ow l<oO

Div of Wa“‘^ Msmgoment
and Radiation Control

MAR 1 7 2017

APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT
TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Box Elder County, Utah PS HW- 20 (7- 002.283

March 2017

Prepared For:
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Prepared By:

Tt
TETRA TECH
BAS

TETRA TECH BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
(909) 860-7777

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT
TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Box Elder County, Utah

March 2017

Prepared For:
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Prepared By:
TETRA TECH BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
(909) 860-7777

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Box Elder County, Utah
March 2017

 PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION
With the signature and seal below, the Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
for the Promontory Point Landfill has been prepared under the direction of Mr. Caleb Moore,
a Utah registered civil engineer.

Caleb H. Moore, P.E.
Division Engineer

Promontory Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\Stamp.docx

Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
Tetra Tech BAS

 Utah Class and Permit Application Checklist

 

Part! General Information

APPLICANT: PLEASE COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS.

 

Cl Class I

I. Landfill Type a Classv

 

 

ll. Application Type

 

El


New Application
Renewal Application

Facility Expansion
[3 Modification

 

 

For Renewal Applications, Facility Expansion Applications and Modifications Enter Current Permit Number

 

HI. Facility Name and Location

 

NameofFadMy
Promontory Point Landfill

 

 

 

Site Address (street or directions to site) County
18900 West East Promontory Road Box Elder
City Promonto Zip Code 84307 Tetephone

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Township 6 Range 5&6 Section(Quarten'Quarter Section Quarter Section 
Main Gate Latitude 44 degrees 12 minutes 55 seconds Longitude 112degrees 28 minutes 5 seconds
IV. Facility Owner(s) Information
Name of Facility Owner
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
Address (mailing)
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
City Salt Lake City State UT Zip Code 84111 Te'ephone 435.414.9880
V. Facility 0perator(s) Information
Name of Facility Operator
SAME
Address (mailing)
City State Zip Code Telephone
VI. Property Owner(s) Information
Name of Property Owner
SAME
Address (mailing)
City State Zip Code Telephone
VII. Contact Information
Owner Contact Name Jonathan Angin Tit'e President and CEO
Address (mailing)
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
City Salt Lake City State UT Zip Code 841 11 Telephone

 

 

 

EmailAddress j0n@promontorypt,com

Alternative Telephone (cell or other)

 

 

 

 

Operator Contact Name SAME Title
Address (mailing)
City State Zip Code Telephone

 

 

 

Email Address

Alternative Telephone (cell or other)

 

 

 

 

 

Property Owner Contact Name SAME Title
Address (mailing)
City State Zip Code Telephone

 

 

 

 

Page

 

Utah Class and Permit Application Checklist

 

Part! General information (Continued)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Waste Types (check all that apply) IX. Facility Area
All non-hazardous solid waste (see for PCB special - - acres
requirements) OR the following Speci?c waste types: Faculty Area .. 2 000
Waste Type Combined Disposal Unit Mono?? Unit Disposal Area .. 1,000 acres
El Municipal Waste . .
Construction Demolition El Des'gn Capac'ty
El industrial Years 100+
a Incinerator Ash ..
Animals A - 
El Asbestos Cubic Yards .. 640 Million
only) El . .
CI Other El Tons .. 364 
X. Fee and Application Documents
Indicate Documents Attached To This Application Application Fee: Amount 1000 Class Special Requirements
Facility Map or Maps IX Facility Legal Description Plan of Operation Waste Description Documents required by UCA 19?6?
IE Ground Water Report Closure Design Cost Estimates IX Financial Assurance 08(9) and (10)
HEREBYCERTIFY THAT THIS INFORMATION AND ALL ATTACHED PAGES ARE CORRECT AND COMPLETE.
Signature of uthorized Owner Representative Title Date
/2 President and CEO 
"Li/1? Address
Jo an Angln
Name typed or printed 32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100, Salt Lake City, 
Email Address Alternative Telephone (cell or other)
ion@nromontor\mt com
Signature of Authoriz?d'Land Owner REpresentative (if applicable) Titre Date
Address
Name typed or printed
Email Address Alternative Telephone (cell or other)
Signature of Authorized Operator Representative (if applicable) Title Date
Address
Name typed or printed
Email Address Alternative Telephone (cell or other)

 

 

 

 

Page

Utah Class I and V Permit Application Checklist
Important Note: The following checklist is for the permit application and addresses only the requirements
of the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. Other federal, state, or local agencies may have
requirements that the facility must meet. The applicant is responsible to be informed of, and meet, any
applicable requirements. Examples of these requirements may include obtaining a conditional use permit,
a business license, or a storm water permit. The applicant is reminded that obtaining a permit under the
Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules does not exempt the facility from these other
requirements. Please take note of the heading of each section for the facilities that the section applies to.
An application for a permit to construct and operate a landfill is the documentation that the landfill will be
located, designed, constructed, operated, and closed in compliance with the requirements of Utah
Administrative Code R315-301 through 320 (Utah Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules) and
Utah Code Annotated 19-6-101 through 123 (Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act). The application
should be written to be understandable by regulatory agencies, landfill operators, and the general public.
The application should also be written so that the landfill operator, after reading it, will be able to operate
the landfill according to the requirements with a minimum of additional training.
Copies of the Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules, the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act,
along with many other useful guidance documents can be obtained by contacting the Division of Solid and
Hazardous Waste at 801-536-0200. Most of these documents are available on the Division’s web page at
www.hazardouswaste.utah.gov. Guidance documents can be found at the solid waste section portion of
the web page.
When the Director has determined that the application is complete, submit two paper copies of the
application as determined complete by the Director, and an electronic copy of the application.
Part II

I.

Application Checklist

Facility General Information
Description of Item

Ia.

Information Required for All Class I and V Landfills

Location In
Document

Page 1

Completed Part I General information Form (See form above)

Front of Document,
Page 1

General description of the facility (R315-310-3(1)(b))

Page 1, Figure C-801,
App A

Legal description of property (R315-310-3(1)(c))
Proof of ownership, lease agreement, or other mechanism (R315-310-3(1)(c))
Area served by the facility including population (R315-310-3(1)(d))

Pages 2 - 9
Page 9, App. B and C
Pages 9 - 10

If the permit application is for a class I landfill a demonstration that the landfill
is not a commercial facility

Page 10

Waste type and anticipated daily volume (R315-310-3(1)(d))

Page 10

Ib. Information Required for All New Or Laterally Expanding Class
I and V Landfills
Intended schedule of construction (R315-302-2(2)(a))
Name and address of all property owners within 1000 feet of the facility
boundary (R315-310-3(2)(a)(i))
Documentation that a notice of intent to apply for a permit has been sent to
all property owners listed above (R315-310-3(2)(ii))
Name of the local government with jurisdiction over the facility site (R315310-3(2)(iii))

Page 3 of 7

Page 11
Page 11
Page 11
Page 11, App D
Page 11

 Utah Class I and V Permit Application Checklist
I.

Facility General Information
Description of Item

Ic. Location Standards for All New Or Laterally Expanding Class
I and V Landfills (R315-302-1)
Documentation that the facility has met the historical survey requirement of
R315302-1(2)(f)

Location In
Document

Page 11
Page 11, App. E
Page 12, App. E and F

Land use compatibility (R315-302-1(2)(a))
Maps showing the existing land use, topography, residences, parks,
monuments, recreation areas or wilderness areas within 1000 feet of
the site boundary

Page 12, Figures C-801
and
C-802

Certifications that no ecologically or scientifically significant areas or
endangered species are present in site area

Page 13, App. F

List of airports within five miles of facility and distance to each

Page 13
Page 13, App. G and S

Geology (R315-302-1(2)(b))
Geologic maps showing significant geologic features, faults, and
unstable areas

Pages 13 - 14, App. S-3

Maps showing site soils

Pages 13 - 14, App. S-3
Page 15

Surface water (R315-302-1(2)(c))
Magnitude of 24 hour 25 year and 100 year storm events

Page 15

Average annual rainfall

Page 15

Maximum elevation of flood waters proximate to the facility
Maximum elevation of flood water from 100 year flood for waters
proximate to the facility

Pages 15 - 16, App. H
Page 16, App. H

Wetlands (R315-302-1(2)(d))

Page 16

Ground water (R315-302-1(2)(e))

Page 16

Id. Plan of Operations Requirements for All Class I And V Landfills
(R315-310-3(1)(e) and R315-302-2(2))

Page 16

Forms and other information as required in R315-302-2(3) including a
description of on-site waste handling procedures and an example of the
form that will be used to record the weights or volumes of waste received
(R315-3022(2)(b) And R315-310-3(1)(f))

Pages 16 – 17, App. I

Schedule for conducting inspections and monitoring, and examples of the forms
that will be used to record the results of the inspections and monitoring
(R315-302-2(2)(c), R315-302-2(5)(a), and R315-310-3(1)(g))

Pages 17 – 18, App. I

Contingency plans in the event of a fire or explosion (R315-302-2(2)(d))

Pages 19 - 20

Corrective action programs to be initiated if ground water is contaminated
(R315302-2(2)(e))

Pages 20 - 21

Contingency plans for other releases, e.g. explosive gases or failure of runoff collection system (R315-302-2(2)(f))
Plan to control fugitive dust generated from roads, construction,
general operations, and covering the waste (R315-302-2(2)(g))

Page 4 of 7

Page 21

Page 22, App. J

 Utah Class I and V Permit Application Checklist
I.

