
Because the components of an artificial synthetic cover system do not pass on the animals'
smell/taste test,they do not usually bother with it or return to it.
• Eliminates Cap Infiltration. Since surface water is not restricted by the hydraulic conductivity
of a vegetative cover drainage system, and can no longer infiltrate into the waste, leachate
production is cut off at the source. (See Appendix B.)
• Enhanced Visual Inspection. Because the synthetic materials are not covered with thick soil
profiles,they are easily inspected for damage,which,if identified,may be easily and inexpensively
repaired. Also, significant additional damage to clay layer caps can be done by earthwork
equipment during repair and soil placement maintenance activities.By replacing the soil layer with
an artificial synthetic cover system,this risk is eliminated.
• Easier Reclamation. Landfill materials are readily accessible in the event of landfill reclamation
for future piggyback areas or future waste lifts due to waste settlement or vertical expansion. The
composite nature of an artificial synthetic cover system allows owners access to the waste without
having to remove the existing cover soils of a typical and traditional final cover system. (See
Appendices B and C.)
Response to Comment C-5j. Thank you for the 2015 article from Waste 360 magazine. As discussed
above, capital cost is and was not the only issue in the selection of the Proposed Project and is not really a
factor in the environmental review. Slope stability issues are the primary concern. With that said, the
Proposed Project would help the City save significant amounts of money in capital cost as well as with the
long-term and ongoing maintenance and operations costs,by significantly reducing the need to repair failing
slopes, avoiding potential water quality issues, inundation of the refuse zone with rain/stormwater, and
potential water quality fines from regulatory agencies. In its assessment of the advantages of the Proposed
Project's ClosureTurf® cover system over the prescriptive clay cover, the City relies on the analysis
conducted by EBA in (Appendix B) as well as the facts and environmental analysis in the DEIR and as
revised in this final EIR.
Response to Comment C-6.The DEIR demonstrates that the Proposed Project would not have any adverse
noise impacts on the recreational uses at Vichy Springs Resort, including to the users of the hiking trails.
As a result,there was/is no need to include an analysis of alternative scheduling construction activities. For
instance,the City would not be permitted to construct the Proposed Project in the winter or wet season as
any grading would be susceptible to water quality and soil erosion restrictions as well as allowing
unpredictable rain or stormwater entering into the waste management unit (garbage) of the landfill. This
and other reasons are further explained in response to comments C-6a through C-6k below.
Response to Comment C-6a: As noted on Page 3.8-6 of the DEIR, the Proposed Project would limit
construction truck traffic to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. As noted on Page 3.8-7 of the DEIR, the use of
construction equipment for the Proposed Project would also be restricted to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
As noted on Page 3.8-7 of the DEIR, since the Proposed Project would comply with the construction hours
within both the City of Ukiah and the Mendocino County Noise Ordinance (7 a.m.to 7 p.m.)the Proposed
Project would not exceed any noise thresholds or result in any significant effects relating to construction
noise. The cabins and hiking trails of the Resort are much farther than 1,200-feet from the closest part of
April 2020 3-10
Page 3169 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
the Proposed Project's construction activities. At this distance, greater than the length of three football
fields,the cabins and hiking trails are not really in close proximity to construction activities. Table 3.8-3 of
the DEIR shows that the noise levels with an intervening ridge would be approximately 39 to 48 dB, Lmw,
at 1,000-feet. Because of the low background levels in the project vicinity, these noise levels might be
audible, but they would not interfere with off-site normal conversations or be a substantial increase over
other ambient noise from daily activities — specifically at the Vichy Springs Resort. Since construction
activities would comply with the acceptable hours for construction in the City of Ukiah and the Mendocino
County Noise Ordinance (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) and would not exceed the normally accepted compatibility
standards for Vichy Springs Resort (65 dB, Ldn), or be a substantial increase above ambient levels, the
Proposed Project would not result in any significant effects relating to construction noise.
Response to Comment C-6b: See Response to Comment C-6a. The DEIR found no significant noise
impacts, thus there was no need to include an analysis of alternative scheduling construction activities.
Construction activities would be restricted to limited hours during the day(daytime hours)— See Response
to Comment C-6a.
Response to Comment C-6c:The Appendix G Checklist Questions for Recreation of the CEQA Guidelines
are the following:
"a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?"
The Recreation section is intended to analyze a project's increase in use of existing recreational facilities
and a project's direct or indirect construction of recreational facilities that could potentially have an adverse
physical effect to the environment. The Recreation section is not the appropriate EIR section to discuss
potential noise or visual impacts.Therefore,because the Proposed Project would result in no impacts related
to the Appendix G Checklist Questions for Recreation of the CEQA Guidelines, recreation was excluded
from further analysis in the EIR. Furthermore, it should be noted that the Proposed Project would not stop
any recreational activities from taking place, such as hiking at the Resort. Generating construction noise
from far away would not stop anyone from hiking and hikers may hardly notice the distant noise.
Response to Comment C-6d: Section 3.8,the noise analysis of the DEIR, focused on the "cabins" of the
Resort because they are the closest sensitive receptor to proposed construction activities. It is common
practice in CEQA analyses to analyze the closest sensitive receptors to a given project. If a noise analysis
determines that a project would have less than significant noise impacts on the closest receptor, a noise
analyst can rule out the possibility of potentially significant impacts at sensitive receptors farther away from
the project. Noise levels attenuate (lessen) as distance from a noise source increases (this is explained on
page 3.8-1 of the DEIR).
Response to Comment C-6e: Section 3.8,the noise analysis of the DEIR, analyzed if project construction
activities would cause an exceedance of the Land Use Compatibility Standards in the Mendocino County
General Plan for the closest sensitive receptor (the northernmost cabin of the Resort). The Land Use
Compatibility Standards are exterior noise standards, which assume that if a project complies with the
exterior noise standard then interior noise levels will be appropriate for the given land use. As noted on
page 3.8-5 of the DEIR,"For residential uses this would be 60 dB,Ldn and for Transient Lodging—Motels,
Hotels this would be 65 dB."
Table 3.8-3 of the DEIR displays typical construction equipment of the Proposed Project and associated
estimated maximum noise level at the closest construction activities (600 feet) and the distance that the
majority of construction activities would occur from (1,000 feet). Note, that the majority of construction
April 2020 3-11
Page 3170 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
would occur much greater than 1,000 feet from the northernmost cabin of the Resort and approximately
half of the landfill area to be covered is greater than 2,000 feet from the northernmost cabin of the Resort.
The estimated maximum construction noise levels in Table 3.8-3 of the DEIR along with the noise
conclusions on page 3.8-7 indicate that construction activities "would not exceed the normally accepted
compatibility standards for Vichy Springs Resort(65 dB, Ldn), or be a substantial increase above ambient
levels."
As shown in Table 3.8-3, the estimated maximum construction noise levels would also be below the
Residential (Low density single family, duplex, mobile homes) standard of 60 dB, Ldn if one wanted to
consider the Resort a"residential land use" since residential land uses have outdoor areas that are enjoyed
by residents and often have outdoor recreational resources within a residential neighborhood. The Land
Use Compatibility Standards in the Mendocino County General Plan do not contain noise standards for
hiking trails,but they do contain noise standards for playground/neighborhood parks(70 dB,Ldn)and golf
courses/riding stables/water recreation/cemeteries (75 dB, Ldn), which construction activities would
comply with.
The hiking trails of the Resort are much farther than 1,000 feet from the project construction activities.
Onsite noise measurements displayed in Table 3.8-2 of the DEIR indicate that existing noise levels in areas
far away from major roads (Site 1 and 2), such as trails, are approximately 42-52 dB Leq. As indicated in
Table 3.8-3 and on page 3.8-7, estimated maximum construction noise levels would be approximately 39
to 48 dB, Lmax. This supports the DEIR's noise conclusions on page 3.8-7 that construction activities
would not cause a substantial noise increase above ambient levels and that the Proposed Project would not
result in any significant effects relating to construction noise. As noted in Table 3.8-1 of the DEIR,normal
speech at three feet is 60 to 70 dB. Hikers would be able to walk and talk normally with the predicted
construction noise levels at 1,000 feet.
Response to Comment C-6f: The Appendix G checklist questions of the CEQA Guidelines were updated
in 2019 during preparation of the DEIR. The question"would the project result in"a substantial temporary
or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?"
was removed from the Appendix G checklist and the appropriate Appendix G question to consider when
analyzing temporary noise impacts such as construction activities is now "Would the project result in
generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicini . of the
project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?". The updated Appendix G checklist questions of the CEQA Guidelines are
clearly defined as significance thresholds for use in the noise analysis on page 3.8-5 of the DEIR.
Response to Comment C-6g: See Responses to Comments C-6d, C-6e and C-6f. With the adaptation of
the 2019 CEQA Guidelines' these two noise impact inquiries are linked and not evaluated separately.
Response to Comment C-6h: The comment states that an example approach to noise impact analysis for
the Proposed Project is the recreation section of a Master Plan EIS/EIR prepared in 2004 for the Los Angeles
International Airport (LAX). The project analyzed in the example 2004 Master Plan EIS/EIR is for a
multiphase project spanning greater than 10 years at the busiest airport in California, which proposed to
increase capacity at LAX and included the construction and operation of new runways,parking garages/lots,
access roads, buildings, terminals, etc. The example Master Plan EIS/EIR analyzed impacts to recreation
facilities adjacent to or within the airport property. Furthermore, the example 2004 Master Plan EIS/EIR
only considered noise impacts to existing recreational areas near LAX because the project was subject to
Department of Transportation Act, Section 4(f),which is required for projects that receive funding from or
require the approval by an agency of the United States Department of Transportation. Section 4(f)requires
California Code of Regulations,Title 14,Division 6,Chapter 3,Appendix G.
Q � A//r g i locs/20 ALTEX 2 � dflt . a .
April 2020 3-12
Page 3171 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
analysis of noise,visual intrusions,or other indirect effects that substantially impair the value of a publicly
owned park or recreation area, in terms of its environmental, recreational, ecological, or historical
significance.The Master Plan EIS/EIR also used the outdated Appendix G checklist questions of the CEQA
Guidelines were for determining significant impacts. Airports are very loud and are a permanent noise
source. The Ukiah Landfill Closure project was analyzed using the Appendix G checklist questions of the
CEQA Guidelines that were updated in 2019. Proposed Project construction activities would occur for
approximately six months and would not cause a substantial noise increase above ambient levels. It is not
appropriate to use the recreation section of a Master Plan EIS/EIR prepared in 2004 for LAX as a guide to
prepare a noise analysis of a project-level EIR prepared in 2019 for a landfill closure project of short
duration. See Responses to Comments C-6c, C-6d, C-6e and C-6f.
Response to Comment C-6i: See Responses to Comments C-6a and C-6b.Also see Response to Comment
C-6h,it is not appropriate to use the recreation section of a Master Plan EIS/EIR prepared in 2004 for LAX
as a guide to prepare a noise analysis of a project-level EIR prepared in 2019 for a landfill closure project
of short duration. The Master Plan EIS/EIR prepared in 2004 for LAX did not include a mitigation measure
restricting use of backup beepers and did not include a mitigation measure restricting construction activities
to either the morning or afternoon. The Master Plan EIS/EIR prepared in 2004 for LAX contained four
construction mitigation measured2 and only for construction activities within 600-feet of sensitive receptors:
1. A noise control plan to use noise control devices such as mufflers,barriers and enclosures;
2. Staging construction as far from noise-sensitive uses as feasible;
3. Replacing noisy equipment with quieter equipment when technically feasible; and
4. Limiting the noisiest construction activities to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays and to 6.am. to 8 p.m.
on Saturday.
Replacing backup beepers would introduce unnecessary risks to construction workers. Backup
beepers/alarms at other solid waste sites have been measured anywhere from 71 to 88 dB, Lmax at a
distance of 50-feet from the rear of the construction vehicle', which is close to the range of estimated
maximum noise levels from typical construction equipment at 50-feet shown in Table 3.8-3 of the DEIR.
Backup beepers at 1,000-feet would be close to the range of estimated maximum noise levels from typical
construction equipment at 1,000-feet indicated in Table 3.8-3 and on page 3.8-7 (39 to 48 dB, Lmax).
Backup beepers would be audible at this distance, but they would be limited to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Hikers
would be able to walk and talk normally with the predicted construction noise levels at 1,000 feet (see
Response to Comment C-6e).
Response to Comment C-6j: The hypothetical road project in Yosemite National Park dreamed up in this
comment is an apples to oranges comparison to construction activities of the Ukiah Landfill Closure. A
road construction project within a national park is very different from a landfill closure project over 1,000
feet away from hiking trails. A road construction project has potential operational noise implications after
the road construction would be completed,while the Proposed Project would generate no new operational
noise once construction is complete. See Responses to Comments C-6a, C-6b, C-6d, C-6e and C-6f.
Response to Comment C-6k: See Responses to Comments C-6a, C-6b, C-6c, C-6d, C-6e, C-6h, C-61 and
C-6f.
Response to Comment C-7. The analysis of groundwater resource impacts in the DEIR(Hydrology and
Water Quality, Section 3.7)were informed by the hydrogeologic analysis presented in a report prepared by
2 Los Angeles International Airport, LAX Master Plan Alternative D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
hit s, wvv.:lQnwQn a /cnn/�awen...•nnnrr....�en%/st�r�lncs..,Qapnd....re�nsnrts/nnnntn nQn na�nn nnigipntornrng::::r sa l rQaprrfl
3 Behrens and Associates, Inc., Lopez Canyon Equipment Acoustical Analysis, October 29, 2010.
MWt //wwvv,;lgi!ys m a�rgl ,s/gral;�llrs/ �iC�ln�/da���rrpflcnnbs/da����rpflcnnbfy250lnIfl �4/ c n,s /cnnb009943.
April 2020 3-13
Page 3172 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
EBA Waste Technologies (EBA) in 1994 (EBA, 1994) and the declaration under penalty of perjury by
Damon Brown of EBA Engineering filed in Ashoff and Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah,Mendocino
County Case No. 70873 (Brown Declaration").EBA evaluated data regarding the potential for groundwater
impacts to Vichy Springs from groundwater monitoring activity on the Ukiah Landfill (landfill) property.
The 1994 EBA report was requested by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board—North Coast
Region (RWQCB) in its letter dated August 1, 1994 (RWQCB, 1994). In that letter, the RWQCB
acknowledged that work to investigate groundwater contamination at the landfill had been delayed by
concerns expressed by Mr. Gilbert Ashoff, owner of the Vichy Springs Resort. Mr. Ashoff was concerned
that monitoring wells placed at the landfill were damaging the geothermal well supplying spring water to
his resort. The RWQCB stated that it wanted these concerns resolved so that a groundwater contamination
investigation could continue (RWQCB, 1994). Mr. Ashoff claimed that drilling monitoring wells on the
landfill property was reducing flow and temperature at the geothermal springs. Specifically, Mr. Ashoff
blamed an immediate temperature decline of 12 degrees and a 30 percent reduction in geothermal spring
flow on the installation of landfill monitoring well 92-4 and 90-8. In its report, EBA reviewed the site
geology, investigated potential for heat loss and flow reduction, discussed natural carbon dioxide pressure
releases,analyzed groundwater chemical data and reported on results of groundwater isotope testing. EBA
concluded from its evaluation that there was no evidence to support the claim that installation of monitoring
wells on the landfill property was lowering the temperature or reducing the flow in the Vichy geothermal
spring. EBA's conclusion was based on compelling technical evidence that the water-bearing zone feeding
the Vichy geothermal spring and the water encountered in the landfill wells were from distinct, separate
sources and that monitoring wells could not account for the observed heat loss in the springs. As stated in
the DEIR,the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) reviewed the 1994 EBA report, as well as
other reports and letters regarding this issue, and concluded that they did not see "convincing evidence to
support the conclusion that the drilling of this monitoring well [monitoring well 92-4] could have impacted
the temperature and flow rate of the hot spring."
The comment suggests that the DEIR's conclusion that the Proposed Project would not impact the Vichy
geothermal spring was based solely on the differences in chemical constituents in the two groundwater-
bearing zones and did not address the "redirection of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)" that allegedly "led to the
pressure drop and flow decrease". On the contrary,the impact analysis in the EIR considered all lines of
evidence supporting the overall conclusions that the monitoring wells did not impact the Vichy geothermal
spring, including the unsupported claim that the alleged temperature and flow reduction in the geothermal
spring resulted from a drop in formation pressure and release of carbon dioxide after drilling a monitoring
well. EBA addressed this hypothesis in its 1994 report and dismissed it because no site-specific data was
presented to support the conclusion or the recommendation that no further drilling be permitted in the Vichy
Springs area. Furthermore, no significant changes in pressure (other than barometric variations) were
observed by EBA during drilling or following installation of monitoring well 92-4 (EBA, 1994).
The comment discusses the hypothesis presented by Al Sevilla of Allisto Engineering that addressed how
the landfill groundwater wells affected natural carbon dioxide gas pressure in the Vichy geothermal spring.
The issue of whether the monitoring well at the landfill tapped into the subsurface gases that drive Vichy
Springs was discussed in the Brown Declaration. Please see Appendix D of this Final EIR. In his court
declaration, Mr. Brown stated that while tectonic overpressure zones in the Coast Ranges, such as the
geothermal fields near Geyserville, are well documented,he believed that Mr. Sevilla's hypothesis that the
monitoring wells are responsible for the release of gases that migrated from the springs to the wells through
faults and fractures is "clearly flawed and not worth serious consideration." Mr. Brown's conclusion was
based on: 1)A review of published maps that do not show faults or fracture sets through the Vichy Springs
and landfill area; 2) Past review of high and low altitude aerial photographs that indicate no photo-
lineaments in the Continental Basin Deposits that could be a migration pathway for gases; 3) Observations
during geologic field mapping that noted no faults,fractures,or joint sets;4)Material extracted during well
April 2020 3-14
Page 3173 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
drilling that did not indicate the presence of Franciscan bedrock or any confining layer capable of trapping
the gases; 5)Field evidence of a pressure release if,in fact,a pressure confining layer had been penetrated;
and 6)EBA's experience with methane gas migration that reflect the Continental Basin Deposits underlying
the landfill are not capable of holding gas under pressure.
The DEIR's compelling substantial evidence that monitoring well drilling did not impact the geothermal
spring at Vichy Springs Resort is the distinct difference between the water-bearing zone feeding the
geothermal source and the water encountered in the wells. This conclusion is based on the review of EBA's
investigations, the results of the SWRCB technical review of this issue, Mr. Brown's expert witness
testimony,and EBA's analysis and dismissal of the hypothesis that well drilling at the landfill released gas
and lowered the temperature and pressures in the Vichy geothermal spring.
The Proposed Project would include drilling and installation of shallow gas monitoring wells,which would
be placed within the waste layers beneath the landfill cover. These gas wells would not extend into the
groundwater bearing zones of the Continental Basin Deposits. Therefore, because no additional
groundwater wells are proposed, it would not be warranted to perform a new hydrogeologic analysis,
conduct groundwater isotope testing, or perform carbon dioxide pressure testing. As stated in the DEIR,
Impact 3.7-2, based on the evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that the grading, cover installation, and
the post-closure maintenance condition proposed under the Project would not influence or adversely impact
spring temperature or discharge rate at the Vichy Springs Resort.
Response to Comment C-8. Please see above responses. Please see Chapter 4 of this Final EIR for
additional photos and documentation that the Proposed Project would not have a significant aesthetic impact
on Vichy Springs Resort,including its guests and hiking trail users. The noise concerns are addressed with
responses to comments C-6athru C-6k. Response to Comment C-7 evaluates comments regarding potential
impacts of project groundwater wells on the springs at Vichy Springs Resort. The City asserts that the
Proposed Project is the environmentally superior alternative and has selected the Proposed Project as the
alternative to move forward with. Finally,the prescriptive cover Alternative has been carried through for
a more detailed analysis as a Project Alternative (see Chapter 4 of this Final EIR).
None of the new information in responses to Comments to Letter C identified substantial adverse
environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines 15088.5). Therefore, significant new information has not been
added in a way that deprives the public of meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse
environmental effect. There are no significant unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the Final
EIR. Therefore, recirculation of the DEIR is not necessary.
COMMENT LETTER D—VICHY SPRINGS RESORT
Response to Comment D-1. Thank you for your comment letter. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the
Draft EIR for specific and minor changes to the DEIR. Further,the City agrees that the baseline or existing
condition is that Vichy Springs Resort is and has been located adjacent to the Ukiah Landfill and an active
private gun range—the Ukiah Rifle and Pistol Club for numerous years.
Response to Comment D-2. Comment Noted. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for
specific and minor changes to the DEIR. Further,the City agrees that the City and Vichy Springs Resort's
property lines adjoin. However, and to the point, Vichy Springs Resort's property line is more than 500-
feet away from the actual landfill area where the Proposed Project will be performed. The landfill area is
located on the City's 283.5-acre property, which provides a buffer area between the property line and the
actual 40-acre landfill area. Further,the closest building at Vichy Springs Resort is approximately 1,200-
feet away and its partial view is obscured by trees, elevation, and sheer distance.
Response to Comment D-3. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR. This alternative is now further evaluated as requested.
April 2020 3-15
Page 3174 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment D-4. Please see previous responses to Comments C-5a-5j and additional pictures
in in Chapter 4 of this Final EIR. The City disagrees with the assertion that the Proposed Project would be
bright and very ugly in late spring, summer, and fall. The proposed olive-green artificial turf cover is
designed to look like and will look like real or natural grass,which is very common even in the late summer
or dry months when the surrounding landscape is brown or tan.
Response to Comment D-5. Please see Responses to Comments D-4 and C-3a above. The City disagrees
that the Proposed Project would have any significant negative environmental impacts on or to Vichy Springs
Resort, its guests, and hiking trail users. First, the Proposed Project would not change the historical
significance of the Vichy Springs Resort. The Vichy Springs Resort has been in operation during the time
period when the Ukiah Landfill was an active landfill and did not change the historical significance. Closing
the landfill in accordance with Title 27 of the CCR will also not affect the Vichy Spring Resort's historical
significance. Second, the hiking trails are not located on Vichy Springs Road and not Vichy Springs
Resort's property. Vichy Springs Road is a public road that dead ends at the landfill gate, which is over
200 to 300-feet from the actual landfill and only provides a small obscured view of the actual 40-acre
landfill area. This is not where Vichy Springs Resort's guest pay money to hike or use any Vichy Springs
resort's amenities. Third,the Vichy Springs Resort's main hiking trails are well over 2,000-feet away and
any partial and/or obscured views from that distance would not be readily noticeable to its guests and hiking
trail users.
Response to Comment D-6. Please see Responses to Comments C-7 above. Further and to the point,the
Proposed Project does not propose any new groundwater monitoring wells and does not propose to change
any operations of the existing groundwater monitoring wells. The new wells included in the Proposed
Project would only extend into the waste management unit/refuse portion of the landfill. As a result, the
Proposed Project would not impact any pressure zones as Vichy Springs Resort has unsuccessfully alleged
over the years.No additional study is needed by pressure zone experts.
Response to Comment D-7. Please see Noise Responses to Comments C-6a, C-6b, C-6c, C-6d, C-6e, C-
6f, C-6g, C-6h, C-61, C-6j, and C-6k.
Response to Comment D-8. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
Response to Comment D-9. Please see Response to Comment B-1 for a discussion as to how and why the
Proposed Project was selected over the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural
Vegetation Closure Alternative and how it out performs the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay
Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative. The primary purpose is to provide an impermeable
layer (even with clay) to prevent rain or stormwater penetrating into the waste management unit (i.e.
garbage) of the landfill and mixing with the waste. The comment is correct that the Proposed Project will
essentially eliminate the discharge of sediment. The comment misunderstands that this is considered to be
a beneficial impact and not an adverse impact to downstream surface water quality. The analysis in the
DEIR and Appendix B finds the water diverted from penetrating the landfill by the Proposed Project cover
will be cleaner with less potential to pollute surface water(s)than the prescriptive clay cover.
Response to Comment D-10. However, see Responses to Comments D-4 and C-6a, C-6b, C-6c, C-6d, C-
6e, C-6f, C-6g, C-6h, C-61, C-6j, and C-6k above. The DEIR analysis shows that the Proposed Project
would not have any significant noise impacts on Vichy Springs Resort, its guests, and hiking trail users.
Response to Comment D-11. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
Response to Comment D-12. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
April 2020 3-16
Page 3175 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment D-13. Please see Chapter 3.1 of the DEIR(Aesthetic/Visual Resources).
Response to Comment D-14. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
Response to Comments D-15 and D-16. Please see responses to visual comments C-5a j.
Response to Comments D-17. The City agrees that there are partial, distant, and obscured views of the
Ukiah Landfill from Vichy Springs Resort property. However,the landfill gate is on public land and Vichy
Springs Road and is not on Vichy Springs Resort's property. The additional information provided by your
attorney in Comment Letter C does not change the determination that the Proposed Project would not have
any significant effect on a viewshed. Please see responses to comment C-5a j. Vichy Springs Resort's
property line is more than 500-feet away from the actual landfill that is located on the City's 283.5-acre
property, which provides a buffer area between the actual 40-acre landfill area and the property line.
Further,the closest building at Vichy Springs Resort is approximately 1,200-feet away from the actual 40-
acre landfill site and its view is obscured by trees,elevation,and sheer distance. The hiking trails are much
further away and any partial views from that distance would not be readily noticeable or considered to be
an eyesore to the guests and hiking trail users over the existing condition, even in the dry season. These
partial views are not considered to be significant and any views to the Ukiah Landfill is not considered to
be a scenic viewshed by Mendocino County. Please see Chapter 4—Revision to the Draft EIR for specific
changes to Section 3.1 -Aesthetics/Visual Resources in the DEIR.
Response to Comments D-18 and D-19. Please see Response to Comment D-17 above.
Response to Comment D-20. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
Response to Comment D-21. The City is unaware of such specific sized animals grazing the area.
However, the artificial synthetic turf cover is made of durable material that is designed to last over 100-
years in the harsh natural environment and would be less likely to attract animals such as pigs and elk over
a natural cover as there would be no actual vegetation for them to eat or root under for food. By not having
or significantly reducing the organic matter and food sources, fewer animals, including birds, are attracted
to the site.Also,because the components of an artificial synthetic cover system do not pass on the animals'
smell/taste test,they do not usually bother with it or return to it. Further,if a section of turf is compromised
by animals or for any other reason,it is much easier to identify and any repairs are much easier and do not
require heavy equipment to come in to do the repairs,which can create additional damages to a prescriptive
clay cover layer system4.
Response to Comment D-22. Please see Chapter 4 — Revision to the Draft EIR for specific and minor
changes to the DEIR.
Response to Comment D-23. The source indicated that Vichy Springs started as a"Resort"in 1888. The
EIR does not further respond to the historical statements in the comment, since they do not have a direct or
material effect the DEIR's environmental analysis or findings.
Response to Comment D-24. Please See Responses to Comments C-7 and D-23 above.
Response to Comment D-25. Please see Impact Statement 3.4-1 on page 3.4-14 and Responses to
Comments C-7 and D-23 above.
Response to Comment D-26. This is a standard approach/requirement to search beyond the main area to
include a buffer area around the Proposed Project location.
4 Personal Communication with David Cieply,Vice President Waste Operations,WatershedGeo
April 2020 3-17
Page 3176 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment D-27.Not sure of the point that is being made and does not affect the environmental
analysis of or in the DEIR.
Response to Comment D-28. Please refer to references provided.
Response to Comment D-29. Please refer to references provided.
Response to Comment D-30. Please see response in Comment C-7 above.
Response to Comment D-31. The "plastic cover"or artificial synthetic turf cover has no bearing on the
hydrology discussion at hand.
Response to Comment D-32. That was done decades ago. This is the current baseline condition(s) and
the Proposed Project would not involve the alteration of a stream or river course (DEIR,page 3.7-26). The
Proposed Project is intended to properly close the landfill to prevent any future impacts to downstream
water resources.
Response to Comment D-33. Please see response C-6a, and C-6b regarding scheduling of construction,
and C-61 regarding noise from back up beepers.
Response to Comment D-34. Please see response C-6a and C-6b.
Response to Comment D-35. Please see Responses to comments to Letter C above and Chapter 4 of this
Final EIR for specific revisions.
Response to Comment D-36. Please see Response to comment C-7 above. The new wells included in
the Proposed Project would only extend into the waste management unit/refuse portion of the landfill. No
new groundwater monitoring wells are proposed as part of the Proposed Project.
Response to Comment D-37. Comment noted. While the comment does not provide any evidence to
substantiate its claims regarding gun club activity and the project site,the contractor is legally required to
maintain the safety of the worksite and the City will be required to cooperate with the contractor to maintain
the safety of the worksite.
Response to Comment D-38. Please see Response to comment C-7 above. The new wells included in the
Proposed Project would only extend into the waste management unit/refuse portion of the landfill. No new
groundwater monitoring wells are proposed as part of the Proposed Project.
Response to Comment D-39. See response to Comment B-1. As indicated in that response (and copied
directly below, the Proposed Project's ClosureTurf® cover system offers significant maintenance
advantages over the prescriptive cover.
Maintenance
• ClosureTurf®offers a significant maintenance advantage over a prescriptive Subtitle D final cover
and any other traditional geosynthetic cover systems that require a vegetative soil cover.In essence,
vegetative soil covers often require regular maintenance related to the repair of erosional damage,
installation of erosion control measures(i.e., silt fences,hay bales,wattles,etc.), slope repairs,and
revegetation. Erosion from the vegetative soil cover also causes siltation of drainage ditches and
culverts that require subsequent repair. Such provisions are not required with the ClosureTurf®
product,thereby providing a significant cost savings over the course of the postclosure maintenance
period and fewer environmental effects.
Response to Comment D-40. Please see changes in Chapter 4 of this Final EIR. Please consider them all
corrected.
April 2020 3-18
Page 3177 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments
Response to Comment D-41. Please see changes in Chapter 4 of this Final EIR. Please consider them all
corrected.
Response to Comment D-42. Please see response to Comment D-32.
Response to Comment D-43. Please see visual responses C-5a j.
Response to Comment D-44. This comment refers to part of the 2016 IS/MND which was provided as
background information and is not the 2019 DEIR analysis.
Response to Comment D-45. That was done years/decades ago. This is the current baseline condition(s)
and the Proposed Project would not involve the alteration of a stream or river course (DEIR,page 3.7-26).
The Proposed Project is intended to properly close the landfill to prevent any future impacts to downstream
water resources.
Response to Comments D-46. Comment noted. The comment regards part of the 2016 IS/MND and not
the 2019 DEIR.
Response to Comments D-47. This table came from the Natural Resources Conservation Service as the
reference material indicates. It is was provided as background information and is not part of the main 2019
DEIR.
April 2020 3-19
Page 3178 of 4165
Chapter 4 Revisions to the Draft EIR
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
This chapter shows revisions to the November 2019 Public Draft EIR(DEIR),subsequent to the document's
publication and public review. The revisions are primarily from comments received. Other minor edits that
do not substantially change the importance of or conclusions made in the DEIR have not been reflected in
this document. The revisions are presented in the order in which they appear in the DEIR and are identified
by section and page number in respective chapters. These revisions are shown as excerpts from the Public
DEIR, with strikethrough (s*ri'��) text in indicate deletions and underlined (underlined) text to
indicate additions. If whole sections are deleted and replaced, only the replacement text will be shown to
avoid confusion and redundancy. It is assumed all subsequent page, figure, and table numberings are
changed accordingly. The following revisions are shown below.
Executive Summary
On Page ES-1, the last paragraph is hereby changed as follows:
Land adjaeefit to the Ukiah Landfill PFE)POI-11-1 . ned pr-imafi!�, as =gelaad and is used for- gr-aziag-
Dwellings around the Ukiah Landfill property include a group of structures owned by the Vichy Springs
Resort that are located within 500-feet of the City's south property line, but are well over 1,250 feet from
the actual Ukiah Landfill area that is also separated visually by an elevation barrier/ridge.A rural residential
development is located approximately one-quarter mile west of the Ukiah Landfill property boundary. A
housing development is also located along the south side of Vichy Springs Road and westward of the Vichy
Springs Resort. The entire development is approximately 1,000-feet southward of the Ukiah Landfill
property boundary and is also separated from the Landfill by an intervening ridge.
On Page ES-5, the second paragraph is hereby changed as follows:
In January 2016, EBA prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (2016 IS/MND) for the
City on a Final CPMP(See Appendix B). Subsequently,the City determined that an EIR should be prepared
due in part to concerns expressed by Vichy Springs lai,estmefit Cffe,,, /Resort that :s We4e,a .r i ;r
�t01�, 59&feet e borders the Ukiah Landfill's southern property line. These concerns included
issues regarding aesthetic/visual resources, air quality and geology/hydrology concerns. Subsequently,the
City prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the Draft EIR and published it on February 2, 2017 (SCH
42017022009). Please see Appendix C.
On Page ES-6, Section ES.6 is hereby changed as follows:
As detailed in Chapter 3 —Environmental Analysis,the construction and operation of the Proposed Project
would have several potentially significant impacts to the environment. However, with the implementation
of the identified and corresponding mitigation measures, all of the potentially significant impacts can be
reduced to less-than-significant levels. As a result, the only alternative that needs to be evaluated in this
EIR is the CEQA required No Project Alternative. However, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic
Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative was also evaluated and would have increased
impacts to air quality,biological resources,water quality,and noise impacts,among others. Among ethef
Other alternatives considered,but eliminated from further consideration include the following:
April 2020 4-1
Page 3179 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
• Relocation of the Ukiah Landfill
• Alternative/Synthetic Specialized Tufted Geotextile Landfill Turf Cover Color.
The No Project Alternative and the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural
Vegetation Closure Alternative are discussed below.
No Project Alternative
Under the CEOA required No Project Alternative,the City would not close the Ukiah Landfill in accordance
with the applicable regulatory standards. Specifically, none of the components and systems required for
closure of the landfill would be implemented. This includes,but is not limited to the final cover and grading
design to control stormwater, potential infiltration and accommodate future settlement, and landfill slope
stability as well as drainage and erosion control systems,landfill gas(LFG)control and monitoring systems,
and groundwater/surface water monitoring systems.
The No Project Alternative would result in less significant temporary construction related impacts than the
Proposed Project. All of the potentially significant impacts associated with the construction and operation
of the Project would not occur under this alternative. However, the No Project Alternative would fail to
meet any and/or all of the objectives of the Project. Under the No Project Alternative, the Ukiah Landfill
would not be properly closed according to state and local regulations and would be susceptible to slope
instability, potential water quality impacts to surface water and groundwater resources due to inadequate
cover leading to drainage and erosion issues during inclement weather/stormwater, and the potential for
inadequate LFG control and monitoring leading to air quality issues and impacts. Under the No Action
Alternative,the City would be potentially susceptible for a variety of water quality and air quality violations
and fines.
Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Lavers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative
The Natural or Clay Layer closure option was a 1974 standard that was officially adopted in 1985 as part of
then Subchapter 15 of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations 27 CCR). However, over the last
35-pluses. the waste industry. along with the re ug lator3� agencies and surrounding communities has
recognized that there are serious short-falls with compacted clay layers from both a performance and cost
perspective — especially on sites with slope stability issues. The Ukiah Landfill is located on steep, 2:1
plus, slope and the potential for a clay and/or geosynthetic clay layer alternative failure is . significant. Such
a failure could degradation of the water quality in the unnamed creek alongside the Ukiah Landfill, which
drains into Sulfur Creek and then the Russian River. Further, forensic analyses of a number of natural
landfill cover slope failures over the last 20-plus years has shown that both Compacted Clay and
Geosynthetic Clay Liners fail due to pore water pressure rise in saturated cover soils building up beneath
the clay lars;particularly on steep slopes such as the conditions of the Ukiah Landfill. In short,the heavy
clay layers increase the probabili1y of slope failure. Further, CalRecycle has approved numerous alternative
landfill covers that are similar to the Proposed Project throughout the State of California and theme
proven to be a viable alternative, especially on landfills with steep slopes. See Appendices B and C of this
Final EIR.
April 2020 4-2
Page 3180 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
From an environmental perspective, the compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay laver alternative would
also cause a substantial increase in temporary construction impacts to air quality.biological resources,water
quality,and noise as compared to the Proposed Project as it would create the need to excavate and/or import
(transport) significant quantities of clay and natural vegetation cover soils to the site and to spread and
compact them over the 40-acre Ukiah Landfill.Also,from an operational standpoint;this alternative would
result in increased maintenance impacts and costs to maintain and repair slope failures as well as to maintain
the natural grass/vegetation to prevent fires and keep rodents from compromising the clay layer structure,
which would then contribute to a substantial increase in air quality, biological resources, water quality,
noise, and other potential environmental impacts.
The City has proposed the Proposed Project and artificial cover alternative because it has many advantages
over the compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay layer alternative. Te Proposed Project provides: 1L
proven stable cover on steep slopes due to the elimination of low interface strength pore water pressure and
gas relief lam, 2) Decreased exposure to construction-related air quality, noise, and traffic impacts and
potential long-term water quality impacts to surface and groundwater resources which could lead to
significant fines, and 3• significant lower capital and on-going/ erpetual maintenance costs. As a result,
this compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay layer alternative has been considered, but is not selected as it
does not perform as well as the Proposed Project.
On Page ES-7, Table ES-1 is revised as follows:
Table ES-1
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Im act Before Mitigation Mitigation Measure(s) After Mitigation
3.1 Aesthetic/Visual Resources
Impact 3.1-1:Would the No Impact None Required. No Impact
Proposed Project have a
substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Impact 3.1-2:Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project substantially
damage scenic resources,
including,but not limited to,
trees,rock outcroppings,and
historic buildings within a
State scenic highway.
Impact 3.1-3:Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project substantially +; ra;.igatig+l ao ,, No rwaet. ,�ra;.;, gig
degrade the existing visual z > >.:A-R i4e Draper F'o,,,.;,,,.
character or quality of the site
";o1.7;....F.,,ry.Coo..44.o
and its surroundings.
Impact 3.1-4:Would the No Impact None Required No Impact
Proposed Project create a new
source of substantial light or
glare,which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
April 2020 4-3
Page 3181 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Im act Before Mitigation Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
3.2 Air Quality
Impact 3.2-1: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project Conflict with
or Obstruct Implementation of
the Applicable Air Quality
Management Plan?
Impact 3.2-2: Would Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.2-1: Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction of the Proposed Fugitive Dust Control Measures
Project Result in a
Cumulatively Considerable
Net Increase of any Criteria
Pollutant Under an Applicable
Federal or State Ambient Air
Quality Standard?
Impact 3.2-3: Would Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Operation of the Proposed
Project Result in a
Cumulatively Considerable
Net Increase of any Criteria
Pollutant Under an Applicable
Federal or State Ambient Air
Quality Standard?
Impact 3.2-4: Would Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction and/or Operation
of the Proposed Project
Expose Sensitive Receptors to
Substantial Pollutant
Concentrations?
Impact 3.2-5: Would Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction and/or Operation
of the Proposed Project Result
in Other Emissions (Such as
Those Leading to Odors)
Adversely Affecting a
Substantial Number of
People?
Impact 3.2-6: Would Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.2-6: Less-than-Significant Impact
Construction of the Proposed Develop and Submit NOA Dust
Project Result in Other Mitigation Plan
Emissions (Such as Naturally
Occurring Asbestos)
Adversely Affecting a
Substantial Number of
People?
3.3 Biological Resources
April 2020 4-4
Page 3182 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
Impact 3.3-1: Would the Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.3-1 a: Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project have a Conduct Preconstruction
substantial adverse effect, Survey for Special Status Wildlife
either directly or through Species.
habitat modifications,on any
species identified as a Mitigation Measure 3.3-1b:
candidate,sensitive,or special- Conduct Bird Breeding and
status species in local or Nesting Surveys
regional plans, policies, or Mitigation Measure 3.3-1c:
regulations, or by the Conduct a Bat Habitat Assessment
California Department of Fish of Trees
and Wildlife or U.S.Fish and
Wildlife Service? Mitigation Measure 3.3-1d:
Environmental Awareness
Training
Mitigation Measure 3.3-1e:
Biological Monitor
Mitigation Measure 3.3-1f
Staging Areas and Access Routes
Impact 3.3-2 Would the 129te+A a gig+ 4eapA Tin ao None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project have a
substantial adverse effect on Less-than-Significant Impact
any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations
adopted by the California
Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
Impact 3.3-3: Would the Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.3-3a: Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project have a Protect Jurisdictional Waters and
substantial adverse effect on Sensitive Habitat Areas
federally protected waters of
the U.S.as defined by Section
404 of the federal Clean Water
Act or protected waters of the
state as defined by Section
1600 et seq. of the California
Fish and Game Code
(including,but not limited to,
marshes, vernal pools, and
coastal wetlands) through
direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or
other means?
April 2020 4-5
Page 3183 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
Impact 3.3-4: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project interfere
substantially with the
movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with
established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors,or
impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
Impact 3.3-5: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project conflict with
any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological
resources?
Impact 3.3-6: Would the No Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project conflict with
an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
3A Cultural,.Paleontolo kai,,and Triba Resources
Impact 3.4-1: Would the
Proposed Project cause a Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
substantial adverse change in
the significance of an historical
resource as defined in State
CEQA Guidelines§15064.5?
Impact 3-4.2: Would the Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.4-2: Halt Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project cause a work if cultural resources are
substantial adverse change in discovered
the significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines§15064.5?
Impact 3.4-3: Would the Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.4-3: Stop Less-than-Significant Impact
proposed Project directly or Work if Paleontological Remains
indirectly destroy a unique are Discovered
paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic
feature?
April 2020 4-6
Page 3184 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
Impact 3.4-4: Would the Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.4-4: Halt Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project disturb any Work if Human Remains are
human remains, including Found
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Impact 3.4-5: Would Potential Significant Impact Mitigation Measure 3.4-5:Halt Less-than-Significant Impact
implementation of the Work if Tribal Cultural Resources
Proposed Project cause a are Discovered
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal
cultural resource?
3.5,Geology Soils and Seismicity
Impact 3.5-1: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project expose
people to injury or structures
to damage from potential
rupture of a known earthquake
fault, strong ground shaking,
seismic-related ground failure,
or landslides?
Impact 3.5-2: Would Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
construction grading and long-
term closure conditions at the
Landfill expose soils to
erosion and result in the loss of
topsoil?
Impact 3.5-3: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project be located on
a unit or soils that are
potentially unstable, or that
could become unstable as a
result of the Project, and
potentially result in on-or off-
site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction,or collapse?
Impact 3.5-4. Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project make a
cumulatively considerable
contribution to cumulative
effects associated with
increased seismic risk,
landsliding, erosion, topsoil
April 2020 4-7
Page 3185 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
loss or increased exposure to
seismic or other risks?
3,6 Greenhouse Gases
Impact 3.6-1: Would Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Implementation of the
Proposed Project generate
GHG emissions, either
directly or indirectly,that may
have a significant impact on
the environment?
Impact 3.6-2: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project conflict with
any applicable plan,policy,or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of GHG?
3.1,Hydrology and Water Qualit
Impact 3.7-1: Would the
Proposed Project violate any Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or
groundwater quality?
Impact 3.7-2: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project substantially
decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such
that the Project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Impact 3.7-3: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project substantially
alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area,
including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the
addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner that
would result in substantial
erosion, siltation, polluted
runoff or flooding on- or off-
site?
Impact 3.7-4: Would the
Proposed Project conflict with Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
or obstruct implementation of
April 2020 4-8
Page 3186 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan?
.8;Noise
Impact 3.8-1: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project generate a
substantial temporary or
permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the Proposed
Project in excess of
standards established in the
local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Impact 3.8-2: Would the Less-than-Significant Impact None Required Less-than-Significant Impact
Proposed Project generate
excessive groundborne
vibration or groundbome noise
levels?
Impact 3.8-3: Would the No Impact None Required No Impact
Proposed Project be located
within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport
land use plan,or where such
a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport,
and/or expose people
residing or working in the
project area to excessive
noise levels.
Growth Inducement Effects
Project implementation No Impact None Required No Impact
includes the final closure of
the Ukiah landfill in
accordance with local,
regional, state and federal
requirements. No residential
or other development is
proposed that would result in
additional population growth.
No infrastructure is required
to be extended to the site that
would induce population
growth in the area. Therefore,
the Proposed Project or the
official and proper closing of
April 2020 4-9
Page 3187 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Summary of iMitigation
Potential Environmental Level of Significance Level of Significance
Impact Before Mitigation Miti ation Measures After Mitigation
the Ukiah Landfill will not
indirectly or directly remove
barriers to population growth
and/or encourage and facilitate
other activities that could
significantly affect the
environment, either
individually or cumulatively.
Cumulative Effects
As described in Chapter 3 — No Impact None Required No Impact
Environmental Analysis, the
construction and operation of
the Proposed Project would
have less-than-significant
effects to the environment
with the implementation of the
identified mitigation
measures. There are no known
projects that would be
constructed at the same time
and within the same vicinity of
the Proposed Project that
would or could create any
additional or cumulative
construction related impacts.
Once constructed the Proposed
Project would not have any
significant impacts. As a
result, the Proposed Project
would not have any direct,
indirect, short-term and/or
long-term cumulative impacts.
On Page ES-14, Section ES.8 is hereby changed as follows:
ES.8 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior
alternative. Of the twe three alternatives considered in (Proposed Project,the Compacted Clay
and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative, and the No Project
Alternative),the Proposed Project would be the environmentally superior+)thO NE) D-eje-4 Alternative.
The Proposed Project would be environmentally superior to the No Project Alternative. The No Project
Alternative would not be a legally acceptable alternative. The No Project Alternative would not meet any
of the goals and objectives of the Proposed Project. Under the No Project Alternative,the Ukiah Landfill
would not be properly closed according to state and local regulations and would be susceptible to slope
instability, potential water quality impacts to surface water and groundwater resources due to inadequate
cover leading to drainage and erosion issues during inclement weather/stormwater, and the potential for
inadequate LFG control and monitoring leading to air quality issues and impacts. Under the No Action
April 2020 4-10
Page 3188 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Alternative,the City would be potentially susceptible for a variety of water quality and air quality violations
and fines.
The Proposed Project would be environmentally superiorto the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay
Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative due to the fact that the Compacted Clay and/or Geo
Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative would have more slope stability issues
that could cause significant water quality issues and concerns of sediment discharging into the ephemeral
creek that discharges to the Russian River.This is considered to be a potentially significant and unavoidable
impact that cannot be mitigated as it is impossible to predict when and where theses potential slope stability
issues will occur.The slope stability issues will also require more maintenance which will cause an increase
in noise, and air quality impacts and concerns as compared to the Proposed Project.
As a result,the Proposed Project is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative compared to
both the No Action Alternative and the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural
Vegetation Closure Alternative.
Chapter 1 Introduction
On Page 1-1, the 3Yd paragraph in Section L]Project Location and Background is hereby
changed as follows:
Land adjaeef4 to the Ukiah Landfill PFE)P0.1-11-1 nod pr-imafi!�, as Fangeland and is used for- gr-aziag-
Dwellings around the Ukiah Landfill property include a group of structures owned by the Vichy Springs
Resort that are located within 500-feet of the City's south property line, but are well over 1,250-feet from
the actual Ukiah Landfill area that is also separated visually by an elevation barrier/ridge.A rural residential
development is located approximately one-quarter mile west of the Ukiah Landfill property boundary. A
housing development is also located along the south side of Vichy Springs Road and westward of the Vichy
Springs Resort. The entire development is approximately 1,000-feet southward of the Ukiah Landfill
property boundary and is also separated from the Landfill by an intervening ridge.
Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis
On Page 3.0-1, the Is'Sentence in Section 3.0.3 Definition of*Project Area and Study Area is
hereby changed as follows:
The project area consists of areas within and around the City of 9�Enafd Ukiah as were previously described
in Chapter 2,Project Description, and are further described throughout this section.
Section 3.1 Aesthetics/Visual Resources
On Page 3.1-4, the last paragraph is hereby changed as follows:
Land adjaeef4te the landfill pr-epeFt�,is zened pr-imafi!�,as Faagela4id and is used for-gfaziag.Vichy Springs
Resort is a California Registered Historical Location (No. 980)that is located approximately 50062-5w-feet
from the Ukiah Landfill's south property line. A single-family residence located approximately 1,000-feet
west of the landfill's western property boundary.A rural residential development is located approximately
one-quarter-mile west of the landfill property boundary. A housing development is also located along the
south side of Vichy Springs Road and westward of the Vichy Springs Resort. The entire residential
April 2020 4-11
Page 3189 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
development is approximately 1,000-feet southward of the landfill property boundary and is separated from
the Ukiah Landfill by an intervening ridge. It should be noted that the City owns an approximate 97-acre
parcel (Assessor's Parcel No. 178-210-01)that adjoins a portion of the Ukiah Landfill's southern property
boundary.This property,which is now known as the Ukiah Rifle and Pistol Club,was purchased as a buffer
zone to limit future development adjacent to the Landfill. The Gun Club Parcel is a separate parcel and is
not considered part of the landfill property or part of this Proposed Project.
On Page 3.1-10, the last paragraph is hereby changed as follows:
The Project Site is located at the end of Vichy Springs Road, which is not identified in the Mendocino
County General Plan as a Scenic Vista or Resource.The Ukiah Landfill is,has been,and will always be a
landfill site and is not, nor will ever be, considered to be a scenic resource. Further,the Proposed Project
would not be visible from the main lodgesprimary facilities of Vichy Springs Resort. However,there
are some distant partial views of the Ukiah Landfill from some vantage points on Vichy Springs Resort's
700-acres, which include hiking trails for its guests. Figure 3.1-5 provides several photos of these partial
views from Vichy Springs Resort property which were taken by Springs Resort's President and
Owner,Mr. Gilbert Ashoff However,these are partial views from 1)either a distance of more than 2,000-
feet or 2)from the edge of the property lines adjacent to the landfill property,which are not the main areas
visited by most,if not all,of Vichy Springs Resort guests and hiking trail users. While the proposed project
using artificial grass with a 5/8-inch sand cover will remain green in the dry season and contrast with the
surrounding landscape which turns brown in the summer and early fall, that color contrast has been
determined not to be environmentally significant. Green grass commonly contrasts with surrounding dry
areas in Northern California and is not regarded as unattractive. Moreover,the views from these locations
are not recognized as designated scenic views or vistas by Mendocino County. Further,the artificial grass
cover will blend into the existing environment, in the same way_green grass surrounding rivers, lakes or
ponds or in irrigated landscapes,such as golf courses,blend with surrounding dry areas.Moreover,at these
distances and partial views, the artificial grass is indistinguishable from natural grass and, thus, will not
cause an environmentally significant change to the existing landscape. For these reasons,no impacts would
occur to a designated scenic vista and Project implementation will not adversely affect existing views from
any designated scenic corridors/roads.
Significance:No Impact.
Starting on Page 3.1-11, Impact 3.1-3 is hereby replaced in its entirety as follows:
Impact 3.1-3: Would the Proposed Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or
Quality of the site and its surroundings.
The Ukiah Landfill began refuse disposal operations in 1955 and ceased operations in 2001. As discussed
herein,the Ukiah Landfill is approximately 40-acres and is located on a 283.5-acre-parcel that provides
no public access and is surrounded by rural buffer area of land (i.e. approximately 240-acres), which is
owned by the City. As indicated above, no development(i.e., facilities, structures or vertical features) are
proposed for the Proposed Project, other than the landfill gas flare station, which would not be
visible/noticeable from surrounding areas and would not affect the aesthetic character either of the project
site or the surrounding area. Furthermore,the Ukiah Landfill is,has been,and will always be a landfill site
and is not, nor will it ever be, considered to be a scenic resource. The 40-acre landfill area is and will
April 2020 4-12
Page 3190 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
always be devoid of trees and will always stick out from the rest of the surrounding area. The area is not
considered to be a source of scenic beauty by the County of Mendocino.
As for potential sensitive receptors,there is the Vichy Springs Resort,the Ukiah Rifle and Pistol Club, and
the residential housing developments off to the south and west of the landfill. Vichy Springs Resort and
some of the residential houses to the west have distant partial views of the landfill. Vichy Springs Resort
in particular has expressed concern that an artificial synthetic turf cover would provide a negative view to
its guests and hiking trail users. Table 3.1-1 provides a summary of the ability to see the Ukiah Landfill
from KOPs within approximately 2,000-feet. As demonstrated in Figure 2-2, and Figure 3.1-2 above as
well as Figures 3.1-3 and 3.1-4 below, any partial view of the landfill from over 500-feet would,however,
not be able to distinguish artificial synthetic turf from natural grass and thus is not considered to be a key
observation point (KOP) with a significant view. As a result, the Proposed Project would not have any
significant visual impacts which would significantly affect the views the Vichy Springs Resort (including
its guests and hiking trail users),the Ukiah Rifle and Pistol Club,the residential developments to the south
and the west, and/or an.. o�potentially sensitive receptor(s).
Table 3.1-1
Key Observation ' i 1 ' III of
KOP Elevation Coordinates Distance Is Ukiah Comments
Location JLeet Landfill
Visible?
A 800 39.10.01.60 N 1,061 No 60-foot+/-Elevation Barrier/Ridge
123.09.30.30 W — Blocks View
39.10.04.31 N Partial View from Edge of Vichy Springs
B 815 123.09.29.02 W 963 Peal Resort's Adjacent Property Line,But Not
Part of the Active Part of the Resort or
Hikin Trails
C 812 39.10.01.79 N 1,270 No 45-foot+/-Elevation Barrier/Ridge
123.09.26.63 W — Blocks View
D 873 39.10.04.07 N 1,459 No Distance and Trees Obstruct View
123.09.22.03 W
E 792 39.10.08.79 N 1,064 No 60-foot(+/-)Elevation Barrier/Ridge
123.09.32.60 W — Blocks View
39.10.32.07 N Partial Views from Some Private
F 791 123.10.28.27 W 1,390 Partial Residential Homes and Roads where
Distance and Trees Obscures Views
39.10.23.33 N Partial Views from Some Private
G 803 123.10.43.75 W 1,892 Partial Residential Homes and Roads where
Distance and Trees Obscures Views
Note: Due to distance and map scale issues,KOPs F,G(residential development(s)to the west)and distant partial views from
Vichy Sixings Resort propegy from over 2 000-feet awa are not ractical or useful to put on a ma .
Most importantly to Vichy Springs Resort's expressed concerns,the Proposed Project would not be visible
from the main lodges and primary facilities of Vichy Springs Resort. However,there are some distant partial
views of the Ukiah Landfill from some vantage points on Vichy Springs Resort's 700-acre property,which
include hiking trails for its guests. Figure 3.1-5 provides several photos of these partial views from Vichy
Springs Resort property which were taken by Springs Resort's President and Owner, Mr. Gilbert
Ashoff However,these are partial views from 1) either more than 2,000-feet or 2) from the edge of Vichy
Springs Resort's property lines adjacent to the landfill property,which are not the main areas visited or used
April 2020 4-13
Page 3191 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
by most, if not all, of Vichy Springs Resort guests and hiking trail users. The closest viewpoint from any
potential sensitive receptor is from approximately 500-feet from the edge of Vichy Springs Resort's property
and or the landfill Rate as it bumps up to the City's buffer area from the City Landfill. Also, and more
importantly, these views are not recognized as designated scenic views or vistas by Mendocino County_
Therefore, no significant impacts will occur either to the aesthetic character of a designated tl3e site or
to that of the surrounding area and no mitigation measures are required.
Vichy prings Resort has also expressed concerns that artificial synthetic turf cannot and would not fit into
the local landscape or look like natural vegetation. However, as discussed in Chapter 2 — Project
Description,the Proposed Project includes the construction of a permanent olive-green artificial/synthetic
specialized tufted geotextile turf/grass cover instead of a clay laver with a natural grass cover. Figure 2-2,
provides two recent examples of where olive-green artificial/synthetic specialized tufted geotextile turf has
been and is being successfully used. Further, Figure 3.1-6 provides a visual comparison of artificial
synthetic turf actually used in actual landfill closures and natural grasses, demonstrating that artificial turf
can and does look like natural grass,especially at distances of over 500-feet,which is the closest view point
from the Vichy prings Resort Property and/or an.. other sensitive receptor.Figure 3.1-7 provides
an up-close view of the existing Ukiah Landfill and a simulated view of it with an olive-green
artificial/synthetic specialized tufted geotextile turf cover. Based on this analysis,the Proposed olive-green
artificial/synthetic specialized tufted geotextile turf cover would have less-than-significant impacts on the
existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
Vichy prings Resort has also expressed concerns that an olive-green artificial synthetic turf would not
blend into the surrounding environment in the summer or dry months when the hills turn brown. However,
this is commonplace throughout northern California, California in general, the American West, and
throughout the world where irrigation takes place in and or semi-arid areas. Figure 3.1-8 provides several
examples of arguably beautiful,scenic views,of olive-green colored irrigated grass adjacent to brown grass
or hillsides. As a result, no significant visual impacts would occur as a result of having natural looking
olive-green grass adjacent to brown hills or surroundings in the dry or summer/late fall months.
As a result,the implementation of the Proposed Project,including the olive-green natural looking artificial
synthetic turf would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings. Further, the Project site is a landfill and is not considered a designated scenic view by
Mendocino County. Any partial, distant, views from Vichy prings Resort's property or the residents to
the west would not be considered significant. Furthermore, the natural looking olive-green artificial
synthetic turf/grass would blend into the existing environment and would not have any noticeable or
negative views from any vantage point. Also, the sand ballast on top layer of the artificial synthetic turf
would help dampen any harsh color contrasts and provides a mix of green and brown colors,which matches
the natural surrounding environment—especially at views from more than 500-feet away from the 40 acre
site.Any pacts are considered to be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. The City would,
however, be willing to work with Vichy prings Resort to help choose a color option that works best for
them if they still have concerns with the olive-green color option. Figure 3.1-9 provides an example of the
three-color pallet's available for the artificial synthetic turf/grass cover.
Significance:Less-than-Significant Impact.
April 2020 4-14
Page 3192 of 4165
f�
U tA/o
,;. CL
l
w% V
O
j � O
f a
%1 O
i
00
0
N
w
N
rtao
0
fAr %r
t Ukiah I-andfill pi t
a
View from KOP C at Vichy Springs Resort — March 2019
II [,,., f�� iiii IIII IIII
II IIII IIII
View from KOP D at Vichy Springs Resort — March 2019
SMB Figure 3.1-4
ERVIRPNME11TAI
Views from Vichy Springs Resort Towards VAY IAPAR
r 1% in;,,ai %kiii«tai oi/rmi� 11 f� l G l /i i f !;
�r
, sr
ti
iron
r,
i
i
I)�
n
�r r
'�(/ � ' /// � u�lrJ� iu ik J / ,�/�✓�i /ir� 9J �� rh
flit �// rr1��l��r�f / /�y u��lrYn) � / ��� � � 4�l ✓II ✓/l / � rl �
� � e/Y�h4�✓�i%' �r111r� i�i�ii� ti { � / �l /. /i 11 l
fl� ' ��(�%4�''9✓^ "�r ���rrl�l ���'ril�/�i���r��'%s� i f� a /i+ �`�'.G:�' fir,yak m"�'i'�lei ��/�%��i�l� ���%
yer/ '"70Y���� �"i °��%N'/,1,"1 i rv;� �f���l,r�r c,��/rr���",�l�„ �'r!�,Niy if���;'✓,��r���rr�'�/k r�Ami � !f rc it ?�r'
�E°��a.' /W�11�;eNr,+.:, ,i, 1,,,,,r J� �'/n,li�?� .,� e /F�h.'��,Y iq,�.a G,��➢, ib�, „�',
5 B Figure 3.1-5
Partial Distant Views from Vichy SpringsWft 06 ty
l�
Existing Ukiah Landfill — March 2018
G
R I
Simulated Post-Constructed Ukiah Landfill
SMB Figure 3.1-7
ERVIRPNME11TAI
Visual Simulation of Pre- and Post-Project YKA JAPA 11
N
`I
i or M y �i f i rfJr'r,I
!Jil
r I r v ��p ry Pr V'/�� R w v'f llv lrr��r (( '[✓���Y t�i�'l� fl��� �r/r /�
( � r,ep, � ! yfh"�1 � frf y�r �V�J�r rl➢'�'9 r��r � it ��r!P�y�/ � .�
' l C. •U � � 19 � I � � �� r � p r;�l>7�r �i�r, J fY� r i �o' �I
ray A
fff
txo
Mo
0.0
CL
^i,I
I. I
I
I
�l N �i� �� '� �� � � (dd��✓D�'�� 11 1 � Z �
r!
JJ, r ��.1 m�(u �1 1Y� i � ���fi•�e�� l � ,rr �(Oiti,.,�.irr � ,
N
I
u " I
H
ca
is � V C7
i � N
O � �
V
N O �
N Y Y O
O m a
0 z rm ff
l�
Existing Ukiah Landfill — March 2018
G
R I
Simulated Post-Constructed Ukiah Landfill
SMB Figure 3.1-7
ERVIRPNME11TAI
Visual Simulation of Pre- and Post-Project YKA JAPA 11
op LA Lo
"t
LAj% J c. p
M txo r_(Y)
txo
II� �
i
.� cr
r i
Y M
uLI O
u � 4-
11 Ili
O
i II
AI �
+ ��IIII III �IIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIII r W ca �
i Fell Y
4p I
O V Q
C i ? O
w O N N OC
V Y �
i�
t
fC� F
O
C
C tA
y
�f
N ,
D
r
Olive-Green
rr �i I
i lid p�
� N' I �I liiiil 11
ii
ilea F
Blend
r
!
�fua N ii i rr
r�e�� �� m ✓Fr t i,
t
Ta n
S B Figure 3.1-9
Artificial Synthetic Turf/Gras§Col9 fCgp�jpq§
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Section 3.2 Air Quality
On Page 3.2-10, the 2nd paragraph is hereby changed as follows:
The nearest
sensitive receptor is the Vichy Springs Resort and Spa, located approximately 500-698-feet south of the
landfill's entrance. A rural residential development is located approximately one-quarter mile west of the
landfill property boundary. A housing development is also located along the south side of Vichy Springs
Road and westward of the Vichy Springs Resort and Spa. The entire development is approximately 1,000-
feet southward of the landfill property boundary and is separated from the landfill by an intervening ridge.
Section 3.4 Cultural and Tribal Resources
On page 3.4-2, the 7`h bullet is hereby revised as follows:
• Historic Resource. A property, site, or district listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in,
the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR),
Vefft+t Mendocino County Historical Landmarks, or City of Omia-Fd Ukiah Points of Interest.
Specifically, On July 5,2019,a records search was conducted by staff at the Northwest Information Center
(NWIC), Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, California (NWIC File 4 19-0004). The record search
included the project Area of Potential Effect(APE) and a 0.25-mile radius outside the project boundaries.
The record search included reviewing pertinent NWIC base maps that reference cultural resources records
and reports,historic period maps, and literature for Mendocino County including current inventories of the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP),the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHP),the
California Inventory of Historical Resources, California State Historic Landmarks, and the California
Points of Historical Interest. No cultural resources are known within this search radius. Two previous
studies have examined the project area in part. In 1975,the Bureau of Land Management prepared a high-
level overview of archaeological sites in its Cow Mountain Planning Unit(Keesling and French 1975). A
small portion of the project area was also surveyed on foot in 1994 (Roybal 1994).Neither study identified
cultural resources in the project area.Just outside of the 0.25-44-mile search radius is Vichy Springs Resort,
established in 1854 4957.Vichy Springs Resort(P-23-001793)is listed on the National Register of Historic
Places (National Park Service 1985). Given this information it appears that the project area is not sensitive
for prehistoric or historical cultural resources
Chapter 4 — Alternatives
Pages 4-2 through 4-5 of*the DEIR are hereby changed as follows:
4.2 Alternatives Evaluat Carried Forward in this DER
As described in Chapter 1 — Introduction and Chapter 2— Project Description,the overall purpose of
the Proposed Project is to close the Ukiah Landfill in accordance with the applicable regulatory standards.
Specifically,the components and systems required for closure of the landfill include the final cover and
grading design to control stormwater, potential infiltration and accommodate future settlement, landfill
April 2020 4-22
Page 3201 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
slope stability, construction quality assurance, drainage and erosion control systems, landfill gas (LFG)
control and monitoring systems, groundwater/surface water monitoring systems, and site security. The
Final CPMP for the Ukiah Landfill has been prepared for and conditionally approved by the following
agencies:
• California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery(CalRecycle)
• Mendocino County Department of Public Health
• North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
• Mendocino County Air Quality Management District
The Final CPMP has been prepared in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations
(27 CCR), and Chapters 3 and 4 and the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)40, Subpart F. The objectives
of the plan are identified below.
• To provide a detailed plan and schedule for closure implementation.
• To provide a plan and schedule for the inspection, maintenance and monitoring procedures to
be implemented during the post-closure maintenance period.
• To allow the applicable agencies to monitor closure and post-closure activities to determine that
all landfill closure and post-closure maintenance and monitoring requirements are being
followed in accordance with the approved plan.
• To provide a basis for the establishment of an accurate detailed cost estimate for closure and
post-closure maintenance.
As detailed in Chapter 3 — Environmental Analysis, the Proposed Project would have several potentially
significant impacts to the environment. However,with the implementation of the identified and corresponding
mitigation measures,all of the potentially significant impacts can be avoided or reduced to less-than-significant
levels.Therefore,and as consistent with CEQA regulations,in the selection of alternatives,there is really no need
to identify or further evaluate alternatives because no tmai,eidable significant and unavoidable impacts have been
identified with the Proposed Project. However, due to the fact that Vichy prings Resort has argued for a
compacted clay lqyer/natural cover alternative be further evaluated,the Final EIR includes the further evaluation
of a compacted clay lgyer/natural cover alternative as provided in Section 4.2.2 below and removed from Section
4.3 —Alternatives Considered and Eliminated. Also, as explained in more ,ao tail i 4.3 n f e ffl,+;.es Considered
(GEQA, 151-26.6 As a restift,for-this Proposed Pfejeet-,the ea!�,aftemative that needs to be eN,eAti4ed in
feasible. The No Project Alternative and the Compacted Clay Layer/Natural Cover Alternative are discussed
below. In addition,below we have also provided a discussion of the other alternatives that were considered and
eliminated-along with the rationale.
April 2020 4-23
Page 3202 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
4.2.1 No Project Alternative
CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(e) provides that a No Project Alternative shall also be evaluated along with its
impact. According to the CEQA Guidelines,the No Project Alternative shall discuss the existing conditions
at the time the Notice of Preparation was published, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur
in the foreseeable future if the Proj ect were not approved,based on current plans and consistent with available
infrastructure and community services.
Under the No Project Alternative, the City would not close the Ukiah Landfill in accordance with the
applicable regulatory standards. Specifically, none of the new components and systems required for
closure of the landfill would be implemented. This includes,but is not limited to the final cover and grading
design to control stormwater, potential infiltration and accommodate future settlement, and landfill
slope stability as well as drainage and erosion control systems, landfill gas (LFG) control and monitoring
systems, and groundwater/surface water monitoring systems. The on-going maintenance of the landfill,
would probably continue in a manner similar to existing maintenance of the landfill, since it ceased
receiving waste.
The No Project Alternative would result in less significant temporary construction related impacts than the
Proposed Project. All of the potentially significant impacts associated with the construction and operation
of the Project would not occur under this alternative. However, the No Project Alternative would fail to
meet any and/or all of the objectives of the Project. Under the No Project Alternative,the Ukiah Landfill
would not be properly closed according to state and local regulations and would be susceptible to slope
instability, potential water quality impacts to surface water and groundwater resources due to inadequate
cover leading to drainage and erosion issues during inclement weather/stormwater, and the potential for
inadequate LFG control and monitoring leading to air quality issues and impacts. Under the No Project
Alternative,the City would be potentially susceptible for a variety of water quality and air quality violations
and fines.
4.2.2 Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Lavers with Natural
Vegetation Closure Alternative
The Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative was a
1974 standard that was officially adopted in 1985 as part of then Subchapter 15 of Title 27 of the California
Code of Regulations 27 CCR). This alternative would require a 2-foot thick clay foundation layer over
the entire landfill area and then another 2-foot thick soil and vegetation layer on top of the cla, thus
requiring approximately 2.5 million cubic yards of material to properly cover the approximately 40- acre
landfill area. Once constructed the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural
Vegetation Closure Alternative would soon return to the existing condition as currently exists with the landfill
covered with natural vegetation. The construction duration would be extended by another 2-months. Detailed
below is an evaluation of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation
Closure Alternative would perform as compared to the Proposed Project in each of the environmental resource
areas. As consistent with CEQA requirements, alternatives do not need to be evaluated to the same level of
detail as the Proposed Project,but are rather evaluated to compare and contrast to the Proposed Project and/or
the No Action Alternative.
April 2020 4-24
Page 3203 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
4.2.2.1 Aesthetics/Visual Resources
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Lavers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have generally the same, but slightly increased temporary construction related
aesthetic/visual impacts as compared to the Proposed Project because the excavation of the additional clay
foundation layer would increase the visual footprint of the construction area and would also increase the time
that the area is exposed. However, similar to the Proposed Project,there are few, if any, sensitive receptors
that would actually see or notice the construction activities. And as the construction activities would be
temporary, any temporary or partial views of the construction activities of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo
Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative would be similar, but slightly increased
and considered to be less-than-significant.
Once constructed, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would return to the Landfill's existing condition and would have less-than-significant to no
significant aesthetic/visual impacts. Any partial views of the landfill would be of the landfill, which is a 40-
acre area that would remain a landfill with a natural vegetation cover and devoid of an. trees.
Of particular concern to the Vichy Springs Resort is the comparison of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo
Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative with the Proposed Project's artificial
synthetic turf cover. The DEIR and the Final EIR provide compelling evidence and proof that any partial views
would be from a distance of over 500- and up to 2,500-feet away cannot distinguish between an olive-green
artificial/synthetic turf cover and natural grass.Please refer to the real-life examples of where artificial/synthetic
turf covers have been successfully used and which are displayed in Figure 2-2 of the DEIR,Appendix B of this
Final EIR,and the figures in the revised Section 3.1—Aesthetics/Visual Resources above.Of particular concern
to the Vichy Springs Resort, is the notion that an olive-green color would not blend into the landscape when
the season changes and where the surrounding hills would be brown and any partial views they have would be
green. As provided in the revised aesthetics/visual resources section,there are numerous examples of beautiful
views of green/irrigated grass adjacent next to brown/dry hills. This type of view is common in northern
California and the semi-arid west. Further, from over 500-feet it is virtually impossible to tell the difference
between artificial/synthetic turf and natural grass. As a result,the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay
Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative, once constructed would have less-than-significant to no
significant aesthetic/visual impacts and would look very similar to the Proposed Project.
4.2.2.2 Air Quality
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have generally the same, but slightly increased temporary construction related air quality
impacts as the Proposed Project as the excavation of the additional clay foundation layer would increase the
construction emissions including criteria pollutants such as ROG, NOx, PM,o and PMzs. However, these
emissions can be reduced to less-than-significant levels with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure 3.2-1:
Fugitive Dust Control Measures and Mitigation Measure 3.2-6: Develop and Submit Naturally Occurring
Asbestos (NOA)Dust Mitigation Plan as discussed in Section 3.2 of the DEIR.
Once constructed, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would produce slightly more emissions as compared to the Proposed project, due to increased
April 2020 4-25
Page 3204 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
maintenance activities associated with ongoing and potential future slope stability issues using natural cover
which would require more machinery and manpower than the Proposed Project.
4.2.2.3 Biological Resources
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have generally the same,but increased temporary construction related biological resources
impacts as compared to the Proposed Project as the excavation of the additional clay foundation layer would
increase the construction impacts. Specifically,the excavation of the clay borrow material(assuming that it can
all be located on-site) would result in the expansion of the construction footprint with additional impacts to
riparian and wetlands resources resulting in additional impacts to biological resources. However, with the
implementation of the following mitigation measures for the Proposed Project, construction measures for the Proposed Project, construction impacts can be
reduced to less-than-significant levels. (i.e.Mitigation Measure 3.3-1a: Conduct A Preconstruction Survey
for Special Status Wildlife Species, Mitigation Measure 3.3-1b: Conduct Bird Breeding and Nesting
Surveys, Mitigation Measure 3.3-1c: Conduct a Bat Habitat Assessment of Trees, Mitigation Measure 3.3-
Id: Environmental Awareness Training, Mitigation Measure 3.3-1e: Biological Monitor, Mitigation
Measure 3.3-1f Staging Areas and Access Routes, and Mitigation Measure 3.3-3a: Protect Jurisdictional
Waters and Sensitive Habitat Areas).
Once constructed, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have increased water qualL impacts as compared to the Proposed Project as placing a heavy
clay layer on steep side slopes has a tendency to fail more often than artificial/synthetic turf covers. Such
failures would most often occur during rain or storm events, resulting in uncontrollable erosion and
sedimentation that would make its way to the local creek(s)which drains into the Russian River,which is an
impaired water body. This is considered to be a potentially significant and unavoidable impact. Under such
conditions,the City would be subject to water quality fines that can be as much as$25,000 per day. Due to the
fact that these events cannot be predicted as to when or where they will occur,there are no technically viable
Mitigation measures to reduce these potentially significant and unavoidable impacts.
4.2.2.4 Cultural and Tribal Resources
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have generally the same,but increased,potential to affect cultural and/or tribal resources as
compared to the Proposed Project as the excavation of the additional clay foundation layer would increase the
construction footprint and thus would have more potential to inadvertently discover cultural and/or tribal
resources. However,with the implementation of the Proposed Project's Mitigation Measure 3.4-2: Halt Work
if Cultural Resources are Discovered, Mitigation Measure 3.4-3: Stop Work if Paleontological Remains
are Discovered, Mitigation Measure 3.4-4: Halt Work if Human Remains are Found, and Mitigation
Measure 3.4-5: Halt Work if Tribal Cultural Resources are Discovered any impacts would be reduced to
less-than-significant levels.
Once constructed, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would not have anmpacts to cultural and tribal resources.
April 2020 4-26
Page 3205 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
4.2.2.5 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity
The Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative would
have increased slope stability and soil erosion impacts as compared to the Proposed Project. Specifically, a
natural cover alternative would increase the discharge of sediment from the waste management unit over a
artificial synthetic turf cover alternative. In addition, the natural cover system would have increased slope
stability issues and concerns as the landfill has very steep,2:1, slopes and would be subject to increased slope
failure,sluffing,eMosing refuse,leachate seeps,loss oftop soil,and soil erosion/sedimenttransport ofmaterial
to the creek,which drains to the Russian River. This would be considered to be a significant and unavoidable
impact. Due to the fact that these events cannot be predicted as to when or where they will occur,there are no
technically viable mitigation measures to reduce these potentially significant and unavoidable impacts.
4.2.2.6 Greenhouse Gases
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have increased greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the Proposed Project due to the
increase in excavation activities to find clay and increased vehicle/equipment usage to transport and spread
and compact the clay layer over the 40-acre landfill site area. However,this increase is considered to be
less-than-significant.
Once constructed,the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have slightly increased greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the Proposed Project
as a natural cover alternative would require increased operations and maintenance activities to ensure slope
stability and repair any slope failures as they occur. However,this increase is considered to be less-than-
significant.
4.2.2.7 Hydrology and Water Quality
As discussed above in the Biological resources section, the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay
Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative would have increased water quality impacts as compared
to the Proposed Project as placing a heavy c1gy Igyer on steep side slopes has a tendency to fail more often than
artificial/synthetic turf covers. Such failures would most often occur during rain or storm events, resulting in
uncontrollable erosion and sedimentation that would make its way to the local creek(s)which drains into the
Russian River, which is an impaired water body. Under such conditions,the City would be subject to water
quality fines that can be as much as $25,000 per day. This is considered to be a potentially siznificant and
unavoidable impact. Due to the fact that these events cannot be predicted as to when or where they will occur,
there are no technically viable mitigation measures to reduce these potentially significant and unavoidable
impacts.
4.2.2.8 Noise
Construction of the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have increased noise as the excavation and compaction of the clay layer would generate
more noise and ground vibration as compared to the Proposed Project. Also,the construction time would be
extended by 2-months, thus increasing the duration of the construction activities and noise. However, the
nearest sensitive receptor structure is approximately 600-feet away from the nearest proposed construction
activity at the landfill.The potential vibration levels caused by the equipment at the landfill would be much
less than the threshold of perceptibility. As a result,potential vibration effects associated with construction
April 2020 4-27
Page 3206 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
truck traffic or the use of construction equipment at the landfill would not result in any potentially
significant groundborne vibration impacts to structures or people. Therefore,vibration impacts would be a
less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.
Once constructed,the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative would have slightly increased noise as a natural cover alternative would require increased
operations and maintenance activities as compared to the Proposed Project to ensure slope stability and
repair any slope failures as they occur. However,this increase is considered to be less-than-significant.
4.3 Alternatives Considered and Eliminated
Summarized below are the alternatives that were considered and eliminated from further consideration —
along with the rationale for elimination.
Stibehapter- 15 of Title -27 of the Ga4ifemia Code of Regulations (27 GGR). HeweN,er-, eN,er-the last 35w-
per-speetiN,e espeew!�, on sites with Slope stabiht�, issues. 44ie Ukiah Landfill is leeated on steep,Cempae4ed Clay and/or- Gee Synthetie Ciffy hftyer-s with Natural Vegetfftien Closure Alter-nfftive. The
quite high. Stieh a failttFe would Festilt in sigaifieavA water-qttalit�, issues to the tianamed eFeek a4eagsi
of a atimber- of aatttf-a4 landfill eeN,er- slope failtiFes eN,er- the last -20 phis �,eafs has shown that bet
building tip beneath the ela�,la�,er-s;paFtiettlaA�,on steep slopes stieh as the eenditions of the Ukiah Lafldf44.
atimer-etts a4ematiN,e landfill eeN,er-s that afe similar- to the Proposed Pfejee4 thr-oughefft the Stat
a4se ea+tse a substaf4ial iner-ease in temper-afy eons .2ts to air-"alit�,, noise, and tFaffie issues
eN,er-the Proposed Pfejea as it would Feqttir-e the need to &Eeai,ate and/or- impeFt (4aaspeFt) signifie
Ukiah Landfill.Also,fr-e Fial s4aadpeifft,this ahematiN,e would Festilt in ineFeased-ma4f4enanee
&� noise, and other-petefftWeaN,ir-epmefftal impa4s,
pr-eN,ides: 1.) A pr-eN,ea stable eeN,er- on steep slopes due to the elimination of low iffter-faee stfength per-e
April 2020 4-28
Page 3207 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Relocation of the Ukiah Landfill. Moving all the waste from one landfill to another is often referred to
as a Clean Closure. It is typically only done on small unpermitted landfills or dumping areas.The relocation
of the solid waste in the Ukiah Landfill is considered to be a technically unfeasible alternative. In addition
to being cost prohibitive, it would require countless truck trips causing significant and unavoidable traffic
and noise impacts. In addition,there is no nearby approved or permitted place to relocate the solid waste
material. Further, there are countless unknown hazards and hazardous waste risks that could affect the
health and safety of the construction workers, Vichy Springs Resort and nearby residents. As a result,this
alternative has been eliminated from further consideration. This alternative is not considered feasible
because it is not capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
taking into account environmental,economic and technological factors(CEQA Guidelines,Section 15364).
Alternative/Synthetic Specialized Tufted Geotextile Landfill Turf Cover Color. The Proposed
Project's alternative/synthetic specialized tufted geotextile turf landfill cover of the Proposed Project was
selected to provide a natural shade of color in order to help mimic the existing natural color and blend into
the surrounding environment. Artificial or synthetic specialized tufted geotextile covers generally come in
three (3)natural colors-olive-green,tan, and a blend of olive-green and tan. For the Proposed Project the
olive-green color was selected as the preferred color as it provides arguably the best color option to blend
into the natural and surrounding environment. With the required minimum of a 5/8 thick sand infill layer
on top,the cover will look like a blend of olive-green and tan.No other non-natural looking colors such as
black,blue, red, orange,grey,white or various color pallets of those or other color options are available in
alternative/synthetic specialized tufted geotextiles for landfills and would not provide any better ability to
blend into the surrounding environment. Fttrther-, the 40 acme Ukiah a Landfill dfil is net aeee-ssible and N,isible
=em a plie-aeee-sr poifft as well�hery en the Viehy, S zResei4. As a result, this alternative
has been duly considered but eliminated from further consideration because it would not avoid any
significant environmental (aesthetic) impacts.
4.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to identify an environmentally superior
alternative. Of the two three alternatives considered in this section (Proposed Project, aPA-the No Project
Alternative, and the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative),the Proposed Project would be the environmentally superiorto boththe No Project Alternative
and the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure Alternative.
The advantages of an artificial synthetic turf landfill cover system over traditional clay cover layer/natural
vegetation cover system, include the following:
April 2020 4-29
Page 3208 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
• Long Life. The durable,high-strength system components ensure a long-life(100-year design life)
of protection against operational and natural forces while maintaining an excellent natural looking
appearance with greatly reduced maintenance.
• Soil Cover Savings. Eliminates the need for high maintenance vegetative soil covers and increases
weather resistance. Since final cover soils are challenging to locate and expensive to place in the
final stages of the landfill's lifespan,the resultingsavings avings can be significant.
• Environmentally Friendly. The system is better for landfills in sensitive areas like the Ukiah
Landfill where soil erosion and sedimentation are a major concern due to steep canyon slopes. Soil
loss is non-existent during operations and post-closure. Eliminates the need for borrow sources,
and siltation ponds can be converted to simple stormwater retention ponds. As a direct result,
associated environmental construction impacts are much easier to manage.
• Increased Slope Stability. Soil stabilL problems either rain/storm events, through earthquake,
and/or gas pressure buildup is reduced.
• Weather Resistant. The components of an artificial synthetic cover system work in conjunction
to seal the waste mass from the destructive forces of hi.9h rainfall intensities and hurricane force
winds.
• Reduced Wildlife Impacts.By reducing organic matter and food sources,fewer animals,including
birds,are attracted to the site. This is important at landfills located in coastal areas or near airports.
Because the components of an artificial synthetic cover system do not pass on the animals'
smell/taste test,they do not usually bother with it or return to it.
• Eliminates Cap Infiltration. Since surface water is not restricted by the hydraulic conductivity
of a vegetative cover drainage system, and can no longer infiltrate into the waste, leachate
production is cut off at the source.
• Enhanced Visual Inspection. Because the svnthetic materials are not covered with thick soil
profiles,they are easily inspected for damage,which,if identified,may be easily and inexpensively
repaired. Also, significant additional damage to clay la. e�ps can be done by earthwork
equipment during repair and soil placement maintenance activities. By replacing the soil layer with
an artificial synthetic cover system,this is no longer an issue.
• Easier Reclamation. Landfill materials are readily accessible in the event of landfill reclamation
for future piggyback areas or future waste lifts due to waste settlement or vertical expansion. The
composite nature of an artificial synthetic cover system allows owners access to the waste without
having to remove the existing cover soils of a typical and traditional final cover system.
Further, the comparison and rationale for each alternative including the Proposed Project is discussed
below.
4.4.1 No Proiect Alternative
The No Project Alternative would not meet any of the goals and objectives of the Proposed Project. Under the No
Project Alternative,the Ukiah Landfill would not be properly closed according to state and local regulations
and would be susceptible to slope instability, potential water quality impacts to surface water and
groundwater resources due to inadequate cover leading to drainage and erosion issues during inclement
weather/stormwater, and the potential for inadequate LFG control and monitoring leading to air quality
issues and impacts.Under the No Action Alternative,the City would be potentially susceptible for a variety
April 2020 4-30
Page 3209 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
of water quality and air quality violations and fines. As a result, the Proposed Project is considered to be
the environmentally superior alternative.