Facility General Information
Description of Item

Plan for litter control and collection (R315-302-2(2)(h))

Location In
Document
Page 22, App. K

Description of maintenance of installed equipment (R315-302-2(2)(i))

Pages 22 - 23

Procedures for excluding the receipt of prohibited hazardous or PCB
containing wastes (R315-302-2(2)(j))

Page 23

Procedures for controlling disease vectors (R315-302-2(2)(k))
A plan for alternative waste handling (R315-302-2(2)(l))
A general training plan for site operations (R315-302-2(2)(o))
Any recycling programs planned at the facility (R315-303-4(6))

Pages 23 - 24
Page 24
Pages 24 - 25
Page 25

Closure and post-closure care Plan (R315-302-2(2)(m))

Pages 25 - 26

Procedures for the handling of special wastes (R315-315)

Pages 26 - 28

Plans and operation procedures to minimize liquids (R315-303-3(1))
Plans and procedures to address the requirements of R315-303-3(7)(c) through
(i) and R315-303-4
Any other site-specific information pertaining to the plan of operation required
by the Director (R315-302-2(2)(p))

Ie. Special Requirements for New Or Laterally Expanding Class V
Landfill (R315-310-3(3))
Submit information required by the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act
Subsections 19-6-108(9) and 19-6-108(10) (R315-310-3(2)(a))
Note the following information must be provided following issuance of the permit
but prior to Director approval to take waste for a new Class V facility.

Page 28
Pages 28 – 33, App. J
and K
Page 33

Page 33
Page 33, App. L

Approval from the local government within which the solid waste facility sites

Page 33, App. L

Approval from the Legislature and the Governor

Page 33, App. L

II Facility Technical Information
Description of Item

IIa. Maps for All Class I and V Landfills
Topographic map drawn to the required scale with contours showing the
boundaries of the landfill unit, ground water monitoring well locations, gas
monitoring points, and the borrow and fill areas (R315-310-4(2)(a)(i))
Most recent U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, 7-1/2 minute series,
showing the waste facility boundary; the property boundary; surface
drainage channels; any existing utilities and structures within onefourth mile of the site; and the direction of the prevailing winds (R315310-4(2)(a)(ii))

IIb. Geohydrological Assessment for All Class I and V
Landfills (R315-310-4(2)(b))
Local and regional geology and hydrology including faults, unstable slopes
and subsidence areas on site (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i))

Page 5 of 7

Location In
Document

Page 33
Page 33, Figures
C-801, C-803 and C808

Page 33, Figure C-802

Page 34
Page 34, App. S-3

 Utah Class I and V Permit Application Checklist
II Facility Technical Information
Description of Item
Evaluation of bedrock and soil types and properties including permeability
rates (R315-310-4(2)(b)(ii))

Location In
Document
Pages 34 – 38, App. G
and S-2

Depth to ground water (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iii))

Page 38, App. G

Direction and estimated flow rate of ground water (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iv))

Page 38, App. M

Quantity, location, and construction of any private or public wells on-site or
within 2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(v))

Page 38, App. N

Tabulation of all water rights for ground water and surface water on-site and
within 2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vi))

Pages 38 – 39, App. O

Identification and description of all surface waters on-site and within one mile
of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vii))

Page 39

Background ground water and surface water quality assessment and, for an
existing facility, identification of impacts upon the ground water and
surface water from leachate discharges (R315-310-4(2)(b)(viii))

Pages 39 – 40, App. M

Ground Water Monitoring (R315-303-3(7)(b) and R315-308)

Pages 40 – 44, App. G
Page 44

Statistical method to be used (R315-308-2(8))
Calculation of site water balance (R315-310-4(2)(b)(ix))

IIc. Engineering Report - Plans, Specifications, And Calculations
for All Class I and V Landfills

Pages 44 – 46, App. P
and Y

Page 46

Documentation that the facility will meet all of the performance standards of
R315303-2

Pages 46 – 49, App. Q
and R

Engineering reports required to meet the location standards of R315-302-1
including documentation of any demonstration or exemption made for
any location standard (R315-310-4(2)(c)(i))

Pages 49 – 51, App. E,
F, S -1 and T

Anticipated facility life and the basis for calculating the facility's life (R315310-4(2)(c)(ii))

Pages 51 – 52, App. U

Cell design to include liner design, cover design, fill methods, elevation of final
cover including plans and drawings signed and sealed by a professional
engineer registered in the State of Utah (R315-303-3(3), R315-303-3(6)
and (7)(a), R315-310-3(1)(b) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))
Leachate collection system design and calculations showing system meets
the requirements of R315-303-3(2)
Equipment requirements and availability (R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))

Page 51, Figures C-806
and C-807, App. Y
Pages 52 – 54, App. P
and Y
Pages 54 - 55

Identification of borrow sources for daily and final cover and for soil liners
(R315-310-4(2)(c)(iv))

Page 55, Figure C-808

Run-On and run-off diversion designs (R315-303-3(1)(c), (d) and (e))

Pages 55 – 56, Figures
C-804 sand C-805,
App. Y and V

Leachate collection, treatment, and disposal and documentation to show that
any treatment system is being or has been reviewed by the Division of
Water Quality (R315-310-4(2)(c)(v) and R315-310-3(1)(i))

Page 6 of 7

Page 56

 Utah Class I and V Permit Application Checklist
II Facility Technical Information
Description of Item
Ground water monitoring plan that meets the requirements of Rule R315-308
including well locations, design, and construction (R315-310-4(2)(b)(x)
and R315-310-4(2)(c)(vi))
Landfill gas monitoring and control plan that meets the requirements
of Subsection R315-303-3(5) (R315-310-4(2)(c)(vii))
Slope stability analysis for static and under the anticipated seismic event for
the facility (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i) and R315-302-1(2)(b)(ii))

Location In
Document
Pages 56 – 60, Figure
C-803, App. G
Pages 61 - 62
Page 62, App. T

Design and location of run-on and run-off control systems (R315-310-4(2)(c)(viii))

Pages 62 – 63, Figures
C-804 and C-805, App.
Y and V

IId. Closure Plan for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310-3(1)(h))

Page 63
Page 63

Closure Plan (R315-302-3(2) and (3))
Closure schedule (R315-310-4(2)(d)(i))
Design of final cover (R315-303-3(4) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))
Capacity of site in volume and tonnage (R315-310-4(2)(d)(ii))

Page 63
Pages 63 - 64
Page 64, App. U

Final inspection by regulatory agencies (R315-310-4(2)(d)(iii))

Pages 64 - 65

IIe. Post-Closure Care Plan for All Class I and V Landfills
(R315310-3(1)(h))

Page 65
Page 65

Post-Closure Plan (R315-302-3(5) and (6))
Site monitoring of landfill gases, ground water, and surface water, if
required (R315-310-4(2)(e)(i))

Pages 65 - 66

Changes to record of title, land use, and zoning restrictions (R315-310-4(2)(e)(v))

Page 66

Maintenance activities to maintain cover and run-on/run-off control
systems (R315-310-4(2)(e)(iii))

Page 66

List the name, address, and telephone number of the person or office to contact
about the facility during the post-closure care period (R315-310-4(2)(e)(vi))

Page 66

IIf. Financial Assurance for All Class I and V Landfills (R3153103(1)(j))
Identification of closure costs including cost calculations (R315-3104(2)(d)(iv)) and (R315-302-2(2)(n))

Page 66
Pages 66 – 67, App. W

Identification of post-closure care costs including cost calculations (R315310-4(2)(e)(iv))

Page 67, App. W

Identification of the financial assurance mechanism that meets the requirements
of Rule R315-309 and the date that the mechanism will become effective
(R315-309-1(1))

Page 67, App. X

Page 7 of 7

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
I

PAGE

Facility General Information................................................................................................ 1
I.a

Information Required for All Class I and V Landfills .................................................. 1

I.a.1

Completed Part I General Information Form .......................................................... 1

I.a.2

General description of the facility (R315-310-3(1)(b)).......................................... 1

I.a.3

Legal description of property (R315-310-3(1)(c)) ................................................. 2

I.a.4.

Proof of ownership, lease agreement, or other mechanism (R315-310-3(1)(c)) 9

I.a.5

Area served by the facility (R315-310-3(1)(d)) ...................................................... 9

I.a.6
If the permit application is for a Class I landfill a demonstration that the landfill
is not a commercial facility .................................................................................................. 10
I.a.7
I.b

Waste type and anticipated daily volume (R315-310-3(1)(d)) ........................... 10

Information Required for All New or Laterally Expanding Class I and V Landfills 11

I.b.1

Intended schedule of construction (R315-302-2(2)(a))...................................... 11

I.b.2
Name and address of all property owners within 1000 feet of the facility
boundary (R315-310-3(2)(a)(i)) .......................................................................................... 11
I.b.3
Documentation that a notice of intent to apply for a permit has been sent to all
property owners listed above (R315-310-3(2)(ii)) ............................................................. 11
I.b.4
Name of the local government with jurisdiction over the facility site (R315-3103(2)(iii)) ................................................................................................................................. 11
I.c
Location Standards for All New or Laterally Expanding Class I and V Landfills
(R315-302-1) ........................................................................................................................... 11
I.c.1
Documentation that the facility has met the historical survey requirement of
R315- 302-1(2)(f) ................................................................................................................ 11
I.c.2

Land use compatibility (R315-302-1(2)(a)) ......................................................... 12

I.c.3
Maps showing the existing land use, topography, residences, parks,
monuments, recreation areas or wilderness areas within 1000 feet of the site boundary
................................................................................................................................. 12
I.c.4
Certifications that no ecologically or scientifically significant areas or
endangered species are present in site area .................................................................... 13
I.c.5

List of airports within five miles of facility and distance to each ........................ 13

I.c.6

Geology (R315-302-1(2)(b)) .................................................................................. 13

I.c.7

Surface water (R315-302-1(2)(c)) ........................................................................ 15

I.c.8

Wetlands (R315-302-1(2)(d)) ............................................................................... 16

I.c.9

Groundwater (R315-302-1(2)(e)) ......................................................................... 16

Promontory Point Landfill
i
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION

PAGE

I.d
Plan of Operations Requirements for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310-3(1)(e)
and R315-302-2(2)) ................................................................................................................ 16
I.d.1
Forms and other information as required in R315-302-2(3) including a
description of on-site waste handling procedures and an example of the form that will
be used to record the weights or volumes of waste received (R315-302-2(2)(b) and
R315-310-3(1)(f)) ................................................................................................................ 16
I.d.2
Schedule for conducting inspections and monitoring, and examples of the
forms that will be used to record the results of the inspections and monitoring (R315302-2(2)(c), R315-302-2(5)(a), and R315-310-3(1)(g)) ................................................... 17
I.d.3

Contingency plans in the event of a fire or explosion (R315-302-2(2)(d)) ........ 19

I.d.4
Corrective action programs to be initiated if groundwater is contaminated
(R315- 302-2(2)(e)) ............................................................................................................. 20
I.d.5
Contingency plans for other releases, e.g. explosive gases or failure of run-off
collection system (R315-302-2(2)(f)) ................................................................................. 21
I.d.6
Plan to control fugitive dust generated from roads, construction, general
operations, and covering the waste (R315-302-2(2)(g)) .................................................. 22
I.d.7

Plan for litter control and collection (R315-302-2(2)(h)) .................................... 22

I.d.8

Description of maintenance of installed equipment (R315-302-2(2)(i)) ........... 22

I.d.9
Procedures for excluding the receipt of prohibited hazardous or PCB containing
wastes (R315-302-2(2)(j))................................................................................................... 23
I.d.10

Procedures for controlling disease vectors (R315-302-2(2)(k))......................... 23

I.d.11

A plan for alternative waste handling (R315-302-2(2)(l)) ................................... 24

I.d.12

A general training plan for site operations (R315-302-2(2)(o)).......................... 24

I.d.13

Any recycling programs planned at the facility (R315-303-4(6)) ....................... 25

I.d.14

Closure and post-closure care Plan (R315-302-2(2)(m)) ................................... 25

I.d.15

Procedures for the handling of special wastes (R315-315) ............................... 26

I.d.16

Plans and operation procedures to minimize liquids (R315-303-3(1)) ............. 28

I.d.17 Plans and procedures to address the requirements of R315-303-3(7)(c)
through (i) and R315-303-4 ................................................................................................ 28
I.d.18 Any other site-specific information pertaining to the plan of operation required
by the Director (R315-302-2(2)(p)) .................................................................................... 33
I.e
Special Requirements for New or Laterally Expanding Class V Landfill (R315310-3(3)) .................................................................................................................................. 33
I.e.1

Submit information required by the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act ....... 33

Promontory Point Landfill
ii
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
II

PAGE

Facility Technical Information .......................................................................................... 33
II.a.

Maps for All Class I and V Landfills ........................................................................... 33

II.a.1 Topographic map drawn to the required scale with contours showing the
boundaries of the landfill unit, groundwater monitoring well locations, gas monitoring
points, and the borrow and fill areas (R315-310-4(2)(a)(i)) ............................................. 33
II.a.2 Most recent U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, 7-1/2 minute series,
showing the waste facility boundary; the property boundary; surface drainage channels;
any existing utilities and structures within one-fourth mile of the site; and the direction
of the prevailing winds (R315-310- 4(2)(a)(ii)) .................................................................. 33
II.b

Geohydrological Assessment for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310-4(2)(b)) 34

II.b.1 Local and regional geology and hydrology including faults, unstable slopes and
subsidence areas on site (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i)) ................................................................ 34
II.b.2 Evaluation of bedrock and soil types and properties including permeability
rates (R315-310-4(2)(b)(ii)) ................................................................................................ 34
II.b.3

Depth to groundwater (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iii)) ..................................................... 38

II.b.4

Direction and estimated flow rate of groundwater (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iv)) ....... 38

II.b.5 Quantity, location, and construction of any private or public wells on-site or
within 2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(v))..................................... 38
II.b.6 Tabulation of all water rights for groundwater and surface water on-site and
within 2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vi)) .................................... 38
II.b.7 Identification and description of all surface waters on-site and within one mile
of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vii)) ................................................................. 39
II.b.8 Background groundwater and surface water quality assessment and, for an
existing facility, identification of impacts upon the groundwater and surface water from
leachate discharges (R315-310-4(2)(b)(viii)) .................................................................... 39
II.b.9

Groundwater Monitoring (R315-303-3(7)(b) and R315-308) ............................ 40

II.b.10

Statistical method to be used (R315-308-2(8))............................................... 44

II.b.11

Calculation of site water balance (R315-310-4(2)(b)(ix)) ............................... 44

II.c Engineering Report - Plans, Specifications, and Calculations for All Class I and V
Landfills.................................................................................................................................... 46
II.c.1 Documentation that the facility will meet all of the performance standards of
R315- 303-2......................................................................................................................... 46
II.c.2 Engineering reports required to meet the location standards of R315-302-1
including documentation of any demonstration or exemption made for any location
standard (R315-310-4(2)(c)(i)) ........................................................................................... 49
Promontory Point Landfill
iii
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION

PAGE

II.c.3 Anticipated facility life and the basis for calculating the facility's life (R315310- 4(2)(c)(ii)) ..................................................................................................................... 51
II.c.4 Cell design to include liner design, cover design, fill methods, elevation of final
cover including plans and drawings signed and sealed by a professional engineer
registered in the State of Utah (R315-303-3(3), R315-303-3(6) and (7)(a), R315-3103(1)(b) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii)) ...................................................................................... 52
II.c.5 Leachate collection system design and calculations showing system meets the
requirements of R315-303-3(2) ......................................................................................... 52
II.c.6

Equipment requirements and availability (R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii)) ...................... 54

II.c.7 Identification of borrow sources for daily and final cover and for soil liners
(R315- 310-4(2)(c)(iv)) ........................................................................................................ 55
II.c.8

Run-On and run-off diversion designs (R315-303-3(1)(c), (d) and (e)) .............. 55

II.c.9 Leachate collection, treatment, and disposal and documentation to show that
any treatment system is being or has been reviewed by the Division of Water Quality
(R315-310-4(2)(c)(v) and R315-310-3(1)(i)) ..................................................................... 56
II.c.10
Groundwater monitoring plan that meets the requirements of Rule R315-308
including well locations, design, and construction (R315-310-4(2)(b)(x) and R315-3104(2)(c)(vi)) ............................................................................................................................. 56
II.c.11
Landfill gas monitoring and control plan that meets the requirements of
Subsection R315-303-3(5) (R315-310-4(2)(c)(vii)) .......................................................... 61
II.c.12
Slope stability analysis for static and under the anticipated seismic event for
the facility (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i) and R315-302-1(2)(b)(ii)) .............................................. 62
II.c.13
Design and location of run-on and run-off control systems (R315-3104(2)(c)(viii)) ........................................................................................................................... 62
II.d Closure Plan for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310-3(1)(h))................................ 63
II.d.1

Closure Plan (R315-302-3(2) and (3)) ................................................................. 63

II.d.2

Closure schedule (R315-310-4(2)(d)(i)) ............................................................... 63

II.d.3

Design of final cover (R315-303-3(4) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii)) ...................... 63

II.d.4

Capacity of site in volume and tonnage (R315-310-4(2)(d)(ii)).......................... 64

II.d.5

Final inspection by regulatory agencies (R315-310-4(2)(d)(iii)) ......................... 64

II.e

Post-Closure Care Plan for All Class I and V Landfills (R315- 310-3(1)(h)) .......... 65

II.e.1.