4.4.2 Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layers with Natural Vegetation Closure
Alternative'
The Natural or Clay Layer closure option was a 1974 standard that was officially adopted in 1985 as part of
then Subchapter 15 of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (27 CCR). However; over the last
35-12lus years; the waste industry, along with the regulatory agencies and surrounding communities; has
recognized that there are serious short-falls with compacted clay layers from both a performance and cost
perspective — especially on sites with slope stability issues. The Ukiah Landfill is located on steep, 2:1
plus, slope and the potential for a clay and/or geosynthetic clay laver alternative failure is unreasonably
quite high. Such a failure would result in significant water quality issues to the unnamed creek alongside
the Ukiah Landfill,which drains into Sulfur Creek and then the Russian River. Further, forensic anal
of a number of natural landfill cover slope failures over the last 20-plus years has shown that both
Compacted Clay and Geosynthetic Clay Liners fail due to pore water pressure rise in saturated cover soils
building up beneath the clay lam;particularly on steep slopes such as the conditions of the Ukiah Landfill.
In short,the heavy layers assist in the probabili e in slope instability.Further,CalRecycle has approved
numerous alternative landfill covers that are similar to the Proposed Project throughout the State of
California and they have proven to be a viable alternative, especially on landfills with steep slopes.
From an environmental perspective, the compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay layer alternative would
also cause a substantial increase in temporary construction impacts to air quality.biological resources,water
quality, and noise, issues over the Proposed Project as it would require the need to excavate and/or import
(transport) significant quantities of clay sources and natural vegetation cover soils to the site and spread
them over the 40-acre Ukiah Landfill. Also,from an operational standpoint,this alternative would result in
increased maintenance impacts and costs to maintain and repair slope failures as well as to maintain the
natural grass/vegetation to prevent fires and keep rodents from compromisingthe he clay layer structure,which
would then contribute to a substantial increase in traffic, air quality, noise, and other potential
environmental impacts.
4.4.3 Proposed Project Alternative
As shown in Table 4-1,the Citesproposed the Proposed Project and artificial cover alternative because
it has many advantages over the Compacted Clay and/or Geo Synthetic Clay Layer with Natural Vegetation
Closure Alternative and the No Project Alternative as the Proposed Project provides: 1)Aproven stable
cover on steep slopes due to the elimination of low interface strength pore water pressure and gas relief
lavers, 2) Decreased exposure to construction-related air quality, noise, and traffic impacts and potential
significant and unavoidable long-term water qualitypacts to surface and groundwater resources which
could lead to significant fines, and 3, significant lower capital and on-going//Verpetual maintenance costs.
As a result, the compacted clay and/or geo synthetic clay layer alternative has been considered, but is not
3 Information of history and rationale for the selection of the Proposed Project and artificial synthetic turf cover was provided by the City's
engineering consultant,Mike Delmanowski,C.E.G.,C.Hg.Senior Hydrogeologist of EBA Engineering located at 825 Sonoma Avenue Santa
Rosa,CA 95404. See Appendices B and C of this Final EIR as well as appendices in the DEIR
April 2020 4-31
Page 3210 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
selected as it does not Perform as well as the Proposed Pro-ject. The No Pro-ject Alternative is not a legally
implementable alternative. As a result;the Proposed Pro-ject remains the Citv's selected alternative.
Table 4-1
Comparison of Alternatives
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
The No Project Alternative would not be a
legally implementable alternative. The
Meets Proiect CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Obiectives? Yes No/Partial No have less slope stability than the proposed
project and would require increased future
maintenance than over the Proposed
Proect.
3.1Aesthetie/Visual Resources
Impact 3.1-1: Would the The Proposed Project is located on an
Proposed Project have a LSI Equal N/A existing dump and is not considered to be
substantial adverse 2 a scenic view area by the County of
effect on a scenic vista? Mendocino.
Impact 3.1-2:Would the
Proposed Project
substantially damage The Proposed Project is located on an
scenic resources existing dump and is not considered to be
including,but not limited LSI Equal N/A
k a scenic view area by the County o
to, trees, roc f
Mendocino.
outcroppings, and
historic buildings within
a State scenic hi hwa .
Impact 3.1-3:Would the
Proposed Project The Proposed Project is located on an
substantiallv degrade the LSI Equal N/A existing dump and is not considered to be
existing visual character 2 a scenic view area by the County of
or quality of the site and Mendocino.
its surroundings.
Impact 3.1-4: Would the
Proposed Proiect create a The Proposed Project is located on an
new source of existing dump and is not considered to be
substantial light or glare, LSI Equal N/A
a scenic view area by the County of
which would adverselv Mendocino.
affect day or nighttime
views m the area?
3.2 Air Quality
Impact 3.2-1:Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Conflict with or Obstruct LSI Equal N/A conflict with or obstruct implementation
Implementation of the of the Applicable Air Quality
Applicable Air Quality
Mana ement Plan? Management Plan.
Impact 3.2-2: Would The Proposed Project and/or the
Construction of the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Proposed Project Result result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net
in a Cumulativelv LSM Equal/PG N/A Increase of anv Criteria Pollutant Under an
Considerable Net — Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air
Increase of anv Criteria Quality Standard. However, the
Pollutant Under an CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Applicable Federal or have slightly increased emissions due to
April 2020 4-32
Page 3211 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compaiison of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
State Ambient Air increased construction and maintenance
QualL Standard? activities.
Impact 3.2-3: Would The Proposed Project and/or the
Operation of the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Proposed Project Result result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net
in a Cumulatively Increase of any Criteria Pollutant Under an
Considerable Net LSI EguaUP N/A Applicable Federal or State Ambient Air
G
Increase of any Criteria Quality Standard. However, the
Pollutant Under an CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Applicable Federal or have slightly increased emissions due to
State Ambient Air increased construction and maintenance
QualL Standard? activities.
Impact 3.2-4: Would The Proposed Project and/or the
Construction and/or CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Operation of the expose sensitive receptors to substantial
Proposed Proi ect Expose LSI EguaUP N/A pollutant concentrations. However, the
G
Sensitive Receptors to CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Substantial Pollutant have slightly increased emissions due to
Concentrations? increased construction and maintenance
activities.
Impact 3.2-5: Would
Construction and/or The Proposed Project and/or the
Operation of the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Proposed Project Result expose sensitive receptors to substantial
G pollutant concentrations causing odors.
in Other Emissions LSI EguaUP N/A Such Those Leading — However, the CCL/Natural Cover
to Odors) Adversely Alternative would have slightly increased
Affecting a Substantial emissions due to increased construction
Number of People? and maintenance activities.
Impact 3.2-6: Would With mitigation, the Proposed Protect
Construction of the and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
Proposed Project Result would not expose sensitive receptors to
in Other Emissions
(Such as Naturally LSM Equal/PG N/A substantial naturally occurring asbestos.
Occurring Asbestos) However, the CCL/Natural Cover
Adversely Affecting a Alternative would have slightly increased
Substantial Number of emissions due to increased construction
Peo —letan and maintenance activities.
3.3 Bolo ical Resources
Impact 3.3-1: Would the
Proposed Project have a With mitigation, the Proposed Project
substantial adverse and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
effect either directly or would not have a substantial adverse
through habitat effect, either directiv or through habitat
modifications,on any species identified as a
modifications, on any candidate, sensitive, or special-status
species identified as a LSM Equal/PG N/A
candidate, sensitive, or species in local or regional plans,policies,
candidate,
species o or regulations or by the California
local special-status regional plans, Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.
policies, or regulations, Fish and Wildlife Service. However, the
or by the California CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Department of Fish and have slightiy increased effects due to
April 2020 4-33
Page 3212 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compaiison of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
Wildlife or U.S.Fish and increased construction and maintenance
Wildlife Service? activities.
Impact 3.3-2 Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project have a
substantial adverse effect CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
su ct
su any riparian habitat ct have a substantial adverse effect on anv
other sensitive natural riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
community identified in
local or regional plans, LSI EguaUPG N/A plans, policies, or regulations adopted by
policies, or regulations the California Department of Fish and
adopted by the Wildlife or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.
California Department However, the CCL/Natural Cover
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Alternative would have slightly increased
Fish and Wildlife effects due to increased construction and
Service? maintenance activities.
Impact 3.3-3: Would the
Proposed Project have a
substantial adverse effect With mitigation, the Proposed Project
on federallv protected and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
waters of the U.S. as would not have a substantial adverse effect
defined by Section 404 on federallv protected waters of the U.S.as
of the federal Clean defined by Section 404 of the federal Clean
Water Act or protected Water Act or protected waters of the state
waters of the state as as defined by Section 1600 et seq. of the
defined by Section 1600 LSM EguaUP N/A California Fish and Game Code(including,
G
et seq. of the California but not limited to,marshes,vernal pools,
Fish and Game Code and coastal wetlands) through direct
(including, but not removal,filling,hydrological interruption,
limited to, marshes, or other means. However, the
vernal pools,and coastal CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
wetlands) through direct have slightly increased effects due to
removal, filling, increased construction and maintenance
hydrological activities.
interruption, or other
means?
Impact 3.3-4: Would the The Proposed Protect and/or the
Proposed Proiect
CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
interfere substantiallv interfere substantiallv with the movement
with the movement of of anv native resident or migratory fish or
anv native resident or wildlife species or with established native
migratory fish or LSI Equal/PG N/A resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or
wildlife species or with
established native impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites. However, the CCL/Natural Cover
resident or migratory Alternative would have slightly increased
wildlife corridors, or
effects due to increased construction and
impede the use of native
se sites? maintenance activities.
wildlife nur
Impact 3.3-5: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project conflict CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
with anv local policies or LSI EguaUP N/A conflict with anv local policies or
G
ordinances protecting ordinances protecting biological resources.
biological resources? However, the CCL/Natural Cover
Alternative would have slightly increased
April 2020 4-34
Page 3213 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compaiison of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
effects due to increased construction and
maintenance activities.
Impact 3.3-6: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project conflict CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
with an adopted Habitat conflict with an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Natural Community NI Equal/PG N/A Conservation Plan,or other approved local,
Conservation Plan, or — — regional,or state habitat conservation plan.
other approved local, However, the CCL/Natural Cover
regional, or state habitat Alternative would have slightly increased
conservation plan? effects due to increased construction and
maintenance activities.
3.4 Cultural.Valeontoloi kal,and Tribal Resources
Impact 3.4-1: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project cause a CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
substantial adverse cause a substantial adverse change in the
change in the significance of an historical resource as
significance of an LSI Equal/PG N/A defined in State CEQA Guidelines
historical resource as §15064.5. However, the CCL/Natural
defined in State CEQA Cover Alternative would have slightly
Guidelines§15064.5? increased effects due to increased
construction and maintenance activities.
Impact 3-4.2:Would the With mitigation, the Proposed Protect
Proposed Project cause a and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
substantial adverse would not cause a substantial adverse
change in the change in the significance of an
significance of an LSM Equal/PG N/A archaeological resource pursuant to
archaeological resource CEQA Guidelines§15064.5.However,the
pursuant to CEQA CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
Guidelines§15064.5? have slightly increased effects due to
increased construction and maintenance
activities.
Impact3.4-3: Would the With mitigation, the Proposed Protect
proposed Project and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
directly or indirectly would not directly or indirectly destrov a
destrov a unique unique paleontological resource or site or
paleontological resource LSM Equal/PG N/A unique geologic feature. However, the
or site or unique CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
geologic feature? have slightly increased effects due to
increased construction and maintenance
activities.
Impact 3.4-4: Would the With mitigation, the Proposed Protect
Proposed Project disturb and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
anv human remains, would not disturb anv human remains,
including those interred LSM EguaUP N/A including those interred outside of formal
G
outside of formal cemeteries. However, the CCL/Natural
cemeteries? Cover Alternative would have slightly
increased effects due to increased
construction and maintenance activities.
Impact 3.4-5: With mitigation, the Proposed Protect
Would LSM Equal/PG N/A and/or the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
implementation of the would not cause a substantial adverse
April 2020 4-35
Page 3214 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compadson of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
Proposed Project cause a change in the significance of a tribal
substantial adverse cultural resource. However, the
change in the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
significance of a tribal have slightly increased effects due to
cultural resource? increased construction and maintenance
activities.
15,Geologv Soils,and Seis tdt
Impact 3.5-1: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project expose CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
people to injury or expose people to injury or structures to
structures to damage damage from potential rupture of a known
from potential rupture of LSI EguaUP N/A earthquake fault, strong ground shaking,
G
a known earthquake seismic-related ground failure, or
fault, strong ground landslides. However, the CCL/Natural
shaking, seismic-related Cover Alternative would have slightly
ground failure, or increased effects due to increased
landslides? construction and maintenance activities.
Impact 3.5-2: Would
construction grading and
long-term closure The CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
conditions at the Landfill LSI PG N/A would have greater potential to expose
expose soils to erosion soils to erosion.
and result in the loss of
to soil?
Impact 3.5-3:Would the
Proposed Project be
located on a unit or soils
that are potentiallv The CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
unstable, or that could
become unstable as a would have greater potential to become
the Project,and LSI PG N/A unstable and potentiallv resulting in on-
result
result of result in on- site landslides,sluffmg,and failure due to
potentialor off-site landslide the steep slopes.
lateral spreading,
subsidence,liquefaction,
or colla se?
Impact 3.5-4.Would the
Proposed Project make a
cumulatively
considerable The CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
contribution to
cumulative effects would have greater potential to become
associated with LSI PG N/A unstable and potentiallv resulting in on-
increased seismic risk site landslides,sluffmg,and failure due to
the steep slopes.
landsliding, erosion,
topsoil loss or increased
exposure to seismic or
other risks?
3.6 Greenhouse Gases,
Impact 3.6-1: Would The Proposed Project and/or the
Implementation of the LSI Equal/PG N/A CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
Proposed Project generate GHG emissions,either directly or
April 2020 4-36
Page 3215 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compadson of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
generate GHG indirectly, that may have a significant
emissions,either directly impact on the environment.However,the
or indirectly, that may CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
have a significant impact have slightly increased effects due to
on the environment? increased construction and maintenance
activities.
Impact 3.6-2:Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project conflict CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
with any applicable plan, conflict with any applicable plan,policy,
policy, or regulation or regulation adopted for the purpose of
adopted for the purpose LSI Equal/PG N/A reducing the emissions of GHG.However,
of reducing the the CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
emissions of GHG? have slightly increased effects due to
increased construction and maintenance
activities.
3.1,Hydrology and Water ualit
Impact 3.7-1:Would the
Proposed Project violate
any water quality The CCL/Natural Cover Alternative
standards or waste would have greater potential to violate
discharge requirements LSI Equal/PG N/A water quality standards or waste discharge
or otherwise requirements due to on-site landslides
substantially degrade sluffing,and slope failures.
surface or groundwater
uali 9
Impact 3.7-2:Would the
Proposed Project
substantially decrease The Proposed Project and/or the
groundwater supplies or CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
interfere substantially substantially decrease groundwater
with groundwater LSI Equal N/A supplies or interfere substantially with
recharge such that the groundwater recharge such that the Proi ect
Project may impede may impede sustainable groundwater
sustainable groundwater management of the basin.
management of the
basin?
Impact 3.7-3:Would the The Proposed Protect and/or the
Proposed Project CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
substantially alter the substantially alter the existing drainage
existing drainage pattern pattern of the site or area, including
of the site or area through the alteration of the course of a
including through the stream or river or through the addition of
alteration of the course impervious surfaces, in a manner that
of a stream or river or LSI EguaUP N/A would result in substantial erosion
G
through the addition of siltation,polluted runoff or flooding on-or
impervious surfaces,in a off-site.However,the CCL/Natural Cover
manner that would result Alternative would have slightly increased
in substantial erosion water quality effects due to increased
siltation,polluted runoff construction and maintenance activities as
or flooding on- or off- well as increased susceptibility to slope
site? failures leading to increased erosion and
sedimentation.
April 2020 4-37
Page 3216 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compadson of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
Impact 3.7-4:Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
conflict with or obstruct conflict with or obstruct implementation
implementation of a of a water quality control plan or
water quality control sustainable groundwater management
plan or sustainable LSI EguaUP N/A plan. However, the CCL/Natural Cover
G
groundwater Alternative would have slightly increased
management plan? water quality effects due to increased
construction and maintenance activities as
well as increased susceptibility to slope
failures leading to increased erosion and
sedimentation.
3.8'Noise
Impact 3.8-1: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Proiect generate CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in generate a substantial temporary or
ambient noise levels in permanent increase in ambient noise levels
the vicinity of the in the vicinity of the Proposed Project in
Proposed Project in LSI EguaUPG N/A excess of standards established in the local
excess of standards — general plan or noise ordinance, or
the local applicable standards of other agencies.
established in However, the CCL/Natural Cover
general plan the
noise
ordinance, applicable Alternative would have slightly increased
standards of other noise effects due to increased construction
s and maintenance activities.
encies?
Impact 3.8-2: Would the The Proposed Project and/or the
Proposed Project CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
generate excessive generate excessive groundborne vibration
groundborne vibration LSI EguaUP N/A or groundborne noise levels.However,the
G
or groundborne noise CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would
levels? have slightly increased noise effects due to
increased construction and maintenance
activities.
Impact 3.8-3: Would the
Proposed Project be
located within the
f a private The Proposed Project and/or the
vicinity o
airstrip or aimort land CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
use plan,or where such a be located within the vicinity of a private
plan has not been airstrip or an aimort land use plan, or
within two LSI Equal N/A where such a plan has not been adopted,
adopted,a public aimo within two miles of a public aimort o
miles r
or public use aiimo public use aimort, and/or expose people
and/or expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels.
residing or working in
the project area to
excessive noise levels.
Growth Inducement Effects
Would the Proposed The Proposed Project and/or the
Project indirectly or LSI Equal N/A CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
directly remove barriers indirectly or directly remove barriers to
April 2020 4-38
Page 3217 of 4165
The City of Ukiah's Landfill Closure Project
Final Environmental Impact Report Revisions to the Draft EIR
Table
Compadson of
Compacted
Proposed Clav/Natural No Project Comments
Project Cover Alternative
Alternative
to population growth population growth and/or encourage and
and/or encourage and facilitate other activities that could
facilitate other activities significantly affect the environment,either
that could significantly individually or cumulatively_
affect the environment
either individually or
cumulative) 9
Cumulative Effects
Would the Proposed The Proposed Project and/or the
Proi ect create anv direct, CCL/Natural Cover Alternative would not
indirect, short-term LSI Equal N/A
and/or long-term create any direct, indirect, short-term
cumulative Impacts? and/or long-term cumulative impacts.
NI=No Impact
LSI=Less-than-Significant Impact
LSM=Less-than-Significant Impact
PG=Potentially Greater Impact than the Proposed Project
Equal=Equal Impact to the Proposed Project
As a result, the City has chosen the Proposed Project as the environmentally superior alternative and the
alternative of choice for successfully and legally closing the Ukiah Landfill, in accordance with Title 27
and all applicable laws,permits, and/or regulations.
April 2020 4-39
Page 3218 of 4165
Chapter 5 EIR Preparers
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
This section presents preparers and reviewers of the Draft and Final EIR.
City of Ukiah
Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482-5400
• Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
• Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works
• Jarod Thiele, Management Analyst
Office of the City Manager and City Attorney
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482-5400
• Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
• David Rapport, City Attorney
EBA Engineers
Final Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plan
825 Sonoma Avenue, Suite C
Santa Rosa,California 95404
• Damon Brown,Former Vice President(Deceased)
• David Noren,Vice President Environmental Services
• Mike Delmanowski, Senior Hydrogeologist
SMB Environmental, Inc. Team
Draft EIR Preparers
P.O. Box 381
Roseville, CA 95661
• Steve Brown, Project Manager, Principal Preparer, and Aesthetics/Visual Resources
• Paul Miller,Air Quality/Greenhouse Gases/Noise
• Dan Jones,Air Quality/Greenhouse Gases/Noise
• Jane Valerius, Biological Resources
• Trish Tatarian, Biological Resources
• Daniel Shoup, Cultural, Paleontological, and Tribal Resources
• Pete Hudson, Geology, Soils, Seismicity,and Hydrology
• Justin Taplin,Hydrology and Water Quality
April 2020 -1
Page 3219 of 4165
Appendix A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Page 3220 of 4165
LO
0
N
N
M
0)
G
a
�c
c�
O
�c
a
C7
z o
H CL
cc °'
O
LLI
li L Q O
Oo
O
L N p > cv N
Z 0 0
C Y N
a 70 rn N
O 0 N � E Q Q O �L
Z +, C} d j Q
++ V = a U cn s a W Q
C) O N O 2
M
0 .; Ln
Z JW
O
Z iTL
O
H
a
c�
LO
to to +^, U to n s. n p U U
O v .. +� C U cj U O U-0 cl clU -C o O bA a ° N
72
N U V sU Z U p U U W *� �" N p �°p N
(J � 'C U O 4� cli � UU n 0U � u `o a)
bA O by cH cl
4= U cH O. cd -C
U N cn En O O W O O 'C � p N O. CO �• s un
.E
W °' -C+� O U �• U oncl CJ
U U
U cl U p 44 bA rn U O F44
V] s. n U S. Q Q n .�" clN U ' ' �O n O '0 O ��
cl
cl U s. 0.. C U U n H U U U U
"C +' cd .O -C cdo
s� U
cl U U cd 5 bA bq m U cicj
O a O O
O + cl 0
S.
o
Cl cn
-0 UOI
+� �. O U
o ° � 5 w ° O �" p o p O on c -C 1 CJ
cHEn cn Q 0 cl
0 CA
cl E
N
cl En 0
CO U t4r- cl 4 N W 3 3
�bA bUA U U "C CJ ,O v 0 �� .. cl
p � N �" cn
O + S
cl d � '� O Q cl
cncn by +� ccl
Cli
cl 0.0
°
cl �cn 0-0 cl -0 o ° -0 cl � s CA 'C U cl � U
171
°sue' Wcl °�' o+ CJ
o p .� .on p oaA c i
I n s. C Pti �O vU p N cdCl
cn 00
cd
c `n
O U O C cl
Cj
O O t� 0 cl U U .O C o O U
O., C '" +C C p t+
U -� U O.
'+ a o c° o o to c° . I .- ` U � +� x
U �. o .°. o cl .- " °
w o ° W 0 ci '- Z v
+ �
} 0 �
cj
N C'j U) on C� U o U on o o o to
Z O Z ° ° cl con a -C O 4� O d c° CA -0 5 o ,.s::::I -C W LL
LO
co
�. �.
o
:�p o v a- N
bLO N
O n u Q a)
to
c m C
m
O G� bD
U +'
¢., Ccz O
o
O o
cz
O � �
14°
I � � En o 0
° En" +C�
U 2
sv. �
O U U bA
cl
c C6 +'
m
N N 'Cj
+C� U
O V U n C V •} bq V bq
o W
cl
cj o c ° ~ ocl
2
cn
ci
Cj
cl
0.
Lu
on U on 0 � °
ocl ° cicad .o . Q cn
cl 4-1
cn
cl
v� U U H own F� o
cl
v • • • • d U �. on .. on �. O • • • w w
'o °' W
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
U N
N
cq
s M
O i.+
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N O ° O
.O O o
O A L bD
A U N C
Q � Y
� 0
E
cO
C
O
chp
C
C
V a
O O
a W
L o o y
CL
U U U
w �
C �
O �\ a
U Q-
� o
w
� O �
O d
cr
a E C
M C E O O
O. 0 H U U
L W
Q — Q Q y
ii a4 0 0 0 ° 41. 75 75ou ct o
o cz n 0. zct
cz
o a� ° ¢ o o a�i w o a o
18,
C
ED Y wl d cz
cd ° ct
v,
ct
I;ct
a+ U cz
u ID
—Ct cz
CZ cz C�t
cz
cz
C't cz
cz u
t cz
b.4
cz
Id' czW 5 U ,Y�' y ,�' ,x o "'t,ct
4.1 y..� i^�r
U W ,F'r r/� �--i H '� H "� .S� O "� O ,r"-i Uj ca cd � w O
Z'
° N OTr vl 3Ur OU '� >
bA • • • • • • • bA y�� . O ° • U D
Ocz
w
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
C N
N
s M
O i.+
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N O ° O
.O O o
O A L bD
A C N C
Q � Y
� 0
E
cO
C
O
chp
C
C
v E
CL1
O O
a W
i w
3 0
O U
U
w
c
10 c
J O
i E
O E
Y Q a�
E o
O ,\
r � U
U O-
cr
H C E c
FL °
a>> °
c o
r W
O P. 0
C
a S-
c r ° O m 0 3w u o � w7 0
Ccz
ct
o '
c
G rl n f-I aVI
ocz
a+ U "'a '� O �--, N N w �, c� cd s� N ca T M u O
° o ° cz
U c -- .- o � °� u .' �
O N O /-� �--, ° 0 Cn M N N Y N 'U �O y0 ,_, c W N
N
o u CZo � a°i �' � W ri .:: � � .r ° °' — = ° = cn � � w
°U' a Sri ° � a ° � U ° cno �° E
m .� a O cz ° o °
w� U Q w° a c c°� a u >
cza4 a ° t
F"r
• • • • • • • • m bA p 'r'-'i�
ct
= . o
u m w � � � W � m cz
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
C N
N
to
O s;
M
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N O ° O
.O O o
O A L by
A C N C
Q � 1
D 0
E
cO
C
C
O
hp
O O �
Sti � Sti
o
a W Q � cz
L
N cd cd
4.1
U
c� c� w
w
c
10 c
J O
L O
O E
Y Q O
E O O
O
r Y Y
U O-
N
cr
H C E c
O C E o 75 o
y y
d OL
�•> o o
a=. LU
O P.
CL
LL Vi rl O N W W N i"i Y N "� F"r bq..�'-, }' cd .ter •• Y O Y Y N '-� '-�
c -C cza ° � w F o ° 3 s � cz
�O-, CC T"a N ,U= r.r � . F"r [� w N A �
cz O
y
cz
b4 ° Pa ct ° ° � U ° ° 6 > .° ° ..cz °
S� > P Z 'C p ..-, � O O ,cz O1�"
c ce 's z p ° N 3 ° b4 0 o
N ."~' ,�' = 0 4�
^o Y b4 ° m Ycz
t cz . ° � + ° cz v Y
w a p U p C cz ° °�' cz -C� y 3 o
O czct cz,
cz O
o .fin o
bD N U cut �+ N Sti Ir-a '-� bD r/� O CC O �--i y r/� U 7--I
O u s.a M F"r U N �' sUa "� ,F'r 7--, U W "'a cz bq ,r"-, bq N Y U ,--, N N P,
o a4Z o w° — ° � u p C ° ° 3
s� o mEz
rl m ° ° a ° cz O , 0 ° ° ^o
� ct o °
N b4 °
cz cz
GO 41vi �--� 4.�.. P. 075 p
P, O P' uv' CN OO-
o
a°i Pa ct ,� C p C p H 0 m
ID c"t
O cz N
c ° oct W Q cz o o Nm o
u cz
w P. p cz
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
C N
N
s M
O i.+
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N C o O
.O O o
O A L bD
A C N C
Q � Y
� 0
E
cO
C
C
O
chp
C
C
v E
CL1
O O
a W
w
3 0
O U
U
w
c
10 c
J O
Y L E
O
U.
N E o
O
r Y\
r � U
U Q-
Q
r
C
� W d cr
H C E c
d O U
•> o
� � o
i LV
CL P,
N
,p�' C�v 75
w cz
'75 ° 'C a� aq w a�i cd Y >z
Y y V Sti P O ' > U O Q U C N V
. It
•L O y 3�' N N 0 G S. O O O N W c� cz N r�
7--I C� � � � �Qy-I � � bUp Un� 7O-i � N y O Vl
ct ct j
p u '� o op4.
cz
�4 N fir' P-I y p a O O O T N O 75
� C-t ° oyez cz
N
o � cz
�'' a °' - ct
w p ° y p ° °3 � x ° 3
ct r"
bb
CZ C
p
CL
W e ct en 0
"
ccz 3N" a
Cz
CL
ct
ct
}' p r'�i ,r"-' 7-' F". 7-' O S"" �r }-•-' L�r CC i U ,� P-' O r� N U U '" fo
P O o a chi °
cC
mac-
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
U N
N
O i.+
M
i E V O a)
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N
O A L bD
A U N C
Q � Y
� 0
E
cO
C
C
O
hp
w g
O
Sti
° w
� � O
V E O v
a W
m
y
cz cn
U
w
c
10 c
J O
L O
O E
Y Q O
CL
E O O O
w � —
O r
U O-
Qt
N L r + m
cr
0
a E C
a r.
0 �
W L O O
r
O Q P. P.
LL
cz
0 cad 'U � F"r � O '~-' Y �' +'r ,�
o o O �� ° o o
b4� 5 � Q � � Pr '� � cz
c > ct cn� � �° 5 r �� o >
CZ
ct
~ ,-acz
~
p cz P" a ~chi P cz
w o a + o g ° ° �
°� . cz
U ' cz
O
cz
° cz
cz cz
u cz
o cz
cz czy0 OU ^� u -H. cz
° ° acz ct a ° cz i
Itczb4 ."��' cd G' 'C N N cz "� ~ Paczcz
ct
cz t
'y -S N O p +u ~ ,-a 44 m p Z O w m "� M m 6 u L� Y � O-
M ct +� U '7' 7-� U rl V� CC C/� Y cz u C/� 1 U N
cz
� '� w cn o M '�
cz-
czcz
v
CZ
U .ti T U O U +' 0 •O Vj Vl O C� OOP y .� f0 O
O .- — „r. U °O 2 Y C+'C ri' th
� cz O p "a CC �
� U >
ocz
V i.�
LO
co
U E 'T
N t0 a�
O tin O
C N
2 N
s M
O i.+
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N O ° O
.O O o
O A L bD
A C N C
Q � Y
� 0
E
cO
C
O
chp
C
W
v E
C.1
O O
a W �
3 w o
O �
U � U
w
c
10 c
J O
i
O E
Y Q O
E o
O
r � U
U O-
Qt
cr
� w m
c E
M c o
FL
a�'>
LU
Q. M Q
m _
� LL ° ° °' c mom" cz — � man a°i
cz cz U
m o ��° oo ��° a o °��° .o o
' ocz
° o .� ° o �G ° o
cz u
3 3 ��
0
cz
0 cz
a '� '� U p bD ° cz '~-' U O O
O cz N Y O O �-' p �, P-I U czG' r""/l N '� '� O u4. .y
W y F"-I N y S~j' '� U p y O 4-I VI 7--I bD N N 'j pp O b4 Ca N P-I p
cz i �� o a� W °
cz bp cz3 U Y U
cz
o o o u.cz cz L4
pczo U
ct ° o Q cz
p o o 0
.a vi p Ov CON �° cUi .y OO
cc 75
U U o w a u m o o ° ° N ri m O ° o .�
U
U ° °° cUi ° 5 Z °i 'S ° ° m
CL
75
U ,1 p N N U cz N O U t
w U -5 It U i o E
F— y O ..i .�. c> vi -a c� �' O
• • • • •
CC 7Ur N �' p cyC bA O 'a p
O O iJi p U bbp.� w O ,
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
U N
2 C)
CL
to
i E V O 4J
O O — Q
is U
07 O C 'O
N
O A L bD
A U N C
0 _ Y
D 0
E
cO
C
C
O
hp
� � c
O
G1 C0.1 O U U U O U U N
a W x x
zUO 0
U zUU
w
c
J O
y YLU. E �
o
U Q-
� o
m L C cr
W
H c E c v v
m a E o 0 0
a 0
� >
LW
o — Q Q Q
m
LL N in —4 ebb" O -;"� a> a4 u +' '-p u u�'
oCZ
cz
lu
UU
cz
U
�� U ° ai an n o o
cc
ED P' OU 0 cz
U s v cz o a� o 'y aq o C
,�, r� CZ
o a 3 a a cz ° a o cz °a o > ° o
a°�n a ° o a
o °' off '° o cn
12 > � ° v
`+� O
W .fir N Nacidcz
4�U CL
oCZ a4 an an ° o w E
a � o °
O m a> m o 0 o cn cz1-1 o
o s� cz cz
un P, P, P, a o m O
to o to o a y = o 0 �a� o
o ° 3 . . . °
u y U u u o ° w w
V
LO
co
U E
N t0 a�
O tin O
O O
c.� v
W M
E u `O
0 0 — Q
is U (6
N
y A L bD
A U N C
0 _ Y
� 0
E
cO
C
C
O
chp
C
C
v E
O
U
L
a W
0
U
w
c
10 c
J O
i E
O E
Y Q a�
O E
r
r
U O-
Q t
y +' M
O r
�p w N cr
H C E c
O r- E
ao
a>>
c r-
Lw
CL
m
U
� O
t
C
L cz
O .Ur
r
0
CO o
G
� U
O �
2
Cr
CT
G �
A �I
O �
A
� p
U O
Q
cz
� U
N
U O-
O _
y � C
4r N
O O E
ray L O
N O
cz
W W
cC U O —
d ct +T C
V i.�
Appendix B
Engineered Alternative Analysis
Page 3232 of 4165
Cwx & E-NviRoxmfiNTAL FNwNEFRs
March H., 2003
Ms. Tern.Kinn(-,-,y
Califomia Regianal Wat ff, Quality Control Board
,114orth Coast Region(R.WQCB)
55,50 Skylane Blvd,.,, Ste. A.
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
RE: ENGINEEREDALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL,MEND0c',IN() COUNTY, CALTrl ORNIA
EBA ect No. 02-90 7(Task 5)
Dear Ms.Kinney:
This letter is being submitted by EBB Engineering (F.B-,A.) on bebalf of tbe City of UkiaI4
Department of Public Wo' rks (City) for purposes of presenting an engineered alternabive cover
fbr final closure of the City of Ukiab IAndfill (Landfill). The proposed engineered altemative
pi,vsentcd herein sul)stitutes a gcos)mthetic clay liner (GCL) in lieu of theprescriptive standard
(ix., compacted clay fin"n. [CC LJ) reqlaired wider Title 27 of the California Code of Regulatioms
(27 CCR.). Regulatory comsideration. of an engweered ahemative is allowed urider 27 CAC: .,
§20080(b), which stipulates that. that an engineered altemative may be considered if construction
of the prescriptive standard is unreasondbly and unnecessarily burdensome and 'will cost
substantially rru-)re than the proposed alteiative. Furthermore, the einagineekcd altemative musst be
consistent with the perffirmance goal addressed by the pTescriptive standard and affbrd
equivalent protection agailast water quality impairment. "'fame follomring infi)rmation has been.
commpiled. to demonstrate c(,.imphance witil these mtena and includes data regarding the
properties of GCLs, as well as comparisons of perfor�-nance and site-specific construction costs
of the proposed GCL engineered alternative to that of flie press mptive,standard,,
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED E NGINEER.1,�D ALTEi RNA,,rrvE
As outlined above, ihe engrineercxf alternative covey proposed "or the Latidfill incorporates a GCL
in lieu of the CCI., presenptive standard. T'be design, characteristics off''the proposed altemative
cover includes�the ffillowing final cover system components(jn mcending order):
A.24-inch-,th,:i.elk-vegetative layL-r,t.ra(,-,k-.-walk-edto ,,.tcbieveafinn cons istenc.,,y;
L:tprqjecA90M'as*5-GCL FeaAeng�akdoc 1.
825 Sonoma Avenk.iie, Su4e C Santa Rosa, Ca4ornio 95,404 (707) 5,44-0784 FAX (707) 544-0866
Mo 4- Southern Cahfoirjn6a
Page 3233 of 4165
A geonet. composite drainage layer wif a high-dennacitydrainaenet (geonet) heat bondeth, a non-woven, needle punched polyester
geotextile filter fandc;
A.reii�-dbreed, dout.)1e non-woven, r-wedle-punched GCL; and
A 1.2-inch-thick (ininimum) f.bundation layer moisture conditioned. and compacted to 90
percent Irelative corapaction.
Me GCL represents tlie primary component of the afternative cover design that will. dictate
comphance equivalency ,wilh respect to the prescriptive standard. A. detailed discussion of the
GCL perfon-muioe cliarazteristics as compared to the CCL prescriptive standard is presented in
the following subction. T lowever, it should be noted that, the altemative covcr desi o
g.n, also
incorpor seates several other characteristics that deviate fh)m the prescriptive standard. These
desi,g,n carnponents and the cormsponding rationales are as follows:
1][he pro
res
posed foundation. layer thickness of 12 indbes is half ofthe prescri tive tandard
P
thickness of' 24 inches. The primary purpos� of the f.bundation layer for s
the pertphive,
standard scenado is to provide, a hr7.n surface for conipaction of a CCL, However, based on
Imo pbysical characteristics and installation procedure..,, associated widi, a GCL, the
constructio�n of a 24--inch-thick fouridatioiii-i layer is not necessary or critiad. in the overall
perfonnance of the L. Thus, a minirn=12-inch-thick foundation layei is considered.
suf"ficient to provide protection from. differen.tial settlement, given. the prop4::)sed, postelosure
land use, and to provide afirm. aml smooth surface upon. Which to place the GCL,
The geonet composite drainage layer, is proposed as a mitigation measure against the
potential development of excessive pore pressures in the overlying vegetative Ilayer material.
"This design fbature is consideTed critical due, to the steep nature of the fmal ver .slopes
honzontal to I veitical [2H:I.V]) coexcessive
. Since the of developmmt of pore
Pr essures would also apply to a prescriptive standard final cover systern, a geonet composite
drainape layer would also be required undeT the CCL scanari.o. In ad(.1ition, the presence a
g(x)net composite provides a(.1ditional protection tothe GCL Rona potential rodent damage
and, oombined with the selection of shallow rooted plant species for reseeding, protects
against top root darnagefroin deeper rooted plants.
The proposed. vegetative cover thickness of 24 inches is double the prescriptive stardaTd
thickness of 12 inches. 17kie bottom.. 1.2 indbes will serve to provide confining overburden
presstre for the GCL material, whereas the upper 12 inches will serve to barbor vegetative
growth. In addition, the inarease iru vegetative cover thickness is intended to further reduce
the potential for damage to the GCL'by rodents and/or deeper rooteA plants. Furthermore, the
overburden pressure induced lby the 24 iniche,.s, of vegetativt-, cover material, md1l serve to
counteract any landfill gas (LFQ) Pressures that may develop below, the GCL, and aid in
maintaining the intqm., ty of GCL,searn.areas.
It sdiouldbe noted that in the Fall of 2001, Rau and Associates, Inc. (RAD of'Uiah, Cal.ifomia
co,nductM a cornpr6hensive survey of the 11and-fill surface to evaluate the thickness of existing
Uprojectl90N Task 5-GCL Feasieng-aft.doc 2
Page 3234 of 4165
interiin soil cover (RAI, 2001), "Me survey consisted of a senies of shallow borings drilled at a
spacing of approximately 50 feet s'part on the roads an.d 'benches and approximately 1.00 fbot
spacin,g on the slopes. A total of 433 bonngs were drilled using a hydraulic drill motor(nnounted
on. a backhoe boo) equipped with 4 inch diameter solid-stern augers. A hand-operated post-
hole digger was used in areas not accessibleby the backhoe-mounted, drift. Findings, ftom the
gurvcy revealed that the existing I.�intermi soi cover thiclaiess is equalto or greaterthan 1.2 inchas
fbr over 90 percent of the landfill surface. Based on these conditions, the existing intenm soil
cover wi'11. be scanified, moisture conditioned within 3 percent of optinjum nioisture., content and
recompacted to 90 percent relative compaction to meet the minirn urn 12-inch-thick I.-bundation
layer requirenit.-nt. ".1.1ose was determined by RAI's smey to have van existing inte nim cover
t1ficlaiiiess of less than 12 inches, additional fbituidation layer matenal will be placed and
subsequently pre tired and compacted according. to the, same specifications des ed above.
REGULATORY'HIS"FORY
Since 1995, �more than, 31 GCL landfill final cover closures have been approved by various
R..'WQCBs and constructed in Cali fomia. Additional GCL caps have, bee pproved by the
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (USERA) for iwmdfills, hazardous waste sites, and rernediation sites in Cilif-briva,
Overall, GCLs have been used in landfill applicationss.,ince 1986 (Koerner, 1996).
COMPARISON OFGC]IL AND CCL PROPE RTIES
ne following subsections provide a cornpanson of ped1hent prop ertinn of the GCL., and CCI,
pjescriptive standard as a mechanism to demonstrate equivalency. "I be vario`ns properties
compared include physical, and mechanical, hydraulic, stability, installation arid epair. Also
addressed are some miscellaneous issiaes that havebeen raised by�the RWQCB during previous
cotTesponderice regarding�the potential application of GCL at the sn
te.
g9i and Mechanical Pr
:.se generall, considen-A.- supefior to CCU in 'temis ae
aiiis
erom differential settlement. Laboratory testing of GCLs h deffionstrated its ability to
withstand relatively high lt-.wels of tensile stm. m (at 'least 5 percent) without, inider i
going
significant increases in pemicability (Koem. er and Daniel, 1993). Standard MI s, -in tum,
generally cannot tolerate strains approaching 1 percent, without cradking (LaGatta et al.,
1.997).
GCI.s oiitperfiairm, CCLs with respect to desiccation caused by repe-mted wetting and, drying
cycles. CCI_s are sulject to desiccation, from above and/or belowand crack inifless &IeqMtejy
protee,ted from changes in moisture content following, constniction or as caused 'by climate
chanbu.,s (Kbamer and Daniel, 1992). The GCL's ability,to expand upon hydration a nd ""self
hed1l" r a- luces detriMental efi` cts,to the GCI.,that may(,)ccw during and aBerinstallation.
L�prqjectIWMark-S-GCL Fe.arleng-akdoc 3
Page 3235 of 4165
* As aresiflt of the "self-healin�?' ch 'bed dbove, upon rewefting, GCLs also,, , aractefistics desen
autperfonn CCLs widen respect, to fteeze tbaw conditions (K.or.;,mer arid Danidl, 1993 and
Danicl, 1.996)
* T"he beanng c paeity of GCLs under hydrated conditions is less tban that of CCLs, thereby
rnak-ing the GCL more ssuseep.fible to physical damage due to 'heavy loads. However,
laboratory testing (Nare,jo of al., '1996) and ,field dbservations (Brown. et 2001) has
dem omens tmted ffiat, such concerns are negated provided that the cover soil thickniess is greater
tb,an 'the footprint of any concentrated bearing load on the GCL (i.e., vehicle tires). The 24-
inch.-thick vegetative layer proposed as part of the -final or design satisfies the
concentrated beaniag load enteria stated above and should be more than sufficient to provide
adeqtmte protection.
Pleasenote that the w.n.struction specifications for the GCL will include ,protocols desig...ned
to protect the GCL from excessive load darnage during installation. 'I"hese protocols will
include: 1.) deployment of the GCL under unhy drat ed conditions; 2).P� lacement of vegetative
layer ii .at erial onl:o the GCL byspreading each fall fift tbickness in advance of a low gTourld
presssure, wide tracked bulldozer (Maximinn Size: Cateipillm D6 or(.,-.quivalent); 3) (,.-,avening
of all GCL installed during any given working day wilh vegetative, layer material to protect
agaim,t oven;migbi, hydration due to precillpitation, condensation, or other causes; and 4)
prohibiting vehicle access wito the GCL until the P.1'acement of vegetative layer at al is
1
complete Furthermore, upon conipletion of the final cover cyst eff.i. ,inns tallation, ffiture vebicle
amess within the limit,; of the GCL fl-ot a.) pn int, will be limited, D d t s.ignated access roadways
constructed as part,of the final dlosire activities.
GCT s are im-)re vdinemble to, pimcturhag than CCLs. The primary Potenfial soirces of
punctuting include manufacturing defects, subgrade protrusions, and peneAration by sharp
obJ,ec the foundation and/or veg.etative layers. However, protection against these
is -tbrou�gh
sotums can be providedthroup,.,h the employment of quality wsurance Ilp.roow1uress and desiggn
controls. As a mechamsm to proted against, iinanufacturing defecLs, a com�� dhensive
PT
manufactuirer's qi Oil contro' (MQC) program will. be implemented to monitor the q afty
.1 Y I y I
and into,aria ly of ffie GCL material drelliv mar ed to the site. Prior to installation, the compitled
foundation layer surface (i.e., GCL sub grade) will be inspected for the idm.. tificadon and
subsequent removal of any sharp ob ects that codid pundure Ihe GCL. Findily, in re g ds to
penetration of,,,-.-;harp 6 ;jocts ffirough the fbundation andA.)T vegetafivelayers, sudhan incident
is considered unlikely fbIlowing installationbased ontlw thicluiess of the respective layers.
ff2draufic Pro e?Wefl
v
For equivalence to a 12-inch �rali��
lcnducitontimeters perecond cm/sec), trb t; required hyu conduethnity of a GCI. is 3.9 x 10-8 emIsec. Typical.
hydraulic conductivities for CGLs rangeftom 1. to 5 x 1.0 9 cm/sec tmder low compressive
stresses with a. comas ervativelyr '.jjigih 12 indh hydraulic ' ef water (Koemer. d 'anDani&I,I had. o
1.993). Mare recent testing of various GCLs found that hydraube canductivities range from 2
x 1.0-10 to I x 10 9 cm/see un(.Ie.x a compressive stress of 150 potmds per sqtjwe, foot (Psf
Uprqjec49071Ta%,Ic 9-GCL Feasleng-aft.doc 4
Page 3236 of 4165
(Daniel, 1.996), conservat.vely less than the anticipated nar.T.nal, load for the prqpf,-)sed
engineered aftemative f(,-)r the'Ukiah. landfill.
it has been, documented that efftain oh foal interactions between the GCL and the
penneating liquid can adveinmAy affect the hydraulic conductivity perforinmce of` the GCI,
(GSE Lilining Technwqj,.�11 gy, 2001) Parameters of caricem, with respect to the� exmeat.14g liq id
P �p.
iiiclwie its dielectric constaint, salt concentradon, pH, and cation emJm-ige capacity,
However, these chemical interactions only come into play with higWy concentrated liquids
such as leadhates or brines. Since the peimeating liqo,d for the finial cover systm,-n
corresponds to percolating rainwater, the potential for adveise chemical interactions with the
final coversystem"s GCL,component is negligible.
Interface direct shear tests 'wcre conducted to evaluate the interface shear strength between the
GCL and underlying site soil sub grade. Sample preparation and ,testing conditioms were, selected
to simulate field coliaditialias. 'It-Aerface direct he tests (ASTIW 1; 5321) were, (:,,onducted at
nomial conipiressive stTesges of 100 psf, 400 psf .an d 800 psf The GCL samples were, tested
Mder cariservatively hydrated condifions by alto inthe GCL saMpl e to 'hydrate for 24 hours
under no confliifing load piiorto shearle.sting. A.bulk sample of representative site subgrade soil
was rem. oldedto 90 pereaut R..0 at just below qptimum moisturt-, content to simulate in place
prepared gutirade. JResults of the interface ,shear testing indicate a peak- ffro etion. a4gle of 30.3'
and. a, residual. friction anigle of 8'. Pe mad post peak adhesion was meastaredat 114.1. psf
fmd 107.5 psf, respectively. A sup mnary of laboratory test results, is presentfad in Appendix,&
the Bollowingwilues were used in performing the stability analyses, as described Ibelow:
Unit"Weight of Soil 110.0 PCf
Cohesion 1.07 psf
17riction Anpje 28.0 degrees
Findl. cover requirements stipulated. in 27 CCR., §210,90(a) rquire that a slope st6ility analysis
be perfomied for final cover systenis equipped wiffi. a. gensynthetic corn onent. Basetl on 'this
P
requirement, the stability of the proposed GCL final oovm i.,y,,ternwas evaltrated using aninfimte
slop; stability analysis. TIns method asst-imes failure of an infinit6ly 'long No& and neglects
resisting forces at the toe and along the sides of the faffiire. Hence, this analysis provides a
conservative stability- evaluation for shallow failures of constant thickmess and slope. kudyses
were per fi)rmed, 'for the proposed GO., final cover system ming, a soil thickness of f6et and a
maxim= slope 26.5 degrees (2111.1:IV). Fin(Jings, from the analysis revealed that the lowest &ctor
of safety dumig trial nms o(..:,ctirred for �failures passing through, 'the soillO.",M inteirface. The
co. ,rresponding minimurn,factor of safetyf.bTthis scenario is 2.28 xmder unsaturated.condildons.
Deterrmhation of time yield acceleration f6r the GCL, final covff, system, 'was &-zompfished
through performance of a psuedo-static, infinite slope stability analysis. The yield ace6leration.
was determined by ite.,ratively choosing a horn zan.L-11 acceleration that reduced thefacOr of safety,
to unity. The resulting 36t.-.1d accel matiori for time proposed GCL final cover system :for
unsaturated conditions was 0.51 9. Using this value and timebistaries of horizontal acceleration
L:Orqj,PrA9O7Mmk.5-(JCL Feasieng-all.doc .5
Page 3237 of 4165
at the top of the reflise mass as deteimined from previous seismic analyses (EBA., 2000b), a
defannatiogym. analysis was performed. to evaluate permanent seim.dc displacem eats at the
soil/ .nterface dunng, dynande loakling 717h,e analysis was pedbmied usung the computer
model YS1.1P' PM (Malasovic, 1997). J::iindings ftom 'this analysis indicate that pemianent
sei.w. mc displacemenbs at the, soff/GCL interfkce for the pr(,-)p(-)sed GO., final over systern. will be
less than 2 indhes.
In sununaxy, findings from the stalfflity analyses reveal that the proposed. GCL final cowz
system is statically stable and 'will Y,
, 'eld less 'than. 2 inches of pennaneat displacement 'tinder
seisinic loading conditions. has on these charactenstics, the proposed GCL final cover sysistem
is considered f6asible fr(.-Ym. a,technical standpoint. Please refer to Appendix A of iffiis report for
supporting,docurneritation and datamed:gym therespmtive analyses.
,fin small atism/R191v air PrAmm
* Tim insWiation of a GCL is sigrdificantly easier than a CCL. Particularly on sfteepe-r slopes
such as those at the Ukiah landfill. In f.,,eneral, GC1, deployment is very straightforward, both
from.. a placeiment =d searning standpoint. Furthermore, heavy equi I pment re(jj,:flreTnents for
GCL deployment are limited plimarky to a nibber-tire fork-lift. or equivalent. Gomm ver,9(,.,.1y,
CCL colinstruction. is very labor intensive with substantialreliance on heavy equipment (i..e.,
scrapers, dozers, compactors, etc.).
* Less construction qualit assurance, (CQA.) is requireA for GC Ls dae to the consisten c-,y ofthe
imatenals and inanufacturing process. CQA testing for a CCL, in tum, is more exten.Rive and
occurs at a higher frequency to vedl'.Y the c(msistency, of borrow somm materials and the
contractor's dbility to achieve moisture content, compaction, and hydratilic conductivity
dining, construction.,
* linstafla ometer (SDR.' uired to test te fhleld tion of a sealed, &.Yuble-d . infiliT k) �is req
per,rnedbility of .CLs, Which is costly and time consuriaing. Such a provision. is not re.qUixed
,for a GCL.
* Postclosure .repair of a GCL fitial cover is less involvedthan the repair of a CCI, final. f,:-.G.ver
syst=. Repair of a GO., is peril rrned by exposing the damabe
d liner., rolling out new GCI,
material, mid covenng the damaged portion of the liner with a CYCL patch. Repair of a CCL,
in t1mi, requires the procurement of low hydraulic conductivity materiat, mobilization of
heavy equi ent, moisture conditioning, com acfian, and CQA testing to verify M it
�PM P plAce. ei
in accordance with the original specifications
Miscellaneousksues
.A number of site-specific issues md.th Iregards to -the potential aPplication of GC1.at the site have
been p reNiously nused 'by the RWQCB,., These issues in.clude �fle potential for dwnage to the
GC t)y rodent activityand deel) Perietrating(roots, as well as the ability to iiretrofmttheland-fill in
1-be fature, with a LFG collection systeria if deemed necessary. Evaluations regarding each of
these issues are provided below
L:�prqjecfl907MdmYk5-GCL FewWAg.-alt.doc 6
Page 3238 of 4165
Rodent Dama e.: Based on the thickness of the vegetative corer(24 inches) fbr the proposed
......."orient...................................
(.1
YCL final cover systena, the GCL is no more susceptible to burrowing rodent damage than
the CCL prescriptive standard. In fact, the GCL final covff, system is prx)bably less
susceptible since rodents wadi d have t,O penetrate a filll 24 inches of vegetative Covex
matenil. and the geonet ex)mposite drainage layer beforerr,%ching the, GCL In the mse of th_e
CCL prescriptive standard, a similar burrowing depth wotildresdit in coipplete penetration of
the C .
One oth ff. aspect that should The noted is that the GCL does :not contain any plasticizers. The
breakdown of plastif.."izerproducts has been docuffnented to serve&s., a potential food source.to
rodents in some cases. As aresiAt of its absence the GrCL materials, there is no phrsical.
aspect offfie GCI.component that would attract.,or pro mote rodent activity,
R.22 t 'Tlie GCL's Potential vulneralbility. to �root damage should be edfi.-Ctively
........................
negated by the nal (zver reveggetation. provisions. As outlined in. ffie Final Closure.., and
Postclosure Maintenance Plan (,FCPMP') (EBA, 1999), the vegetative layer will be reseeded
with plant qpecies having w shallo :r tenas Dartherm:root sys . ore, the geo.net composite drainage
layer M11 also inhibit pend,ration of the GCL by roat systems. Mtires the potential exists
,fbr thenitroduction of'different phant, species wilh deqper root systems via wind-blown. seed
deposition, such conditions have not been observed.to date in the soil borrow are that have
undergone comparable resee din g processes. Mus, there is no current, evidence to suggrest,that
the site will be susccpfible to this conexrn.
Rptrjahtin,-_o R. C"ollection S..., IgM,: As discussed in the previous subsectioA, repairs. to
g f
the GCL 'final cover system. are relatively simple to implement based an the natm of the
installation process. As a result, the same conditions apply to paietrating and reseeding the
GCI, for the purpose of instaffing LFG extraction wells if such provisions are necessary in
the future. Installation of an extraction well would are ire, w posing a small portion of the
GCL and cutting a hole slightly larp -1 than the diameter of the (In.11 augwr or bud et.
,eT, ge
Following drifling and installation, a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well. bore seal would 'be
placed. aroundthe casing mid secured, followedby plat .:cent: of a GCL pateb, avex the PV(.I`
w H bo.
e, -re seal. Finally,, the se us along the edges (.:)f time GCL I.-match. would be augmented
with po,wdered bentonite and the area back fill.W., with vegetative layer material. Apprqjjpniate
precaiiations wmild be im pl.ernexited to ensure, that m6bilization of the dx-ill ng to the
respective,drill sites does not damage the underlying GCL.
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
As 116ted at the our of this re ,n,port, one of the r itenafor kni fan gran eered alternative approval
corresponds to cost and demanstra lore. that the proposed altemative offs a significant cost
savings as corripared to tbe prt-,scriptive standard. Based on 'this cntenon, an ecoixymicandlysis
was performed to compare overall clonire.. costs fbr the C"'CL, prescriptive c.dandard. and the
proposed GCL final c.11over system. alternative. The results of the econo,mic analysis am prey m.—ted
'below in Table 1.,, Please refer to A ppendix B for aniore detailed breakdown mid N� ppordng data
.for the costs presented in'rable 1.
L�prq/eeAWMaslc 5-GCZ.FcaOeng-ahaioc 7
Page 3239 of 4165
PVC' . '':III:. '"n
E .
..................
Item Prescriptive,s ndar "I IlE,n.. mn. a .. t.erna. (2)
(..�o nstuxaiamn 1 fnnes and Controls 45,000 45,000
............
en L , ,ka:�a�anmrk and Test P ad(3C 60,300 45,300
.............. ...... ..........
�.
Low Hydraulic Conductivity layer 2,036904 :11,917,623
"a°�;m m;Lager 423, 20 $ 857,6a40
_.... ................... ........................................
Drainage 'ystemmro. _... 3.3 ,070 336u,070
_.. .. ..w.mm. ....... ................... ... ...........�
site Security 2,000 2,,000
....................................... _ ................
.evcgetatiomn 428,020 428,020
Access.Bonds 16,500 16,500
......�.................................
Sedimentation'Bas° 36,500 36,500
............ � .......................................
..._......... .. ..
orro .Area.. .ec tame $ 229,700 205,700
_................
__.
Final]11'.:)esn mn and Can:sm.shuuctioren Quality Arburance $ 316,321 $ 233,007
snubtx,)ta $4;,700, 66 $4,316,331
20 Pexc mnt Contingency 40,17 $ 863,266
n :nmucludes the, -oflowing cammns ctio n(:[in aseending order): 24".fibu do n layer, :12"as acts clay, tumuar;
eammiet composite 4. " ,age I '.y�r;and 12"vegetative layer,
,.
a a:Design includes the. following construction (in ascending order):: 12„ fanuumndatiamn layer; geos.,ymn0efic clay
geanct can. ansin drainage layer.,and 24"'vegetalive layer.,
(117eanb pad only T.)em°M to the resc nn�s�ve standard spa nwio
As presented i 'Table I., the proposed. engineered aft it ,at offers s, significant cost savings as
comipared to the r s nriptive standard. 71e cost differentfid between the two final cover systems
s p n.)xi n t l 4 1,000., " fin n.t runs prig ri a responsible floc th i �� . in cost include:
reduction in foundation layer tludknna ss fi-)r the (M scenario ($571,P800 n,Cost savings);s); lower
installation costs for the lowhydraulic conductivity layer component ($119,300 cost savings);
and lower design/CQ .. ex sts ($83,300 cost savings). The one cost it for the enn.ginevred
alternative that ena.a e.s -the presen.pfi e standard by appro: at ly $428,800 is the, ve etnntive
layer oa)mponu ..t due to the need for 24 inches of vegetative layff material Pri s o (.:)se to t2
i. ones :for the prescdptive stzridard. However,based on the overal i re .nn.otion in cost of altnost percent, q..
the proposed engineered alternative ati e mnn, s the cost savings s criteria specified� w7 ,
§20080(b).
Page 3240 of 4165
It should be to that the, cost differential calculated in the economic analysis is considered -to
represent a conservativcly low (JiBert.mce because the. 'bid cost of instaffing a CCL, can vary
widely. Estimates of the cost to excavate said place a 12-inch thi6k CCL at the Lfldah landfill
were, provided by five diffi=nt earthwork conlractors ssurveye for this pro.ject. Cost estimates
ranp ged fiom $6 per cubic ,hard (qy,) to $25/cy. nie variation in costs illustrates 'llhe uncettaint
Ya 'Y
inherent in. estimating earthwork an steep slopes" For this analysis, EBA 'used an median cost of
$15/cy. It is NObableffiat the cost for plaent ofmill 'fie sliT ificntly:hi g),her at the time
of construction. bidding In contrast, the variance in cost of GCL procur err aiat and placemt-.nt has
luston eall 1been relatively low and stable.
In addition, the potential exists for higher M.costs due to vanability of the clay borrow sawvc.
As re'fuwrericedin the borrow source investigation conducted by 'EBAA.n 1.999 (EBA, 1,999 and
EBA, 2000i), the excavation of low hydraulic conductivity matenials :may be hindered by
conglomerate beds occw-rinp.., at. vanous depths in 'the 'borrow source area. Sudh contlitiolils, if
encountered, would restilt in ILigher matena 1 handling costs, as 'well. as hig�her CQA inspection
and testing costs Since GCL is a manufachire-d product, such conceinis are not an issu(.,,. As a
result, actual GCL costs are more predictable and not sulfject to sig nificant change due to
conditions encountered intbe field.
REVISIONS TO TUNAL CLOSURE AND POSTCLOSURE MAIINTENANC.Le PLAN
Since the proposed engineered altemative represents a sig.�)i,,ficant design dhange to the curreiat
final cover systein desigi presented in the K;TMP, a R.M_&A� FCPMP'would have tobe prepared
and submitted for regulatory approval -to meet the mquirements set forth in 27 CCR, §21890.
Preluiration of sueh, a do(mment would be c.ontingent-4pon appim,val of the engineered altemative
by the R,WQCB. Specific sections and appendices of tie FCP'MP requiring revisions 'would.
include the folio wing:
* Proposed Final over Design and Colastruction(Section 2.9.2)
* Proposed Emil Cover Matenal Specificatiows(Section 2.93)
* Slope Stdbility(Section 2.10.4 and,4p,pendix
* Const.miction Quiality Assurance(CQA,) Plan(Section 236.1 and,Ap.pendix F)
* 0osure,Construction Schedule(Section 2.17)
* Final Coverin pectian and Maintenance Program(Section 3..P)
* Closure and Post closure.Maintenance Cost Estimiates (Section 4 andAp,pendix G)
* Fund Disbursement Schddule for closure(Section )
all Final ClorarePlan]DrawiiaEgs (Se.vion 8 and Sheets I througli 5)
As s#pulated. in 27 CC,R, §21890(a), the Revised FCPM..P would be ,nib mittedto the RWQCB,
Calift-)Mia lnteL7. ated Waste Management Board, and the Mclindocino County Environmental
Health Dqpartment (i.e., Local Enforcement.Agency [ILEAJ) for final app'roval.
L�m-yee690717lbsk 5GC1.,FeeWengakdoc 9
Page 3241 of 4165
CONCLUSIONS
As dernon stoma ed by the comparative infonnation presented herein, tfie 1voposed G'CL engineered
alternative is or exceeds Ifie pea-fonnance critena addressed by the Jrescnptrv(:",: standard®
.P
Furlhennore, the economic analysis comparing constni.ction costs for the two scenarios q',�l.eafly
shows fhW" the CCL prescriptive standard is un nab miec rewoly and uessanily 'llburdemome and
wi.11 exceed the GCI, enpincered altemative constilic.tion cost by a conservative estimate of
approximately $461,000. Based on these circumstances, :it is E,BA's conclusion that the GCL
e
fi' in 27 CCR, §20080(�).ngneered, altemative meets ffie qualifying critenia specined
C.1,0SIN '
We trust that this sbbmittal irichades 611 t1w necessary informatiron and data needed for the
R.'WQC.B to approve the en&eered alternative proposal, If you 9hadid have any questions
regarding the infomiation contained herein or need additional infonnation, please do not hesitate
to contact us.
Sincerely,
KBA ENGINEERING
Mike Delmanowski, C E.G., CJ:1g.
Senior Hydrogeologist
Damon,Brown, E. C.Hg.
President
MDMB/mc
cc: Ms. Diana Steele, City of Ukiah, Dt-,partment of'ptiblic Works
Mr. Scott Hmnpe#, Callfbmia Integrated Waste Managrement Board
,Mr. John Marle , Mendocino County' riviramnental.Healt1i Depaitment
Y
LJprqj'ecA90ATask5-M.Feasleng-aft.doc '10
Page 3242 of 4165
REFERENCES
Brown, D.F., I)elmanowski, M,, and Brun-uner, C.J., 2001, Cost Ej,fe,ctive—Afternative to an
Unreh!lbrced GCL firLan4fill Final Cover "yslems, 'x"i' ng.p Proceedis to Geosy tithe fics 2001:
Econoinics, PcTfibmiance and CanstrucfibiI#y Advantages of Geosynthetics, Portland, OR,
February 200.1, IFAL
Daniel, P.E., 1996, Geosynthetic Clay Liners, Part Tvo: raulic Properties; Geotechnical
Fabribs Iteport, 'I'lidustrial Fabncs Assoi aton Intematianal, St. Paul, MN, Vol. 14,No. 5.
EBB. Wmtechnologddes, August 1.999, Fin al Closure and Postcloswre u4intenance Plan for the
Uklah Minicipal Solid Waste ,D ins posalRte, Mendocino County, Callfornia, ERA. Aoh No. .99-
691; Prepared ffirthe City of Ukdah, Department of Public Works by ESA. Wastecbnologies,
Santa Rosa, Califomia.
EBAWakedhn.ologi es, Feb p .ruary 22, 2000a,,Revision No. .1 to the Final Ch?sure and Posiclosure
Maintenance Plan for the Mdah Munic�pal 961id Waste D&posal She, Me'ridocino County,
C'afijbrnia, EBA Job ,N6. 9.9-6,91; Prepared -for the City of Ulddh, Department of public Works
'by EMA.Wastedbnolog
Oes, Sanui'R.osa, California.
EBA Wastechnologies, August .1, 2000b, Revision No. 2 to the .Pin al Closure and Post closure
Maintenance Planfior the Odah Munici]pal &Iid to Disposal Site, Appendix C (Yope
Sto bilinp and Seiymicfiazard Ana4ysis) and A endbr G (Clo,,.vure and I'lostelosure Maintenance.
Pp
Cost EvIlmatev); Prcpared lair too ( tyofT Jkdah, Department of Public 'Wo�rks 'by FIR.A.
Wasteclmolqpes, Santa' osa, Cahfoxma.
.., P R I
moo„E Lining Tedhology, SeptcnibeT,° 2001, The GSF, Gundseal GCS Design Allanual;
www.,gseworld.com.
LaGatta, M D., Boardman, B.T., Coolley, B.1 L, and Daniel, D.E. (1.997), Geosynthetic Clay
Liners gui�jecred to Df&recntial Setdpmenl, Joumal of' Geatechnical and Geoenvirormenftd
Enp,ineering, Volume 123, No. 5,pp. 402 410.
Koerner, P.M., and Daniel, D,E., I 992, .Beffer Cover qps, Civil.Eng.ago cdnp Volume 62,No 5.
Koerner, R.M. and Dan�1�.:
l, D.E.5 1993, Y�chnical Equivalency A.wessment of'G rls� to (XIs., in
ProceediRgs of the 7th Senumiar, Geosynthetic.liner Systems; 'Innovations, CGneerns,
Designs; I)eceinber 1.4 1,511P 1993, Pbiladelphia, PA.
Koei-ner, R.M., 1996, Geosynthetic Clay Liners, Part One: an Overview, Geotechzfical Fabrics
R.e.part, indust'riail. Fabncs A,,ssocia ton',I.nter-n.ational., St. Paul, MN, Vol. 14,No. 4,
Ma tag sovic, N., 1997, YSLIP PM, as computer progra. flb�r simulation of dynm'sera behavior of a
rigid block on an inchned plane and calculation of per.marient displacement of-the blodk..
L:�prqje?&M M Tuk,S GCLFea.0eng-ah.d6c
Page 3243 of 4165
Najero, D., Koemer, R.M., and Wilson-Fah.my, R.F., 1996, luncture. Protection of
Geomembranav,, Part II: Experimental, Proceedings of the Gcosyniletics Intemational, Vol.. 3,
p. 629 653.
Rau and Associates, Inc., December 1.9, 2001., Site Reconnaissance and Prellminary
Geoter finical.h vestip-ation,lbr Evaluation of'Earthen Lan4fill Cqp at 3 100 Vichy ring
Ukiah, Calffiornia, Job No R01234; Prepared thr the City off' Ukiah, Department o f Pliblic
Works by Rau and Associates, 1he., Uldah., Califomia.
LJprqjec690Msk5 GCLFeasleng-akdoc
12
Page 3244 of 4165
mWW w
...............
PPIlln. ..W: X.
Page 3245 of 4165
Determining thp, Irytortaw Frictim of GeosyrAN.-,�dIcs
By thie Direct Shear,,Method
AST'IVI D 532 1
Consulting Engineers
Laboratory Services Group 750 Corporate Woods Pkwy Verrion Hihs,flftioQs BOOM Phonc�:(847)279-2600 Fax:(847)279-2T,D_
Determinirig the Coelf Nicierit 0,1 Fflf,'Alon of Geosynthetics
Bythe Direct SElie r Method
A S'TIVI D 5321
ct 1114
Projeame: CE MO, City of Ukiah Landfifll STS F."roject# 29 1 139.B
Date I ested: .1 01�2512001
1I eat PararTIO61"S Test Flesuilts
.....................
f�ao�, sTe—d Op ayer: Silty Clay, �Ihfle sand, gravel --t)rown (CL.) ............Norrm-,0 Shear ............R e.....s"i'c`]"�j"a'
Rernokied to 109.8 pcf a"I 1 0 % Str('�ss Stress Stress
Bot. Layer. WIL Beintorywc.d. DN, Hydrated for?4 hours psf m �'!...........
1.
under no corifinhig Noar.J 100 163 1 IT,5 IS
,400 365 340
Shear Rate: 0.04, hftn'Nn
Peak Firlcfion AngNe=303 T.Degrees FlesidiuW IFriiotioin Am"k.,, 28.8 I)egirees
AdhesNon =: 114.1 Us bri =,. '107 5 1b.................... .............. Adhe.3
........... .................................................................. ...................'..._._._............. ............ ..........................
e
600 ................................... Falluire Enveloj:...)...........——........................... D nent es',21hear Stress
SOD .... ............... ...........
y O.M.15 1 x+11411 y=0.54 8x,.+1(Y7,58
R 2 OMI1.3 0 9966
Soo ............. ..............
400..............-- ..................................................40' ........... .................. .......
"O
Ew A Op
8300. ............... ............ ... .................
or
m
200 ............. ................. .................................... ..............
err
100- -...........................................
0 0 .......... ........... ............................... ............ . ...... .......... .. I _.................................
0 200 400 600 800 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
Tqarimol R,,;tress,ipsf Displamm-Twent,liar lhes
.........................
I JKLAI 1.)ds
Page 3246 of 4165
...................I.....—" —----- .................
140 ...... ............... ......... ........
wI
.......... Moisture Density, Relationsf flp of Soils
.......... ... ...... ...
PROJECT NO, : 29139-B
130:.......................... .............. ... ............. PROJECT.- LAB T"rES7`3"NG 2001
...... .....
Test spec'ificatiorl�:
....... AM.M.- 2-55'T 92. ProaadIX11M A Mc41ft .
.... ............... sel
.............
....- Ill.nnlllllln ...........
120,... ................ ............... ............... ..............
I.. ........... ............... ... .... ........ 100%SATURKINON(DUFIVES..... ....... .............. ........... ........... I, 2.8
........ .................... 23
110 .............. .........................................
. ......................................... 2 6
..................................... .............
.....................
IV) ..... ........ ..........................
is,
....................... ........... .... ...
..... .................................................... —— I I
00 ............ ...... ... .........
............ ............ .................-
..................
...................... ................................ .............
..........
............ .......... ........ ................ ...................... ...... .........I
90 .......... . IIII
............
........... .............
....... ........................ ................ .... ................ .. .............
.... ............ .. ........ ............. ............. . ......
......................................... ....... ........ .......................... .......... .......... ......................
RO ..........................
...................... ............. ............. ....................... ...... .......................... ....... .......
......................- ................I ................ .. ........................... ............
............................. .................................. ........................ ....... ............. ...... ........................................
...........
.............................
..........
- ........................... .. ......................... .............. ......
0 .. ................... ................
7
10 30 40
Water min'Wi% %
----------------
Swnp].e Elev. or Material SPECITIC LL pls
No. Depth Deacription GRAVITY...... . ...............— No.4 #200
.............................. .......................................................................
CLAX 111111T.T.10 F-C O"D
..................................................................................... ..........T."VXITIX F QRXMCX� . BROM
..................................................—.-.............-1............................................................ .................................... ..................
...............................
................................................................................................................................................................................11..................
..................................................................I........................................... ............. ......... .............................................
................................---------------............................................................. ........... ........................ ..................................... .........
Sample No. S-3
..........
...................... ..........——---------"—--------........ —"—--------
Natural water content, �percent 3.0
...........................—.................................................................................—.-................................................................... ........................................................
Qpthnun water, colatent, perceiat 1 11.5
.................................................................................................................................................. .•..................................
Max. rlry dens.i.ty, PO 122
............. .......................................•.. ........................................ ....... ................................................................................
Remarks �]-;: I
Prqject ZAM TESTING 2001 �roject No. 29139 B
........................................... ................................. .........................................
........... ....................... ............................................... .................................................................—..-..................
Lom�,.ition.
Source
.................. .............................. ........................................................... .........................................................
0000
SITS COVISUItOinh. Ltd.
7 50 Ccxporde Wrxxj,.,�pajiLway
Plate VeMon U--Uhs,11. 60061
......................................................... ....................... ..........I..........
.................... . ....................
Page 3247 of 4165
Infinite-1,, lope S"tabillity An all ysis with 1,"arallef Seepage
Uklat MUMIMPOI Solid Waste Dlqpasap Site
scifl ideq,itb Z 0 ft
fins c,tion sat. M = O.CK) c1c)s 11 = 0.81949
slope c.]Ing le S = "26 5 sin rs = 0.44,162
tari 11 = OA-1?4:36
S10H iur,ft 1�mr- Y
coh(,,,s�on c" 107 Fll";�
hict-Jon angUe 0 = ZBLi tain eii = 0.5317
ic, icoic,,Iff
drivk,-ig stre�..,,s 87.8 PSF
nound "1 76.2 PS F
P011"01 I�Y,91E-31,:%Urio 0.0i F-)SF
resi�:Hats nig S= 200.7 PSF��
Factor of Setely FS= ZZE3
Inflinfi.e.-S Ill ope Steblfti nalysis with IlPslrdltl l Seep" de,
Uklahi IlMunicipal Solid Waste Disposal 'Site
GCL cap yevised 20102)
sicAl idepth 2 0 I:t
froiction sat, n,J. = (1100 cos R, = 10,13949
dop,, an0e, �1 = 2 11,5 sin 4 = 0.4461)
tan ki = Di,4986
soH init,tm-, y "I'll D,10 PCF
icohias�on CN 10 7' RSF
frkftlon an14le, 01 28,.0 tari o = 10.53117
seism c ccli"'pf:" P(J" 0,511
idfihv,llng Stress -L = 177. IRSF
iinorrina Stress ej = 131 A RSF
,)oria pressure U = (1n, PSF
reskidng stress S = 1, �9 R:�F
Factor cif Safety, FS= 1 AM
gd Witew Tsportdoc
Page 3248 of 4165
24 ............................................................................... ........ ............................................... ......................................
"111dah Munici.]jpal.Solid
Waste DfLslx,)sal Site
18
12
0 ................................................................................................................................................... ................................... ........................................................... "Homm-mmommg
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 11
Yleld.Acceleration(9)
Figure 1. "1. of afyi.-.1d.accederkabon,versus perrymnent sedmmide displacerrmit:for covff..,.
(I.Jkmaux-�,COR50C62) and 50--lbot waste ptohle. Open.circte,rt-prescmks the
3�ekl acced ff, ation calculaicd from.the iafih fz sdope stability. ainalysis and fhe nmirumm.
displacammil predictedby
gd ledpr rpportidoc
Page 3249 of 4165
,k k
YSLIP ]I-?M
(VERSION 2.2, JANUARY 1996)
A COMPUTER, PROGIZIM FOR. SIM01jiATION OF
DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF A RIGID BLOCK ON
AN INCLINED PIANE AND CALCUIAV.10N OF
I,* PERMANENT D1,13PLACEMEMI'S OF TIM, 'BLOCK
By
Nevpai. Matzisirnri c
Edward Kava- zanji.an, Yr.
CARD 1. 7:1ME CORGC7:..u62.Y'ir2L
UKIA-11, MUKICIPAI...,i SOLID WASTEs l.Y.11::SP0SA-lp SITE, REVISED 2002
CARD 2::: STIETIT12
MCE CORRAI.R11TOS I.EOMA PRIET.A. Khl=0.62q
C-ARD 3: KPAR N KM�!C KC0114 g(ft1s1s) KOW KSL':I[P KDZIR
1 1 32.2 0 0 0
CARD 4. Ky(1) Ky(N)
0.53.
Ml�.I) 5 , YIELD ACCELERN.VION DEGRADATION 11)ATA
Ky -i s constant.
CARD 6: FILE NAME 11FOR HORIZONTAL ACC.
corSOc:62.hea
CARD 7. Kll)ll KREAD NP MINE ur APH
4 1 1500 3.500 0 02 0.0
CARD 8: FlIZ MAME FOR VER.TICAL ACC.
NO Av
CARD 9 NIDV KREW.") NP NL'1.'NE DT AR V TORIFT
NO I.WPUT
CARD 10. FILE NUM FOR. OUTPT.Tr 017 SLTD17G MOTION
:NO FILE
CARD TA..: F111.2 NAME FOR 01117PTIT OF ABSOLKY'rlT MOTION.
NO �Fll PE
114AX- VALUF OF INFUT IROIRI. ACC. i", 1.207951
INPUT ki,'GRI. A.CC. 71MM: A FACTOR 1.000000 TO GET .APH = 1,207951
IRESUTa"I'S FaR. ]IMMST 0PE YIELD ACCELERATION 53.0000
RTJD',f I- THE DIREariam OF Ah 'IS AIS INPUT
MAX. SLIDING, VELOCITY ::::::: B677 ft/sec
PERIZMAKENT' 131,1DING ='.31PLACEIMEINT- mm .1.505 f it
ATIN UIKE 113ERECTIO7R7 01:i .Ah TS REVERSED
MAZ� Ri.jill)ING VMOCITY = .2870 ft/sec
PERMUMEN73" 131,11.)ZINGi = .0,305 'Et
gid Oa irwAllrotdoc
Page 3250 of 4165
YSIP11", Fm
(VERSION 2.2, JAMWZY 1996)
A COT PTITER PROGR AM FOR SIMULATI'M OF
-DYNAMIC BEHAVIOR OF A, RIGID BLOCK ON
rc AN INCLINRD PLANE AND rALCUIATION Gil'.?
PERMANENT DISPTaACEMENTS OF THE BLOCK
:k*
R,y
Ix.-.Lpi:ng 'Yam .we arx
Neven Matasovi.c
B'dward KavazzArij:i�m, .Tr,
INPIM,
CARD 1 FILE PAM.:,CL68.YSL
UXIA3.1 MUNICIPAL S0.1.,ID WAS"11M DIS]POSAL &1TE, RENISEM 2002
2'. SUBTI"llZ
MCE PAC01MA-MMTHRIDGE, KhmmO.68g
CARD 3- :KPAR N FA-CC XCOM q(ft/,B/s) X017T 11rMLIP TrK.D.MR,
0 1 3. l. 32.2 0
0,.51
CARD 5: YM1ZrLD A.CCELERATTON DEGRADATION
Xy i.ii.; constant.
CARD 6. F11.0 'NAME FOR HORIZaN'TAL ACC.
:pac5(.')c68.,hea
CAR-1) 7 MD1.1 XREA.r..) NP Mil.m. DT APIH1
2. 1500 l.5 0 0 0.02 0° 0
CARD 8 71:1.,E NAME FOR VERTICAL ACC.
NO kv
CAR D 9- NlDV KREpj) NP MAINS, DT All.?V "rSHIFT
NO 1,111PUT
CARD 3.0 FILE NW. dE FOR 0U'.11']1:lTJT OF SLIDIX(,�., MO TICK
NO FILE
CARD 11. FILE NAME F01Z (:)T.),.rPUT GF ABSOLUTE MOTI.ON
NO F1.1.10v
MA.Y... V.ALfjr!� dpl :r.�mpTTT TIORI. MX:. 1.0152-902
INPUT 1.10RI. A,Cl..,. TIMES •A, FACTOR 1.000000 ".170 GET API.-I = 1-05.1.902
IMSUT MS FOR. 1.)OWNSLOPE YIELD AC( ETA ERATIOTST (g) 510000
RIM 1. 'THE D]MMTION (W Ah IS AS INPUTI
Ma. S1,11Ml."M 11EMOCITY m= .7239 ft/sec
PERMANMT SIP]MING DISPLACEMENT .1095 ft
RUN 2.- TMIE DIMECTION OF Ah IS REAMERSED **,"k
MAX. SL]l)llqG, VELOCITY = .4770 ft/sec
PERMANNUP.1' SL,][DING DlSPl'ACEMr.,..UqT = .0688 ft
qd de report.doc
Page 3251 of 4165
+
YSL IP PM
(VERSION 2.2, JANUARY 1,996)
j\. compurER PROGRAM FOR. SlMM:.AA'l.'T.0N or
DYNAMIC BE11AVIOR. OF A RIG"D.") BLOCK ON
AN INCLINE-T.) PLANE AND C-ALCUT.AATl()N r OF
PE104ANENT DISPLACTIMMqTS OF Tll:;llF BLOCK
BY
Liping Yam.
Neven Matasov"I.c
113dward Xavazanjian, Jr,
• IN'T 3XPUT
..ARD 1: FELE SCZGCI.66.YSL
UKIAH K(JNICIPAL S01,21) WASTE 111,1S1OSAL REWISED 2002
("ARX 2,, SUBTITLE
MCE SANTA CRUZ• LOMA PRIE'.1% Kh=0.66g
CARD 3 XPAR N' Khcc xc0m 9(ft/r./,q) KOUT KSL11? KDIR
a 1. 1. 1 32.2 0 0 0
4 Ky(l) Ky(VI)
CARD 5 YIELID ACCE.r.iERATION DEGRADATION DATA
Xy i s constant.
CARD 9: FILE 1TAME 1170R, lT.GR,lZ0NT.AJ1:.4 ACC.
s=50c6g.h.ea
CARD 7: NIT)II, KREAD Np N1,1NE 11)71 APH
4 1. lzoo 1500 0,..02 0...0
r-A.11D 8: FIT-sE NAME FOR NrENTICAL ACC
:NO Ate,.
CM�D 9- NID'V KRDU,D N` p DU.,INF, D1 r AlyV TSI-117T
NO :[NPIrr
CA.'.r,M 1.0: 1PILE NAME FOR OUTPUT OF SL3'.DING MOTION
NO FlIm
CARD 11: FILE NAME FOR WIPUT UlF ABSOLUTE MOTION
NO 711Z
MAX- V'Ala'107 OF INPUT ACC, .,660000
Z'NPUT 110R.I. A.M. T3:Yn"?lS A FACTOR .1-000000 TO G'ET APH = .660000
lZESULTS Y°O IDoWNSLOP11r YIELD ACCELERATION (9)
R117N 1. TT-IS OF All IS A. INPUT
MAX,. SLID�1,]NG VELOCITY .1341 f t/sec
PERMANENT SLIlUr1ra DJFSP:LAA("Zlv,%7lqT. .0048 ft
RUN 2: TI-IM DIRECTION 017 Ah IS REVERSED ***-
MAX. "TELOCITY = .0576 :fit/sec
RIZI-WANENT SLIDING DISYrLACEMENT = .0019 :Et
gc Wter reprLdoc
Page 3252 of 4165
...........
I-A]INX B
ECOMYNIIC AN ALYSIS
...............
...............
Page 3253 of 4165
&', 3ILE B.,I
4ur1`,`OIroZOM1V 7 ANALYSIS 3:3JV+FINAL CLOSURE COSTS
19*333f:S3'R131"'TIV STAilS'33AR313vsnUI;NG3NFERE1). ]I.Ta;T3•NAT337E
"3"3Y OFURTAR 3aAN?l3NHILL
.�,,,,�mmmmm, m�m�mmmmm�mmmmmm��mmmm �mm �m
R3WD
44 120,000SM
i. mdl1llu'�jaPd.. 1�PT 'y23. Spt,o Q�:al^15mlia"aaa.1criom CC.�Y..°naQ•`ttbms,al'k`a�' Y�{t"�% tr{'9 1 20,Cit1G) 1 ZC),t)00
6a 1 $ 10,0(X) 1 $ 10,000
a.3 CimRFOf4AZtA<Innu��uulimian 1L.; 1 $ 5,000 1 $ 3,000
G,suMual,m, ......... ...m, ..� , 1 s
$ 10,6908V
2Ap GENLana,Y:.4?..�Jftailu""a4ti"tl'L:ICYK a�..IrFS'T PAD �.YN''Y,OQRO
2.1 L9',-G;-am f`SC $ 2.00 500 $ 1,000 500 $ 1,000
2.2 CS-sent%t9runb AC $ 1,000.00 443 $ 44,300 44.3 $ 44,300
15 u'awrR a. $ V__. 00M 1,0 $ 15,000
-- 1 ro
0 ..
_.warnrtmnsmn•. n61U 04V.. _. _...... .......�_ . .... .... ._.,.m � .$45,300
2m FOUNDATION➢.,2Y'ffR
2"l F-dali.n,.acy.ulllvzuoaii 12") AC S 4,,356M 44.3 $ 7192.,971 44.3 $ 192,971.
212 a u w no n ayw g r aaR S 7 EX.-. 1 E.02 7 4�C 1 3S fD 3p., _____M,__�____-__�„....,_, mm,m ,.�. _..m _.�,., ..___ ..........,_, „
1KWDYIDRA"PNt
mxtonaamin 5 64731 9l22mDX1,
LO _ m,,,,,. . __m,.
:9.0 LOW T,.2i.N'IW,ak
1.a. 0yMpd dO.yrtt2-(CCI) Cly $ 1.SAM 711„470 $ 1,072,050
2.2 carol,w,va»En.&n"reytwrcsarrmx,q•r<fp Pla"np@h lsl; $ 800,00 _ $ 3.5 9S 2,810
0
3.5 OWL S.bp)0aSep'kvy-"ruerpa(9fagc 1prrogrmrael A1° $ 2,0?)0,00 .. $ 40"3 $ 811,600
3.5 C;R'P-&'pptly."atu.hlt S1, $ 0.41' $ 1,929,708 $ 808,369
4 L. ➢ "gt.x_a,"! ' ., ,.. ,,..,_,.,,.,... . 7G2� 3r4 a 64,154
yfaaztmat as $2 11:36g004 59,E 17 Cu23
._ _ „__..._ ..___ .,.. __, ....
4.mo wmce,n,�raatvnlmmYtYa
3➢ 1211) . .._.'.................$,m, ,.,......,5: p 71,4T0 $ 428,820 71„4"76 $ 428,3.20
A7 "Vm-Gape cY,Gyam�'S,Jpn4uarSB'" $ '78,4°70 7 426520
v...UU..._YBIf',4fl1"A;Y+,la�.,,,�....._�___M_____.__..,.,....,., _.. $,557y4S40
d.1 &,dr-Dithm, 1.af^ $ 5,30 2,000 1 $ D0,O00 2,000 ,,$ '10,000
�.2, ft,.p crt,tn. 1.5 $ 2000 j 1,800 �$� 36,000 JI 800 $ 36,000
9,'P 21 YPVniEpipx, 13p. $ 3a�5'"06 � '1.,825 $ 63,87�5 ]1,5'25 $ 63,875
.5.�4 tP HOPE,Ntx Y° $ 25,00 2„`z75 $ 64,375 2,.5"75 $ 64,37'5
5.5 tr YtIREP'IN, JLY $ 23M) 2,040 $ 46„920 2,040 $ 46,920
5.6 12 101I^Pprom l F $ 20.Oh 3,020 �$ 60,400 3,020 $ 60,400
5:7 L'Y;exasvuEnnrr6,am S:A� $ v3tl.04'd roll $ 43,",a64) 9"e" $ 4fr1„',ti@16)
zuralk:abhzflie „� ti1)6 $ 6,0EVSN sC 'D $ 6,000
m.m mYft m�r,e7artan"m v
6,070
S'36,070
m
rs Ea av p4u.00 1 U 2,WO 1 .5 2,Ctu0
6 _ ........................ m..._ a $ 1d1....,_,_,_,...._. _.
aft=vare,otaca•... aru lratn�p $2000__..__ 21UGM
ION
7.1 5ny1. u„,di.g AC $ 11,400SWO 443 $ 62,020 44.3 1i 62,020
7.E .p ,F mean $
.....,,,,, 0.,20 1830,f1L)0 $ 366,(K)ll 1 11a6,01)Q1 �i $47020
.3+"sfr,0O4)
41
.pn fi
r vYYmma xn z: $428 020 28
�t hA C"t+aM1$bp6�Ae4.a�I��S ..
E
G O90 $ GFa r1)0 15,fp¢PO $ 16 5M
mf Yam ttn 5¢: $12u.i00 616 500
.. __ .. � ..,..
°m.gb li:YII)SMaIF.Pd71.M'Y➢Qbfui BARNS, ,„..
51 1.rppwfinm AC $ 5,000.00 ' :3 $ 12,.500 3 $ 12„500
Gkr6 P:uc
........ ,...,1°4,,,..,.1 8,000.00 3 $ 24 U4D1D 3 � 24,000
mao-.5 �.. .mm ._ $lrtw 500_. 536u S)O
S➢ta@BaIDVW r0N;.4ll'F4,kp!kR.."k fG16N3,'41fQ.1N i
IM hepr- m AC $ 5,0000.0o 2C $ 1100,000 E7 $ 85,000
W 2 m<,ai a e a v rmauwr G+ua AC $ :3,000.00 20 $ 60,1)00 17 $ 5 d.04)0
Pa L 4®p!ro 110,,lb Q 20 48,500 $ 69,700 343 00 ' $ 69 t0(
$277
_..
�. a 700 $20ry J04d
11,il1 taYPtAfi,nDah„vIlpsCda"�"ClQ.Aa ..,._.�., .,.,........ .,.__„ ._,.:._.,,...
a a 1 ssm raa m m m Ada f,. " 1, fit, 10,00 $
xema,nu ccs.o IF",ra, 3 441,06fb ., ,,
11 YNa d"mumt rMn�A"Vaam 4pr 5 6anwrz;v�✓llls @YXa xasxe�axr0.fCaT.'t.} EA '$'� 55s 000, � 11 $ 55,00€)
r a 1 tl�.r nny nr far a��.l.,d. v,a,n,uy3.pa b,ttrm3,. 1 A $ 10,000,00 l $ 10,00 _ $
II 2 m m Uw, a,+^n, s ) EA $ $5,000.00� 4 $ 123,010 1 $" 5,0(0
1 p 7 &'.an¢aarutaane aekeo~trvv+afxm�i,wa d+S P¢a vinVmrn ) .. l 4 25 6,)C2R
u 13 Y)rxn4y f., m „as x 6 pAh P t In rpe P ec,¢.I.}S,a�,l[,o t-iw E $ 155,0RDM7
It.nc. rn-ay -mm,nII,�:,.«1f,mxvp�,E,&fa�p ,gL(lcla)(� r���aau1�) EA $ U7,247,30 - $ 1 $ D'7° 247
114. S-11gro(arqu,Y"a' : EIA I$ 86,3111."46 1 11 86,,:3111� $
at Po:,nm al, a�p a turr°m w p r1 F Y $ 1 �0 766
TOTAL
0 76Q 00 5 1 1
m� mmmmmmm «mm m�mmm1u6,.12;a 71Lar
�mm wwww 4nl0Sl,866 $ �3116,33s
w� w� �mm�
11;..3. Lump Sum Ek Bach
CY: C uWc 5"Yua'6, f 1"1:,: Compacted clay 1.roan
A C: Acmaa GC L 3SemeralutM.nap(jay[All el
NSF Square Feet 1,:UID : 1L7ugpla Mn ally Potyethyleme
1.;4''. p.n¢ur i pvel
conalt3
E114 InTfigmeea ing
Page 3254 of 4165
TABLE B-Ja
jmsmcrION,TESTING AND REPORTING COSTS
CITY OF UKIAR LANDFILL
PRENCRIP77M ENGINEPRED
STANDARD ALTERNATIVE
......................... ............— ....................--
ITEM UNIT TOTAII TOTAL
No. UNIT PRICT, ]IRICIE, qn, PRICIs'
7............ .........
77177MEMM=FOWI INC,
H34 URA-D.Hy Impmd.m Day $ 72U0 65 $ 46,800 21 N 15,120
1'3-2, EBA-8DRI Wsm"MOR MY $ '720,00 2 $ 1,440 -
113 3 FBA-Tmwd And 1A,D§— Trip $ 225,00 15 $ 3,373 13 $ 2,925
113-4 CMdvIbA-D131HY GOOWdhnk-Wsp-'A ms(H JCCL) lhq $ 8051,00 80 $ 64 0 48 $ 38,640
1113-5 C.:�ftwftr-Dafly G,0twhnkA W�pwkmn(Vl,) Day $ 805M 117 $ 13:'6�'S,?5, 34 $ 27,370
M3 6 Co b=lor-IN ffly4BC.JwpcvGfwti Day $ 747,50 - $ 45 $ 33,638
H3-7 ConAndor-'Tmvel Tri p $ 15,53 214 $ 3,323 160 $ 2,485
L,-8 Cow=Wy-Nujcd monagei'munt in. 86.25 81 $ 6,986 2A $ 2,070
(�no 2 ............. ........................-- —..........---..............
....................... ............................ ...... A.-!— $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000
'SMTE� --........................................................-'I' .................................
..................................... ..................—.—................... g55,010 7,247.
M4 SAMPLING&TESMING PROGRAM
1 LA-A AS I'm v 50%1(&r)jkj higgMm) EA $ 7,600,00 1 $ 7,600 $
1 L4-2 AS TM D 5W.3(1,DJU M,,jftq&g) Fz S 4,894,40 1 $ 4,894
1,4-3 A S'I M)2A 8'? EA $ 1 L75 1.15 $ r),951
11A 4 ASTM D 421. EA $ 34.50 115 $ 3,968 $
8 A-5 ASIMD4318 EA $ 92.00 114 $ :488
IL46 ASTM D M7 LIA $ 126�M 56 7)84
11.47 ASTMD5084 EA $ 409.25 05 $ 42,866 $
1.446 Aq'j'M J3 2.488 EA $ $ 1 1 $
1-4-9 ASTM D 11556 EA $ - $ $
L440 AMMD2922 EA $ $ $
HA-H AS M t)2.2 16 E'A
HA t2 ASTM 1)5035
EA $ 55M 20 $ I'm 20 j, I'm
114-13 ASTM D 5199�Ucmj� EA s 1 8.00 20 $ 360 20 360
11,444 ASS' T)�505(UDQ EA $ 30,00 20 $ 600 20 $ 600
:a 4 B ASP A D 3776(GUA) EA $ 18,00 20 $ 360 20 $ 360
M446 ASI M C146.32(fiCY)L) EA $ 52.00 20 $ 1,040 20 $ 1,040
HA.A. ASIM[)5993(GCL) EA $ 25,00 ¢ SO $ 500
9 2.4-" A M D 5890(OCL) EA $ $ - 20 $ 'l,800
-.!L i T—A S�11�1M72 ...... . (10
A 20 $$
1 485,00J7025021 . 7 "'j� ...............
.... Sul,"IyjU $
...........FO— L
Hn How CC:L: Cmn&cted My Unei
EA: Each GCL Geusyndiede Clay Lim
fq.,' Foundation Ukyer GUM: Geonat Composite Drainage Lapw
Vl,,: vegeftddve Uyer SDRI: Scaled Double-Ring Inflitrccmetor
Note: Itravis I t.4-8 through 11.4-11 included in cost for daily inspections(Itern 11,34).
costalB EBA Engineering
Page 3255 of 4165
''(6!INIm aiFuwnlipM'�17��?rzC�lpsqurl mMN
i of Ukiah
N.nuuvrr.H,,,- „,Yn wuaY6.Yj�lJllr;IF{'Nl%//N!!!!/!IF/NNNJlU1lYAAlk/dIYAIIYI!(ItIAINIH!/l YlYlYll{I/I✓!x/.R..........
'...INFYN!/111111,1%l///m/////%llIXllh.
August 14, 2015
Mr. Trey Strickland
Mendocino County Environmental Health (County)
860 North Bush Street
Ukiah, CA 95482
RE: FINAL CLOSURE SUBMITTAL PACKAGE AND EXTENSION REQUEST
CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL
MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Strickland:
This submittal package, identified herein as Joint Technical Document (JTD) Addendum No. 2,
has been prepared in response to the County's letter dated June 18, 2015 inquiring about the
status of the final closure project for the City of Ukiah Landfill and requesting information from
the City of Ukiah (City) to demonstrate that a "good faith effort" is being put forth to complete
the project in order to justify the granting of an extension to the previously agreed upon
construction start date of August 15, 2015. Included in the County's letter is a request for
submittal of miscellaneous documentation that is needed for the County and California
Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to approve the final closure
project. The following provides a list of the documentation requested and the current status of
their development:
• Complete Final Closure Plan: Updated closure and postclosure maintenance
information is attached herein that incorporates changes from the previously submitted
Final Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plan (FCPMP) included as part of the
January 2008 Joint Technical Document (JTD). The updated information provides
supporting documentation for a revised final cover system. Also included are the
corresponding Construction Drawings, Technical Specifications, Construction Quality
Assurance (CQA) Plan, and updated final closure and postclosure maintenance cost
estimates.
• Financial Assurance: The requested financial assurance documents will be prepared
utilizing the enclosed updated final closure and postclosure maintenance cost estimates.
The financial assurance documents will be submitted to CalRecycle Financial
Assurances Unit by no later than October 9, 2015.
F IYlld'FIIMXf1F"RIY/XlYY4111XAYAIXA1MIflIXIIY)YnIFI1YAlYRxlhlkA,1,1YIIMIYI1w1YIYppYAIw1YG^A)Y1p/All)AIYIRIX!)XL)XL)XLY/!!!IY/A1AlIflpIIXUYIIYY#I,1XIY/ I r .. ,
IIl10NpIIFN01Y1i11IIIIIIiii4i!.WNIY1lM1kYIG'IFPJFXiIllflYi7t ONSYLYIII+YIIYI XIIAIXIY+YIAAYdgdIXYIIUI!GYFdNNIYIUIry lAIINIVAM4Lk(YdANY+YttttdINIYYIIIIMAti1✓dAIXXtlIIIX(UtYdNtldNRdrtUip184'WNI'eNWIN'lY/,IIdYMl1MIIlY/dPINgIN!@G'Nal4'ib'/hlUd4lMlfllVlAkldVltlF,NANYNIN lIIIF(YI3i1 U11 pl tlltlk/1dh 111G1GIYRIXId AXUFIli1111L1 I OIVInN II'Rw,X IJFYIJFbY MYBJ!1411IdXAlllt
300 Seminary Avenue • Ukiah • CA • 95482-5400
Phone: (707)463-6200 • Fax: (707)463-6204 •www.cityofukiah.co
Page 3256 of 4165
• California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Consistent with the information outlined in
the County's letter, provisions are being made to update CEQA that include the
development of an updated Initial Study that incorporates changes that have occurred
since the previous CEQA determination in 2000, as well as the performance of studies
for special status plant/wildlife species, wetland delineation of the creek, and greenhouse
gas emissions. In addition, permits are being obtained through the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board — North Coast Region (RWQCB)(401 Permit), US Army
Corps of Engineers (404 Permit), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (1602
Permit) to accommodate discharge modifications to the creek. All the field studies for
the above work have been completed. The new CEQA determination and acquisition of
the various permits will be completed before the end of this calendar year (2015).
• Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs): The information provided herein associated
with the updated FCPMP should be sufficient for the RWQCB to develop closure WDRs.
Whereas the City has no control over the RWQCB's schedule and priorities, the
issuance of closure WDRs by the end of this calendar year (4.5 months) is considered a
reasonable time frame for this to occur.
As demonstrated above, progress has been made with respect to implementing the final
closure project. Whereas the City will be unable to meet the existing August 15, 2015 closure
construction start date, this should not be perceived as a lack of commitment by the City. As
the County is aware, a revised final cover system has been identified for the site which
represented the primary cause of the noted delays. However, the additional time expended in
researching potential alternatives proved to be highly beneficial from a performance (higher
stability), maintenance, and cost perspective. Based on the revised closure and postclosure
maintenance cost estimates presented in the attached addendum, the cost reductions related
to the revised final cover system equate to approximately $696,960, which represents a
significant savings of tax payer dollars. In addition, the City has already committed $50,750
towards the CEQA and permitting process, and $186,520 for the design and fabrication of a
totally-enclosed vertical ground flare. These provisions clearly demonstrate that the City is
committed to moving forward on this project and that a "good faith effort" has been made in this
regard.
Based on the circumstances presented herein, the City would like to respectfully request that
the closure construction start date be extended to May 1, 2016. This extension will allow
sufficient time for regulatory review and approval of this submittal package, the development of
closure WDRS, completion of the CEQA and permitting process, the procurement of contractor
bids, and awarding of the construction contract.
2
Page 3257 of 4165
Thank you for your understanding and consideration of this extension request. If you
should have any questions regarding the information contained herein or need
additional information, please contact our office accordingly.
We
Tim Eriksen, P.E.
Director of Public Works / City Engineer
c : Mr. Andy Marino, California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
Mr. Trey Strickland, Mendocino County Health & Human Services Agency
Mr. Robert Scaglione, Mendocino County Air Quality Management District
Ms. Terri Cia, RWQCB, North Coast Region
Mr. Damon Brown, EBA Engineering
Enclosure: Joint Technical Document Addendum No. 2 (August 2015)
3
Page 3258 of 4165
Page 3259 of 4165
i E B
Ede MEE NIN
August 1 , 2015
r. Tim Eiriksen, P.E.
City of Ukiah, Department of Public Works (City)
00 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
JOINTTECHNICAL DOCUMENT (JTD) o.
FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTIONSUBMITTAL
CITY F UKIAH LANDFILL, III CALIFORNIA
EBA JOB . 02-907
Dear Mr.. rlksen:
This addendum has been prepared to respond to a request by 'the Mendocino County
Health & lH urnan Services Agency (Local Enfolrcement Agency [LEA]) In a letter dated
June 18, 2015 to submit a complete Final Closure Plan (F P) for the City of U ialtn
Landfill (Landfill)., Modification of the F P has become necessary based on a proposed
revision to 'the 'lInal cover system design. The proposed revision will also require an
update 'to the Final Postcllosculre Maintenance IPlan (F'P P). In 'this (regard, it is important
'to mote that the existing FP and FP MP are part of the January 2008 Joint Technical
I ocument (JTD, PPA Engineering [F AL 2008), with various closure and postclosure
maintenance details included In Section 5„ (Based on this circumstance, 'this addendum
has been prepared to update Section 5 of the January 2008 JTD and associated
Addendum I o. 1 (IF A, 201 ) as'they pertain to closuulre and postclosure maintenance.
(Please note -that 'this document is also intended to serve as a Final Closure
Construction Submittal for review and approval by 'the LEA, California Department of
Resources Recycling and Recovery ( al ecyclle), California Regional Water Quality
Control Board, North Coast (Region (R CIS), and Mendocino County Air Quality
Management District ( CAS D). As such, Included herein are a final cover stability
analysis, updated 'Final closure and postclosure maintenance cost estimates, updated
FPP, Technical Specifications, Construction Quality Assurance ( A) (Plan, and
Construction Drawings. These documents are hereby Incorporated into the January
2008 JTD by reference herein.
JTD Addendum o. :2
25 5onoirna Avenue,Suite C - Santa Rosa„CaHfornua 95404
(707)544-07 4 - FAX(707)544-0866 - 4ebagr0Ujp,,C0uT1
Page 3260 of 4165
EBA appreciates the opportunity to be of service to the City on this project. if your
should have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please contact
our office at ( ) 54- 734.
Sincerely,
ENGINEERINGEBA
No,. 1847
Mike Delmanowski, C.H.G., ,. g. o
Senior Hydro geologist m ,
N CfElTrIMED
NG-„'EMOM
Damon F. BrownC. U-Ug. oG��
President „
oo: Mir. Andy Marino, California Departmeint of Resources eo offing and Recovery
Mr. 'Trey Strickland, Mendocino County Health & Human Services Agency
IMr. I obert Scaglione, Mendocino County Air Quality Management District
. 'Teriri Cia, IRWQCB, North Coast Region
Enclosures"
Attachment 1 - Updated JTD Section 5 — Closure & Postclosure Maintenance
Attachment 2 - ClosureTurf'Tm Product (Literature
Attachment 3 - Final Cover Stability Analysis
Attachment 4 - Updated Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Cost Estimates
Attachment 5 - Updated Final Po tollo uyre Maintenance Plan
tt ofnirrnernt 6 - 'Technical Specifications.— Final Closure Construction
ctiorn
Attachment 7 - Construction ction u ality Assurance Dian -- Final Closure Construction
Attachment 8 - Construction ctiorn Drawings .-- Final Closure Construction
JTD Addendum No,2
a
�
Page 3261 of 4165
REFERENCES
EBA Engineering, January 2008, Joint Technical Document for City of Ukiah I andfill,
Mendocino County, California, Volumes / through /11, EBA Job No., 02 907; Prepared for
the City of Ukiah, Department of Public Works by EBA Engineering, Santa Rosa,
California.,
EBA Engineering, October 2013, January 2008 Joint Technical Document Addendum,
Response to Regulatory Comments, Final Closure and Postolosure Maintenance Plans,
City of Ukiah Landfill, Mendocino County, California, EBA Job No. 02-907, Prepared for
the City of Ukiah, Department of Public or by EBA Engineering, Santa Rosa,
California.
J'TD Addendum No.2 3
Page 3262 of 4165
ATTACHMENT'
UiPDA,TED
CLOSURE
Page 3263 of 4165
CITY OF UKIAHLANDFILL
MENDOCINO COUiNTY, CALIFORNIA
SECTION 5
CII INTENANCE
(Updated)i
This section addiresses, the general closure and postd1osure maintenance requirements,
for landfills as stipulated in Title 27, California Code of Regulations (27CCR), Division 2,
Chapter 3, Subichapter 5. As outlined in 27CCR, §20950, the primary performance goal
for closure is to minimize the infiltration of water into the waste!, thereby minimizing the
production of leachate and landfill! gas (LFG), The primary performance goal for
postcllosure maintenance, in turn,, is to assure that the waste management unit (WMIU)
continues to comply with the aforementioned closure performance goal® In order to
meet these objectives, Dischargers who are impiementingi final closure of a new or
existing classified solid WMU must carry out the closure in accordance with a Final
Closure and PosWosure Maintenance Plan (FCPMP) which the RWQCB finds meets all
applicable requirements, In general, the FCPMP s,halll provide for continued compliance
with the applicable SWIRC13-promulgaced performanice standards for waste
containment, preciplitationi and drainage controls, and imonitoring throughout the closure
and postclosure maintenance period, which shall extend as long as the wastes poise a
threat to water quiality,
A FCPMP (EB,A Engineering [EBA], 119991) was prepared and submitted for the Landfill
in August 1999. This was followed by the subrnittal of a final cover Engineered
Afternative Analysis dated March 11, 20031 (ESA, 2003). Copies of these documents
are enclosed as Appendices M and IN, respectively, of the January 2 Joint Technical
Document (JTD, IBA, 2008). This updated section has been prepared to address a
revision to the final clover systern design for thie WMU. Details regarding this revision is,
presented i n Subsection 5.1.1 (Final Cover Requirements).
In addition to closure of the WMU, the surface impoundment formerly used as a
leachate holding pond will be closed in accordance with requirements for surface
impoundments as, stipulated in! 27CCR, §21400. Closure of this surface impoundment
was not addressed in the August 1999 FUMP. Details, regarding the proposed closure
activities for the: surface impoundment are summarized herein under Subsection 51.3
(Closure Requirements for Surface Impoundments).
Upidated J'TD Section 5
Page 3264 of 4165
5.1 CLOSURE, & POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR SOLID WASTE L,ANIDFILLS,
27CCR, §1210190
6.1.1 Final Cover Requirements
27CCR, §21090(a)-(a)(2)
The proposed final cover, system will clonsist of a patented geosynthetic product
identified as "ClosureTurfTM:11' Clo Suer eTu rfTM is a three-comploinenit system comprised of
a structure membrane, a specialized tuft textile, nil a sand infifl layer. The
structured geornembrane component serves as the low-hydraWic conductivity layer
(LHCL,), whereas the specializied tufted geotexfile and siand infill layer represent the
erolsion-resistanit layer as d'iefined in 27CCR, Literature for the, Clo suture Turf TMI product is
enclosed in Attachment 2 of this,Addendum.
Overall, the proposed final cover system design can be summarized as follows, (in
ascending order):
0 Minimum 1-foolt thick sell foundation: layer,
0 50 mii linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) gleornernbrane liner (Super
Gripneewith Spike, Down),
0 Specialized tufted geotextile (Engineered Turt).
0 Minimum Y.-inch thick sand infill layer.
In addition to the above features, the final cover system will also be, equipped with a gas,
relief component., This component will consist of a series, of 3.5-foot wide collection
strips, placed parallel and/or perpendicular to slopes and spa at maximium 2201-foot
intervals, The collection strips, which will be constructed of the same Super Gr1pneto
with Spike Down material described above, for the geomernbrane liner component, will
be cm nnected to the LFG collection system, to prevent the bu:Hd-up of gas pressures,
beneath the final cover system, I "re suture release valves will also be installed at regular
intervals, between the collection strips as an additional precautionary measure.
Please refer to the Technical Specifications (Atta,chimenit 6), Construction Quality
Assurance (CQA) Plan (Attachment 7), and Construction Drawings, (Attachiment 8), of
this Addendum for details regiarding material and Installation specifications for the
respective final cover stern components described above.
The pr,opolsed final cover system presented herein represents an engineered alternative
design to, the prescriptive standard (i.e., compacted clay liner (CCL]) and therefore
requires regulatory approval, In this regard, an enigineeired alternative analysis is
presented in the following subsection that demonstrates its viability as a final cover
alternative.
U W, JTD Section 5 2
Page 3265 of 4165
5.,1.1.1 'Engineered Alitemr ative Analysis
As presented in Subsection 5.1,,11 (Fina/ CoverRequirements), the proposed englineered
alternative presented herein substitutes the patented geosynthetic product
ClosureTurfT11 in lieu of the LHCL prescriptive standard (i.e,, CCL)i required under
27CCR. Regulatory consideration of an engineered alternative is alllowed under
27CCR, §20080(b), which stipiulates, that an engineered alternative may be considered
if construction of the prescriptive standard is unreasonably and unnecessarily
burdensome and will cost substantially more than the proposed alternative,
Furthermore, the engineered alternative must be consistent with thie performance goal
addressed by the prescriptive standard and afford equivalent protection against water
quality impairment. The following information has been compiled to demonstrate
compliance with these criteria and includes data regarding the properties of the
ClosureTurfTM, as well as comparisons of performance and costs of the proposed
ClosureTurfTM engineered alternative to that of the prescriptive standard and the
previously proposed' geosynthetic clay liner (GCL), final cover system.
Performance
One of the primary variables for demonstrating equivalency to, the prescriptive standard
is infiltration through the finial cover system. In this regard, infiltration equivalency
analyses have been performed on thie ClosureTurfTM product versus a prescriptive
Subtitle D cover system;. The ainalyses, have included the use of two methodologies: 1)
the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HIELP) Model; and 2) the Giroud
Method (Giroud et al., 19,97). Both, methods were employed for a generic landfill site in
Texas. Findings from these analyses revealed the following:
INFILTRATION EQUIVALENCY ANALYSIS
ClosureTurf'rm vs. SUBTITLE D FINAL COVER SYSTEMS
ClosureTurt" Prescriptive Subtitle D
Methodology Final C over System Final Cover System
HELP 1Model for Site in Texas-Average
&3 3,47
Annual linfiltratio�_(qul:iic ......................................
Girould Method with Silty-Sandy SoiiI I ellow the 1.33 4.51
CfosureTyff!�G!! ear
Giroud Method with Silty-,Sandy Soif with: Some 0,24 4.511
Clay below the DosureTuq: �aNlo�~� er Ida
As demonstrated in the above table, the ClosureTurfT11 produict exhibits substantially
lower infiltration rates for the respective scenarios as compared to the prescriptive
standard. This can be attributed to the lower hydraulic conductivity characteristics of
the LLDPE geomembrane linter as compare to a CCL, as well as the more efficient
removal of moisture above the LHCL compoinenit, thereby reducing the amount of
Updated'JTD Section 5 3
Page 3266 of 4165
potential infiltration into the WMU. Based on these circumstances, the ClosureTiurfTM
product meets the required performance goal for an engineered alternative by providing
equal to or greater protection against potential water quality impairment. Other features
afforded by ClosureTuirfTM that demonstrate its suitability as an engineered alternative
from a performance perspective can be summarized as follows,-
The slope stability characteristics of Cloaure`furfTM far exceeds those provided by
other geoisynithietic products (including GCLs),,, which is very important based on
the steep slopes that exist at the Landfill. The bottom s, ikeld friction surface of
the Super Gripnet'9 provides, maximum interface friction and a high factor of
safety against sliJiding at the linertfoliundation layer soil) initerfa,cle�.
The Engineered Turf component eliminates the potential for soil creep and
veneer failures resulting from saturation of the vegetative soil cover that is a
required component of the prescriptive Subtitle D final cover and other traditional
geosynthetic cover systems, As noted in the previous bullet item, this potential is
exacerbated by the very steep slopes that exist at the Landfill.
The drainage aspects of the ClosureTuirfTlI are designed to, allow rainfall to
penetrate rapidly through the sand infill layer and into the, structured drain liner
below which has a very high transmissivity for subsequent conveyance of the
water off of the finer system. The sand infil has been demonstrated to handle
over affix inches per Ihouir of rainfall intensity without erosion when applied on
three horizontal to one vertical (31AV), slopes. Such rainfall energy conditions
on a traditional: vegetative soil cover would likely, result in significant erosional
damage,
'The drainage aspects of the ClosureTurf Tm as described above promote very
"clean" and low turbidity storrinwater run-off, which represents a, beneficial feature
since the collected run-off' is subsequently discharged to the ephemeral creek
that borders the northern boundary of the WMU. Achieving comparable
stormwater run-off quality from a traditional vegetative soil cover would be
difficult.
ClosureTUrfTM is designed to, provide weathering: resistance and geomembrane
protection when exposed to extreme! heat and ultra-violet (UV) exposure. Based
on results of independent, real-world weathering tests and data from existing
projects,, ClosureTurf"m can provide decades of reliable performance beyond the
standard 3 -year postclosure maintenance period.
CloisureTurfTm has been tested for wind uplift resistance and demonstrated no
uplift when exposed to 120 miles pier hour wind. As, such, the ClosureTurf'TM can
withstand most wind conditions that could realistically be encountered at the site.
Updated JTD Section 5 4
Page 3267 of 4165
As presented iin the product literature data enclosed in Attachment 2 of this Addendium,
GlosureTurfTm has been approved for use as an engineered alternative by the IRWQCB
at two sites in California, These sites correspond to the Crazy Horse Landfill and Portola
Landfill located: Monterey County and Plu!mas County, respectively, This product has,
also been successfully employed at a number of landfill sites thirouighout the Limited
States, including sites, in the southeast and east that are subject to much harsher
weather conditions thian w ouuldl e experienced at the Lanidfill.
Installation
The installation and CSC A testing of the ClosureTurfTM product at the Landfill wouild be
significantly easier than for a CCL. The following pro ides a surnmary to support thins
position:
a In general, MsureTui rfTm deployment Is very straightforward, both from, a
placement and seaming standpoint. Furthermore, heavy equipment requirements
for Closure'Turf Tm deployment are limited primarily to a rubiber-fire forklift or
equivallent, Conversely, CCL construction is very labor intensive with substantial
reliance on heavy equipment (i.e., scrapers, dozers, cornpactors, etc.),
0 Less CQA is required for ClosureTuirfT'm due to the consistency of the materials
and manufaCtUringi process. CQA testing, for a CCL, in turn, is moire extensive
ands occurs at a hiighier frequency to verify the cons,is,tenicy of borrow source
materials and the contractor's ability 'to achieve molis,ture content, compaction,,
and hydraulic conductivity dluring construction.
0 Installation of a seWed, double-ring infiltrometer (SIDRI) is requuired to test the
field permeability of CC a, which is costly and tirne consuming, Such a Iprovision
is, not required for, GIOSUreTurf'lm,
In comparison to other geosynthietic liner systems, CiosuireTUrf TM is, slightly more labor
intensive due to the placement of the send infill layer, However, thiis increased labor iis
more than offset be the, elimination of the vegetative soil layer. Similar to, the CCL
construction, construction of a vegetative soil layer is also very labor intensive wIth
substantial reliance on heavy equipment. In addition, in the case of the GCL final cover
system that was previously proposed for the Landfill, the gas, relief layer material and
labor requirements are, siginificantly greateir as compared to the ClosureTUrfTM, Thus,
the ClosureTu rfTM finial cover system installation represents the least intensive approach
from an, Installation standpoint,
Mainitellance
ClosureTurfTM offers a significant maintenance advantage over a prescriptive Subtitle D
finalll cover and any other traditional geosynithetic, cover systems that require a
vegetative soil cover. In essence, vegetative soil covers often, require regular
Updated J TD Section 5 5
Page 3268 of 4165
maintenance related to the repair of erosional damage, installation of erosion control
measures (i.e., silt fences, hay bales, wattles, etc.), slope repairs, and revegetation.
Erosion from the, vegetative soil cover also causes siltation of drainage ditches and
culverts that require Subsequent repair. Such provisions are not required with the
ClosureTurfT14 product, thereby providing a significant cost savings, over the course of
the postclosure maintenance period.
Cost
The cost of the final cover system using ClosureTurfWwas compared to, the GCL final
cover system as previously proposed in the January 2008 JTD and subsequent October
31, 2013 Final Closure Construction Submittal Package (EBA, 2013b). Sinice the
different products influence other aspects of the final cover construction (ie., foundation
layer, gas relief layer, erosion-resistant layer, drainage, access roads, etc.), the cost
comparison inclluded these variables in the analysis. Conversely, those final closure
construction items not influenced by the final cover system design, (i.e., mobilization,
leachate control system improvements,, LFG collection and control system, etc.) are not
included in the analysis. The corresponding estimated construction costs for the two
final cover systems are presented in, the following table,
CONSTRUCTION COST COMPARISONS
ClosureTurfT11 vs. GCL FINAL COVER SYSTEMS
Item Closureruff1m GCL
Final Cover System Final Cover System
Foundation Layer/ Engineered Fill $694,530 $465,8910
Gas Relief Layer $861,200 $2,290,360
Low-Hydraulic Conductivity Layer(LHCL)M $'2,034,,620 $1,4913,690
Erosion-Resistant Layer(2) $3,,807,850 $1,866,300
Drainage System Components $552,910 $695,590
Erosion Control $100,300 $581,93'6
Access Roads $172,580 $374,790
EXTENUED,TOTAL $7,348,990
GCL: Geosynthetic Clay Liner
(1) The LHCL component for the ClosureTurf final cover system includes the Suiper Gripniete with
Spike Down, while the GCL finial cover system includes the GCL.
(2) The erosion-resistant layer component for the ClosureTurf final cover system includes the
Engineered Turf and ,and infili layer, while the GCL final cover system includes a geonet
composite drainage layer and vegetative soil layer,
Updated JTD Section 5 6
Page 3269 of 4165
As, presented' in the above table, the cost for the CloisureTurfTM final cover system is
approximately $419,560 less than the GCL final cover systern, In addition, as noted in
the previous subsection, long-term maintenance associated with o
'h Clsu T reU rf TM is
substantially less thain any final cover system that requires an erosion-resistant layer
comprised of a vegetative soil cover. The estimated cost savings, from a maintenance
perspective over the 30-year post closure maintenance period equates to approiximiatelly
$2,77',,400, Thins,, the overall, cost savings, resulting from replacing the pre viounsly
proposed GC L final cover system with, Clos,ureTurfTM is approximately $696,,960,
Conclusions
As, demonstrated by the comiparative information Ipresented herein, the proposed
ClosureTurfTm engineered alternative meets or exceeds the performanlice criteria
addressed by the prescriptive standard, Furthermore, the cost analysis comparing
construction costs for the ClosureTurfTM ,versus the previously proposed GCL final cover
system reveals that a significant cost savings can be realized through implementation of
the ClosureTUrfTM option. Based on these circumstances, it ca.n be concluded that the
ClosureTurf T11 engi�neered alternative meets the qualifying criteria specified in 2,7CCR,
§200801(b).
5.1.2 Eros ion!-Res ista nt Layier
27CCR, §21090(a)(3)-(a)(3)(A)
The erosion-resistant layer for the proposed final cover system is, comprised olf the
Engineered Turf and sand linfill layer. As presented ln Subsection 51.1,11 (Enigineered
Altemative Analysis), the combination of these componeints are designed to provide
weathering resistance and geomemb�rane protection when, subjected to the most
extremile conditions, including rain, wind, heat, and UV exposure., Based on the
absence of a traditional erosion-resistant layer constructed of spill, the proposed system
is not subject to erosional channeling that can lead to exposure of the geomembrane
component. As a r sult of the aforementionied characteristics,, the proposed system
meets the performance criteria specified in 27CCR with regard to resisting the
foreseeable erosion effects by wind-SCOUr, raindrop impact, aired runi-,off, Please refer to
the Technical Specifications (Attachment 6) of this Addendum, for further, details
regarding the material specifications,
5.1I.3 over �aintenance Plan
,27CCR, §2,1090(a)(4)-(q)(4)(D)
This section requires, FPMPs to incorporate a cover-integrity monitoring a,nd
maintenance progiram that includes the following components: perioldi'c leak search;
periodic Identification of other problem areas; prompt cover repair; and vegetation
maintenance, Details iregarding periodic leak search procedures is outlined in the
following paragraph. The identification of' other problem, areas and cover repairs, in
turn, are addressed!! under Section 5,1.8 (General Postclosure Duties) of this
Updated JTD Section 5 7
Page 3270 of 4165
Adldendum. Finally, vegetation maintenance does not apply since the erosion-resis,tant
�layer for,the proposed finial cover system is comprised of Engineered Turf material.
Integrity monitoring of the ILHCL (i.e., Super Girlpineto with Spike Down) will be
accomplished using LIFE as a surrogate for determining, potentiall leaks. In essence, the
detection of elevated: methaine ( rimary com lonent of LFG) at concentrations, in excess
of 5 percent by volume on the surface of the waste management unit (WMU) would be
indicative of a possible breach in the LHCL. Monitoring will be accomplished using a
portable hydrocarbon detector (calibrated to methane) meeting the irequi:lremenit!s of
Assembly Bill 32 (AB32) for meas,u'ring methane emissions from municipal solid waste
landfils. The monitoring pattern across, the WMIU will also, coincide with AB32
requirements, It is EB,A"s opinion that thin walking pattern, required under AB32 is
adequate for providing a reasonable survey of the Will surface conditions, In addition,
unider AB32 requirements, the frequency of monitoring ranges from quarterly to annual,
thereb roviding a robust monitoring program that is suitable for complyingl with the
period leak search regulations.
5.1.4 Dis,chia,rgies of Liquids to Covers, (Leachate & Condensate)
27CCR, §21090(a)(5)(A)
The discharge ofleachate, LFG condensate or other waste Hquids onto the final cover is
not proposed at the Landfill. Instead, these liquiids will' be processed through the
facility's existing leach into collecton and pumping system as described in Subsection
2,9 (Leachate Collection and Removal Systems[LCRS)) of the January 20,018 JM
Discharges of Liquids to Covers (Olt her Liquids)
27CCR, §21090(a)(5)(B)
The discharge of other liquids onto the final!, cover is also not proposed at the Landfill.
Pos,tcloisure land use will be non-irrigated open space, As a result, monitoring of
pote ntialll liqluid throlugih, flow to the underlying waste will not be necessary,
Please niote that the, need for dust control provisions (other thain during final closure
construction) as outlined in GaiRecycle citations 27CCR, §20800 and §21600(b)( (Di)
during the postciosure maintenance period is not anticipated based on the placement of
aggregate blase rock on all access roads, at the tiime of closure., In regards to, finial
closure constrUction, the Technical Specifications for construction stipulate that dust
colintrol provisions must I suchi as to protect against excess, water application that
could result in potential through flow into underlying waste or run-,off into surface water
drainages,
UpdaledJTO Section 5 8
Page 3271 of 4165
5.1.6 Stability Analysis
27CCR, §21090(a)(6)
Please refer to the stability analysis enclosed in Attachment 3 of this, Addendum for
details regarding stability determinations for the proposed flier cover system.
5.1.7 Grading Requi�relmelnts
27C'CR, §211090(b)-(b)(3)
Please refer to, the Construction Drawings (Attachment 8) in this Addendum for updated
grading plans,for the WMU, sedimentation ploinds, and associated borrow, areas,
5.1.8 Genleiral Pos Polo sure Duties
27CCR, §21090(c)-(c)(5)
General postclosuire duties will Ibe performed in accordance with the Facility's FP MP,
which was previously presented in the January 21008, JTD, However, due to a variety of
changes that have taken place since its submittal, an updated FRMP has been
prepared and is enclosed in Attachment 5 of this Addendum,
One substantive change in the updated FP MP as, compared to the 'PIMP presented in
the January 2008 JTD corresponds to, the elimination of stormwater monitoring during
the 30-year postclosure maintenance period, Since submittal of the January 2008 JTDl,
a Notice of Termination (NOT) for the existing stormwater permit ('VVDID Nlumber
12310016516) has been granted approval by the RWQCB on the basis that industrial
activity no longer occurs at the site, nor will it occur in the future as the end use of the
Laindfill during the postclosure maintenance period will be noin-irrigated open space.
Furthermore,, surface water monitoring and inspection will be performed as part of the
Landfill's postclosure Monitoring and Reporting Program (M&RP), thereby prow idinig
long-term provisions for monitoring surface water, quality. Approval of the NOT was
issued on July 30, 20,15,
5.11.9 Landfill Closure Deadlin Extension
27CCR, §21090(d)
The existing closure construction start date was pre,vious,ly established as August 15,
2015, IHowever, adheirence to this start date became unattainable due to delays related
to pursuing a more economical fiinal cover alternative. The proposed final clover system
presented herein represents the outcome of those efforts. In response to this
&cuimstance, the City has requested an extension from the LEA and CalRecycle to
revise the closure construction start date, to May 1, 2016, Based on an estimated
construction period of eight months, the corresponding completion data for the final
closure project is December 2016,
Updated JTD Section 5 9
Page 3272 of 4165
5.1.10 Final Cover Survey(s)
27CCR, §21090(e)'-(e)(4)
A topographic map of the completed final cover grades will be produced at a minimurn
scale of one inch to 1010 feet and accompany the Final Documentation Report. In
addition, iso-settlernent maps will be p,roduiced every five (5) years thereafter to
calculate any differential) settlement. The iso-settlement maps will be prepared with a
maximum contour interval of two (2) feet and a scale of one inch equals 60 feet,
5.1.11 Operational Clean Clos,ure
27CCR, §210190(0-(0(2)
Not Applicable
6.2 Landfill L I an Review
217CCRI §21132
Please refer to the updated FP MP in Attachment 5 of this Addendurn for a copy of the
Facility's Ernergency IRespoinse Plani,
6.3 Cllosi uirements for Surface Impoundments
27CCRI §21400
As part of the January 20,08 JITD, recommendations were provided:! folir assessing the
unifined leachate surface impoundment for potential environmental irripacts.
Authorization to proceed with, the assessment was issued by the RWQCB in their letter
dated April 24, 2013. The work was subseq,uently implemented by EBA on August 6,
2013. The scope of worlk entailed the advancement of four (4) soli borings within the
footprint of the surface impoundment to depths ranging from 11,5 to 16.5 feet below
ground surface (BGS) and the collection of four (4) soil saimples from each borehole for
chemical analysis. All soil samples from each borehole were analyzed for volatiile
organic compounds (VOCs), arsenic, and barium, In addition, one (1) soil sample from
each borehole was analyzed for organochlodine, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls,
organophosphorus pesticides, chlorinated herbicides, and olil and grease.
Findings from the aforementioned investigation were summarizedin a technical report
dated October 31, 2013 (EBA,, 2013,a) and submitted to the RWQCB, Cal Recycle and
LEA., Results from, the soil sampling activities did not reveal any evidence of appreciable
residual contamination associated with the former leachate surface impoundment
operations. Based on these results, it was conclluded by EBA that no further
assessment or remedial actions were necessary, 'urtherm,ore, it was recommended
that the leachate surface impoundment be backfilled with "clean"' engineered fill and the
final grouind surface graded to promote positive drainage and prevent pionding, These
Updated JTD saction 5!
Page 3273 of 4165
p�r is,ions are i:nc,lud'ed in the Technical Specifications (Attachmient 6) and Construction
Dirawings (Attachmen't 8) of this Addendum.
Updated JTD Section 5
Page 3274 of 4165
REFERENCES
EBA Wastechnologles, AUgIUSt 19,919, gins/ Closure and Postclosure Maintenance Plan,
Ukiah Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site, Mendocino County, California, EBA Project
No, 99-691; Prepared for City of Ukiah, Public Works Department by EBA
Wastechnologies, Santa Rosa, California.
E,BA Engineering, March 11, 2003, Engineered Alternative Analysis, City, of Ukiah
Landfill, Mendocino County, CA, EBA Project No. 02-907 (Task 5); Prepared for City of
Ukiah, Department of Public Works by IEB,A Engineering, Santa Rosa, California.
EBA Engineering, January 20018, Joint Technical Docurnent for City of Ukiah Landfill,
Mendocino County, California (Volumes / through I//), EBA Project No. 02-907;
Prepared for City of Ulkiahi Department of Public Works, by EBA Engineering, Santa
Rosa, California.
EBA Engineering, October 3, 2013a, Leachate Surface Impoundment As,ses,sn7ent, City
of Ukiah Landfill, 3100, Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, Califomia, EBA Job No, 13-1952
(Task 3),- Prepared for the City of Ukiah, Department of Pubilic Works by EBA
Engineering, Santa Rosa, California,
�SBA Engineering, October 311, 2013b, Final Closure Construction Submittal Package,
City of Ukiah Landfill, Mendocino, County, California, EBA Job No. 02-907; Prepared for
the City of Ukiah, Department of IP blic Works b Engineering, Santa Rosa,
California.
droned, J.P., King, TD., Saniglerat, T.R., Hadj-Haimou, T, rn IKNire, M.V,, Rate of
Liquid Migration Through, Defects in a Geomembrane Placed on a Semi-Permeable
Medium; Geosy nth etics International 1997, Vol. 4, Nos, 31-4.
Updated JTD Section 5 12
Page 3275 of 4165
Page 3276 of 4165
Infiltration Equivalency Analysis http://waters,hedgeo.com./closLtreturVclosurettirf-per'fomiance-benefits/...
Cail lodayl,770,11'7-0386 1 Send Us An Ernaill 12
WatershedGeo"
pp
h U'1 .7,U'hif'Vj SOILIthA15'
Infiltration Equivalency Anallyss I-lome I Clo5ureTurft t ClosureTurf*Performance Bf.nefits I
Infiltrat[un FquIvj1enr.yAnaVysk
lnfktrcition Equiva�ency Arla�ys�s .... ....... , -
Clos,ureTurf' The rnjnlrrturn technical requilremerits as defiried by6e EPA for Subtitle D FVnA Cover Systems are contained In 40 CFR
25&M 1 his regulaiJon allows'for'an alternative.(performance baseco caversyste,,rn.one of the reqWrements for
determining equivalency Is InfiltraVon.TypIcally,this N evaluated Lnmg two methodologies-(q the Hydrologlc
1 ur Urdls EvaWadon of Landfill Performance(HELP)Model and(11)the Girioud Methodi.Both ofthese methads have been used
to compare the Infiltration performance or the ClosureTurf0 Final Cover Systern to the Prescriptive SubUde 0 Cover.
ClosureTurftD Main Page A comparison of infIftratrion rates Is shown in die Table for both rnethodolop'les for a genedc site in`Texas.
The results demonstrate that the CloslureTuMb Hnai Cover System prolvidessuperior Protection against
infilltrailon when COMpa red to the Prescriptive Subtitle D Standard andR4 hinal closure systems,
ClogureTuff1j:Peirformance
Beneft's
Finan�ial Cnfflrradan AnaVyws Clo5ure'lbrfl&Cover Symem Prewriplive,St�bfl0 ry e D Cover SLon
conlpaulv)n
HELP Model for Site in Texas- 8.3 347
> OosureTurfl'tk Solar Average Annual Innhiation(Cuhk
Feet)
) Oa5ure I urrM.-Gas Syslem
0roud Method with Slity-Sandy So" 133 4.51,
Ooswrel'uirf P , ;irrnance Bznef�,,.,, beiow the ClosureTurf(k)(Gallons
Link's day)
> Wiltradon Equivalency Analysis Gproud Method with Slity-Sandy Soli 17.24 4,51
Dosion,, �,,� �I v0ou� with Some.Clay delow the
Performance ClosureTurft(Gations I day�
> Longevity Teving
Summary of Results for Infiltration Equivalency Analyses for a Generic Site In Texas
>Aerod,yr,
................-.— I I'll - 1 11 1 Rate Of Liquild Mugrafion Through Defects In A Geornembrane Placed On A Serval-Permeable Medium,J,P.Giroud,
Interfac," t,v V, T.D.King,T,R.Sangierat,r,Hadi-Harnou and M.V.Khire,Geosynt)'Netics lni.ernafionM 1997,Val.4,Nos.3-4.
........... ........
rr8flk L,,. i i lr�sc a..0
Sustainability
ca,IU;CJ,Uslortil",
3, 770- ,
0 Send t:w,W
I of 2 PagWN0756040MM
/ r
r /
r , , rrrr
r 1 /
/ / f
fr
/ rr,
/
f i
/ 1,r
i
i
l
I.
r,
i�
u
i
r w ;
n
r
o
TM
�ddP I Clos,u"reTurf
Brought to you by AgruArnewirna
1
U t
1 tit � oPy
Soll slopes don't work, although they keep
you working ,
Soil erosion continually plagues the ongoing management of landfills, industrial
waste sites, CCR storage areas, and other environmental containment applications
requiring constant rebuilding of slopes weakened by rain and wind. In addition to ongoing mainte-
nance headaches, traditional systems utilizing soil as their main component are costly to maintain,
slow to install, and introduice unwanted slope instabilities..
There is an alternative soluition available for these challenging applications which, address the les-
sons learned by the industry since the implementation of Subtitle D. The innovative solution is
called ClosureTurfTM which meets and/or exceedls the requirements set forth by the EPA in Subtitle
D. A three component system, ClosureTurf is revolutionizing the way engineers, owners, government
agencies ands many others sollve containment challenges. The ClosureTurf system offers exceptional
durability and pleasing aesthetics at a lower cost than traditional practices.
'x-
Page 3279 of 4165
r;
li
+
5
7
F
0 �
f (%i
I
r
i
/
Ferformance.
Prevents commoin erosion, storm water
and siltation problems—even during severe
weather events.
Utilizes the highest interface friction
geomembirane available in the market which
provides greater stability on steeper grades
and' reduces the need to rebuild' slopes.
The lifespain of the ClosaureTurf system
extends well beyond the reg,u.uired 30 year
post closure maintenance period. It protects
against driving forces, severe weather
conditions, heat and wind uplift. 011
Cost Savin
Significantly lowers upfront ca itai costs.
""0 Dramatically reduces maintenance costs,. o
Reduces the cost associated with the repair
of significant fail wires. t
saufley r_an,dflH
Page 3281 of 4165
v
Environmental
Ben ef its:
Obtain control over gas collection sooner than
later ("close as you go").
Deduces environmental
carbon footprint b u!p
to 7 a% during construction.
/
Lowers the production of leaclhate by allowing
incremental closures.
' Durable system construction designed to safely
convey internal gas pressures, reduce unwanted
releases and avoid slope stability issues.
The IosureTurf system requires no irrigation,,
fertilizing, seeding or moving.
Provides fliillltratlon resulting in clean storm, water
runoff.
Crazy uAoi se LEndfunu
Other Benef its,
Reduces overall ,surface emissions,> Easily
�IVgiy���uiillll�(�i�llf
adapted
p r after constructrorm for
solar fie development.
Rapid, low-impact construction.
� I"III
r
;r
Hcwlford L,ndlfld
Page 3282 of 4165
Take a closer k at ClosdreTurf"
i �su�r urfT�" is a patented, three component ponent system comprised of a structured gm membraine, an
engineered turf, and a specialized sated iimfilll. The foundation of the system, is an, impermeable,, highly
transmissive structured geoimembrane. It provides for the highest ,'interface friction values available
In the market.t. The engineered turf mponent gives the system its natural took and feel f grass while
protecting the geomembrane from extreme Feather conditions for the long terms The specialized
sand linfil'l component is placed between the blades, of the engineered turf and allots the system to be
trafficked while also providing additional protection from weathering. i h n re ulrad, l suraTurf's
patented surfi ial gas system is included with the system to vent landfill gas emissions. ClosureTurf is
fast and easy to install for an aesthetically pleasing, cost-effective landfill closure solution,
SAND I FI LENGINEERED
.'.
STRUCTURED TURF °Supports traffic loads
Provides additional UV protection
G'E, M EM BRAN E Dimensional staff iiity' Lad tested In high rainfall events
w 4311 interface friction Creates a non-exposed system
• Studs on lop provide Aesthetically Pleasing Superior weathering protection
Buick drainage of Virtually maintenance tree •Reduces heat absorption
higih pnterrsity rainfapi events, *Sauperpor resistance to;
Spikes on hottorn provide Extreme weather
-Figh friction to�ubgrade -Lorin-terra UV light Jl �J,• t, %/�%
• Exceeds rmosp regulatory Heat
g y
thickness requirements by 2fg
0
j
J
f i',
'��iry �.
��
��n � mil� �ibi �.i
,,, ,� �; ,,, � � � � diWr N� �. Vl�ry� N.. mom �nU.
�w
�'
�p� ��
� M1' mwo 0wyw
�����
„, ,;„' w
„ ,,, ,,, ,,,�� „ ' ,�, o�
.. ��a '.
„,,, ,,, �
a „
�. ,,;a
,�' al � ,.
�r I
��.%' y'�+ �� ,, r r y
Y f � I
�� � o� � � S
I
r
��
N u
I �,, � �'r � � �1V �� .ulf� 'I'
m
� �WI��W� � � u�� �Il � ��)
I sl ��� ��� �r� �
w�, c���r�� „��
�,�� ����nll�� ��
�, t
� �If i i ��� � ���� o��
I 'I U
� � i
��
I I � � ����� �� � I� � ��VI iI i I
� � y
� � l 1� .,�, � �yil�Iij��ii�"��Y:r��l I�I��uN� il�� �f�� � � � ll�� �� ��1+
� rr
� � ���� ;� � � ��� � � �� 1 ����
� � �
,. ��"���i�ulliP�4��1���;u�� � , ���III'i�'� �qV
�' ;����� IIII ;�IIIIIIIIIIUIIIII�IiJ� ���� I �
;� � 1 ��� ������ � ���
� ,1�// �� �1� � r���
,r 1
Ildo � �rl��u°�u���
� � �� � ,,
W' I k��P���le / l
Y �� � "��� � � o
� , 1
�, ;�%�r /�i ,i�
��/% � °
��
����� uuuuuuuuuuuuuul�u'u'u uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!!q
��
�/
� ..
„.....III IVlllp,iiiiiiiiii!I
III ��i III IIIII
��� �V V V V VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV YI e � � � �
V III
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
� � �
I'� Illllllliiiiiillllllllllllllllllllll
,� V
..,. ,„
VV �,
�i� p�,�' III � uuuuuuuuuuVm uuuuuuumuu
�,w
V
� ��
uuuuuu°°uuuglllpuu°°uiuuuuuuuuuuullll if
I�
», �
. IIIII III ililililil ilililil
IIIIIIIgI,�,� °°°°°°°°°I I �I��IIlllllllllllllllllllllllljjjjjjjjjjj
More engineered solutions...
CLOSURETURFTMSURFICIAL GAS COLLECTION SYSTEM
ClosureTurf's patented surfici�al gas collection system reduces, and in some cases, eliminates, the need for
traditional gas wells and piping. It can function as a standalone system or in conjunction with a traditional
system. Underneath the ClosureTurf system, gas is generated and rises to the surface where a vacuum cre-
ated by the differential pressures is vented through the suirficial gas collection foot. This method provides ain
efficient method of gas collection while reducing the amount of condensate that needs to be managed.
The iunique design of the ClosureTurf Surficial Gas Collection System resulted in one landfill winning an
International Achievement Award! for a, combined gas collection and closure system and the Solid Waste
Association of North America (SWANA) Gold! Excellence Award for landfill gas collection, In 2012.
„// // r/ / , „r// ,;..„ / ... rrr ,r.. r /......
// / f f,, i i t r 1 r, e
/i��,, � //�l //�, / ////,,,,//�///„� ��(,,,✓%rrr � r /// r/ ///„. ar,//ter/ / /r ,/,r /rr r,/, r ,/%/��
/// // / a / / r � / ✓ sills ri // //
/ / / rii � r � eels/< //, r r
HYDROTURIF TM
HydroTurf Is an economical, environmentally-friendly alternative revetment to rock r1prap and piped channels.
It is a patented three component system made up of a structured geomembrane, an, engineered turf and a
specialized pozzolanic infill (HydroBInder'"),, Created specifically for,bench drains, diownichutes and perimeter
channels on,landfill covers, HydroTurf will flex and move with typical differential settlements that occur on land-
fill covers.It provides superior hydraulic performance capable of handling large velocity and large flows resulting
In very high velocities.
Delivering the same advantages as ClosureTurf, HydroTurf offers rapid, low Impact installation that's, significantly
less costly than hard armor and piping, and is projected to last more than 100 year's when property maintained.
Best of all, unlike hard armor r1prap channels, HydroTurf improves the environment by producing cleaner storm
water runoff.
// fir/ �/ / r /
/ /�// /// � rrr // /
r r �
r / /
1® /
r // r /
Page 3285 of 4165
1
/
o
i
/
1 NN�r
II!Illllllp�/ � P
i
s �
{
➢Ilsm� Illlli�
/ �w III IIIIIIVIuo' ��
Page 3286 of 4165
w
w ww w w w ww w
w
w w
w
r
nt +r
w
w
w
a
i
J'
environmentallyAN TM
closu'remlm'�UrT-1-
The cost - ef ficie nt ,
0 d 0
compliance -ariven ,
friendly
soli
tion .,
W''ith slope erosion and vegetative maintenance an
ongoing battle, and' compliance issues ever i!ooming,.
choose the cover solution designed to eliminate the most
common problems aiss ciat d with laindfill management.
u;
losur Turf is specifically designed t solve soul erosion,
�i
slope instability, gas emissions,and high casts of installation
and maintenance. Discover the solution that makes your job
a legit easier, keeps you compliant and makes your look good
in the process..
rr �
For more information on ClosureTuIrf, visit closureturrf.com, '
miail us at info@closu.uraturf.com or call 00- 7 - 4T .
AL.L.,ClosureTurf COMPONENTS ARE PROUDLY MADE IN, THE USA.
fti
i
i
IpiVl�l4
Watershed
Clos,ureTur M rfu factor d in partnership with C19'r�o��
Brrsu g ht tra your by A epvr A rr wrfar ar �
800-a 7�"IL,'o478�- * ll it .IL
(losarePorl"°product MUM M tdo.102,1dh'and 8W3'�85,322,Canadian Patent No,g„G ut70Y and alter Patents parading)and trademark are the propertyofWaaeashed Geesynd eflcs,L111,and evJusWly III to Agru A morrra,OJl
Infonmat"jecommendOon5 and suggestions aplpeagrrg Bn this Oterature n rrrirrg rbe use of our pronum, are biased;upon tests and data belipeved to be rekuable;however,this dntbutafunn ihoiuld naf be used of relied upon
foramy specific rapoloanonWHh"tindepeaidentprnIexarmlrtAori dad verfiratlmrrof Its.actvacy,sudrabitlty and appsl'lcablIlty.%ce the actual use byorhersrsbe ardour control„to guarantee oirawarraimlyPofanyIk9nrfl,
euymwssed nr Irnp9ped,is rma�d�r gay Amterstaed f .apmrthetucs Lf t as fo the e#lerts of surrh use or tN re�suhs to be obtalaed,nor doe-sWatembed G'eosynthettrs tit In ronneatlon hetewooh.Any rpaierment made
herOn an ay not be ab:ilsiWycormplete sine addlfloo6 WNmrafYom may henmssary or des&cable when part(cuIv orexcepborcrap condiif onsor cprruntstances exist or ismuse of appIicable law^sor gwrrentreat regwfaborts.Nothing
herre@n Is to be construed as p�enru as]on;or as a mcor mendardion to infringe any patent
v.5„114
Closu'reTurf'
Brought to you Iby Ay n,ii A Pneric
U.S.Patent Nos.7,682,105 &8,5 5,322 Canada Patent No.2,663,1I70 Other Patents PendGngi
ViiOlWou
r
II�i�N�uy, I .
r r
rf f1
rX
r
I
r i
1/
i sureTurf TM ensures fast, costefficient and environmentally-
friendly erosion control —even, in some, of the toughest applications.
losureTurf"" Is a three comiponent system comprised of an Impermeable, highly transmissive structured
geom7embrane, a specialized engineered turf, and sand infilll. The structured geomembralne component Is
the foundation of the system and provides for the highest Interface friction values available In the mairket.The er i-
neered turf component Is placed on top of the geomembrane diving the system its natural look and feel of al graiss
while protecting the geomembrane component from extreme weather conditions for the tong term. Finally„ the
sand infill placed) in the engineered turf enables the system to be trafficked, while also providing for addiltional
protection and an additional factor of safety against weathering. A virtually maintenance free technology de-
signed to last„ ClosureTurf has proven to be the most sustaiinable closure option available for the waste indus-
try, See hour aCllosureTurf performs in, some of the most demanding applications.
I=, , IMISM,
MIN,
=Nuff «�
LASALLE-GRANT LANDFILL
OUICK STATS PROJECT SCOPE
Location: Jena„LA The sod of the LaSalle-Grant Landfill in central t,ou'lsuana was highly erodible,had
Completed!:2009 a high plasticity index, and had a natural pH of 4.0, so its characteristics weren't
Owner Progressive Waste conducive to side slope maintenance In fact, every spring the existing vegetative
Solutions slopes required slope repair,reseeding and liming in order to rermarn intact. Pres-
t :9 acres sure'to'find a more stable solution led the operator to impiermenting Closure Turf's
43 degree interface friction technology, which is more than a 3.0 factor of safety
am
agialnst sliding failure,over 10 acres,of the landfill.
CRAZY HORSE LANDFILL
'QUICK STATS PROJECT SCOPE
Location:Salinas,CA Situated adllacent to the San Andreas Fault in California,the Crazy Horse Landfill
Completed-.2013 In Salinas, CA, required a solution that would enable capping without modifying
Owner':Progiresswe Waste steep slopes,of 2.25H:1'V. ,And,swnce most available borrow soil was expensive aind
Solutions environmentally impacted with agricultural chernmals,the site was especlally chap
Size:68 acres lenged m producing surface water quality that met the regulations. The 65-acre
landfill' is also situ hated in a residential area that demanded a final) cover system
�w that was aestheticallly•plea:s,ing and not subjected to on-going erosion and main-
tenaince noise.
TIMBER- LANDFILL
QUICK CK ST'AT'S PROJECT SCE E
Location:Richwvood's„ MO Due to its location in a,seismic area,concerns over slope stability that could corn-
C mnpleted:2'0'1'0 promise gas collection and ccontai iment was,a major concern;for thus landfill.The
Owner::Progressive Waste lack of quality borrow soil and the high cost of procuring it made a ClosureTurf
Solutions system an easy choice, Likewise,gas collection using deep wells would drastically
ize:10 acres increase installation costs and compromise speed of closure.A system that couidd
perform effectively without deep vertical wells was greatly,advantageous.
Wp pp
41
HARTFORD LANDFILL
OUICK STAT i PROJECT SCOPE
Location:Hartford,CT The vision that the owner had for the Hartford Landfill was,one where they would
Completed.-20'13 be able support the initiatives to promote renewable energy that were consistent
Owner:Connecticut Resources with both the CTDEEP and the'City of Hartford,CT.ClosureTurf enabled there to do
Recovery Authority just that, by providing for the best closure technology available and is capable of
Size.,38 acres incorporating traditional rigi',d or flexible solar pho,tovoltwc panels.
e
Page 3291 of 4165
RESULTS "We'd been Offing ourselves
working and reworking our
Operators quickly learned of Closure Turf's,ability to provide long-term eiroslcin control as,the system slopes,bat after we inistaliied the
controlled rainfall runoff in excess of 4 inches per hour at times cludrig it's first year in action,In fact,the Closure Turf system we,didn't
system has endured more than 300 inches of rainfall since 20108.And,thiree months after phase one of have to do onythifrig,to It again,
the project was completed,a tornado producing sheer winds of 70,mph hit across the front of the fancif Of The gross looks great,the sand
without damaging the turf cap.Finally,the LaSalle sand infill remained in place with no erosion when 3: hasn't moved and there's no
levee,broke,releasing water over 5 acres of the protect area, erosion,"
The Closure Tuirf system requires no mowing, little maintenance, and has remained in tact even u!ni- Delaney Lewis,
der the most extreme weather conditions Low maintenance costs can relate to significant savings over District Landfill Monager,
the 30 year post closure period,Best of all,sod erosion,water infiltration,leachate reductioin and fugitive IESI Cora,A Progressive Waste
gas emissions were immediately controlled once the ClosureTurf system was installed. Solution Company
RESULTS "We've been extremely im-
pressed with the stability of our
installabon of the ClosureTurf system was successfully achieved wlth currently developed slopes under slopes and quality of the water
earthquake loading,eliminating 11,000 round trip truck loads,(equivalent to 660,000 miles)that would runoff,Plains now Include a 2
have been required for sort borrow.The combination of soil import elimination and reduced heavy equip- mego-watt solor array system
meat needs reduced the piroject's carbon footprint by 70%, down the road,which will mean,
this land will produce renewobie
ClosureTurf eliminated dirty storim water runoff by replacing a traditional vegetated cover with a cover energy source that gives back to
system that produces very clear and clean water free of fertilizer and muddy runoff,In addition,Closure- the environment,"
Turf eliminated slope veneer failures from high selsmir loads and reduced yearly maintenance activities
for the SVSWA to essentially zero. These would have included rebuilding slopes because of erosion, Dave Me a,RE
revegetaition,dust control efforts, mowing of weeds and grasses to reduce fire danger,and controlling Project Manager
rodent populations. Salinas Valley soild,
Waste Authority
RESULTS 'Capturing 1010%of methane has
provided options for corbon credits
Closure"Tuirf's patented system precluded the need for gas wells or piping,This resulted in a cost savings and given us more fuel to burn for
of$15,000 per acre that would have been required for installing deep gas wells,ClosureTurt's structured generating energy.As soon as an
membrane reduces oxygen in the system that results In higher quality methianie gas to be vented for fl'ar- area,is closed,all emissions can
ing or alternative energy generation, be contraided which is great.Arid',
the structuredmembrone protects
Under the ClosureTurf system,the gas,rises to the surface due to positive pressure and generates little against oxygen Infittration,eumi-
condensate to be collected and managed. The Timber Ridge system is consistently venting 500,SCFf,4 noting that as a fire pathway"'
of gas over a ten-acre closure with no vertical wells,This achievement has resulted in Timber Ridge win-
ning an International Achievement Award for a combined gas collection and closure system and the Solid Mike Frelsen,PE
Waste Association of North,America,(SWANA)Gold Award for landfill gas collection in 2012, Regional Erigineer
IESi Corp,A Progressive Waste
Solution Compony
RESULTS
ClosureTu:rf was selected for use by the owner for the following reasons., C4)sureTuirfi`s geomembrane
component had a proven track record in landfill closure applications,the engineered turf with,sand infill
was durable and strong protecting the underlying,geomembrane from ultraviolet degradation while also
enabling the system,to be driven across by fight rubber tire veh,icies mthout damaging the SGN required
for normal solar field operations,As the best long-term solution for H artford,ClosureTurf also provided
for an diesthetically-pleasing environment in a Mgh-pirofilei area.
Page 3292 of 4165
successfulOther installations.
Industrial Sludge and Ash Lagoon Tim erlane Landfill
Location N incen„ GA Location: Oakdale,dale, LA
Completed 2013 Completed 2011
Owner GA Pacific , Owner Progressive Waste Solutions
Size 70 acres • Size 4 acres
Weatherford Landfill Salufley Lanclf III
. Location ' 'eatheirford, TX Location Pensacola, FL.
. Owner Progressive taste Solutions Owner Escarnbla County
. Sl a 8.5 acres Size 22.5, acres
Berkeley County Landfill Sandto,wn Landfill
Location Monc s Corner, SC . Location Sandtown,, DE
Completed 2013 . Completed 2013
Owner Berkeley County . Owner Berkeley elley County
,Bile t ' acres . Slze 4 acres
LaNnclroastmer Landfill BI-County Landfill
• Location, Nar on, Pew . Location W'oodlawn, TN
Completed! 20,13 , Completed 2013
. Owner Chester County . Owner Montgomery County
lae 7 acres - Size 5 acres
Tanglpwahoa parish, Solid Waste Facility S&W Pantex Landfill
* Location independence, L • Location Amarillo, T
. Completed 201,3, . Completed 2013
. Owner T n ipahoa Parish Government . Owner Department of Energy, 'EPA Region 6
- Size 22 acres -Size 5 acres
Contactgruff America, for Information n other successful ClosuireTur M
landfill applications across the U!.S
ClosureTurf deliverssuperior perform,ainice. Watershed
ClosureTurf was, specifically designed to address and solve erosion, Geo y lthetics-
slope integrity, gas ernissionis, installation and maintenance cost
control, EPA regulation compliance, and longevity of structure and Manufactured in Ippairtnership with:
appe�arance. DNcover the solution that delivers on its promises,
Choose ClosureTurf, AFA%
PAS
For more information on ClosureTurf, visit closureturf,corn, or email ros all,
at inf'oCaklosureturf.com or call 00- 7 - 47 .
J 014 Watershed Geosynthetics
G �.. S' '
�Y1ri1p ;'i�n�I 1.:1, e�..��,is:e, > >i,s� d2
�..... l , M' 1110' � ndl," Ind� � I mi I
J
e
Brought to you by Agry Ayn ric&r
ClosureTUr has been extensively tested in the lab and in
real-world"' applications for �performanice and durability.
The goal was to produce a system that performs better ClosureTurf has proven to be environmentally protective
than current "subtitle D" requirements and can resist the and more stalble than traiditional vegetativefsoill solutions
many common failure modes of today's closure covers, as a cover system..
Tradiitional approaches to landfill closure have customairily
involved the use of a vegetative cover, however„ many of The engineered turf technology was, originally developed
these cover systems have failed ais a result of excessive for professional sports venues, Over the last decade the
erosion, gas pressure buildup, earthquake loads, poor market has expanded greatly and technology has im
maintenance and inadequate oversight procedures after proved dramatically, The latest generation of polyethyl-
site closure, ene material now provides excellent residual strength and
color durability against UV light.
In response to numerous failures of these closure sys-
tems and associated rising costs" engineers have looked y combining the newest technology of engineered
at new approaches in establishing a more stable and en- turf with a 50 mil thick geomembrane that has the higlh-
vironmentally sound solution, An old solution to address est interface friction available in the market, and adding
cover failures and the associated environmental impacts approximately a o.5 inch of sand for infill,the CllosureTurf
is the implementation of exposed geomembranes. How- system is quickly becoming the preferred choice among
ever, exposed geomembrane systems are still costly to the engineering community for covering landfills, mines,
maintain" are not wind resistant„ and do not provide for an industrial waste sites, and CCR storage areas. The prod-
aesthetically pleasing solution. For these reasons, many uct is proven to significantly outperform current closure
state agencies do not grant final cover status to exposed methods while allowing engineers to deliver a .sound
geomembrane cover systems. After all, the geomembrane solution with net:savings to their clients,
is still exposed to the elements for the entire duration, of
The driving performance criteria for the product are
the application, The best approach still involves covering
stability, trainsrmissivity and durabillity. These criteria
and protecting the underlying geomembrane, however
serve to mitigate t.FC emissions and liquid infiltration
inistead of using two feet of soil to do it, it can be done
for a duration that extends well beyond the post closure
with a specialized tufted geotextile (""engineered turf"), in- period. The graphs and charts represent a summary of the..
fulled with sand that has been engineered to perform better
performance.
than the traditional soil cover.
Combining an engineered turf unfilled with sand and a highly
U.S.Patent giros.7,682,1i05&8,585,322,
transmissive structured' geomembrane forms a system Canada Patent No.z ar'n, o
known as ClosureTurf.The next generation closure system, other Patents Pending
On landflils and mine plies„ sliding) of the soil cover along steelp side slopes is of primary concern, particularly
after major storm events. During a rain event,the rainfall will penetrate quickly through the sand infiillll and
drain directly In the drainage system below avolding sand erosion and maintaining stability of the saind
infiiil. "The Infillll is also held In place by the unique structure of the engineered turf that traps the sand to
anchor and ballast the engineered turf to the surface it covers. mete that,
> Closure7'ur 'o can, be placed on very steep slopes
',,, Tests Indicate 43 degrees Interface friction value
> The slope stability safety factor can be calculated from the chart usinigi the equation:
SF=taro (/tan a
I "Tor r II i
soo
Sh Parameters
(deg)Slope angle Slope S _ (Psf)
400 Pealk 43 ss 0.996
34 1.5 :1V 1.4 LD 3,8 25 0.9 °
CL 430
14 4.01-1« 1V 3.7
Peak
170 LD
° Unenr�IPeak)
mmm Unear(Lc)
0
o 100 Zoo aoo 400 soo
INormail stress Cpsf'1
ClcsureTuurf w' sand infill material is
stable o steep slopes under severe ���u�r�� Intensity
weather conditions. The stability
of the sand infill is controlled by the (utane flow)
foHowrving product characteristics:
L wr
� of
Perceiati n/Perrneabiiitw
o Trensrnissirity -read
I Loss/Length
> Send friction
Gress interlocking grid
Senu:i gradation
CIosureTurf was designed with the abcuve
characteristics in, mind.: The sand inflli can
handle over six inches per hour of rainfall
s intensity without erosion, when applied on
3H:IV slopes.
a
Rainfall penetrates guicMy through the sand and into
the structured drain liner bellow which has a very high
transrnissivity.The energy that could l cause erosion i
r
on, the structured geornembrane and not on, the sur.
fake of the sand. The transmissivity is presented in
r the graphic at left.
0I
Hydra,uilic Gradient
Weathering Resistance For al Long Life
120
.................. 7 yr(8,4%retained strength) ................... . .......
............................................
100 --------------------------
retained strength)
--------------
4z,
Y -7113145�n(x)+ 165,37
80
60
;5 yr(901/6 retaincd strength) ...............
40 .. ........
30 yr projection
............ ............... 75%retained
strength
1.3 yr(97%retained strength)
201 ---------
.................
0
10000, 100000 1000000
Weathering Time(hour)
ClosureTurflm is designed to provide weathering resistance and geomembrane protection when exposed to the
most extreme coniditi�onis. Based on independent, real-world weathering tests performed at Atlas Material Testing
Laboratories in New River, AZ, The tensile strength of the engineered turf fibers is projected to have 75% retention
after 30 years. This means that with typical traffic loading forces, the material can provide over four times the
strength, required after thirty years of extreme heat and UV exposure. Based on the testing data collected and
shown in the giraph, above, and data from many existing ClosureTurf projects, the system can provide decades of
reliable performance beyond the standard thirty-year post-closure maintenance period.
Wind Tunnel Testing at GTRI
Since all exposed ge rnernbranes are susceptible to damage, from high winds, the technology
must withstand these forces. A study was performed on the wind uplift reactions by Georgia Tech
Research Institute, To complete their evaluation wind tunnel testing was performed.The IosureTurf'
product indicated no uplift wwhen exposed to 120 rnph winds. This is in contrast with exposed geomern-
braine systems where extenisive anchoring is required even for 30 mph winds.
losureTurf technology provides features that help r iti�glate the forces of wind,such as a, porous sur-
face to brew vacuum and engmeere turf blades that wwill Increase the aerodynamic boundary condi-
tions and blades blending and reacting against the wind causing a resistance to the ulplif't.
t C wl aflci ara r'q'afa U'. C P rr 4
Ra - -..
1 { vi riduw �9r�,�i�u va nu uis i A
tlyw.�4r4u'ri a v .,l¢tyw V �s¢tiY rrdmV ve .
d""; y �•, N MP 4"n, $f V P tt'wL LC f P6MI fl^CvoMVPV C fHl Yil^try
r n, Gio4rfnumiov Vrri ar as�.mYawr�'{aaiik h .
DragUir aet to b gnu+•
hh
at
�c
Yk.7S .✓P'
Gas system monitoring locations or wells in the landf`lll will have to be accessed by persons on foot or in vehicles.
The typical exposed geomernbrane closures, being fully exposed, would likely be damaged during i access.
Further, the r eornlernbrane can be damaged by blirds or other animals. All such damage to the georruembrane
would l have to be continually repaired and replaced at additional costs after construction. The closureTurf"is
thicker, covered with saind lnflll that moot only ballast the system but also allows for access of al 60 psi tire pres-
sure vehicle on 3:1 slopes and up to a psi the pressure in flatter areas without being susceptible to damage.
�
i
GJ ii' f1,�1 l Tire pressure
on final cover
i6 J'�1 r�vi�i j Vv�✓W��d�l✓r���uiri'd�.l rr���Jir��/1 1 n1�l���r Ij��r���l�i{�P px����'i�%����1t�r`r�°�W��1�l/1,���JW�����1%��/1`�i i ry�i,y��'%j�����f%�,lu�Il,k/1G�li�'i..//yjr��/i'l�iw"'//I1✓�%�i�`I�G,f,i/y�����t%�/p�r�//irOfi`✓✓f�lt���9�t�'t'1r ri��✓�'�%jl✓l�/ilU/�%l�r�/N�l(��I����4i�//"t'��y"�'i,I f�,✓,,1'ii✓rS°/J�rin'%J���yrll��i�,t��G��/�1/�y✓%✓/�/Ev��✓f�����r�i�i�������A�Iy✓h,i��'i.��r�����f�l/iIt��✓t'm�/�
;
'
-�„ �I
" �g l Pered
TIuirf
h ru 0-nn Sand 6nfigl
LlDPEIM11
Gr G �wqt"
pike Down
Prepared Su
'.
�. , rJc',,,�pe„rrJ� F�,/to �ll�x6 f/���%'�'J�„�✓��,1�f 1��%n±�/>��uG�i//r��"�r.,,lYif��� ��OA7
�l r,
w�
m 18..E
r r , l/ / r / r ✓ /,/
�/ r ,/ ,� i. / f �/.. ,/,� ,h it /i✓ � � / ., �, ,.
r., ,r /o ;;. ✓ I✓ r r ,, / ,... � LI ,,... r. ,✓ r / f ,./r /,r./.. 1 /,.., ,.,J /„/ /,
/... /� v ii � „/ 1 / o,. i„ r %ail /,.. �..../ ✓ l / ,rbY„ �,�ii / ,o,r,/ I
„ ;�'„ r,
u � ,�,, ., .,,.,.��/ ✓,,,r';; ✓�k n,,:., ,., I, .:, , -1 ,,,r/,//, ;r//1,, /,r/ r/ :.o!/ � lr � /y �d �/� � %i 1/ ,:-% ����//��/
w
I
w w w w
�w� � M � ro�l � � � • � w
ww Iww wr
w r w
if
q
d y PA, ° "ne �� � �� ✓r r ,iW �/� m
10
m r✓ I,�I N w`; n, I mo 9 Y al +', sb Y' o. I ' 'Y ,a ae �' mP m °, a/
t mf ➢
A '' W 4 u 9Wi / N, :,'<2 ,%Y Id : Y �, „a4. by M M4/✓
Closu 1 re' Turf"
To iaarn more, about ClosureTurf or to find a representative
near you, wrisit our website at losur' turf.co t,
Watershed
ClosureTurfr
mm m " � :
OGeosynthetics- h
Brought to you by Ott rrr A merka Manufactured In,partnership with 4 O" ligj,pe Y
„��,473
TtasuneTuie pmrisra(N5 Patent INm.'F',692atg5 and 0,505,522;raNdW Patent No.P,Gfi'd,t M,and ether patemts Pend Ing)and trademark are the pruperty of Water shed as;ynthrtk%LLC,,and o dusimely I ken5edIzAgruAri
ut uruatfem„reanmmerdations and sstggesilrns appearing,%this rkreratere cr ncernling the use otauT products are based upon tests and data befiewed to be Mix Ivifo remati n should not be used er re-its upon
for any sperificapptkra ion qn houit independent prnPessfanaB ewatrdmattaam and vedfisatlnn mr iris aseucaat sultabditg aaudapPiO¢C,abkidy.5kruare the aural use by ntrrees 1%b y+rnd pupa cwrmrrrl,ra quarataree of swartamty at my kind
ewptassadarrntpbed,is made byWaters dtjeasynilhelksi,Vastotheeffectsoutsuctumeru'tivresultstobenbtalred,rundosesWatershedGeutsynt4tett W..assutumea babul hevewhh.Anyt etaten,entroade
hemeht may rwt.be abstulutel,y mpdete sdna addtttu aa@ Werma4han maybe ury ess°ary ordes4taBara wahan partkutarnr rxcepttnnad candttlumus or dr¢umstanuea ISG ar berausc of applIkablelam Nothing
heredo Is lobecamsCuraed as permNsIan or as a retarnt ndarmrto Infringer any patent
v.5.14
ATTACHMENT 3
FINAL COVER STABILITY ANALYSIS
Page 3302 of 4165
FINAL COVER STABILITY ANAI..,YSIS
UKIAH LANDFILL CLOSURE
February 2015
WASTE MASS, SLOP'E STABILITY
A stability and seismic hazards analysis has been performed for the final closure of the Ukiah
Landfill and is presented in the JTD Final Clos,ure Plan (EBB, 2008). A summary of the static
stability and seismic response of the final landfill waste mass configuration presented in the JTD
is as follows-
A scismic hazards analysis concluded that the design earthquake is a Maximum Credible
Earthquake (MCE)with an estirn ated m agni tude 7®I Mw occurring on the Maacama
Fault, resulting in an average peak bedrock acceleration of 0.66g derived from multiple
attenuation relationships.
Slope stability of the entire waste mass was,inodeled by evaluating failure mechanism$
passing through refuse and the base of the landfill and indicate a static factor of safety
greater than 1.7 for -failure through the base of the landfill.
• Pseudo-static analyses performed to determine the yield acceleration(ley) and evaluate
,the stability of the waste mass under seismic conditions was also perfornied. The yield
acceleration calculated for the entire waste mass was 0.13g.
• Seismic displacement analyses,using the program SLIP—PM (M atasovic, 1997)indicate
that permanent seismically induced displacements, will be less than 8 inches for failure
through the base of the landfill.
FINAL COVER SYSTEM SLOPE STABILITY
The shear strength of the various interfaces present in the proposed alternative final cover system
were evaluated and the resulting static and psuedo-static slope stability analyzed, The desigi
characteristics of the current proposed alternative final cover system includes the following
coniponents,(in descending order).
• Ali engineered synthetic,turf over with sand infill ballast.
• A linear low-density polyethylene:structured geomernbrane liner
• A landfill gas, pressure relief layer consisting of strip drains, pressure relief values, and
associated collection piping components; and
• A 12-inch-thick (miminum) foundation layer moisture conditioned and compacted to 90
percent relative compaction.