Post-Closure Plan (R315-302-3(5) and (6)) ......................................................... 65

II.e.2 Site monitoring of landfill gases, groundwater, and surface water, if required
(R315-310-4(2)(e)(i)) ........................................................................................................... 65

Promontory Point Landfill
iv
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION

PAGE

II.e.3 Changes to record of title, land use, and zoning restrictions (R315-3104(2)(e)(v)) .............................................................................................................................. 66
II.e.4 Maintenance activities to maintain cover and run-on/run-off control systems
(R315-310-4(2)(e)(iii)) ......................................................................................................... 66
II.e.5 List the name, address, and telephone number of the person or office to
contact about the facility during the post-closure care period (R315-310-4(2)(e)(vi)) ... 66
II.f

Financial Assurance for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310- 3(1)(j)) ................ 66

II.f.1
Identification of closure costs including cost calculations (R315-310-4(2)(d)(iv))
and (R315-302-2(2)(n)) ....................................................................................................... 66
II.f.2
Identification of post-closure care costs including cost calculations (R315-3104(2)(e)(iv)) ............................................................................................................................. 67
II.f.3
Identification of the financial assurance mechanism that meets the
requirements of Rule R315-309 and the date that the mechanism will become effective
(R315-309-1(1))................................................................................................................... 67
References................................................................................................................................... 68

Promontory Point Landfill
v
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO OPERATE A CLASS V LANDFILL
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figures
Figure C-801
Figure C-802
Figure C-803
Figure C-804
Figure C-805
Figure C-806
Figure C-807
Figure C-808
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
Appendix H
Appendix I
Appendix J
Appendix K
Appendix L

Appendix M
Appendix N
Appendix O
Appendix P
Appendix Q
Appendix R
Appendix S

Appendix T
Appendix U
Appendix V
Appendix W
Appendix X
Appendix Y

Existing Land Use
Existing Utilities & Fencing
Monitoring Locations
Pre-Development Hydrology
Post-Development Hydrology
Proposed Excavation Plan
Proposed Fill Plan
Potential Borrow Areas
Class I Solid Waste Permit
Proof of Site Ownership
Proof of Interest in GWSC parcel
Letter to Property Owners within 1,000 feet of the Site
Historic Information
Wildlife Information
F-1 – Environmental Baseline Report (October 2003)
F-2 – Wildlife Assessment Reassessment (February 2017)
Log of Test Pits and Boring Logs
Flood Waters Information
Sample Forms
Fugitive Dust Plan
Fugitive Waste Plan
Class V Information
L-1 – PPR Class V Needs Assessment
L-2 – UDOT Letter of Approval
L-3 – Traffic Study
Groundwater Movement Figure
Utah Division of Water Well Logs and Location Map
Water Right Location Map and Information
HELP Model Information
Draft Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan – Construction
Draft Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan – Industrial
Geotechnical Reports
S-1 – Geotechnical Report (July 2003 and October 2009)
S-2 – Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map
(October 2015)
S-3 – Geotechnical Engineering Report (September 2016)
Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation
Facility Life Details
Hydrology Information
Closure Costs
Financial Assurance
Phase 1 Plans

Promontory Point Landfill
vi
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 I

Facility General Information

I.a

Information Required for All Class I and V Landfills

I.a.1

Completed Part I General Information Form
The General Information Form for Promontory Point Landfill (the Site) is provided at
the beginning of this submittal along with the report checklist.

I.a.2

General description of the facility (R315-310-3(1)(b))
The Site is currently a 2,000-acre permitted Class I facility (1,000 acres for disposal
bounded by 1,000 acres of buffer area) located on the west side of the southern tip
of the Promontory Point Peninsula in Box Elder County, Utah and is protected visually
from the Wasatch Front by a ridgeline along the Promontory Peninsula. An additional
137 acres south of Promontory Road will be utilized for rail operations and access.
Access to the Site will be either by way of the Union Pacific Railroad or a county road
as shown on Figure C-001. The Site was issued a Solid Waste Permit Renewal by the
Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board on September 1, 2011 (see Appendix
A), a permit modification name from Utah Landfill & Ballast, LLC to Promontory
Landfill, LLC was approved on July 16, 2015. A Permit Modification and Design
Report proposing modifications to the permitted design and operation, including
excavation and development designs for Phase I construction was submitted on May
3, 2016.
The Class I Permit allows for the disposal of non-hazardous solid waste which
includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Municipal solid waste;
Commercial waste;
Industrial waste;
Construction/demolition waste;
Special waste as allowed by UAC R315-315; and
Conditionally exempt small quantity generator hazardous waste as specified in
UAC R315-303-4(7)(a)(i)(B) and PCB’s as specified by UAC R315-315-7(2).
Additionally, the Class I permit states that acceptable wastes are restricted to
wastes that are received under sole contracts with local governments, within
Utah, for waste generated within the boundaries of the local government. Each
contract shall be approved by the Executive Secretary prior to acceptance of the
waste at the Site.

As a Class V Landfill the approved waste types will not change; however, the waste
origin and Director approval restrictions will be removed.

Promontory Point Landfill
1
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 The Class V permit will regulate the operation of the landfill cells. Construction plans
for Phase 1A, 1B, and 1C were submitted as part of the Class I Permit Modification
submitted to DEQ on May 3, 2016 and approved on March 14, 2017. Construction
of Phase I will begin in the summer of 2017. Phase 1A, 1B, and 1C are designed to
meet all Subtitle D criteria as administered by the State of Utah and are to be
incorporated into the Class V permit application.
Detailed construction plans will be submitted for each additional construction phase
after Phase 1A, 1B, and 1C to the Executive Secretary for approval prior to
construction.
Facility components that are not regulated by the permit include but are not limited
to the following:









Administrative/Scalehouse Building
Maintenance Building(s)
Railroad Car Rotary Dump
Heat Building(s)
Wash Facility(s)
Intermodal Yard
Solidification facility
Truck and Rail Scales

Additional, unloading and material handling facilities may be constructed as
necessary. Current Site plans and drawings are included with this submittal.
I.a.3

Legal description of property (R315-310-3(1)(c))
A parcel of land lying and situated in Sections 18, 19 and 30, Township 6 North,
Range 5 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian and Sections 13, 14, 23, 24 and 25,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. Comprising the
2,025.42 acres described in that certain Special Warranty Deed recorded as Entry
362739, in Book 1290, at Pages 848 through 853 of the Box Elder county Records.
Basis of Bearing for subject Parcel being Geodetic North as determined by GPS.
Subject parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Southeast Corner of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6
West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, which is a number four rebar and cap with a
plastic cap stamped “GREAT BASIN” set in a mound of stones, thence North
01°38’18” West 622.15 feet coincident with the east line of said Section 25 to a
number five rebar and plastic cap stamped “PLS356548” monumentalizing a point
on the northerly right of way line of a sixty-six foot wide Box Elder County Road and
the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence the following twenty-four (24) courses coincident with the northerly and
easterly right of way line of said County Road;

Promontory Point Landfill
2
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 1.
2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

7.
8.

9.
10.
11.
12.

13.
14.

15.
16.

17.

North 71°14’37” West 137.11 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Westerly 356.24 feet along the arc of a 1416.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 18°45’23” West) through a central angle of 14°24’52” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
North 85°39’29” West 535.18 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 182.12 feet along the arc of a 434.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 04°20’31” East) through a central angle of
24°02’33” to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
North 61°36’56” West 359.46 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 144.66 feet along the arc of a 1059.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 28°23’04” East) through a central angle of
07°49’35” to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
North 53°47’21” West 447.84 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 197.60 feet along the arc of a 3459.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 36°12’39” East) through a central angle of
03°16’23” to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
North 50°30’58” West 434.87 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 9.13 feet along the arc of a 934.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears North 39°29’02” East) through a central angle of 00°33’37” to a
point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
North 49°57’21” West 76.98 feet to a point of curvature;
Northwesterly 122.11 feet along the arc of a 1316.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears South 40°02’39” West) through a central angle of 05°18’59”
to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS
356548”;
North 55°16’20” West 7.82 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 12.18 feet along the arc of a 434.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 34°43’40” East) through a central angle of
01°36’28” to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
North 53°39’52” West 1099.38 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northwesterly 435.25 feet along the arc of a 1384.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 36°20’08” East) through a central angle of
18°01’07” to a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
North 35°38’45” West 823.97 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;

Promontory Point Landfill
3
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 18. Northerly 250.37 feet along the arc of a 11566.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 54°21’15” West) through a central angle of 01°14’25” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
19. North 36°53’10” West 641.50 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
20. Northerly 149.95 feet along the arc of a 1934.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears North 53°06’50” East) through a central angle of 04°26’32” to a
point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
21. North 32°26’38” West 136.46 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
22. Northerly 340.82 feet along the arc of a 1684.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears North 57°33’22” East) through a central angle of 11°35’45” to a
point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
23. North 20°50’53” West 242.98 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
24. Northerly 253.93 feet along the arc of a 2091.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 69°09’07” West) through a central angle of 06°57’29” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
25. North 27°48’22” West 118.96 feet to a number five rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
Thence leaving said right of way, North 00°41’58” East 32.10 feet coincident with
the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 25 to the Northwest Corner
thereof which is a number four rebar set in a mound of stones;
Thence North 89°34’25” West 17.42 feet coincident with the south line of the
Southeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base
and Meridian to a point on the easterly right of way line of said County Road and a
number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Thence the following thirteen (13) courses coincident with said easterly right of way
line;
1. Northerly 590.00 feet along the arc of a 5066.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 62°00’00” West) through a central angle of 06°40’22” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
2. North 34°40’22” West 317.77 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
3. Northerly 14.03 feet along the arc of an 84.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears North 55°19’38” East) through a central angle of 09°34’15” to a
point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
4. North 25°06’07” West 304.86 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
5. Northerly 222.99 feet along the arc of a 2766.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 64°53’53” West) through a central angle of 04°37’09” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
6. North 29°43’16” West 237.17 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
7. Northerly 719.56 feet along the arc of a 1317.00 foot radius curve to the right
Promontory Point Landfill
4
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 8.
9.
10.
11.