1.B
%*Zz—17E MEEMNG
Page 3303 of 4165
Shear Strength Properties:
Gcosynthetic material interfaces, whether between two geosynthetic materials or between a
gcosynthetic and native or compacted soil material are typically the weakest interfaces in a final
cover system, causing block-type or wedge failures to occur. 'Table I presents the shear strength
propeities use in the slope stability analysis
Table I
Slope Stability Properties and Stability Results
NTERFACE' FRICTION DHESION/ADHES ION STATIC SEISMIC
,s PD�O
ANGLE <D.)� (M (r
) )4,5 SSETA,UTIC PERMANENT
tlmmelm
(FS),"' DISPLACEMENT
Foundation 3 /280T
SoWLIDPE
Intemal 351)' 301 3.3� ------------------ <1
shear strength�,6r I I
(1) LLDPE=linear I'low-density polycthylene geoinembrane;
(2) Peak shear strength
(3), [lost-peak shear strength(large displacement)
(4) Factor of Safety
(5) For maximum sidcslope of 2:1 (26.5")
(6) Intert cet,)fco mbiTiedgeosyntheticcoiniioi,ieyits(LLDPE/tLii-f,/sai,idbillast)
Stability Analysis
Slope stability of the proposed final cover system was modeled using the infinite slope Tnethod.
This method provides a conservative approach to the evaluation of the stability of shallow
failures of constant thickness along a defined interface. This method, assumes the failure block is
infinitely long and neglects resisting forces at the toc and along, the sides. Analyses were
pertbrined for a 1,LDPE geomernbrane/artificial turf with sand infill ballast cover system using a
critical slope angle of 2,6.5 degrees (211-IV),
The stability analysis was perforined, using a spreadsheet based on the principles and equations
of the infinite slope stability analysis. Results of the infinite slope stability analysis indicate a
minimuni static factor of safety of 18 fbr failure at the LLDPE/stlbgrade interface and a
mininium static factor of satbty of 3.3 for failure above the LLDPE geomenibrane (see Table 1).
Spreadsheet files and equations used in the analysis are appended to this technical memorandum.
A pseudo-static analysis was perfon-ned to determine the yield acceleration (Ky) for the cover.
nic yield acceleration was deter nined. using a trial and error procedure in which the seismic
coefficient was varied until a factor of safety of L0 was obtained, The lowest yield acceleration
calculated for the LLDPE, geomembranc/artificial turf cover system was 0,70 , Because the
maxinium horizontal acceleration of 0.66g predicted by the site response analysis does not
exceed the calculated yield acceleration, permanent seismic displacements of the LLDPE
1'40'Swl0q�,2015 Ukiah UAR I Cova Slope SombililyAtw
Page 3304 of 4165
geomembranc/artificial turf cover system are highly unlikely. The stability of slopes subject to
scisinic, loading conditions can be further evaluated in terms of permanent displacements
(deformations), that are expected to occur, The Newmark Method (196 is commonly used to
evaluate slopes under seismic loading conditions, The method evaluates, the stability of slopes in
terms of permanent deformations that result when scisinically induced ground accelerations
exceed the yield acceleration of the slope mass. 'I"he total arnount of slope deformation is
estimated by summing only the down-slope displacements that occur during cacti brief period of
time when the yield acceleration of the slope mass is exceeded. As stated above, a pseudo-static
analysis of the site determined that the yielld acceleration is not exceeded by seismically induced
strong ground motions, therefore no permanent displacements of the final cover system are
predicted by the Newmark Method.
CONCLUSIONS
Results of the slope stability analysis using the infinite slope method indicate a rninimuln factor
of safety of 2.8 for failure of the cover systems utilizing a LLDPE geornembrane/artificial turf
eligmeered alternative cover systern constructed on maximum 2H:IV slopes under static
conditions. These results suggest that the final landfill configuration will be stable throughout
the postclosure maintenance period following closure in accordance with the Final Closure Plan
Drawings and Technical Specifications.
The yield acceleration calculated for failure of the cover system is greater than the PGA
predicted by the site response analysis, indicating that permanent seismic displacements of the
LL1f PE geonienibrane/artificial turf cap are highly unlikely,
REFERENCES
EBA Engineering, 20018, Joint Technical Document ,for Citi, Qf Ukiah Landfli/I Mendocino
County, Caltfornia; January 2008, EBA Engineering, Santa Rosa, CA.
Makdisi, F.I. and Seed, H.B., 197 , Sitnpl,fled Procedure.for Eslimating Dain and Embankment
Earthquake-Induced&afbrmations, Journal of the Geotectmical Engineering Division, Arrierican
Society,of Civil Engineers, Vol. 104, No, GT7,July 1978.,
Matasovic, N., 1997, YSUP_PM, A computer progranifior simulation oftlynamic behavior Ql'a
rigid block on an inclined plane and calculation qI'pertnanent displacement oJ'Ihe block, April
1997.
Newmark, N.M., 1 , 4ffects olEarthquakes on Darns and Embankments, fiffilh Rankine
Lecture, Geotechnique, Vol, 15, No. 2, 139-160,
UMITATIONS
The conclusions presented in this, technical mernorandurn are qualitative jud&nnents based on a
limited amount of quantitative testing performed at the time and sample locations. They arc,
intended only for the indicated purpose and project site. Conclusions and recommendations
,�ti,'
TurfSIaWh)A2W5 Miah LandfW Cover Wpe Yabifity-doc
Page 3305 of 4165
presented herein apply to site conditions, existing at the titne of our study and at those points
were samples were collected. Services performed by EBA Engineering have been conducted in
a manner consistent witb that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by inernbers of the
profession practicing in the same locality under similar conditions at the time the services were
provided. No other representation, expressed or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is
included or intended in this report or in any opinion or document.
EBA Engineering,
V, Ik
Darnon Brown, P CEG,CHg
President
4
`I'urf Subih9,)A2015 Ukiah LindfiR Cover$3opc%abihty,dov
Page 3306 of 4165
Infl n ite-S lope Stability Analysis with Parallel Seepage
City of Ukiah Landfill Final Closure
Geosyntheti Final Cover System
Suibgrade Soil Against LLDPE Microspike
Static Conditi ns
sr ll depth Z � 04 ft
'fraction: sat. rn = 0,00 cos 9 0.8949
sbpe angle, R, = 26,5 sin 9 := 01.4462
tan l0.4986
soil unit. wt. 110.0 P,CF
cohesion Ca = 3 NSF
friction angle W = 2&01 0 tan o 0.5317
seismic coeff. KIh OM
d0ving stress 'r 1-7570 P,SF
norrr4 stress, (Y 15240 P'S F
pore pressure. U 0.0000 P,SF
effective stress & 3.51240 PSF
resisting stress S 4.873 PSF
Factor of Safety FS =: 2.77
2015 Findl cover—inf—slope Closure 'Turf EPA Engnneiering
Page 3307 of 4165
I nfin fto-S lope Stability Analysis with Parallel Seepage
C ty of Ukiah Landfill Final Closure
Geosynthefic Final Cover System
Subgrade Soil Against LLDPE M:icrospike
Pseudo-static Conditions
soil depth Z 0.04 ft
fracfion sat. IM 01-00 cos R = OM49
shope angle (I 26,5 sin 9
tan R = 0.4986
Soil Unit wt. T 'I MO PCB"
cohesion C, w 3 PSF
friction angle 0� 28.0 tan o = 0.5317
seismic coeff, Kh 0,66
diriviing stress, T 4.0828 PSF
normal stress (Y 2.3644 PSF
pore pressure U 0.0000 PSF
effective stress Ov 2.3644 P,SF
resisting stress S 4.25172 P'S "
Factor of Safety FS = 1 .04
20!15 Find coverjrJ_rSIope Oosure TtArf E , Engineedng
Page 3308 of 4165
Infinite-Slope Stability Analysis with Parallel Seepage
City of Ukiah Landfill Final Closure
Leos rye Final Cover System
LLDPE MicrospikeAga ins t Turf
Static Saturated Conditions
sofl depth .014 ft
fraction sat. M! :=
0.00 cos, R = 0.8949
s,lolpe sngl� i 2&5 sin 9 = 0.4,462
tan R, = 10.49816
soil unit, wt. ly IOU PCF
cohesion CO 3 P,SF
fficfion angle 35.101 tan o = 0.7002
seismic coeff. Kh OMI
driving stress T 1.5973 NSF
normal stress, (T 3.2036 PSF
pore pressure U 0,.0000 NSF
effective stress G 3.2i SF
resisting stress S -- 5.2432 PSF
Factor of Safety FS = 328
20,15 RnaN cover inf,-slope Oosure Turf EBA Eng4ieedng
Page 3309 of 4165
l lini hope ( Milli bilit,y Analysis with Parallel Seepagie
City of UkiahLandfill Final Closure
Geosynthetic Final Cover System
LLDPE Microspikeins Tub
Pseudo-static Conclitions,
Oil depth Z - O
fracHon sat. M = OM cis C
s1 e eagle f = 26,51 sin, R = 0.4462
tan 9, = 0.4986
cohesion col = 3 S
seism c coeff. Kp,1 = OM
driving stress Ir 3.7117 PSF
norlrnial stress (T 2.1494 PS
pore pressure U 0.01000 PSF
effective stress a"' 2.1494 PSF
res astini stress S : 'S,
2015 'Finall gayer _inf-sJoge Closure re Turf EBA Engineering
Page 3310 of 4165
Page 3311 of 4165
FINAL CLOSURE COST ESTIMATE 1VORKSHEET
CITY OF UKIAJI LANDFILL
PROJECT DVSCRip'rION
Tbe-infonitation pare rated herem provides an iteg-vitzed bmakdown of costs to implement dw fimal closure
cunstniction aetwifics suaTimariml in the Con5trudion Drawings for the Final Clusuie afthe Clay ofUkiM LandrM
PREPARED BY,, h8A I,NUNEFIRMU
GENERAL SITE INFORMATION
Nanic of'WW Wow,LandfiW 01y Id,Ukiah Umdfid
Solid Waste radMics Pernift No,: 21.AA*M9
Facility opvawr. Cily of Ukiah,Depamncia of NAibc WoFkq
Site Owner Ciq ot"Ugiah,Depwramm of'l1vjbhc'tip qxka
Si w Uxation (CA township&mige or Sl?'P4,secdon 10
longitude/latiotdc,prefewed) Tommhip I Nmflt,Raiiue 2'West
Assessors Parcel Number: 179-130 olo
Site Address 3 l0t)V�chySpi'ings Road
UkW, ,CA
FINAL CLOSURE COSTS
I. Final Clostwe Costs,
04 M4colhaneouq-Mobihzatimg,Renwval,Adjummw,Demohigion $ 129,68�O Sa Cost Estiumle Wrwkshed-lim I-1J
b. Final Cover S 6,752,703 S"(xst Fstimta Workshed,limm W49,33-39,4a
c. Drainage Facihfics $ 5512,9018 Sm Cwt Esfimo Worblioet-hm 21-32
d, Ameis Roads S 172,575 Smart:'W Eatirrote WorWied-tfino 20
o. LandrM(]as Fxtracdon Systern $ 599,535 SccCoim:Esfirwe Worlodmi-tom42-68
�r Land fi I I Lea c1m te Col lecikin System Mod i ricationi, S 52,%5 See Cut Estimate wo"mf•goam 60-71
S. Riwegetation S 27,0�00 Sw(,'mt EmInWe Workibot-It=40
Contractar Bid Subiotital S 8,297,366
1 Design Support Eiggimerigig $ 15,0W
3. Qmustruction QwiI4 Assurance Vor Closure Construction $ 317,040 See Com Loizmflon 800bip
4, Landfill Stiawtuic Removal $ [imchided in Awe
5, Grol,iTidwater Monhod gig ImUffla tions, $ None
6, Security $ hichided gm Abow
FITW ctuslart Subtotal S 9,619,406
Fijud(Ansury Subtotal 20,%Cbosingency S l,723,88i
TOTAL FINAL Cl,(XSITRF S 101,343,281
Page 3312 of 4165
ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE
FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION
CIT F UKIAII LANDFILL
August 14,2015
NAP UNIT WEAL
i QTY
PRICE ..-.PRJCE
I Mobffizatian I'S, $ 100,00000 1 $ 100 C100
2 Adjust Existfiag Groundwatcr 1wlorni'toriplEcll to Grade EA $ 5001,001 3 mS .1,500
.3 us Leachate Well's to Grade EA S SKOO 2 1,000
F
4 Rernowymisting MPE,Dow m ndrains mull Drain Outlets Ls S 140()0 -L 00 5,0100
--� --- - �$
5 2 mauve FX�Jst4i Leachate Piping US 2,500,00 2,500 F __� L_ 1$
6 Lkjd Leachate Manholes to Grade EA $ 1 0001a00 5 $ 5,1000
7 Install G5 Tmffic Vault mith Checkc, EA $ 1,000m -I- $
8 Adjust Exisiti.2n Vauh to Gradle HA $ 500,00 2 $ 1,000.1
9 pros iW1-1Bi4-3F)Gas FE-xtr-action Vault math ChLcker Plate Top EA S 1,0001.00 .9 $ 5,000
10 .5010
_ALq.,ql Fxisfin&ARV and Vault to GracLe EA !S 51, 0 1 ,
1.1 _AcjFaq F.xistiplIXG 11�rimcter Monitoring WeUs to(Iradc EA $ 500,00 $ 20010
12 Ltemove LF' S 2.00 180
13 Structure Demolition TES $ 5,000,00 1 $ 50010,
----------------=�
14 �Oin wg and G,rqj!!jjp&_ AC $ 850,00 611 $ 52020
----------==
I, _ftjefusc Jxcava m and ReWcation ........... cv 1's 10 00 l�'n511�� _ 135,00,0
16 LefuLw Dis,mal r1DN $ 120kO 9 000 75 $ 1 ,
2 ------------------
17 Sedimentation Basin Excavation LS $ 5,000,00 1 $ 5,000
18 S ubEadc Pre a�rafio Li SF $ OJO 1,937,71�O $ 193,773
0 19 Fill(Foundation LaLer and FnEi�=24 Ij cy $ 3,50. 114 50 S 0,750
20, Access Roads SF $ 1,30 132,750 $ 1-72,57-5
21 EA_ 2,500.010 13 $ 32,500
�22 Ea 1,000,010 5 S 5,000
I ...........
23 18"CMP Drain Pipe LF 40,010 , 40 $ 1,600
Lr
24 18"CNIF Drain Pipe(Buried) LF S 55,010, 120 S 6,600
25 18"HDPE Drain NE(Buried) IF S 55.010, 1,733 S 95,315
'F
26 Sedimentation Basin Drair%M,Riser Lis $ 21 '00... 1 S 2,500
27 T Tc I Swale LF $ 1.50 735 S 1,103
28 Type 1,1 Swale 11 $ 6.00 7,965 S 47,790
29 Type III Sivale LF $ 35�.010 5540 S 193,900
30 I)rninM Channel Grading excludes tort,jeomembranc,hydrobindcr ............................
r-lFF- $ 10ba, _2,685 IIt �6�115iG1
31 Grouted lkipira2 Outlets 2,00&0,01 6 S 11211000
32 Loose Rock Riprap Inlets,Ovalds,Channel Ends SF $ 35,00, $ 127,750
33 Erosion Control(Straw and Noting) SF $ 013 253 465 is 58,2,97
34 Gcomcnbrane ST, $ 1.05 1,9 7 L3 0 $ 2,034,617
35 Gcomembrane Surficial Strips LF $ 1501 -j 28 S 41,398
36, Engineered Tuff with 518"Sand Ballast JAIrin SF $ L90 IL817�87L S 3,453,953
37 Engineered Tw-f wath 2"Sand Ballast Infill SF $ 2,05 10,93 0 $ 22,407
39 Engineered Turf witb HydroBinder hifill SF $ 2.65 1018,9130 S 288,665
39 L`ng tiered Turf/Geomembrane Anchor Trench 1'r $ 5A01 565 S 42,825
40 AC S 2,500,00 113.5 S 27,000
41 Tcmvraty Erosion and Sed,hnent ConlTol LS $ 15 OKOO 1 S 15,000
42 Flare Station Concrete cy $ 80000 113 $ 92010
43 LFG Emiraction Wells vly $ 90,00 940 $ 94,600
4 'T'�fabricated Wellhead Asscmbfits 4 r EA $ 750,00 18 $ _13,500
45 T�ditio ��� I-orct2!!LSctullr EA $ 35t3,00 3 T- 1,050
46 Borehole Abandonment VL,F S 45.00 100 $ 4,5010
47 LFG Collection Foot Assdnbl IRA $ 800,00 56 S 44800
48 8"PVC )c andFitt' $ 16.00 12,195 S 1915,120
49 6"'PVC P Lc.and Fj ftings LF $ 15.00 I 179 $ _.L6 8-1
50 4"PVC Npe and Fittimp ............ Ilf- $ 14.00 500 $ 7,0010
51 8"isolation Valve PA $ 1,500.00 16 $ 24,0010
52 16'Isolation valve E6jS 1200.00 1 $
53 8"Flexible CoqvfiR&j_ EA 1$ 350.00 99 $ 34,650,
54 16"Flexible Couplings EA S 300,00 3 $ 900
55 Vacuw-n Test]sorts EA S 50.00 i 21 $ 1050,
56 Staked Pipic Su its FA $ 130.00. 5 $ 650
65,0001
57 �BlockType Pipe Sueparts EA $ 5UO 1,300 $ im
17ngineers Cost Estimme 8,14,15(Rey 1) EBA 1,ngineering
Page 3313 of 4165
ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE
FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF UKIAII LANDFILL
August 14, 15
ITEM, IT
LIMIT 7,0TA L,
/Va UN PBICE Q'Ty MUCE,
58 Metal r1rame Pipe Supports EA $ ]3tl00 5 $ 0
59 Buried Header Clg5sing, A $ 1,000AD, 4 $ 44000
...........
60 1 Road Crossing EA— S 2,500A, 4 $ 11000
61 1'ry J- 600 pe 2 Road Crossinf, EA $ 2,80U() 2 $
62 12"'HDPE Pipe and Ffttbdp LF $ 1 5 00 2110 $ 31,650
63 Condensate Drop,Outs EA $ 2 000 00 6 $ 11000,
6
64 Condens tuDisoluirLePoints L-A_ $ 00 00.._ 6,0100
6$S FWc Station Assembly LS $ 12,000.010 1 $ 12,0010,
6 6
6 _Security Fencing A If i S 25.00 210 $ 5,250
67 -Flare SMn 6&,m�lz Base SF �j 1 30 600 $ 12,480
68 M"ical andlVe)hone Feed L'S $ 10,000,00 1 $ 10,000
69 12"Ixachatc,CoUcction Piping LF 7$--,1 TO 6- 149 $ 6,705
70 6"Leachate Callmlion Piping L,F $ 40,00 44 $ 1,760
71 Concrete Junction Boxes EA $ 2,0011.00 3, 6�,000
72 lxachatc,Sediment Chambler/Wlet WcH Lining I's I $ 3,500,0a 1 3,500
73 1,cathate UST is 0 1 35,0(W
T(XJ'AL $8,287,366
IS l,ujnp Sum EA I-,aoh
cy Cubic Yard Pvc Polyvin.0 ChlorWe
AC Acre FJPDE Iflej-Densily Polyethylene
SF Square Feet IFlr-T Landfill Gas
IX I'hicar Feet UST Underground Storage Tank
Vl,F Vert call Linear Fect
En&cm Com Estimate 8,1.4.15(Rice l y EBA Engjneering
Page 3314 of 4165
INSPEcnom,I-ESTING AND REPOUING COSTS
CITYOF URUH LANDFILL
MW
UNIT VNITCOSr aff �MIAA CaST
A,-6-
DARN INWE.CrM,RECONOW"PING&REPORTING
SBA ?Mpoo 5 ¢JJVp(i=l.mnct) bky $ 1,3910D 39 S 54,7W Anumea I day per weak fin 39,weaks,8 ku's per day
2 LBA a=Vmkms 4= Amer) Day $ 1,070.00 39 $ C,7301 Amu=I daypev week fAr 39 vmmks,8 hys per day
I EBA•AdadWsmorio. Doy S %fY,X)DD 39 S 39,000 Amuncs 8 hrs-per wca, for ackmft,ouciThwhon
A DRUY OWNjagw brup'%tiolls(F1011 Day S I'Ofm')'d'X) 46 S 46,M3 Assuines 2,NI X)CY/flay for M and ET matenal
5 NO Ommee6mat laqmlkam Day S 1,000 W 45 S 45,000 Ass urnin I acre InT cMy
6 Dall,E40notnd'ruff Inspx1inm my $ 1,000 N) 30 S 30,000 M5 wncs 15 ecre Imir day
M,lr AIN r ,for ukxYwinag siu Gm Irmf 0=,jmznms Tl ip $ MM 75 S 1,25C)
8 Prapo MMSSI Im G"A=hzkW 4jW Cm Mmr Inspa.110M Hr S 1350, 40 �S s'4m
-281WM 4 �Sz 8,1)(*
J00 IN 5
S,AMPLTNG&TFSrMG PROGRAM
&Vrm D 638"'romflo PATOAmm(GW.=hWmI EA S 70 W d9 $ 1,330 Assumes testing pior every CX),M S r
2 AMA D 1501,pahly(t Mhdmbrm) rA S 3500 q 9 S 665 Assumeq testing per every l 00,0M SP
3 ASM 1)W Carbon Block Ombul(Cmwmmmtmm EA S 3500 19 5 565 Assumes wstyng per cvmy 100,W)SF
4 ASTM D!;W,CALtan Brad Mqcman(Ommuhmix) Ek 5 25,00 19 $ 473 AswukmI temfing per every 100,051.)SF
5 AVI'MO 51M, (iGmumitImma) E,A $ 1000 89 $1 190 A smmms to sting pier every 100,000 SF
6 AVrM D I,CSR handum gTml p2 � 70,00 19 S 1,330 Asnunrs tsatrng pra evex),I(X),000 SF
7 AS"TMD EA $ 70,M1 19 S 1,330 Asqunm temmig perev4ry d DO,000 SF
9 MT11 D 964 5%RaiaM Uyluo"i Emakm rrud) J'A S 250M 1 S 2M) Assumes testing ont per ka
ASTM(I N 47,Fib UV S ImbiWY(TWI, SA S 1500 49 S W Aisumes testing per even,1 ,000 SF
W ASTM to w34.5,BodUng,Symem UV SiahWly(Trf)� EA S 15 00 19 $ 605 Assurnes testing picr cycry, 1 00,000 SF
AST!M D 72T%Hydmhc Ovempong(Tuff) EA $ 250.00 1 $ 2,50 Assumes testurg orre per I or
U ASTM D 47v6,I'muruniOly(Turf8 EL Is 50 no 19 S 950 Aisioncs teuing peer amy I 00,1WO SF
ASTM 1)W a,1940MA F(iWM(Ted) EA S '350-00 S 350 As smes Ws--tang M ever),I(P),1000 SF
4 AST,14 D fV0 1,Sand Ur,AU Gr&I ff'mfro CA S DOM 9 S 1,7W Asuunres tw9ting prey every 100,0100 SF
Is ASTM D 520,Yfiry WalgM UGM LIA S is DO G S 35 Assurnes testinA cant per lut
16 ASTM D 22%,Tcum3c SucIII ar Yud crwl) EA S 70XV I S 70 Asmunes testing une dame lot
17 AST d M D 422,?ArUd&Y.ff EA S 90W 2, 3 S 2,070 Assumes testing p 500)at,evew)1 , CY
1
8 AHM D r 5S7,Woum&Arx Rabrdw Camp QFLMT) EA S Ia9C,1M 23 S V20 Assumei tesfing pra, every 5,OW CY
9 sou nmmmcmacn 4njuj EA S MOO 23 S 230 Assunres regfing per eytry 5,OCK)CY
......................
SUATOTM,Sumo'Ho udTaft�dl S 16 50
'S 5=317 0410
Hr Hour EF Em&eicred RU
EA EMIL
FoundwRon Layer
Page 3315 of 4165
FINAL POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE COST ESTE%1ATE WORKSHEET
CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The information presented herein provides an itemized breakdown of costs to implement postclosure maintenance activit
for the City of Ukiah La during the 30-year p�os,telosure maintenance period,
PREPAREAR )BY: EBA ENGINE"ERING
GENERAL SITE INFORMATION
Name of Solid Waste Landfill: City of Ukiah Latidtill
Solid Waste Facilities Permit'Number.- 23-AA,-00 19
Facility Operator: City of 1.ldah, Department of Public Works
Site Owner: City of Ukiah,Departaient of Pubfic Works,
Site Location (CA coordinates,township&range:Or SE 1/4,Section 10
longitude/latitude,preferred) Towriship 15 North,Range 12 West
Assessors Parcel Number: 178-130-0101
Site Address: 3 100 Vichy Springs,Road
Ukiah,CA
FINAL POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE COSTS
1. Revegetation
a. Regrading $ 1,185
b, Erosion Control $ -
c, Reseeding $ -
2. Leachate:Management
a. Leachate System Maintenance $ 2,600
b, Leacbate/Condensate Disposal $ 690
c, Leachate Monitoring and Reporting $ 2,193
d. Leachate 5-year Constituents of Concern Testing(normalized to cost per year) $ 354
3. Environmental Monitoring
a� LFG Collection System Operation,Monitoring and Maintenance $ 29,707
b, Annual Source Testing of Flare $ 3,860,
c. AB32 Surface Emissions Monitoring and Reporting $ 11,632
d. Perimeter LFG Monitoring and Reporting $ 4,931
e. Perimeter Monitoring Probe Replacement(normalized to cost per year) S 3,717
f Perimeter Monitoring Probe Maintenance S 299
g. Groundwater Monitoring and Reporting $ 41,998
h. Groundwater 5-year Constituents of Concern Testing(normalized to cost per year) $ 3,1014
2015 PM Cost Estimatc Page I of 2 EBA Engineving
Page 3316 of 4165
I Environmental Monitoring(cominued)
L Monitoring Well R,eplacernent i(nornialized to cost per yew) 5,724
j» Monitoring Well Maintenmice 515
k. Surface Water Monitoring wid Reportin ,432
1, Surfke Water 5-year Constituents of Concern'resting(normalized to cost per yea,r), $ 3 65
4, Drainage Maintenance S 2,720
5. Security $ 1,226
6. Inspection $ 3,152
7. Other
a. 5-year Iso-Settlernent Analysis(normalized to cost per year) $ 1,667
Final Postclosure Maintenance Subtotal S 124,072
Subtotal x 30 years Postelosure Ca r 5 3,722,158,
2015 FIM Coq Ufiruft Page 2 of 2 E&I Engineering
Page 3317 of 4165
ATTACHMENT 5
PO'STCLOSURE MAINTENANCE PLAN
Page 3318 of 4165
..
FINAL
POSTCLOSURE MAINTENANCE
AUGUST 201. E
Prepar fir:
JCity of Ukiah
Department of Pub] �
00 Seminary Avenue
a Prepared by:
BAA Engineering,
825 Sonoma Avenue
Santa Rosa, CA 954 4
EBB Project . 0 -
W
180
'A Mike Delmanowski, C.E.G., CuH . 8,A
enioriroeoio ist Emm
1 E E R I
Page 3319 of 4165
TABLE OF CONTENTS
jjECTION PAGE
INTRODUCTION ..,....... ........................ ....... ............ ...mw. ..............
Responsibilities.................--...........................,.........,....,..,..........., ..........,.,........
Resources, ......-....................................................................... ........ ...........n.,n.m...
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
......... ......... ......- ............m. ...m.................................
INSPECTION IIIIILITIES AND FREQUENCIES.....,
PERSONS RESPONSIBL TCLOSUIREMAINTENANCE................ 3
POSTCLOSURE .........®....®..m®.........................®..... ..................m.................N..
CURRENT MONITORI TROL SYSTEMSa......... ..........M....................p.........3,
Descriptionof S t s .............n.....,...........,.................,...M..............-..................3
Monitoring Tasks and re p ienc ..............9,4.,.4..,........,..,... ..........,.........--..........
INSPECTION MAINTENANCE ...,.a.m..m.......... ...w.m...............M..M.................
FinalCover..............--.................................................. ....u4.,....o............,.,,µ.,..,,...7
FinalGrading ..........,.---................................a..........................,...m........,,..........m...
Drainage ......
Leas ate Control Sat rn. ...................9..,.....,...An.. ..,........ti.............,..........-9
Detection and C rre tli �e Action Monitoring System. -.,.....-.,9
GasMonitoring Systam�w.,-....,..,,..w.................H...ti., ,.,.....,..,..,.......,,............,.,..,....,.�
SiteSecurity ......................................................................................................1
OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE J PLAN FOiR GAS CONTROL �. T .,...,......... ��....1
REPORTING m..m......®... ...... ...r....... m.m..w.......... ...........°
UPDATED POSTCLOSUREMAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE .................µ..............11
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix i Figure -1
Appendix B Tables
Appendix C Ernergency Response I 'lane
Page 3320 of 4165
CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL
MENDOGINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
FII INTENANCE PLAN
2'7CCRo V1769(ch"21
) and 21830,
INTRODUCTION
The contents of this, Final Postclosure! Maintenance P'lan (FP MP) for the City of Ukiah
Landfill (Laindfilll) have b n developedto comply with the requirements and applicable
subsections set forth in 27CCR, §211180:,, §21190, §21769,, and §21830,, The following
information describes the responsibilities and resources, for carrying o�ut postclosure;
maintenance upon cl'os,uire. Specific inspection and maintenance activities are detalled in
the subsequent sections.
Responsibilities
Maintenance responsibilities following landfill final closuire will be assigi ed to the City of
U�kiah Public Works Department (Public Works Department). The Publlic Works
Department will be responsible for all inspection, maintenance and monitoring activities
related to, the LandfiH such as,:
* Final cover
* Drainage systems
* Final grading
* Landfill environmental control systems
* Emergency res rinse
Resources,
Current resouirces of the P,ubllic Works Department for inspection, maintenance and
monitoring of the Landfill are as fol1lows-
Technical Setvices Staff.,
- Public Works Director/City Engineer (Registered Civil Engineer),
- Deputy Director of Public Works, (Pe gis,tere!d Civil Engineer)
- Engineering, Technicians
Annual Maintenance Contracts:
�s control system
Annual Consultant Aqreemerent fo Environmental Mog LtoHng and Consuffinq Servicqs.�
- Detection and corrective action monitoring systems,
- Gas monitoring system
August 2015 Updated FPMP
Page 3321 of 4165
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN
27CCR, §21830(b)(1)
An Emergency Response Plan has been prepared for the Landfill lin accordance with
27CCR, §21130 and is presented in Appendix C of this document. This plan identifies
steps to be taken in the event of a, failure or breakdown of the waste management unit
(WIVIU) uinder potential contingency s,ituiations. Appropriate agency and business points of
contact are also included in this plani.
INSPECT11ON RESPONSIBILITIES AND FREQUENCIES
27CCR, §21830(b)(2)
Routine and periodic inspection will be conducted by,an Engineering Technician. At least
twice a year and immediately after any special events,such as major earthquakes, storms,
and fires, a thorough and comprehensive inspection will be conducted by one of the two
Registered Civil Engineers. Inspection frequency will be as shown in: the following table:
TABLE,I
INSPECTION RESPONSIBILITIES AND FREQUENCIES
Activities Immediately Monthly Quarterly Semi-Annually
Special Events RCE
Security EV) ETR 3) RCE
Final Cover EV) ET(2) RGE
Final Grading EV) ET(2) RCE
Drainage System EV) ET(2) RCE
eac ate Control System ETW I ET(2) RCE I
Detection and CorrectiveAc�&n__
Ionitorin System C
Gas Monitoring System C
Gas
—.—
Gas Control System
RCE: Registered Civil Engineer
ET Engineering Technician
C: Consultant
(1) During the wet season(October 1 through April 30),
(2) During the dry season (May 1 through September 30)
(3) Assumes consultant will check security monthly between quarterly Inspections as part of gas control
system monitoring.
August 2015 Updated FPMP 2
Page 3322 of 4165
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR POSTCLOI INTENANCE
27CCR, §21830(b)(2)
The L,amndfill is,wholly owned by the City o�f Ulkiah (City)and operated and maintained by the
Public Worbs, Department. Personnel resploinsible for the postclosuire maintenance of the
landfill and their emergency phone nuimbers are as folilolws'.
Emergiency
Name Position Phone! INumbers
Rick Seanor Deputy Director of Public Works (707) 463-6296
The address for the Person above is;
City of Mah
PuNic Works Department
3010 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
The listedi number is for working hours. Foir off-hour emergencies,, the City has an
established notification Procedure initiated by ca,lling (707) 463-6281.
POSTCL,OSURE LAND USE
27'CCRs §21190 and §211830(b)(3)
The end use of the Landfill is a non-irrigated open spacei. The area wKI be returned to a
natural setting with the exception that all necessary access roads, monitoring wells and
dlrainage structures wild remain,
CURRENT MONI NGAND CONTROL SYSTEMS,
27CCR, §2118,30(b)(4)
Description of'Systems
Current monitoring and control provisions at the Landfill incliude a leachate control system,
a detection andl corrective action monitoring system, a gas, monitoring system, and a gas
control system. Details of these respective systems are provided in the following
subsections,, A site plan showing the locations of the current monitoring and control
systems is presented as, Figure A-1 in Appendix A of this document.
August 2015 Updated FPMP 3
Page 3323 of 4165
Lealchate Control Systems
The ILandfiH is unlined and is, not equipped with an engineered or traditional blanket
leachate collection and removal system (LCRS). Instead, lleachate collection tthe Landflil
currently,consists of aseries of polyvinyll chloride (PVC) piping and French drain systems,
installed to colliIect leachate from seeps occurring along existing WMU slope faces.
Leachate collected by these components is then conveyed by gravity flow to a primary
buried pipeline located along the northern toe of the WMU. The buned pipeline, in turn,
drains the lleachate westward and ultimately discharges to the leachate management
facilities located at the western tole of the WMU, A description of the leachate
management facilities is, as follows:
0 Discharge from the primary buried pipeline is diverted to, a subsurface concrete
sedimentation chamber equipped with a valved sediment drain at its base. 'The
clarified leachiate within the chamber is then dischargied (by gravity flow) to an
adjacent pump station wet well (identifred herein,as the"lealchate wet well"')via a 10-
inch diameter overflow linle.
0 Clarified leachate discharged to,the leachate wet well is then pumped to a 63,5100-
gallon Illeachate aboveground storage tank (AST) for temporary storage. 'The
leachate wet well is equipped with two (2) 25-gallon per minute, (gpm)l,, low-head,
submersible pumps that are actuated by high/low water level controls. if the clarified
leachate discharge rate exceeds the leachate wet well's pumping capacity(50 gpim),
the excess leachate i1s, currently diverted to an emergency leachate pond via a 1:01-
inch diameter overflow line.
0 As noted abolve, leachate from the lleachate wet well is diverted to the leachate
AST, The leachiate AST is constructed of AWWA factory epoxy lined and co to
bolted steel, As, was the case for the Ileachate wet well, the AST is, also equipped
with a 10-inch diameter o,verflow line that diverts leachate to the emergency
leachate pond in the case of an emergency.
0, Leachate stored in the leachate AST is subsequently pumped to, a sewer line
colninection located on Mchy Springs Road via a force main/gravity drain. The force
main/gravity drain is,constructed of 4-inch diameter PVC andl is approximately 5,200
feet iin, length. The pump, lift station for the Ileachate AST is equipped with two(2)45-
gprn pumps (one duty, one standby), thereby giving the system a total pug ping
capacity of 90, gpm.
Several upgrades to the leachate control system as,describled above will be implemented
as part olf' the final cloisuire construction project. 'These upgrades will include lining the
existing leachate wet well and sedimentation chamber to provide a higher degree of
containment, In addition, the emergency leachate pond will be backfilled and an
underground) storage tank (UST), system installed to provide new overflow protection
provisions. Finally, the leachate wet well and leachate storage tank will be retrofitted with
communication teiernetry to enhance emergency capabilities.
August 20,15 Updated FPMP 4
Page 3324 of 4165
Detection and Corrective Action Monitori
The current,detection and corrective action monitoring system is designed to comply withi
the Lanldfill's, existing Monitoring and Reporting Program (M&RP,) per Waste Discharge
Requirements Order No. R1-2002-0061, No changes to the monitoring system components
are proposed as part of postclosure maintenance, Monitoring points, associated with the
current stern can be summarized as follows:
Leachate: The leachate wet relll as,described in the previous subsection is utilized
i—sihieleachate monitoring point. In addition, three leachate level monitoring wells,
(1-W-1, LW-2 and LW-3), have been installed at the Landffll as, part of a previous
study. However, these leachate wells,have not been used historically for monitoring
as they are not identified in the existing M&RR
Groundwater: The groundwater monitoring systern is, comprised of 14 detection
monitoring wells ( -1, 90-1, 90-2,, 90-5, 90-6, 90-7, 90-8, 92-2, 92-3, 94-1, 94-2,
96-1, 96-2 and 96-3), and four corrective action monitoring wells, (90-3, 90-4, 92-1
and 92-4). Seven of the aforementioned monitoring wells, (87-1�, 90-2, 90-31, 90-4,
901-5, 9101-7 and 90-18) also serve as point of compliance weUls,
Surface Water. The surface water monitoring system consists of one upstream (S-
and one d"o--wnstrearn (S-2), monitoring point located alongi the ephemeral creek
that flows aiong the northern margin olf'thie WMU.
Table B-1 in Appendix B of this document provides a sumimary of the giroundwateir
monitoring well construction characteristics, Please refer to the January 2008 Joint
Technical Document(EBA Engineering [EBA]I, 2008) foir copies of exploratory boring logs
for the respective groundwater m onitoiring wells,
Gas Monitorinq Svstem
The gas monitoring system conis,is,ts of ten gas monitoring I oints (GAS-1 through GAS-1 0),
located at various locations along the Landfill) property boundary., No changes to the
monitoring system components are proposed as part of postclosure maintenance, Each,of
the gas monitoring points are equipped with one to four individual monitoring probes
constructed of %-inch diameter PVC casing and capped with labcoick valves. The
monitoring probes range in depth from approximately 9 to 25 feet below ground surface
(BGS). The number and depth of monitoring probes, at each location are based on site
lithology (Le,, permeable zones) and the maxiirnum depth, of refuse as, measured within
1,000 feet of the monitoring point in, question.
Table B-2 in Appendix B of this,document provides a summary of the gas monitoring point
construction chiaracteiristic . Please refer to the January 2,008 Joint Technical Document
(EBA, 2008)for copies of exploratory boringi logs,for the respective gas monitoring points.
August 2015 Updated FPMP 5
Page 3325 of 4165
Gas ConLrgL S
ystgols
The Landfill is currently equipped with a partial perimeter gas collection system that was,
installed between the SOLIthwes,tern edge of the WMU and the property line in 19!917 as, a
mitigation mieas,ure against subsurface gas migration, The system consists of 1!17 vertical
extraction wells installied iin native geologic materials and completed at depths rang�ing from
35 to 133 feet BGS. The wells are connected to a 6-inch diamieter, high-dens,ity
polyethylene (HDPE), header pipe that leads to a vacuium blower located at the western
end of the U. The VaCUUM Ib'lower creates,a vacuum in the header pipe that draws the
gas from the soil through the extraction wells and subsequenfly to the blolwer. Discharge
from the system is vented directly to the atmiosphere via a,4-foot tall',4,-inch,diameter s,taick.
This, system confinues, to operate on an intermittent oasis. Please refer to Table B-3 in
Appendix B of this document for individual gas extraction welil construction characteristics,
A full-scale gas, control system for the entire W'MU is plannied for installation as part of the
final closure coinstruction project. This system as currently proposed will consist of 18
extraction wails (EW-1 through EW-18), aboveground conveyance piping, and a flare
station that will include a total ly-encloised vertical ground flare for combustion of the
collected gas. Information pertaining to this,system, i,nciludinig des,)gin criteria/rationale and
detafls, for the various system components, are p'res,e'nted rrnl the Die �gn Plan, for Landfill
Gas Collection, and Control System (Design Plan), dated October 2013 (EBA, 20113).
r'echnical Specifications and Construction, Drawings fo'r the system: are also Included as
part, of the Addendurn INo. 2 submittal.
It should be niolted that o,nc�e the full-'scale as controll system is installed and operational,
the need to operate the partial perimeter gas collection system may no longer be
necessary. Under this, scenario, the partial perimeter gas collection system will either
abandoned o'r ma,intaine'd for emergency use only,
Monitoring Tasks and Frequencies
The monitoring tasks and frequencies associated with the monitoring and control systems
are in accordance with applicable regulations and corresponding facility/ope,rating permits.
Regulations and permits goverining the respective monitoring/collection systems are
summarized as foHows:
each to MonitoringlControt Current WDR/M&RP
Groundwater Monitoring: Current WD,R/M&RP
Surface Water Monitoring.-, Current WDR/M&RP
Gas Monitoring,- 27CCR, §20921
Gas Control: Mendocino County Air Quality Managemient
District (M,CAQMD) — Permit to Operate
August 20,16 Updated'FPMP 6
Page 3326 of 4165
INSPECTION AND, MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
27CCR, §21830(b)(5)
The following subsections provide a surnimary ofthe ins, tion and rim aintenance program
that will be employed' as part of postclosure maintenance. Specific features and
components,to be targeted by the program include the final cover, final grading, drainage
system, leachate controll system, idetectiloin and corrective action monitoring system, gas
monitoring system, and security.
Final Cover
The final cover is designed to limit water infiltration, minimize leachate generation,, prevent
exposure!of waste to people and animals, limlt gas emissions, minimize odor, control fires
and provide for,a pleasant earanc�e, As such, the plostcl sure maintenance prograrni
will be instituted to ensure that the final cover continues to meet these objectives. The final
cover areas will be visually inspected on a monthly or quarterly basis as previously outlined
in Table 1 and eveluated foir:
* Breaches, in the liner system
* Odors
* Exposed refuse
Slope failure
Leachate seeps
Based on the nature of the final cover system and the absence of a vegletative soil layer,
erosional' damage does represent a potential concern at the Lanciffll, Thus, from an
Integrity perspective, a, physical breach in the final cover's liner system would be the most
problable cause prompting the need for final cover mia intern ance. In this regard, the
dletection of odors, exposed refuse and/or leachate seeps ild be indicafief a potential
breach, In the event a breach is identified, the darnaged portion! of the liner will be repaired
as soon as retie ll depending up'on contractor,availability and liner material delivery, as
welll as weather. With that being said, every effort will be made to Implement the repaiirs as
soon as practical. In the interim, provisions win ilil be emplloyed to temp,olirarily tarip and
secure the area to prevent water infiltration into the refuse, All repairs,to the liner will be to
design conditions and in accordance with the Technical Specifications for the respective
final cover components. Any undedying subgrade irnprovernents will also, be repaired in
accordance with the fou and atioln layer Technical Specifications.
Final Grading
Surface grading of a cl sedl landfill, when properly designed and constructed, can be an
econornicaI method of controlling infiltration a,nd promoting surface water run-off., The final
grading configuration, is, designed to compensate for the effects of settlement, thiereby
preventing the need for difficuilt and costly maintenance and repair. Thu ,, the postclosure
maintenance program wi'll be implemented to ensure that the landfill final grades are
maintained properly to ensure final cover integrity and effectiveness. The final cover areas
August 2015 Updated FPMP 7
Page 3327 of 4165
wilil be visually inspected on Imonthlw or quarterly basis as previously'outlined in Table I
and evaluiated for.
* Visible depressions
* Ponded water
I@ Settlement and subsidence
Based on the steep slopes that exist throughout the WMU, any setdementthat might occur
that could potenflaMy comp,romise drainage or induce ponding would likely be limited to
bench, areas. If such deficiencies are identified, provisions, will be made to repair and
restore the conditions, as soon as practical, weather Ipermitting, Repairs would entail the
placement of suitable material (Le,, fine-grained soil, base,rock with appreciable fines, etc.)
within the Hinnits of the deficient area to restore positive drainage conditions,.
As, an additional means, of monitoring settlement and sub,sidenice, the entire vita wil1l be
aerially photographed every five years during the postc1losure maintenance period and'iso-
settlement maps prepared to calculate any differential settlement. The iso-settlement
maps will be generated with a maximum contour interval of 2 feet and a scale of 1 inch
equal to 60 feet.
Drainage System
Drainage control probIerns can result in accelerated erosion of a plartucular area. In
addition,, differentW seftliement of drainage conitroll structures can limit their usefulness and
may result in fa,ilure to direct stormwater properly off of the s,ite. Therefore, the postclosure
maintenance program will be implemented to ensure that the integrity and effectiveness of
the final drainage system are maintained throughout the postclosure maintenance period.,
The final drainage system will be inspected on a monthly or quarterly basis, as pirevious,ly
outlined in Table 1 and evaluated for:
0 Evidence of erosion
6 S,taniding water
a Formation of gullies
0 Settlement, blockage of and damage to drainage channels, structures, swales
and culverts
Deficiencies, damage to and! failure of the drainage system w,illl be repaired and restored
withiin two weeks, weather permitting, to design conditions and in accordance with
construction specifications. Temporary repairs may be made until permanent repairs can,
be scheduled. Culverts and drainage basins will be cleaned of sediments before they are
no longer able to, function (properly. Drainage inlet grates will be kept free of debris.
Drainage channels will be maintained to,permit free flow andl sealed or repaired to,maintain
structural integrity of the system.
August 2015 Updated!FPMP
Page 3328 of 4165
Leachate, Control Systeirin
The leachate,control system will be Inspected on a monthly or quarterly basis as previously
OLItlinied in Table 1, lin addition, Iproventive maintenance will be carried ouit on all
components of the system at regulair intervals to ensure proper operations., This consists
of performing manufacturer's recommended maintenance on the puimp system and
monthly/quarterly(depending upon frequency shown iin Table 1)i inspection of the collection,
and storage system. This inspection includes assessing the condition of system
components for possible leakage, failure, or damage, and adjusting individual pump
controlis or liquid levels for optimum performance, Any potenti 111 or existing fa,ilure polints,
wlil, be noted and repairs implemented promptly. The leachate collection lines will: be
flushed as needed to remove any sediment buildup in the piping system,
Detection and Corrective Action IMonitoring System
The leachate wet well will be inspected on a m,onithlly or quarterly bas,is in conijunctloin with
the leacha�te control system inspection as described in the previous siubsection. The
surface water monitoring system, in turn, requires no maintenance since there is no
dedicated equipment or features, Finally, in regards to groundlwater, the monitoring wells
will be inispected regularly in, conjunction with,t'he scheduled monitoring tasks,(quarterly)-for
sigins of failure or deterioration. If daimage is discovered, the nature and extent of thr !
problern will be recorded. A decision will be made to replace or repair the monitoring well.
Possible repairs include redevelopment, chemical treatment, partial casing replacement or
repair:, resealing the annulus, Ipurnping and testing, if a monitoring well needs to be
replaced, it will be properly decommissioned. Damaged m onitoring wells will be scheduled
for repair or replacement within,one(1) month after identifying the problem. As for general
mainteniance, the following provisions willl be performed on a quarterly basis:
Cut weeds in 2-foot radius around each well, as needed.
Replace locking well caps, as needed.
Lubricate enclosure locks and hinges, as needed,
As previously noted, three leachate level monitoring wells exist that have not been used
Historically for monitoring purposes. While these monitoring wells will be preserved as part
of the finial closure construction,, it remains uncertain,whether they wKi be incorporated into
the site's future M&RP. In this, regard, if damage is discovered during informal inspection
of these monitoring we]ls, the nature and extent of the problem, wfll be recorded and a
decision will be made regarding their replacement, repair or, abandonment,.
Gas Monitoringi Systern
The gas moinitoring, system will be inspected quarterly in, conjunction with scheduled
monitoring tasks. System components will be repaired anid replaced as required to
maintain full system capabilities as intended at initial installation, Quarterly maintenance
provisions, will indlude the foll'awing:
fol Cut weeds in 2-foot radius around each point, as needed.
August 2015 Updated FPMP 9
Page 3329 of 4165
Replace probe parts, as needed.
Lubricate enclOSUre locks, and hinges,, as needed®
Site Security
Site security uipo,n closure will conform with the requirements of 27CCR, §2113 .
Perimeter fencing will be maiiniained to exclude cattle from the site. Other security
provisions will include:
Lockable date at the site entrance,
Lockable utility boxes, or gates, or, both, enclosing the environmental control
systems.
At least one sign posted in a visible location at the site access road indicating where
the Final Closure Plan and FRMP are located. The sign will also inc[ude a
telephone number for emergency notification and will remain throughout the
poistclosuire maintenance period.
OPERATIONS AND, MAINTENANCE PLAN: FOR GAS CONTROL SYSTEM:
27CCR, §21830(b)(6)
preventive maintenance folir the existing partial: perimeter gas collection system will be
carried out on all mechanical equipment at manufacturer"s recommended interv,als. This
includes cleaning, lubrication, and replacement of worn parts. The accessible portions,of
gas,collection piping will be thorouglhly inspected on a regular basis for detection of poten-
tial faliluire points and necessary repairs,will be noted and impilemenitedi, System failures,
such as pipe leaks or breaks that reduce gas collection efficiency and control effectiveness
will be addressed to operating permit coinditions. As previously noted, this system may
become obsolete upon, installation and operation of the full-scale gas control system, If
that is the case, the maintenance provisions described above will be suspended
accordingly.,
The full-scale gas, control system, including the totally-enclosed vertical ground fl'are, is
currently under design and has yet to be formally approved by the IVICAQVID, Thus, until
the system is formally approved through the issuance of an Authorityto Construct Permit, a
formal Operations and Maintenance! Plan for the system will be not be prepared. Upon its
preparation, the Operations and Maintenance Plan will be submitted to the LEA,
CalRecycle and MCAQMD under separate cover for incorporation into the FPIVIP.
August 2015 Updated FPMP 10,
Page 3330 of 4165
REPORTING
27CCR, §21830(b)(7):
With the exception for thie gas monitoring system (see below), the reporting requirements
for the leech to control systern, detection and corrective action,monitoring system, and gas
control system are permit specific. Under the current WDR,/M&RP (Order No,. RI-2002-
010161), the leaichater grounidw ter, a,nd surface monitoring nd/or control data are reported
to the R,WQCB on a quarterly basis. Hiou ever, a semi-annual reporting frequency is being
requested as part olf the new WDR to be issued for postclosure maintenance. As for gas
controll, diolcumientation as to, operatiu n of the existing partial perimeter gas collection
system is included as, part of the perimeter gas mo�nit orinig reports prepared for 27CCR. As,
for the proposed full-scale gas, control system, reporting will be dictated by the Permit to
Operate to be issued by the IVICAQW. The reporting frequency recomimiended in the
Design Plan (EBA, 2013u) is annually.
In regards to the gas, monitoring system,, the scope and frequency of reporting is dictated
by 27CCR, §20934, which requilres quarterly report submittals, wiftri a timie period
specified by the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) but no more thain within 90, days of
sampling. Each report shall inClUde methane concentrations, documentation of sampling
conditions (i,e,, barometric pressure, atmospheric temperatures, general weather
conditions, and probe pressures), instrumentation utilized, monitoring personnel, and a
brief description of methods.
UPDATED POSTCL,OSURE MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE
27CCR, §211830(b)(8)
Ain updated plostcloisure maintenance cost estimate is encloised, in Attachment 3 of this
Addend'um, In accordance with 27CCR,, §21840(a,)(2), the cost was calculated by
multiplying the annual cost for maintenance and monitoring by 30 years, (duration of
plostclos,uire maintenance perlod). As presented in, ttachment 3, the updated posticlosure
imaintenanice cost in current dollars, is $3,,722,158,
August 20 15 Updated FPMP
Page 3331 of 4165
REFERENCES
EBA Engineering, January 20�08, Joint Technical Document for City of Ukiah Landfill,
Mendocino County, California (Volumes /through I//), EBA Project,No, 02-,907, Prepared
for City of Ulkiah Department of Public Works,b�y EB,A Engineering, Santa Rosa, California.
EBA Engineering, Oct it 3, Design Plan for Landfill Gas Collection and Control
System, City of Ukiah Landfill, Mendocino County, California, EBA Job No. 02-9,0�7(Task
8)"- Prepared for the!City of Ukiah�, Department of Public Works by EBA Engineering, Santa
Rosa, California,
August 2015 Updoted FPMP 12
Page 3332 of 4165
APPENDIX
FIGURE A-1
'I
Page 3333 of 4165
Lo
zoo-to VIN80311VO
tea' 111JO t HY'Nn 30 AJO
!T �
cal SW31SAS IONINOO ONV ONIU011 W
a
tt�
r�
Qj
�6 iA 4y + I5 �r
OZ.
e wow �v ,, rmr "wy
^w04I' �u "<.�
1
fky � m
r '�JI
49
Iv
u p
a
n ^
iam0� III �b �- y d
I
V "
pj a r J a
04 �
Vs,
T k it
1
V
IF
Cl
CA
i
APPENDIX B
TABLES �
I
Page 3335 of 4165
I
I
J
Table B-I
Groundwater Monitoring Well Construction Information
City of Ukiah Landfill
well well well Well TOP Of Casing screen Filler Pack Filter Pack
NO. Casing ConWledon Screened Elevation size Interval Material'
Din. Depth Interval (Fe e t MSL)
87-1 2" 1&0' &'- MY 684.95 U20" 5ff- 16.0' #3 Monterey
90-1 210 14ff 5.5'- 14.0' 679.52 H20" 5.(Y- 14ff #3 Monterey
90-2 2fF 49.0 19.0-49.0 68&00 0.02V 18.0'-50.0' 43 Monterey
90-3 2° 35.0' 25,V-35,0' 72239 0,0201" 24,51-35.0' #3 Monterey
904 2" 34.0' 19ff-34.O' 720,910: U20" 18ff-35.0' #3 Monterey
90-5 21t 34.0' 19ff-34ff' 746�,37 U20" 18.0'-35ff #3 Monterey
90-,6 2-1 37.5' 17.5'-37.51' 758.94 �0.020" 163%39.25' #2/16 Monterey
90.7 2" 159.0' 135.0. 15%01 832.85 135.01- 160.0' #3 Monterey
90-8 211 1385 1 l0ff- D&Y 839.03 0.020" 97,0'- 140-0' #3 Monterey
92-1 214 28.0' 15ff-28A1'" 707.89 0,010" 11Y-28.0' #2/12 Monterey
92-2 2" 40.0' 20.0'-4U' 711.67 0.0101, 18ff-40.0' #2/12 Monterey
92-3, 2" 49.5' 29.51-49,51 745'.50 0.010" 28.01-49.5' #2/12 Monterey
924 2" IWO' 90,01'- 13010' 805�-81 U20" 86.0'- 130.011" #3 Monterey
94-1 2" 12.0' &Y- 12.0' 796.97 U20" 4ff- 12.0' #12/14 Monterey
94-2 T 75.01, 55,0'-75.0' 708,35, U20" 52,W-75,0' #2/12 Monterey
96-1 V 235 8,0'-23.0' 702.34 0.01011 7,0'-23.0' #2112 Lone Star
96-2 V 28.5' 13,5'-2&5' 702,09 0,0101, 11,5'-23,0' 42/12 Lone Star
96-3 4" 26.5' 1115'-26.5' 701.74 0.0101, 11 ff-23.0' 4 2/12 Lone Star
Diia. = Diameter
MSL = Mean Sea Level
L:V)i,ojecs 907Wu,gzist2Ol5r�.xie?zsion&RD Addendum Updated FNIFTable B-I.doc
Page 3336 of 4165
Table B-2
Perimeter Landfill Gas, Monitoring Point Construction Information
City of Ukiah Landfill
P Total TOP,of Casing Elevation Gravel Paek Screenedoint Probe
No. Depth (Feet Mean Sea Level) interval Mterval
GAS-I ill 686,59 ... 4.5'-9' 5'.9T
GAS-2 1261 839,65 Shallow 51- 10, 51- 10,
Intermediate 13'-601 30'-60'
Deep 65'-105', 110'- 126' 811"- 100% 110'- 125r
C,AS-3 135' 861.42 Shallow 4 - 15' 51- 15,
Intermediate 20'-66.5' 35'-65'
Deep 83.5'- 135' 85'- 1351
GAS-4 1451 919,33 Shallow 51- 11, 51-101
Intermediate 15"-7'5' 52.51-72.5'
Deep 85'- 145' 113'- 143"
GAS-5 250' 1,03124 Shallow F- lot Y-10'
Intermccliate 1 15'- 113' 73'- 113'
Intermediate 2 118'-166.5' 126'-166'
Deep 171,5' -250' MY-250'
GAS-6 144.5' 865.60 Shallow 65- 145 75-12'
Intermediate 19'-69' 20'-68.5'
Deep 74"- 144.5' 78'- 1441
——---------
GAS-7 SCY 771.52 Shallow 51- 11, 55- 10,5'
Intermediate 16-42.5' MY-42'
Deep 475-84.5' 475 8- 15'
GAS-8 IXY 920.47 Shallow 6.5'- 12.5' 7.5'-1 F
Intermediate 17'-84' 18'-84'
Deep 89.5'- 171.5'' 90'- 165'
GAS-9 30' 763.85 Shallow 4.5'-95 59,9*
Intermediate 14,5'-20' 15'- IM'
Deep 251-30' 25.5'-30'
OAS-10 59' 788.54 Shallow 4,51- 101 51-9,5'
Intennediate 145-28' 15'-27«5'
Deep 33'-59' 33'-55
L:1prqjec('t907Wqgz4v12015 Exiension JTD�A�ddendumYUpdatedFPMPU�rble B-2.dac
Page 3337 of 4165
Table B-3
Perimeter Landfill Gas Extraction Well Construction Information
City of Ukiah Landfill
Well No. Well Depth Screened Plate Elevation
interval (Feet,MSL)
0-1 80' 27'-76' 824,75
PG-lA 35' 15'-35' 829.60
PG-2 90, 3 5.5'-88' 838.09
PG-2A 40' 20'-40' 852,19
PG-3 101, 44.5'-99' 857.51
PG-3A 52' 24.5'-47' 859.52
PG 107 391-80, 868,00
PG-4A 50' 25 -50 873.24
PG-5 85' 4 4'-83' 8,74.88
PIG-5A 50' 24'-50' 879.12
PG-6 93' 43"-93' 889.07
PG-6 A 5 V 16'-50' 899.90
PG-7 133' 45'- 12' 913.36
PG-7A 45' 15'-42' 922.24
PG-8 117' 47 - 117' 927.50
PG-8A 1 501 15'-47' 931.22
PG-9 117' 47'- 114' 936.69
MSL Mean Sea Level
L:Orqjea1907Wugust2015 Extension&M)AddenAmVPd21edFPMFTah1e B-3.doc
Page 3338 of 4165
I
APPENDIX
Page 3339 of 4165
Emergency Response Plan
City of Ukiah Landfill
Mendocino County, Cal'iIfornia
August 2016
Prepared For
City of M�ah
Public Works Department
Ukiah,, California
Prepared'By:
EBA ENGINEERING
825 Sonoma Avenue
Santa Rosa, Caffornia
EBA Job, No. 02-907
Page 3340 of 4165
1.,0 INTRODUCTION
Division 2, Title 27, Article 2, Section 21130 of the California Code of Regulations
(effective date: 7/1'8i/98) requires,the development of an Emergency Response Plan
at landfillclosiure to address potential events that could impact the integrity of the
land:filll cover and related appurtenances resulting in the release of waste products,
Thie,se regulations are included here for review.
gzq!2� � '
(a) the operator shiallmaintain a written postclosure Emergency Response
Plan at the facility or at an alternate location asp approved by the EA. The
Emergency Response Plain must identify occurrences that may exceed
the designi of the site and endanger public health or the environment
The plan shall describe specific procedures that minimize these hazards
to protect public health and safety, The events that the plan, shall
address include, but are not limited to,.- vandalism, fires, explosions,
earthquakes, floods,, the collapse or failure of artificial or natural dikes,
levees or damsii- surface drainage problems; and other waste releases.
(b), The Emergency Response Plan shall contain the following.-
(1) identification of events which could require the implementation of
emergency response actioi This section shall not apply to the
gais monitoring provisions;
(2) a description of the actions to be taken, and the sequence and
implementation timetable needed to mitigate the condjtions,
(3), a statement regarding the general availability of equipment
required to mitigate, each type of emergency.
(c) 'The operator shall amend' the Emergency Response Plain under the
following conditions-
(1) whieneveir a failure or release occurs for which the plan did not
provide an adequate response,
(2) when the posticlosure land' use anidlor structures on the site,
change and these changes are not addressed in the existing
plan; or
(3) if the EA,notifies the operator in writing that the current Emergency
Response Plan is inadequate under the provision of this section.
The notifying agency shall include within the written notice the
items that plan needs to consider for it to,comply with this section,
The operator shall submit an amended Emergency Response
Plan to the EA within thirty (30) days of notification of an
inadequacy,
(d) Whenever the,operator aimends the Emergency Response Plain pursuant
to (c) (1 or 2), the operator shall submit a written copy of the amended
plain, to the EA.
Emergency Response Man 1
Page 3341 of 4165
2.0 SPECIFIC EVENTS AND, RESPONSES
The following presents a summary of specific events, requiring correction action a,t
the City of Ukiah, Landfill (Landfill) and actions to be taken to mininlize the release of
waste products,.
Earthguake
Given the firm closure configuration of the Landfill, a seismic event within the area
shouild not result in slope faHure or a release of waste products; however, such all
event could impact the integrity of the final cover, drainage conveyanice systems,, or
monitoring systems., The following is the sequence and schedule of actions to be
taken in the event of an earthquake to minimize potential hazards.
In event of an earthquake, the site will be inspected Ihy a qualified
enig:ineer within 24-hiolurs to evaluate the integrity of the landfill cover,
ancillary facilities and the potential for hazardous conditions,
Within 5 days, notify the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), the
Sheriff's Department, California Regional Water Quality Coinitrol Board
— North Coast Region (R,WQCB), and the California Department of
Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRe!cycle) of any faiiure.
Contact with areas of damaged landfifli cover or poteintiaHy Ihaza,rdo,us
areas/conditions will be limited.
Areas of concern will be stabilized pending reconstruction activities.
RelconstrUction requirements and construction scheduling will be
evMuated and prepared for submittal to the LEA, RWQCB,, and
CalRecycle within '7 days.
Areas requiring repair will be reconstructed in accordance with the
Construction Qualfty Assurance Plan to onginall desiign specifications
and contours, or the Fiin,al Closure Plan will be amended/revised and
approved by the LEA, CalRecycle, and RWQCB.
0 The LEA, RWQCB,and CalRecycle will be notified as to completion of
construction activities,,
Ei�reg, Subsurface Fire orEx�Iosi�on
The potential for fire, subsurface fire, and/or,explosion exists, due the presence of
landfill gas. In the event of a fire or expllosion, mitigative actions, sequence of
actions, and timetable to minirnize potential hazards,will indlude the f0owiing-
0 Immediately mis a determination of the severity of the fire, or
expliosioini.
Emergency Response Plan 2
Page 3342 of 4165
If the fire or explosion is deemed severe, the Sheriff's Department
and the Fire Department will be immediately notified. Also notify
CaiRecyIe, RWQCB, LEA and Mendocino County Air QuaRy
Management District, andi other authorities necessary to evaluate
extent of damage.
In the case of a surface fire or e losion, an area wilI be cordoned off
from the incident and perror neI will be retained on-site uintil the area
has been declared safe.
In the case of a subsurface fire that is not deemed severe, within 24
hours, turn off extraction w0s, in the adjoining area, then proceed with
locating, the source of the oxygen Infiltration and repair the breach
accordingly. If repair of breach wiII take longier than 48 hours,
temporarily cover area of breach with soil to minimize further oxygen
intrusion.
If a subsurface fire is deemed severe;,
X Secure the services of'a consultant experienced in subs,urface
fires
13, Identify surface fractures,, geologic features, or other cover
features, which may act as a coniduit for oxygen infiltration.
C. Determine the extent of subsurface fire through subsurface
vapoir and temperature monitoring,
D. Cordon off area affected by fire.
E,. Evaluate the feasibility of extinguishing the fire by 1)
remiediation of conduits of air infiltration, 2) excavation of
affected areas and extinguishing the fire using conventional
means(water orfoam vapor suppressant), 3)extinguishing the
fire through CO2 injection, or 4)other methods identffied by the
consultant.
F, limplement procedures, to, extinguish the fire.
Repairs shall be made in accordance with the Construction Quality
Assurance Pllain,
The,LEA, RW'QCB and CalRecycle wKI be notified as to completion of
construction activities.
Emeigency Response Ran 31
Page 3343 of 4165
Surface Drainp2q Faffures and Floods
lin the event of a wash out due to a surface drainage failure or flood, mitigative
actioins, sequence of actions, and firnetable to minimize potential hazairds will
include the following:
6 Inspection and evaluation,of any damage incurred to the landfifl cover
and determination of the potential for hazardous conditions.
61 Areas identified as potentially hazardous will be cordoined off,
0 The LEA, R'WQCB, and CalRecyclle will be notified of the failure,
0 Reconstruction requiirements and construction scheduling will be
evaluated and prepared for SUbmittal to the LEA, RWQ1CB, and
CalRecyclle within 7' days.
0 Repairs wfll be rnade in accordance with, the Construction Qualility
Assurance Pllan,
0 The LEA, RWQCB and CalReGydle will be notified as to completion of
construction activit,ies,
Vandalism
ln the e nt that vandalism occurs that impacts, the integrity of landfill closuire
facilities, mitigative actions, sequence of actions, and timetable to minimize potential
hazards include the following:
lnspection and evaluation of any,damage incurred to the landfill cover
and determination, of th r t rnti ll for hazardous conditions.
Areas identified as, potentially hia and us w ill be! cordoned off.,
The LEA, RWQCB, and Ca!lRecycle will be notified of the vandalism.
Reconstruction requirements and construction schedufing will be
evaluated and prepared for submittal to the LEA, R,WQCB,, and
Cal Recycle within 7 days,
Repairs s,hall be made in accordance with the Construction Quality
As,suirance Plan.
The LEA, RWQCB and CalRecycle will be notified as to completlon of
construction activities.
Emergency Response Plan 4
Page 3344 of 4165
3.0 AVAILABLE EQUIPMENT
Standby equipment is available from the City of Ukiah Public Works Department n
a priority basis,.
4.0 EMERGENCY CONTACTS AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS
Cit f Ukiah Pubfi rks Department.,, (707) 463-6200
Fire Department: 911
Mendocino County Sheriffs Department: 911
Am bu an Service: 911
RWQCB- (707) 576-2220
CalRe!cycle- (91�6) 341-6360
LEA: (7'017) 2,34-6625
Mendocino County Air Quiality Management District: 1(7017) 463-4354
Emergency Response Plan 5
Page 3345 of 4165
ATTACHMENT
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION
Page 3346 of 4165
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
for the
CITY OF UKIAH
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF UKIAH LANDFILL
FINAL CLOSURE CONSTRUCTION
October 2013
Revised August 2015
EBA Job No. 02-907
Prepared by:
EBA ENGINEERING
825 Sonoma Avenue
Santa Rosa, CA 954014
(707) 544-0784
owvwolw��
E, 8147)
NEERING
Page 3347 of 4165
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
c I
ry oF UKIAH LANDFILL
FINAL CLOSURE C0Ns,r,RUc'rt0N
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
DIVISIONA GENERAL RE,QUIRKMENTS
010�10 SUMMARY OF ......a. ,..,..,.. ,a,,........011 1.I1'-I
01039 PROJECTMEEUNGS ... ............. ...... ......... ......A1039-1
01060 SURVEYfNG AND FIELD ENGINEERING--......---........ 0 1060�-1
01200 A(MONYMUS'l...... ...... .......... ...............0 1200-1
0130�O SUBMUTALS...-........... ..................... ....... ............... ...... ....0 1300-t
0150�O MOBILIZATI T.... --... .... ......-.--... ........-...... .....01500-1,
01 O S'FORM WA'rERPOLLUTION PR ...-01550-1
01720 RE-CORDI)OCUMENTS ..........................................-....... .................. ...... 0 17'20-1
01800 HEALTH AND ......—.01800-1
DIVISION 2—SITE WORK
02200 REMOVAL, REPLACEMENT, AND ADUSTHINT OF EXISTING
FACILTIMS.............. ........—....... ......-.........-....... ....--02200-1
02207 02207-1,
O EXCAVATION ............................................. ........ .........02222-1
02224 ENGINEEIUM FILL--... .......-........... ........... ......- ..........,-022 4-1
11�2,225 TRENCHING AND ......----...—,-02225-1
O 40 FOUNDA'FION LAYER... ..................... ............... ....02240-1
Tutf Srwm0oc,dx rhid 00sure ConoTuakml ecliflical spedfical kmq
EVA Enpnpering Augum 2016
Page 3348 of 4165
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
DIVISION 2—SITE WORK(Continued)
02310 ACCESSROADS..,...... ...-.............. .......... 023 10-1
02722 DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROLS........ ....... .......-......—02722-t
02771 REINFORCEMENT GEOTEXTILE..... ......... 02771-1,
02773 ENGINEERED TURF ..... ...... ......... ........... ........ 02773-1
0290O SEEDING AND FERTILIZING!........ ......-.-...... ..... 00-1
0129610 TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS.....—..........--012,960-1
013300, CONCRETE.............. ...... .............. ......... ...... 0,33001-1
15100, '1,..ANDFILL GAS (LI.FG)EXTRACTION ........---- t51001-1
15200 LFG COLLECTION sysTEM COMPONENTS ......-............ .............. f 52001-1
15300 FLARE STATION.....--........--....... 153010-1
15400 FLARE S'FATION ELECTRICAL AND TELEPHONE FEED.... ........... 15400-1
15500 LEACHATE OVERFLOW COLLECTION AlD STOR AGE SYSTEM- 15500-1
E BA Engirstledng Augum 20�5
Page 3349 of 4165
DIVISION .GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Page 3350 of 4165
SECIJON 01010
SUMMARY OF WORK
PAR"I' i GENERAL
1,01 STJMMARY
A. Project description.
& Work by Contractor
C Work.by Owner.
D 'or k by Others.
1 02 PROJECTIDESCRIP'TION
A. "The ProJect is titled "City of Ukiah Landfill Final Closure Construction". 'ne City of",
I.Tkiah Landfill is located in Meridocino County, California approxii-riately t en miles east
of the City of IJkiah- The 'Work site address is 3100 Vichy Springs 'Road, Ukiah,
Califomia 95482 (Sheet 1). T'he City of"Ukiah Landfill was operated as a Class "11' solid
waste disposal facility and is, comprised of a single waste management unit that is
approximately 40 acres in sizc. The Him] Closure generaily consists of the Bello in
construction features:
Site PreDaration:
1 Refuse excavation and relocation.
Interim cover preparation.
ClosureTurf Final C J'J asc a ntn rd
0 1-fool thick foundation layer.
0 Gas reliel7venting systeni.
a LIME geomembrane liner.
0 EIngineered synthetic turf with specific grade sand infill ball'ast,
Miscellaneous items:
0 Drainage and erosion control measares.
0 Seditnentation basin improvements.
0 Access roads,.
0 General earthwork, including,various excavations and fiffis.
0 Leachate overflow collection and, storage systern, including installation of a
leachate underground storage tanks,(UST).
0 Landrill as (11(3) collection system, including condensate drainage
components.
0 Installation of flarre and blowers Provided by others.
0 Borrowarea reclamation.
0 Seeding and fertifizing.
Security fencing,
WO I A Surnmary ref MAdoc Vbud Ckpsum Cm noruovo:nTednkml Srmcifica6ona
FRA Eupuwping A iugum 7015
01010-1,
Page 3351 of 4165
1.03 WORK BY CONTRACTOR
A, Unless noted otherwise,the Contractor shall perform,or s ubcon tract to plerCorm, all Work
shown oil the,Plans in accordarice with the'Fechnical Specifications,
B, nic geosyn(blelics installation subcontractor or histaller and the Installer's foreman must
have exPerience in placing 1,000,0100 square [M of geornotnbrane material on at least
three(3l) landfill pro�jccts and at least on project installing closure turf.
C Fxcept as specifically noted, the Clontractor shall provide the Following Work:
L All labor and nhiterials.
2, All tools, construction equipment,and nrachinery.
1 Any water,beat,and utilities reqnired,
4. All other facilities and services necessary for proper execution and completion of
the Work,
D The Contractor shall pay legally required sales,consumer,and use taxes.
E be Contractor shall secure and Pay for, as necessary for proper execution and
completion of the Work, all applicable perinits and licenses.
la. Tile Contractor shall comply with the requirements of all Permits,
G, 1"he Contractor shall give alilrequired notices.
H The Contractor shall comply with all codes, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders, and
other legal requirements of public authorities which blear On performance of the work.
4
L The Contractor shall within five (5) calendar days,, subirnit written notice to the Design
Engineer ofobscrved variance of'Contract Documents frorn legal requirenients.
J. The Contractor shall give written notice to the Design Engineer of any conditions
encountered at the Work site which are unforeseen, concealed, or materially dif1brent,
1"roin those set fortIr in the Plans, o r Teichri�cal Specifications, or ordinarily encountered
and generally recognized as inherent in the Work. Such written notice shall be given ter
the Design Engineer within five(5) calendar days of the discovery of any such facts,
K. If any Subcontractor or person ernployed by the Contractor appears, to the Design
Engineer to be incompetent or to act in a disorderly or improper manner, he or she shall
be discharged irnmediately at 'the reqUeSt of the Design Engineer, and such person shall
not again be eniployed on the Work. Jbis provision doles not impose an obligation upon
the Design 1ingineer to, ensure proper or orderly behavior on the part of the Contractor's
einployces or the employees of the (,,ontractor's subcontractors, nor shall the Engineer's
fifflure to make such a request relieve the Contractor of the: obligation to require
ernpioyees and subcontractor emiplolyees to refrain from engaging in disorderly or
improper conduct,
SpedSzcflon 01010 SulftrMay or work,dac Final SpmMcg6ons
A'RA Engineering Awipst 2015
01010-2
Page 3352 of 4165
1 04 WORK BY OWNER,
A All portions of the Work specified to be perfornied by the "Owner" refers to the
'responsibilities, of the City of Ukiah, Department of Public WorU and are, not the
responsibility of tine Coritractor,
13. Tlw Owner will award a contract to the C.,ontractor Cor constmetion of the pi-Qject,
administer the contract, Tneasure quarailies for progress payinents and final payment, and
numage the contract. Performance of the Work will commence as indicated in the 13id
Documents.
L05 WORK BY OTHERS
A, All portions of the Work s-pecified to be perronned by the "Design Engineer", "'(.QA
Officer", QA Monitor", "(,,'QA Surveyor", "Soils Testing Laboratory" or
"Geosynthetics, Testing Laboratory" reller to; the respo n si blili ties of EBA U"ngineering
(EIBA or subcontractors to EBA) which bave contracted se aneitel and diTeCtly With the
P y
Owner and are'not the rcsponsibility of the Contractor,
EN D OF SECTION
L:41rojwM N'lowre I I w fSpoes'Staimi 010 W Summury of Mirk,doc Fiiut(Insum("onvn uction'rmhniad Spec,MvwOm
EPA D�gxpwevrh;y A ugum 2M
011010-3
Page 3353 of 4165
SECTION 01,039
PROJECT MEET INGS
PART I CY'Ll"NERAL
1.01 St-TIVIMARY
A, Preconstruction niecting.
B Progress meetings,.
("I' Preparatory rnectings,
1.02 PRECONSTRIXTION MEETING
A, 'rhe Design Ungineerr will scliedule then p,!recoiis:trLrctiotI Meetingatlerawarding tbeContractto
the Contractor. The obJectives of this ineeting are tO:
L Clearly define the roles, responsibility, and authority of each organization and
individual involi'ved in the prqject,
2. Review details of the Construction QualityAssuranice (CQA) pro&Tarn,
3, F"stablisl1i a foundation of cooperation to achieve quality constrtiction.
B, The following agenda,as related to CQA,,will be addressed by the Deli gn Engincer car CQA
Officer.
L Introduce and discuss role, authority, and resl,)ojisibilities of each organizafion and
individual involved in the grqjea,
I 1^'Istabfish lines of communication,
3. Re view Technical Specifications and Plans.
4, Distribute of the CQA Plan,
5, Review of CQA activities to'be perfbi-med,
6. Discuss Contn,.tctor's construction schedule and workplan.
T Discuss, Contractor's Construction Quality to procedures and
responsibilities,
8, Discuss submittal review and approval procedures.
9 Discuss non-CO'nirol-MaIM21, Wid corrective aeflon prociedures.
101, Discuss construction restrictions due to weather conditions.
M Discus,s and schedule weeldy progress inectings.
11 Discuss health and safety issues.
Meeting rninutes and itenis for resolution will Inc recorded by the Design Engineer and
distributed to all parties in attendance.
1), The following represeiitatives from each organization are required to attend the
preconstrudion nneeting.
1. Owner's Project Manager or Tepresentative.
I Contractor's Flrqject Manager arid on-site Superintendent.
3, Installer's Project Manager and on-site Superintendent.
4. Design Engineer's ProJect Manager and CQA Officer.
ABA 1"'Yogintyrrinp 01039-1 Augum 2W
Page 3354 of 4165
F. The Contractor's attendance at the preconstruction ineethig is not a payable Rein. Any costs
incurred by the Contractor fior attendance at the preconstruction meeting sho uld be inchided in
the Contract Lump Sum Price for"Mobilization".
1,03 PROGRESS MEETINGS
A, In coordination with the Engineer, the CQA Officer will schedule and, adn'linister weekly
progress meetings. 'rhe objectives or these tyieletings are to: 11) inaintain fines, of
conin,iunication;2)review procedures and results of flie QA program;and 3)maintain and
improve the established foundation ofcoolieration, to achieve quality construction. 'rho
following agenda, will be addressed by the CQA Officer,
I. Review minutes of previous progress meeting.
I Review work progress.
I Review and update construction schedule and obtain an schedule frorn,the Contractor,
listing the construction activities for the following two (2),weeks,
4, Discuss COA and (..�'Q(` related field observations, testing restilts, proWerns,
decisions, and conflicts.
5. Review arid update Subrnittal Log,
6, Review status,of pending Change Orders.
B. Meeting minutes and iterns,f6r resolution will be recorded by the CQA Officer and distributed
to all parties fil,attendance,
C The following representatives From each organization are recluired to attend the weekly
progress niectings,
1. Owner's Pr(iject Manager or representative,
2, Conti.,-actor's on-site Super"ITItendent.
3. Installer's on-site Superinte�iident(dUring geosynthetics installation).
4, Design, Ein, ineer's Project Manager and CQA Officer,
5„ Representative of rnajor subcontradors perl'orming work during the week- of the
weeMy progress meeting
D, The Contraclor's atteridance at the progress meetings is not a payable itern. Any costs
incurred by the Contractor for attendance at the progress inwetings should be included in the
Coritract Lump Stun Pfice for"'Mobilization".
1,04 PlUTARATORYMEEUNGS
A, In coordination with the Design Engineer,the CQA Officer will schedule and achiiinister,as
needed, infori-na] preparatory rneefings 1.)rior to construction of the (61lowing iteins.
1. Refuse excavation and interini cover Preparation,
2. Foundation layer placemem.
3�. GR_L,place ineillit.
4. ILDPE Geoinernbraneand EngineereclTurf installation.
6. General eanhwork, drainage arid erosion control, and access, road construction, as
needed,
7, Sedirnentation basin improvements.
8. Leacbate overflow collection, and storage system installation.
9, LIG collection systern installation,
M Borrow area reclamation and Seeding and rertilizing.
TtwfSpvCS'Svcuon 01039 Projec�Moe6np,doo, Final Ckmure Corisknulion Tmlvka�*66cadong
ERA Faghwering AwV
01039-2 wq 120 15
Page 3355 of 4165
13. 'I'he objectiie of the preparatory nwetings is, to establish a C(1111P CtC Understailding o�f the
upcoming unit ol"construction and CO A procedures and testing that will Inc fillj)lcniented
during constTuction. 'Fo ac[fleve this obJective,the following agenda will be addressed by the
CQA Offlicer.
1,, Review"Products"section of the applicable 7'echnical Specifications.
2�, Review"Execution"section of the applicable 1'echnical Specifications.
3. Discuss any construction and gmde control staking needed to complete the Work.
4 Discuss CQA testing,observation, and surveying to be perl'brined.
5 Venify that all submittals have been or will be received and approved by the CQA
Officer in accordance with the schedule.
& Discuss C"ontractor's C,QC' responsibilities,
7 Discuss Contrzictor's coordination, scheduling,and sequencing of the Work.
8, BiLscuss Contratctor's proposed eqpiprnent and manpower.
C, Meeting minutes and items for resolution will Inc recorded by the CQA OtTicer and distributed
to all parties,in attendance.
D, 'Fhe follow ng representatives-from each organization are required to attend the preparartory
rnectings.,
11 Design Enk,�incer's Prqject Manager or representative,
2, Contractor's on-site Supeiintendent,
3, On-site Supeiintendeni of any Sul)contractor, as applicable to thiC Unlit Ocf
construction.
4 CQA Officer,
5, CQA Monitor(s), as applicable, to the unit of co'
'Fhe Contractor's attendance at the preparatory meetings is not a payable item,, Any costs
inumed by tine Contractor for attendance at the preparatory meetings sbould be distributed,
I
and included ine C o thntract Unit f"rice for,the item for which the rneeting is held,
PART 2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED)
PART3 EXECUTION (NOT USED)
END O F SECTION
LApro m69071CbRive 01039 Prr%mu MC,06np: doc Finm nosive Construcion'TwhakftJ Spvc&aluans
EBA E,q',dmerIoK, 01,0391-3 Aurum 2W
Page 3356 of 4165
sEcr[ON 0 �
SURVEYING AND FIELD ENGINEERING
PART 1, GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, Surveying and field etigincering. All survey and layout for all improvements are to be
provided by the Contractor.
K Qmlityassurance,
Cl. Submittals.
11 ProJcct record documents.
E. Examination,
1" Survey reference points.
CT Survey requirernents.
U. Surveying accuracy and tolerances in setting of'survey stakes,
L Surveys for record drawings.
J. Payment,
1 M RELATED SE(',,"f IONS
A Inforination Available to Bidders: TopographiC sUrvey,
B. Section 0 1720-Record Docuinents.
PART2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED)
PART3 EXECUTION
101 DESCRIPTION
A Reference points: Reference points to be provided by Design Engineer pursuant to the
General Conditions will inClUde referenced monuments and elevation benchmarks in the
vicinity of the Proped. If displaced by Contrador, replacernent of these reference points
will be:at the expense of Contractor,
R Contractor will furnish all necessary detail sur�teys including all lines, grades, and
elevation appropriate to control construction. At a minimum, constrUction surveys, are
required for tor.) of founclation layer,
Turf SpecsSeedon OHM Surveying&Fidd F115r11r1CCrM&dDC Rnal Come
FBA Engineering 0 1060-1 Augum 20�5
Page 3357 of 4165
Use by Desippi Engineer- Design E'rigineer may at any tinie use line, an,d, grade points and
inarkers established by Contractor, Contractor's surveys, are a piart ofthe Work and amniay
be checked by Engineer at any tnne,, Contractor is responsible for any lines, gradles, or
measirrements which do not comply with specified or proper tolerances, or Much Are
otherwise defiective, and for any restiltant defects in the Work. ("I"Ontraclor will be
reqtdred to conduct re-surveys
or clieck surveys to correct errors indicated ley review of
the field not6books or othemvise detected.