12.

13.

(center bears North 60°16’44” East) through a central angle of 31°18’16” to a
point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
North 01°35’00” East 188.35 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northerly 357.01 feet along the arc of a 1783.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears North 88°25’00” West) through a central angle of 11°28’20” to
a point of tangency and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
North 09°53’20” West 103.89 feet to a point of curvature and a number five
rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
Northerly 360.36 feet along the arc of a 2533.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears South 80°06’40” West) through a central angle of 08°09’04” to
a point of reverse curvature and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS
356548”;
Northerly 397.36 feet along the arc of a 2717.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears North 71°57’36” East) through a central angle of 08°22’46” to a
point of reverse curvature and a number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS
356548”;
Northerly 102.49 feet along the arc of a 1283.00 radius curve to the left
(center bears South 80°20’22” West) through a central angle of 04°34’36” to
a point on the west line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 23 and a
number five rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;

Thence the following twenty-seven (27) courses coincident with aliquot subdivisional
section lines;
1. North 00°41’45” East 321.05 feet to the NE 1/16 th Corner of Section 23,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
2. North 00°41’45” East 677.79 feet to the C-N-NE 1/64th Corner of said Section
13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
3. South 89°30’19” East 659.98 feet to the NE-NE 1/64th Corner of said Section
23, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
4. North 00°41’51” East 647.45 feet to the E-E 1/64th Corner of said Section 23,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
5. North 00°17’08” West 652.53 feet to the SE-SE- 1/64th Corner of Section 14,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
6. North 89°22’46” East 660.38 feet to the S-S 1/64th of said Section 14, which
is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
7. North 00°15’58” West 653.48 feet to the S 1/16 th Corner of Section 13,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
8. North 00°15’58” West 653.47 feet to the N-S 1/64th Corner of said Section
13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
9. North 89°10’56” East 659.68 feet to the NW-SW 1/64th Corner of said Section
13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
10. North 00°06’15” West 654.82 feet to the C-W-W 1/64th Corner of said Section
13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
11. North 89°04’01” East 661.54 feet to the C-W 1/16th Corner of said Section 13,
Promontory Point Landfill
5
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
12. North 89°04’01” East 1323.07 to the C 1/4 Corner of said Section 13, which
is a 1½” iron pipe;
13. North 89°54’49” East 2614.38 feet to the E 1/4 Corner of said Section 13,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548” with a chiseled
stone alongside;
14. South 89°46’59” East 1325.38 feet to the C-W 1/16th Corner of Section 18,
Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
15. South 89°46’59” East 662.69 feet to the C-E-W 1/64th Corner of said Section
18, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
16. South 00°20’22” West 667.77 feet to the NE-SE 1/64th Corner of said Section
18, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
17. South 89°40’56” East 661.42 feet to the C-N-S 1/64th Corner of said Section
18, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
18. South 00°26’49” West 668.94 feet to the C-S 1/16th Corner of said section 18,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
19. South 00°26’49” West 1337.88 feet to the N ¼ Corner of Section 19,
Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548” with remains of stone mound alongside;
20. South 00°40’55” West 5285.67 feet to the N 1/4 Corner of Section 30,
Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a stone monument with 1/4 chiseled
on face and a rivet set on top.
21. South 89°57’56” West 649.34 feet to the E-W 1/64th Corner of said Section
30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
22. South 02°03’04” East 672.21 feet to the NE-NW 1/64th Corner of Said Section
30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
23. South 02°03’04” East 672.21 feet to the C-E-NW 1/64th Corner of said Section
30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
24. North 89°40’33” West 652.70 feet to the NW 1/16 th Corner of said Section
30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped “PLS 356548”;
25. South 01°54’52” East 1340.22 feet to the C-W 1/16th Corner of said Section
30, which is a copper rivet set in limestone stone outcrop;
26. North 89°19’16” West 1312.18 feet to the E 1/4 Corner of Section 25,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
“PLS 356548”;
27. South 01°38’18” East 2041.54 feet to the point of beginning.
A parcel of land lying and situate in the Sections 25 and 26, Township 6 North,
Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian lying south of a four hundred foot
wide Southern Pacific Railroad Right of Way; Comprising the 6.54 acres, more
or less, being openly, notoriously and adversely possessed by GWSC Properties,
LLC. Since November 16, 2006. Basis of Bearing for Subject parcel being
South 01°38'18” East 5327.38 feet between the Northeast and Southeast
Corners of said Section 25. Subject Parcel being more particularly described as
follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of Section 36, Township 6 North, Range 6
Promontory Point Landfill
6
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, which is a number 4 rebar in a mound of
stones with the original stone and "T" post alongside, thence South 01°38'18”
West 92.59 feet to a point on the point of intersection with the southwesterly
right of way line of a four hundred foot (400.00') wide Southern Pacific Railroad
Right of Way and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing coincident with said east section line South 01°38'18" East
185.44 feet to a point on the Meander Line of the Great Salt Lake; Thence the
following five (5) courses coincident with said Meander Line;
1. North 55°52'04" West 332.59 feet;
2. North 72°52'04" West 665.17 feet;
3. North 62°22'04" West 665.17 feet;
4. North 72°13'22" West 651.32 feet;
5. North 48°21'58" West 400.05 feet to the point of intersection with said
Railroad Right of Way;
Thence easterly coincident with said southerly right of way line, approximated by
the following seven (7) courses;
1. South 67°39'29" East 244.35 feet;
2. South 67°20'58" East 79.03 feet;
3. South 67°12'33" East 133.79 feet;
4. South 67°15'21" East 83.24 feet;
5. South 67°43'35" East 513.55 feet;
6. South 68°17'37" East 1142.96 feet;
7. South 68°56'20" East 399.54 feet to the point of beginning.
A parcel of land lying and situate in the Sections 25 and 26, Township 6 North,
Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian lying south and west of a sixty-six foot
wide Box Elder County Road; Comprising the more or less 129.09 acres contained
in the three (3) parcels of land described in that certain Warranty Deed recorded
November 17, 2006 as Entry 236747, in Book 984, at Page 278 of the Box Elder
County Records. Basis of Bearing for Subject parcel being South 01°38’18” East
5327.38 feet between the Northeast and Southeast Corners of said Section 25.
Subject Parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of Section 26, Township 6 North, Range 6
West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, which is a number 4 rebar in a mound of
stones, thence North 89°36’21” West 92.59 feet to a point on the southwesterly
right of way line of a sixty-six foot (66’) wide Box Elder County Road and a number
5 rebar and plastic cap stamped “PLS 356548” monumentalizing the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence the following twenty-six (26) courses coincident
with said right of way;
1. Southeasterly 52.64 feet along the arc of a 5000.00 foot radius curve to
the right (center bears South 61°35’26” West) through a central angle of
00°36’12” to a point of tangency;
2. South 27°48’22” East 138.28 feet to a point of curvature;
3. Southeasterly 245.92 feet along the arc of a 2025.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears South 62°11’38” West) through a central angle of
Promontory Point Landfill
7
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

06°57’29” to a point of tangency;
South 20°50’53” East 242.98 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 354.18 feet along the arc of a 1750.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears North 69°09’07” East) through a central angle of
11°35’45” to a point of tangency;
South 32°26’38” East 136.46 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 155.06 feet along the arc of a 2000.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears North 57°33’22” East) through a central angle of
04°26’32” to a point of tangency;
South 36°53’01” East 641.50 to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 248.94 feet along the arc of an 11500.00 foot radius curve to
the right (center bears South 53°06’50” West) through a central angle of
01°14’25” to a point of tangency;
South 35°38’45” East 823.97 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 456.00 feet along the arc of a 1450.00 foot radius curve to
the left (center bears North 54°21’15” East) through a central angle of
18°01’07” to a point of tangency;
South 53°39’52” East 1099.38 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 14.03 feet along the arc of a 500.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears North 36°20’08” East) through a central angle of
01°36’28” to a point of tangency;
South 55°16’20” East 7.82 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 115.99 feet along the arc of a 1250.00 foot radius curve to
the right (center bears South 34°43’40” West) through a central angle of
05°18’59” to a point of tangency;
South 49°57’21” East 76.98 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 9.78 feet along the arc of a 1000.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears North 40°02’39” East) through a central angle of
00°33’37” to a point of tangency;
South 50°30’58” East 434.87 feet to a point of curvature;
Southeasterly 201.37 feet along the arc of a 3525.00 foot radius curve to the
left (center bears North 39°29’02” East) through a central angle of
03°16’23” to a point of tangency;
South 53°47’21” East 447.84 feet to a point of curvature;
Easterly 153.67 feet along the arc of an 1125.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears North 36°12’39” East) through a central angle of 07°49’35” to
a point of tangency;
South 61°36’56” East 359.46 feet to a point of curvature;
Easterly 209.81 feet along the arc of a 500.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears North 28°23’04” East) through a central angle of 24°02’33” to
a point of tangency;
South 85°39’29” East 535.18 feet to a point of curvature;
Easterly 339.63 feet along the arc of a 1350.00 foot radius curve to the right
(center bears South 04°20’31” West) through a central angle of 14°24’52”
to a point of tangency;
South 71°14’37” East 161.65 feet to a point on the east line of said Section
25;