3.02 QUAl.A,rY ASSURANCL-.�'
A, Eniploy a Land. Surveyor or eligible F,ngn1cer registered in the State of California and
a )cceptable to t he I esig�n Engineer to perforni sumey Nvork of this, Section,
B, St,�brnit evidence of Land Surveyor's, or eligible Engineer's Errors and Omissions
insurance coverage in the forni of an Insurance Cerfificate,
C Provide instrriments and other survey equipment that are accurate, suitable for the
surveys required in accordance with recognized professional standards, Find in proper
condition and adjustment at all times. Perforrn surveys under 1he direct stipeivision of a
licensed Land Surveyor or eligible Engineer.
R 'Record surveys in field notebooks.
103 S LJB M11-17 ALS FO,R REVIEW
A, Submit name, address, and telephone numbur of Land Surveyor or eligible Engineer
before starting survey work.
B. in request,submit documentation verifying accti,racy of s,tirvey work.
C Subrnit a certificate si&Ted by the Land Stirveyor or eligible Engineer, that the elevations,
and locations of Work are in confivniance with Contract Docunients,
3,04 RECORD DOCUMENTS
A, Maintain a compilete and accurate log of control and survey workas it pro gTesses,
1 . Subinit record docnments under provisions olSection,0 1 720
3.05 EXAMNATION
A. Verify locations of su.j,rvey control points,prioir to starting work,
& Promptly notify Desigti Engineer ofany discrepancies discovered,
3,06 SURVI�.Y KEFERENCEPOINTS
A, Contractor to to ate and protect survey control and reference points,
B, Control dauirn for stuvey is tbat,indicated on the Plans.
FUTFS[Yrcedlkainn NOW Surveying&Field Hagiftlexhig.& H W nM Clos Con ure wavion Texhnkal Spedfican ons
EWA rngfnerring 01 1,O'60-2 AuguA 20�5
Page 3358 of 4165
C, Protect survey control pohils prior to starting site work; preserve Permanent reference
points,during construction.
D. Promptly report to Design Engineer the loss or, destruction of army reference point or
relocation required because of changes in grades or other reasons,
11, Replace dislocated survey control points based on original survey control. Make no
changes without prior written notice to Owner,
3,07 SURVEY REQUIREMENTS
A Provide field engineering services, f:br, all, proposed improvements. Thilize recognized
engineering,survey practices.
& Establish a nnninninnur l of two (2) permanent bench marks on site,retbrenced to established
control points. Record locations, with horizontal and vertical data,on record docLiments,
C. Establish elevations, lines and levels. Locate and lay out by instrunientation and similar
appropriate micans:
1, Site irnprovernents including: stakes for grading, fill, slopes, and all site
itnproverrients.
1). Periodically verify layouts by sarne means,
E, C"'ontractor's layout work will include the following:
I. Slope staling for top of crosion-resisttnt layer at 510--foot grid and grade breaks.
2, All as-built surveys as specified here,in.
I Surveys to rneaSUIV C0111pleted units of Work specified here in.
17" Contractor must perfbrm all additional slope staking,off-setting and other control staking
necessary to perl'orm the Work.
3,08 SURVFIYIN(Jm ACCUTRACY AND TOLIRANCES rN slrri'mi, OF SURVEY s'rAKES
A Perform control traverse fileld surveys and computations to an accuracy of at least
I:I 0,01U1
& The tolerances applicable in setting survey stakes are as set forth below. Such tolerances
cannot supersede stricter tolerances required by the Plans or Teel-Ulical Specifications,
and cannot otherwise relieve the Contractor of responsibility for measurements in
corrip Hance therewith.
'r ypg of Mark florlizontal Position Elevation
Pernianent reference points I fit 10,000 4,O t fl;.
Generat excavation and carthwark I in 2,000 +AO 1-1
'FIm-fSp=,StvIi*n W060 Surveying&Fiel�d EngiriecHng,A)c Final(,3onov Cm nuction I'exhniofl'spwriomiang
E8.1 rnkhm"o-Mg Aug 20 15
0110160-3
Page 3359 of 4165
C Tolerances for the thicIcneas of eartlien fayers shown on Plans and for elevations show r
(.,)n lbe Plans are±0.10 foot unless otherwise specified,
3,09 SURVEYS FOR REC'ORD DRAWINGS
A Provide the Design Engineer with as-built record drawings (field surveyed) for items that
were revised during conswuction and differ froni the Plans including the f6flowing items;
I. Topograjfliy that depicts the top of the foundation layer.
2. Topography of ditches.
1 Locations of catch basins,
4. Alignment, ends, and invert elevations of Pipes and culverts,
5. ropography of strorin water retention basins and blorTow area,
& Locations of Lf Gr collection system components, including collection system
Piping, LFG extraction wells, above ground condensate drain lines, condensate
discharge points, flare slation concrete pads,and flare station security fencing.
I.,ocation of"leachate UST manway,
P. 'rhe Designi Engineer may perform independent Checks.
Provide record documents on 24" x 36"" si7& &aivings, and on a, computer disk in
AutioCAD. Use the coordinate systern shown on the drawings.
PART4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4O 1 PAYME;NT
A, P'ayment for providing all, stirveying and field engineering is included in the, Con,tract
I Jnit Price paid for the various iteins of Work for which they are required. No separate or
additiorW payment will be made 1hereforv.
END OF SECTION
Spook9rretkm 01000 Suntymig&Fidd F-14neefingAm Frar%d Clow,"corlswucx on To(AIT&a]sporifications
U10A If"ngmaAng 01101604 Aupm 20 d 5
Page 3360 of 4165
S ECTION 0 1200
ACRONYM LIST
PARTI GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
A Standards,Institutes and Societies
B. Materials and Units,
C iscellaneous
L02 STANDARDS, [NSTITUTES AND SOCIETIES
A, Whenever the following terms are 'used, the intent and meaning shall be interpreted as
17ollows:
AASH'l"0 Arnerican Association of State Highway and
TTansportation Officials
AISC Ainerican. Institute of Steel Construction
ANSI Arnerican National Standards Institute
ASTM Arnericani Society for Testing and Materials
AWWA American Water Works Association
CAC California Administrative Code
(717,R Code of lZederal Regulations
CTR S I Concrete Reirilloreing Steel Institute
:ATM Cali fornia Test Method's
M-11MA National Electrical Manufacturer's Association
NEC National Electric Code
NFP'A National Fire Protection Association
OSHA - Occupational Flealth and Safety Administration
RW(.'B - Regional Water Quality Control Board
SWANA - Solid Waste Association of Norlh Aniefica
SWRCB - State Water Resources Control Board
IT - Underwriters Lzboratories Inc,
US Lhifted States
1,0 MATERIAL.S AND UNIT S
A Whenever the fifflowing terins, are Used, the interit and meaning shall be inteilireted as
fifflows:
AC acre
AWCY' American Wire Gauge
C111 centimeter
00sure'Turr T'liree (3) cornponent final cover system composed of
structured LLDPE geomenibrane liner drainage studs
012010 Auon��m Lisf,dw HiW Omwc CwsawtWn I achniiul Spuffluflom
U0 Flwwcww q Augum 20 M 5
01200-1
Page 3361 of 4165
and spike, engirteered synthetic turl', and a specific grade
of'sand infill ballast,,
CMP - con-tigated rnetal pipe
Ern gineered,rurf SyntheticTUrf component ofTlosureTturf
I. - efl-uYlene propylene diene�,uwnomer
01; - degree:Fahrenheit
ft - root
9 grarn
LLDPE Linear Low-Density Polyethylene
HP hurse power
HydroBinder Cementious, infill used for surface dran,lage, conveyance
areas of EngineeredlTurf'.
in inch,
�t - incb
kN kilonewtorus
lb pou-nd
MAR V minimum average roll value
M - meter
MITI - millimeter
Mil - 1/10,00 of I inch
nil - milliliters,
i'nin Ininutle
No. number
oz 01111ce
% - percent
psf - pounds,per square foot
psi - pounds per square inch
psig - J)OUnds per square inch gauge
PVC - Polyvinyl Chloride
SDR - Standard Dimension Ratio
see - second
TIDE; tetrafluoroethylene
TRM turf reffiforcement mat
yd yard
1,04 MISCELLANEOUS
A. Wbenevej-, the following tenns are used, the intent and rneaning shall be iritcrpreted as,
follows:
AST Above Ground Storage Tank
@ a
t
BWmm Best Management Practice
CQ,A - Construction Quality Assurance
CQC - Construction Quality Control
CSNIP - ClonsiTuction, Storm Water Management Plwi
EBA - EBA Engineerillg
- equals
GC1., - Geosynthetic Clay Liner
GRL - Gas Relief Layer
FhW Clumv Constnjc6onrechnioO Six6fiva6ong
Aurpst 10B
011200-2
Page 3362 of 4165
LFG, Landfill (.3as
niax. max i muni
ruin. minirnuni
Mt C - ManUfilcturcr's t uality Control
BDS - Material Data Safet)(Sbect
NOI - Notice of Intent
NPDES - Nationa] Pollutant Nscl-iarge [limination System
PDf F - Portable Document Format
POC - Point of Connection
QSD Qualified SWPPP Developer
QSP Qualified SWPITTractitioner
REAP Rain Event Action Plan
S NIP Storni Water Action Plan
SMA.R.TS Storin Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking
Systen-i
SPC Storni Water Pollution Control
Sid, Standa�rd
SWITP, Storni Wr ater Pollution Prevention Plan
,rEF(.1' Totally Enclosed Fan Cooled
UST Undergi-OLInd Storagu 'rink
Uv Ultra-violet
WDfD Waste Discharge Idenfification
wilc Water Pollation Control
END OAF SECTION
'Tiff!'Spccq%Srcdon I 2N A crunym UsTAAir FfiW Guam co lisp,ruclkm I echma I
U14 hvilwerj* Aupa 2()�5
01200-3
Page 3363 of 4165
SECTION 01300
SUBMITTALS
PART 1, GENERAL
1.01. SF GIIONSLTMMARY
A Subriiitta] Control Log,
1 . SUbmittal review and approval,F)rocedures.
1 M SUBMITTAL CONTROL LOG
A. A l I submittals require(]by the'rechn i cal Speci fication s are hicl uded in in d i vidua I sections. A
Submittal Control Lc)g will be mainwiried by the CQA Officer in coordination with the
('7ontracLor during construction, The Submittal Control Log,documents; 1)submittal number.
2)referenced specification section;3)submittal description;4)subrrntter;5)date received;6)
reviewer; 7),action taken determination;and 8),returns date.
1.03, SUBMITTALS -('3WENERAL REIQ(JfREME_NTS
A The Contractor shall' submit to the F.'n&eer all submittals required by the Contract
Docu trients and as reclU ired herein,or subsequently required by modifications. All such items
required to be submitted for review shall be furnished by and at the expense of the Contractor,
and any work al'!'fected by there shall not proceed without such review. Submittals and their
contents shall be properly preparcd, identified,and transmitted as provided hiercin or as the
lingineerrnay other xise direct, lExcept for record documents,and instructional manuals for
operation and maintenance,each submittal shall be approved before the material oir eqU ipment
covered by the subinittal is delivered to the site.
B. Unless otherwise specified, three(3) sets of printed subirruttals shall be submitted,
C. (,,ontractor shall allow a total period of not less than two(2)calendar weeks for review and
approval ofstibrifittals by the 1-1,"rigineer, trot including the time necessary for delivery or
mailing, and shall cause no delay in the Work. Extension of"the Contract Time will not be
granted because of the Contractor's failure to, niake timely a�nd correctly prepared and,
presented subinittals with allowance flor the checking and review periods,
II At the time orthe submission,the Conti-actor shall give notice,in wnting, in the submittal,of
any deviation froni, the re1quirennents of the Contract Docialients, T lie deviations shall be
clearly indicated or described, The Contractor shall state in writing, all variation in costs
occasioned by the deviations, and his assurnpition of dw cost of all related changes if the
deviation is approved.
E, The Contractor shall deliver submittals by means of dated, signed,and sequence numbered
transmittals on the Engineer provided forms,identifying as to initial orrcsubmiffal status,and,
frilly describing the: submittal contents® In each transmittal, the Contractor shall state the
llro�ject Number and Name,Marne and Address of Contractor, Name and Address, of Sub-
Contractor,Manufacturer,Distributor,and specification Section(as applicable),Articles,and
rwfspns skvirw%01300 SubmRWcdoc Find Tvchn cal Spafficadms
EBA Enginming Aupst 2015
01300 - I
Page 3364 of 4165
paragraplis to which the submittal pertains; acconipanying data sheets, catalogs, and
brochures shall be identified in the saITIC rrianner. Where several types or models are
contained in the litcraftil.re,the Contractor shall delete,non-applicabile portions,or specifically
indicate which,portions are irftended zand applicable, Submittal transinittals shall fully inclex
all items,submitled.
I Incomplete Submittals, including,those not correctly transmitted, not correctly titled
and identified, or not bearing dic Cron tractor's review and approval starnp, will be
returned to the Contractor withoi.it review.
2. to related Submittals: Except where the preparation of a submittal is dependent
upon the approval of.a pirior submittal,all submittals pertalning to the Work,shall be
subiliftted simultaneously.
]:°I, Every submittal of shop drawings, samples, rnaterials lists, equiptirent data, instruction
inanuals, and other submittals upon which the proper execution of the!Work is,dependent,
shall!near the Contractor's reverie wand approval suunp certifying that the Contractor: J)Iias
reviewed, checked and approved, the subm inittal and has coordinated the coritents with the
requirernents of tine Contract Dommients,2)has determined and verified call quantities,field
Measurements,field construction criteria,materials,ecluipment,catalognuinbers,and siniflar
data,or will do i so, and 3)states the Work covered by tile submittal is reconarnic tided by the
Contractor and the C.,ontractor's guarantee will fully apply thereto, Contractor's stanip shall
be dated and signed by the Contractor in every case.
G. Submittals will be reviewed only for conformance with the design concept of the Project and
with the infon-nation given in the Contract Documents, The approval of separate item, as
sticb, will not indicate approval of the asserribly in which the item Rinctions, nor shall
approval be construed as revi.sing, in any way, the requirements fbir a fully integrated and
o,y)erfibl,es,)r,steiii,asspecifielci. be approva I of submittals shal Inot relieve the("ontractor of
rcsponsjUity for any deviation frorn the requiren'tenis of the Contract Documents,or for any
revision in resubnnrittals,urfless the Coutractorhas giveni notice,inn writing,of the deviation or,
rcv1sion at the time of submission or resubniisslon,and written approval has been given to the
specific deviation or revision,nor shall any apipr(wal relieve the oaf responsibility
Cor errors or omissions in the SUbmittals,or for the accuracy of dirnensions,and quantities,the
adequacy of connections,and the propier and acceptable fitting,execution,and completion of
glue Work.
R The Contractor shall make all required cotTections art(]shall resubinut the required numberof
corrected submittals until approved by the Engirieer, The Contractor shall direct specific
attention, in writing,to revisions other than the corrections called for on previous submittals,
and shall state, in writing, all variations in costs, and his assurnl)tion of the cost of related
changes. Identify each resubmittal with nurnber of the original SUbirnittal, followed by
consecutive letters starting with "A" for first rembinittal, "B" for second resubt,nittal, etc.
Note that in addition to any applica bile liquidated damages, the Owner reserves the right to
deduct morries from the amounts due to Contractor to cover the cost of 11EIngincer's review
tinie beyond the second submission.
L The Contractor shall check submittals returned to hirri R)r coiTection and ascertain ;if the
corrections result in extra cost to hini.above that included urider the Contract Documents,and
shall give written notice to the Engineer within,live(5)days,if in his opinion,such extra cost
results from corrections, By failing to,notify the lingin(,rer or by starting army Work covered by
a Ribmitt,-,fl, the Contractor waives all clairns for extra costs, resulting froni required
L Appjec6'007%diasure W NO Subnuftahvdoc Frmfl ChmAre CoagInw6or0'ocbnkM Sprcificalftntg
EWA RnRiiywrrinjg, Augusl 301 S
01 13001 - 2
Page 3365 of 4165
c,orrections.
J, No Work represented. y required submittals shall be purchased,or paid for,or commenced
until the a licablle subrnittal has heen approved. Work shall confionn to) the approved
SUbmittals and all other requirernents of the Cantract Documents,unless subsequently revised
by an appropriate modification, in,which case,flic Contractor shall prepare and subunit revised
sul',)niiiialsasrii,i,y laws rL-qtiiired, The Conlraclor shall not proceed with any related or which
may be affected by the Work covered under submittals until the applicable subonittals have
been approved,
K. Piccerneal subivittals will be returned unreviewed. However, ror MCchanical equipment and
the like,separate submittal's for embedded iterns,enibedded nietal work and anchors,will be
reviewed,as applicable,
1,04 OTHER SLAMITALS.
A. Provide no less than two (2)copies of other Submittals %wh as calCUlations, irkinufacturer's
certiFied reports,operational dernonsu'-ation and systeiiii validation wpottsspe6fiedelw-where
in the Contract Documents,one(1)of which will be retained by the Engineer and the rest of
which will be returned to the Contractor inarked tcn show the required corrections.
1.05 f,,(,)R,M OF APPROVAL,.
Aa Cbpies of'subn'rittals whicli are returned to the Contractor and which are subject to approval
will be marked with notations(1),( ,( or(4),arnd may also be marked with notation(6),Rio.
which case the action so indicated shall be takien by the Coritractor.
I, No Exceptions T'aken.
I Furnish as Corrected
3. Revise and Resubmit.
4 Not reviewed.
5, 1kciecte&
& Returned copies of drawings inarked with either notation (1)1,or(2)authorize Contractor to
proceed with the fabrication, or construction, or any cofflibination thereof, covered by such
returned drawings, proyid: d, that such fabrication, or construction shall be SUbject to the
conirnent%, if any, shown on such returned copies,
Returned copies of drawings marked with notation (3), (4) or (5) shall be corrected as
necessary arud a revised submittal shall be submitted in the saine nianner as beftne.
D Retunied copies of drawings naarkedwith either notation (3),(4)or(5)shall be resubirlitted
not later than seven (7)chiys after date of transmittal by Engineer,
E °he Submittal Control Log Mll be reviewed and updated in coordinat i0n With the Contractor
at the:weekly progress meetings.
END OF SECTION
lurrSpexiSwimr 01300 SubmimaN,&c Fmal Omwe
h BA Enginerriag Aupw 2011
013010 - 3
Page 3366 of 4165
SEA TIT
MOBILIZA"FRON
PAR], I GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A The Contractor shall provide all services associated with the inobiliz,,ttion and demobilization
of personnel, equipment, supplies, and incidentals to the Work site in accordance with this
Section.
K The Contractor shall supply and implement al,l construction fficifities and tem),ormy controls
in accordance with this Section and as shown on the Plans.
IM REFERENCES
A, ("alifornia Department of Transportation, 20 10,
B, Ytwidard Plans Book. California Department of'I"ranspoitation, 20M
1,03 S(JBmrFTAI.,S
A. ant least 14 calendar days prior to Tnobilizing to the Work site,the Contractor shall subrnit a
Dust Control Man for apiproval by the Design Engineer pHor to,commencement of I the Work.
The plan shall comply with thic requirements of the Mendocino County Air Quality
Management DiArict and shall identiry procedures,to,minimize dust related impacts with the
intent of eliminating dust nuisance complaints from adjacent areas or regulatory agencies.
PART2 PRODUCTS (NOTUSED)
PARI'3 EXECUTION
101 MOBII.,,IZATK)N
A. "I'lie CODtraetor shall pertbrm Preparatory work arid openitions, 61,Ckiding,but not hinnedto,
those necessary for the movement of personnel, equipiricat, supplies, and uncidentals to the
WioA� snits,„ fbr the est,-,iblishincril of all offices, buildings., and other fficilities necessary for
execution of I be Work; an,d fior a]l other work, and operations wl-,aicb must be performed or
costs, incurred prior to beginning the Work in aaccordwice with Section I I of the Standard
Specifications.
B, The Contractor shall give written notice to the Design Engineer at, least 48 hours Pfior to
transporting oversize and/or overload equiprnent to the Work site.
3,02 DEMOBIIJZ/VFlON'
A, 'rh[e Contractor shall perfibmi arty work and,operations, including, but not Ifinited to, tht,),,,,e
necessary for the rernoval of personnel,eqtdpinent,supplies,ternporary utilities(undierground
01500 Molxhu(Jaa,doc FhW CIMUNC Sp)MffiCHGOW
BWA rd�ginerring Auglist 2015
01,500-1
Page 3367 of 4165
and above ground), construction fhcilities, excess, surphis, waste materials and iricideiltals,
from the Work site prior to application for final paynient.
B. The Contractor shall cleaun and repair dannage caused by installation or use ofconstn,lction
fiacilifies,or ternporary controls,
3.03 CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES
A General
L Unless noted otherwise within these Technical Specifications or allowed thl-OUgh
specific agreement with the Des gn Engineer, the Contractor shall provide and pay
,for all labor,materials, tools,equipment,maeNnery,necessary permits,Nvaler,heat,
Litilities, and any other facilities or services necessary to conip ete the Woi rk in
accordance with theseTechnical Specifications and as shown on the Plans.
I Provision of alll construction facilities shall be coordinated with the Design Engineer.
B, Access Roads
I 'F fie Contractor may construct and maintain any hau I road necessary to execute I lie
Work or use existing haul and access roads at the Work site.
2. T'he Contractor shall repair any existing roads damaged by the Contractor during
constriwfion, as directed by the Design Engineer.
Cl. Staging, Area
I The Contractor shall utilize a s0ging area for equipment and rruiterials storage,and
personnel parking. The location of the staging area, shall be determined in
coordination with the Design Engineer,
D, Ternporary Buildings
1. "I"he Contractor may provide and maintain an weather-tight temporary office trailer,for
the use or the C",ontractor and any, Subcorttractors, eqnipped as desired by the
Contractor,
I The Contractor shall provide a weather-tight temporary office trailer, for the use of
the Owner and CQ�A representatives, equipped with a table, desk, and chairs. The
Contractor shall locate the trailer at a location approved by the Design Engineer,
3, The Contractor's office trader shall be located adjacent to the CQA office trailer as
deten-nined by the Design Erigincer.
4, The Contractor shall install a security fence around their office trailer and the CQA
Office, as directed by the Design Engineer. The fences shall be chain link, as
niini'muin 6 feet in height with,three strands of bathed wire and a ininfinum 12-foot-
wide pate.
E Ter nporat3r Utilities
I Electricity
a. I'lie Contractor shall provide and pay,to connect to electrical power required
for construction facilities and executioni of"the Work including, but not
firnited to, a temporary electric feeder Erorn: electrical, service, adequate
power outlets with branch wiring and distribution boxes located as required,
flexible power cords as required, and main service disconnect and
overeurrent protection at convenient location.
MOO WIbII'Vzftflot:,&x Himl CUnute Con.5krvc6wwTcrb6v0 S'pr6ficmiori
Aq,,psl
01500-2
Page 3368 of 4165
bi. The C'ontractor shall proivide and pi,ay]"Or the electrical service and all power
required for the teniporary office trailer for use by the Owner and CQA
representatives for flue duration of the project.
2, TOepilione and F'acsimfle
a. The Contractor shall provide,maintain,and pay f"or separate telephone and,
facsimile service for the Contractor's office trailer and the COA Oifficer's
trail et-,as needed.
3 Water
a. Construction Water
1. The Contraictor shall be responsibile for developing a water suppily
for construction,water and dust control and delivering and applying
water as needed. FUll compensation for developing a water supply
and delivering and applying water shall be consideredias included in
the Contract Unit Pncie paid for the various coritract items requiring
wa t e r,
b Drinking Water
I Drinking water shall be provided by the Contractor from a potable
source so piped or transported as to keep it safe, fresh,and served
ftorrl single Service containers or satisfactory typies of sanitary
drfi't-lcing stands or fountains. Drinking water services and i'iticilitiesi
shall bie furnished in strict accordance with existing governing
health regulations.
4. Sanitary Facilities
a. "I'lie Contractor shall ffiniish,install,and maintainmiple sanitary facilities as
required for the Contractor's and Design Engineer's employees and for the
employees of any Subcontractors,
b, A sufficient number of enclosed teen porzu , toilets shall lac conveniently
placed as required by the sanitary codes of state and local govemTrIent,
3.04 'TEMPORARY C0N"rR0LS,
A, General
I,. The Contractor shA comply with alll codes,ordinances,rules,regiflations,orders,or
other legal requirements of public authorities, which bear on performancle of the
Work,
I The: Contractor shall irIStrUCt all personnel and maintain strict control of afl Work
actiivities to, pirotect and maintain the integrity of all existing environruental
monitoring and control systems, for the landfill.
R Satiety
I The Contractor shall subinrit as Healib arid Saf`etry Plan with an, Emergency Contact
I.-Ast to the Design Englineer prior to corrunencernent of the Work and in accordance
with Section 0 18001(Health and Sarety) ofthese Technical Spiecifications,
Z The entire Work site is subject to shUldown,at the dis,cretion oftbe Design Engineer,
due to heavy rain, high
winds,or other inclement weather,
I The Contractor's equipment and vehicles shall not travel at speeds of inore than 20
miles per hour within 200 fbet of army active work areas,equipment, or perso-nnel,
C Equipment Fueling and Maintenance
'I'lie Contractor shall perforin equipment fbelingand maintenance within as contained
T 'projeoMOT(Immm:TurfSpecs'Siimim M,500 Mobifiii NMI CAN=Consmwfinn I a lmicad Spe6ficarbins
FRA E'nginvaing, A upw 20 15
O5tO Page 3369 of 4165
area, to be constructed by the Contractor in a location approved by the Design
Ifrigineer to prevent any release of fuel or other contaminants. The Contractor shall.
immediately rernediate any leaks,spills,or other release of fijel or other cont an-iicants
as directed by the Desigm.Engineer.
11 Drainage Control
I. The Cbntractlor shall provide ample means, and devices with which to promptly
remove and dispose of all water frown any source entering the Work areas and
maintain these at all times whirring execution of die Workand until the final Workhas
been approved by the Design Engineer.
E l."Tosioni and Sediment Control
I Temporary erosion and sediment control measures shall be irnplen,,ientedl by Ihe
Contractor for all Work areas in accordance with the SWPPP prepared as part col"
Section 011550,(Storm Water Pollution Prevention)of these'rechnical Specifications,
F Dust Control
I IJust control measures shall be impleniented by the Conti-actor for all Work areas in
accordance with the Contractor's approved Dust Control Plan submitted under
Section 14-9.02A ofthe Standard Specifications.
PART 4 MEASUREMENTAND PAYMENT
2,01 MOBtLIZA'HON
A, Payment for mobilization, deniobilization, construction fialcilities, and temporary controls
including ternporary erosion control described fil these'fecl-rn ieal Specifications is considered
as included in the Contract Lurnp Stan 111rice paid for "Mobilization" and includes all
con pensation for providing al]nlaterWs, lal)or,equipment,tools,and incidentals reqUired to
complete the Work,specified herein and as,directed, by Ihe Design Engineer. No additional.
compensation will be allowed therefore,
B, payment tier"Mobilization"shall be as follows:
I When the niondfly partial payment estirnatre exceeds 5a1Xo the contract aixiount, not
including any aniount paid for Mobilization, 5%of the contract arnoiint or 500/o of
the arnount bid for Mobilization shall be included in the pi'ogress payment,
whichever is, lesser.
2, When the nionthly partial payment estimate exceeds 10%the contract arnount,not
including any aMoUllt paid for Mobilization,7.5%of the contract amount or 75%of
the arrionnt bid for MoNlization shall be included in the progress, payment,
whichever is lesser.
3 When the monthly partial payment estiniate exceeds 201%,the contract amount, not
including anyarnount paid for Mobilization,9.5%ofthe contract amount or 951%of
the amount bid Bor Mobilization shall be ineluded in the progress payrneryt,
whichever is lesser.
4. When the inontIfly Partial Paynient estimate exceeds 5�01%the contract anlou,nt, not
TurfSpenSeelmn MOO MoNlization,dric HBO S'PCdfiC4tI,=S
1"'BA'I"Vigmeering Axipum 2015
0 1 500-4
Page 3370 of 4165
includirig,an y amount paid for Mobilization, 10%Of the COntradal'110MIt Or 100%Of
the amourit bid for Mobilization shall be included in the progress piyment,
whichever is lesser.
5. Afler the Engineer detennins that the work is substantially cornplole, any amount
bid for Mobilization exceeding 10%of the contract amount will paid in the filial
payrnent.
END OF SECTION
Tud Spe&ISeci ion W 500 Mobkemim doc NnM Cleigure Qmmwfioa Fechnical Spedfludkom
Nugua2015
01500-5
Page 3371 of 4165
SECTION Ol1550
STORM WA'FER POLLUTION PREVENTION
PART' 1. GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
A. Preparation, implementation, axid monitoring of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(S WPPP) for the purpose of preventing the discharge ol"pollutants froin the Work site into
receiving waters, This includes,but is not limited to the prevention of'sedirlientation from the
Work site into storm drains and natural drairiagesand the prevention of pollution discharges,
derived ttoni equipment fueling and niahitenance/repairs, improper dumphig, spifls, or
leakage from storage tanks or transfbr areas,
B. Prohibit, illicit discharge (non-rainwater') into the storni drain system or natural drainages,
C Construct any and all necessary systerns to eliminate contaminants frorn entering the storms
drain system or natural drainages.
D. Clean up,and control of Work site materials,spoils, and debris.
* Removal of contanihiants prodUced by the Prl
* Implement emersion and sediment confroll measures to prevent discharge of'sedinient, to the
stone drain system and natural drainages (see Section 02960 [Temporary Erosion and
Sedirrient Controls] ofthese Tech nical Specifications).
G, The Work, shall include the provision of all labor, materials, equiprnent, and applaratus not,
splecilically nientioned herein or noted on the Plans,but which are,nicidentaiand necessai'lyto
complete the Work specified.
1 M R.F"FERENCES
A, Cal!,'Ibridas General Permitfi?r Slorinl Wirier-DiischiaiTp!es,,4,a,,voci�al'ed w4th Construction avd
Land Disturharice Aetivities (General Pexnzit) Order No. .2009-0009.-DWQ as wnended fry
Order M)� 2010-0014-DOIC? (NI'DES" N6. CASOOOOO.Z). State Water Resol Control
Bolard, 201(p
13. Calqbrnia Storm Water Best Altim agementilracticel Handbooks:
L Municipal
2, 1 rid ustrial/Corri.mercial
3. Construction Activity
1 0 l lli.t, lll..a?t,1OlY RI.IQUIR laic EMS
A. Contractor shaIl comply with the State Water Resources Clontriol Board(SWR.CB),Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB'), county, city, mu�rdcipM, and other local agency
requirements regarding storin water dischiarges,and ruariagernent, The State doles not obtain
TIlATfSpI,Q%'ISCCtMfl 0Ul50Sw'pp,&)c Nnal ClimAr,CoftAruction TtchRdcO Spucified1jans
OM Enginaering, 2015
015501- 1
Page 3372 of 4165
local permits,
1,04 STORM WATER PC; i,,i.,urio'N PREVENTION PLAN(SYIP,,PP)
A A SWPP,P shall be prepared for the Project by tile Contractor. SWPPP preparation includes
obt,aining SWP,PP acceptance,amending the WPPP,preparing a Construction Storm Water
Management Plan (CSMP) and a Storm Water Action Plan (SAP), and monitoring and
inspecting Water Pollution Control (WPQ practices at the Work site and shall include:
I Storm water sampling and analysis including reporting of storm water quality per
qualifying rain event. If specified for the risk level, the work includes preparation,
collection,analysis,and reporting of storm water samples for turbidity,pH,and other
constituents,
2. Preparation of the Storm Water Annual,Report including certifications,,monitoring
and inspection results, and obtaining Storm Water Annual Report acceptance.
1 If specified for the prqject risk level, preparation of a Rain Event Action Plan
(REAP) including preparing and submitting REAP Forms and monitoring weather
forecasts,
13. The Contractor shall amend the WPPP,as necessary,during construction showing the best
management practices(BMPs)for the prevention and control of pollutants and erosion of the
Work site. The SWPPP sliall be in accordance with all of the requirements of the General
Construction Storm Water Permit (Permit). Contractor is responsible to implement the
SWPPP and make revisions, to the SWPPP as necessary until completion of the Prqject.
Information on the Permit can be found on the internet at litl ://%vw",,sw,rcl),caga'roV/StA ri,iiiNvt�r/
con struct ion.him. I I he Contractor shall prepare the Notice of Intent(NOI)to the SWRCB and
provide to the Owner for filing at the SWRCB,
1 05 RISK LE VEL
A. The Risk Level Im this Project is Level D.
1 O6 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. All work performed under this Contract and all Contractors and their associates andlor
employees are 'required to comply with all applicable storm water regulations and to
implement BMPs at all times.
13. A SWPPP shall be provided by the Contractor for the proposed control ofcontarninants
entering the storm water system and natural drainages. The SWPPP must be approved by the
Design Engineer prior to commencement of work.
C. All employees and subcontractors shall be trained on the storm water pollution Prevention
requirements contained in these'Technical Specifications.
1), A supply of spill clean-tip materials Such as rags or absorbents shall be kept readily accessible
on-site at all times.
01350 SWNI.doc Fiml Oo rc Canstruction Tachnicat Specifications
FBA ExHinerrinp Augum 20 15
01550 - 2
Page 3373 of 4165
1,07 S(.JBmrrrALS
X The Contractor shall submit an sfte-s ecific S W11)p pre ared by a Quali fied SW1111 'A
P P I
Devel!A)per (QSI 1, The Contracum, shall amend the SW111111 Mien required, prepare as
CSMP',, and perform water polhition con�rof Work under the oversight of as Qttalified
SWPPP Flractl6oner(QSP), as specified in the (Jencral Permfl. All reports and data
that rnast be SUbmitted to thc SWRCB will be Ufloaded by the Cotitrt,,tctor's()SP tan tile
Storm Water Multiple Applica6Dn and Report Tracking System (SMAR-rs) website
l'br final subiniiaal, t`inal submittal and certification will be perfimned by the
B. Withiti 14calicn(�iard,,tysol:'Autliiorizatioritollrocee(ll,trine Cont�rici,orspiallstibrl!-uittilree(3)
printed copies of"the S"TRI" and Site Map and one (1) electronic copy in a Portable
Docuinent Fornmt (FIDF) to the Desig�n Engineer For review. T'he("llontractor shall allow
five f5) working days P)r the 1)esagn F!,,ngineer's re%riew. If revisions are required, the
DesignE"n,gincerwrill providecomments,and lbeCMAraCtOTshall reviwandresubinift1he
SWITT" and Site Map, in printed and elcOVnic form within five (5) working days of'
reccipt of the Design Engineer's comments, Within three(3), working days of'receipt of
the Design EAigineer's approved SWPPP', the Contractor shall submit three (13,) paper
copies of approved SWlTP to the Design Engineer and 1,,)repare the:Noland upload
all pertinent docurnientation to SMARTS R.)r finat subrnitW and certification by the
Design. 'I'he SWRCBwjH review the Noland the issue a hscharge Identificatiorl
(WDfD)number 1'cwr the RrqJect.
C The Contractor shall riot perl"01-M work that moan), cause water pollution untfl the state
has issued a NVDID munbscr for the ProjecL, The Design Engineer's review and apj.-.provap
of Ole SWI)IT Shall not Waive any Con'tract requirements and shall not relieve the
Contractor fronli complying Willi, Federal, State and local laws, regulations, and
requirements.
f1 'Fhe CioMractor shall keep as copy of the approved SWPP11 at the Wolrk site.Tbe S,WPPP'
sha,ill be madc avail able when requested by a representadve ofthe RWQC,,B, SWRCT3,
United States, F'i,wiroruncntal Protection Agency, or the local storm water maliagernent
agency. Requests fr(am the public shall be directed to the Owner,
E, The Conu-actor simll subnait an ClonstrUction Management Phin that includes proposed
provisions to prevcnt pollution and debris from reaching the water channel and shall include
wet weather protection, erosion measures, methods, and location for cleaning tools and.
equiprnent dust coijitrol, biter preventiori,debris collection and removal, location ol'Portable
toflets, storin water numagement controls, and hazardous material (inchiding Fuel)
rnanagement at the Work site.
J-", 'Flie Contractor shall submit Stonn Water Trairning Records including training dates and
subjects for crnployees and subcontractors including:
Within five (5)working&ys of'SWP'PP accepuince for existing eniployees,
1 Within five (5),woTking days following trairfirig of al I new employees 1C.7ontractor
and subcontractors).
1 At geaist five (5) Avorking days prior- to subcontractors staftdng work for
subcontractor's amploym,
"imi Omum c,onvmc4on 1'ecwAkal Spat otficn,'llu
4'84 ENAMeering Au$,,,,uYm 2015
01550 - 3
Page 3374 of 4165
The WPPP illClUding the CSMP and SAP, SWIIPP amendmems, training records, RE, Ps,
sauipling and anall.y.9is, results, exceedance reports, visual monitoring; reports, inspectioll
reports,BMI)status reports,annual reports, and reporting on,Ston-n Water Pollution,Control
(SPQ practices, shall be prepared and submitted to the Design Eiiiginftr Lmder the direction
ofa (-,?S[).
1,08 P E RM['I'
A Within three (3) working days, of-receipt of the Desip.pm Engineers approved SWPIT, the
Ciointractor shaH submit three (31) paper copies, ofthe approved SWPPF1 to the Owner and
pirepare the NOI and upload aH pertinent documentation to SMARTS for final submittal and
certificationby tire~Owner. 'r ieSWRC'13willi eview that NOlatidtliciSSL�leaW DID iiiii,iliber
for the Pro.jiect.
B, "]:'hew Owner shall pay, required fbies, and pay annual renewal fees until comPletion of' the
'Pro9ect.
1.09 Ll A BilL,ITIES AND PENAIATFIS
A- 1~ eview of the SWITI),amended and finalized by the Contractor froin an initiated phrn,shall
not relieve tht Contractor from liabilities arising from non-cornpliance of' stoii m water
pollution regulations,
R Contractor will be held resI,-)onsible for paying penalties flor vilMations of pietmit conditions. Ir)
the event of any fitnes against Ifie City, due to non-compliarice by the Contractor, the City
shall recover all costs of tiger;fines frorn the C'ontractor.
1,1,0 IMPLEMIEN"I'A'rION
A. The("ontractor shall riot perl-brin work that array cause watcrjpollu Lion u nt il the SWR(,,,B has
issued as WDID nurnber for the ProJect. 'rhe City's i-eviewai,i('[,,,,u,'.)pr(.)vaI of the SWITP shall
not waive any,contract requirementsaml shall not relieve the Contractorfirom,cornplying with
Federal, State, and local laws, regulafions, arid requircments.
R tractor shall cornply with the requiren"ients of the Permit and the SWVPR Contractor shall
update the SWIT11 and have the SiWPPP niap available at the Work site at all times,
C Contractor sball firiplen"ient BMI's for control of"arlll pollutants including sediment, ffiel and
other fictrolevmr and non petrolmim hydrocarbon products, concrete waste, fertilizers, soil
airiendnwnts and other construction related pollutants.
D. Contraelor shall irnplernent an eff�ctivc cornbination of erosion and sedimient, controls biy
stabilizing all disturbed soil, paying particular attention to,exposed slopes. 13ack up crosion
prevention i-neasures with sediment control nwasures. Ensure all control inc.asures are
adeqUatc, iri pkee, and in operable condition.
Contractor shall conduct site inspections before,during extended storm events,and aftereach
storni event to idienfifY areas that may contribute to erosion and sedinient problems or ariy
other PORLItant disielmi-19Cs. If additional control measures are needed, implement thern
rwfSpox,*�,Senjrjn OUSID SM111,doo HW Clown Cont ruction&echmW SpecAmmiris
EWA bqiweriny A tigwo 20�5
0151501 -
Page 3375 of 4165
immediately. Docuiment all inspection flndings and actions tilwn in detailed, site specific
inspection reports. These reporrs must be maintained on site for review.
F. Contractor shall nutintain and repair all, erosion prevention arid sochrrient contr(A ineasurcs
throtighout the season and dun it Corlipletion of ille project. Replacement supplies sliall be kep�t
on the Work site,
G, Contractor shail I train all site personnel in crosion prewend on and set]iment control techn iq us,
and the respon s,ibi I i ties iinder the Permit.
If Contractor shafl conduct weekly training rnee tin gs and training forpersonniel collecting water
s,amples.
L Contractor shall inirnechately report to,the RWQ(,,B office any inStallCie,OfSediIIICDt orother
pollutant discharges from the Wo,rk site.
I Contractor shall obtain services and pay 6or any sanilfling,testirtg,and analysis of'slorm water
as required for colinpliance with the(Jeneral Pen-rift and the SWPIIFI,
K. Contractor shall make the SWP,P,P available to the R,WQC'B staff and correct any
requirenaents imposed as as result of their inspections,
I I ll CERTIFICATION AND RETORTS
A. Prior to JUly I of each year during the construction period, submit two, (2) copies of the
Animal Report that the co'nistruction activities,are iri compliance with the General Permit and
the SWI)IIII to the Design Engineer for re,yrje'W
B. At Completion dal the Project,subrilit records of all inspections,co'snpliance certifications and
noncorriphance reports to the SWRC,13.
C. Upoil Corripletion of the Project,the Contnactor shall file a Notice of"Tennination with the
SWR,(',B.
PART 2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED),
PART 3 EXECTTION
10 if I)OLIS MATER.IAL)WASTE MANAGEMENT/MATEIZIALS MANAGEMENT
A. Designated areas of the Work site shall be proposed by the C"011tTaCtor for approval by the
Desi,gn ,Flngineer SUitable for material delivery, storage,arid waste collection d,s fir from catch
basins, drainage infers, and, natural drainages as possible,
& All hazardous rnaterials stich as fuels and solvents and all hazardous,waste suclit as,waste oil
and antifreeze shall be labeled and stored in accordance wiith State and Federal regulations,
�pe&Secfion 01550 S%TT'I dou
FR4 Enginar"in; Atigost 2015
01550 - 5
Page 3376 of 4165
C. All hazardous materials and all hazardous,Nvaste shall be stored in accordance with secondary
containi"nientreguktions,and it is recounmended that these materia Is and waste be covered as
needed to avoid potential nianageTrient ofcollected rainwater as as hazardous waste.
D, Regular hazardous waste collection shall be arranged for to,coniply with tirrw limits on the
storage of hazardous waste.
I Granular materials sball The stored a ininknuni 10 feet ftorn the closest catch basirs, and
drainage inlet associated, with the stop drain systern. "I"he Contractor shaH not allow these
gnanular niaierials to enter the stomri drain systeni or natural drainages.
Warning signs shaH be posted in areas containing or treated with chernicals,
G An accw-ate up-to-date inventory, including Material Safety Data Sheets (MSf: s), of
hazard'ous waste stored on site shall be kept and available to, assist ernergency respouse
personnel in the eveint ofa bazardous rnalerials iricident,
R Maintenance and Neling of vehicles, and equipment sball be performed irr as designated,
ben-ned area,or over a drip pan that witl not aHomvv run-off ol'spills, Vehiclesandequipment
shall lee regWarlychecked and have leaks repairedpronipfly. Seec),iitl,,irycontainnieiitsi'vallbe
u sed to catch leaks or spills any time that vehicle or equipment fluids are dispensed,chwq,!,ed,
or poured,
3.02 DUST CONTROL
A. The Contractor's Dust Control Plan required under Section 01500 (Mobilization) of these
Technical Specifications shall,comply with the requirements of the Mendocino Coanty Air
Quality Management Mstrict.
B. A rninifniun of two(2) water trucks with operators shall be in operation at all times during
cxeavadon to provide dust controi at all excavation,haul road,stockpile and staging areas. If
necessary, additional water trucks or other equiptnent with operators shall be provided arld
used by the Contractor to mainwin ffiese areas in as misted condition at all tinies, during
excavation.
Access and haul roads shall be watered on a continuous,basis to control dUSL.
1)1. The Contractor will be restricted froni arenas where dust cannot be controlled and,excessive
equipmem speeds, which cause dust, rnay be regulated by the Owner,
E 'rh,e Design Engineer will require all excavation acfiviiies to cease if the Contractor's dust
control efforts do not follow the approved SWPPP,or fail to rneet any of the requirements of
this Part, until such tit-ne that d'ie Contractor can denionstrate a rcturn to compliairce.
F Other methods of'dust control and suppression may be used, however; Design Engineer
approval most be of prior to such use.
103 ON(",TETE WASTE MANMIJEMEN]"
A (1,oncrete trucks shall not be washed Out into storin drains or natural drainages.
SPwNSO,,,,6m Cs S50 MV11hWQ Crv"nar Closuyt Specifica6mn
AWA,Eng"inearmg
01550 - 6
Page 3377 of 4165
B. Concrete trucks and equipment shall be washed out off-site or in a designated area on-sitC
where, the water will flow onto dirt or into to temporary pit or bernied area, The water she
percolate into the soil acid the hardened cone rete p I aced i n a waste container for disposal. Tfa
suitable soil or bernted, area is not available on-site, the wash water shall be collected and
removed off site and disposed of properly,
1104 EROSION AND SEDIM ANT CONTROL
A, Stabilize all denuded areas and install and maintain all teiriporary erosion and sedinlent,
control continuously between. October 15'1' and April 15"' of each year, until per.ruanent
erosion controls have been installed (see Section 029601 ['Fernpiorary Erosion and Sediment
Controls] oftheseTechnical Specifica:dons).
K Divett on-site runoff around exposed areas, and divert off-site runoffaround tile Work site
(e.g,., swales and(likes).
Incorporate provisions,-for prevent.fing erosion and trapping sediment on-site,such as sediment
basins or traps,earthen dikes,or berms, silt fimces, check darns,Monti drain inlet proteelion,
sod blankets or inats, covers for soil] stock piles, and/or other nicasures.
3.05 CON'STRUC711ON SITE' BMPs
A, Store,handle,and dispose of construction materials and waste properly,so,as to prevent their
contact with storm water.
& Control and prevent the discharge of all potential pollutants, including concrete, petrole urn
products,chemicals,Nvashwater or sedinients,and non-stomas water discharges,to storni drains
and natural drainages.
CI' Use sedinient controN or flItt'alion, to remove sediment wli,en deivatering site and obtain all
necessary pertnits.
U Avoid cleaning Fuelling, oir maintainin g vehicles on-site, except in a designated area where
z,l
wash water is contained and, treated,
E Dehneate with field markers clearing finifts, easernent, setbacks, sensitive or critical areas,
buffer zones,trees, and drainage courses.
F. Protect adjacent properties and undisturbed areas Frorn construction inipacts,using vegetative
buffer strips, sediment barriers or tilters, dikes, mulching,or other measures as appropriate.
G. Perf6rm clearing and earth moving activities only during dry weather.
1-1, Linift and titne applications of fertilizers,to prevent polluted runolf,
L Limit construction access routes and stabilize designilated access points.
J. Avoid tracking dirt or other inatetials off-site,clean off-site paved areas using dry sweeping
methods.
Tuff Sjams�Sevjnn Or 550,SWPP.&)u Find Gomm CmIstrig"'liarl I echyk-A spedficwrons
E"BA Enoffeering AugwM 2011:
0115 50 -- 7
Page 3378 of 4165
K. TIw ConlTactor shall train and pmvide instruction to all employees and subcontractors
regarding the construction MPs.
106 SITE CIJANUP
A 'I'lie cleaning of eqUiPMCnt Or rnaterials sludl rj,ot be performed on-site using soaps,solvents,
clegreasers, stearn cleaning, or equivalent methods,
B. All cleant,rp nIILIA be performcd in as des ign ated area fl-nat will, not allow the cleaning rinse to
flow off-site or i ntaw on-sile storna drains or natural drainap es
3.07 PERFOIZMANCJ REOLURF"WiNTS
X 'The SWITI? is a trAinitnum requirement, Revisions and modifications to the SWPIIII are
acceptable oral y if they rnaintain levels of' proLection equal to or greater Ilia originally
specified.
B, Read and be thoroughly fknifiar with all of the requirements of ffie SWITP,
C,. Inspect and mondtor all Nifork and storag,e areas For compliance with lhe SWPP13 prior to any
anticipated rain,
D Cornpiete any and all corrective rneaSUres as inkry be directed by reguilatory agencies,
E. Cost(,;-C,ontractor to pay all costs associated with the impleinentation of the requirements of
the SNVP'P,P in order to inaintain coniphatice with tbe Perrin it. J'h is includes installation of all
Housekeeping BMP,s, General Site and Material Managenient BMPs, inspection
requirenients,rviaintenar)CC requireineants,and all offier requirernents specified in 1he SWPIIP
PAIWT 4 MEASUREMENTAND PAYMENT
4,01 SFORM WATER POLLUTION PREVEIN110N
A Mcasuren-jent and pa)niient i7or storm water pollution prevention shafl be considered as
included iii, the Contract Luiq) SUM Price paid for "Taniporary Erosion and Sediment
Controls"addressed in Section 02960(Temporary Erosion and SediTrICT)t C'011trohs)offliese
"Technical Specifications.
END OF SECTION
TuA rsgxCi""'m"unn 0 1 3,50SWMI,doc, Nnal Ckmve
LTA EngdHeeHng Augum 20 15
015501 - 8
Page 3379 of 4165
SECTION 01720
RECORD DOCUMENTS
PART I GENE'RAL
1.01 SIMMITTALS
A, Quality Control SubmitWs: Written procedUrCS for rnaintaining and Markup of record
docurnents,
13 Contract Closeout Submittal- Submit rex=d documents in accordance witli the requirements
of this section. Submit prior to al,-)plicafion for final payment.
1,02 Q[JAj-xrY ASSLRAN(T
A Furnish qualifiedand experienced person,wtiose dkity and responsibility shall be to maintah-1
record docuinents.
B, Accuracy of Records:
1, Coordinate changes wittrin record documents,making, legible and accurate entries on
each page of Technnieanl Specifications and each sheet of'Plans and other documents
where such entry is required to show change.
2. Puiliose of Pro'�ect record documents is to, provide factual iffl-bi Tnation regardhig
aspects ol'Work, bofli concealed and'vis,ible,to enable future rnodification of Work
to proceed without lengtliy and expensive site measurLirient, investitlation, and
ex imination.
C. Make enffies witbin 24 hours after receipt of in rorynation that a change in Work has occuri-ed.
U Prior to submitting each request for progress paynient,reqluest Design 1-i'igineer"s review and
approval Of CUrrent status of record docurnents. Failure to properly maintain, update, and
submit record docunients may result in delay of'Progress,Payment mi'tdc by the Owner.
1.0 DELIVERY, AND HANDLING
A, Maintain record documents conipletely protected forni deterioration, loss, and dariiage until
cornpletion of Work.
B In event of loss of recorded data, use means necessary to again secure data to Design
Engineer's acceptance.
1. Stich ITM,1118, S1111,11 inClude, if niecess,ary in Desi&9i Engineer's opinion, removal and
reconstnxtion of covering materials, at no cost to Owner.
TiM SpmsSLefijun 01720 Reaml Dommm&d0c Fbwl Onsue C'onslmmonl uchmcW Spwificahvu
EBA Engimwinx Aarwl 20
0 1720-1
Page 3380 of 4165
PART 2 PRODMI I S
101 RECO�fW DOC'UMEN"I'S
A. PromptlyBollowing corTirneticeinent of ConfriactTimes, secure from Owner at no cost to
Conlractor, (Yne complete set of'("'ontraet Docurneat's. Plartswill be frdl size,
PART 3 EXECUTION
101 MAIN'111"NANCE OFRJ"S ORD l")0('11JMf,",,NTS
A, Gewral:
L Label or stamp each record document,with title,"RKORD D0(..UM.EN'TS,"in neat
large printed letters.
2, Record infionnation concamentlywith constniction progress and within 24 hmrss after
rec6pt of inforimal-ion that change h,',I,';OCCUrred. Do not cover or conceal Work a,mfil
rcqt.dred information is recorded,
B. Preservation
I Maintain record diocuments in a clean,d*,,le le condition and in good order. 1.10
Trot use record documents, for construction purposes,
2, Make record document,;and samples available at all times fibr observation by Design
Eilgineer.
C' Making Entries on Plans
I Using an,erasable colored pencil(not ink or indelible pencil),clearly diescribe change
by graphiclime and unote as required,
a. Color('oding:
i. (3reen wben showi rig in ffirmition deleted frorn Plans.
ii. Red when showing information added tc')Plans.
iiL BILIc and circle din blue to show notes.
2. Date entries
1 Call attention to entry by"cloud"dravni around rhea or areas afficted.
4a 1,egibly mark to record actual changes made during constructlon, including but not
limited to:
a, 11ori7(.r)ntal and vertical loeations,of exisdjq; and new undergrotind Eacilifies
and appurtenances, wid other underground structures, eqUipirient or Work.
Refierence to at least two iiicastirementi of'penrianentsurface imp rovernents,
K Locatiori ofinternal'utilifiesand apputtenances con,cealed in,the construction
retbrencied to visible and accessible 1'utures of the structure.
C. Locate existing facidities,diilirril, equipmeni,amid item-S critical to the interface
between exisling physical conditions,or construction and, new,construction,
d. Changes made by Addenda and Field Ordem,'Words Chanj.,,e Directive,Ch',"inge
Order.'Written Aniendi-nent,and Design Engineer's written interpretation and
claiification usung consistent symbols for cacti wid showing appropriate
document tracking number.
specespom 01720 Record D1x%RwtSAx Rud(30mn Cunmmu6m redmol'""pecificafions
1"SA Augu� 210 G S
01720-2
Page 3381 of 4165
5�. Dimensions cv Scheniatic Layouts: Show on record documeriN, by dimension, the
centerline of each run offtems such ms described i;n the previous subparrigraph above.
a. Cleady identify the itcin by accurate note such as "cast iron drain," galv,
water,"and the Re.
b how,by s3anbol or ride, verdcal location of item,("under slab,", "exposed",
and the I ike).
C. Make:identification sufficiently desci,-iptive that it nmy be related relikly to the
T'cchnucal Specifications.
R Make entries,in other perrfinent record documents,as accepted by Design,Engineer.
E. Ifrecord documents are not accepted by DesiMui Effigincer,sccure as new copy ofthat record
doicument froom Design Engincer at Desigri Engineer's usual charge for reproduction and
handling, and carelIffly transfer change data to,new copy to acceptance of Design 1,,,r gineer.
END OF SECTION
W72,0 Rocord Mnuments,doc FhvO 00wT Spe"Ok"Immm
Auyu%�20 V 5
01720-,31
Page 3382 of 4165
SECTION 01800
HEALTH AND SAFE,ry
PART 1 GENERAL
1.01, SUMMARY
A. Site safety,
R LFG hazards.
C. Other landfill related[hazards.
1.02 SITE SAFETY
A. All safety recluh-ernents are applicable to the Work to be perfinnied, under the Contract
and any SUbsequeritaddenda, modifications, alterations,,and extensions thereto.
R The Contractor shall be solely, and completely responsible for conditions of the Work
site, including the safdy ol'aH persons and property doxing performance ofthe Work and
provision of safety ineasures on weekends and holidays. This, requirement will apply
confinuously and shall not be limited to normal working hours.
C The Contractor shall comply with all ficderal, state, and local safety codes, or&nances,
and regulations, including the requirernents of the Occupational Safety and, Health
Agency, and Division of Industrial Safety, State of California, and other such safety
measures as jiiay be required by the above mentioned regulatory agencies.
D, Contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the safety of all construction
personnel per l'brnihig the Work, including all Subcontractt-.)rs. Contractor shall be
Ultimately responsible for any and all necessary satiety precautionsand safety programs.
E Contractor shall also be held reslwasible f(,,)r their own compliance with the provisions of'
this Section, as well as (be compliance of Ball Suixonlractors with the provisions of this
Section, Contractor shall be ficld respon,sible: for any and all violations of the provisions
of this Section, as well as violations of' any ftderal, state, and 'local safety codes,
ordinances, and regulations, including the requirement's of the Occupational Safety and
flealth A&!ency, and Division of Industrial Safety, State of California, and other such
sat,ety statutes and requirements which apply to the Work.
f°", No act, service, drawing review or construction review, by the Owner, F)esign Engineer,
CQA Officer or, their ConSUItants is intendied to include mview of the adequacy of the
Contractor's safety measures in,on,or near the Work site,
& If a conflict should occur between the safety requirements of the Stanckird Specifications,
these Technical Specifications, the approved Health and Safety Mali, Referenced
Standards, or other Bederat, state, and local safety ccaides, ordinances, and rcgulatknis, tfie,
more stringent requirenient shall prevail.
TjvfSpus!,Swkm ON00 Heallb&Safcq&'w riig,ai aiNu7c cuwwmct�on'rvcbnwQat SpeONcalkrms
FRA Enginveripq; August 20B
01,8001-1
Page 3383 of 4165
1.03 LFG HAZARDS
A. The Contractor is advised that decomposing refuse produces LFGY, which is,
approximately 50 percen't rriethane and 5'O percent carbon dioxide by volurne, LF(3 may
be present in the Work area. LFG i,s colorless, can be ododess, may contain benzene,
vinyl chloride, hydrogen suffide, and other toxic constituemts, is, corntnistible, and
contains little or no oxygen, 1J,G can migrate through soil near the s,urthce so the
Contractor is therefore advised of the need for precautions aWainst :lire, explosion, and
asphyxiation whenworking in or near excavations which are in or ricar refuse fill areas,
B. The Contractor shall be responsible for inforTIling his or her employees and,
SubcoMractors and their enaployees of the potential danger of LFG on and near landfills.
C. Smoking shall be prohibited at all times and at all locations within the lirnits of the Work
shown on the Plarts,
D ]"'he Contractor shall be Farniliax with"A onipitation of Landfill Gas Field Practices and
Procedures" as prepared by the Solid Waste Association of North Anierica (SWANA)�,
E. Ll'�G has the potential to create ha7ardOLIS conditions if not controlled or recognized.
Some of the hazards of LFG include:
I Fires which may start spontaneously froni exposed,and/or decornposing refuse.
2. Fires and exp osions which may occur from the presence of nietharle gas,
I Oxygen deficiency in underp ground trenches, excavations, vaults, conduits and
structures.
4 The potential presence ofhydrogern sulride,a highly toxic and flarnmable gas,.
5 The Potential presence of berizene, vinyl chloride, and, other toxic gases which
are known to the Stale of California to cause cancer, birth defects, and
reproductive barm,
6. Water vapor in LUG often becomes over saturated and condenses as a liquid in
contained pipes, and vessels. I'his condensate may contain the toxic constituents,
ftnuid in L,FG.
1,04 OITIER LANDFILL-REINrIll)IIA7,ARE)S
A The Contractor is, advisled that solid waste fills arid the decomposing refuse therein may
present other unique health and safety considerations. Such considerations include, but
are nr,-A htnited to:
I UnstaNe �.-;round and surface cave-ins due lo decon1positrion and dit"ferenthil
settlement of refuse when woiking over, in, or near refuse fill areas.
2. Possible caving of trenclies and excavations when working over, in, or near
refuse fill areas.
I Potentially hazardoxis, rnaterials in or near reftise Mull areas,
PART2 PRODUCTS (No,r USED)
rL�Trspccs'Saakm 0 1800 HU2101&Safrlydoc NrW Cbwu
FBA Augum
018010-2
Page 3384 of 4165
SARI' 3 EXECUTION
101 HIE.ALT11 AND SAFI-!,TY' PJ-,AN
A Prior lo start of construction, the Contractor shall submit a written I leallb and Safely
Plan, to the Design LIngineer indicating all proposed safety nicasures. Said plan, shall be
i
pre'l.nired in accordance with the requirements of Part 29 of the Code of Fed,eral
J egulations(29 CFR) 19 M 12A
B. The Health arid Saficty Plan shall comply with, all Bederal, state, and local safie,tV codes:,
ordinances, and reg-ulations, including the requirements, of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (01811A), and Division of Industrial Safety, State ol," (.,'ahfor-nia,,
The Contractor shall comply with Section 5-1.02A of the Standard Specifications for
safety plan requirements for trenches and excavations, Contractor's attention is further
directed to Section 6705 of the:Labor Code concerning trench excavation safety plans.
102 SITE SAFI;.TY MON11"OR
A. The(7,ontractor shall provide a person who will be designated as the Site SafelyMonitor.
B. 'rhe Site Sarbty Monitor shall be thoroughly trained in rescue procedures, arid use of
safety equipment arid gas detectors as required by the Health and Safety P'lan.
C, At a mininw-rn the Site Safbty Monitor shall have taken as cartified 40-hour OSIIA safety
course and 8-hour supplementary health and safety supervisor course which inects the
requirements of 29 CF'R 19,10,120, Certificates, of pail icipation shall be suhnaitted to,the
Design f,'ingincer prior to,staft of conmruction.
D. The Site Safety Monitor shall have the (:Me gated authority to order any person or Worker
to follow safety rules related to LFG; or other site safety ha ands, Failare to observe these
rules shall be sufficient cause f'or rernoval of the person or worker from the Work site.
E, Supplemental to the Contractor's regular safety prograrn, the Site Safety Monitor sliall,
develop anti, institute procedures to inform all workers arid the public visiting the Work.
site of the potential for the presence of"methane and other landlIll gases emanating from
the natural decomposition of refijse buried at or near the Work,sate,arid,the importance of
safety precautions to provide for the safety of workers and the public.
3,03 TRENCHAND EXCAVATION SAFETY
A Contractor shall comply with all reqUirements of the trench and. excavation safety,
including provisions, of Section 5-1,02A of the Standard Specifications and all
occupational safety and health requirements of the Labor Code. In particular, the
('on tractor shall:
1. SUbmit to the Design Engineer at least 14 calendar (lays in a&,Ince of
excavation, a detailed plan showing the design of sheeting, shoring, bracing,
slopes, or other provisions to be made fZ)r worker prolection frorn the hazard of
caving ground during excavation, Sheeting and shoring plans shall be designed
and staniped by a, Registered Civil or Structural Fnigineer with experience in
shoring design, The Contractor shall be solely responsible for ensuring the safety
of any excavation. Shoring and submittal of any plans for sheeting, shoring,
SpedC,=Aijon did W Heakh&,Safibqy,doc MIM DMAJIM COnVrUO6,Dn TOQW60W SP06fiCa60m
E'84 Eqdneedng Aublum 2015
1800-3
Page 3385 of 4165
bracing, slopes, or other provisions to be made for worker prolection shall not
rehieve the Contractor Piro m this responsibility.
2, 'If requirc.,,d, obtain a permit from the division of Industrial Sa(bty fo r t'h e
constrLiction olf excavations that are 5 &�ct in depth or deeper and into which a
person or persons is(are) required to descend.
B. Contractcn° shall provide all necessaiy materials to shect, shore, brace, or othierwise
provide for worker protection in temporary excavations as well as rnay be reqLjired to
prevent adjacent, SUrfiace settlement or daniagc to public and private property and to,
ensure safe, working conditions at the 'Nor site,
C. C.ontractor shall remove all sheeting, shoring, bracing or similar strLictures in accordance
w i th the above requirements and in such a inanner as to prevent any damage to the Work,
R The Contractor shall; !repair all darnages resulting finoni filliproper sheeting, shoring,
bracing or,sirnilar rneaSUres, or damages, resulting frown failure to provide such measures
at no expense to,the City.
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMEM'
4.01 111,",ALT11 AND SAFETY
A. Payment for providing all health and safety nicasLires, including preparation of required
Heallh and Safety Ptan, is included in the Contract (J'nit price paid for the various items
of Work for which they are required. 'No separate or additional payrnent will be ina'de
therefore.
END 01F SECTION
4pm'Stc6on W 90 1 icalffi A&6COIA00 Final Omulc Const'nxtionlechnicO Sr.ecIfications
EWA AVPA�2015
0 1800-4
Page 3386 of 4165
DIVISION 2
SITE
WORK
Page 3387 of 4165
SECTION 102201)
REMOVAL, R.ETLACEMENT, AND ADJUSTMENT OF Ems,r[NG FACRATIES
PART I C'ENIKRAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. E'xisaing flicifitics,that interfere with the Work shall beremoved,reset,relocated,aqjusted,or
otherwise modified as specified herein,as shown on the Plans,or as directed by the lEngineer.
The Contractor shall petfonm all rernO%ral, replacement, abandonment, and, adjustment of
existingfii,icilities in accordance witli this Section and at the locations and details shown on the
Plans including the followin&
A4just three(3)existing groundwater monitoring wells to grade,
1 AdJust two(2)existing leachate wells to grade;
1 Remove existing C'mP and ,1113PE downdrains and drain outlets to creek;
4. Remove and/or abandon existing leachatc piping;
5�, A4just of five (5)existing leachate manholes to grade;
6,. Reniove and replace existing vault boxes;
T Install (35 traffic vault with checker plate top over existing valve;
K Actiust existing gas vau It to grade;
9. Adiust existing air'release valve rand vault to grade;
I tl1. AdJust four(4)existing landfill gas perinacter monitoring wells/vaults to grade;
IL Rernove existing fencing at site entrance; and
12. Dernolish existing scale house structure,
R The C,ontractor shall himish all labor,supervision,tools,,rruateTials,equipment,transpoda tion,
and incidentals riecessary to implement the reVective removal,replacement,and actlustment
activities outlined above and within this Section.
I 012 'RETERENCES
A. Ccdtrans California Department of"FransporUition,210 10,
B,, Standard Plans Book, Califbmia Department ofTransportation, 20 1 O,
1.0 SUBMrrTALS
r At least 14 calendar&iys prior to beginning any replaccrnent work in accordance with the
requirements of this Section, the Contractor shall provide three Q. ) copies to the Design
Engineer manufacturer's product data sheets for any new materials used in the replacement or
ad.justment ol'existing facilities.
1.04 1'n11 OJECTCOND17HONS
A, Except for materials, indicated to be stockplil,ed or to remain the (".1ty's praperty, cleared
matenals are the(",ontractor's property. Reinove cleared materials fi-orn the prqject site and
dispose of in, lawf'ul manner.
R Salvaged Materials: Carefully reinove iterns indiicaded to be salvaged and store where
indicated on Plans or where designated by the City. Avoid damaging materials designated for
Tud Spmi'Sm600 02200 ftmoval ofUAWiq1g,dm, Final 0mure Construction Techmwa�SgXcfficauiom
C11A A,'mPWV.v1Ag p
022100-1 Au'u's 2013
Page 3388 of 4165
salvage.
C Lhindenflfied Materials:
L fl" unidentified materials are discovered, including hazardous rnaterials that may
require additional removal other than is required by the Contract Documents,
irmnediately report rile discovery to the City.
2, 1 necessaty, the City will, arrange for any testing or analysis of the discovered
materials and shall provide iristruction regarding the; 'removal and idisposal of
unidentified nuiterials.
PAR'1'2 PRODUCTS
2,01 SOIL MATEIUAL
,A. Backfill excavations estilling from removfl, operations with onsite or import inaterials,
conforining to,the specification for compacted engineered fill as described in Section 02224
(Engineered Fill).
2,.02 VAULT BOXES
A. New or replacement vault boxes shall be pre-casiboxes with solid concrete or steel lids, at the
sizes and dimensions as indicated on the Plans. Extension risers shall be used as necessary to
raise vault boat to grade. Vault boxes shall be Christy boxes or equivalent witil traffilc rated
cover where indicated.
PART 3 EXECUTION
101 GENERAL
A Items demohshed or reinoved that are not to be salvaged or reused in the Work shall become
the property of the Contractor and shal l be legally disposed ofor recycled.
B Veril"y that uti fities have bleen disicoruiected and capped before starting demolition operations.
3.02 DOWNDRAYN AND DRAIN OUTLETREMOVAL
A Unless indicated on ffiellllar)s to rernain, all existing aboveground and below ground CMP
and HDPE downdrains arld drain pipe including any hardware shall be reniolved within the
lirnits of Work.
& Backi-111 trench excavations resulting from removal olperationswith onsite or import materials
conforming to the specification fbr cornpacted engineered fill as described in Section 02224
(Engineered Fill),, Compact to 90'Yo relative compaction.
103 I,EA("I-JA`I`E PIPING REMOVAIJABAN DONM ENT
A,, Cut exisling leachate pipe at points shown on the Plans, 'rho pipe cuts shall be square,
perpendicular to the center of the pipe. Cap or plug with concrete the ends of tile piping
where indicated.
02200 Y.=)W of Exiving,4m, RW("Inar,Cwwnwlin TochniraJ Spe6ficaflons
AWA 022010-2 Augask 2 0�5
Page 3389 of 4165
B. Unless,piping is shown on the I'lans,to be abandoned in place,excavate and remove piping
for disposal per section I,04A.
C, Backfill cxcavations resulting frorn removal operations with onsite or import niaterials
corn flonningto the specificatio nf"'c)rcoiriipactcd engineered rill as described in Sections 02224
(Engineered Fill). C.ornplact to 90,%,relative compaction,
3w04 LEACHATE MANI IOLE ADJUSTMENT
A- Fraines and covers oC existing lealchate rnai'A-wles shall be adjusted to grade with new
in,aterials similar in character to those in the ariginal structure in accordance with the
PIVViSiODS ofthese specifications.
C Afterthe existing cover and Franie has been re-moved,the top of the structure tcn be raise(]shall
be trimmed to provide a suitable fOUndation for the new materiaL
When reconstruction or ack ustrnenl of a concrete structure requires partial removal of
concrete,stifficient concrete shall be removed to pennit ncmr reinforcing steel to he spkeed,to
existing reinforcing steel. Existing reinforcement that is to be incorporated in new work shall
be protected from dainage and shall be thorougbly cleaned of adhering niatefial beflore being
embedded in new concrete,
E. Concrete rernoval shall be performed without darnage to the portion that is,to remain in place.
Damage to the existing concrete,which is to remain in p1ace,shall bc repaired to a conditio'n,
equal to that existiag prior tc'n the beginning of removal operations. The cost of repairing
existing concrete darnaged by the Contractor's operations shall be at the Contractor's expense.
J''. At tile option ofthe Contractor,raising devices may be used in palace ofadjusting manholes to
grade with new imilerials siinilar in character to those in the original structure.
(I The shape a�nd size oft h.e raising devices,shall match the ex isti ng fra rric and sba l I produ ce an
installation which is equal to or better than the existing installation in stal.)ility, support and
non-rocking characteristics. Each section ofthe raising device shall be fastened securely to
tile existing fralne.
3.05 I)EMOLITION
A, Dernolish indicated existing buildings as shown on the Plans. 'Use methods rcqtdred to
complete the Work within limitations of governing regulations.
B. Use water mist and other suitable methods to lhiiit sfiread of'dust and dirt. C',Ornply With
governing environmental protection regulations. Do not use water when it may darnage
constniction or, create hazardous or objectionable cariditions, such as ice, flooding, a�nd
Pollution.
C Proceed with demolition of strucluralfiraining members systcrnatically,from higher to lower
level.
D. Remove beiow--&qade construction, including lootings arid, foundation walls,completely.
E. Remove existing tuilities witbin litnits of structure completely. ]fill depressions and voids
(12.2100 Remund aff,,Asfing,du Spouffimifians
EPA EngxnernryR 02200-3 August 2015
Page 3390 of 4165
w ith on site or import fill canipacted to a re laflve compact io 11 of 900/'o,
j;,, C.7ornpletely fill below-grade areas, and voids resulting from building demolidon operations
with satisfactory onsite or intportfill coinpacted to a relative cornpaztion of 90%.
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.01 AI)JI..�S']'(jIZOtJNI)�WA'1'1,IRMONi"r'ORIN('JWEIII.,S, TOI(.,�'RAI)E
A adjustiment of gi�ou.i"i(lwater!n�i(-)nitf.)i,,-il!ng wells to grade shall berneasured by each well drat is
adjusted, Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Piece pier each w0l adjusted for
"Adjust Giroundwater Monitoring Wells,to Grade"addressed in this Section and Anal l include
11ill cornpiensation for providing all materials,labor,equipt'nent,tools,and iricidentals required
to complete the adjus,tment as,shown on the Plans,as specified herein,and as directed by the
Design Engineer, No additional ecirripensation will be all owed therefore.
4M ADJUS'1"LEACHATI- WELLS TO GRADE
A. A4justtnent (if leachate wells to grade shall. be measured by each well that is adjusted.
Payment shall be included in (lie (.7oiatract Unit .Price pier eacli well adjusted for "AdJust
Leachate Well's to Grade"addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation for
providing all niaterials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to complete the
adJustinent as shown on the Plans, as specified berein, and as directed by the Desif„n
F.rigineer. No additional compensation will he allowed therelbre,
4,03 REMOVl" EXISTING C`M-P AND IJDPE DOWN1 RAINS AND DRAfN Ouu-.Ers
A. Measurement and payrnent for removal of existing above groundwid undergroiind CEP and
HDRE., downdrains and drain outlets shall.be inClUded in the Contract L,urnp Surn Price for
"Remove Exist�ing C.MPand HDPE Downdrains,and.Dn,%in Outlets"addressed in this Section
and shall include full connpensafion for providing all materials,labor,equipnient,tools,and
h1cidenuals recluireld to complete the removal as shown on the Plans,as speci�fted herein,and
as directed by the Desikqi U"rigincer,includingpipe removal,excavations,disposal,and Utnich
backfill and cornpaction. No additional compensation will be allow(d therefore
4.04 REMOVE EXISTING LEACHATE PIPING
A. Measurernent and pa)anentl for ren!ioval and abandonment of ex isting leachate piping shall be
included in the Contract Lump Surn Price for"Rernove Existing Leachate Pipe"addressed in
this Section and shall include full compensation fbr providing all niaterials.,labor,eclIj iptnent,
tools,and inicklentals required to complete the removal as shown on the Plans, as specified
herein, and as dircr,cted by the Design Engineer, including cutting and capping pipe,
excavation,pipe rernoval,arid trench hack fidl and compaction. Noadditional core pensaflon
will be allowed therefibre.
4.05 ADJUSTLEACHATE MANHOLES
A. Adjustment of leacbate rnanboles, to grade shall be measured by each tmnhole that is
actiusteld. Payrnent shall be inch ided in the Contract L)nit Price per each rnanlwle a4i usted tier
"Ai(d ust L,eacliate Manhole to Grade" addressed in this Section and shall incllude ffill
cornliensation firr providing all materials,labor,eqUipment,tools,and incidentals required to
L;`pus0JOU690700sum TurrSpevs,See4on T'hud t1isum Cunnnwfirinl'mhnicaV Sr=ifiCAfirm%
ESA Lnglryevring 022001-4 August 20 15
Page 3391 of 4165
complete the adjustment as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as,directed by the
Design FIngineer, No additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
4,06 INSTALL(351TRAFFIC VAUT-,"r wrri,l CHECKI"'�R P1 XPE COVER
A. Installation of G5 traffic vault with checkerplate co er shall be measured by each vaultdiatis
!installed, payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per each vault reMoved and
replaced for"Install G54'raffic VaLdt With Check Pllate Cover"addressed in this Section and
shall include fall compensation Cor ,P roviding all materials, labor, equipment, tools, arid
,
incidentals required to contra pfete the replacement as shOWD On the Plans,as specified herein,
and as directed by the Design Engineer, No additional compensation will be allowed
therefore.
407 Aalus,r EXISTING �GAS VALU-3-1`0 GRADIH,
A. Ad.insfinent of gas vault to grade shall be measured by each,vault that is adjusted. payment
shall, be irWhided in the Contract Unit Price per each manhole adjusted for"Mtjust Existing
(Jas Vault to Grade" addressed in this Section arid shall include full compensation for
providing all materials, labor, equipi-nent, tools, and incidentals required to curnplete the
adjustment as shown on the Plans, as specified liereffi, arid as directed by the Design
Engineer, No additional compensation will be allowed therefore,
4M IN STALL B2,436 GAS EXTRAM"ION VAULT WITI I CHECKER PL ATE T011
A. Installation of B2436 gas extraction vault with checker plate cover shall be measured by each
,vault,that is installed. Payrnent shall be incInded in the Contract Unit Price per each vaWt
rernoved and replaced for "Irtsaall B2436 Gas Extraction Vault with ("'hock Plate Cover"
addressed in this, Section and shall irkClUde full compensation firr providing all materials,
labor,equipment,too�ls,and incidentals required to complete the rel.)laeementas shoNvn oil the
Plans, as specified herein, and a,% directed by the I.Jesign Engineer. No additional
compensaticm will be alllowed therefore.
4.09 AD.FUSTEXISTING AIR RI,',LEASE VALVE all VAULT—ro BOX GRADE
A Adjustinent of existing air release valve and vault box to grade shall be nicasirred by each
valve zidjustnient that is perforrried. Payment shall be inClUded in true Contract L,Jnil Price per
each va-ult rcrnoved and replaced for"Aqiust Existing Air Release Valve and Vault Box to
Grade" addressed in this Section and shall include fiill compensation for providing all
rriaterials, labor, equipnient, tools, and incidentals required to complete the replacenient as
shown on, the Plans, as specified her6n, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No
additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
4,10 ADJUST LF,G PERIMETER MONITORING WELLS
A, A4justrnent of LFG perimeter inonitoring wells to grade shall be measured by each well that
is adjusted. Payrrient shall be included in the Contract Unit price per each well ad*justed for
"Adjust LFG, Monitoring Wells to Grade" addressed in this Section and sliall include ffill
cmnpensation for providingall nraterials,labor,equiptilent,tools,and incidentals required to
complete the a4justnient as shown on the Plans, as specified berein, and as directed by the
Dcsign Engineer. No additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
I urfSpec:Mroirm 02200 Rxnmya�afllmsfinSADC FmM Uowe Cmvlruv�on Tmlmwal Speeffirstorm
EBA bighwering 02200-5 Atigtm 201,5
Page 3392 of 4165
4,11 R"MOVE f,"AISTING FENCING
A Measurement and payruent flex removal of existing fencing shall be included iii the Contract
Lunip Sum Price for"Remove Existing Fencing"addressed in,this Section and shall includt
full comperisation f"or providing at I inaterials,labor,equipment,tools,and inicidemale required
to complete the removal as shown on the Plans,as specified herein, and as directed by the
Design,Engineer, including cutting and capping pipe,excavation,pipe rein vat, and trench
backfill and compaction. No additiortal compensation will be allowed therefore.
4.12 STRUCIURE DEMOLITION
A. Measure and playnient for the demolition of the existing scMc bous,e stmcttire shall be
included in the (.,,oiAract Lunip Suin Price for "Structure Demolition" addressed in this
Section and shall include rtill compensation for providing all materials,, labor, eqttipmem,
tools,and incidentals required to,cornplete tbe:demolition as shown on the Plans,as specified
herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer, including dei-nolition of structure and
foundation, removal of utilifles,disposal olf materials,wid backfilland compaction of vaids
and depressions, No additional compensation ivill be allowed tlierefoire.
END OF SECTION
02200 R=rwY,.,d of Exivirig-doc FvnW Mum Convlwvo-on TulinkAd Sperikalkgm
EBA Foiginecring 022010-6 Augal'201 S
Page 3393 of 4165
SECTION 02207
AGGREGATE MATERIALS
PAWF1 GTENER�AL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, J'he Contractor shall fivnish, trarispoil to the Work site, and install all aggregate
ina,lerials, including aggregate base fin the construction of'access ro,ads ,,ind placement
within and, around the flare station, piple bedding for trenches, gravel ror the GR.L, roick
riprap for fined swales,and outfad Is,, gravel pack material for L,F(ir extracfion wells, coarse:
rock for the construction entrance, conarete sand fbr Lfw G(.,'I,, and tank bedding and
back.fill for the icachate UST, in accordance with this Sectioln and at the locations and to
the dimensions shown on the Plans. The Contractor shall ftirnish all labor, supervision,
tools, materials, equipment, transportation, and incidentals necessary to install the
respective aggregate malerials.
1.02 R-I� ERENCTS
A, ("ahrans S'tandard S�)eqfications. Cal ifornia Depaitment of T'ransportal ion,20,10,
R Caltrans Sland'ard 1"lans. Califomia Department offransportation, 20 1 O
American 5ocie(vfir 7esting and Materials. ("urrent fWition,
D. Cala„fiwnia Test Methods. CalitbrDia Department of T'ransportation, Current Eldition.
1,03 APPLICABLE S11ANDARDS AND, SPEC 111CATIONS
A S"I'M C 3,3 Standard Specification lbr Concrete Aggregates.
& AS]FM C 1316 Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates.
C S'I'M D 2434 Standard 1"est Method for Permeability of Granular Soils
((,,'onstant Head).
R C'I'M 229 Method of Test ror Durability Index.
E C"I'M 3O 1 Method for Determining the Resistance "R" Value of 'Freated
and Untreated Bases, Subbases, and Basernent Soils by the
Star bilorneter,
1.04 SlJBMFl-1'A1,S
A, At least 14 calendar days prior to beginning any agp; egate material installation, the
('ontractor shall provide three (3)copies of the nanic and location of the proposed borrow
source, and laboraNny rest results on the aggyregate materials frorn the proposed borrow
saurce to the Design f"ngineer whicli show that the aggregate materials have the
properties specified in Part 2 of this Section. 1"he E)esign Engineer will provide the
L:\PmjVu,"907U"bAUxe TudspecOSeeflort 02207 Malffift[SAM FInAl CkIgUte OAGMWONr T'XhV� 0w1 q�Wcifi,2(fliOUS
"Al&Nweelliv A ugugf,20�3
02207-1
Page 3394 of 4165
Contractor with an approval or rejection of the borrow source and aggregate materials
within two (2) working days, of receipt of the borrow SOUrce inforniation and laboratory
test results.
L05 QUALITY ASSURANCE'
A. Testing of the aggregate materials shall be conducted in accordance with the(.,9A Plan.
B, tf the Design Engineer's review of Coritractor's submittals hidicates that an aggregate
rnaterial(s) does not ineet specified, requirernents, the (]ontractor shall provide an
alternative material(s) and subixtit corresponding test results to flee Design Engineer for
approval.
PART 2 PRODUCTS
101 GENITAL
A, Each aggregate prodnct shall corne From,the sarne source throughout flee'Wo�rk.
102 AGGREGA"FE BASE
A T'he aggregate base material shall be clean, hard, smInd, durable, uniform in quality, fi=
of any surface coalings:, and free of any detrimental quantity of soft, Friable, thin,
elongated, or laminated pieces, disintegrated material, organic inatter, oil, alkal�i, or other
deleterious substance, The aggregate base niaterial may contain Portland cement concrete
and asphalt Concrete meeting the gradingspecifications.
B, Aggregate base shall conform to requirements of Section 26 ol' the Standdrd
Specifications and these 1'echnical Specifications. Aggregate base shall rneet the
requirarnents (`or Class 2, %--inch u-.KIXirnUIII Per the Standard Specifications.
103 SAND BALLAST INFILL.
A Sand Ballast Infill wiHmeet particle Size Parameters of ASTM C-33 for fine aggregates
as show n in 'rable I below."
Table 1: Sand Ballast 1iffill ASTM C-33-03 particle Size Distribution
ASTM (,!-33-03
..........
§,i e, re P-e r e,-e-�ii—tPa-s-s-i r i g
9.5 rnm (3/8 in) 1 100
4.75 nun(,N(.). 4) 95 tolOO
2.36 Titim (No. 8) 80 to 1001
02207 Aggrepic MairridmtDc Fuml CIOALIKe COTInjuction lwhnicl spedflumons
F&I LVIjIew=v4F July 200
02207-2
Page 3395 of 4165
I 18 munr (Nol .
16)
600 Am( o fl) 25 to Cat;f
1501 µour (No. 0 to 10
1 tff'
2.04 HYDROBINDER l 'f^fLL
lfyufroPlnder-"m is ar ceraennious pro uuct used as the rnfill cornpriorrent for surface drainage
conveyance,:areas..
R llydro.l lnderl' infill,f Shall be flydroffin 4ot•mr4 ernentft loins if ll. 4.°flee Hy+ o4tuna efl-1a
urufnll rnateriaul nnany be delivered In cltber pallet form of 80 lb. bags or 3000, 1b. bulk surper.
sacks,
C. Cement, exceprit as otherwise specified herein,will be a brand of Portland Cement,
naccting ASTM C 150 and wiH be Type :[or Type 11. Only one bly-and of u~,ement~w lfl be
used tlnrouup!luout the duration of this C oiltrn°act.
C The ccr'rncrrtltlou5 lrnfall rrrl:aa design will conform to the requirements of ASIM CW` 387 for
1pfln strength mortars,
};°�, The cementioua urnfill rrrlll have a urrfrnlrrnurn 28 dairy counapressivc strength of 5000 00 psi.
Pipe bedding rrnatcrlal dull conf urm to Section 1 -.f.02E( ) of'the Standard
Specifications.
.06 l.,CfC.fSE ROCK.:RHIRA
A. tome arrrf/or recycled concrete for loose rock, rllurapr shall conform to cction 7r- ,tl ol,
the Standard and Specifications and the following 1, o roupulrurnnents.
Screen Size °MO Ly_. b,(ly ,l �,Laui¢ngs Above
gill,, far 400
07 GROUTED ROCK RBIRAP
Stone and/or recycled concrete for gyrouted rock rlpnrap shall be "Ligbt" class rock per
Section 72- .02 of'the Standard SIlecifications.
lH}vrtuHrcttiAM57"4Yp�rsrurr»'Hurl"SHa���`Sa:r�c+aufUT.r.P'8AggilegaleMautefisls,.du¢: Fi�nalC,louRr' TmhniadSlIx6fucatilyn:s
,!u"C1s3 Fa rtiH+rxcnr.Sr�ddr' ra Lquo 20l4
fl2 017-
Page 3396 of 4165
2.08 GRAVEI., PACK
A. Gravel pack material for the LFG extracBoat wells shall, 'be I- to 2-inch dianieter non-
ca lea reou,s waslied rock.
109, C'ONCREIT,,AGGREGATE
A. Coarse and, fine: aggregate for concrete shall conforrn to Awl TM C 3 3 as determined by
the Supplier. All aggregate shall be thoroughly washed. Maxiinurn aggregate size: shall
be 3/4 inches in diarneter,
2,10 COARSE ROCK FOR CONSTRUCTION ENI RANCE
A, Coarse rock for constructiort entrance sliall be 2-to 3-inch crushed stone.
2.11 TANK BF.DDING AND BACKIIII,
A Tank bedding shall consist of filter sand,
B. Tar ic backfill shall be clean natumlly rounded aggreb,,,ite with a mix of particle:
sizes not less than 1/8-inch or more thal-i "Y4-Erich (T)ea gravel) in accordance with
t1i.e tank nranuflacturer's specifications,
PART3 EXECUTION
301 GENERAL
A The Contractor shall Provide all con strLIC:60n, �nading control, and other staking
neccssary to construct the aggregate rnaterWs, to the lines, grades, and O'sickness Shown
on the Plans.
3.02 STOCIU11LING
A. Materials shall be stockpiled at the Work site at a location(s) designated by the Design
[H'ngineer.
B tocky)iles shall be of sufflciei-a quantity to meet Pro�ect s,cbedule and requirements.
C Surface water shall be directed away ftorn stockpile site(s) so as to prevent erosion or
Meta rioration of materials,
3-03 S'FO(.,KPILE CLEANIJP
A. Surplus aggregate rnaterial stockpiles shall be removed or left in a clean and neat
condition. Stockpile area surface(s) shall be graded to prevent free standing surface
water,
Span,Awtion D2207 Agggegiuc Mmtriah,Aoe: Fivild Ongure Technica I specifical ion's
ERA IUqimmrvq My 211Hi
02207-4
Page 3397 of 4165
3,04 PLA(IMM"FINT
A. Aggregate base shall be placed in accordance with thie requirements for aggregate ba,se
placement in Section, 023101 (Access Roads) and Section 15300 (Flare Station) of these
'.I,echnical Spec ificm ions,
B. Pipe bedding shall be placed in accordance with the requirements for backfilling in
Section 02225 (Trenching and Backfilling)of theseTelchnical Specifications.
C and ballast infill, and Hydroffinder infill shall be Placed in accordance with fl-le
requirements I'or infill placement, respectively in Section 02773 (Engineereld Turf) of
these Technical Specifications,
1). Rockriprap shall be placed in accordance with the requirements for pkicement in, Section
02722 (Drainage and Erosion,Controls)ofthese Teelmical Specifications,
E Gravel pack rnaterial shall be placed in accordance with the requirements for backfifling
in Section ISWO: (Landfill Gas [LF(3] Extraction Wells) of these 1'echnical
Specifications,
lr Coarse rock- shall be placed at the construction entrances, in accordance with the
requirernents of Sedion 02960 (Temporary Erosion and Seditnent Controls) of these
Technical. Spec i fications.
G, (,oncrete sand shall be placed in accordance with the requirements of Section 02774
(G cos ynthetic Clay Liner J,GCL]I)of`fheseTeclinical Specifications.
11, Tank bedding and backf ill shall be:placed in accordance with the requirements of Section
15500 (Leachate Overflow and Collection stern) of theseTeclMical Specifications,
PART4 MEASU 11CA MENT AND PAYMENT
401 AGGR.EGAII.i., BASE
A. Measurement and payrnent for aggregate base shall be included in the Contract Unit
Prices for "Access, Roads" addressed in Section 02310 (Access Roads) and "Flare
Station"addressed in Section 15300(Nave Station)of these Technical Specifications.
4.0,2 SAND BALLAST'INFILL
A MeaSUrement and payment for sand ballast infill shall be included in the Contract T.Jnit
Prices f4r "Engineered Tiwf " addressed in Section 02773 (Engineered Turf) of these
Technical Specifications
4.03 HYDROBIN"DE",R INFILL
A. Measurement and payment for Hydroffinder infill shall be included in the Contract Unit
Prices for "Engineered Turf " uldressed in Section 02773 (I"nigineered Turf) of these
'rechnical Specifications
TurfSpvcs'Sculion 02207 Apgregme MmvflAkd)xa F nai Ocniure 4:;mulmo6ol ethMcal Spomfiumumg
rRA A ugaM 20 5
02207-5
Page 3398 of 4165
4.04 1111111 131.1: D ING
A Measurement and payinent fbr pipe bedding shall be included. in the (7ontract Unit Price
paid Bor the various items of Work for which piPe bedding is requprcd,
4.04 LOOSE ANL)GROUFED ROCK R.'IPRAP
A. Measurement and payment for loose and grouted rock riprap shall be included in the
Contract Unit Price paid for the various,items of"Work for which loose and grouted riprap
is required.
405 ('T'RAVEL PAcK
A, MeaSUrement and payrnent for gravel pack shall be included in the Contract Unit Price
for "LT'G Extraction Wells" addressed in Section 15 1010, (Landfill Gas [j.,FG] Extraction
Wells) of these Technical Specifilcations.
4.06 CONCRETE AGGREGATE
A. Measurement and payment for concrete aggregate sball be inclUded in the Contmet Unit
Price paid for the various items of Work for which cone rete aggrega te is required.
4X COARS1i' W)CK FOR, CONs"r'RUCTION ENTRANCti
A. Measurement and payment for coarse rock for the construction entrance shall be
considered as included in the Contract LLUTIP Sum Price paid for "Mobilization"
addressed in Seclion �O 1500(Mob i�ization)o f these'I I echnical SI)ecifications,
4.09 TANK BEI)F)ING ANDBACKFILL,
A Measurement and payment Rn tank bedding and back fill for the leachate UST'installation
shall be considered as included in the Contract Unit Price paid f(-)T "Leachate UST"
addrcsseZ in S,ection 15500 (1,eachate Overflo and CoHection Systeni) of these
"I'echnical Specifications.
END OF SECTION
TurrSpe&SpcAan 02207 A&grepre Matmials.dac Specificalvrms
VIA July 201$
O2207--6
Page 3399 of 4165
SECTION 02222
EXCAVATION
VARTI GENERAL
1.01 SUNIMARY
A. The Cbntractor shall PC60ini all excavation work including clearing, grubbing, stripping,
excavation,and grading of the one :site borrow area and constniction ofthie final cover Closure
Turl"Cap System soil layers (i.e., foundation layer), sedimentation basins, drainage and
erosion control structures, LFG collection system and condengite drain/discharge
coniponents,and leachate UST inn accordance with this Section and at the locations and to the
dirnensions,shown on the Plans.
B. The Contr tctcyr shall excavate ref se in selected areas and relocate the reffise ni the designated
refuse relocation area shown on the Plans. Incidental refuse excavatiort and disposal shall
also be perfortned as part o�f the installation of drainage, LFG collection, system, and
conde n sate,drain/discharge components.
CII Excavation to bne performed by the Contractor shall alw include construction ofany necessary
haul roads, stockpiling of all excavated n3ateiials, hauling and disposal of any excavated
refuse,and provisions for temporaty dust, erosion, and dr,,ainage control measures,
D, The Contractor shall I fLu-nish all labor,supervision,tools,rnaterials,equipinent,transportation,
and incidentals necessary to iniplement the respective excavation activities outlined above and
Within this Section.
L02 IZEFERENCT."S
Via.. Ce,,dtrans Slandard,`Imcficafions, California Department offransportation, 201 01,
B, C'alifornia I)epamnent ofTrarisportation, 20M
1 M SUBMITTALS
A. Temporary erosioln and sediment contTol measures,associated with excavation activities, shall
be addressed in the Work site's SWPPP Prepared as Pad of Section 011550 (Storin Water
Pollution Prevention)of these echnical Specifilcations.
R The Contractor shall provide the Design Engineer with certified Nveight tags is,sucid, by the
pennitteld transfer station or sollid waste disposal facility florall loads ofrefuse transported off-
site for disposaL
L04 QUALITY ASSURANCT
A, Observation
I. I'he CQA Monitor will periodically observe performwicle of the excavations to,verify
conforrnance with the execution requirements in Part 3 of this Section.
T 02222 Rma Clowe,Cononjeflou rechnkml S vudkwww,
LTA EAelawring, 02222-1, Augun 20�5
Page 3400 of 4165
2, If any portion(s)of the cxcavafloris are deterinitied by the CQA Monitor to not ineet
the requirements of this Section, the Contractor, at his, expense, shall rework or
-replace that portion(s) to meet the reqtiireinents of this Section as directed by the
Design Engineer.
13 Stirveying
I The Contractor shall provide all construction staking, grading control, and other
staking necessary to constnict the excavations to the lines, grades, arid dimensions
sbown on the Plans. The Design Engineer will providc data on existing control
points, in the vicinity of the Project for arse by the Contractor's I,and Sni-Veyor or
eligible Engineer.
2. All grades and diniensions of completed areas of the excavations shall be verified Bay
the Design Engineer or CQA Monitor by field sin-vey.
3, If it is dernonstrated by the CQA field sni-veying that any portion(s) of the
excavations does riot ineet the required lines, grades, or dimensions shown on the
Playas,the Contractor,at his expense, shall rework or replace that portion(s)to bring
the deficient area(s) to grade or the proper dirnerision in accordance with all
requirements of this Section. A deduction will be made from the Contractor's
conipensation(based on standard wage rates)to retest the materials and re-verify the
grade or the proper diinension by sw-vey.
PART 2 PRODUCTS (NOT USED)
PART3 EXECUTION
101 GENERAL,
A. Unless provided othetwise within this Section,all excavation activities shall cordbrin to the
applicable reqLdrements(A'Section 16 and 19 ofthe Standard Specifications,
K The Contractor shall instnict all personnel and maintain strict control over all excavation
activities to protect and maintain the integrity oFaH existing environmental monitoring and.
control systems arid any other facilities, for the existing landfill, The cost ofrepairing any
darnage to these existing features will be deter-rnined b the Owner and be borne by the
Contractor, "Elie total repair cost to be borne by the Contractor will include those for
exploraflon to detennine extent of damage, niobilization of'work crews, nnaterials,material
delivery, CQA testing and observation, and additional design.
102 Cl.,EARINGAND(MUBBING
A Tlie existing interim cover soil on the landfill skirface and natural ground sLirface within t�he
lirnits of the on-site borrow area as depicted on the Plans shall be cleared of all vegetative
growth, sun chas brush, grass,weeds,or other deleteTiOUS material.
R Clearing and gnibbing shall be performed prior to beginning excavation in any area,
C. Cleared and stripped topsoil shall be stoc1q)iled separately fi-om excavated material or
disposed of in accordance with this Section,
02222 Rri3O 00sure Consal'"flnu TacknaGM,specificarim"
E84 fi'Vq_rwvvqYg 02222-2 August 20 5
Page 3401 of 4165
3,03 REFUSE EXCAVATION AND IZ-ELDCATIC)N
A Refuse shall be excavated at the designated locations beneath the existing power fines,to the
lines, grades and diniensions shown on the Plans.
B Fxcavated refuse shall be relocated to the designated refuse relocation area shown on, the
Plans.
C Relocated refuse placed within the designated reffise relocation area shall be spread in
und"orra liffs not to exceed 2 feet in thicknessandeacb liftft cornpacted witbaminirnuniof four
(4)passes using a dozer,
11 Relocated refuse lolls shall be covered Nvith a nifinnium of 6inches of soil at the end of each
working day to rninirnize:vector haza,rds and odor nuisance.
17" -apletin t g he'reuse ex lase work beneath the existing
Within five(5)working days of coi
power lines, the refuse relocation area shall be completely covered with aminfirturn of 12
inches of prepared and compacted foundation layer rnatcrial in accordance with, Section
02240(Foundation Layer)of these'rechnical Spec ifications.
3.04 INCIDENTAL RULTSE EXCAVATION ANT) INSWOSAL
A, Refuse shall be excavated as necessary to accommodate the installation of drainage, LF'G
collection system, and condensate drain/discharge cornponents at the locations, and to the
details sl-Aown on the Plans.
B. Excavated refuse maybe temporarily stockpiled onwid covered with visqueen at a designated
location on-site, or discharged directly into a roll-off bin or dUMP tru,ck. If temporarily
stockpiled,the refuse must be removed by the end of each working day and,transferred into a
rotl-off bin or durnp truck for subsequent transport and disposal, by the Contractor to a
permitted transfer station,or solid waste disposal facility, Refuse remaining on-site overnight,
in a roll-off bin or dump,truck shall,be covered at the end of each working day. Excavated
refuse shall not remain on-site lbr more than a 48-hour period.
C The Contractor shall jwt mix excess,, surplus, or waste materials from other general
Construction activities with the reftnse derived from the excavation work described in this
Section. Those niaterials,shall be managed and paid for separately u nder the Contract Lunipi
Bosun Price for"Mobilization'"as on tl i n ed in Section 0 15010(M obilization)oftheseTechnical
Specifica tions,
105 SOIL EXCAVATION
A The horizontal control points and one (1) benchmark shall be provided by the Design
Engineer in the vicinity of the Work site. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to
maintain control points and properly line markers and to provide and rnaintain construction
staking,,grad ing control, or other s�taki ngnecessary to perform tine excavation and constnict
the stock-pile,
B, Control points, and property line Tnarkers that are removed, darnaged, or destroyed by the
Contractor shall be reestablished by the Contractor at the Contractors expense.
TkufSw'Sccuen 02222 Fxcavalkndoc Nut Ckmium S varkauont
FBA 13mgMernng 012222-3 Aug""t!,N5
Page 3402 of 4165
Boulders encountered by the Contractor during excavation shall be removed, separated b�y
size as directed by the Design Engineer,and stockpiled separately froni excavated inaterial or,
disposed oaf in accordance with this Section,.
Dl xcavation ftir drainage arid erosion control structures shall conflorm to Section 19-1.03E of
the Standard Specifications.
3,06 GRADING
A, '11ie excavation shall he constructed in confon-riance with the lilies, grades,and dimensions,
shown on the Plans; all distances and measureinents, except elevations and structural
dimensions, shall be made on a horizontal plane unless otherwise stated in this Section.
K When completed,the fp-ading plane for the drainage channels arid sedimentation basins at am
point shall not vary more than 0,10 .foot above or below the grade shown on the Plans on
slopefless than 10 percent nor vary tnore than 0.201 folot above or below the gTade shown orl
the Plans on, slopes pq, crater than 10 percent.
C. Unsuitable materials, as determined by the Design Engineer, encountered at the subgrade
elevation shall be removed and stockpiled separately from excavated rnaterW or disl.,)oscd of
in accordance with this Section. If, after removal of the unsuitable materiak, a SUrtace in
accordance with Part,3 of this Section does not result,ov ere xcavation correefilon procedures
in this Section shall be followed,
D, If any portion of"the excavation area is excavated by the Contractor bel.ome die design
(prepared SUbgrade) elevations, shown on the Plans, the ("I ontractor shall perforni
overexcavation,correction procedures,resulting in a surface wh ich rneets,therequirenients of
Part 3 of this Section, as directed by the Design Engineer. Overexcavation convc1ion
procedures may consist of excavating, grading, and surflace preparationn of the entire
overexcavated slope,or somepoilion thereof',to a lower subgTade elevation detenivined by the
Design Engineer; backfitfing with engineered fill and compacting to provide as Finn and
unyielding sub grade in accordance with the requirements of'Section 02224('Engineered Fill)
of these Technical Specifications;or as otherwise directed by the Design Engineer, The coot
of'overexcavation correction procedures,redesign,additional sulveying,and other incidental
fees, resulting frorn the overexcavation shall be paid by the Contractor, unless the
overexcavation is plerfornied at the direction of the Design Engineer to remove unsuitable
materials at the subgrade elevation.
3,07 HAUL ROAD CONSTRUCTION
A 7'he CAmtractor shalt construct and maintain any liau I roads necessary to perform excavation.
B, The location, of all haul roads proposed for construction and use by the Contractor must be
approved by tine Design Engineer.
108 DUSTCONTRO11'..
A. Dust contrc)l shall comply,with the Contractor's approved [)ust Control Nan,
B. A rnininiurn of two (2)water trucks with operators shall he inn operation at all Carnes during
exe,avation to provide dust control at all excavation,hau I road,stockpile and staging areas, If
Turf SpetASec6on 02222 E'xcavlubmdoc HTW Ckwale CoAstcualon'I'mfinicA specukaooms
A"84 02222-4 Aupst 20 95
Page 3403 of 4165
necessary, addidonal water tmcks or other equipment with operators shall be provided and
used by the (.,'0ntTaCt0T to maintain these areas in a misted condition at all tinies dMing
excavation,
(11. The Design Engineer will require all excavation activities to cease ifthe Contractor's dust
control eftorts do not Bollow the aIPPT()Vcd Dust Control Plan, or flail to sleet any of the
requirements of this Parl until such time that the Contractor can derrionstrate a return to
compliance,
3.09 EROSION AND SLiDIMENT CON,rROL
A. Erosion and sediment control measures shall be iniplerrierited by the Contractor inaccor(hance
with the approved SWPI`111,and as directed by the Design Engineer for all exca,vation work
areas including haul roads and stockpile areas,a4jacenit areas which have been disturbed,or
other aff"ected areas.
B The Contractor shall maintain erosion and sediment control ineasures until the finial graded
surlhee of the excavation is approved, by the Design Engineer. If erosion creates a final
sub grade surface which is not in accorchince with any requirernerris of this Section,
overexcavation correction procedures in this Section shall be performed by the Contractor,at
the expense of the Contractor, including payment of all incidental fees.
3.10 DILAINACiE("ONTROL
k T'he ConlTador shall provide ample inn arcs and devices with which to promptly remove and
dispose of gall water frorn any source enterinn the excavation or stockrape area(s)and,mairitai n
these at all tiMes during excavation and until the: rhiM graded surface of the excavation and
Str)ckj)ile are approved by the Design Engineer. The Contractor shall perforni excavation irl
the borroWr source area in as manner that allows for the discharge and retention of s,torm Nwater
that does no conflict with the Conti-actor's excavation activities in the borrow area,
3.11 ARCHAWLOGIC,AL AM) PALEONTOLOGICAL RE.SOURCE'S
k The Design Enginm- shall serve as the ArchaeologicA and Paleon to logical Monhor, The
Contractor shall riotify the Desil,',rn Engineer in the event that lie suspects that all
archaeological or paleontological discovery is fbund during excavation for tile Design
Engineer's, investigation. Shoidd a paleontological or archaeological disc!ovei-y be made
duritig excavation,the Contractior shall cease,work in that area until the discovery is evaluated
or recovered, The Contractor may resume work elsewhere on the Work site that does not
disturb the discoveryunfil the evaluation or recovery is completed, Should the discovery
result in,an unavoidable delay to the Contractor, the Contractor shall immediately notify the
Design 1-ingineerof the delay inwriting. Additional workingdays will beallowed fiver such a
delay. The Contractor shall riot charge the Owner fbr the delay under Sections 8-1.09 oi-8-,
L 101 of the Standard Specifications until such delay exceeds a total of 20 hours ft,)r the
Pjoject, after w1rich the Contractor rilay be entitled to compensation under said sections,
PAR']"4 MEASUREMENTAND PAYMENI
4.0 Cl.,EAR.TN("3 AND,GRU13BING
k (1earing and grubbing shall be measured by the acre cleared and gnibbeld. Payment shall be
4Y22,22 EkCawnficambe rmW Closiur,Comme6on TcchnU Spc6floahma
'84 August 20 r 5
012222-5
Page 3404 of 4165
included, in the Contract Unit.Price per acre tar"Clearing and (3rubbing"addressed in t1lis
Section and shall include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment,
tools, and incidentals required to complete the clearing and grubbing as,shown on the Plans,
as specified herein,and as directed by,the Design Engineer. No additional compensation will
be allowed therefore,
4.02 REFIJSEEX(",AVA,r[ONA,NI) REI,.00A'F[()N
A, Refuse excavation and relocation shall be measured by the in-phice cubic yarlds,to be removed
and in al] excavation, loading, transport, placernent, compaction, and cover soil.
Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per cubic yard for"Refluse Excavation
and Relocation-addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation fbr providing
all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to complete the reft'ise
excavation and relocation as shown on the Plans,as specified herein,and as directed by the
Design Engineer. No a,dditionia l.compensation will be allowed therefore.
4O3 INCIDENTAL IU'IFIJSE EXCAVATION AND DISPOSAI,
A. Measurementand payment for incidental refuse excavation shall be inchided in the Contract
Unit, Price paid for the wirious items of Work, flor which incidental reffise excavation is
required,
B, Disposal of refuse shall be nicasured by the tonnage of refuse disposed of off-site at a
permitted transfer station or solid waste disposal facility, Payment shall be included in tile
Contract Unit Pr ice per ton f6r"Reffise Disposal"addressed in this" ection and shall inchide
full compens,zition 1"or providing all inaterials,labor,equipment,tools,and incidentals required
to dispose of refUse as shown on the Plarts,as specified herein,and as directed tbe Design
Engineer. No additional compei.,isation will be allowed therefbre.
404 SOIL EX(-`,AVATl0N
& Sedimentation basin excavation shall be measured on a lurnp s,uin basis fbr the complete
excavation ol'ston,n water retention basins to the grades and elevations shown on the Plans.
Payment shall be included in the Contract Lump Suni Price for "Sedimentation Basin
,Excavation"addressed in this Section and shall include flillcoinpensation for providing all
materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to excavate the sedimentation
basins as,sh.own on the plans,as specified herein,and as directed by the Design Engineer. No
additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
B. Measurement and payment for soil excavation associated with construction of the foundation
layer, drainage and erosion control structures, LFG collection system and candensate
drain/discharge components,and the leachate overflow collectionand storage system shall be
included, in Ihe Contract Unit Price paid for these various items of Work for which, soil
excavation is required.
END OF SECTION
SpuesIvo ion 02222 RXaIVRI�uQnI Hnal 43osurir Conrlruakml echumcal Sprcifiealoiu
ESA E"Agineving 012222-6 A ugua 20 1:
Page 3405 of 4165
SECT ION 02224
ENGINEERED FILL
PAWF 1 GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
A, The Contractor shall install all engineered fill including all 1111 needed for construction of
sedimentation basin improvements,backfilling of the former leachate pond,fill required,for
conforms outside engineered turfclosure area,as well as incidental engineered fill placeinent
Bor access ri�!)ad sub grades, buried header crossings, roaad crossings, and backtilling anchor
trenches,and pipe/conduit trenches in the flare station area, inn accordance with this Section
and at the locations,and to t lie dimensions shown on the Plans,
all labor,supervision,tools,equipryient,transportation wid incidentals as necessary to prepare
thC SUbgrade, excavate, Naul, place, moistirre condition, compact,and grade the material to
install the engincered fill.
l 02, R EFER!"',NCES
A Caltrans Califor-nia Depannient ofTransportation,2010,
B, Caltrans S'fa flard Plans. Ca]ift)rn ia Department of"I"ransportation, 20 1,0.
C A#neticati , ociel.Y,fc)t- 7esl"iiigaiidMtitep-iiily. CurrentEdition,
1.03 APPLICABIJE, STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A, ASTM D 1557 Standard Test Metbods for Laboratory Cam action Characteristics
of Soil Using Modified Eff'on(56,000 ft-lb'1711" 1 1 2,0f O kN-alhn'3]),
1 04 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A Testing and Observation
1, Tes6ng and observadon of engineered fill shall be conducted i�n accordance with the
two QA I'lan.
2. The Contractor shall cooperate witti the CQA Monitor during observation, testing,
and collection of samples,
3. If field andYor laboratory testing by CQA Monitor indicate that any area(s) of
engineered fill does not nleet compacted moisture content and dry density
requirements, the Contractor shall rework the inaterial in that area at his,expensle
until ffie engineered fill is in conformance math the requirernents of this Section. A
deduction will be n�iade from the Contractor's compensation(�based oil standard wage,
rates)to pay for testing of the recompacted engineered fill materiaL
at.. Where work is internipted by rain, operations sulrject to the: rnoisture and density
reqt.drements shall not be resumed until observations and field tests by the CQA
Monitor indicate that the trioisture content and density of the in-place fill are within
the limits specified, This retlidremetit will not preclude the Contractor frorn disking
or aerating the subJect materWs to achieve acceptable conditions.
B. Surveying
02224 Engingmed JlfflkOc FffiW Uoqurc Cummuokma rmhnical SpmAcmion
ERA Emoneolng 02224-1 August 2,015
Page 3406 of 4165
1, The Contractor shall provide all construction. staking, grading coiltrol, and other
staking necessary to construct the engineered fill to the lines,grAlldes, contour lines,
and difnensions shown on the Plans. The Design Engineer will provide data on
existing control points in the vicinity of Project Ibruse bythe Contractor's Land,
Surveyor or eligible Engi!neer.
2, All grades and dimensions of completed areas oft he engincered fill may be verified
by the Design Engineer or CQA Monitor by field survey,
3 If is demonstrated by the CQA verification surveying drat any portion(s) of the
engineered fill does not meet the required lines,,grades,or dirriensions shown on,the
Plans,the Contractor,at his expense, shall rework or replace that porlion(s)to bring
the deficient area(s) to grade or, the proper dimension in accordance with all
requirements of this Section, A deduction will be niade froln the Contractor's
comperisation(based on standard wage rates)to retest Uses rriaterials and re-veri fy the
grade or the proper dimension by survey,
PART 2 PRODUCTS
2M SOIJRCE
A On-site material meeting the requirenients of this Section, and as follows shall be used Bor
engineered fill. The Contramr may need to segregate suitable on-site material Cor use as
engineered Fill.
& Material excavated fiom withirl,the on-site borrow area,sedimentation basins,and leachate,
UST excavation meeting the requiretnents of this Section shall be used for engineeredfill,
cl. It is expected that sufficient,suitable material for engineered fill will be available from the on-
site sources described in these 1'echnical Specifications. The Conn actor may need to
segregate or select inat rial from these sources, for use as engineerW fill, however the
(",'ontractor will not be required to mechanically screen or import rnattn-ial for engineered fill.
102 PROPERTIES
A Engineered fill rriaterial shall be soil or soil/rock mixture that is free of organic jiuitter,debris,
andJor deleterious or other unsuitable inatetials.
B. Engineered fill material shall not contain rocks or clo,ds,over 6 inches in greatest dimension,
and not more than 5 percent,by dry weight shall be Maori er than 2 inches in greatest dimension
or as approved by the Degign Engineer.
PART 3 EXECUT10N
3,01 PLAC!"WNT
A, Prior to placenient ofengirieered fill on native k,7ound,scarif`y the exPosed soils in-place to a
depth of approxin'uttely 6, lurches, moisture condition to within I to 3 percentage Points of
optimun"I moisture content, and compact: as engineered fill to at least 90 percent of the
maximum dry density as detemfined by ASTM 13 1557.
B. General engineered fill shall be placed uri 6-1nch lifts with a inaximum uncorn,pacted thickness
of"8iniches. Each layer shall be spread even!ly and thoroughly mixed to obtain a near tunform
CIM4 Vn�aeerai Rldoc Film]Ousure
02224-2
Page 3407 of 4165
condition in each lay ar, EliginecredfiHmateriaI shall
content within, I to 3 percentage poi tits of the optimurn moisture content,mixed as required to
estabifish uniforim moisture,and coni'lmcted to a mininium of 90 percent of the maxiinum dry
density as determined by AS1 I'M 1) 155T
PART 4 MEASUREMENTAND PAYMENT
4,01 EIN C3 I NEER F"D FILL
X, Engirieered fill I:br the sedimentation basin improvements, backfilling the former leachate
pond,access roads,andiareas outside the engineered turfelosure area, shall be included irl the
Contract Unit Price fbr"Fill (Foundation Layer and Engineered Fill)"'addressed in Section
02240 (Foundation Layer) of these "Fechnical Specificat ions and includes all excavation,
transport, placenient, moisture conditioning and compaction. The quantity for "Fill
(Fomidation Layer and Engineered Fill"shall be a rinal pay quantity as describied in Section
91-H)15 of t�he Standard Specifications and shall include fuH compensation fbr providing all
materials,labor,equiptnent,tools,and incidentals required tic)install engineered fill as shown
on die Plans,, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design, Engineer. No additional
corripensation will be allowed therefore.
4.02 INCIDENTAL ENCHNEF.'RED FILL
A, II' easurenient and payment for hvidentat engineered fill shall be included in the Contract Unit
Price paid for the varims items ol'Work, for which incidental engineered fill is required,
END OF SECTION
f urf SpvrA$eaion 02224 ERginmod FillAw Final:Cbsiai�,Conslruoioro-Toofinjuid S1xvIka6ims
EBA ErvV*vevHnV Aupwit 20
02224-3,
Page 3408 of 4165
SECTION 02225
TRENCHING AND BACKFILLING
PART I GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
A. Tbe: C,ontractor shall perlcnmi all Ircriching andk)r backfilling operations, necessary to
install corrugated nieW pipc (CMP) catch basins, down drains and overflow pipes,
sedimentation basin oudet, binied pipes and conduits, anchoring or the ILDPE and
engineered turf cover (if necessary), and coastruoion of the GfU-, condensate trench
drains in accordance with this Section and at the locations and to the din'iensions shown
on the plans. The Contractor shall furnish all labor, supervision, tools, ffl2terials,
equipment, transportation and incidentals as neces,s,ary to implement the trenching and
backfilling olieraflo!ns,
1.02 REFl RENCES,
A. Cal ifornia Department of Transportation,20 10,
13, Caltrans,5tandard I'lans. Califomia Department ot"Fransportation, 20 10.
C, AmericanSociea yjbr Testing and Materials% Current Edition,
1,03 APPLICABLE, SIANDARI")S AND SPEC"IFICAI'LONS
A, ASTM D 1557 Standard 'lest Methods far Laboratory Compactio'n
Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (56,0�00 ft-IbRIV
[2,700 kN-ni/rn'l).
1,04 QUALITY ASSLIRANCT
A Testing and Observation
L Testing and observation of trenebing and backfilling shall be conducted in
accordance mrith the CQA Plan.
I The, Contractor shall cooperate with Ll'ie CQA Monitor (luring, observation,
testing,and collection of samples,
3, Iffield testing by the C(' ;Monitor indicates that the moisture coritent or density
of any lift, or portion thereof, of trench and fornier leachate pond backfill fails to
meet the specified requiret-meant„ the subJed layer or portion thereof shall be re-
worked,at the Contractor's expense, witil the required moisture and density have
been attained, No additional backfill sball be phaced until the iva-place fill has
been inspected and accepted by the Design Engineer.
4„ Where wolrk is interrupted by rain, operations sul�uject to the moisture and density
requirements shall not be resumed until obsenrations and field tests by the (.,QA
Monitor indicate that the aloisture content and density of the in-place 1-111 M
within the limits s,pecifiled. This requirement will not pre61de the Contractor
from discing or aerating the subject materials to achieve accepitable conditions.
02225 FmaWrigand RaWIdling,&w, NnO Clusure Sprcifin6oris
2"'RA Enpinwring August 20 tl 5
022,25-1
Page 3409 of 4165
PARI' 2 PRODUCTS
101 PIPE BI.DDING
A Pipe bedding shall conform to the requirements of Section 02207 (AggTegate Materiak)
of these tech nical Spec i ficat ions,
2.02 1 1 RENCH BACKFILL
A. Backfill inateTial for the condensate drain fine Lren,ches as shown on the Plans shall
consist of material excavated 11-om tfic (rerich unless sp,ecified otherwise by the Desi&1i
Eingineer,
103 ENGINEF'RED F11-1.
Aa Backfill material for trenches with pipe bedding and for the GCL/geonet composite
anchor trenches shall confomi to the requirements of'Section 02224 (Engineered Fffl) of
thcse Technical Specifications.
I
PART 3 EXFC'JJT1ON
3,011 '1 1 RENO I PREPARArioN
A. Required, points of connection, lines, levels, contours, and darturn locations shall be
identified by tine Contractor. Locations, for points, of connection IliaL are sbown on the
P'l.aris are approximate. The Contractor shall locate tifilities to best serve the intended use
and to avoid, inechanical and structural interference,
,r 3�O�2 -nui,'NCH EXCAVATING
A. Trenches shall be excavated to the lines and grades as shown on the Plans, Water or
niaterials that interfere wid'i the work shall be ren-loved.
B" Soft areas of trerich subgrade not capable of cornpl action in place shall be CLA OUL
C. The trench bottom shall be firm, continuous, relatively smoolh and free of rocks and/or
unsuitable material prior to the installation of pipe bedding or ITC11ch backfill material.
3,03 SHORING, S11F.111NW-3, AND BRACIN(i 01-17TRENCH
A, The trench shall be braced arid supporled with sheets when necessary to prevent caving
during excavation in Unstable material, or to protect adjacent structures, property, and
workers.
B, T'he Contractior shall secure a trench permit from the California Uvision of Industrial
Safey prior to the excavation of any trench over 5 feet in, depth
C. horing and shecting shall be removed as the backfill is corril',ileted in a manner tbat will
not damage the pipe or permit vc)ids in the backfill,
D. All sheeting, shoring, and bracing of trenches, shall conform to the safely requirements of'
the federal, s,tate:, or local public agenicy '),iaving,j,u.;trisdictiori. 'rhe most stringent of these
requirements shall apply.
I urrspvc ,smaon 02125 Frrach4q,and H&AR I fing.doe NnM Clevure Constmokm Tedmicid SpecirwWons
Ed A Engineawhip, October 20 13
02225-2
Page 3410 of 4165
3.04, ["IPF�,/(,'ONDIJrf"FRI".,.NCH BACKl`lLLJNCj
A. Trenches shall be backfilled to the lines and grades as shown on,the Plans.
B, Placcinent niethods shall be employed that do not disturb or damage buried drainage
pipes,and conduits in the trerich.
C. Pipe bedding rnaterial shall be placed at trench blotloin, level fill niaterials iri one
continuous, layer not exceeding 61nches compacted depth and compacted to 90 percent of
rnaximurn dry density as determined by ASTM 1) 1557,
D, Pipe bedding shall I)c placed around the sides and to the top of the pipe/conduit, Lamped
in place, and compacted to 90,percent of inaxirriurn dry density as deter iiiined by ASTM
J) 155T
111 Optimunii moisture content of pipe bedding material shall be maintained to attain reqUired
compaction density.
Portion of trench albove pipe bedding shall be backfilled mrith engineered fill in
accordarice wffli Section 02224 (Engineered Fill)of these I eclinical Specificaflons.
G, Jetting of trenches shall not be permitted, unless allowed by the Design Engincen
H. For buried pipe that d1ocs not require pipe beddirig or engitleercd fill (condensate drain
pipe), the trench backfill shall be placed in a manner that will not damage the piple. The
trench back-fill shall be compacted to a firm consistency consistent with sun,ounding
erosion-resistant layer nviterial.
105 ANCHORTRENCH BACKfILLING (IF NECESSARY)
A, A placement rnethod shall be employed that does not dainage (he LLIVE
geom,ei,nbr�iuie/ei-ugii!"icere,d, turf in the trench.
R The portion of the trench above the LIME geoniembrane/engincered turf shall be
backfilled, with engincered fill in accordance with Section 02224 (Engincered M11) of
these I`ec lira ical Spec ifications.
(.'% Jetting of trenches shall not be Permitted, urdess allowed by the L)esign Engineer.
D. Trenches shall be backfilled to the lines arid g,rades,as shown on the I'llans.
PART 4 MEASUREMEN,r AND PAYMENT
4.01 TRENCIIING
A Measurernient and payment for treriching per this, Section shall be, considered as inicluded
in,the Contract Unit Price paid for the various items of Work I'Or which it is required.
4M SHORING, SHEEIING, AND BRACING,
A. Measurement and payment for any shoring, shecting arnd trench bracing per this, Section
shall ].,)e considered, as included in the Contract Unit Price paid for the various items of
Work for which they are reqoi red,
02225 I'michmSand BaCkHhkg dm.x Final Chxsu"ConstmvAon d echnieml SprcfflciGum
ETA Emeincyy'Wp August V)9 5
02225-3
Page 3411 of 4165
4,03 TREW."l-I BACKFUJANG
A. Measurement and payrnent for backfilling of trenches per this Section shafl be considcred
as included in the Contract Unit Brice paid for the various items (A'Work for which it is
required.
'END OF SECTION
Spcvn',Scc6on0222S Tirvichbig and Bwkfiffing.doc Final(",k"vilTv cotwl,u uc4 oon TcchniaA S�x,,Wwm kmi
EBA Enginpvdng (XWber 20 1
O 25-4
Page 3412 of 4165
SECTION' 02240
FOUNDATION LAVER
PARTI GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
& The Contractor shall prep,,'rre all existing interhii cover soil to he incorporated into the
foundation layer and Place all new foundation layer material as necessary in accor(hance with
this Section and at the locations and to the dimensions shown on the Plans, The Contractor
shall ffirnish all labor,sul)ervision,tools,materials,equipment,trranspor tation,and incidentals
as,necessary to pre parc, hai.fl, place and grade soil rnaterW to install the floundation layer,
1.02 REITERENCI!'S
A. Caltrans (",'alifornia, DepartTllent of",17j'ans[),ortation, 2010,
B. (,'tiltr-aii,v,,Slandcir(III'lans. Caliromia Department of Transport.a t ion, 20,10,
Ame1*,wnSocie4yJbr 7u,,,sting atid,Haterials. C"'urrent Edition,
1.03 APPLICABLE', STANDARDS AND SPECIl"ICATIONS
A. AS"I'M D 1557 Standard"rest Methods for Laborauw.y Coniliaction Characteristics
of Soil Using Modified Effort(56,0001 ft-lb,17ft' [2,700 kN-m/m3])
I.04 QlJAUTY ASSURANCE
A. Testing and Observation
I Testing and observation ofthe foundation layer, including verification ofth ickness,
shall be conducted in accordance wil�h, the CQA Plan.
2. The Contractor shall cooperate with the CQA Monitor cludrig observation,testing,
and collection of samples.
3. If field and/or laboratory testing by C."QA Moriftor indicates that any area of"the
foundation layer does not meet compacted moisture content and dry, derisiry
requirements,the Contractor shall rework the material in that arezi(s)at his expense
untfl the foundation layer is,in conformance with:the requirernents of this Section. A
deduction will be made flour the Contractor's compensation(based on standard wage
rates)Ix.) rmy fbr testing of the reconipacted foundation kayer niaterial I
4. Where work is interrupted, by rain, operations sulrject to the rnoimure and derisity
require,nients, shall not be resumed until observations and field tests by the CQA
Monitor indicate that the nioisture content an(]density of the in-place fill are within
die limits specified. 'I I hi's requirement will not preclude the Contractor ftona discing
or acrating the subject matetials to achieve accepitable conditions.
B. Surveying
1, Tl-w Contractor shall Provide all constmction stakirig, grading control, and other
staking necessary to construct the foundation layer to the lines, grades, and
din-iensions slu')w n.on t1w Plans. The Design Engineer will provide data oil existing
controll points in the vicinity of the Work site for use by the Coraractor's, Land
022AD roundmkol I Aqmdoc HnO Maim spmiflofionb
EBA Enginvoing 02240-1 August 21 H 5
Page 3413 of 4165
Surveyor or eligible [,,ngineer.
1 A II gmadesand dimensions oftompleted areas of the foundation layermay be verified
by the Desigj'i Engineer or CQ�A Monitor by field survey.
3, If it is demonstrated the CQA verification surveyirig that any portion(s) of the
foundationi layer does not rneet the required lines, grades, or dinlerisions showri oil
the Plans, the Contractor, at his expense, shall rework or replace that portiorr('s),to
bring the dcficient area(s) to grade or the proper diniension in accordance with[ all
requirements of this Section, A deduction will be niatle fi-oni the (.1ontractor's
compensation(based on standard wage rates,)to retest thernaterials and re-veti Fy the
grade or the proper dirnomsilon by survey.
C. Faunda6on Layer Thickness
L If field testing by CQA Monitor indicates that any area(s) of the foundation layer
does not meet the ininimurn: thickness requirements, the Contractor shall dace
additional foundation layer rnaterial at h�is expense until the deficient area(s) is in
conformance with the requirements,of this Section. A deduction will be rnade rrorn
the Contractor's coinpensation(based on standard wage rates)to pay for tesdrig of the
new foundation layer placernent arca(s),
PART 2 PRODUCTS
101 SOURCF,,
A Ciro site material meetingthan requirements orflfls Sectionandas follows shall be used 6orthe
foundation layer,
13. Material excavated ftom within the: on-site borrow area meeting the requirements of this
Section, shall be used for the foundation layer.
C. It is expected that sufflicient suitable material for the roundation layer will beavailable ftom
t[le on-she borrow area described in these'Teclrnical Speci Fications. The Contractor may,need
to scgregxite or select rnaterial frorn the borrow area for use as f0undation layer matenal,
however the Contractor will not be required to rnechanically scrtmi or,import niaterial ror the
foundation layer.
102 PROPERTffi,,S
A, Foundation layer material shall be soil or soil/rock mixtare that is Eree of organic triatter,
debris, an(Vor dOeterious or other unsuitable materials.
B. Foundation layer material shall not contain rocIcs or dools over 6 inches,in greatest dimension,
and not more thani 15 percent by dry weight shall be larger than 2 inches in greatest dimension
or as approved by the f esign, Fngirieer.
PART 3 E XECUTION
3.01 SUBGRADE PREPARATION
A. All vegetative growth on existing inferim cover soil surfaces shall Inc:removed in accordance
with the "Clearing and (3rubbing"procedures presented in Section 02222 (Excavafion) of
these'l,"ectinical Specifications,
02240 Fifud OwFum cansl:Tuciianl Uhumd spoxffinfians
EHA 1 OV'Virgeo ing Aupw 20 1
022401-2
Page 3414 of 4165
B, The existing intcrim cover soils shall be fine graded to ehrninate:rough or tow areas,
C, "I"he existing intiefirn cover soils shall be sc:arified wfthin the Iftnits shown ori the Phans to as
depth of approxiinately 12 inches,nioisture c()lnditioned to within I to 3 percentage poirits of
optimurn moisture contant,and cotripacled to at least 90 percent ofthie maximuni dry density
as determiried by AS"TTVI D 1.557,
3.02 PEACEMENTOF N"H"W FOUNDATION LAYER MLATERIAL
A, In areas requiring additional roundation layer material as showri oar the plans,new fioundation
'layer material shall dale placed in 6-inch Iffl's wilh a maximumuncompacted thickness of 8 to
12 incbe& Each layer shall he spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to obtain a near uniform
condition in each layer. Foiindation layer material shall then be brought to,as unifbnn moisture
content within I to 3 plercent,"Ige Points of the Optimum moisture content,mixed as required to
establish uniforrn nroistnre,and cornP acted to au rninirnurn o f 90 percent of the niaxinium dry
density as deterni.ined by ASTM D 1557.
303 StJRFACE GRADING
A. Wherk completed,the surface of the foundatiori layer slhall conforni to the grades shown on the
Plans after placerneat and:,compaction and at no point on the corripdeted grading plane shall
the grade vary above the designated grades by more than 0,tO feet.
B. When corripleted, the surface of all f'oundation layer slopes g7eater than 1,01 licreent shall
corif"orm.to the grades shown on the Plans.At no point on the completed grading plane shall
trine grade vary below the designated grades rneasured perpendicular to the slope,nor by more
than 0.20 feet above the designated grades as rneasured perpendicular to the slope.
PART4 MEAWREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.0 StMGRADE PREPARATION
A. Subgrade preparation shall be measured by the square foot and includes all fine g pad i ng,
scarification, moisture conditiorring and relcorripaiction., payment shall be included in die
Contract Unit,Price per sqUare foot conapleted fbi,"Subgrade Preparation"addressed in this
Seetion and sluill inchide flull eon ipensation for providing all triaterials, labor, equipment,
tools, and incidentals required to prepare the sub grade as shown on the Plans,as specified
herein,and as,directed by the Design r,ngineer. NO additional compensation will be allowed
therefore.
4.02 NEW F(M-NDATION LAYI`IR MATERIAL
k New f6undation layer triaterial sliall be measured by the hi-place cublic yard installed and
includes all excava tion, transport, placernent, nwiskire conditioning and cornpaction. The
quantity For"Fill (Foundation Layer and Engineered Fili)-shall be a firial pay quantity as
described in Section 91-1,0115 of' the Standard Specifications, and shiall include full
compensation for providing all materials,labor,equipnient,tools,and incidentals required to
install new foundation layer material as shown ono the Plans, as specified herein, and as
directed Ibly the Design Engineer. No additional conipensation will be allowed therefore,
END OF SECTION
02,240 Fouidmian Larn doc rbla CWort Canuva4ln redmical
EHA 02240-3 Angum 2015
Page 3415 of 4165
SECTION 02310
ACCESS ROADS
PAR,"I' l G'ENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, 'rhe Contractor shall construct all access roads, including,grading and subgrade preparation,
in accordanu with this Section areal at the locations and to the dame ens ions sbovo as on the Plans.
T'he Contractor shall furnish all labor"SAxpervision,trools,inatarials,equipmerit,transportation,
and incidenials as necessary to prepare and construct the accessroads,
1-02 REITRENCES
A, C.alifornia Depaitinent offrarisportation, 2010.
B. Calfrans Standard Plans, California Dep�aitmcnt ofTranspottatlour„ 2010,
C. Current Edition.
1.03 AIPPLIC-AfILP" S"FANDARDS AND SPECIFICA,mNS
A. ASTM D 1557 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Conipaction Characteristics
of Soil Usin,g Modified liffort,(56,006 ft-lbfft' [2,700 kN-Tn/rn3"'
1.O4 QUALF-rY ASSURANCE
A. Testing and Observation
I Testing and observation of the access roads,shall be condUcted in accordance with
the CQA Plam
2. The Contractor shall cooperate with the CQA Monitor during obsetvation, testing,
and collection of samp�es.
3. If any portion(s) of the access road, constrixtion is determined by tbe Design
EIngincer to not meet the requirenients of this Section, based on either testing or
observations,the Coniractor,at his expense,shall rework or remove andreplacedeal
portion(s) to rneet thie requirements of this ection as directed by the Design
Engineer,
4. Wbere work is internipled by rain, operafions, suibject to the uioisturc and density
requirenients, shall not be resunied until observations and field tests by the CQA
Monitor indlcate that the moisture content and density of the in-place fill are within
the limits specified, This requirerrien(will not preclude the Contractor fron'l discing
or aerating the subJect materials to acIvieve acceptable conditions.
PART 2 PRODucrs
2.01 REIN FORC1.4"MENT GBOTEXTILE
k Reinforcement geotcxtile for the access road consInction shall confomi to the requirements
of Section 02771 (Rein-forcernent Geotextile)of these"J"echnical Specifications,
02310 Accem a Roadt doe FM Cbutn CmUvc6on Technnol SpocirwAkijuns
EBA En�,unvwuhq Nigast 20�5
02310-1
Page 3416 of 4165
102 AGGREGATE BASE,
A Agp,-egate base fortfie accessroad constniction shall conform to glue requirements of Section
02,207 (AggregatelMaterials)of these'rechnical Specifications.
PAJIT 3 EXECUTION
3,01 GENERAL
A, The Contractor shall,provide all construction,grading control,and other stakirig neeessaq to
construct the access roads to the lines,fin-ades,and dimensions shown on the Plans,
3"02 SUBGRADE
A Where access,roads are not con strucled on engi neered fi 11,the subgqade for the access roads
shall be scarified as minimum of 6 inches, unilimnly moisture conditioned to within I to 3
percentage point of optimurn rnoisture content and compacted to at least O percent of the
rnaximurn dry density as determined by ASIl'rM D1557.
R Where access roads are constructed on engineered fill,the:engineered fill shall be placed mid
compacted in accordance with the requirements of Section 0222,4(Engineered Fill)ol"these
Technical SpecificaHons,
103 REINFORCEMENT(.111SOT Elf TILE
A Prior to placing geotextile on the subgrade for access roads,the stability of the s4bgrade sllall
be checked in the presence of the CQA Officer by 1:,)roof rolling with a roller or loaded water
truck. Areas which are not suitable shall' he allowed to air dr i y unnntil stable or shall be over-
excav,ated and backfil led with aggregate base,ant the Contractor's expense.
B, Reinforcement geolextile shall be installed over the access road subgrade and scanned as
specified in Section 02771 ( einfiorcement Geotextile)oftbeseTe&nical Specificitions,as
shown on the Plans, and in accordance with the manulhaurer's instructions.
C. Reinforcernent geotextile panels shall be installed (unrolled) in the direction of traffic
(longitudinally).
D Reinf'orcement geolexd l,e panels shall be overlapped an minimurn of fi et on sides and ends.
E, Trucks and other construction equipment shall not dri've on reinforcement gootextile prior to
covering with the full thickness ofaggregate base.
3.04 AGGRIGAI I E BASE,
A, Prior to, placing aggrregate base on subgrade for access roads, the stability orthe s,ubgrade
shall be checked in the presence of the CQ,A Officer by proof rolling with an roller or Wded
water truck. Nreas which are not suitable shall be allowed to air dry until stable or shall be
over-excavated and backfilled with aggregate base, at the Contractor's expense.
B, rrucks shall back-durn:p aggre,gate base onto the reinl"orcemen eotextile, driving on
A1srojec,fi907'Uo sun,Turf SpecdS'm6on 023 1 Q Amm Roadsdoc MnAl Clogurr Conmucibn&imbucW Speci6cowns
RHA A"agineering Auguo 2 0 1
02310-2
Page 3417 of 4165
previously dumped aggregate base to progress.
C, 'Hie aggregate base shall be splread in unilbi-m loose lifts,riot exceeding 8,inches ill thickaiess,
D. The aggregate base shall be moiswre condifloried, to within I to 3 percentages points olf
oplimani, moisture coment, and cornpacted to a Minimarn of 95 percent of�riaxinwrii djy
density per A STM D 15 57,
E Access roads shall be "proof rolled" hi die presence of the Design F1'ngineer or their
representative with a heaVyheel-load vehicle,such as a loaded water truck,to iderififyweak
areas. Weak areas shall be reworked to the:Design Engincer's satisfaction wilhotit additional
compensation.
PART 4 MEASUREMENT ALND PAYMEN'T
4.01 A.C,CESS ROADS
A. Access roads shall be meastired by the square root in phace as determined bly the actual leng4h
colistracted by the actual width constructedand inckides all grading, subgrade preplaration,
reinforcenient geotextile and aggregate blase. Payinent shall be included in the Contract U'llit
Price per sq�,mre foot installed fbr"Access Roads"addressed fir this Section and shall include
full cornplensation f6r providingaH rnWerials,labor,equ passer(,tools,and incidientals,requi.red
to install the access roads as shown on the Plans, as specified bereiri, and as directed by the
Design Engirmer, No additional compensation will be allowed ffierefbre.
END OF SECTION
TlufSpw0';mfirm 023 10 Ammms Roa6mim Hnlld Clo:mire ConstrucWn TcchuicW Spot;ficlatiom
ARA Fqdmll Augwo 2M.5
012310-3
Page 3418 of 4165
SECTION 02722
DRAtNAGE AND EROSION CONTROLS
PART I GENERAL
1.01, SUMMARY
A, 'Ilie Contractor shall furnish and install (including necessmy excavation's) all drain irflets,
drain pipics, sedimentation basin drainage risers,, earthen and li.ned swales, rock riprap
swales, rock riprap oulfalls and inlets, and erosion control niaterials in accordance with
this Section and at the locations and to the diniensions and grades shown on the Plans.
The Contractor shall ffirnish, all labor, supervision, tools, materials, equipi-nent,
transportation, and incidentals as necessary to prepare and construct the various drainage
and erosion,control f° aturcs.
i.02 1UTERENCES
A. SI)ecyicafions, California Department of—Fransport,,,nion,20 l O
13. Caltrans "tapielard Plevi, (I'a I i fornia Department of Transporta tion, 2010.
C. Ameri'can.Societyffir 7'a.vtingsand Alhite viral s. Current Edition.
1,0 PPLICABIX STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A ASTM D 1557 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory (,,'ornpacdon
Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort (56,00O ft-lbf/fI3
[2,7010 kN-rn/M3]),
1.04 SUBNff FI'ALS
A. At least 14 calendar days I)rior to beginning any drainage or erosion,control construction
in accordance with the requirements of this, Section, the:Contractor shall provide three( )
copies to the Desig.)i Engineer of the naineand location of material sources, laboratory
test results and/oTrnaterial data sheets conf'orlIrling with relevant details shown on the
Plans,
R The Contractor shall provide the narne and location of source, labloratory test results,and
product data sheets (inix design) for the concrete to be used showing that the material
meets or exceeds the product requirenients, It'niore than one (1) concrete unix is to, be
used, mix designs fair each area shall be submitted and, clearly marked as to the area of
Work that the mix is intended for.
C. At least 14 calendar days prior to delivery of materials to the Work site, the Contractor
shall subinit the followingto the Design, Engineer for approval:
I Samples, manufacturer's product datt sheets, and manufacture's installation
guidelities, for the following materials to verify that Ibe materials rnect or exceed
the corresponding product requirements:
a, CNIP, Fittings and anchor asserribly stakes and hardware.
b. Turf reinforcement mat(TRNI) and anchorage stakes.
TuffSpw0,.%vc6on 02722 Dahiage CoomAdoc RnM Closura Consgrookm Twfinical spmiftwimw
FRA k."ngineermp Aupw 200
02722-1
Page 3419 of 4165
C. Erosion control netting and anchorage staples.
1.05 QUAT-11"Y ASSURANCE
A. '"resting and Observation
L Testing and observation of the draftllge and erosion control structures shall be
conducted in accordance with the CQA Plan
2. T'he (".ontractor shall cooperate with the CQlA on during observation,
testing,and,collection of'sarnples.
3. If any portion(s) of the drainage and erosion control structures is, determined by
the CQA Monitor to not meet the requirements of this Section, based on either
testing or observations, the Contractor shall, at his expen,se, rework or reniove
and replace that portion(s) to tneet the requiretnents ofthis,Section as directed by
the Design Engineer,
B, SLlrveying
I. 'rbe (.7ontractor shall provide all coil stmction staking, gradfi'lg control, and other
stalung necessary to construct the drainage components to the lines:, grades, and
dimensions shown on the Plans. "Ille Design Engineer will provide data on
existing control points in the vicinity of the Work site, For use by the Contractor's,
1,and SUI-VeY017 or eligible:Engineer.
1 All lines, &a-tides and dirnensions of installed drainage components inay be
verified by the Design Engineer or CQA Monitor by field st'irvey.
1 If it is demonSITated by the CQA verification surveying that any portion(s) of the
drainage components doles not meet the required lines, grades, or dimensions
sh own on, the Plans, the Contractor, at his expense, shall rework or replace that
portion(s), to bring the deficient area(s) to grade or thic proper dimension in
accordance with all requirements of this Section, A deduction will be made frorn
the Contractor's complensation, (based on standard wage r,ates), to retest the
rnaterials and re-verify the&.!Tade or the proper dimension by survey.
PART 2 PRODUcrs
2,01 DRAIN lNLE-'TS
Al, Drain inlets shall be as shown on the Plans, 1.3rain inlets shall be manufactured of cast in
place concrete or prefabricated reinforceld concrete or approved steel equivalent to the
dimensions set forth in the Plans.
B. Concrete for the drain inlets shall conform to the requirements of Section, 033001
(Concrete) of these'"Fechnical Specifications,
102 PIPE AND F,rn"INGS
A. The CM.P for the drain pipe shal I 'be of 16 gauge continUOUS helical lock corrugated steel
pipe conflbry'ning totic requirements of Section 66 "Cornigated Metal Pipe" of the
Standard Specifications, All CMP and standard assembly fittings required for complete
assembly shall be galvanized conforming to the requirements of Section 6,6-,1.02 E(l) of
the SLandard Specifications for zinc coated steel.
Aprojme')OnCknuzu Tuff SpaihSvvian 02722 1kamage CbRitto I doc Him[Own Construvionl'exhnirW Spaificaiiarm
LBA Eoongwrrov,ll A upat 20 G 5
Ol2722-2
Page 3420 of 4165
13 1-fifth density polyetlrylene (IMPE) pipe shall be 17ype S, con-Ugated polyethylene pipe
with smooth interior and shall conforin to the requirements in AASFITO Designation
M294. The Pipe shall be manufactured fTom high-density' polyethylene virgin,
compounds.
C Pipe (inclUding all couplings and fabricated fittings) shall be supplied froni the source
appro ed by the E)csign Engineer based on the SUbmittal requirements in Part 1,04 of this
"section.
D. Anchor assembly stakes and hardware for above, ground CMP shall confbrm to Section.
75-1.02 of the Standard Specifications. All hardware shall be galvanized after flibrication.
All pipe statues shall be either galvanized after fabrication, or be fabricated fi-orn pre-
galvanized pipe. If pre-galvanized piipe is Wed, Nveld areas shall be cleaned and painted
with zinc-rich primer.
2.03 PfFIE BEDDING
A. Pipe bedding shall conform to the requirements of Section 02207 (Ag&qegate Base) of
these'rechnical Specifications.
2.04 BACKFILL
A, Backfill above the pipe bodding, shall consist of material excavated ftoni the
trench/excavation unless specified offierwise bly the Desi&q,ii Engriineer.
2,0,5 EROSION MATTING
A. Erosion matting as shown on the Plans for erosion mat lined swales shall be lined with
'TRM and shall be inaide of thermally-welded PVC' rnoni'AIlaments in a two-dimensional
web as nianufactured by Greenstreak and distributed as GAPE C-MAT," or approved
equivalent.
B, Anchorage lor the TRM shall be wooden SUrvey staRes, I inch by 4 inches in dimension,
and approximately 10 to 12 inches in length.
106 ROCK RIPRAP
A Loose and grouted rock riprap for the swales and ootfalls shalt conform to the
requirements of Section 022017 (Aggrregate Materials),of these Technica I Specifications.
2.07 CONCRETE
A. Concrete Cor the drain inlets, sedimentation basin's drainage riser foundation,and grouted
riprap outt"alls shall conform to the requirements of Section 03300 (Concrete) o f these
Telc h.nical Specifications,
2,08 EROSION CONTRoj.,
A Straw for erosion control shall be certi Illed weed Free,
t urf'Sp=Seokm 02722 DT3M3BC QITATOIJOC Final Closure C,mmmmion TcOinkal Spuciflumiumi
ERA'EnginerrIVIR A Uspar 20�5
02722-3
Page 3421 of 4165
B. Erosion Control netting shall 'be lighvwveight polypropylene having an approxiinate 0.50�-
inch x 0.50-inch rriesh.
G U-staples to anchor the netting, shall be 0,50-inch by 10-inch U-staples as reconunended
by the netting manufactiirer or as approved by the Desigpi Engineer.
109 WOOD POSTS AND RAILING
A. The wood used for, the posts and railing at the drainage irflets shall be construction common or
better grade redwood. The wood shall be painted with two coats, of premium quality exterjor
grade flat white latex paint approved by the Engineer, Nails used to fasten the rails to the posts
shall be galvanized box gauge.
2,1.0 STEU, GRATE
A. The steel grate on the drainage inlet shall be made of#6 reinf6rcing bars at as 12 inch spacing.
The bars shall be 9hop,welded to form the grate per Plans. The ends oft he baTS in the upper mat
shall be bent downward% inch so that they will rest flat on the bottom of the notch at the top of
the drainage inlet. 1,lie steel in thereffiforcing bars inay be Grade 40 or 60,
PART 3 EXECUTION
101 GENERAI,
A, The Contractor shall provide all construction, grading control, and other staking
necessary to construct drainagio arid erosion control structures to the lines and grades
shown on the Plans.
3.02 S"MCKPILING
A, The Contractor shall stockpile drainag!e and erosion clontrol rnaterials in an Urca(s)
approved by the Design Engineer,
31 M EXCAVATION
A, Excavation for drainage and erosion control structures shall be in conformance with the
requirements specified in Section.02222 (Excavation)of theseTechnical Specifications.
3,04 DRAM 1'.NTJ.�-FS /�ND DRAIN PIPE
A, 1'renching for drain inlets and buried drain pipe shall be in conrorniarice with the
reqtfirements, specified in Section 02225 (Trenching arid Backfilling) of these "fechnical
Specifications.
B, Pkicement of drain inlets/buried drain pipe and associated bedding anti backfill niaterial
shall be in conforrriance with Section 66-1 of the Standard Specifications and Section
02225 ("I'renching and Bads filling)of these Technical Spec i fications.
C. Above ground drain Pipe shall be Placed andmichored in conformance with.Section 66 of
the Standard Specifications and as shown o,n the Plans,
rt,l'url'SpeoNxi�on 027Z2 Dminage Corwtrol,doc, F11"W("'Wgun C0r['MnAQfl'M D-ohnkA speedluaGum
EBA A"n)"Meefing Augfur 210 0
02722-4
Page 3422 of 4165
;ID EDIMENTATION BAST N DRAfNAG'ERISERS
A Vertical slots shall be cut in the sedimentation basin drainage risers to the dimensions,
orientation and frequency as,shown on the Plans,
B, 'l)-enching for the drainage riser foundalions, sliall be in conl'ormance with the
requirernents specified in Section 02225 (Trenching and Backfilling) of these Technical
Specifications.
C, Minor concrete for the drainage riser ft)U.11dafl0DSshall be installed as,shown on the Plans
and placed in conformance with Section 013300 (Concret&) (if these Technical
specificatiolm
D. Placement of backfill material shall be in conformance with Section 66-1 of the Standard
Specifications and Section 02225 ('1"renching and Backfilling) of these Technical
Spelci6cations,
106 EARTHEN SWALFS
A. Earthen swales shall be excavated to, the lines and grades as shown on the Plans and in,
accordance with Secdon 02222 (Excavation)of these Technical Spec i 11 cations.
3,07 EROSION MAT LIN171) SWALES
k The TRM shall be installed as shown on the Plans and per manufacturer's
recommendat ions.
B. '"rrenches for terminal and check slots (anchorage) shall be excavated into lhe erosion-
resistant layer as shown on the Plans. Backlill of trenches, shall be compacted to
90 percent of niaxinium dry density as determined by ASTM D 155T
C TRM placed at the top of swale (finish surface) shall be at or below the final Wade so
stmflice drainage can flow freely info theswale.
D. TRM shall first be installed in the tillistream terminal end slow and rolled downstrearn
with care taken to assure that the"FRM conforms to the flow surface of the channel and is
not in tension.
'E. All splices shall be shinglect downstrearn.
F. Anchorage stakes shall be installed as shc)wn on the Plans and per manufacturers
recornmendal ions.
3,.08 LOOSE ROCK RIPRAP LINED SWALES
A. The e,aarthen portion of the swale shall be excavated to tbe lines and grades as, shown on
the Plans and in accordance with Section 02222 (Excavation) of these Technical
Specifications.
Tmf Spocs,Sm6on W 722 Drainage OnoolAx: Fwl Cknuvo Congtraulion Fechwood Spwficaakms
EA4 Enginevying dqnsv 2015
0127'22-5
Page 3423 of 4165
B. Rock riprap shall be placed on the cailhen swales to the dimensions a,s shown on the
Plans. Rock riprapi shall be placed to the average thickness shown on the Plans with a
niaxirnum thickness deviation of'4 inches at any location.
Rock riprap shall not:be placed by darnping,
The Contractor shall move and place individual ripirap stories as necessary to obtain a
stable three-point bearing for each stone and a well.-graded distribution along the entire
length of the swale, 'Fbe placed rock riprap shall be free of pockets of small stories or,
clusters,of larger stories.
109 GROUTED ROCK RIPRAP ourFALLS
A The footprint of the oulfall shall be excavated to the dimensions as shown on the Plans
and do,accorclance with Section 02222 (Excavation)of these TeCIfflical Specifications.
B. Rock riprapi shall be Placed within the excavated fbotprint to the average thickness shown
on the Plans with a maxiinum thickness deviation of 4 inches at,any location.
C. Rock riprap shall not be placed by dumping,
D. The Contractor shall move and place iridividual riprap stories as, necessary to obtain a
stable three-point bearing for each stone and a well-graded distribution over the entire
footprint of the outfal 1, The placed roick rriprap shall be frec of prickets of small stones or
clusters of large
r stones.
E Placement of concrete for the grouted rock riprap shall be in conformance with Section
03300(Concrete) of these'rechnical Spice ifi cations.
3.1110 ROCK RIPRAP INLET PROTECTI(DiN
A, The earthen, portion of`the swale or inlet shall be excavated to the lines and grades as
shown on the Plans and in accordance with Section 012222 (Excavation) of these
'Fechnical, Specifications.
-113, Rock riprap shall be placed on the earthen swale at inlets to the dimensions as shown on
the Plans. Rock ripiral) shall be placed to the average thickness shown on the Plans with a
ma.xin,iurnthickness deviation of 4 inches,at any location.
C, Rock riprapi shall not be Placed by durnping.
1 Ilie Contractor shall move and place individual riprap stones as necessary to obtain a
stablc three-point bearing for each stone and a well-graded distribution along the entire
area of protection. The placed rock riprap shall be free of pockets of small stories or
clusters of larger stones.
11,1 EROSION(.'.(-)NTR,01.
A, Following the application of seed and fertilizer, straw shall be blown onto landfill and
borrow area swface slopes that are steeper than 10 percent. Blown straw shall be applied
to achieve a MininIUM thickness,of 1.5 inches in place.
Spt&,Scelian 02722 Thamr.Conlrd,dbe FiPW Ckmurc Consitructian IcOnical Spccifkadmw
EHA EngimcpIng dugus�20�5
02722-6
Page 3424 of 4165
13, Following application of the straw, cover the straw mrith erosion control netting. Space
netting anchors at as frequency of I foot on center along the edges, and one (1) every 35
square feet! ror interior areas, Space the butt Joints, I foot aPart,
P,ARI'4 MEASUREME NI'AND PAYMEN'T
4V DRAIN INLETS ANI)DRAIN PIP'F
A. Dniin inlets shall be ineasured, by each drain inlet installed and include all trenching,
CMP, backfill, concrete,metal cover, and bars at the opening. Payment shall be included
in the Contract Unit Price per each, unit installed for "DnAiTl Inlets" addressed i1n, this
Section and shalliiiclude full compensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment,
tools, and incidentals reqiLired, to install the dmin inlets as shown on the Plans, as
specified herein, and as directed by the Design Enghwer. No additional coinpensation
Nvi 11 [)e allowed therefore.
13 Above ground, drain Pipe shall. be measured by the linear foo�t in place arid include all
pipe, couplings, and anchor assemblies. Payment shall be included in the Contract thift
Price per linear floot installed for the vatious sizes, and types of "Above Ground Drain
Pipe" addressed in this Section and shall include tbll compensation for providing all
materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the above ground
drain pipe as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Desigil
Engdneer, No additional compensation,will be allowed therefore.
CI Buried drain pipe shall be ineasured by the linear foot in place and include all trenchinj.,
pipe bedding,pipe and couplings,backfill, and compaction. Payment shall be included in
the Contract Unit Price per linear foot installed for the various sizes and types of"Buried
Drain Pipe," addressed in this Section and shall include FuH compensation f6r providing
all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the buried drain
pipe as shown on tbePlans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer,
No additional compensation will be allowed,therefore,
4M SEDIMEN'I'A"TiON BAS)N DRAINAG'E RISERS
A. Sodinientation basin drainage risers shaH be measured on as furnp Run basis for the
complete installation of die drainage risers, Payrnent shall be included in the Contract
Lump Surn Price for "Sedinientation Basin Outlet" addressed in this Section and shall
include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and
incidentals required to install the sedinientation, basin drainage risers as shown on the
Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer, No additional
compensation will be allowed therefore.
4.03 SWALES
A, Earthen s,wales (Type r) shall be measured by the linear foot in place and include all
excavation and grading. payment shall be included in the Contract I.Jnit Price per linear
foot installed for "'I I ype I Swales" addressed in this Section and shall'
include full
compen.sation for providing all materials, labor, equipinent, tools, and incidentals
reqUired to install the T'A w 3e I sales a w s shown can the Plans, as specified herein, arid, as
I
directed by the Design Engincer. No additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
U'protmOVAClowre 02722 OmAnage(,maoLdoc Fnal Closure Specificat kms
EPA EngMmring Aupun 10 k 5
02722-7
Page 3425 of 4165
B, Earthen swales with TRM 1',,rncs .11 and IV) shall lie measured by the linear foot in place
and include all excavation, grading and TRM materials. Pa, rnent shall be included in the
Contract! Unit Prices per linear foot installed for"J'ype If aales" and "Type IV Swales"
addressed in this Section atone,] shall include full compensation for Providing all niaterials,
labor,equipment, tools,and incidentals required to install the Type 11 and'I"YpeW swales
as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No
additional cowensation will be allowed therefore,
C, Earthen swales with loose rock riprap (Type 111) sliall be measnred by the linear foot in,
place and include all excavation, grading avid ripra,p. Payment shall be included in the
Contract Unit Price per linear foot installed for Ill Swales"" addressed in this
Section and shall include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment,
tools, and incidentals recluired to install the Type Ill swales as shown on the Plans, as
specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional compensation
will be allowed therefore.
4,04 (.3R OUTEI)ROCK R 111RAP 0UTFA1J.,S,
A. Grouted rock riprap OUtfalls shall be: ineaskired by each grouted rock, riprap outfiall
installed and include all excavation, rock riprap and concrete. Payinerit shall be included
in the Contract Unit Price per each unit installed for "Grotned Rock Riprap 0utfalls"
addressed in this Section and shall include i1ill compensation for providing all materials,
labor, equipy-nent, tools, and incidentals required to install,the grouted rock riprap outfalls
as shown on the Plains" as, specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer, The
Contractor shall make provisions for additional matenal needed to, account for excessive
vo ids between rocks, as no additional compensation will be allowed therefore:.
4,05 ROCK R.IPR.,AP'INI,I-"1"' PR(,.)off C"r'ION
A. Rock riprap inlet protection shall be rneasuTed b each rock riprap inlet installed and
include all excavation and rock riprap. Payni,lent shall be included in the Contract L)nit
Price per each unit installed for"Rock Riprap ]inlet Protection" addressed in this Section,
and shall include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, eq�uipnlenl, tools,
and incidentals, required to instafl the rock riprap protection as shown on, the Plans, as
,specified horein, and as directed by the Desiign Engineer. The Contractor shall make
provisions, for additional material needed to account for excessive voids between rocks,
as no additional conipensation will be allowed tbere((.)re.
4M EROSION comrROL
A Erosion control straw/netting shall be measured by the square foot in place and includes
all straw, netting and anchorage, Payrrient shall be included in tfic Contract Unit Price per
square foot,installed for"Erosion Control"addressed in this Section,and shall include full
compensation for providing all materials, labor, eqUipment, tools, and incidentals
reqnired to install the erosion control materials as shown on the Plans,as specified hereirl.,
and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional compensation will be allowed
therefore,
END OF SECTTON
07722 Dymnoge,Comml doc Final Chmure Conauumon Twhgl6ud SjvafiuiA60nA
EWA Augnae 20
02722-8
Page 3426 of 4165
SECTION 02771
REINFORCEMENT CEOTEXTILE
PARTI GENERAL
1.0 1 SU-MMARY
A, The Contractor shall furnish, transport to the Work site, and install all reinforcement
geotextile in accordance with this Section and at the locations and to the dirnensions,shown
on the Plans. The Contractor shall,furnish all labor,SLIPer'ViSjOrl.,tools,materials(iricluding
sewing thread), equipment, transportation, and, incidentals as nece:ssary to install the
reirift,wcenient geotextile, including that needed for testing and jc)ining rnaterials in field
(sewing, heat bonding,etc.),.
1,O�2 'REFI RENCES
A. Califtmi ia, Department of'Fransportation, 2010.
B altrans "tandev,d Plans. California Department ofTransporlation, 20 101,
C, AmericanSocietyfiv TesfinA,and Materia/s. Current Edition.
1,03 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
A, ASTM D 4533 Test Method for Trapezoi(f]"earing Strength of Geote .tile s.
R ASTM D 463,2 Test Metho(I for Breaking Load and [Iongation of Geotemiles
(Grab Method).
C ASTM D 4833 Test Method fbr Index Puncture Resistance of Geotextiles,
Geomembranes, and Related Products.
11.O�4 SUBmrrrALS
A, At]east 14 calendar days prior to delivery of Teinfrorcernent geotextille rolls to the Work site,
the Contractor shall submit three: (3) copies, of the folloMng to the Design Engineer f6r
approval",
t Sarnples,product data sheets,and complete description of reinforcement geotextiles
that:meet or exceed the product requirements of this Section,
2. Manufacturer's Quality Control(MQQ testing reports for rein fbreerneni cote tiles
to be delivered to the Work site, At a ntinimuni, results of those tests specified in
Part 2 of this Section must be included in the MQC testing reports.
I Manuflacturer's reconiniended procedures for transporting, unloading, storage,
handling, installation, repair, and searning (sewing, heat bonding, and lapping) of
reinibreenlient geotextiles,
4, Samples, product data sheets, and coniplete description of sewing thread
recomrnended by the Manuflacturer to sew the reinfiorcerrient geotextile.
02M GCQMx0v.doc FhW Chnavc Construction Tccknwa Spedficaflon's
ERA Engineeoing O'277 1-1, August 200
Page 3427 of 4165
l 05 TRANSPOR'r AND STORAGE
A The reinforcement ge�otextile rolls shall be transported to the Work,site by the(",ontractor with
opaque protective coverfiigs in a closed trailer.
B. At least seven(7)calendar days prior to any Work site delivery,the Contractor shall notil the
Design Engineer of the date,tinie,material type,rnaterial quantity,and Ynanber of tnicks for
delivery. A copy oft lie packi rig listsbowing lot and roll numbers for each shipment Shall also
be Provided to the DesigntIngineer prior to site delivery.
C Unloading,,uid storage(stacking) ofthe rein Ibreement geotextile rolls at the Work site shall
be the responsibility of the Contractor; who shall observe and certify, in writing, that the
unloading and storage of reinf6rcerrient geotextile rolls wasperforrned in accordance with the
submitted,Manufacturer's recommended procedures,
D, The Contractor shall,transport reinforcernent geotextile rolls ftorn the storage area in a manner
that does not damage tfic reink)rcerneril geotext�iles, and in accordance with the
Manufacturer's recarnmended procedures.
1 06 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A, Testing and Observation
11 Testing and observation of the reinforcernent geotextile shall be conducted in
accordance with the CQA Plan.
2. The Contractor shall cooperate with the CQA Monitor during observation,testing,
and collection,of sarnples,
I ff any portk)n(s) of the reinforcenient geotextile installation is determined by the
Design Engineer to not meet the requirements ofthis Section,based on either testing
or observations, the Contractor, at his expense, shall remove and replace that
portion(s) to meet the requirements of this, Section as directed by the Design
Engineer,
PART 2 PRODUCTS
101 REINFORCEMENT'GEo,,rEx,rlf.,E
A. R,einforcenient geotextile shall be constructed of polypropylene rnaterials and shall be
resistant to &irnage under normal construction activities, and to biological, and chemical
degradation.
& Rein 6orceinent geotextile shall be as woven geotextile trianuractured far the pm-poses of
separation,confinement,and roadway SUbgrade reinforcement,
C Physical propeftics of the reinforeement geotextile shall be tested at as minJinum testing
frequency of once per every 1010,000 square feet of reinforcernent gleotextile manufactured
and the physical proj.)erties shall be as 1,01lows:
1,AprojecCA9107,Oosun rwfpwsScv ion 0277 1 GowtAfile.doc RIA(Ire UTC(AOn,,MnACfi0n'I u;�x,)MVC,4U
EWA Enhimevmng AnFust 2W 5
02771-2
Page 3428 of 4165
Test method Propefty Re( uired VahieNARV
ASTM D 463 GrabTensile
-Machine Dircclion 31,5 1b.
-Cross Direction 315 ib„
ASTM D 4632 Grab Elorigation
-machine Direction 12%
-Cross Direction I 2'Yo
ASI'M D 4833 Puncture 120 1b,
AST'M D 4533 Trapezoid Te:ar Strength
-Machine Direction 113 1b.
-Cross,Direct,1011 113 lb,
D. (3colextile products which can be used and meet these specifications are TC Mirall 600,x,
S)mthetie Industries Geotex 315s,r, or equivalent.
102 SEWING THREAD
A. 'rhe thread used Im sewing of reinforcement geotextiles shall be Polyrnericarid have strend
properties equal to or greater flian the reinforcement geotextile.
13, Tbe thread Liscd for sewing of reinforceinent geotextiles shall be chemical resistant.
C, The thread used for sewing the reinforcement geo(extiles shall be equivalent to that
rccornmended by tile reinforcement geotextile Manufhcturer sublTlitted in accordance with
Par l 1,04A of this Section.
PAR"Y 3 EXECUT ION
3.01 PREP ARATRWAND [AAMINATION
A, The Contractor shall verify that the material and surface upon which the reinforcement
geotextile is to be placed is cotyiplete and in accordarwe with the,Technical Specificatioxis for
that material or surface prior to reinfiorcenient geotextile instaHation,
3,012 INSTALLATION
A. Reintbreament geo,textile shall be installed in,,iccordance with Mari u fiacturer's insiructions.
B. Reinforcement geoltextile shall be installed with sufficient tension to prevent exces,sive
overlapping, insufficient overlapping, wrinkles, and folds.
Reinforcernen eotextile panels shall be overlapped with sufficiew material to create a prayer
fold for,sewing operations.
D. Reinforcement geotextile shall be ballasted during installation and until the reinforcement
geotextile is covered with the overlying material.
L',pYujw'MTCh3surc ufion 02 77 B GamcxWe'do C Rmll Clasisre Con siracliml achnkat Sy�wcffkmfiam
ERA EnVneering',, 02771-3 Aupm 20�5
Page 3429 of 4165
E 1'emporary anchorage for the reinforcemient geotextile during placement shall be the
responsibilit, of the Contractor.
E Reinforcement cote the shall be: anchored as shown on the Plat vs when installation is
conilflete.
G. Reinforcement geotextile:daniaged daring installation shall be rem.oved and/or repaired with a
sewn patch.
H- Terminal ends of reinfiorcement geotextile, where the type and PLUPOSe of the reinforcement
geotextile changes as shown on the Plans, shall be ovarkipped a,mininIUM of 4 lea
L Portions of the refinforcenient cote the wasted by the Installer„ and rendered unusable, as
detcrinined by the CQA Monitor,sluill be IraDsported by the Contractor off-site tca a permitted
ftansft rstation or solid waste disposal facility for disposal at the Contractor's expense,
3,03 SJ7AMJNG'
A, All seams for reinforcement geotextile filter shall be made by sewing; alternate seaming
methods maybe allowed if it is demonstrated lay tl,ieContractortliattl"ie method wi1I createa
searn, that is acceplable for the intended purpose and will not reduce the properties of the
reirifbrcernent gcotextile below those specified in Part 2 of this Sectio�n or cause damage to
any underlyfiig geosynthetic materials,
& Soil rnaterials which could adversely affect sewing of shall be cleaned from t1le
reinforcement geotextile prior to sewing.
C A prayer fold shall,be created within the overlap prior to sewing.
I), 'Fhe Prayer fiold sliall be sewn with a 401 two-thread chain Stitch.
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.01 REI'r)ll�'OR(,-',EMEN'I'GEoTEX'I'ILE
X Measureinent and pziyrnent for reinforcement geotext�ile shall be included in the Contr act; nit
Price for "Access Roads" addressed in Section 023 10 (Access Roads,) of these Technical
Specifications,
END OF SECTION
I urf Sj OSmfim 02771 Gememkdoc, k�Omum Comtruaim'I"bka)Sp"ifienfins
LUM Engineering 02771,-4 AUSW'I 20 Is
Page 3430 of 4165
SECTION 0277'2,
GEC)MEMBRANE
PART I GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A The C"ontractor shall ffirnish and transr)ort to the site all geomembrane as shown on the Plans,
and a sufficicirt amount ol"extrwhate rod to complete the extnision welding necessaryf6r
testing and repaijing the geornernbraiie.
R The Contractor shall furnish all hibor, tools, supervision, transporUation, and equipment
necessary for the installation of the geomernbrane, including that needed for testing and
welding,materials in the field.
1,02 REFERENCF.'S
A rM D 638 Standard'Fest Method for-Tensile Properties of Plastics,
B AS TM D 7461 Standard Test Mediod for Brittleness Temperature of Plastics and
Flastorners by Impact,
C. ASTM D792 Standard 'I"est Method for Specific Ciravity and Density of Plastics by
Displacernent.
D. ASTM D 1004 Test Method for lilitialTear Resistance of Nasfic Filin arid SI-teeting.
L ASTM', D 1204 Standard Test Method for Linear Dimensional Changes to anrigid
Thermoplastic Sheeting or Film at Elevated Temperatures.
AST'IVID 150S Test Method for Density of Plastics by the I)ensity-(,jradierit'l'ecililiqL e,
G. ASTNI D 1603 Test Metliod fbr Carbon Black in 01elin Plastics,
IL A M 1)3895 Standard "lest Meffiod for Copper fnduced Oxidative Induction Time of
Polyolefins lay'I'liermal Analysis.
1. Aar m, D 6392 Smadard Practice ftwr Detemining the Intlegrity, of Field Seanis Used, in
Joining Flexible Polymeric Sheet Geamernbranes.
I AS TM 1),5321 Standard, 'rest Method flor Deten-nining the Coefficient of Soil and
Geosynthetic or(jeosynthetic Friction by the:Dircct Shear Method,
K ASTM D 5397 Standard Test Method 'fo,r Notched Constarit Tensile Load Test of
Geoftlembrane.
L AST M D 5596 Standard Test Method, fbr Microscopic EvalUaliOn of the Dispersion of
Carbon Black in Polyolefin Geosynthetics.