Promontory Point Landfill
8
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Thence South 01°38’18” East 551.72 feet coincident with said section line to the
Southeast Corner of said Section 25; Thence continuing South 01°38’18” East
253.96 feet coincident with the east line of Section 26, Township 6 North, Range 1
West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian to a point on the northerly right of way line of
the Southern Pacific Railroad's Lucin Cutoff, said right of way line lying 200 feet
northerly of the centerline of the main track; Thence southwesterly coincident with
said northerly right of way line approximated by the following eleven (11) courses:
1. North 68°34’27” West 230.30 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the
right;
2. North 68°17’37” West 1142.96 feet to a pcs;
3. North 67°43’33” West 513.15 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the
right to a psc;
4. North 67°14’46” West 79.63 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the
right to the pc thereof;
5. North 67°12’33” West 133.79 feet along a tangent line to a PT;
6. North 67°20’55” West 80.01 feet along the chord of a curve to the left ;
7. North 67°41’22” West 286.08 feet along the tangent of said curve to a psc;
8. North 68°05’31” West 220.53 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the
left to a pc;
9. North 68°21’03” West 455.39 feet;
10. North 68°24’16” West 559.19 feet to a pcs;
11. North 70°52’35” West 340.11 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the
left to the point of intersection with said 200.00 foot right of way line and the
meander line of the Great Salt Lake;
Thence the following four (4) courses coincident with said meander line,
1. North 39°54’43” West 2388.32 feet;
2. North 07°39’43” West 1248.70 feet;
3. North 02°00’23” East 391.86 feet;
4. North 13°59’37” West 685.79 feet to a point on the north line of said
Section 26;
Thence South 89°36’21” East 72.42 feet coincident with said section line to the
point of beginning.
I.a.4. Proof of ownership, lease agreement, or other mechanism (R315-310-3(1)(c))
Proof of ownership for the 2,000 acres where the landfill will be located is included
in Appendix B.
Proof of purchase for the 137 acres south of the landfill area that will be used for
the rail spur is in Appendix C.
I.a.5

Area served by the facility (R315-310-3(1)(d))
The Site will accept a wide range of material as defined by UAC R314-2-2. The
potential area served is the state of Utah and areas that make economic sense to
haul via rail or truck to the Site. As a Class V Landfill, the Site will be able to accept

Promontory Point Landfill
9
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 material from any origin.
The Site is the only major US municipal waste landfill that is located on a main trunk
railroad line (Union Pacific). The location of the Site on the main trunk railroad line
will allow the facility to economically accept waste from the region. Region is defined
as greater than the State, but less than the Nation.
I.a.6

If the permit application is for a Class I landfill a demonstration that the landfill is not
a commercial facility
Not applicable.

I.a.7

Waste type and anticipated daily volume (R315-310-3(1)(d))
The Class I Permit allows for the disposal of non-hazardous solid waste that may
include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Municipal solid waste;
Commercial waste;
Industrial waste;
Construction/demolition waste;
Special waste as allowed by UAC R315-315; and
Conditionally exempt small quantity generator hazardous waste as specified in
UAC R315-303-4(7)(a)(i)(B) and PCB’s as specified by UAC R315-315-7(2).
Additionally, the Class I Permit restricts the aforementioned wastes to be those
that are received under sole contracts with local governments, within Utah, for
waste generated within the boundaries of the local government. Each contract
shall be approved by the Executive Secretary prior to acceptance of the waste at
the landfill.

As a Class V Landfill the waste types will not change; however, the waste origin and
Director approval restrictions will be removed.
The initial disposal rate will be approximately 200,000 tons per year and the volumes
will increase per year depending on the waste sources. Daily volumes are estimated
at approximately 750 tons initially.

Promontory Point Landfill
10
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 I.b

Information Required for All New or Laterally Expanding Class I and V
Landfills

I.b.1

Intended schedule of construction (R315-302-2(2)(a))
Construction is slated to begin in the summer of 2017 and be ready to accept waste
in the fall of 2017. The rail spur to the Site is anticipated to be completed by late
2017. The construction of landfill, rail spur and ancillary facilities is contingent on
obtaining other local permits.

I.b.2

Name and address of all property owners within 1000 feet of the facility boundary
(R315-310-3(2)(a)(i))
The following are the property owners within 1,000 feet of the Site.
Property Owners

Property Owner Within 1,000 Feet
Northshore Rail Services LLC
Young Resources LTD Partnership
Chournos Promontory LLC
Peery Calvin Henry
Southern Pacific Trans. Co
I.b.3

Property Address
1740 Combe Rd, Suite 1 South Ogden, UT 84403
5010 UT-38, Brigham City, UT 84302
590 N 1600 E Tremonton, UT 84337
6015 Balfern Ave, Lakewood, CA 90713-1245
1400 Douglas St, Ste 1640, Omaha, NE 68179

Documentation that a notice of intent to apply for a permit has been sent to all
property owners listed above (R315-310-3(2)(ii))
A letter was sent to each of the surrounding property owners on March 16, 2017.
Copies of the letters are provided in Appendix D.

I.b.4

Name of the local government with jurisdiction over the facility site (R315-3103(2)(iii))
Box Elder County
81 North Main
Brigham City, UT

I.c

Location Standards for All New or Laterally Expanding Class I and V
Landfills (R315-302-1)

I.c.1

Documentation that the facility has met the historical survey requirement of
R315- 302-1(2)(f)
Documentation from the State of Utah and a cultural reconnaissance are provided in
Appendix E. As noted below a cave/rockshelter was noted in the buffer area. This

Promontory Point Landfill
11
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 area will not be disturbed by operations.
I.c.2

Land use compatibility (R315-302-1(2)(a))
The Site and related facilities conform to the general location standards outlined in
R315-302-1(2)(a).












I.c.3

The Site is not located within 1,000 feet of a national, state or county park,
monument, or recreational area, designated wilderness or wilderness study area,
or wild or scenic river area.
The Site is not located within 1,000 feet of a designated wilderness or wilderness
study area.
The Site is not located within 1,000 feet of a wild or scenic river area.
The southern property line is within 1,000 feet of the Great Salt Lake; however,
the active areas/operations areas are not within 1,000 feet of the Great Salt
Lake. Additionally, the Site will not violate any applicable state water quality
standards or the Clean Water Act. Further, fugitive dust and stormwater plans will
alleviate impact to the Great Salt Lake. The Site is not within 1,000 feet of a
reservoir. There are no streams within 1,000 feet of the Site.
The Site is not located in an ecologically and scientifically significant natural area,
including public wildlife management areas and habitat for threatened or
endangered species as designated pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of
1982 (Appendix F).
The Site is not in farmland classified or evaluated as "prime," "unique," or of
"statewide importance" by the U S Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service under the Prime Farmland Protection Act.
The Site is not within a one-quarter mile of any existing permanent dwellings,
residential areas, and other incompatible structures such as schools or churches.
The nearest dwelling is several miles away.
A cave/rockshelter is located on the property (Appendix E). The cave/rockshelter
is within the buffer area to ensure its preservation.
The Site is not within 10,000 feet of any airport runway used by turbojet aircraft
or within 5,000 feet of any airport runway used by only piston-type aircraft. A
private landing strip used by the brine shrimp operations is located approximately
8,000 feet southeast of the Site. The landing strip is used primarily only during
the brine shrimp harvest season.

Maps showing the existing land use, topography, residences, parks, monuments,
recreation areas or wilderness areas within 1000 feet of the site boundary
Figure C-801 is provided which shows the existing land use, topography, and any
residences, parks, monument, recreation areas or wilderness areas within 1,000 feet
of the Site boundary.

Promontory Point Landfill
12
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 I.c.4

Certifications that no ecologically or scientifically significant areas or endangered
species are present in site area
A wildlife survey was conducted in 2003 and updated in January 2017 (Appendix F).
The Site is not located in an ecologically and scientifically significant natural area,
including public wildlife management areas and habitat for threatened or
endangered species as designated pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1982.

I.c.5

List of airports within five miles of facility and distance to each
There are no major airports within five miles of the Site.