M. ASTM D 56 17 Standard Test Melbod for Multi-Axial Tension Test for Geosyntheties,
clot Fnnml chcmm Canowtion TUCIYDCCA spedricatlowls
FNA Em"iflomomF O2772-1 Augwa 20B
Page 3431 of 4165
N, ITI'M S 1011 C Ptincture Resistance.
O STM D 59194 Smeet'Thickness fc)rTextured Geornerribrane,
1,03 QUALIFICATIONS (Not Used-See:Section 0110 10-1 M13)
1.04 SUBMITTALS
A At least 14 days prior to delivery of gcomeinbra,ne rolls to the site,the Contractor shallsirbilift
the following, in triplicate, to the Engineer for approval:
I A Certificate of Compliance stating that all resin used for the product to be supplied
is,from a single source in the United States or Canada,of the sense general type,and
rneets the req uirernents of Part 2.01 1 of this Section.
I Manufacturer's Quality Control(MQC)test i-esults,for the geoniernbrwme base resin,
I Sarnples,product data sheets, and as complete description of the gcomernbrane to be
supplied drat inects or exceeds the product requirements of Part 2.02 ofthis Section.
4. A 2-1-bot by 2-root(mininium size) sample from the same geornembrane specirrian
tested in accordance with Pail 2,02G of this, Section and possessing as degree of
texturi7ittion representative of the material that will be shipiped to the site.
5. MQC test results for the geomernbrane rolls to be delivered to the site. At a
mininintin, the results of the tests specified in Part 2.02 of this Section rnust be
included in the MQC testing reports.
6, Maralfaclurer's recommended procedures for' ITansporting, unloading, storage,
handling, installation, repair, seanring (extnision and, fusion welding), and searn
tesdii „of geomembrane.
7, A Certificate of Compliance staring that the extrudate rodrnaterial kneets the product
requirements of Part 2.03 of this Section,
B, At least 14 days prior tic)beginning installation of geoniernbrane,the Contractor shall,submit
the following,in triplicate,to the 1"ngineer for approval:
I Installer's Geornembirane Installation Quality Control Plan, which includes WSting
procedures and ftecluencies.
2, Shop Drawings showing the proposed geornernbrane panel layout and details of-field
fabrications including skin and sleeve pipe boots.
3 Installer's Qualificalions including the following:
a. Resume of Installer's foreman.
In Resume oHnstaBer's master welder,
c. Resumes of Installer's welding and quality control personnel.
C. Upion conipletian ofthe geomembrane installation,the Contractor shall submit tile following,
in triplicate, to the Eagincen
1, lnstafler's warranty in compkarice with Part I XB of this Section.
2. As-built geonrernbrane paw iiellayout drawingsstiowing all ptuiels,,testirig,sarnpling',
and repair locations,
02772 Hral Cosuir(%nm1w6onTechnicSul specirwations
ERA Elingweerbig 02772-2 Ada igqxsl:20 G 3
Page 3432 of 4165
1.05 TRANSPORTANDSTORAGE
A. At least seven days piior to any site defiveny,the Contractor shall notify the Engineer of the.
date, Orne,material type,rnaterial quantity,and number of trucks for fivery, A copy of the
packing list showing lot and roll twinbers For each shipment shall also be provided to the
Engineer prior to site; delivery.
B, Unloading and storage(slacking)of the geomenibrane rolls,at the site is the responsibility of
tine("oil tractor,-however, u illoading and storage of geornem[nane rolls shall be performed in.
accordance with the sublTlitted Maliufacturer's recornivended procedures,
C "I'lic Contractior shall transport geoinembrane roll sfirorn,the sto,
rage area in a nianner thall does
not darnage t1w geomenibralle, and in accor(hynce with the Manuffichirer's recorillnerided
procedures.
D, The storage area For the geornembralle rolls, will be located by the("."ontractor and must be
,approve:d by the Engineer.
1.06 QUALITY ASSURAW.T, TESTING
A The CQA Monitor w; illl take, at least one samp e for every 1.010,0100 square feet of
geomembrane delivered to the site and, perform the following quality CQA conforniance
testing to verity that the product rnects the requirements of Rarl ,02 of this Section.
I. Tensile Properties(ASTM D638).
I Density(A.STM D 1505).
3, Carbon, l lack(,,ontent(ASIN D1603).
4, (,'arbon Black Dispersion (ASTM 1 5596),.
5, Shee[Thickness(ASTM 1 5 94)
13. 'rhe COA Monitor will take at least,one sarrrp?�le per lot of geomaitibrane delivered to the site
for CQA conforinance testing to verif;; compliance with the interface shear strength
requiretnents,of Pait 2.02F'of this Sectk)n.
C. Geonielubrane shipped to tine site,that does not contain a degree of texturization comparable
to the approved temrure sample sijbinitled in accordance with Part 1.04A of this Section will
be rejected, by the Engineer.
D. Sampling fiv CQA conformance testing may be performed by the CQA Monitor at the
manufacturing plan't prior to shipping.
E, The CQA Monitor will collect samples, and send thern to the Geosynthetics Testing
Laboratory for scam testing in accordance with Part 3.05E of this Section. Within 48 hours of
sanipling, the Engineer will accept or reject the seanis based on the results of laboratory
testing,
I
F'. Th C e ontractor shall assist with seani sainpling by cutting samples and repaining sarnple
locations at the direction of the CQA MODitOr,
'Fur rSpeo-sSev ion 02772 Fund Msuvr C"onsm.w6on Technical S'p(%Acw�rcvj
EBA Fop4dueeping 02772-3 Aupm 2015
Page 3433 of 4165
1 07 WARRAMIES
A. T'he Contractor shaR provide a five-year prorata warranty 115or the geornembrane against
deterioration due to,exposure to the elements, either exposed orburied.
B. The Contractor sliall provide a two-year non-prorata warranty for the geomembrane against
installation deflrcts,
,PART' 2 PRODUCUS
2.01 RESIN
A, 'I'lle resin used for Manufacturing the geornenibrane shall be new virgin material, first quality,
conipounded Linear Low-density Polyethylene(LILDPE),and manufactured specifically for
producing geoineinbrane,
13, Prefbrred,but,not required to have a 4- to 6-inch wide smooth edge to prornote welding.
D. No,m ixing of di fferent resin tM)cs sha I I occur duri ng geomem brane manu fiacturing,
E. No second run or recycled !iii,,,ritc,,�r!ia,:ils shall he used ChIrin eomembrane manufacturing,
E 'The resin used for n-mmi,facturing,the geomenibrane shall have a Specific Gravity(AST M D
792)of minh-num 0.940 g/c1113 after addition of carbon black and other additives,
(IT. '17he resin used for manuf4ouring die geornernbrane shall not contain rnore than l percent(by
weight),additives other than carbon black,
R I'lie resin used for manufacturing the geomernbrane shall not,con; ain niore than 3.5 percent
(by weight)total additives.
2.02 CiEOMEMBRANE
A. All geolnembrane sh,all be manutactu red by the sanic ManufactuTer in,llie�'United States or
Canada,
R Geonaembrane shall have a structured studded drat lage SLIrface on the top side and a spiked
friction surface on the bottorn side using a method which Fully integrates the texture aspeildes
with the sheet,such as Super GTipnetffz),or equivalent;,no spray-on texturing shall be allowed,
C. Additives for LJV protection,themial stability,or processing agents must not"bloom"to the
surf.4cc of the georricinbr,,me over time or inhibit welding.
D FInished geornembrane rolls shall be free fi-om blemishes,holes,pin holes,bubbles,blisters,
excessive gels, uildispersed resins, undispersed carbon black, contamination by f'breign
materials, nicks, and cuts.
E Geornembrane shall meet the following minimuni average roll values, for the fibliming
prolierties.
TurfSpccA'Sutkm 02772 Geornembume&x Filud Mawr Cons4lue6m Tomdukal Speaficsfions
ERA Fngineering kupst 20�5
02�772-4
Page 3434 of 4165
,FELST MINIMUM AVE.Rk(-,'E MQCO' TEST
ROLL VALIJE( ) FREQUENCY
Sheer 1"frickness (As"r-M D 5994) 50-rA]±Io%(I) 10 per roll
Density (ASIN 1)792, Method 13) 01.9193 gl/cni 3 1 pler tail car
nnsile Strengh @ Break (As"rm D 6693) 105 ppi I Per l 00,00'O tl"'
F."lougation( Break (ASTM D 6 3 8) 3000%, 1 per 100,0001 fl?
T'ear Resistance (ASTM 1) 10,04) 30 lb I PC r 100,00 01 ft2
'Puncture Resistance (ASTM D,4833) 55 lb 1 per I 00,00'O ftau
Carbon Black Coritent (AST M D 4218) 2,0 to 3.0% I per 100,000 1f2
Carbion Bllack Dispersion (ASTM 1) 5596) All Category I oi-2 1 per 100,0100 fi:2"
Oxidation Nduction'll'ime (ASTM D 3895) l 40 minutesnij ninrurn 2010'C I per 101()'00'0 r12
LowTeniperature BdUleness(ASTM D 746) <4011F Certification
Dfirrensional Stability (A ST NI D 1204 2%maxilnUrn change Certificationi
DraiMgC Stud Height (AST'M D 7466) 130-nail I Pei- 100,000 112
F'riction Spike licight (ASTM D'7466) 175-n-iJI ] per 1001,000 117
('"The average of afl measurenients on arty roll shall nat be less than the MARV value.
u,2r The minununi, alloNvable thickness for arvy nieasurenient shall not be less thari 1101�1"4 of the notninal
specified,thickness, The average of all rneasuretnents on any roll shall not be less than 48 mils.
(3)Manufacturing Quality Control.
1. Thc geomentbrane shall have the following rnnirrvam sc:ain streng1h and test failure criteria
when welded in accordance with the submitted Manufiacturer's recommended procedtlres:
I For peel test specimens;
a. The failure, mode shall be a film tear bond(17TB).
b There shal I be no rnore than 10 percent Peel penetration into the weld.
C. The quantitative value for the peel strength shall be a minfinum ol'75 ppi,
I For shear test specimerm
a. The Failure mode shall be film tear bond (FTB).
b The SpeCiroen shall acl-fieve a 2-inch elongation with the grips,initially set
orre irtch back from the edge of the weld.
C. The qUantitativc value for bonded searri strengtil shall be as minimum of'120
ppj.
2,03 EXTRIUDATE R01.)
A. All extrudate rod shall be made from same resirr as the georneinbrane.
& All additives shall b'e thoroughly dispersed throu&4iout the rod,
C Extrudate red shall be free of clontarn i nation by rnoisture or foreign rnaterials.
02772 Gcoa=ibnw.doc specifications
EB,4 EngAzoey-MR 02772-5 Awtpwd),015
Page 3435 of 4165
2,04 FIELD 17ABRICATIONS
A All geornerribrane used f6r Field fabrications shall be obtained from the approved
geomembrane rolls, to be used for the panel instal]a t k.)n which ineet the material property
requirements of Part 2.02 of this Section.
R 'rhe Installer shall fabricate and weld all skirt and sleeve pipe boots in the kwations shown on
tine Plans, arid as shown on (fie approved Shop Drawings.
105 FIELD'rESTMG EQUIPMEN'r
A, A field terisiometer shall be used by the Installer for searn strength testing and be calibrated
and accurate to within 2 pounds.
13. A one-iiich(width)by six-inch,(length')cutting die shall be used for cutting scam strength test
specimens frojill bulk seam sainples.
PNRT 3 EXECUTION
3.01 PREPARATION AND EXAMINKI",ION
A The Installer shall verify that the subgrade surface upon which the geornenibranc is to be
Placed is sinooth, uniform, firm and unyielding, and free froni rocks or other debris, No
protrusions, ruts,or ridges pfreater in depth or height than L0 inch sball be allowed prior to
gcomernbrane installation
B. The C.ontractorand li-istallershall cornpletle and sign thin;Sub�,yi-adeAccepitiinceF trait,pr,)vi(,Ie(I
by the CQA Monitor, verit""ying that the surface which the GCL will be installed upon is
acceptable. The CQA Monitor and tine Design Engineer will also verify that the surface
which the GCL will be installed upon i!s acceptable. Once the Contractor has si,ie . tine-
jp d
Subgrade Acceptance Fon-n,it is the Contractor's responsibility to maintain the surface in the
condition reiq uired by Part 3.O I A ofthis Sect i ori.
C, The Contractor is responsible tbr ternponaryanchorape during insta I lation and u ntil perima nent
ballast is fully installed.
D. Prior to and at the n-�iddle: of each geornembrane welding work shill and whenever
adjustnients are made to the welding machines,the Installer sliall prepare and test trial welds
fbi,each welding machine that are being iNed or will be used during that work shill. 'I'llal
welds,shall be prepared for both flusion and ext,nision"felding machines. Trial weld sarriples
for fusion welding machines shall be a nunirnurn of'6-feet in length, trial weld sa�mples for
extruSiOTI welding machines,will be a nainitlltinl of 3-feet in length with the trial weld centered
on and running the length of the sarnple. Trial welds shall be tested as follows.
1 Trial welds shall be allowed to cool to arnI)ien't conditions, prior to testing, After
cooling, excessive triaterial shall be cut froin the: begiriningand the end ofthe trial
weld sarnple (approximately 44nehes fTom each end). [Jsing the eutting die, four
I-inch specimens shall be cut at an,even spacing along the length of the trial weld.
1 Using the field tenisometCT, two non-a4jacent specimens shall be tested for peel
adhesion (peel) and two for bounded seam strength (shear). Both sides of fusion
L',projer,6910 ACImure Tiuf SpmeSecdcm 02772(ImmunnWano,duc MTW Ch"Jiure Cavmrucdnn"rcdmica�specift"atiolls
EM Fnghweolng Augua 20H,
02772-6
Page 3436 of 4165
welds shall be tested for I.)ecl. The rate of separation toy-both the peel and the shear
tests shall be 2 inches per minute. 'The CQA Monitor will be present for, and
observe, all trial weld tests,
3, All peel test specimens shall rneet all of the following criteria.
a. The faflure mode shall be:a film tear bond
b. There shall be no rn(,,)re than 10 percent peel penetration into the weld.
C. The quantitative value for the peel !strength shall be a minullum of'75 ppi,
4, All shear test speciniens shall rneet all of the following criteria:
a, The fiailure niode shall be filrn tear bond (FTB)l.
b. The specimen shall achieve a 2-inch elongation with the grip,s initially set
one inch back from the edge of the weld.
C. The quantitative value for bonded seams strength shall be a rninimurn of'I 20,
pipi,
5� if any of the fOUT test specimens do,not meet the peel or shear criteria,the entire trial
weld will be rejected and that machine shall not be used for instaflation of the
geornernbrane until passing a retest, Retesting shall consist of repeating the entire
trial weld sarnpling and testing procedure on as new weld performed with the failing
machine, If the retested trial weld fails, that welding mactinie shall not be used for
installation of the geornetribrane until proper a4justments or repairs, and a passing
trial weld test results. If the welding machine continually fails field testing, the
ni,,i,chine shall be tagged and,completely removed f'rorn work area.
3,02 INSTALLATION
A- (3jeoinern4rane panels shall be deployed parallel to the slope by unrolling down the entire
length of the slope. Corrections or adjustments shall fie made to pariels,whiclibecorric askew
to the parallel line of the slope, F1'nd-to-end panel bua seams shall occur on benches,
K The textured gearnernbrane shall be placed in. direct and uniform contact with underlying
protective cover sub rode soil,with the spikes down and the stud side up. 1lie geonierribrane
surface shall not be dragged over the underlying suligrade;as plastic slip sect or other means,
shall be used to position the geoineinbrane wittmut dragging it over the subgrade.
C, A4jacent geornembnarre panel edges shall be overlapped a irdnininin of4-ladies for fusion
Nvelding. The aligninent of the overlap shall be kept consistent by markirig overlap indicator
points.
D, Geomernbrane darnaged during handling, transport, or deployment shall be removed or
repaired as directed by the Engneer,
E, GeOuleMbrane installation and searning ryiethods shall not darnage underlying subg-rade or soill.
materials; any darts ge to underlying soil materials shall be repaired at the expense of the
Contractor.
I,- `fhe histal ler shall only deploy the quantity of geonienibrane which can be completely welded
and anchored by the en°d of the work shift:or day,
G. The Cc)ntractor shall prepare an adequate riumber of sandbags to ballaM the geornernbrane
duringdeploynient. Geomenibrane rolls,nut also lbe used ftir ballast provided that no dwriage
to the deployed geouierribrane occurs, Only plastic ties shall be uscd to close sandbags; no
SfPecASvC1kM 02772 Growernbrane-doc 7 7 FInA 0041me Consnuc�Kin Tcrhnical STw6fikalimA
CRA E'n"ginwing 0272- Augum 2015
Page 3437 of 4165
metal or wire ties shall be used, Sandbags shall be removed pdor to deploying overlying
materials and afler completion ol7pernianent clwa'ire tuifballlast installation.Sandbags shall be
disposed oaf as directed by the Engineer. Sandbag fill shall not be disposed of within the
litnits of work utiless, the rill consists of material which meets the Spec ificat ion for the
mate,rial it is d,isp�osed upon. Adequate sandbags,and timely covering are required to prevent
wind shiffing of, eoraaeuuahrarue. If shifting of geornernbrane occurs, inspection of underlyntg
subgrade will be required to enstire the subgrade has not been cornprornised. Repairs or
replacement will be required if displacement or daniage has occurred .
Ill. The Installer shall deploy and seani the geonlembraiie hi a rnanner which iiiiiihnizes wrintdes;
however, the Installer shall be responsible for, and coordinate with the Manufacturer in,
providing the proper aniount of slack in the histalled geomembrane to compensate lbr
contraction due to local letriperature extremes prior to coveting. Stress-bridging arid
"fishmouths"shall not be allowed.
1. ljiunediately after geornembi-wic panels running through ditch flow lines or at toes of'slopes
are gelded,sandbags shall be placed end-to-end along the entire length of the flow or toe line
to prevent geomembrane stress-bridgingat those locations.
J. Portions ofthe geoniernbraiie wasted by the histaller,and rendered unusable,as deterri'lined
' y the CQA Monitor, shall be transported and disposed olby the Contvictor,
K No equipment will be allowed on slopes exceeding 15%oil the partially constructed turf Cap
system until after the completed installation of the sand infill ballast, On slopes less than
1.5%, AT'V type vehicles will Akre allowed prior to infill placernerit,if the tire/track pressure is
less than 5 psi,
1" Following full specified sand intidt ballast thickness installation,shall be firnited to,lightdilty
vehicles with drivability tire/track pressures of less than 35 psi.
3,013 FUS IO,N W1J,I)ING
A usion welding shall only take place when the anibient temperature is between 40T and
110T. The Installer shall measure anibient teniperature 6-inches above the deployed
geomernbrane. pecial weather Searriling plaiis shall be submitted by the Installer anti
approved by Engineer to perform fusion welds outside this aflibieM temperature range,
R All geornenribrane seanis shall be flusion welded by tile double-b-ack method leaving an air gap
flor leak testing. Extrusion welding shall only be used for repairs,patches,and falaricaatiouns®
C. Fusion welding machines shall complete trial weld procedures and pass field testing as
specified in Part 3.61 of this Section prior to welding the goornenibrane seams,
D power source capable of producing sufficient and constant voltage ulider the combined hire:
load of other welders and equipment shall be used.
E, The SUd'ace of tbe geloniernbrane to be welded sliall 'be thoroughly cleaned.
P" Geoinembrane panels shall be wel'ided at the sarrie speed, temperature, roller pressure,, and
gaugle settings used to prepare the trial weld; the histziller shall adjust the above settings as
02772(jewrembrute doo Frimd(I..w.CmWnxnon'Techn"l Specifirafions
EJ)"T Anginev'ring Augua 20 15
012772-8
Page 3438 of 4165
temperature cotiditions indicate and record weWing inachine number, operator, niachine
settings, thine, and date for each warns welded.
3.04 ExrRusioN WfLDJNG
A, Extrusion welding, grins shall coniplete trial weld procedures and pass, field testing as,
specified in Pait 3.0,1 of flits Sec6on prior to welding patches or fabrications.
13 Georrienibrane patches to be extrusion welded shall overlap the underlying geomembrane
panel a nunitniarn,of 4 inches.
The Installer shall cut square:repair patches with rounded corners large enough to extend a
min irrurn of 4 inches beyond the repair area iri all directions.
11 niz geornembrane patch shall be tack-welded to the undedying geomembrane panel to
preventinovernent during grinding and extrusion welding operations.
I A disc grinder shall he used to remove surface debris and oxidation from the outer edge of
overlapped geotnenibnvie patches and the underlying geotnernbrane. Grinding parallel to
seam,shall not be allowed.
F. The nozzle of the extrusion gun shall be purged to,reniove solidified,extrudate before each
unwise.,
G 1"he CXATLISion. weld shall coinpletely cover the entire width of the grind area and extend 4
inches up any intersecting Fusion weld,
IL A cap strip patch shall be extrtision welded,atall fUsion welded scam intersections ofthree or
triore geornembrane panels.
3 05 QUAIITY CONTROL
A Cieneral
L The Installer shall pertbrm all quality control procedu,res and testing in accordance
with the approved Geornernbrane hislaRation Quality Control Plan.
2. The Installer shall maintain.an accurate geonlembrane panel layout drawing during
installation. The drawing shall include: 1)roll and panel numbers;2)slearn.nurnbers;
3)geornernbrane liniits;4)anchor trench locations;and 5)seaITI test sample dates and
locations.
B. Deployment
I- The Installer shall coordinate with tine: CQA Monitor in assigning geoinernbrane
panel and corresponding searii, numbers.
2. Tfie,Installer shall niaintait'i,and submit to the,CQA Monitor,daily deployn'ient togs
and panel layout drawings as the deployment progresses and record panel and seaman
nurnbers, Enamel dimensions,,and deployment quantities.
C, Fusion Welding
I The Installer shall rnaintain,and submit to the C QA Monitor,daily welding logs on
which are recorded welding machine number,operator, rnachine settings, tinie,and
LApsajutW',Closure'rLnTSpvrs',Srccfion 02M doe (Iosure carwructkon 11,echnNAI Sp"ificafions
FHA rnyineerkx Augum 2015
012772-9
Page 3439 of 4165
date f'or each seam welded.
1 The entire; length of each fusion welded scam shall be air-pressure tested by the
InsUfflen The Installer shall provide an air purnp capable of generating and
maintaining 40 psi of pressure and equipped with, a regulator and pressure gauge.
The histaller sball,provide pressure feed needles with pressrrre gaugcs accurate to I
psi and perforni the following air pressure test procedure:
a. Seal both ends of the fusion welded searn with,vise-grip plate clamps or all
extrusion weld. Heat may be app lied to the seam ends to aid in sealing the
seam in conjunction with the clamps, Due to the potential hazard orignitirig
landfill gas, propane torches or any other flanie produciiag device shall not
be used,
b. At one end of the seana, insert air pressure ricedle into the flusion weld
channel,
C. 11rcSSUrize the chaiinel to 40 psi and maintain pressure for 5 minutes.
d. Release air from the opposite end of'the seam to verify that the entire lengtf�
of flue fusion weld channel was pressurized. If channel pressure is not
maintained with a maximurn allowable pressure loss of 2 psi over [lie 5�-
rninute test period or does riot stabili7e,at all; the Installer shall locate the
defective area, isolate it, and repeat air pressure test procedures in each
direction from the clef ctive area.
e. 'rhe Installer shall maintain airpresSUre tC,S:t logs On,which are recorded sewn
numbers, beginning and euding air pressures, beginning and ending test
times, lengfts oftested scarri, defective areas found, and confirmation of
repair.
D. Extrusion Wclding
L The Installer sliall maintain,alld submit to the CQA Monitor,daily welding logs on
which arc recorded welding inachine mariber,operator,nrachine settings,time,and
date,
2. The Installer shall vacuum test cach extrusion welded along,its entire length, T'he
Installer shall pi-ovide a vacuum purnp capable of generating and maintaining a
pressure of'3O inches of mercury,and equipped with a regulator and vacuum gauge,
The Installer shall also provide a vacuran box with a gasket-t)j.)e se,,d and a clean
view window, and, vacULM1 gauge accurate to I psi and perforni the following
vacuurn test procedurc�
a. Saturate the extrusion weld with a soap and water solution,
E blase view box over the saturated weld, create an air tight seal, and ap ly
vactuirn in the box.
C, Maintain the vacuum for 10 seconds and,examine weld for Ibrming bubbles
which indicate leaks, Mark, detected leaks f6r follow up extrusion weld
repair. lizetest detected leaks after repair, to verify that the leaks, were
successfully repaired.
JLL Tbe Installer shall mainfain vacuum test logs on which are recorded repair
numbers, vacuum test dates, an(]vacuum test results.
E. ScamTest Sampling procedures
L The C1QA Monitor will determine seam test&irnple locations at tnininiurn intervals of
5010 lineal feet of welded', seam. '11w: CQA Monitor may decrease or increase this
frequency based on previous searn test results. The Installer shall cut the seam test
sample wbere indicated by the CQA Monitor.
I uW',;pL0&,wtion 02772 Geommilfflule,dac Fin,0 aunre C'manwhon Tuhmad Spm fflim"im
ERA EnginevriAg 02772-10 Augusf 2015
Page 3440 of 4165
2. The Installer shall repair sample holes with an,extnision welded paatchn in accordance
with Part 3.04 of this, Section and perforn�n is vaeumn test in accordance with Marl.
3-05D of this Section,
3. Seam test sainples shall be 12-inclies wide by 36-inches,long with the weld centered
aloiiigtlieleti�gthoftliesarnli e. Sannple sizes n,i,ayl,)einodifieditifie request oftlie
CQA Monitor. The Installer shall cut one I-inch specimen ftom each end of the
sample and field test the spechriens for peel adhesion in accordance witli Part 3.01 of
this Section. If these speci rnen s pass the field peel test,the CQA Monitor will divide
the rernaining sample and submit one specimen to the (Jeosynthetics Testing
LaboratoTyl,"or further testing and retain one fiar,,=,hive, If either of the specirriens
fail,the field peel test,the Installer shalt perform hailed Searn Analysis ProcedUres,in
accordarice with Part 3.07 of this,Section.
4, The Installer may take and test any sample at its option; however,all sarnpling and
testing shall be done under the observation of the CQA Monitor and all tests and
repairs shall be in accordance with, the procedural reqtdrements,of this Part.
3.0 6 LABORATORY TESTING
A. The Geosynthetics, Testing Laboratory will per-forra the following test Procedure at the
direction of the Frigineen
I 'I"est five specimens fi-Orn each sample submitted for peel adhesion and five
specirriens froin each sample for bonded,scam strength,(ASTM D 6392).
2, All specirriens rmist rneet the criteria specified inPart3.ill C ofthis,Section foreach
type of test.
3, Both sides of fusion we Wed scams shall be tested lbr peel'adhesion.
R The Engineer's acceptance ofthe welded geoinerribrane seams will be based on the results of
laboratot�y scam analysis.
C The Engineer will notify the Iristaller ofaciceptance or rejection of the scam within 24 hours
of subrilission of the samples to the Geosynthetics'll"esting,Laboira,tory,
107 FAH-ID SEAM ANALYSIS 111T(DCEDIJ1ES
A The Installer shall Perform tine following procedUrcS in the event of a seam failure determined
by field or laboratory testing:
I The Installer shall mark the failed seam at a distance of'10 feet in each direction froni
the failed test saniple location. The Installer shall cut an 12-hich,by 12-inch sample
from each location,then cut one I-inch wide specirrien from,each end of the sample,
and field test the specimens for peel adhesion in accordance with Part 3 O I of this
Section. Ifall specimens pass the field peel test,the Installer shall cut,and submit to
the CQA Monitor, a 12-inch wide by 18-inch long sample frarri each location for
laboratory searn testing. Ifany of the specimens fail the field peel test at either
location, the Installer shall continue sariiplh,ig dw failed scam at 10-footintervals
urttil specimens successfully pass the field peel tests and a sainple can,be submitted
for laboratory testing. If specimens continually fail field peO tests at the 104bot
intervals, the entire searn or portion of the welded scain shall be repaired by the:
Installer as directed by the Engineer.
1 1 he Installer shalt repair the failed length,of seam determined by field peel testing
with an 18-rach wide extrusion welded cap strip in accordance Nvith,Part 3.014 of this
Hnal Closum C'maywv4on TedmeW SP'N"ific"Numu
RBA rnginpeWng 02772-11 811got 20 1$
Page 3441 of 4165
Section. The installer shall vaeuxim test the cap strip in accordance with Part 3,05D
of this Section.
3, If the retest sample fails laboratory testing in accordance with Part 3,06 of this
Section, tyre Installer shall repeat the interval sampling and testing procedure.
& .fit tiro discretion of the CQ�A Monitor,seanii test samples will be taken from extrusion welded
cap stnps exceeding 10O 1` etirr length,
PA,wr 4 MEASUREMEN'r AND PAYMENT
4.01 61i"(W EMB RA NE',
A, Cieorriernbrane nuiterial shall be rneasured on a horizontal plane hi plan view by the square
foot of the:in-place mateiial installed. The qUantity for"Geomembrane"shall be a final pay
quanfity as described in Section 9-1.02C, "Final Pay Quantities," of the Standard
SpeciFicatit)ns,ati,dassl,i,owiioiitliePlai,is. The price paid per square fbotl'orgeomembrane
shall include fun compensation fi,,rr providing all labor, equipni'lent, tools, and incidentals
reqtdred for installation of the geornenibrane as shown on the Plans,as specified lierein,and
as directed by the Engineer aird no additional compensation will be allowed therefor. J'he
Continctor shall make provisions f'br additional material neleded to account for overlaps,
anchorage, and waste,as no additional complensation will be allowed therefor,
4,02 G1.�'0ME.'NIBRANE StIRFICIAL STRIPS
A. Cleomobrane material foir the sufficial strips shall be measured by the lineal Foot for the ,5
foot wide strips, The Price per fineal foot for geamernbrane surficial strips shall be included
in the Contract Unit Hwe per lineal foot installed for "Geomembrane Surficial Strips"
addressed in this Section and shall include full cornpensation for providing all rnaterials,
labor,equipment,tools,,and incidentals required to histall the geomernbrane surficial strips as
shown on (fie Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design F1'ngineer. No
additional compensation will be allowed therefor.
END O�F SECTION
C hirf SpeQs%Src*m 027721 Cmmmhbranexloc H
EB,4 02772-12 rya gwo 2015
Page 3442 of 4165
SECTION 02773
ENGINE :RED Tel R.F
PART I GENERA-L
1,01 SUMMARY
A, The Contractor shall furnish, transport to the Work site, arid install all erigincered turf in
accordance with this Section and at the locations and to the dimensions shown on the Plans.
The Contractor„„hall fill-nish all labor,supervision,tools,matedals,equppment,transportation,
and incidentals necessary to install tbe engincered turf,sand ballast infill,and I lydroBindeo,)
Infill, including drat needed for testing and connecting materials in field.
11.02 REFERENCES
A Caltrems Califonlia Deparb.rient offransportation,2O 1 O
B. Caltrans Standard flans. Calillornia Department of'rransportation, 20 1 O
1.03 A!"Pl..JCA BLE STANDARDS AND SIXE,CIFICATIONS
A, ASTM D 1505 Standard'fest Method for Density of Plastics by the Density-
Gradient Technique.
13, ASI"M D 4218 Test Method for Carbon Black in Olefin Plastics,,
C STM 1) 4491 1,est Methods for Water Permeabi I ity of Geotextiles by Permittiv ity.
11, ASTM D 4632 Test Method for Breaking Load and Elongation of(leotextiles
(GrTab Method).
1,1;1�, TM D 471CN tandard'Yest Method for Constant I-lead Hydrau I ic Transmissivity
(In-Plane Flow)of'Geotextiles and(3totextHe Related Products.
tz TM D 4751 Standard Test Method f-br Determining Apparent O. pening Size of
a Geotextile.
GT. ASI I'M D 503 5 Standard Test Method for BmMng Force arid Elongation of Textile
Fabrics(Strip Method).
fl. AS TM D 51,99 StandarclTest Mediod for Measurhig,Nominal']"hickness(,"Y'eotextiles
and Geomernbranes,
1. ASTM D 5261 Test Methods For Mass Per Unit Area,(weight)of'Woven Fabrics,
I AS,rm 13 5321 Standard"I"est Method f6r Deterrnfi-ing the Coefficiel'It of'Soil and
Geosynthelic or,Gieosynthetic Friction by the Direct Shear Method.
0277 Rnginomed Nrfdoc FhW(losus v Constructio n Tmbmical Speofica lkm
ERA EngWeenng 027'73-1 AugwA 20 B 5
Page 3443 of 4165
K. ASTM D 6243 Standard Test Method, for Determining the Internal and Interface
Shear Resistance of E"oeosynt'helic Clay Liner by the Direct Shear
Method.
L AS"I'M D 71")05 Illy Adhesion of Geocomposites.
1 D411 ST.JBmrl"rALS
A, At least 14 calendar days prior to delivery of"engineered turf rolls to the Wcxrk site, the
Contractor shall subrnit three(3)copies of the f6flowing to the Design Engineer for approval:
I Sarriples,prodUCt data sheets,and complete:description of engineered turf that meets
or exceed the product requirements of this Section.
2. MQC testing repo for engincered turf to be delivered to the Work site,, Al. a
mininium,results of those tests specified in Part 2 of this Section must be included in
the MQC testing reports.
3 1-7or the geonet base resin:
a. A Certificate of Compliance staring that all resin used for the product to be
supplied is from,an single source Ira tine'United States or Canada,of fhe sarrm:
general type,and areets the requirements of Part 2 of tbis Section.
b, MQC test results.
4. Manufacti.ruer's recommended procedures for transponing, unloading, storage,
handling,installation,repair,and seaming(sewing,heat bond i ng,hq)ping,and plastic
ties) of the geonet composite.
5 Sairiples, product data sheets, and complete description of plastic fasteners (ties)
recommended by the Manuflacturer to join tht', geonet and sewing thread
reconmiended by the Manufaclurer to sew the geotextile,
6, Panel layout showing machine direction of rolls.
1.05 TRANSPORTAND STORAGE
A. The engineered turf rolls shall be shipped by the Supplier Mth protective coverings in a
closed trailer or a covered open trailer.
R At least seven(7)caleridar days prior to any Work site delivery,the Contratctor shall notify the
Design Engineer of the date,time,niaterial type,material quantity,and number of trucks for
delivery, A copy of the packing list showing lot and roll nwilbers for each shipment shall also
be provided to the Design Engineer prior to Work site delivery.
c- Unloading and storage (stacking) ofilie engineered tur.f rolls at the Work site shall be the
responsibility of the Confnactor,- howewnr,unloading and storage of engineered turfrcrffls shall
be perforMed in accordance with the submitted Manufacturer's relcomrnended Procedures.
engineered turf rolls shall be stacked no more than three(3,)higft
D The Contractor shall transport engineered turf rolls, froln the storage area in as manner Il'iat
does not damage the geoniet composite, and in ac")rdance Avith the Manilfa—chlrer's
recommended procedures,
1,:upwje,c61,9MCJus=Twl'SpcaSocq4on 02M Engbw .,,d Turfdoc' RnA Ckmarc ConmnwiIanI uchnW Sprc&ufivnj
E8A ExAginedulng 02773--2 Aupum 20M
Page 3444 of 4165
1.06 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A, Testing and Observation
L Testing and observation ofthe engineered turf shall be conducted in accordance with
the CA Plan.
2. The:Contractor shall cooperate with the CQA Monitor during observation, testing,
and collection of samples.
3. If any portion(s) of the engineered turf installation is determined by the Design
Engineer to not meet the requirements of this Section, based on either testing or
observations,the Contractor,at his expense,shall remove and replace that portion(s)
to meet the requirements of this Section as directed by the Design Engineer.
PART 2, PRODUCTS
2.01 ENGINEERED TURF
A. The engineered turf is a synthetic structured material consisting of one or more geotextiles
tufted with polyethylene yams that resemble grass blades such as DuraTurf manufactured by
Shaw,or equivalent. Engineered turf shall be manufactured of UV-stabilized yam oriented
into a stable network that maintains its structure during handling,placement and long-term
service.
& The engineered turf shall be chemical resistant and cannot be heat burnished or contain
recycled materials.
C. The engineered turf shall have the following minimum average roll values-,
ENGINEERED TURF COMPONENT
VIRIMP,NNIMM,H/
CDR Puncture AS TMI 06241 $00 Iti.(MARV)
Tensile Product(MD/XD) ASTM D459S 1,000 fb/ft min,(MARV)
Rainfall induced Erosion ASTM 0,96459 <0,45%infill Loss 6 Inthr
Aerodynamic Evaluation GTRI Wind Tunnel 120 mph with maximum uplift of 012 lb/sf
Engineered Turf Fiber UV Stabil Ity ASTM G 147 '"60%retained tensile strength at 100 years
(projected)
Seeking System UV Stability(Exposed!) ASTM G1545 Modified Cycle 110 lbs/ft retained tensile strength at 6500 hours
1,UVA340 (projected)
Steady State Hydraulic Overt*Wn$(CJ*sure"Turf`' ASTM 07277/07276 S ft overtopping resuffing to 29 ft/s velocity and
with Hydrollinder—) 8.8 psf shear stress,for Manning N Vailue of 0.02
Fulll Scale Wave,Overtopping Test Colorado State University 165,000 ft'/ft:
Cumulative Voturne(Closurerurfs with Wave Simulator
Hydrollinder—)
Full Scale Wave,Overtopping Test Colorado State University 4 0 ft/s/ft
Wave Overtopping Discharge(CloslureTurr with Wave Simutator
Hydrolillndee")
TransmIssivitV w/underlying structured ASTM ID,4716 2,5E-03m'/sec.,min.
geoirnembrane
Normal stress 50 ps!and 0.33 gradient(m2/sec)
Internal Friction of combined components ASTMI D5321 35"min
Saind,infill Gradation and Ballast ASTM 06913 ASTM C-33 Fine Aggregates
Yam weight(Total Product Weight) As'rM D5261 19 oz./sq.y&(25 oz.I sq.y&*-I oz.)
Tensile Strength of Yarn ASTM D2256 15 lbs.min,
2.02 SEWING THREAD
A. The thread used for sewing of engineered turf shall be polymeric and have strength properties
equal to or greater than the engineered turf
I,�wpuw;ptAunw�anp7"u(.",puusrusr Gain Sp=Scvion Uri EDginecjTd'rurfAoc Nnal(imLrc con u4,ncwr'reCfinjca1 Spcuifica�wns
h,'BA Engpneedng 02773-3 August 20 t 5
Page 3445 of 4165
R The thread used for sewing of engineered turf shall be chen'kal resistant.
T"he thread u sed for sewing the engineered turf shal I be equivalent to that recommended by
the engincered to Manu fhcturer sobmitted in accordance with Pw-t I 04A of this Section.
2.0;3 SAND BALLAST INFILL
A and Ballast Infill Nvill,meet Particle Size Pararneters of"ASTM C 33-013 for fine aggregates CLS
shown in the fonowing,rable I:
Table 1: Sand BaHast Infill
Sieve Percent PassiTIS
9.5 n1m(3/ 100
4,7 5 nun fN(�). 4) 95 to 100
801 to 100
............
1,18 ran g L(No.16) 50 to 85 ........
, (No. 30)600 p �i 25 to 60
. .........-.z --
�t LO 2111 5 to3o,
to
104 HYDROBINDER""' INFILL
A. llydroffinder'um is a ceinentious, product used as the infill cornponent 1'(,)r surface drainage
conveyance areas,
B. FlydroBind err m in till Shall be HydroBindef"11 Cernentitious Infill. The HydroBindef"m infill
rnaterW may I-I)e dclivered in eitlwr pallet fly un of'80 1bn bags or 30010 11). bulk super sacks.
Cl. Cement, except as,offierwise speoffied herein,will be a brand, of Portland Cement,rxiceting
ASTM C 15,01 and will, be Type I. o )Te 11. Only one brand of'cenient will be used
throughout the duration,of tbis Contract.
lo, The cernentiti(xis infill mix design will conform to the requireinents ofASIMC387 for high
strength moilars.
11. The cementious infil I will have a niininiurn 2,8 chay coinpressive strcmgth of 5000 psi,
PART 3 EXECUTION
101 PREPARATION ANI) IiXAMINA,rm
k The histallersluill verify that the material and surface upon which.the engineered turfis to,be
placed is complete and in accordance with these Technical Specifications for that material
prior to beginnin eonet installation.
02773 Lingovered TwNkx �Rjmd CInnue
A'"BA LItgraecring 02773-4 Augium 2045
Page 3446 of 4165
B "Ehe Contractor is responsible fortemporaty anchor age duiring installation and until pennanent
anchorage is constructed and completed.
3,02 INSTAI.-A.-ATION
A Engineered turf shall be installed in accordance with the Manufacturer's instructions,
B. Engineered turfshall be installed with the machine(lengthwise)direction o the roll,ogiented
down the slope in accordance Witil the Partiel Layout"
G Engineered turf panels shall be deployed rrom flac top of the slope in a Nvay that the
engineered turf is laid substantially sinooffi and filanients are pointing upstope after
deployment is,complete.
1), 'I'lle first engj:neered turf panel, deployed shall have the turf' rilanients facing upward.
Subsequent pariels shall be deployed turf side down, and oil top,of the previously installed
panel. After searning each, panel, the panel shall be flipped onto the geoinenibralle
conipollent with care to avoid pulling of tutts in tile drainage StUdS.
End-to-end panel overlaps shall only occur on benches, unless the length ofa slope between
benches exceeds the total length ol'a full engincered turf roll,
1". Engineered turf shall be installed with sufficient tension to prevent excessive�Oveflapping,
insufficient(.')veflapping, wrinkles,and folds,
G, A single stitch prayer type Sea]Ti shall be constructed using a Nulong sewing machine or
equivalent. Sewing thread shall be 207 Polyesteror equivalent. Scwing Will OCCUrbetween
the I st and 2nd row of Engineered"I"Urf stitches,
11, Engineered ruffshall be ballasted during installation andunfil the engineered ftirf is covered,
with the sandbaIlast infill niaterial,
L On slopes exceeding 1511110,noeqtriprneant will be allowed on the partially constructed turfcap
system until after the cornpleted, installation of the sand ballast infill, Oil slopes less than
15%,AIN type vehicles will be allowed prior to infill placenlent if the lire Arack pressure is
less than 5 psi,
I Following full specified sand ballast infill thickness instal lation,shal I be linnited to figflt dray
veIddes with drivability fire/track pressures of less than : 5 psi.
K- Engineered turf dari-naiged during installation shall be removed and/or repaired with a sewn or.
fastened patch at the:direction or the Design Engineer.
L Portions ofthe engineered Itirf wasted by the Installer,and rendered Unusable,as deternlivied
by the Design Engineer, shaH be transported by the, Contractor and disposed of'off-site at a
perraitted transfer station, or sofid waste disposal fficiffity.
02,771 Engmecred I uifdaf; FkAl(logure,ConWimakm Techn�OA Spetifica6um
)E BA EnyiAeulng 02773-5 Aqwm 210 15
Page 3447 of 4165
103 SAND BALLASTINFILL,PLACEMENT
A Sand ballast infill shall befflaced between the: Innt s of the engineered turf and:
Shall be per plan either5/8 inch thick or 2 1 m inch thick,with as thickness tolerance
of-f/-U8 inch. Measuring the sand ballast infill thickness will beperfarmed utilizing
a digital cahper, or approved alternate measuring device approved by the CQA
Officer,
2. Shall consist wholly of siind n1ceting ASTM C-33-Ell liar fine aggre,gptes. See
Section2.03 - SAND BALASTINFILL - Table I for sand infill ballast grain size:
panan-teters.
I Engineered Inrfareas that are to receive sand ballast infill must be accepted by the
CQ�A Officer before placement of sand baflast infill takes place
R Sand ballast infiH shall be worked into the Engineered"Furf between the synthetic yam blades,
(11. Conveyor systems and/or Expres,s,Blowers slW I be used to spread and iace the s and barflast
infill,
C, The (7ontractor stiall explained with detail in the Preparatory Meeting the n1lethrod of sand
infill deployrrient to be LISed.
D, l)-eviously installed components shall not be displaced or darnaged as a result of t1w sand
(ballast infill cotriponent installation,
E A standard washer will be utilized as a Plate for the Point oferary into the sand ballast inffll
tbr Consisterit depth Control.
3,04. 'INFILI.......HYDROBINDER( PLAC'117MENT
A See also Section 2.04 - llydroBinderI�) INFILL,
13. The llydroffindeiI) infill, layer may be placed using any appropriate equipment Capable of
completing the work, Manual, hand spreading is acceptable when equipment isn't practical,
C 'Flie Contractor shall explain in detail during the Preparatory Meeting the method of
HydroBinderIE't infill deployrnent.
D Installation of HydroBinder'& infill will only be performed by a Manufacture's approved
installer using techniques and equipment ap, roved by the,Manufacture.
p
E The llydr(,)Binderd? shall be installed into the turf while it is in a dry state. The
llydroBinder(R)will be worked into the tufts so the ujftsarc in an upright position,
1"", "1'1,ie1-tychl oBinder�linfillsballl,)eplaceiddlrytoathic:k.nesso�f7/8 inch witilaitoleraiiiceof
1/8, inch.
G, I I lie hydration process must occur on the saran day as the FlydroBinderR)infill placernent,'I"he
required llyxuluµoBind r`alt, infiR thickness will be achieved prior to the hydration process.
ft The cemented infill shall be hydrated thoroughly, however care must be taken to avoid
Tuff Spv,,s\SftIkwi 02773 Engmecral Turffkw Final Ormn CoroAruction'l edmkai Sp=Auaians
EV4 Engineering 02773-6 AupW 20 R 5
Page 3448 of 4165
displacement of the amour-hydrated hififl. 'I'lie obJective is to soak the area to start the hydration
process but not to inundate with water beyond saturation.
1. Once hydration is cotnpleted as desefibled, backfill and compaction of the verlical ,Inchor.
trenches (if applicable) shall take place,
K, The I lydroffinderlk)slial Fbe at nfinirrimn performance levels,within 24 houm ffydroffinder(,R)
that dooes not rnect mininiurn performance levels within 24 hours wiiI be renioved arid
replaced.
3.05 RI-TAIR,
A, All darnaged areas or holes shall be repaired with a patch by the Installer as directed by the
Design Engineer.
13. Repairs to engineered turf are coniplete y using a heat-bonded seam. All tie-in seams along
flatter slopes less than 15%with length greater than 25 feet wfll use an approved,leistering
rnachine so consistient pressure is achieved dirougilrout the searri. A,hand held heal,gun with a
pressure wheel shall be used for repairof smaller areas. The patch shall extend 2 feet beyond
the edge of the damaged area or hole.
C C,Liontractor inay also demonstrate teChuiCl Lies and prac fices'For a pprova 1, Field demonstration
and approval by the CQA Offlicer and the ManufacIrtrer is required before incorporating ziny
alternative repair. technique,
PART 4 MEASIJREMF�'NTAND PAVMENT
4,01 ENGINEEREDTURF WFM 5/8" SANDIAALLAST INIIII.A.,
A Engineered Tu-rf with 5/8" Sand Ballast Infill shall lie Lneasured by the square lbot of
engineered turf in place covering the entire limits of waste, installed to the toes of all slopes
on the landfill or five feet beyond thehinits of waste, whichever is greater,as shown on the
Plans. The quantity nicasured ftm-eriginecred turf sball be as measured on a horizontal Plane
in plan view and,shall includcan allowance Foroverlaps,ancliorageand waste, Payrnent shall
be included in the Contract l Mit llruce per square fbot installed for"E'ngincered Turf w4h
5/8" Sand Ballast Infill" addressed in this Section and shall include flill compensation for
providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidcnrals required to install the
engineered turf and sand ballast ijIfill, inicluding that needed for testing arid Connecting
materials in fieW as shown on the Plans,as specified herein, and as directed by the Desigm
Engineer, No,ad,diti(nial compensation will be allowed therefore.
'4prqp='I9071,0mArr ruTfSpecs\See6m 027 73 Engi tCT r , k o n rd Turbdoo m ims
ERA J,,'ngOwering Augum 2015
0277 -7
Page 3449 of 4165
4,02 ENGlN'EERED,rUR.F WITH 2"SAND BALLAS'J" INFILL
A Engineered Turf with 2" Sand Ballast Infill shall be incasured by the square foot of
erigineered turf in place covering the entire limits of waste, installed to the toes of all slopes
on the landfill or five feet beyond the limits of waste,whichever is greater,as shown on the
Mans. The q tiantity ineasu red for engi neered hirf sh al l be aas nacasti red on as horizon tal Pla ne
in plan view and shall hickide an allowance for overlaps,anchorage and waste. Payment shall
be included in,the Contract lJnit,Pricc per'sqnare fbot insLilled for"Engineered Turf with 2"
Sand Ballast Infill" addressed in this Section and shall inchWe ftill conif,)ensation, ("or
providing all uilaterials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals, required to install the
engiricered uirfand sand ballast infill, inchiding that needed for testing and connecting
inaterWs in field as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design
Engineer. No,additional compensation will be allowed therefore,
4,03 ENGINEERED TURF' WITH HYDROWNDER INFILL
B. [`°Ingineered Turf with HydroBinderV Infll)shall be measured by the sqrwre fort ofengilleered
turl'in place covering the entire firnits of waste, installed to the toes of all slopes un the
landflll or five feet beyond the limits of waste,whichever is greater, as shown on the Plans.
The qUantit3T ineasured for engineered turf shall be as measured on a horizontal plane in plan
view and sliall include an allowance RIT overlaps, anchorage and, waste, Payment shall be
included in the Contract Unit Price per square foot installed for "Erigirieered Tnif with
llydroffindev,(o Infill" addressed in, this Section and shall include full compensation for
providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install tbe
engineered turfand flydroffindet%, infill, inchiding that needed for(esting,and connecting
materials in field as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Dcsigrn
Engineer, No additional compensation will be allowed therefore
4.014 ENGINEEItEl) TURF/GEOMEMBRANE ANCHORTRJ,`�,NCH
A, Engineered un-17g.,comembrane anchor trench shall be nwasured [)y the lineal foot ofanchor
trench installed,as shown on.the Plans, T'he quantity meaSUred for the MIC110T trench shall be
ineaRircd on the hoHzontal plan and shall include trenching,placement(,:)f nuiterial in trench,
andbackfilling. Payment shall be included in the C'ontract L)nit Price per lineal foot installed.
for"Engineered Turffleonieinbranc AnchorTrench"and shall include full compensation for
providing all materials, lab�or, eqtfipinent, tools, and incidentals required to install, the
engineered tUr/geornernbrane anchor trench,as shown on the Plans,as spec i fied herein,and as
directed by the Design Engineer. No additional compensation will be allowed therefore
END OF SECTION
L�'VT,q*,f007X1D$V9T TU11 SP1.xA'SecAion 02773 FyWineffod Amrf.doc Fund Ck:ioure Couflnkcikm T'eaynkal spwficatirmm
EWA Engineeping August 2015
02773-8
Page 3450 of 4165
smnoN 02900
SEE,DING AND FERTILIZING
PARTI GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. The ("',ontrador shall seed and fertilize the erosion-resistant layer and on-site Morrow area
surfaces, eaithen drainage swales, and all constmetion-related disuirbed surfaces in
accordance with this Section and at the locations and to the dimensions shown on the Plans.
The Contractor shall fbi-nish all labor,supervision,tools,niaterials,equipment,transpoilation,
and incidentals as necessary to seed and f'e'rtilize the various areas ideatified herein.
A Pis. Califomia if partrnent ol"I"'ranspollation, 20101,
B. Plans. California'Department of Fransportation, 201.t1®
1.03 SIJBMITTALS
A. Prior to seeding,the Contractor shall submit to,the CQAMonitor,in triplicate,the nan'le and
lo,cation of material sources,laboratory lest,results,arid/or material data sheets conforming to
the relevant detafls shown on the Plans as outhned herein.
13. Afterseeding,the Contractor shall subtaift to the CQA Monitorthe certified tags ftorn tine seed.
bags.
L04 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Testing and Observation
I Testing and observation ofthe seeding, fertilizing and mulching shall be conducted
in accordance with the CQA Plan.
1 If anypor lone(s)of tbe seeding and J."ertilizing is determined by the CQA Monitor to
not rneet the requirements of this Section,the Cmitractor,at his expense,sball rewmrk
that portion(s) to meet the requirernents of this Section as, directed by the: Design
Etigineer.
PART 2 PRODUCTS,
101 SEED
k Seeding shall coriform to the provisioris of Section 210 2,101 (Seed) and Section 20-3.014
(Seeding and Fertilizing)of tlie Standard Specifications,
13. The seed shall consist ofthe f"611OWiDg mix of species and clon-esponding application rates:
1. Trilloliurn Ineaniaiiam(Critnson Clover): 25 lbs/AC
2. Hordearn Vulgate (Cornmcm Bat-ley): 50 lbs/A(,
02960 SeedixT mnd Nnfl'i7Wj,,Aok� Mpud(lowe Conarudon j,r,,O,,,j,,,tl
""JVA I'AgnAmmAg Augua 20�5
02900-1
Page 3451 of 4165
3, Festuca Rubra (Creeping Red Fescue): 50 Ibs/AC
4. Loliuni Perenne (PerennialRyegrass): 25 lbs/AC
102 F Eli]"ILIZER
A Fertilizer sliall consist of the following components and percevages:
Anainonia Phosphate Sulfate 16 percent
Phosphoric Acid 20 pereent
Water Soluble Potasli 0 pereent
PART3 EXEI CUTION
3.01 (T'El',N E R A,I I
A rrhe nietbod and equipment used to spread, the seed and fertilizer shall be subject to the
approval of the Design lingineer.
B, Seed and f rtilizer shall be applied after the after the access roads, draitiage Mructures, and
erosion-resistant layer have been placed to grade,
C' Seed and fertilizer !shall not be applied to the access roads, rock dprap swales, auud
sedirrientation basins.
102 APPLA",ATION
A The application of seed and f"ertilizer shall'be performed by hydroseeding methods using the
f6flowing steps:
I Step I.- Seed and fiber shall be hydroseeded onto the designated surfaces at a rate of
150, lbs,/AC and 500 lbs/.AC, respectively.
2, &eI7 2: Hydrornulch witli tackifier mid f rtilizar sliall then be applied at rates oF500
lbs/A(',' (fiber), 150, lbs/AC (tackifier JIM-binder, organic bean base glue]),and 200
lbs,/AL("(fertilizer).
& All products shall be spread urfiformly over all areas subject torevegetation,
PAJIT 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4,01 SEEDING AN D FF RTILIZING
k Seeding and fertilizing shall be measured by the acre histalled and bicludes all sced,fertilizer,
tacktficr and fiber. No adjustments in compensation,will be made in the Contract Unit Price
paid for "Seeding and Feililizing" as as result ofan increase or decrease in the quantity of
re vegetation products used,regardless of the reason for the increase or decrease,even if the
increase or decrease exceeds 25 percent ol"the Design Engineer's 1"Isfir rate.The provisions in
Section,4-1,03 B(IncreaseJ or Decreased Quantities)of the Standard Specifications shall not
apply,
B Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per acre installed for "Seeding and
Fertilizing"addressed in this Section and shalll include full cornpensation for providing all
Turl SpLcsIScc63n02900 Somfingand Fertifizixg,dou Firal Oamurc Constrkxfion'ftdudun Specificafions
b"84 Engineolng, 02900-2 Aueum 21'��5
Page 3452 of 4165
rnateriak, labor, equipMent, tools, and incidentals required for seeding and fiertflizing as
shown, on the Plans, as specified herein, raid as directed by the Design Engineer. No
additional compensation will be allowe.�therefore.
END OF SECTION
02900 Smififig and Fewflli4ftpdco Final C105urt t%mslructam'I&Amud Spcofwavions
EBA ErIAMpe"J"Rig ALqpm ZO 15
02900-3
Page 3453 of 4165
SECTION 02960
EMPORARY EROSION AND SE'DIMENT CONTROLS
PART I GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, The Contractor shall implement all erosion control provisions consisting of,but not HMUexito,
the construction of permanent and ternporarylacitities and taking,measures as are necessary to
preve'ril,control and abate:water,niud,and erosion darnage to public and private property as a
result of the constniction of this Project. Erosion control shall aplfly year round to all areas
where earthen rnaterial is exposed on the Work site and shall not be limited to those areas
outlined in these Technical Specifications or as shown on the Plans, The Contractor shall
17urnish all labor, supervision, tools,tnaterials,equipment, transportation,arid incidentals as
necessary to implement the erosion control provisions,
1,02 REHNFNCI,�'S
A, (,"'Cllti-eins,5tt7,ncicird,5pec�ft,(�ationn(Sevfion 2(�)I.Califbmia Department of Transportation,May
2006
B. Cal�jbrpfias General Perrnitft)rS`10 rni 94afer DischaiTes Associated with Construetion and
Land DiSturinince Activities(General Ilertnit) Order No. 2009-0009-DTTQ as amended 1 v
Order Nod 2010-00,14-DIVQ (VIDES No� CAS000002), State Water Resources Control
Board, 2010,
k03 SUBMITTALS
A. The Contractor shall: pr(pare and implement as SWPPP for construction activities in
accordance with Section 015501 (StornFt Water Pollution Prevention) of these 'rechnical
Specifications.
PART 2 PRODUCTS
101 STRAWBALfill
A, Straw for bales shall be noxious weed Iree and shall be derived froin wheat, rice or barley,
2.02 STRAW' WATTLES
A. Straw wattles shall be fiber rolls cornposed ofbio-degradable fibers stuffed in a photo-
degradable open, weave netting.
2.03 ROCK FOC (."ON'STRLJ(.,""I'ION' ENI'R,AN(,'[,:I
A. Rock for the construction entrance shall conform to the requirements of Section 02207
(Aggregate Materials)of these,4'echnmeal Specifications,
TurfS° w,&Scvkm W960'IF emporary,Lromon Co:nuoLdoc Rna�Closurc Corkoruawn TerhAufl Specifkafiom
E84 Efoginvering Augum 2M
029 60-1
Page 3454 of 4165
104 SILTFE�,INCING
k Silt Fencing: Pilterfabticslialibeaperviotis sheet:of"syiitlicti olyii.�iiercc,�rrip(,)sedolfatgust
85%by weight ethylene,propylene,arnide,ester,or vinylidene yarn,woveri or non-wovell. It
shall contain stabilizers and/or,inhibitors to resist deterioration bybeat,water,and ultra-violet
light. The fabric shall conform to the fibHowing:
1. The Equivalent Opening Elie(U.S. Standard Sieve,)shall be within the range 70-100
1 'rhe tensile strength (per ASTM 1, 46321 shall be at least 120 pou!nds.
B. Silt Fencing Posts. posts for sill.&nces sliall be either 4-inch diameter wood or 1.33 on
per linear foot steel with as mininium 1crigth of 3 feet. Steel posts shall have projections f6r
fastening wire to them.
PART'3 EXECUrIJON'
3,0-1 SC11EDLJLE
A. Construction or iinplernentation of eTosioo control measures shall be perfiinn,ed year round,
Between October 15 and May 15 of each year,SUCII tell1porary erosion contr(,)l features as are
necessary to prevent datna,ge during the forthcorning winter season, shall be Constructed "'Ind
remain Functional.
B. '11e Contractor shall comply with the pollution control rneasures referenced in these
Technical Specifications as,part of the overall program to,control erosion and de-silt runoff
Cl. All templorary erosion control faLilitiles shall be rnaintained during,temporary suspension of'
Worl< eriods.
102 P1~tOTECT10N
A, All areas of exposed earth created by the Contractor beyond what is shoe on dw Plans and
referred to in these Technical Specifications and areas cleared and grubbed prior to
excavation or enibankment operations which are subject to wind erosion and runoff shall also
be subject to ti,ese 'recl-inical Specifications, except that dic Contractor shall be fully
responsible for all costs and liabilities associated with water pollution and temporary erosion
control work in these areas.
3,03 TFIMPORARY r'IROSION CONTROL FAC1LrrJES
A, The Contractor shall conduct his operations in such arnanner that stoma water runoffwifl be
contnined within the Work site or channeled hito the storm drain system which serves the
ninoffarea. Storrs water rurwiT from one area shall not be allowed to divert to another runoff
area.
R 'I"emporary down drains,drainage structures,and other devices shall be provided to channel
storm water, ninoll' water into the respective permanent storm drain systems during
consh'tiction. Pen-nanent drainage structirres, not fully cornpleted, shall be modified as
rcquired to accept de-silted runoff.
C. F''ill areas, while being brought to grade, and during periods of cornpletion prior to filial
Spees,Svc6on 029601'wnpougy Wvskm ComrMAOO 14W Claw,Corkan.mriors Tcduhkaq sp,6ka6ans
EBA Augum 20M
02960-2
Page 3455 of 4165
construction,shall be protected by various ineasures to eliminate erosion and tile siltation of
downstream facilities and adJacent areas, These ineasures rnay include, bUt shall not be
limfted to:
I 'remporary down dranis, either in the ft.)nii of pipes or paved ditches with protected
ot,afifll areas;
2. Grraded berms around areas to elinnnate erosion of'crnbanknient slopes by sur-hare
runoff;
I Embankment slopes, not inelLrded as pail of the constniction contract and constmcled
by the Contractor for temporary access roads, shall be compacted by track walking
Ilse face of the slope in a direction perpendiCILdar to tlae slope contours, Several
passes rnay be reqii ired to adequately coinpact the slope face.
D, Contour graded areas shall be protected agairist erosion and the resulthig siltation of
downstream flacilities,and aqjacent areas during grading operations. Various measures n-1.1y
include, but shall not be Iiinited to:
L Use of graded contour benxis to control sheet flow
2, Supplemental gradingof lard eareasarowid terripor,°ai-y,oruji-finislied!itilet!sti,uc:tur'es,
such as inside ran�,iip loops,
E CulveTt pipe used in coq unetion with temporary erosion control measures, which was new
wban delivered to the Work site and, in the opinion of the Design f,"ngineer, is not damaged
and whoscchinensioiis asid oilhierlilroperties corn form totl,ietvqtiii°eiiients for new nuilerialmay
be used in the new Work.
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.0 1 "FEMPORARY FROSION ANI) SEDIM ENE'CONTROL
A, Measurernent and payment for ternporary erosion and sediment control provisions hicluding
preparation and implementation of a' w'PPIII shali be considered as included in the Contract
Lunip Sum Price,paid for"I'emporary Erosion and Sediment Controls-as addressed in this
Section and Section 01 O (Storm Water pollution Prevention) of thiese TecbIlical
Specificafionsand includes all compensation for providiing all materials, labor, equipment,,
tools,and incidentals re(piired to complete the Work specified herein and as,&ected by the
Desig,n Engineer. No additional compensation will be allowed therefore,
END OF SECTION
AWA A"'nRineering Aug=20B
02960-3
Page 3456 of 4165
SECT[ON 03300
CONC RE,
rE
PART I GENERAL
1,01 SUMMARY
A, ne Contractor shall supply, transport to dre Work site, and install all concroe for
constrUction of drain hilets and the pads at the flare station, post foofirigs for the rnetal
frame pipe supports and security fiCnCirtg, ftKindation for the sedimentation basin's
drainage riser, and grouted rock riprap outfalls, in accordance with this Section and at the
locations and tro the dimensions shown on the Nan . The Contractor shall furnish all
iabor, supervision, tools, materials, equipment, transportation, and incidentals as
accessary to prepare and consinict the various concrete structure s.
1,012 R'.E',FEREN(.",ES
A (."cilireinsSlanelev,-eiYI)ecijice,atic)tis, California Department of Transportation,20,10,
B, Caltrtms a"Ianzhirdlllans, California Department of"Tra nsporta t ion,20C 1:1 0.
Cl. American ocietyjbr Testing and Materials, Current E'Aition.
11 Manual�,)f, Iandard Ilrem,Uce,(,,onerete Reinforcing Steel InstitWe(C[Z.S.0, 20019,
1,.03 A,Illll,,I(,'A] LF,, S"I"ANDARI)�S AND SPECIFICATIONS
A, As,rm A, 615 Stan(Lard Specificationfbr Deformed and Plain Billet-Steel Bars
for Concrete Reinforcement.
& A STM C 31 Standard Specification for Making and Curing CorlcreteTest
Specimens in the Field.
C1. ASTM C 39 SLandard T'est Method for(,`,ompressi ve Stree tlr of Cylindri cal
COTIcrete Specirriens.
1), AST M C 143 Standard 'Fest Method fi,)r Slump of Portland Cement Concrete
E ASI'M D 1557 Standard Test Wthods for Laboratory Compaction
(I
1haracteristics of Soil U'sing Modified Effort (56,000 fi--lIhrmtl
[2,70(l kN-rn/m'j),
N suamirrALS
A. At least 1.4 calendar days prior to defivery of materials to the Work site, the Contractor'
shall provide: three (3) copies, of the following information to the Design Enginecr for
approval:
I.. Nan.w and location:of the source for the co'nerele and reinibrcing bars,
2, 1L,aborat(:)ry test results for the concrete and reinforcing bars.
V uff',Spmo�S okrm MOO Coricrele dpv IF:4W(1r v e cungtfrn w6kin I tamrka Is peo fica 1 ims
Augum 2W 5
03300-1
Page 3457 of 4165
S. Manufacturar's product data sheets for the concrete and reinfiorcing bars to vcrfl`;
that the inateiials rnect or exceed the coiTesponding product requirements,
l-05 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A. Testing and Observatioll
I, T'esting and observation of' the concrete components shall be conducte(I in
accordance'with the CQA, Plan.
1 The Contractor shall cooperate wUh the CQA Monitor during alas ervation and
testing.
3. If any portion(s) of the concrete is determined by the Design Engineer to not
mect the requirements of this Section, based on either testing or observations, the,
Contractor, at hi% ex.pense, shal] reinove and replace that portion(s) to mccA the
requirements of this Section as directed by the Design Engineer.
PART 2 PRODUCTS
2.0 1 CONCRETE
A Concrete shall be supplied frorn the: saine approved source during construction of each
structure.
R Cloncrew fin- the drain inlets and flare station, concrete pads, shall be 'rye H Portland
cernent concrete rneeting all material requirements of Sections 90-1 and 90-2 (if the
Standard, Specifications, and shall exhibit a maximum 4-ineb slump wheri tested in
accordance with AS,TM (,,' 143, and have as designated 28-day compressive strength of
2,50O psi (drain inlets) and 3,00O psi (flare station concrete pads) when tested in
accordance with AS"IM C 31 and ASTM C 39.
C, Concrete fbir post footings and the sedimentation basin's drainage riser fbundation shall
be minor concrete confbrniing to the requirenients of. Section 1901-10 of the Standard
Specifications,
D. Conarete for the grouted, rock riprap, outfalls shall 1)e minor concrete conforming to the
requirements of Sections,72-5.02 and 90-10 of the Standard Spec if cations,
102 REINFORCEMENT'
A Reinforcing bars, shall be billet-steel bars fbir concrete reinforcement, conforming to
ASTM A 615, Grade 40,#4 bars,
103 FORMS
A, Fonns used in concrete- installations shall be APA "Plyform" or equivallellt as designed
by then Contractor and exhibiting sufficient strength to hold the concrete.
fSpeOSection 03300 Conrec.,I)c Raa Clnsure Corlmruclkw I vxhwcafl
A.'R,$AiWR wrj WrW Augusu 20�,5
0133,001-2
Page 3458 of 4165
2,04 EPDXY
A, Epoxy used for securing dowells or anchors in concrefe shall be Knipson "SET , Flpoxy"
or Covert"C]A-Gel 7000 Epoxy",
2.05 AGGREGATE BASF'
A Aggregate base fbr the flare station;,concrete pads shall conforim to the requirements of
Sedion 02207 (Aggre:gate Base)of atese'reclinical Spec i fications,
106 ENGINEFRI,J) FILL
A, Umgineered fill for the flare s4dion conciTte pads shall conflomi to the requimments of
Section 02224 (Engineered Fill)of theseTechnical Specifications.
PART 3, EXECti-rION
101 GiENERAL
A. The locations, dimensions, and final clevations, ofthe concrete slabs shall be as shown on
the Plans or as staked by the Design Engmeer.
R 'rho fbotprint areas R)r the flare station concrete pads as shown on the Plans shall be
cleared arid grubbed in accordance with time, requirements, of Section 02222 (Excavatjoif)
of IlieseTechnical Specifications.
C Following clearing and grubbing, the flare station concrete pad areas shall be
overexcavated to a de th of 19 inches and recompacted as eneineered fill in, accordance
P ZD
with the requirements of Section 02224 (Engineered Fill) of these 'I"achnical
Specifications. Overexcavation is myt required if cornpaction data beneath the coim ete
stab footprints are available ftorn the fortmer feachate and backlIfling operations, that
demonsh-ate that the upper 18 inches mect the engineered fill compaction requirenlents.
1). Aggregate base for the flare station concrete pads sliaH be spread in a uniform loose lift
not exceeding 8 hiches in thickness, moisture conditioned to withi'n I to 3 percentage
points of the oplinium moisture content, and compacted to a nijinimum of 95 percent of
rm,ixinium dry density per AS TM D 155T
3,02 R,EJNF0R(,,EMEN'F
A. All reinforcement shall be hisuffled in conftwmawice with CRSI's "Manual of Standard
Practice".
B, Alf rein forcernent shall be rree from rust,6 1,, dirt:,or any other coating.
C Continuous reinforcing bars shall,be lapped at splic:es at as minitnum of 2 diameters.
D. Uifless otherwise noted, reinforcemern shall have as minimum concrete cover of 3 inches.
LApjqjLdM7Ckk.nuv.TtwfSpw¢Savwn 01300 Cuncmle,doc FiruO Cbsarc,Gvn,%nw6un'TvcrhEwicM Sper0kaflons
tWA b),Rwe"M$ A qud 2015
03300-3
Page 3459 of 4165
E. RehiftWcement shall not be damaged and shall I)e securely supported and anchored to
avoid movement dur�ing placernent oftoncrete.
3.03, FORMWORK
A. Design, and erection ofconcretc formwork shall' be the responsibility of the Contractor,
Strength of'concrefe formwork shall be sufficient to hold the concrete with minimal or no
leakage. Shoring and Imacing shall be provided to ensure sta,bility of formwork.. Three-
quarter-inch chainfer strips shall be used at exposed corners.
104 CONCRE'rE SLAB PLACEMENT
A. Subgrade and forms shall be nioistened prior to placing concrete.
R Care shall be taken to,not damage or dislAace the rein ficarc ing steel components,
C, Concrete shall be placed in a continuous operation and thoroughly vibrated to ensure
consolidation around reinforcement.
D. 1"'he final surffice of"the concrete slabs shall hive a non-slip broorn finish.
E The Contractor s,hall repair or patch all sipnfificant cracks, spalls and irregularities in
foriiied or firvished surfhces or other defects, as required to attain the workmansIfll),
standards herein.
105 MINOR CONCRJ"'FE PLACEMENT
A, Minor concrete for post footings and the sedimentation basin's drainageriscr fi), undation
shall be installed as shmn on the Plans and in conformance with Sections 51 and 90-10
of the Standard Specifications,as applicable.
B, Minor concrete for the grouted rock riprap shall be Placed in conforniancc with Section
72-5.04 of the Standard Specifications.
3.06 E'[IOXY SECI JRED DOWEL S 0 R AN CH ORS
A The diameter and depth oftbe drill 'hole shall be as indicated, If not included, the hole
shall be drilled 1/8-nich larger and ten (10) times deeper than the dianieter ofthe dowel
or anchor,
B,, The hole shall be thoroughly clearned by blowing it out with compressed air and par ttsing
a wire brush.
Placcinent of epoxy in the hole sliall be performed using a dispensing tool provided b�y, or
reconimended by the manufacturer, The hole shall be corripletely filled with epoxy,
EX The dowel or anchor shall be placed in the hole and the epoxy allowed sufficient tissue to
completely cure be:R)re disturbing the dowel (�)r anchor.
urfSpusSwokm 033M)Cbmremdou FYml(logme Coo nwl�on Tcchnjimt Spaificaflams
A"HA Aakpav ME$
033010-4
Page 3460 of 4165
PART4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.01 CONCRETE SLABS
A, The concrete slabs for the flare station shall ble measured by tile CUblic yard of concrete
installed and includes all subgrade and Pad preparation work, aggregate base,
reinforcement steel, formwork,and epoxy secured dowcls and anchors, Payment shall be
included in, the Contract Unit Price per ciibic foot installed for "I'lare Station Concrete
Slabs" addressed in, this, Section land shall include full compensation for providing at]
materi,,.,fls, labor, e(.,luipment, tolols, and in required to install the flare station
concrew slabs as shown oil the Plans, as specified herein, and u::Is directed lily the Design
Engineer-. No additional conripensation will be allowed therefom.
4012 DRAIN INLE'rs
A. fwalcasurement and payment for concrete associated with tine drain inlets shall be included
in the Contract, Unit Price ror "Drain Inlets" adolressed hi Section 02722 (1)rairmgm and
Erosion Controls)of these Technical Specifications.
403 CONCIU-iTE Pos,r F 0(YFTNGS
A. Measurennent and paynient for concrete post foodrigs associated with the metal frarne
pipe supports and security fencing for (tic flare station shall be included in the Contract
Unit Prices lbr "Metal Frarne Pipe Supports" addressed in Section 15200
Collection System Components) and "Security Fencing" addressed in Section 15300
(Hare Station), respectively,of these'rechnical Specifications.
4.04 J)RAfNACols RISER FOUNI-WrIoN
A, Mcasnreinent and payrnerit f6r concrete associated with the sedimentation basin's
drainage riser- roundatiori shall be included in the Contract Unit Price for"Sedimentation
Basin Outlet" addressed in Section 02722 ())rainage and Erosion Controls) of these
"reicbnical Spec i ticati ons.
4,05 GROUIED ROCKRITIRAP OUTFALLS
A Measurenient and payment for concrete associated witli the grouted rock riprap, outtalls
shall be included in the Contract, Unit Price for "Grouted Rock. RiPrap Outflalls"
addressed in Section 02722 (Drainage and Erosion ControW of these Technical
Spec i fications,
END OF SECTION
kyrfspma"Sovioll 03300 con art:dou Him]Clown,Cunmnwflm rechnical specificalli"m
AXAl Loguorgum"; Augnmk 20 15
03300-5
Page 3461 of 4165
SECTION 15100
LANDFILL ("OVS (LFG) EXTRACTION IVELLS
PAR ' I GhNFRAL
1,A)l SUMI MARY
A. The Contractor shall install all LK3 extraction wells as shown, on the Plans and in
accordance with these Technical Specifications,. The Contractor shall Furnish all labor,
supervision, tools, materials, equipment, transportation, and incidentals as necessary to
install the extraction, wells,
1.02 REFETENCES
A, Caltrans Cal ifornia Departinent of Tran sportation, 20 10,
k03 SUBMITTALS
A. At least 14 calendar days Prior to corni-nenceinent of driffing operations, the Contractor
shall submit the Hlowing to the Design [,ingincer for approval:
I Drilling subcontractor infivniatian, including 'nanile of subcontractor, proof of
State of Cafifi.,vrnia drilling contractor heense (Class C-57), type and make of drill
rig, narnes and experience of drill rig operator and helpers, and prop,osed
op�erating procedures,
I "I"he riarne and docafion of source, laboratory test residts, and/or pr(,,)duct data
sheets for the fifflowirig rnatetiaBs to verify that the rnaterials rneet or exceed the
requiretrients in Section.7-1,2�
a. PVC well casing and fittings.
b. Gravel pack material.
el Bentonite,
�d. PVC well bore seal.
e. Preffill.ricated Well Head Assemblies.
I Manufacturer's recornmended installation procedures and ope�nition instructions
For prefabricated well head assemblies,
4, Copies of app�roved drilling perrnits (if required) issued by the local governing
agency.
B, At the completion of each working day, the Contractor shall prepare as work order
surnmarizing tile total footage drill(-,,d and aniount of materials used ror well construction,
and submit it to,the Design E.ngineer for approval.
C. 'The Contractor shall subinit to the Design Engineer performance test results for the
prefabricated well head assemblies within 14 calendar days of completion ofthe testing.
1 0:4 QUALITY ASSURANCT
A, Testing and Observation
1. Testing and/or obscn�ation of the casing, annular materials, PVC well bore seal
and prefabricated well head assembly installations shall be conducted in
1, Specifloo6ons-SwRion 15WO LFG Emracucm Wdh,dou If inal Oosurc Cnnsimcdon rechnical Specifications
ERA AxApM'20 5
15100-1
Page 3462 of 4165
accordance with the CQA Plan.
I 'rhe Contractor shall coopera(e with the CQA Monitor during obsei-vation and
testing,
3 11'any portion(s) of the LFG extraction well installations is detertnined by the
Design Engineer to not meet the requirements of' this Section based on
observations, the Contractor, at his,expense, shall atitigate that portion(s) to meet
the requirements of diis Section as directed by the [)esigp Engineer,
PAKC 2 PRODUCTS
2,011 LF'iG ENIRACTION WIIIILLS
G A , ND FITTINGS: PVC well casing and fittings, for the LFG', PVC WELL CASIN A
extraction wells shall conform to the requirements of Sec:tion 15200 (I.FGI CollLction
System ConiPone tits)of these Technical Specifications.
B, ("MR.AVEL PA(,,K,- Gravel Pack rnaterial shall conform to the requirenients of Section
012207 (Aggregate Materials) of these'Fechnical Specifications.
C, BENTONTTF, SEAL: Bentonite seal material shall be 100 percetit prelillumi grade
bentonite clay.
D, PVC WELL 1-1(. RE SEAL: PVC well bore seals shall con,si,st of a prefabricated pipe
boot and zi 10-foot by 10-foot skirt manufactured foam 30 rnil PVC, and designed
specifically for the intended PUTPOse. The boot portion shall have as minirnun.i length of 4
feet and shall be si7ed to accurninodate as 4--inch diameter well casing,
1:,. SOIL BACKFILL: Soil backfilill niaterial shall the erosion-resistant layer material in
accordance with Section 012250 (Erosion-Res,istant Layer) or these 'Feelinical
specifi,cations,
102 PRJ'�,FABRICA,nl)WELL fffiAI) ASS LIES
A, Prefiabricated well head assemblies for LFG extraction wells shall be Series 3100 PVC
well lwads manufactured by Real Finvironryiental Products [(209) 29'6-7900], or approved
equivalent, The overall assembly shall include: Series 31100 PVC' well head equipped
With as t.5-inch diameter PVC gate valve and dedicatcd thernwineter; orifice assernbly
with four (4) interchangeable orifice plates with bore diameters ofV2, inch, -1/4inch, I inch
and p-1/2 inch; clastonieric adaptor for connection between the well casing and well
head; and a 2-inch diameter PVC flexible hose for connection between the well head and
the LFG collection system pipin&
1031 CLOSMIRETURF W711JEF VALVE AND COLLECTION FOOT
A The CIOSUre W,rf LFG refief' vMves are a component of the closure turf, to provide
necessary 'release of presstire in the event the LFG systern malfunctions. 'I'liese relief
valves are to be:p,rovided by the turfinanufacturer of the closure turf,".
13, The CIOSUre turf LF`G collection foot is as cornponent of the closure turf to provide the
interface between the scarf cial collection strips, the geornenibrane, and the LF(I
collection well head. unte collection, foot and surficial collection stripes are to be provided
sprAJUBIR-)TIOSM'Mucyn ISM)L113 F"Nnobill WOUS dol- Mmfl Owme Conslnxqwnl'edin cal S'pc6rwwdons
ABA Augum V,�15
15 1 0ff-2
Page 3463 of 4165
by the turf ins ufacturer of the closure:turf,
PART 3 EXECLTION
101 GENERAL
A, The Coritractor's attention, is directed to, the details contained hi the Plans, for information
regarding individUl well,construction characteristics,
F3, The locations of LFG extraction wells will be staked by the Design Engineer prior to the
comniericement of drilling operatrion&
C All required drilling perniit(s), fees, and inspections shall be arranged., and paid for, by
the(',ontractor.
3,02 DR111,1ING
A, Diilling and installation of LFG extraction well. shall be by as drilling contractor ficensed
I
(Class C-57) in the State of California,
B. hiclividual 1-1(3 extraction 'wells shall be drilled and installed in a single day so as to
naininaize the potential for LFG ernissions from, the borehole, Installation shall include
placement of easing, gravel pack, and surface seal (including lower and upper hydrated
bentonite seals),. "I'lie top of the casing shall be capped until instaflation of the
prefabricated well head assernbly, In the event of equipment breakdown or other
unf6reseen circumstance prohibits complete installation of the 11'G, extraction well
Within the sarne working day, provisilans shall be made to cover arid seal the exposed
borehole at the surface to, prevent LFG ernissions.
C 'rhe boreboles for the LFG extraction wells, shall be drilled using a hucket auger drill !rig
capable of drilling 24-inch diarneter boreholes, The Design Engineer will prepare boring
logs and associated records.
D. '"rhe borehole depths listed in the plans are esthnated and may be a4justed in the field by
the Desi&qr Engineer.
hl poi l Is generated as,part,of drilling operations,away be temporarily stockpiled in proximity
of the 'borehole, or discharged directly into, a resell-offlilin or dump truck, If temporarily
stockpiled, the spoils must beremoved by the end of each working day and transferred
into a roll-off'hire or dump, truck for subsequent transpoil and disposal by the Contractor
in accor(hince with Section 02222 (Excavation)of these 11-1 echnical Specilications, Spoils
ren,iiaining on-site overnight in as roll-off bin or dun,ip truck shall be covered at the end of
each working day. Spoils shall not remain on-site for more than a 48-hour period.
F As soon as drilling is completed, a safiety sicreen shalll 'be placed over the top of the
barehole, 'this screen shall stay in place until backfiffing is within 4 Pect of the surfiace.
The safety screen size should be large enough to accomniodate all backfill materials and
activities yet not large:,enou,�gh for any human toaccidentally fall through.
G 'I'he borehole shall be straight and the well casing shall be, installed in the cienter offhe
borehole. The Contractor shall tike all tensioru off of the pipe by meebanical Tneans and
L`pwjecf,155M'Tuhmkm speefficW ion slsw ion MOO LF0 E"um.fim WOh,&C FjnM ConrUvdion Technfkal SpcciAOiOous
E'BA Engineering AupA 20�I
151 00-3
Page 3464 of 4165
center the well casing in, fl-w middle of the borehole before stailing to backfill.
Fl. PVC, well casing joints shall be solvent cemented and secured with 3/8-inch tong 'J'Ype
31,6,stainless steel 6g screws.
L 'ne coinpletion height of the well casing above ground surflace shall be such that the final
height of the installed prefabricated well head assen,ibly is 5 feet above final grade.
J, Obstructions and saturated conditions inay be encountered dUring drilling; the Contractor
is expected to make reasonable effort to, drill throug,!h obstructions and swurated
conditio!ns, and may only abandon the borehole if written approval is obtained from the
Design l"ngineer.
3.0,31 BACKFl[1L,1NG
A. Backfilling operations shall commence unniediately afterwefl drilling is completed and
the well casing has been installed in the borehole, Backfill materials shall be installed as
shown on the Plans,and as,directed by the Design Engineer.
1. If Water is encountered during drilling, the Design Engineer may elect to,have the
borehole remain open overnight to allow the water level to stabilize. Under this,
scenario, the Contractor shall make provisioins to cover and secure the borehole
as a sarety precaution and to preverit],I',G eniissions.
R The gravel pack shall be Poured or scooped through the safety screen at a rate that will
not endanger the integrity of the well casing,
C "fine upper and lower bentonite seals shall be formed by evcrrnly distributing the bentonite
material around the annulus of the well casing and then adding fresh water in a manner
that will allow fbr as thorougli saturation of the bentonite. The proportion of water added
versus bentonite Material shall be tri accordance with the bentonite Manufiacturer's
recornmendations. This process shall be continued unfli the minimuni bentonite seal
thickness as specified on the Plans has been achieved,
D,. Soil tiacHilt shalll,)e placed from the top of the lower-•bentonite seal to the bottom, or the
Lipip,er bentonite seal in a manner that will prornote ss(,,,Af complaction and avoid bridging of
the soil backfill material.
E The PV(.,, well bore seal shall be installed in accordance with tine man afticturer's
recommendations around the well casing and placed at the location shown on the: Plans,
At a Miniinitin, the following provisions shall be impleniented during PVC well bore scal
installation-
L rlie boot portion of the well bore seal shall be secured around the well casing
with swinless steel straps tob provide an air-tight connection, Following placement
of erosion-resistant Jayer material, flue boot sball be installed in a collapsed
position above the final grade to accommodate poteritial settlement.
1 Following installation, the PVC well more seal shall, be covered, with the
overlying GCL material or soil (teniporary), if the PVC well more seal is going to
be exposed for niore than three(3) working days,.
f". For, each completed LK] extraction well, the Desigpi, Engineer will make a record of
boreWe and we]l completion details to,include tine following ird"orniation:
MOD 1 FG Extracrion Wclks.doc Finat Clonme Conanx6on Tmhmrat
ERA,1"'O"Oneering Augosi 2015
15100-4
Page 3465 of 4165
I. Boring log suniniarizing inaterials,and conditions encountered.
2, Well construiclion log ouflining completion depths and intervals for well casing
and construction materials,
3, Mal) showing the well location by p,,,vid coordinates and groUnd stirl'ace elevation.
4. Nwnbering system to correlate each well with its,corresponding well log,
3,04 NSTALLA,rm OF PREFABRICATED WELL READ ASSEMBIJES
A. The prefabricated well head assemblies shall, be handled and installed in accordance with
the nianufad i,irer's, recorntnendations and as shown on the Plans.
B, Provisions shall be made to ensure that the well head is installed such that the interior
extension tUbe assembly is concentric within the well easing.
C 'rhe completion height of the wcIl head assenibly shall be 5 feet above final grade as
shown on the Pians.
D. The PVC flexible hose connection het�ween the well head aad LFG collection system
piping shall be installed with s-tifilcient slack (6 to 8 inches) to, accommodate expansion
and contraction. "113S Weld-On 79 " Plastic pipe cernent, or approved equivalent, shall
be rased for llexible hose connections to the well head and LFG collection system Piping.
3.05 ABANDONMEN'r(*, LXG EIXTRACTION WELL BOREHOLE(IF REQUIRED)
,A, l orehoa les approved by the Design Engineer for abanclorn-nent shall be backfillcd with
refuse and/or soil to the final grade and cornpacted. If refuse,is Used,the refuse should be
mechanically corripacted within the borehole using the bucket anger to elirninate potential
voids,
B. Upon completion of borchole abandornment activities,, the area around the: borehole shall
be restored to meet the surrounding grades as shown on the Plans,.
3.06 PERFORMANCETESTING
A, During testing of the entire LFG collection system, as described in Section 1530,01 (Flare
Station) of these Technical Specifications, tile Contractor shall test the prefabricated well
head as,sembilies to verify proper operation. The soope of testing sliall, in the
fb1lowing-
1, Testing of static and differential pressure ports with valve cornplIetely open and
completely closed.
2. Operation of tenip,erature gauge.
3. Operation of gas saniple port.
4. General inspection of well head assembly, PVC flexible hose, and fittings for
leaks,
B. 'resting of the static and differential pressure ports and gas sample port shall he
conducted using as LAND'ITC GEM-2000 Aanalyzer, The Contnwtor shall measure and
record thel'ollowing infbnnation.for subsequent submittal to the Design Engineen
1, Static and dil"ferential pressure(valve open and closed).
2, Temperature (valve open and closed),
3, Glas, composition: methane,carbon dioxide,oxygen and balance (valve open and
15M)LVG E"olw6on wenujoc NYIA Gosuirb specificwbim
ERA&&4ureving Augnj st 10 t 5
15 1 00-5
Page 3466 of 4165
closed ,.
PART 4 MEASUREMEN"I"AND PAYMENT
4.01 Ll,9(.j"EX'I"RAC'1'1(,)T Ll.,S
A, LFG extraction wells, shall lie ineaSUred by the vertical linear foot installed and includes,
all drilling, backfiffing, arid materials, Payment shall be included in, the Contract Unit
Price per vertical linear foot installed For 'TFG Extraction Wells"' addressed in this
Section and shall include full compensation fox,providing all mateiials, labor, equipment,
tools, arid incidentals required, to install thc,,. LFG extraction wells a,s shown on the Plans,
as specified herein, and as directed by the Desj&pi Engineer. No additional compensation
will be allowed therefore.
4M PREFABRICA't-ED WELL HEAD ASS[.,,M_BLlES
A, Prefabricated well head assemblies shall be rneasured by each assembly installed and
include supply of fib ur• ('4) interchangeable orifice plates for each assernbly. Payment
shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per each unit installed For"Prefabficated Well
Head Assernblies" addressed in Ons Section and shall include ffill compensation for
Providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the
prefabricated well head assemblies as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as,
directed ley tl,icl Design Engiiiieer, No additi ona I compensation will be allowed there fore.
4.03 ADDITIONAL BOREHOLE SUF-UP
k Additional borehole set-up (resetting on boreholes allowed to sit overnight for water level
stabilization) shall be meas-ured by each set-tip requireld, PayTTICTIt shall be included in
the Contract Unit Price per each ocCUrrence for "Additional Borehole Slet-up" addressed
in this Section and shall include full compensation for providing all materials, labor,
equipment, took, and incidentals required to implement an additional borehole set-up as
specified herein, and as directed by the Dicsign Engineer. No additional coinpensation
will be allowed therefore.
4.04 BOT `71JOLE ABANDONMENT
A Borehole abandonment sball be measured by the vertical, lirier foot of borehole
abandoned arid includes all drilling, backfilling, and materials, Payinent shall be included
in the Contract Unit Price per 'vertical linear Foot of borchole drilled/backlij fled for-
""Borehole Abandonn"Ient" addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation
for providing all niaterials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to irriplement
each borehole abandonnient as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer.
No additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
4.05 REFUSE DISPOSAL
A Measurement and payment for disposal of refuse generated by the .1111"(3 extraction well
drilling operation shall be included in the Contract Unit Price for "RrCl"Llse Disposal"
addressed in Section 0122,22 (Excavation)of these Technical Specifications.
L5100 I R3 Emmulkni Wchdoc spc%:uflwjnom
EPA ERyincefing, Augw4 2015
15100-6
Page 3467 of 4165
4,06 PERFORMANCT—fES'lING
A. Measurement and payment for performance testing of (Ire preflabricated well head
assemblies described in this Section shall be included in ibe Contract Unit Price paid for
`Trefab!ricated Well Head Assemblies". No additional compensation will e allowed,
thererore.
4.07 CLOSURE "FLIRF RELIET VALVI-`�'S ANI) Lf"`G COLLECTION F OOT ASSET BLY
A, Measurement and payment l"by the clos,ure turf refief valves described in this Section shall
be included in the Contract Unit Price paid for the "Cleornembrane"addressed in Section
02772 (Geomembi-ane) of these Technical Specifications. The relief valves arc to
provided by the rnanufactLzer of the geornembrane material. 'No additional compensation
wi I I be al lowed thereffire,
B., MeaSUI`Cment and payment for the LFCIM closure turf collection foot,assembly described in
this Section shall be included in dine C'ontact Unit Price per each assembly installed for
"LFG Collection Foot Assembly" and shall include full compensation for providing all
inateri,als, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the LFG collection
foot including the piping, well head assembly, flexiblle connector', and connection 'to the
LFG collection header as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the
Design Engineer. No additional, coin lean sation will be allowed therefore.
END OF SECTION
FmM C1,03un
IFBA EngMeering Aupm 2015
1,5100-7
Page 3468 of 4165
SECTION 1 0
LFG COLLECTION SYSTEM COMPONENTS
PART I GENEILAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A. The Contractor shall fttrnisfi, transport to the Work s,ite, and install all required LFG
collection systern components, including PVC and HIVE pipe, fiffings, and valves,
flexible couplings, pipe !supports and anchors, condensate dr0p-OUB, and condensate
discharge points, as, shown on tbe Plans and in accordance with these Technical
Specifications. 'Fire Clontractor shall fiArnish all, labor, supervision, tools, rnaterials,
equipinent, transportation, and incidentals, including excavation and backfifling services,
necessaty to, install the respective LFC collection system coniponents oxidined above,
1.02 R,EFFRENCJ"1;'S
A,, California Departrywnt of'Fransportation, 2010.
& CaftransStandard Plan California Department ofTransportation,May 20,10,
(1, American, 56cielyfir Testing,and Haterials. CLUTent F tditiOTL
D, American Naliorvfl Standards Institute(ANSI).
E. Plastic Pipe Institute.
1.03 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND Sl1EClFFK.'A"r'1ON'S
A As' elf A 193 Standard Specification lbr Alloy-Steel and Stainless Steel
Bolting for High "I'ernpenalure OT High Pressure Servicc and
Other Special Purpose Applications.
B. AS TM A 1.94 Standard Specification r(HCarbon and Alloy to Nuts fear Bolh",
for Ffigh Pressure or HighTerriperature,Service, or Both.
C". ASTM A 325 Standard Specification for Structural Bolts, Steel, Heat Treated,
120/105 KS I Minimurn Tensile Strength.
D AS"I'M D 1784 'S'tw'idard Specification for Rigid PVC Compounds and
Chl orinated PVC Cornpounds.
E I'M 1) 1785 Standard Specillication for PVC 'Plastic Pipe, SchedUles 40, 80,
and 120.
E ASTM D 2464 Staridard Specification for Threaded PVC Plastic Pipe F'ittings,
Schedule 80.
L1PrqedM55MTCThx1kM SPCMca6onA9w"on 15200 HOPE Pipt Rump,and Vahrs,dw HA'd Cos=Comtnwtwn'111"hn� cld speanutionh
EIM Brai.,ol., Awpw 201'1
152,00-1
Page 3469 of 4165
a, ASTM.D 2466 Standard Specirication for Threaded PVC Plastic Pipe Fittings,
Schedule 40.
11, ASTM D 24,67' Standard Specification for Socket-Type PVC, plastic Pipe
Fittings, SchecMe O,
L A STM D 2513 Standard Specification for The-,nnoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe,
Tubing,and Fittings,
J ASTM 1)2564 Standard Specification for Solvent Cements for PVC11 Plastic
,Piping Symms,
K, ASTM D 2855 Randard Spec j lication for Making Solvent-Clemented Joints with
PVC Pipe and Fittings,
L ASTM D 3261 Standard Specification t"or Butt 11cat Fusion Polyethyleile (PE)
Plastic Fittings fbr polyethylene(PE,) Plastic Ilipe and 'I"ribing.
U ASTM 1)3350 Standard Specification for Polyethyleric Plastic Pipe and Fittings
Materials.
1,014 SUBMITTALS
A. At least 14 calendar days prior to delivery of niatcrials to the Work site, the Contractor
shall provide three(3) copies,ofthe following to the Design Engincer for approval:
I Manufacturer's product (hata sheets for the fi.fllowing materials to verify dual the
materials nicet or exceed the corresponding product requirements:
a. P'VC pipe, filtings, and valves (including gasket, seal, bearing and gear
materials).,
b, HIRE lilipe and, fittings.
C. Vacumn test port fittings,
d, PVC-IIPDE transition coupling.
e. Flexible couplings and band clamps.
r. Staked pipe supports and anchors, (including stakes, pipe clarrips and
miscellane(nis fittings).
9u Metal ftanie pipe supports (including metal fora nies, pipe clarnps and
miscellancous fittings))
h Pritner and paint.
2 Manufiicturer's reconirnended procedures for handling (transporting, unloading,
storage, etc.), installation, and weld ng of PVC and H.DPE pipe, fittings, and
valves,as applicable.
B, At least 14 calendar days prior to conducting perl"on-nance testing, tbe Contractor shafl
submit proposed procedures fear tlic following to the Desigm Engineer for approval:
1, '"acuum pressure lest ofl-IDPE condensate drain Pipe.
2, (iravity flow discharge, test of condensate discharge points.
Vprolev\1 5500'exAuk"Al 15200 HDPE Pipe,fit�fiq"R'and Varlves'dm Fbid Closwe,CansftuvtonTechirneal SpLviflumans
rBA Engbwunng Auguig 20L 15
152001-2
Page 3470 of 4165
C Wjtfiira 14 calendar days of cornpletion of perfixmiance testing for the respectivc
components, the Contractor shall subndt to the Design Engineer test results for the
following system components:
I PVC LFG collection systeni pipe,
1 1 IDPE condensate drain pipe.
1 Condensate discharge points,
1,05 QUALITY ASS'URANCE
A. Testing and Observation
1. Testing and observation of the LFG collection systern component installations
shall be conducted, in accordance with the CQA Plan.
1 "['he Contractor s,liall cooperate wit], the ("'QA Monitor during observation and
testing.
3. If any portion(s) of the LFG collection systern cornponent, installations is
deterinined by the Desi&m Engirleer to not me et the requirerneras oftbis Section,
based on either testis, or observations, the Contractor, at his expense, shall
remove and replace drat portion(s) to nleet the requirements of this, Section as
directed by the Design Engineer.
PART 2 PRODUCTS
2.01 PVC' PrPE ANT) FITTINGS
A. PVC pipe shall meet the requirernents of ASTM D 1784 and ASTM D 1785 'for Schedule
40 and Schedule 80 PVC pipe. The pipe shall be manufactured froin a P'V(' compound
which meets the requirements of Cell Oassification 12454-B PVC as outlined in ASTM
1) 1784.
B. PVC, fittings shall meet the requircrnerits of ASTM 1) 2464 ASTM 1) 2466, and ASTM
D 2467 for Schedule 40 and Schedule 80 PVC pipe fittings. Fittings unavailable in
Sche&de 40 may be replaced with Schcdule 8,0. Tbe fittings shall be manufactured ftom
a PVC compound which rneets the requirements of Cell Classification 12454-B PVC as
outlined in ASTM D 1784-
L Fittings shall be industrial, heavy dirty, hub style.
1 Socket liffings shall be pressure rated as f,or the corresponding PiN Size
prescnbed by AST M D 1785, Threaded fittings shall be pressure rated at 50
Percent of the rating for socket fittings,
1 F'Ianges Flanges shall rneet the fbllowing speciflications:
a. Flanges shall be one-piece solid design or two-part van stone type
which use the taperc(l, serrated, face artd full-face� gasket tiechnique
for Joining and are: comparable with ANS I B 16.5 Class 150 tnetal
flanges.
b. Flanges shall be non-shock and pressure rated at '150 psi for water
service at 731T, and have a rninnnurn burst requirement of; . times the
rate,pressure.
C. Bolts shall be 'rype 316 stainless steep AS'I'M A 193, Grade 138M he
head and nuts shall be AS'FM A .194,Grade:8m hex head.
d. Gaskets shall be full-face neoprene.
0200 HL"T Pipe,Phtings,and Valves dac FURA 4^lON19C COMMIC61M'NOdUkal SPMifDCN&qk)n,5
Aup sE 20 ll 5
1512010-3
Page 3471 of 4165
4. Branch Saddlesl- Branch !saddles shall either be socket style affixed using PVC
cennent or clamP
, -on style secured using,stainless steel screws.
102 PVC BU17E1;fFLY'VALVES (ISO1.AYl()N' VALVfr,S)
A. Butterfly valves Used for isolating L,FG collection system piping segi-fients shall be wafer-
type design with a body and disc manufactured frOM a PVC compound which ineets the
reqUirernents of Cell Class 12454-B PVC as OUdined in ASIM D 1784 and shall be
corripatibIc with associated PVC pipe fittings. T'he f,,Vr C butterfly valves shall also meet
the following material and perfonriance slier ificatjons�
I Shall shall be cadinjuni-plated steel alloy or 300 series stainless steel, positively
attached to the disc, and totally sealed fi-cirri ex osure to the process gas or.
enviromilent. The shaft shall also have a directional indicator on top to indicMe
disc position with handle removed.
1 Valve body shall be of the wafer desil for ease of installation arld maintenance
and shall be cornpatiWe with ANSI B 1 6t,,5 Class, 150 ineta] flanges.
3, Seat rnateiial shall be Viton,
4. Bearings shall be corrosion resistant TFE or polypropylene 20 percent glass
filled,
5 Secondary seat material shall be '"iton and correspond to [lie seat material for
niaximurn,cheinical resistance.
6. Handles and worm gear operators shall be corrosion resistant,
7. Valves shall be non-sbock, rated at 150 psi R)r water service at 73'F, arld have a
rninirnunii btirSL Tequirenient of 3.3 tinies the rate preSSUTe,
2,03 PVC BAIJ,VALVES
A PVC valves shall he ball-type design with the ma,*jor cornporients manufactured
from a PVC compound which meets the requirements of Cell Class 12454-B PVC
as OUtfined in As,,rm D 1784 atid shall be compatible with associated PVC pipe
fittings, The PVC ball valves shall also meet the following material and
performance specifications:
1. Balt seats shall be virgin 'IT,E and the stern/'body seals and seat energizers shall
be 'Viton,
2. PVC' socket type connectors shall confivin to the requirements (:if AS'I'M D 2466
and As,rM D 2467
3. Threaded type connectors shall conform to the requirements, of AS'TM D 2466
and AS TM D 2464 and ANSI 131,20,1 Im tapered pipe threads.
4, 'The valve assembly shall be of construction such that a, two--piece body is
screwed together to contain seats which are maintained under compressive load
against the tiall.
5 alves shall be non-shock, rated at 150 psi for water service at 73'F, and have a
rnininlum burst requirement of 3.3 times the rated work4ig preSSUre.
2.04 P'VC(.,EMEN'T
k PWI, cements shall meet the requirements, of AS"m D 2564 fbi solvent ceniented PVC
joints.
SpmJficakan%Smfii:m 15NA MPE Pi}v Nawigg„and VaNem dtw HaW Ooswc Umonx6m I cchnk;ag 8p,.,,6flc&6ons
CHA EoAgnmriovg, hupA 2015
1 5201f1-4
Page 3472 of 4165
2,05 VACUUM TEST PORTS
A Vacuum test po!as for the LF(i collection systern piping shall be U8-inch flow, 1/,-inch
threaded polypropylene quick,disconnect couplings,
2.06 HIRE 111PE AND FFFTINGS
A. I-IDPE'pipe and Fittings for the condensate drain piping shall be SDR 9 and rated PE 3408
by the Plastics Pipe Institute, The HDPF, pipe shall have a cell Oassification per AST'M
1)335O of 345444C
R 1-11)PE pipe and fiffings shall meet the following criteria:
1. The norninal inside diameter of the HDPE j,)ipc shall be true to t1w pipe size
shown on the Plans in accordance with ASTM D 2513.
1 HDPE fittings for use in laying pipe shall have standard dirnensions that conforrn
to AE]"M 'D 3 261
1 Where possible, RIVE pipe and fittings should be produced by the same
Manufacturer from identical materials meeting the 'requircments of this
specilIcation, Special or custom fittings may be exempted ftoni this requirement,
2,07 TIVC-HDPE TRANSITIONCOUPLING'
A 1'be PVC,'-111013 transition coupling used in the condensate discharg.,e poult asselublies to
the existing leacbme drain shall be Series 735 tran,sition coul.)1ings manufactured by plop y-
Carn, I.nc. [(763Y786-6682'1,or approved equivalent,
2.08 FLEXIBLE COUPLINGS
A, Flexible couplings shall be 18-inch long LANI)TEC Models F.UX11-060-180T (6-inch
pipe diameter) and FLXH-080-t8ff (8-inch pipedianic,,fl:er),orapprovcdeqaivaleiit:,
B, Band clan!ips used to secure the flexible coupllings shall be stainless steel ['11ANDIEC,
Models 11C-060 (6-inch pipe diameter) and 14C-080 (8-inch pipe diarrreter), or approved
equivalent,
109 STAKED PIPE SUPPORTS AN"D ANCHORS
A. Stakes for pipe: supports, and rarichors shall be galvanized carbon steel and shall be, a
minimum of 3 -lbet in length. 17he upper portion of the stakes shall contain appropriately-
sized holes to aHow R)r the coruiection and adjustment of angie I)races and bolts. The
hole spacing shall be at a minitnum o�["2 inches on-center.
R Pipe clamps shall be galvanized carbon steel and as shown on the Plans.
Cl. Miscellaneous fittings (i.e., angle braces, bolts, nuts and washers) shall be zine-coated
carbon steel and conform to ASTM A 325.
SpmMicationiSeakm 15200 HOPE Npe,Fhfings,and Val m,doc Hui Chmuve Consbwuon Twhnknl Speefficaunns
ERA ErWineerMp, Augpj o 2015
1,5200-5
Page 3473 of 4165
2,10 ME't'ALFRA PIPI;, StJIIIIORI'S
A. Metal frames for pipe suppoils shall be I-5/8-inch hot-dipped galvanized carbon steel as
manufactured by'UNTSTRUM(Part No, PJOOOHS[HGj),OT'approved eqUivalent.
13, Pipe clanips shall be galvanized carbon steel and as shown on the Plans.
C Miscellaneous fittings (i.e., a e braces, belts, nuts and washers) shall be zinc-coated
carbon steel and conR)rm to ASTM A 325,
111 BLOCK PIPE SUPPORTS
A, Blocks for pipe Supports shall tx 8" x 8" x16" inasonry blocks, with a 2 x 8 redwood cap
and 44 rebar stakes covered with rubber hose.
2.12 CORRUGATED METAL PIPE (CMP)
A, CMP for pipe: supports or sleeves, shall be of 16 gauge CWP continuous helical lock steel
conforming to the requirements of Section 66-3 of the Standard Specifications. All CMP
shall be galvanization compatible and conforin to the requirements of Section 66-31,02 of
the Standard Specifications for zine coated steel,
2.13 CONCRETE
A, Concrete for inetal franie pil)e supports and block pipe suppoirts sball cordbrrn to the
requirements of Section 03300(Omerete) of these Technical Specifications,
114 PIPE BEDDING
A Pipe bedding for buried header crossings shall c(,niforin to the requirements of Section
02207 (Agpp�egatc Materials),of these'Fechnical Specifications.
2.15 ENGINE.I.-'RED FFLL
A Engineered fill For buTIed header crossings and road crossings shall conform to, the
requirements of Section 02224 (JEngineercid Fill)of these Technical Specifications.
PAR 1'3 EXECUTION
3,011 (31a,N E RAI,
A The aligninent and locations of the LFG collection systern components 'will be staked by
the Design Engineer prior u".) installation,
R PVC and III)PE"'. pipe, fittings, and valves shall be instaHed by skilled laborers
experienced in installation of such materials,
(11 All exposed PVC pipe and fittings shall be painted.
B200 IADPE Npe,Fh mgs,,and V a Nes,.doc Final Oolnlre("txIsIlUc6on Tmhnioat Spuffin6ons
LRA E'npaordag Au,gu a 20 13
15200-6
Page 3474 of 4165
102 1,17("Y' COLL[TTION SYSTEM KPING
A 11',G' collection system piping, in.cluding flexible couplings, isolation valves and
condensate drop-out points,shall be installed as,shown on the Plans.
B, All PVC pipe, Fittings and valves shall be handled carefully in loading and unloading, and
in sucli a mariner as to avoid shock.(hiring placement., PVC pipe, fittings and, valves shall
not be dropped or dumped,
C. Prior to painting and installation, all P'VC pipe, fittings and valves shall be inspected for
Cuts, scratches, or other darnages. Pipe, fittings and valves, With, iTTIPerfections shall not
be used.
'D, Prior to installation, all PVC pipe anti fittings to be left exposed shall be steam cleaned
and allowed to dry, then painted with an iundercoat coat of high-quality, water-based
exterior latex prit-ner, followed by a topcoat of high-quality, ultra-violet resistant, water
based exterior latex paint. The pipe shall be plainted to within 6 inches of each end of the
pipe section length. Light sanding may be necessary to achieve an acceptable boad. The
paint shall be mediurn gray or white in color, or as specified by the City. Within 24
hours of cleaning, the first coat sball be applied l"Ifflowcd b,y the second coat noniore than
48 hours after the first coat has, dried. The pipe joints shall be painted in this manner
after installation.
E PVC pipe, f atings and valves, shall be Joined with socket and solvent cenient welding in
accordance with ASTM D 2855, Joining of PVC pipe, fittings and valves shall be in
accordance with these specifications and the pipe manufacturer's recommendations,
F. All PVC pipe cuts shall be square and perl)endicular to the centerline of the pipe. In
addition,PVC pipe ends shall be beveled prior to applying primer and solvent cenient so
that the primer or cenient are not wiped off during insettion into the fitting socket.
G All burrs,chips, etc, genera ted as a result of cutting operations shall be removed froin the
pipe interior and exterior, hij addition, the inside of the piping shall be kepit clean of dirt
and debris. Piping left overnight shall be capped,
'H, A coating of CTS prin'ler as recommended by the PVC pipe supplier slurp be applied to,
the entire interior surface of the fitting socket, and to an equivalent area on,the exterior of
the l',)ipe prior-to applying solvent cernent.
'I". The so,lvent clement shall comply with the requireinents of AS"I'M D 2564 and shall be
applied in strict accordance with inanufacturer's specifications.
I PVC, pipe, fittings, and valves shall not be pfirned or solvent welded when it is raining or,
when ambient temperatUre is,below 40T or above 100T.
K, After solvent welding, the PVC pipe, fittings and valves shall remain undisturbed until
cement has thoroughly set. As as guideline Cor joint setting time, use I hour for arnbieril
temperatures 6O'F to NOT, or 2 hours when anibient temperature is 40"F to 610"17,
1— Flexible couplings shall be installed at the locations shown on the Plans. The flexible
L',pn'YjwN5NWTcd16v,aI Spec HkationASookm p1200 HIVE Pilm,t41qWIP_and Valves,docr Fino Gosuse spe6ritation5
EBA En�,,,znrering Auyuol 2015
15'200-7
Page 3475 of 4165
couplings,shall lie installed per the pipe separation criteria specified in the Plans based on
the �nnibicnt temperature at the time: of installation. The stainless steel banid clan f)s shaH
be secured around the ends of the flexible coupling in such as manner as to provide an air-
fight joint.
A Vactailm test ports shall be installed at the locations and orientations shown on the plans,
"I'lie ports shall be installed by drillitig and tapping an appropriate sized We in the LFG
collection pip c to allow insertion of`tine threaded quick disconnect coupling, The ports
shall be installed currently with the L,FG collection pi I pe installation and near the end of
pipe sections (but, not within coupled joints) to flacilitate the removal of lIVC shavings
introduced into the piPe my the dril ling/tapping process.
N, Staked piPe supports shall be installed ander the selected Ripe segnients as specified, on
the Plans. The staked pipe SUPPOrts shall be spaced at, 10, feet on-center along the full
length of the pipe segments, The height of the pipe sapports shall be adjusted as
appropriate to ensure positive slope of" LRIF collection system piping. Stakes shall be
driven no less than 12 inches and no more than l 8 hiches below final surface grades,
0, Staked pipe anchors shall be installed every 50 linear lbet (ininimum) of 1,FG collection
system piping, as well as at the locations of all tee,elbow and wye fallings (both cnds, but
not on the fittings thiernselvcs) and, at flexible couplings located oil slopes as shoiwn on
the Plaris. Pipe clamps shall be secured around the LFG header systern pipe to ensure
that the pipe does not move. Securing of the pipe clamps shall be done in skich a ManTier
as to not daynage the pipe. No portion of the fittings and flexible couplings shall rest on
the stake pipe anchors. Stakes shall be driven no less than 12 inclies and no more than 18
inches below final surface grades.
P, Metal frarne pipc supports shall be iristalled at selected road crossings and near the flare
station at the locations shown on the Plans. Concrete for the pipe supports shall be
batched and placed in accordance with the requirements of Section 033010 (Concrete) of
these Technical Specifications, The height of cross-bar pipe supports shall be adjusted as
appropriate to ensure positive:slope of LFG collection system piping.
3 A3 BURIED HEADER CROSSTNGS
A, Trenching across bench sections shall be to the dcpth and dimensions shown on
the Plans. Dc not ex-cavale deeper than neciessevy to maintain adequate b1fl
ahove the underij,ing G(.-.'I..
R Pipe bedding material and LFG collection system piping shall be placed, to, the
diiiiensions shown on, the Plans. IYG collection system piping shall be stop ed at
a jr1linimurn of 3 percent to maintain proper condensate drainage capabilities.
Cl, The remainder of trcnch shall be: backfillied with engineered fill in accordance
with the requirernents of Section 02224 (Engincered Fill) of these Technical
Specificatilons and as shown on the Plans.
3.04 ROAI)i CROSSINGS
8pwiihcafiuRu\SixTNoin B200 HTHIE ApL,Rdii:VA rind Vakies.dfwc Finid Spmfflcwions
A"BA 1"'PudneerinR Augum 21015
1,512010-8,
Page 3476 of 4165
A. CMP used fcir pipe support or protective sleeve, shall be installed il:l the
orientations, shown on the Plans. Whenused as, a pipe: support, the CMP shall be
aligned with the center line of the drtinage swale.
B, A sniall section of reinforceinent geotextile used in the access road construction shall be
wrapped around the CM11 protective sleeve where it wil,l be in d�irect contact with the
Underlying CM.P pipe support in order to p,rovide a cushion between the two CMPs.
C. 1.17G collection systern piping shall be inserted through the CMP protective sleeves in a
niatiller that will not damage or compromise the: LXG collection system piping,
rx Engineered fill shall be pil'aced around and over. the CMP's as shown on the Plans
arid in accordance with the requirements of Section 02224 (Engineered Fill) of
these Technical Specifications.
E. The tinal surface of the n)ad crossing shall be completed iri accordance with the
reqUirements; of Section 02,310, (Access Roads) of these rechnica] Specifications,
and as shown on the Plans.
3,05 CONDEN'SATEDRAIN PIPE AND, FITTINGS
A, The EUVE pipe arid fitting manufacturer shall package products fbir shipment in a
maniler suitable for safe, transport: and shall be subsequently handled in accordance with
the manufacturer's reconinlendations.
B, Prior to installation, all HIVE pipe and fittings shall be inspected for cuts, scratches,, or
other damages, Pipe and Fittings with imperfections shall riot be used.
C. Trench excavation and backfiffl for bluried FIT)PE pipe and fittings shall 'be as shown on
the Plans.
1), 1-l"DPE pipe connection ends and fittings shall. be joined by buti fusion procedures in
accordance with the HDP E pil)e and fitting manufacturer's recorninended procedures.
E, The Contractor shall not bend the HIRE pipe to a degree greater than the minirnum
n1dius recommended by the manufacturer,
1a,. The HDPE pipe shall not be subjected to strains that will overstress or buckle piping or
impose excessive stress on joints.
G. Open ends, of" used ,RDPE pipe shall be covered or, capped at the end of each working
day to prevent entry by animals or debris.
H. For segments, completed above ground, provide sufficient slack to allow 1"or therinal
expansion and contraction so as to not prornote excessive stress on the piping following
installation,
1, For seginents completed below ground, the C!ontraclor shall allow for thermal expansion
or contraction ofthe HDPEpiple within the trench and coordinate pipe backfill operations
Oprojim"i"0,50"fuchniW 15100 HIVE Pipe,Ili"hp,and V a Nmdoc Final(An yry Consintailin Technicat Specificatlons
E"BA Enpioweing A p �2(H 5
1 qa
5200-9
Page 3477 of 4165
to avoid bUildup of therinal stresses. Whenever possible, segnient tie-ins, shall be
cornpleted within d"ic trencli to pre:vent overstressed cond,itionns.
I Following placernent of IJDPE pipe, SLIMCieTIt time shall be allowed (per rnanufiacturer's
rt,�conunendafions) for the pipe to ad.just to trench temperature prior to testing, swgment
tie-ins, or backfilling activities,,
3,06 (,',ONDENSA'rF' DROP-OUTS
A. Conden&ite drop-OUtS, including u-trap assembHes, shiall be instafled at the locations and
to the dimensions shown on [lie Plans. Do not excavate (Jeeper th,an necessary to
maintain adequate bqfft-,r above the underi(ving G(.,'],,
B,. The transition froin PVC; to I-IDIT shall lie at the flange, coninection as shown on the
Plans.
C. PVC' and HIME pipe, fittings and v�flves shall pone installed in accordance with Part 3.01
(11(3' Collection ystern Piping) and ["art 3.05 (Condensate I)rain Pipe and Fittings) of
this Section.
D, Staked pipe anchors shall be installed at various points on the to-trap piping as shown on
the Plans to prevent rnovenient associated with thermal expansion. Staked pipe allebors,
shall be installed per the instructions outfined in Part 3.01 (LFG' C'ollection Systern
Piping,)'of this Section.
E, Following consh-uction of u-trap assernblies and Prior to start of 111"G collection systern
operations, the U-trapasseniblies shall ble,filled with clean water.
3,07 CON13ENSA'rE DISCHARGE POINI.'S
An Condensate discharge points shall be installed:, at the locations, ard to the dimensions
shown on the Plans.
13, Soil, and/or refuse shall be exca,vat:ed to expose the existing condensate drain, IT refuse is
encountered, the refuse shall be reiriloved and disposed of in accordance with
Section 012222 (Excavation) of these Technical Spec i fica lions,
C' When entering excavations to install branch saddles,iniscellancous piping and/or backfill
inaterials, the C ontractor's Health and Safety Plan shall be l'ollowed accordingly,
inchiding trench safety, LFG hazards and possible confined space entry (i.e., oxygen-
deficient atmosphere),
lea P'VC and HUPE pipe and fiffings shall be installed in accordance with Part 31.01 (LFG
Collection Systern Piping) and Part 3,04 (Condensate I)rain Pipe and Fittings) or this
Section.
Er, For condensate discharge Points located within the limits of the final cover systern, the
respective final cover syslem components shall be placed and installed in accordance
with Sections 022401 (Fouridation Layer), 02245 (Gas Relief Layer [GRLj), O 774
(Geosynthetic Clay Liner 02773 (()eonet Composite), and 02250 (Erosion-
Spropa"1550"J"mAmicai MOO FIDPE Pipe,phi ilTs'ruld va ves*w NnO Ckwury Consu uctkm T'mhyucal spe6flui ions
EHA Fnginerolng, Mgwg 20 15
15200-10
Page 3478 of 4165
Resistant Layer)oftheseTechnical Specifications. portions below the: final cover system
shall be backfilled as enklincered fill in accordance with Section 022,24 (Engineered
Fill)of these Tectntical Specifications.
F. For coridensate dischar&,!e e points located outside the limits of the final cover system, the
excavation shall be backfilled with engineered fill in accordance with Section 02224
(Engineered Fill)of these Technical Specifications.
3 M PERLI'ORMANCE TESTI N(,'j
A PVC. Ll,(1 C,'ollection yslern Pilml- After all PVC pip�e and fittii,igs have been joined,
including flexible couplings, all connections shall be visually inspected to verify that the
connections are securely intact. Tension on the stainless steel straps for the flexible
couplings shall also be checked to ensure that the ends of the flexible couplings, are
adequately secured to the LFG collection system piping and that the tension within the
flexible couplings is appropriate based on the given ambient temperature,
B. HDPE Condensate Drairi Pipe: Before the HDPE condensate (train pipe is connected to
the PVC piping system and existing leachate drain, each HDP'E condensate drain pipe
segment shall be tested and withstand a minimuni of-5 psi vacuun,ii for a period of riot
less than 10 minutes without any drop in pressure, Vacuum shall be measured by a
mercury marwnieter, slope gauge, or an eu,,juivalent device calibrated to, read increments
of not greater than OJ Psi, The source of the vactruni shall be isolated before the test is
made. Testing shall be perforryied prior to backfilling segnients of the 111:fPE condensate:
drain pipe that arc to be buried, It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to ensure, that
proper safety precautions are observed dUrilIg the tesfin&
C. ("Ondensate Dischai�ge Points: After the HDPE condensate drain pipe is connected to the
leachate drain but prior to connecting it to PVC piping system, the functionality of each
HDPE condensate drain pipe segment shall be tested to verif= each seginent's ability to
transinit water to the existing leacbate drain. Testing shall include introducing water at
the uppermost point (i.e., highest elevation) of each segnient arid verifying the influx of
water into the existing leachate drain utilizing the closest down gradient manhole as the
point of observation,
PART 4 MEASUREMEN'T AND PAYMENT
4,01 LFG COLLECTIC)N SYSTEM PTPING
A. J1VC7 pipe and fittings, for the LXG collection systern piping shall be measured 'by the
linear lbot of each for each size of pipe installed arid includes, all fittings. Payrnent shall
be inclucied in the, Contract Uniit price per linear foot installed for "PVC Pipe and
FittiugS" addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation for providing all
materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals, required to install the PVC pipe and
�fittings, as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design
Engineer. No additional compensation will be allowed ther0bre.
02W)RDFE Kp,F'ktbd gs,and Vakirs doc Hnal Closure Conmrucfion
EBA Eogine"efing Aupsm:2015
15200-11
Page 3479 of 4165
� . Isolation valves shall be nicasured by each isolation valve installed. Payrnent shall be
included in the Contract Unit Price per each nnit installed ,f,or "Isolation Valves"
addressed in this Section and shall include full, compensation for providing all materials,
labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required, to install the isolation valves as shown
on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional
compensation will be allowed therefore.
C. Flexible couplings shall be measured by cacti flexible couplin installed. Payment shall
be included in the Contract Unit Pricc per each unit installed I"br "Flexible Couplings"
addressed in this Section and shalt include full coinpensation for providing all materials,
labor,equipment, tools,and incidental,s required to install the flexible couplings as shown
on (he Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design I-Engrineer. No additional
compensation will be:allowed therefore.
D acuum test ports shall be measured by each vacuum test port installed. Payment shall
be included in the Contract Unit Price per each unit installed for "Vacuum Test Ports"
addressed in this Section and shall include fUll compensation for providing all inaterials,
labor,equiprrient,tools, and incidentals j equired to install the vacuum test ports as, shown
on the Plans, as s,pecif ted herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional
compensation will be allowed therefore
E Staked and block pipe supports shall be measured by each staked or block type, pipe
support installed, Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per each unit
installed for "Staked Pipe Supports" addressed in this Section and shall include, flill
conipensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals
required to install the stake Pipe Supports as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and
as directed by the Design Engineer, No additional cornpensation, wffl be allowed
therefore.
Staked pil')c anchors shall be ineasured by each stalled pipe anchor installed, Payrneiit
shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per each unit installed for "Staked Pipe
Anchors," addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation for providing all
rnaterials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the stake, pipe
anchors as shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design
Engineer, No additional compensation wfll be allowed therefore.
G. Metal frarne pipe supports shall be measured by each nwtal firarne pipe support installed
and includes all fittings and concrete post fbotings. payment shall be included in the
Contract Unit Price per each unit installed for"Metal Frame Pipe Supports"addressed in
this Section and shall include full cotripensation flier providing all materials, labor,
equipment, tools, and incidentals required to install the metal ffilvIC Pipe SLIPPOrtS as
shown on the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Desigii Engineer. No
additional compensation Nvil I be allowed therefore.
ff. Buried header crossings shall be measured by each buried header crossing (I I ype I or 2)
installed and includes all trenching and, b�ackfill rnaterials. PVC pipe and fittings,ffir the
L,FG collection systern piping are riot included in this pqynient cis they are addressed
separate,ly. Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Prices per cacti unit installed
for "Type I Buried Header Crossing" and "Type 2 Buried Header Crossing"addressed in
this Section and shall include ffill compensation for providing all inaterials, laboi,
spmficabonsSee6on 152W HNIF,hpr,Fftfliµp,and VWvx dou k%al Clonve Consknndon Tcch6W Spedfikadwim
04 Engin"ving AUgum 20 15
1,5200-12
Page 3480 of 4165
equipment, tools, and.incidentals required to install the buried header crossings as shown
on the Plans, as sPecified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional
compensation will be allowed therefore.
L Road crossings shall be measured by each road crossing (Type I or 2) insuilled and
includies all trenching, CMP sleeves and supports, and backfill rnateriak, PVCpipe and
fittingsJbir the LFG'colkction,system piping and reiqfin,ceinent geotextilelaggregate base,
associated with the access road construction are not included in this pqytnent as th eY are
addressed separatelj). payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Prices, per each
unit installed for "Type I Road Crossing"and "Type 2 Road Crossing" addressed in this
Section and shall, include full compensation 1-br providing all materials, labor, equipment,
tools, ind incidentals required to install the road crossings, as shown on the Plans, as
specified herein, and as, directed bly the Design Engineer. No additional compensation
will be allowed therefore.
4M CONDENSATE'DRAIN PIPIN('),
A HDPE pipe and fittings for tile condensate drainage systern piping shall be measured by
the linear foot installed and, indudes all fhtings HDPE pipe and fiffing's fir, the
condensate drop outs and condensate discharge points, are, not included in this payment
as ihey are addressedseparaley Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price
per linear foot installed FOT 1-11)PE Pipe and Fittings" addressed in this Section and shall
include full compensation for providing all niaterials, labor, equipment, tools, and
incidentals required to install the FIDPE' pipe and fittings, as, shown an the Plans, as
specified herein, and as directed by the Design, Engineer. No additional compensation
will be allowed therefore.
4.013 CONDENSATE DROP-OUTS
k Condensate drOP-moots, including u-trap assenib lies,shall be measured by each condensate
drop-out installed. Payment shall be included in, the (ontract Unit Price per each unit
installed, for "Condensate Drop-outs" addressed in this Section and shall include full
compensation for providing all inaterials, labor, equipment, tools, arid incidentals
rcqUired to install the condensate drop-outs as shown on the Plans, as specified herein,
and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional, compensation will be allowed
therefore.
4.04 CO�NDENSA,rE,DlSCHA,R,A(.j'E POINTS
A, Condensate discharge points shall be ineasured by each condensate discharge point
installed. payment shall be included in, the Contract Unit Price per each unit installed, for
"Condensate Discharge Points," addressed in this Section and shall inicluude full
compensation for providing all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals
required to install the condensate discharge points as shown on; the Plans, as specified
herein, and as directed by thc Design Engineer, No additional compensation will be
allowed therefore.
Dproj='6 If,50"'Jechwul SpccificslbnskS¢9w.6ov I MW UJOH Pipe,FitOngs,xM VaNmdoc MUM Clasure Conmuction Technical SpLdfication's
EBA Enrimeering Aapust 2015
15200-13
Page 3481 of 4165
4.05 PEIU,0fWANCEI"I"STING
A! Measurernentand Payment for perforinance testing of the various LF('j' collection systern
coi,nponents,described in this Section shall be included in the Contract LJnft Price paid for
the various items of Work., for which they are required. No additional cornPlensation will
Pao,allowed therefore,
END OF SECTION
1,%jTftIjccN550I'0ch"1Va Spr0ficaliongSwdon 152.00 NE)PE Pipe,Fjq6ng%Ond V41VcSAQQ
Augum 2M 3
152010-14
Page 3482 of 4165
SECTION 15300
ARE STATION
PART I GENERAL
1.011 SUMMARY
A The Contractor shall assemble all required flare station components and associated
appi,irtenances and implement improvements as shown on the Plans and in accordance
with these 'fccbnical Specifications, including: installa(ion o f as skid-mounted packaged
combustion system; installation of condensate drainage line between the skid-mounted
packaged c(,)rnbilstion systern and leachate Nvet welll; cornpletion of a]] clectrical,
telephone, an(,[mechanical connections; installation of security fencing; and placement of
aggregate base within and around the flare station area as shown oil the Phrns.
R uie Contractor shalil f"umish all labor, supervision, tools, materials, equipment, and
incidentals necessary to assernble all required flare station comporricilts ancl associated
appurtenances, including all required piping, fittings,and connections.
The Contractor shall not begin flare station assemb�ly activities requiring hookup to the
LFG collection system until perf'ormance testing of that system is coinpleted in
accordance with Section 151010 (Landfill Gas[prig"] Extraction Wells) and Section .15200
(LFG Collection System Components) of these Technical Specifications,.
D, The wne:r will be responsible for purchasing and arranging delivery of the skid-mounted
packaged o(�nnbtlstion system, Since tile manufacturer of this unit will not be selected
until December 2013 or JanUary 20,14, actual, plans and specifications for the�se units are
riot currently available. The desigm. plans, specifications, and installation instructions for
tile afibrementioned system will be supplied to the Contractor a minirnurn of six(6) weeks
prior to commencement of the scheduled 1,FG collection systern installation activities.
'rhe Contractor shall be responsible for reviewing the design 1,,ihins, specifications, and
installation instructions in a finiely manner and! Furnishing all necessary materials
required to complete the Worn in accordance with the approved Construction Schedule.
E. The Contractor shall be responsible for rnechanica0 and electrical assembly and
connections of the skid-mounted packaged combustion systern, As noted above, actual
plans and specifications for these units are not currently available. Based on these
eircumstances, an assumed scope of work has been developed based on the Design
Engineer's experience on similar pro.icas, Whereas the assumed scope of'work presented
herein is considered representative of what the assembly will entail, the actual work
scople is SUbject to minor revisions based on requirements specified by the selected flare
manufacturer,
F. Assembly of the skid-mounted packaged cornbustion systern, will require use of as 5 Ion
crane. 'rhe cranc will also be required f6r unloading the skid-mounted packaged
combustion systeni upon its delivery to die, Work site, The Contractor sha;lll be
responsible for furnishing and operating the crane to implement these tasks. The Design
Engineer or Owner will coordinate the delivery schedule off"the skid-niounted packaged
rurNp0cfMwaoll 9 5300 Flaw stauomdoc Filial Cloalm SpedfW46ong
EM 1Dgjaee&W August 20 15
15300-1
Page 3483 of 4165
conibIlStion systern with the Contractor.
(31 A reprcsentative of the manuf cturcr of the skid-mouated packaged combustion system
will be present during start-up and troubleshooting of the system Written approval of the
systam installation and operation by the manufacturer will be reqifired prior totwner's
acceptance of the flare station componerits. The Owner will pay For the manufaCtUrer's
inspection services under the provisions and requirements of this Section,
1 M REFERENCES
A C'crlti-ans S'lanclard S&eficafioris, California Depailment of T nansportation, 2010,
R Calowns S(andm d Plans. Californ ia Department of"Fransportat ion, 2,01 O,
C American&xiqYfir Ta sfing andMaterials, Current FAition,
D� American Institute of Steel Construction(AISC).
1,03 APPIACIIA'13LE S'l"ANI)ARDS AND SPECIFICA'FIONS
A ASTM D 1557 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Complaction
Characteristics of Soil Using Mmlified Effort (5�6,000 ft-lbf/ft 3
[2,7'00 k.N-iYYrrI3])'
1.04 SUBMITT&LS
A. At least .14 calendar days prior to coinnieneement of flare station assembly, the
Contractor shall subinit to the Design Engineer copies or any building permits (if
required) issued by the local goveming agency,
B. Within 14 calendar days of completion of flare station assenibly, the Contractor shall
SUbinit to the Design Engineer copies of any btdiding inspection reports (if required)
issued by Ilie local governing agency.
C At least t4 calendar days prior to conducting perfomiance testing, the Contractor shall
submit proposed procedures for the following to the Design Engineer for approval:
I, Skid-mounled packaged combustion systein operation.
I Hydrostatic Pressure test of PVC condensate discharge pipe.
D. Within 14 calendar days of completion of ped5ormance testing for the respective
components, the ContractOT Shall subrilit: to the l')esign Engineer test results for the
f'ollowing systern components:
I, Skid-mOUnted packaged combiistion system.
I PVC condensate discharge pipe.
1,05 QI.JAI.rI'Y ASSURANCE
A. I I esting and Observation
7 - ation of the flare station c, lomponen,ts, shall be conducted in
L 1'esting and obseiv
accordance with the CQA Plan.
'I m(Spm"Cxuun MOO flue Sqafiam,doc HnA CIO$=Corxrnwflonl mhukW SpmAjCaTkmz
1"JM FaRAmminq, amber 20B
15 00-2
Page 3484 of 4165
2, Tile, Cont-actor shall cooperate with the CQA 'Monitor during observation and
testing.
1 If any porl�ion(s) of the flare station cornponents is determined by the Desigm
Engineer to not meet the requirements of this Section, based oil either testing or
observations, the Contractor, at his expense, shall fix that portion(s) to meet ille
f7e(ltlirernents offl-ris Section as directed by the Design Engincer.
4, Abraded and oltbenvise damaged portions, of shop-applied paint shall be: cleaned
and repainted per the flare manufacturer's recommendations. Welded scains and
and other un-coated surfaces, beads and nuts of fjeld-installed bolts,, and suff4ce
where paint was damaged during installation shall be givell a coat of specified
primer, fbIlowed by top coat paint once the pritner has conlpletely dried.
PART 2 PRODucrs
2.011 SKID-M0UN1,"1'.,,',D PACKAGED COMBUS"HON SYSTEM
A Tlre skid-mounted packaged conibustion system will oe furnished by the Owner. In
general,the system will be comprised of the following prirnary equipment COMponents:
I 1rintary Skid Assembly (AIS,C designed,), housed oil a galvanized structural steel
skid. This, sidd will be installed on the eastern flare station c�onicrete pad as
shown on the Plans. Priniary equipment cornponents, mounted to the skid
ini
a, Gas-liquid separation
b,. I'Wo (2) centrifugal bilolwers equippiled with TEFC electric niotors arid
variable frequency drive.
C, 4-inch to 8,-inch id,iameter LFG process piping (stainless steel or FJDPE)
eqUipped within all automatic block valve,
(L Control station assembly that includes a self-supporting steel rack with a
weather-proof control panel, main power supply disconnect, power
transformer,and pilot gas control system,
1 rotcd y--Enclosed Verlical Ground Flare constructed of 6 carbon steel. The
flare will be: installed on the westerni flare station concrete piad as shown on the
Plans. The flare stack dianieter will be 4 to 5 feet (estimated) with an overall
height of a pro xinnately 25 feet (estirnated). Pritnary equipment components
inounted to the:skid include:
a. One(1)or two,(2)combustion air dampers.
b, Self-checking ultra-violet flame scanner.
C, Purge air blower,
d. '17hennocouples.
3. Miscellaveolzis ApInirlenances including a flow, metier, inlet flame arrestor,
continuous chart recorder,and an automatic telephone dialer system.
4. All piping, conduit arid nianual valves are pre-piped/pre-wired to the
gi,eatest extent possible and are mounted within trine skid boundaries,
102 ELECI RICAL CONDUIT, WIRE AND F11-11711ING"S
A, Electrical conduit, wire, and fittings for the flare station shall conforin to the
requirements of Section 15400 (Flare Staflon Electrical and TeicPholle Feed) of these:
Technical Specifications.
Ttv1'SpCCA SeC6A)n 03010 Hart SulkmAtw FlnA Cliwon Cmmuawn I echniicM
A'Al&VYfte6'W Au$.nx1 2W 5
15300-3
Page 3485 of 4165
2.03 PVC, PIPE,1`11-TINGS AND BALL VALVE
A. PVC pipe, fittings and ball valve for the condensate drainage, fine betweeri the skid-
mounted packaged combustion system and leachate wet well shall conform to the
requirements of Section 15200 (j,F(.j' Collection System,Components) of these Technical
Specifications.
104 13 WE BEDD IN(;
A. Pipe bedding :or the buried portion of the condensate drainage line shalt conforixt to the
requirernents of Section 02207 (Aggregate Materials)of these'rechftical Specifications,
105 ENGINF,'ERED FILL
A, Engineered FiR for the bultied Portion offlw condensate drainageline shall confonr-i to the
requirements of Section 02224 (lH,`ngjneer,ed 1,ffl) of these Technical Specifications.
2.06 C1 MINLINK FEM".71.1,
A. Chain link fence materials for the security fence shall conform to the requirements of
Section 80-4.01 ol"Ithe Standard Specifications and as shown on the Plans.
2 W CON(IM!"rE
A. Concrete for the semirity fence post footings shall conform, to the requirements of Section
033010(Concrete) of these Technical Specifications,
2,08 AGGRE(3A,rEBASE
A. Aggregate base placed on the completed ground surface wid'ilin and around the flare
station shall conform to the requirements of'Section 02207 (Ag ire gate Materials)of these
Technical Spec j fi cations.
PART 3 EXECUTION
3.01 FLAR11 STATION ASSEMBLY
A. All required building pemifts, fees, and inspections shall be an-anged and paid for by the
Contractor'.
& Assembly of the flare components shall be performed by skilled labrivers experienced in
installation of siniflar equipment.
cl, The skid-inounted packaged combustion systern shall be installed in strict accordance
with, the manufacturer's specili cations. Design drawings and installation instructions will
be provided to the Contractor Upon selection of the flare manufficttirer., In general,
installation of the skid-mounted packaged combustion system will inchade the following
tasks:
I, Mechanical Assembly
'I uHSPCcsS 15100 FIM staflcmAoc Rnal Closurv,Consivuenon 7mhnkA Spa6ficaaonm
PMA&Yffl,"anuirw rx'Wrx
15300-4
Page 3486 of 4165
a. Mount/anchor the priniary skid assembly and total ly-cnclosed vertical
ground flare to the concrete:slabs.
b. Connect inlet flame arrestor to the totally-enclosed vertical ground flare.
01 Connect LFG process piping from the priniany sW assernbly to the
flame arrestor.
d. Mount thermocouples (three or 'four) onto the totally-enclosed vertical
ground Rare (elevated),
e. Connect the LFG collection systems header pip'e from the wellfield to the
primary skid assembly,
I Electiical Assembly
a, Con-nect inain po�wer supply, telephone 'line, and conduit to the control
station assembly,
b. Connect thermocouple wire! and co nduit between the, theimiociouples
(elevated)and I lie control station assernbly.
D. Abraded and otherwise damaged
3,02 CON'DI.,',NSA:rEI)RAINA,CiE,LLNE
A Trenching and pipe bedding placement shall conform to the requirements of Section
02225 (Trenching and Back-filling) ofthese'Yeelin cal Spec i fications.
, . Handting and installation of the PVC pipe, fittings and ball valve shall confomi to the
requirements of Section, 153010 (LFG Collection System Components) ol"these Technical
Specifi cations.
C The condensate drainage line shall be installed at a, nrininnim slope of I percen,t in, the
direction of the leachate wet well.
D. 'I'lic wall of the leacliate wet well shall be penetrated attlie appropriate depth by coring or,.
other means to allow for insertion of` tine colidensate drainage line. The annular space
between the condensate drainage line and the wall of the leachate wet well shall be sealed
using non-shrink grout.
E Following placemeot of piple bedding material, the remainder of t:he trench shall be
backlilled with engineered Fill in accordance with the requirements of Section 012224
(11"ngineered Fill) of these Technical Specifications.
103 SECURITYFENCE
A, The chain link fence and gates shall be installed as stiown on the Plans and in accordance
with the requirements of Section 80-4.012 ol"the Standard Specifications,
R All, line, comer,and gate post assemblies shall be constructed. with concrete post footings
in accordance with the reqpirernents of Section 03300 (Concrete) of these Technical
Spec if cations.
C. on between lence posts, shall be leveled to create a 2-inch clearance under the fence
fabric,
TwfI5',fxa%SCaIOn 1,5300 Rur stafim&w, Numl dognir Cbmkmakyn I a6r6M Spedfimfiom
MIA&#,W�Vuw Ampst 2015
15300-5
Page 3487 of 4165
104 FLARE STATION AGGRII'G`AIT BASE
A, Aggregate base within and around the flare station shall be placed to the diniensions
shown on the:Plans,.
B, '"17he aggregate base shall be spread in uniftirm loose fills not exceeding 8, inches in
thickness.
(1, T'he aggregate base shall be moisture conditioned to within 11, to 3 percentage points, of
optimurn rnoisture content, and compacted to a niinimurn of 95 percent of maxiinurn: dry
density per ASTM D 1557. The final conipacted thickness shall be a, rninfinum of 6
inches,
3.05 PERFORMANCETESTING
A. Skid-Mounted Paclaiged Coinbustion �vstenc The skid-mounted packaged coiribUStion
sys,tern shall be tested to verif proper o eration in accordance with the nianufactUrers
recorm-nendations, Perfonnance testing shall be supervised by the flare manufacturer's
ore site inspector and shall encornpass all aspects of'systern operations, including but not
limited to the verification of proper operation of the following components:
t. Gas-liquid separator,
2, Blowers.
I Automatic ignition and pilot gas control system.
4. Automatic temperature controls, including thermocouples and actuated louver
assembly.
5. Automatic block valve operation.
& flow meter and continLIOLIS,chart recorder..
7, Control panel gauges and indicator lighter.
K Safety shut-down and alarm systenis, including automatic telephone dialer
systerm
Written approval from the flare manufacturer's representative for the systern inssta I latjon
and operation will be required prior to the Owner's acceptance of the flare station
coinponents. The written approval shall certify lhat the equipment was properly installed
and connected, is in accurate alignment, and is ftee of undue stress imposed 1,,)y piping or
MOU11ting bolts. 'rhe pert'arinance testing and acquisition of the manufacturer's approval
shall be(tone within a 3-day work period.
During performance testing of the flare station, the entire LFG collection system well
field shall be visually inspected to identify any problenilis or breaks in the system that Imay
have resulted from syslein operations.
B. Condensiate Drainage Line: The PVC condensate drainage line between the flare
station, and existfrig lealchate wet well shall be hydrostatically pressure tested in
accordance with the pipe manufacturer's recornni,ended procedures, It shall be the
Contractor's responsibility to ensure that proper safety precautions are observed during
the testing,
Turf Sp x4kSwfljon WOO Ram Sufion,doc Final(Ioqum c4asnuCOOTI rwhnkM SP*CAI(,'A6On5
111A bwwemxig, C)Oobm 2013
153001-6
Page 3488 of 4165
PART UIUMENTAND PAYMENT
4,01 FLARE' S11AT10N ASS EMBLY
A Measurement and payment for flare station assernNy shall be included in the Contract
Lump Surn Price for"Flare Station Assembly" addressed in this Section and shall include
Roll compensation for providing all inaterials, labor, equipment, tools, ge:ricral electrical
work, and incidentals required to assemble the flare station as shown, on the Plans, as
sneedled herein and with in the flare manufacturer's sPecifications, and as directed by the
Design Engineer, No,additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
4M CONDENSM111' DRAINAGE, LINE
A. Measurement and payment for the condensate drain lfiw shall be irlCkided in the Contract,
Lunap Sum Price above for "Flare Station Assembly" of this Section. No additional
conrpensation will be allowed therefore,.
4,03 SECURITY FENCE
A. Security fencing for the flare station shall be nleaskired by, the linear foot installed and
includes all Posts, chain link fence fabric, gates, slats and fittings. Payment shall be
included in the Contract Unit Price per linear foot installed for "Security Fencing"
addressed in this Section and shall include full compensation for providing all materials,
labor, equipment, tools,, and incidentals,required to install the security fic nee as, shown on
the Plans, as specified herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional,
compensation will be allowed therefore.
4D4 FLARE STATION AGGREGATE,BASE
A Aggregate base placed within and around the flare station shall be measured by the
square foot installed. Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit Price per square
,foot installed for "Flare Station Aggregate Base" addressed in this Section and shall
include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, equillincrit, tools, and
incidentals required to install the aggregate base as shown on the Plans, as specified
herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No, additional compensation will be
allowed 1herefore.
4,05 PERFORMANCETESTING
A. Measurement and payment for performance testing of the skid-mounted packaged
cornbustion systern and condensate discharge pipe described in this Section shall be
included in the ClOutTact Lump Surn Price paid fot r ".Flare Stalion Assembly". No
additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
END OF SECHON
luf SPCCItScc6on Flam Slapkx0m Flnal Closwe("onvt1goio:n roehnicM spbuffies6ons
1,'84 rW"v7JW AUyxjgl
I 53'001-7
Page 3489 of 4165
SECTION 15400
FLARE STATION ELEC,TRICAL AND TELEPHONE FEED
PART 1, GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, The Contractor shall furnisli and install the electrical and telephone feed for the flare:
station as shown on: the Plans and in accordance with these Technical Specifications,
which includes extending electrical and telephone services from the existing service point
locations to the flare station control panel, 1"he Contractor shall, furnish all labor, tools,
stipervision, equipment, and materials necessary to provide the flare station electrical and
telephone feed.
B, The Owner will be responsible for upgrading the power supply at the existing electrical
service point shovrn on the Plans to accornmo(hate the following power requirements for
the flare station: 480 volts, 3 phase, 60 heriz, 100 amps, arid 35 11P, In addition, the
Owner will be respon,sible for extending, telephone service to the service ponit shown on
the Plans.
1,02 APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND SPECTFICATIONS
A. Califonnia Administrative Code(CAC)-Title 24.
B, County Ordinances.
C.
National Electrical Code(NEC).
D. National Electrical Manufacturer's Association EMA),
E, National Fire Protection Association(NFTA).
F. Underwriters 'Labaratory true, (U).
1.03 S1.1 BMI7171'ALS
A At least 14 calendar (lays prior- to delivery of materials to the Work site, tfie Contractor
shall subinit the following,to the Design 1-1rigi'neer for approval.-
1. Name and location of source,product data sheets, and manufacturer's installation
instructions Im the following materials to verify that the materials meet or exceed
the product requirements specified herein:
a. Wire,
b Conduit and fittings,
C. Meter socket.
d, hull boxes,.
e. Panel.
f. Junction and outlet boxes.
LAprq*,f9CrA(Icswe 15400 Plare S;44bn E3ccqdvM andTdcp1hona Feml&w FmA Chas=congtructionTrdynkal S ofichficqls
Augo ol 2015
1,5400-1
Page 3490 of 4165
B. At least 14 calendar days prior to commencement of ecific task, the Contractor shall
submit to the Design Engineer copies of electrical pernifts(if required) issued by the local
governing agency,,
C. Within 14 calendar days of corn.pletion of''all electrical work, the: Contrador shall subinit
to the Design Engineer cop�ies of electrical i:n,spection reports (if required) issued by the
local governing agency.
1,04 QUALl TY ASSI IRANCE
A, Testing and Observation
I The Contractor shall notify the Design Engineer of progress of all 'Work in order
that the Desip�i Engineer may make the appropriate site, inspections.
2, The Contractor shall cooperate with the Design Engineer during testing and
observation.
3, If any portion(s) of the electrical coinponents is determined 'by the Design
Engineer to not meet the requirements of dais Section, based on either testing, or
observations, the Contractor,at his expense, shall repair or replace that portion(s)
to nieet the requirements ofthis Section as directed by the Design,Engineer.
1 05 I-LAZARDOIJS CLASS1FICATION
A All underground electrical installed shafl, be classified as Class 1, Division 2. Above
ground electrical work frorn the ground surface to within 18 inches above the g)round
surface shall be classifled as Class 1,Division 2.
PART 2 PRODUCTS
101 GENEAL
A. All electrical rnaterkals shall be new, meet UL requirements, and bear appropriate UL
labels,
102 WIRE
A, Wire shall be NEC standard copper wire arid shall bear UL and twanufacturer's labels.
Wire shall provide proper connectioll and operation, of all equipment. Requirenients for
connection o�fthc respective electrical compo�nents are as follows:
I. Main Power Suj)ply: Copper DWG No, 2,T11W (four[41 wires total').
2, Automatic Telephone Dialer �vstenv Standard telephone: fine (one [1] wire
total),
103 CONDUIT AND HFTJNGS
A. All exposed conduit and fittings sliall be rigid PVC type, Schedule 80. All buried conduit
and fittings shall be rj& PVC type, Schedule 40. Conduit size requirements for the
respective elect�rjCal components are as follows:
1. Main llower,5upjr�)�: 1-1/4 inch conduit.
2, Autoinafic Mephone Dialer System: 1/2! inch conduit,
n 000[Ilure 6oxj F�vcliical amdIckpWric Fwridu FinoA Cbsufe Construction Technixa Sptcifivauuguq
EAA ktoWr 20 J I
15400-2
Page 3491 of 4165
2,,04 MER SOCKET
A. Meter socket for main power s,upp�ly shall be NEM.A. 3R, raintight-outdoor, UL listed,
With drip shield top that requires no gasketing. Size of meter socket shall accommodate
power service requirements,
105 JUNCTIONAN"D OUT'LET BOXES
A. Junction and outlet boxes shall be NEMA 4 galvanized metal type,cast iron, or malleable
iron with proper cover and/or jmUnting lugs as required.
2-06 WARN ING TAPE
A. Direct burial warning tape reading "CAUTION, FLECTRICAL, L,INF, BURIED
13FLOW", 4 mil Polyethylene with, foil laminate shall be installed in all undergyround
electrical instal lations. PandUit, Motivator 3M,or appt-oved equivalent.
2,07 PIPE BEDDING
A. Pipe bedding for conduit shall confortni to the requirements of Section 02207 (Aggregate
Materials)of these'rechnical Specifications.
2.08 EN(A'NEER1,"D FILL
A. Engineered rill ("or backfill above the pipe bedding shall conform to tile requirements of
Section 02224 (FIngineered Fill)oftheseTechnical Specifications.
PART3 EXECUTION
3,01, GENER AL
A All required eleeffical permits, fees,and inspections shiall be arranged and paid for by the
Contractor.
I
B,� 'rhe Contractor shall rurnish, install, and maintain all ternporary power and lighting
systems needed for constrUCtion, After' construCtion is comldded, the C.,ontractor shall
remove all ternporary power equipment and devices.
C. All electrical work shall be conducted by skilled electric ia ns and laborers experienced in
this type of work. All equipment, materials, installation, and workmanship shall be hi
accordance with the mandatory and advisory provisions,or NYPA 70 and the NEC",
D 'The Contractor shall verify that the wire and conduit sizes specified herein for the inain
power supply and autornatic,telephone dialer system are appropriate for the intended use.
E. T'he Contractor shall install all electrical components in accordance with the'NEC, NFPA
and local codes and regulations for installation in a Class 1, Division I or (1ass 1,
Division, 2 classified locations as defined in Part 1.05 of this Section and shown on the
Plans. Nothing on the Plans, or in these Technical Specifications is to be construed to
permit work not coril'brnfing to these governing codes and standards,
Turf 15400 Ram Swim Dmtr�u I and Fekphonc Fer,(Lduc �,inat closwe cormtruo on G eamkW speckfications
FBA E�40mxeW August 2015
15400-3
Page 3492 of 4165
1" Installation of electrical and telephone 'feed shall be performed in accordance with the
local electrica I and telephone company rules and regu lations,.
CIO. The electrical and telephone feed from the existing service points to the Aare station
control panel shall be conipleted below grade as,shown on the plans.
I
R The Clontractor shall verity service and panel locations and all other service requirements
prior to starting Work. Except for Work specifically excluded firom the Contract, the
C'ontractor shall provide all Work required by the serving titility companies to render
utility services to the Project.
3.0 PREPARATION
A The Contractor shall handle electrical inaterials carefully during loading and unloading,
All ineans necessary shall be used to protect electrical materials before, during and after
installation and to protect the installed work of other trades. In the event ol"daixtage,
provisions, shall be =de to immediately makle repairs and replacement necessary to (he
approval of the Design Engineer,
B, T'he Contractor shall inspect materials for darnage and iniperfections prior to installation.
1,)amaged materials or materials with imperfections shall not be used.
103 TRENCI HNG AND BACKRUING
A Trenching and placement of pipe: bedding and engineered fill shall confomi to the:
requirements of Section 012224 (Engineered Fifl) and Section O2225 (Trenching and
Backfilling)of theseTechnical Specifi cations.
3,04 INSTALLATION
A. All equipment, motors, conduit and outlets, as applicable, shall be permanently and
effectively gTounded in accordance with NEC, CAC- Title 24 and local codes.
B. Conduits shall be: sloped towards pull bo es. Conduits shall run in straight lines except
where a change in direction is necessary, Couplings shall be staggered for maxinium,
duct line strength.
C. Buried conduit and fittings shall not be dropped or dumped into trenches and the ends of
conduit, shall be kept closed with approved conduit seals during construction,
Immediately prior to pulling wire or cable, a swab shall be drawn through all conduits to
force out water and fbrei�.',,n materials.
D Junction boxes shall be installed in an, accessible location as, required for splicing,
connections and pulling of wire,
E. All above ground conduit Stiall be properly secured on pipe su ppl orts or concrete slabs,
f", The meter socket installed at the existing service pole shall comp�ly witli the height and
rastenling specifications outlined in the local electric cornpany rules and regulations.
LApiqjw',M1CU)suYe Turf Spu0section�$1,00 playo%ifffian ElorviaO Uld 1,0q.4"mc Food-400 FinM Cbmat Cngruoion'Tuhnkaj Slim ficafiang
Or uAwr 20�3
15400-4
Page 3493 of 4165
105 CLEAN-LIP
k All exposed portions of electrical installation shall be thorougd,ily clewled, including the
rernoval of all traces of soil, labels, grease, oil, and other ftweign matter, Only cleaners
reconamended by tine manufacturer shall be used,
PART 4 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
4.01 ELECTRICAL AND'TELEPHONE Fl,`,ED
A,, 'I'he electrical and telephone feed sball be rneasured by the linear foot installed, including
trench excavation and backfill. Payment shall be included in the Contract Unit 11rice per
linear foot installed for '1�1'lcctrical and Telephone Feed" addressed in this Section and
shall include full compensation for providing all materials, labor, eqUipment, tools, and
incidentals, required to install the electrical and telephone feed as shown on 111cPhins, as
specified. herein, and as directed by the Design Engineer. No additional compensation
will be allowed therefore,
4,02 G FINERAL ELECTRICAL WORK
A,. Measurement and payment for general electrical work associmed with assembly of the
flare station shall be included in tine Contract Lump Sum Price for "Flare Station
Assembly" addressed in Section 15300 (Flare Station) of"these Technical Specifications.
No additional compensation will be allowed therefbre.
END GF SECTION
h1TfSrcWSwkjn p5400 Mary Siation filadviWand Tdcphmc Feed,duc MnM CW51m va"anlefion Nchnicol
ERA A'aWweyw�W Aug um 2M5
15400-5
Page 3494 of 4165
SECTION' 00
LEACHATE OVERFLOW COLLECTION AND STORAGE SYSTEM
PART I GENERAL
1.01 SUMMARY
A, The Contractor shall ffirnish, transport to the Work, site, and install all leachate overflow
collection and sloragle,system components, including as tO,O00 gallon double wall fiberglass
reinforced leachate UST, tank accessories, field testing, collection systemi piping and
accessories,and lining of th e existing sediment chan�iber and leachate wet well in accordance
with this Section and at the locations and to the ditnensions shown on the PUms. The
Contractor shall fumish all labor,supervisiori,tools,materials,equipMent,transportation,and
incidentals as necessary to instal I the leachate overflow collection and storage system,
B, The existing sediment charnber is a concrete manhole structure,approximately itine fbet deal)
(base to top of mardiole); four feet in dianieter with a 30" high riser cone (48" to 24" in
diarncter). 'The existing wet well is approxiniately 18 feet deep and five feet in diameter and
contains IWO submersible pumps,
C The Contractor accepts rull responsibility for proper handling and installation of the leacliate,
UST an,d shall insure that good workmanship, practices, and construction procedures art,-
followed during the handling and installation of the leachate US"I',regardless,ofthe inclusion
or one scion of any apaplicable suggestion in this Section.
1 02 I FER.EN("J:,,S
A. (:'aliforniiaDepattin,eiitof']'rans,po�rt,,atioTi,201t).
K Cali foniia Department ofTransportation, May 201 O.
C Aniei ic;atzSoeictyfoi,, T(,,sl'ingAlitteriaLv (-urrentEdition
I'), OccuInvional Sqg and Health ASena y(OSHA) Ce)nst?-ucti(i)i,51ap7dat-tiv, CurrentEdition,
E Ainerican National Standards Institute(ANS,I),
R American,Water Works Association(AWWA).
1 03 APPLICATBLE s,rANDARDS AND SPECIFICAJIGNS
A ASTM C 39 Standard Test Method fior Compressive Strength of C'ylindrieal
Concrete Speciniens.
B. ASTM D 143 Standard Test Methodf'OTSlurnp of Pordand Cernent Concrete,,
AS TM 1) 3034 Standard Specification forType TA Poly(Vinyl(-'Illorilde)(PVC)
spedfimfiam"'Socflun M NfX)p aefiweOverfiow CArnwfloz mW SWragrSywter&dw FhW 00 nve("twirmelion�wrhnkas Spou Ifico tDOWIN
ERA&$whvC6�' Mpg 20�5
155010-1
Page 3495 of 4165
Sewer Pipe and [`ittings.
E). AS"I'M D 4414 Standard 111ractice for Measurenient of Wet F'flrn Thickness of
Organic ClIoatings by Notched Gages.
E, ASTM 1` 477 Standard Specification for Elastomeric Seals(Gaskets) tbr Joining
Plastic Pipe.
F. UL Standard for Saft y 1316.
1 04 SLJBMITTALS
A At],east 14 calendar days prior to delivery of rnaterials to the Work site,the Contractor shall
provide three (3)copies ofthe following in'Borniation to the Design Engineer for approval:
I Manllfildlffer's product data sheets for the following materials to verff�r that the
materials meet or exceed the corresponding pro�dti,ctr'Cq,tlirel'i'lierits:�
a. Leachate LJST, fittin,gs, and accessories.
b. Col lection p ipin&Y and fittings.
C. Concrete junction boxes and,accessories,
2 Manufactitrer"s recommended procedures for handling (transporting, unloading,
storage, etc.) and installation of each or the products identified in Subsection
11.0,4(A)(1)ofthis Part.
R Field Test Reports: Tank tightness test at delivery and after instaHation.
C, At least 14 calendar days prior to commenceinent of lining the lea hate sediment chamber and
wet well, the Contractor shall submit the following to the Design Engineer for approval„
L Procedures for removal and re-installation of die existing pumps within the leacbate wet
well.
2, Name, location and experience of Subcontractor responsible for installation of lining
product. Subcontractor shall have SUfficient,prior experience in the installation of the
lining product,
3, Man:ufiacturer's recommended application procedures for lining 113roduct.
4, Product data and chernical resistance data.
L05 TRANSPORTAND ST'ORAGE
A Unloading and storage of the leacliate:USTand collection piping at the Work site shall be the
responsibility of the Contractor and sliall be perfori-ned in accordance with the rnarnifacturer's
recommended procedures.
L06 QUALITY ASSURANCE",
A, Governing SVindards, as applicable.
1, Manufacturer of the leachate overflow storage tanl< shall be in the business of
manut' cturing tanks with materials conforyning to the requirements,of ANSI/AWW'A
1.)120-02 Thertnosetting Fiberg lass-Rein forced PlasticTanks.
I Tank nimmufacturer shall be in the business of rnanufactudng tanks to UL 1316
standards.
LAprDjccL'9OTA ask I Tculmjr,l specthradufts"Sm"6011 1550 t=1vue Overfbw CoIh-xPkxn and Stomp S",urv%do G FinA Clomyyc ConmucRion 1'"bukal Spccifioafions
J.""BA EhRiazyn'tV August 20 5
15500ff -2
Page 3496 of 4165
P'AR.T 2 PRODUCTS
2,01 PIPE MATERIALS
A Pipe for gravily drain lines shall be PVC per AW'WA C-900, wilth integral wall, bell and
spigot joints. Pipe and filling shall meet waR and strength nfiriimuni of SDR 26, and the
requiren-ients of ASTM 1) 3034, Joints shall be equipped with nibber rings, The bell, shall
consist of an integral, wall section with a solid cross section rubber ring factory assernbled,
securely locked in place to preverit.disptacernent,, Rubber rag gsshall inn the reqifirerrients of
ASTMF477. dull fittings and accessories shall be manufactured arid flimished by the Enpe
supplier and have bell and/or space confiprations identical to that of the pipe.
102 PEPE ACCIESSORIES
A. All fittings and accessories shall be man ufactured and furnished by pipe sapplier of sarne
rnatefial as Pipe rnolded or forined to suit pipe si e and end design, in required tee, bends,
elbows, cicanoWs,reducers, traps and other configurations required.
103 PIPE BEDDING
A Pipebodding shall confom'i to the requirmnents of Section 022017 (Aggregate Materials) of
theie'l."eclinical Specifications.
2.014 CONCRETE JUNCTION BOXES
A. Concrete j-u ricti on bo es for the leachate collection piping shall be as shown on the plans.
Concrete boxes sliall be manttfactnred o,f cast in place concrete or Prefabricated reinforced
concrete or approved steel equivalent to the diMensions set forth in the Plans,
B. Concrete for the juaction boxes shall be a 6 sack Portland cernClItType It mix and must meet
the requirernents of a rnaximum slunip of 4 inches and a minimum 28-day cornpressive
strength of 2,500 psi when tested in accordance with ASTM C 143 and ASTM C 3,9,
respectively,
2.0,5 LEACIIATJ: SEDIMENTCHA MBE R/WET WELL LINFNG
A. Lining material for the existing sediment charnber and wet well shall be a solids epoxy resin
based coating fbi-mulated for tise in chemically aggressive sewersysterns, hisdieinteinthat
this rnaterial shall provide waterproofi ng, sealing, st4nicturat reinforcement, and corrosion
protection of the existing sediment chamber and wet well.
R The coating material shall be resistant to attack from the following: volatile orgarlic
compounds; bleaches; sulfuric, acetic, hydrochloric, phosphoric, nitric, chromic,oleic, and
stearic acids;sodimn and calciurn hydroxides;arninonium,sod4rn,calcium,magnesialn,and
femic chlorides; ferric sulfate,, llydrogen sulfides, Petroleum oil and greases, vegetable and
anin-,)al oils,fats,greases,s,oaps and detergents, The coating shall be imperineable to sewage
gases and liquid wid, shall be non-conducive to bacterial or fungtis growth.
L:*roje4W1j0'A1 nqk14echYRiw11 SpodrjcHfioTWSccuYn� 5,900 L eachale OwtTflow Collerflork ind Slorage Symeno,doc Final Cloam, Specifications
ABA hWineeviiV, 20 V 5
15500-3
Page 3497 of 4165
2.06 LEACIIA,rE US"I"
A Design Criteria,
I Internal Load: Tank shall withstand a 5 psi air pressure test with 5:1 safety factor.
C,ontractor sball individually test Uink for leakage prior to installation.Maximurn test
pressure is 5-psi.
I Vacuum Test: To verify structural integrity, tank shall be vacuum tested by the
[nanufacturer at the factory to 11.5 inches of mercury.
3, Yu � ce Loa&I'ank shall withstand surface 11-21)axle loads,when properly installed
according to current nianufachirer's installation instructions,
4. External "I"arLk,shall be capable ofbeingburied in ground with
7 feet of overburden over the top of the tank, the hole fully flooded, and Qa, safety
factor of 51.-1 against general buckling,
5. Tank Shall SUpport accessory equipment such as drop to when installed according
to tank manufacturer's recorrunendations and Htnitations.
B, Tank, slnill be double wall, horizontal glass fiber reinforced tank trianufactured with 10O
percentresin and gllass,-fiberi•eiii,forceiiient., Nosandfibers. Capacity shall beas indicate don
Plans.
(1, Product Storage:
1.. 'rank shall be capable of storing chemicals or leachate with specific gravity up to IJ,
I Iank shall be, vented to atimosOeric pressure.
I 'I"anks shall be capable of storing prodUCtS identified in the manufacturer's current
standard lin-ited warninty,
R Interstitial Space: Double wall tank shall bave an space between the walls to allow for the free
flow and containment of leaked material f1roin the priinary tank. The space also allows the
insettion of a,monitoring device through a inorfitoring fittirl&
2,07 TANK ACCESSORII`,''S,
A, Manway: Flanged 22-inch(4-ninhIlUM) inside diameter manway with UL listed gasket, bolt
,arid cover.
B. NPTFittings: N Vf firtingssliall be sized and located kis indicated on Plans. Fittings shall be:
UL listed, All fittings are to be 4 iricbes in diameter and supplied with plugs, NPT fittings
shall withstalid a rninimurn of 150 ftrot-pounds of torque and 1,000,foot-pounds of bending,
bofl,l with a 2:1 safety factor, The monitor fitting shall consist of a 44rich NP'Tfitfing oil the
tarik.
Striker plates,shall be instal led under each service fitting andmanway opening.
Da Float Swit�ch and Alarm Panel: One(1)rnechanical float switch shall be provided and set at
bottorn of tank 110 detect presence or any liquid. The float switch shall be approved for use
with intrinsically safe, Class 1, Division I applications and shall be Connected to an alarm
panel located at pump station struchire, warning lights only. 'I"he alarm, "',hall also be
connected to an existing auto-dialer,
Uprqpaca/9077'mk 3,'9whnichl N5W Umahao Overflow Q'Ilevion mid swmqm symmn,doo Final C�Oqum,Consiruction Tmhmca Sperirmwinns
EBA bwymmlw Augum 2W 5
1,5500-4
Page 3498 of 4165
1". A 2-inch diameter PVC vent pipe shall be installed from tank to the surface with a-goose-neck
and screen.
j-'' Anchor Straps: Anchor straps shall be of glass fiber reinforced type and located pier
manufacturer's recainniendations. Eacli strap shall be capable of wift"Unding the maxitnum
buoyance force of the tank assituning the:tank empty and submerged in groundwater. Number
and location of straps sliall be per manufacturer's recommendations.
GL Concrete Deadman: Two concrete eadman, 12"x 12"x the tank length,sball be installed at
the bottom ofthe tank excavation as showrii on the Plans.,
2,08 TANK BEDDfNG AND BACKFILL
A, Tank bedding and backfill sball conform,to the requirements of Section 022017 (Aggyegate
Materials)of these'rechnical Specifications.
109 ENGINEERED FILL
A, Backfill material above flue, pipe bedding and tank bedding shall con-r6rm to the requirements
of Section 02224 (Enghiecred Fill)of these Teelinical Specifications.
PART3 EXECUTION
101 RRACING AND SHORING
A As required,by the Trench Construction Safety Orders of the California Construction Safety
Ordei s of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, bracing and shoring shall be
insUilled in trenches or excavations of 5 ,feiet or greater depth to insure the safety ofwarkers
and to protect and facilitate the Work.
R Bracing and shoring shall comply with Section 5-1.02A and 7-1,01E of the Standard
Specifications.
102 GE'NE10 I., PIPE INS"I'Al.A.,ATION
A. Contractor shall verify, location of point of connection (PO() at the existing leach ate
collection piping as shown the Blares by potbofing to deterrnine the location and depth
(elevation).
R For the gravity drain pipe, the trench subgrade shall provide uniform support at a uniform
slope along full length of pipe.
('11. Contractor shall furnish all necessary fittings, Fixtures, hardware, plates, fasteners, etc, to
provide complete installation,
D. Location of pipes, fixtures,fittings,and drains that are shown on the Plans are,approximate.
'rhe Contractor shall locate fittings and ldrainis to best serve the intended use and to avoid
mechanical and structural interferences. Location of valves, drains, and fittings must be
approved by the Design Engineer prior to installation,
ask 3-7"echr6ml SpecificafionmSec6on MOO lxlidulte OvolkM, nid stora'80�pitem.doc Mnfl(losum,ConstructOri TechDical Spcaftations
AAA Alwlh�-Yy& Migum 2M
15500-5
Page 3499 of 4165