I.c.6

Geology (R315-302-1(2)(b))
The project Site is situated at the southerly end of Promontory Point, which is a
peninsula extending southward from the northerly shore of the Great Salt Lake. The
Promontory Mountains occupy this peninsula, forming one of the mountain blocks of
the Basin and Range geomorphic province. Much of the Site is occupied by a broad
valley containing Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of the ancient Lake Bonneville, and
flanked by Late Proterozoic and Early Paleozoic metasedimentary outcrops. The axis
of the valley drains from northeast to southwest at an approximate grade of seven
percent. Some of the surrounding outcrops (where once submerged by Lake
Bonneville) possess a partially-eroded coating of tufa, observed to be as much as one
foot thick.
The Great Salt Lake is a present-day remnant of the ancient Lake Bonneville,
stillstands of which resulted in topographic benches representing the ancient waveeroded shorelines, four of which are shown on the map (Plate A-1). Graphic logs of
test pits performed in 2015 is shown on Figure B-1 and logs of test pits and boring
logs are provided in Appendix G.
Generalized geologic cross sections (Cross Section numbers A-A’ and B-B’) were
constructed across the project area in generally north-south and east-west directions,
respectively, and are shown on Plate A-1. Cross Section A-A’ extends roughly down
the central axis of the broad valley comprising the proposed 1,000-acre disposal
area; and Cross Section B-B’ extends from the westerly quarry, across the valley at
roughly elevation 4,440 feet, and terminates in the metamorphic outcrops to the
southeast.
The highest level of Lake Bonneville is known as the Bonneville shoreline, located
just beyond the northeast property corner at an elevation of 5,276 feet, occurring
18.6 to 17.7 kiloanni (ka, thousand years ago). This highest transgressive shoreline
was mapped at the Site based on its pronounced geomorphic expression. The Provo
shoreline represents an open-basin stillstand that occurred at an estimated 17.7 to
15 ka (Nelson and Jewell, 2015). It was mapped at the toe of a pronounced bench in
the central portion of the Site at an approximate elevation of 4,865 feet. The
Stansbury shoreline represents the earliest transgressive stillstand of Lake

Promontory Point Landfill
13
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Bonneville, estimated to have occurred between 26.2 and 24.1 ka (Currey, et. al.,
1984; Nelson & Jewell, 2015). It was mapped based on the expected isostaticallyadjusted elevation range and geomorphic expression, and is shown at an elevation of
4,619 feet. The regressive Gilbert shoreline is mapped at an elevation of 4,250
based on recent work by Oviatt (2014), and occurred as recently as 11.6 ka.
Geomorphic expression for this feature was not readily recognized at the project Site,
and the shoreline is mapped on the basis of elevation alone.
The depositional record preceding the Site’s occupation by Lake Bonneville contains
a substantial hiatus, as the underlying bedrock consists of metasedimentary
exposures ranging from Late Proterozoic through Middle Cambrian. These rocks are
primarily quartzite and limestone, with minor quantities of shale. This sequence is
recognized as the lowermost of 3 structural units within the Promontory Mountains
and is cut by high-angle faults that may have acted as tear faults for the underlying
Willard Thrust during the Sevier Orogeny (Crittenden, 1988). Primary metamorphic
foliation of these rocks (i.e. foliation subparallel to protolith bedding) generally dips
toward the southeast at 10 to 45 degrees.
Subsidence Area
The Site is not located in a subsidence area, a dam failure flood area, above an
underground mine, above a salt dome, above a salt bed, nor is the Site on or
adjacent to geologic features that will compromise the structural integrity of the Site.
Holocene Fault
The nearest mapped Quaternary fault to the Site is the Promontory Section of the
Great Salt Lake fault zone, mapped approximately 0.5 miles to the southwest of the
Site. Although our map shows fault traces mapped across the Pleistocene lacustrine
deposits (mapped by earlier regional studies, AGEC and our mapping), those traces
represent the interpreted fault location at the buried bedrock surface and the faults
are not interpreted as Quaternary features. This bedrock beneath the Pleistocene
lacustrine deposits is mapped as Precambrian to Cambrian.
Observations in one of the quarries in the southwest portion of the Site revealed a
fault within the quartzite bedrock, overlain by a continuous (unbroken) contact with
the Pleistocene lacustrine sediments, effectively demonstrating Holocene inactivity.
Additionally, no obvious scarps, disrupted shoreline traces, or similar features were
observed at the Site that would suggest Holocene faulting activity.
As a conclusion, none of the observed and mapped faults at the Site are deemed to
be Quaternary.
Seismic Impact Zones
The Regulations state that municipal landfills must be designed to withstand seismic
accelerations if they are located in a seismic impact zone. A seismic impact zone is
defined as an area with a 10% or greater probability that the maximum horizontal
acceleration in lithified material would exceed O 10 g in 250 years. According to
Blake, T F, et al (2002), there is a 10% probability of ground acceleration exceeding
Promontory Point Landfill
14
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 0.55 g in a 250-year period at the Site. The Site is therefore located in a seismic
impact zone. The proposed cells have been designed to remain stable while
undergoing the predicted maximum earthquake accelerations.
I.c.6.i Geologic maps showing significant geologic features, faults, and unstable areas
Significant geologic features, faults, and unstable areas are shown on Plate A-1 (see
Appendix S-3).
I.c.6.ii Maps showing site soils
The Site soils are shown on Plate A-1 (see Appendix S-3).
I.c.7

Surface water (R315-302-1(2)(c))






The Site is not located on any public land that is being used by a public water
system for watershed control for municipal drinking water purposes.
The Site is not located in a 100-year floodplain.
The Site is not located in any wetlands and will not contribute to any degradation
of any wetland.
The Site will not violate any applicable state water quality standard or Section
307 of the Clean Water Act.
The Site will not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of a
critical habitat protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

I.c.7.i Magnitude of 24 hour 25 year and 100 year storm events
Precipitation for the 25-year, 24-hour storm event is 2.25 inches and the 100-year,
24-hour event is 2.78 inches (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) precipitation frequency data server). All environmental controls were
designed to be protected from the base design prescriptive precipitation event.
I.c.7.ii Average annual rainfall
Average annual rainfall measured at the nearest station in Ogden, UT is 19.13
inches.
I.c.7.iii Maximum elevation of flood waters proximate to the facility
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website, the Site is
located within zone D areas in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible.
No Flood Insurance Rate (FIRM) map is printed for the location. The nearest FIRM
map is located north of the Site on the Promontory Peninsula. The FEMA flood map
number 49003C2200D show the 100-year flood located within the shores of the
Great Salt Lake as Zone A with no base flood elevations determined. The historical
Promontory Point Landfill
15
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 average elevation of the Great Salt Lake is 4,200 feet. The lowest elevation on the
Site property is approximately 4,228’. From 1982 to 1986 the precipitation in the
Great Salt Lake drainage basin averaged 134 percent of normal and resulted in a
historic record high level of 4,211.85 ft. When taking into account the NAVD 88
vertical datum correction, the elevation of the historic flood level was 4,214.93 ft.
The lowest point of the railroad along the southern boundary of the Site is
approximately 4,216 ft. The landfill and infrastructure are not at risk of inundation of
the 100-year flood. See Appendix H for all supporting documents.
I.c.7.iiiiMaximum elevation of flood water from 100 year flood for waters proximate to the
facility
The landfill and infrastructure are not at risk of inundation of the 100-year flood. See
Appendix H for all supporting documents.
I.c.8

Wetlands (R315-302-1(2)(d))
Wetlands are not present at the Site and Site activities will not contribute to
significant degradation of wetlands.

I.c.9

Groundwater (R315-302-1(2)(e))
The historic depth to groundwater from existing topography underneath the proposed
landfill at the Site within the landfill limit ranges from approximately 90 feet near the
southern limit to approximately 550 feet near the northern limit (see Figure C-803).
The proposed depth of excavation ranges from approximately 40 feet near the
southern limit to approximately 315 feet near the northern limit (see Figure C-806).
The proposed liner design leaves a minimum of 50 feet of separation from
groundwater which exceeds the required minimum 5 feet of separation between
groundwater and liner.

I.d

Plan of Operations Requirements for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-3103(1)(e) and R315-302-2(2))

I.d.1

Forms and other information as required in R315-302-2(3) including a description of
on-site waste handling procedures and an example of the form that will be used to
record the weights or volumes of waste received (R315-302-2(2)(b) and
R315-310-3(1)(f))
Daily operation of the Class V Landfill and related facilities will be under the direction
of the Landfill Manager. In the event of the Landfill Manager's absence, a Senior
Operator will be the designee in charge of the Site.
A landfill entrance sign will be constructed and will provide the landfill name, hours of
operation, list of materials not accepted by the Site, and emergency contact
information.

Promontory Point Landfill
16
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 At the beginning of each working day, the Landfill Manager will be responsible for
informing operators of any special off-loading conditions, for either trucks or the
railroad, and where to direct all solid waste for disposal. Site personnel will be
responsible for directing each transport vehicle to the proper location for disposal of
the waste. This could alternatively be accomplished through the placement of
directional signs or a combination thereof. The Landfill Manager or his designee will
be at the Site during all operating hours to provide supervision and oversight of the
operations.
The Landfill Manager will maintain the following operating records for the Site:











Records of maintenance
Records of training and notification procedures
Records of groundwater monitoring
Records of landfill gas monitoring
Records of weights and volume, number of trucks and railcars
Deviations from the plan of operation
Records of placement or recirculation of leachate
Records of any gas condensate
Prepare an annual report and place the report in the Site's operating record
Inspection log or summary

Sample forms for maintenance and gas monitoring as well as an example of a typical
tonnage report that will be available from the scalehouse software system are
provided in Appendix I.
I.d.2

Schedule for conducting inspections and monitoring, and examples of the forms that
will be used to record the results of the inspections and monitoring (R315-3022(2)(c), R315-302-2(5)(a), and R315-310-3(1)(g))
The Landfill foreman or his designee is responsible for conducting and recording
routine inspections of the Site facilities in order to prevent malfunctions and
deterioration, operator errors, and discharges which may cause or lead to the release
of wastes to the environment or to a threat to human health. The schedule for
conducting routine inspections is provided in the table below. An example of forms
that may be used for recording routine inspections are presented in Appendix I. The
forms include the date and time of inspection, the printed name and handwritten
signature of the inspector, a notation of observations made, and the date and nature
of any repairs or corrective action. The log or summary will be kept at the Site or
other convenient location if permanent office facilities are not on-site, for at least
three years from the date of inspection. Inspection records shall be available to the
Director or his authorized representative upon request. The Landfill Manager is
responsible for verifying the completeness of the inspection records on a quarterly
basis.

Promontory Point Landfill
17
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Inspections
Landfill Facility

Inspection

Frequency

Landfill Cell

Daily cover integrity

Daily

Intermediate cover integrity

Weekly and after significant rain
events

Leachate collection sumps for liquid

Weekly if no liquid, daily if liquid

Stormwater run-on/run-off control
conveyance integrity

Quarterly and after significant rain
events

Cell perimeter fence integrity

Daily

Perimeter fence integrity

Weekly

Available capacity

Annual and after significant rain
events

Leachate Tanks

Leachate depth

Daily

Leachate Collection and
Recovery System

Leachate volumes

Monthly

Landfill gas collection
system

Flare and blowers

Daily

Piping and wells

Monthly

Entrance/scales/main gate integrity

Daily

Cell access roads

Daily

Other roads

Quarterly and after significant rain
events

Perimeter fence integrity

Weekly

groundwater monitoring well
integrity

During sampling events

Equipment maintenance

Per manufacturer's Periodic
Maintenance Schedule

Berm integrity

Quarterly

Fugitive Waste

Daily

Stormwater Basins

Other Appurtenances

Promontory Point Landfill
18
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 I.d.3

Contingency plans in the event of a fire or explosion (R315-302-2(2)(d))
Fire Protection (R315-302-2(2)(d)) and R315-303-3(7)(e))
A fire suppression area shall be designated as the location for any burning materials
to be moved to or to be consolidated on for fire suppression activities. These areas
shall not be located within 150 feet of any exposed HDPE liner or gas collection
system piping or within 5 vertical feet of any existing liner. This area may move from
time to time to be in close proximity of the working area of the Site operations.
Vehicle Fires
In the event that a disposal vehicle carrying a burning or smoldering load of waste
enters the Site, the following procedures will be instituted:
1. The vehicle should be directed to the designated fire suppression area as
previously outlined above.
2. Once burning waste is removed from the vehicle, the application of cover material
by landfill equipment or the application of water by the on-site water truck will be
used to extinguish the fire. Smothering with soil will be the primary method used
to extinguish a fire.
3. Vehicles and any equipment in the "fire zone" will be inspected and sprayed with
water, as needed, while working to quench the fire.
4. Precautions should be taken throughout the entire fire-fighting operation
including using a hot-spot observer.
5. If, at any time, additional assistance is required, local fire-fighting units will be
contacted per pre-arranged agreement.
Ground Fire/Below Cover Fire
In the event that waste placed on the ground or waste that was previously covered
erupts into fire, the following procedures will be instituted:
1. It will be isolated from previously deposited waste immediately. This will be done
by either moving burning waste to the designated fire suppression area or by
concentrating the burning waste in one spot using landfill equipment.
2. Once burning waste is separated from other exposed waste, the fire will be
extinguished by the application of cover material by landfill earth moving
equipment or the application of water by the on-site water truck. Smothering with
soil will be the primary method used to extinguish fire.
3. Vehicles and any equipment in the "fire zone" will be inspected and sprayed with
water, as needed, while working to quench the fire.
4. Precautions should be taken throughout the fire-fighting operation, including
using a hot-spot observer.
5. If, at any time, additional assistance is required, local fire-fighting units will be
contacted.

Promontory Point Landfill
19
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Explosion
In the event that an explosion should occur at the Site or in any structure associated
with the Site, the following will be done:
1. All personnel and equipment in the area, including those in surrounding buildings
will be evacuated immediately to the emergency staging area.
2. All Site personnel will be accounted for.
3. Local emergency personnel will be contacted by dialing 911.
4. The Landfill Manager will be informed of the situation if he/she is not already at
the Site.
5. The explosion area will be restricted to all personnel until cleared for reentry by
local emergency personnel.
6. Precautions should be taken throughout the entire emergency response
operations.
7. The President of Promontory Point Resources, LLC or his/her designee will be the
only person authorized to make statements to the media.
I.d.4

Corrective action programs to be initiated if groundwater is contaminated (R315302-2(2)(e))
In the event that groundwater is determined to be impacted and that the landfill is
determined to be the source of those impacts as by the methods defined in UAC
Section R315-308, the following steps will be undertaken:
1. An assessment will be performed to determine whether the nature and extent of
the identified impacts have been adequately defined. Should it be determined
that supplemental data is needed to ensure adequate definition, a work plan
describing any supplemental sampling activities and/or additional temporary, or
permanent monitoring points will be developed and implemented. At a minimum,
at least one additional well will be installed downgradient from the well showing
evidence of impacts and that well will be sampled for the full analyte list for the
Site if technically feasible.
2. Upon determination that the nature and extent of the impacts have been defined,
an engineering feasibility study will be performed to identify the most appropriate
corrective action for the specific impacts. This may include performance of
additional field studies, treatability studies, pilot testing, aquifer testing and
hydrogeologic modeling depending on the condition. The feasibility study will
identify the most appropriate corrective action based on effectiveness,
implementability (technical, regulatory and constructability, timing and cost). At a
minimum enhanced landfill gas extraction, monitored natural attenuation,
groundwater extraction and treatment, bio-augmentation and no action will be
considered in the feasibility study.
3. Based on the findings of the feasibility study, a corrective action plan will be
prepared along with detailed plans and specifications and implementation
schedule. The plan will include definition of corrective action evaluation criteria
and goals.
4. All corrective action measures implemented under the corrective action plan will

Promontory Point Landfill
20
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 be documented including construction of any new facilities, performance of any
corrective action activities, including any potential long term operations
maintenance and monitoring. Corrective action activities will be performed until
such time as it can be demonstrated that the established corrective action goals
have been achieved for a period of not less than three years, or it is determined
that an alternate corrective action is more appropriate.
I.d.5

Contingency plans for other releases, e.g. explosive gases or failure of run-off
collection system (R315-302-2(2)(f))
Explosive Gas Emissions (R315-302-2(2)(f) and R315-303-2(2))
Methane gas releases would be detected using a methane detection meter capable
of measuring methane levels below the 25% lower explosive limit (LEL) (1.25%
methane by volume in air). Gas monitoring will be conducted in perimeter probes
around the disposal area and in any of the facility structures on a quarterly basis.
Upon detection of explosive gases equal to or above the LEL in perimeter probes (5%
methane by volume in air) or 25% of the LEL inside structures, the Owner or Operator
would take the following steps:
1. Immediately upon detection, steps would be taken to protect human health.
These steps would include, as applicable, accounting for all Site personnel
providing adequate ventilation, moving all equipment and personnel away from
the release area, shutdown of any electrical devices that could cause ignition,
monitoring the release area and surrounding areas with a combustible gas
indicator and document reading for placement into the operating record,
determination of the cause of explosive gas levels, and keep the area off limits
until corrective actions are taken.
2. Within 24 hours the Director would be notified.
3. Within seven days of detection, the explosive gas levels would be recorded in the
operating record along with a description of the steps taken to protect human
health.
4. Within 60 days of detection, a remediation plan that had been approved by the
Director would be implemented and a copy of the plan placed in the operating
record. Upon implementation, the Director would be notified.
Surface Waters (R315-302-2(2)(f))
If the surface water run-off collection system were to fail, the following actions would
be taken:
1. As necessary, construct berms and ditches or take other appropriate actions to
divert water around the collection system failure area using Site soils or readily
available materials and equipment.
2. Analyze and evaluate the extent of damage to the run-off collection system.
3. Identify the mechanism of failure.
4. If warranted call a qualified professional to discuss possible solutions.
5. Develop and implement corrective actions.

Promontory Point Landfill
21
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 I.d.6

Plan to control fugitive dust generated from roads, construction, general operations,
and covering the waste (R315-302-2(2)(g))
Fugitive dust from the working area will be controlled by timely spraying water
periodically on the tipping deck. Haul roads will be maintained by maintaining
positive drainage and removing excessive trackout on paved roads within the
property boundary and on entrance roads. Sprayed water or a dust palliative will be
applied as needed on unpaved roads. Disturbed areas not immediately needed for
landfill operations will be revegetated if they are causing excessive dust. See
Appendix J for the detailed Fugitive Dust Plan.

I.d.7

Plan for litter control and collection (R315-302-2(2)(h))
The Site will minimize fugitive waste using management, engineering, process, and
personnel controls. Among these are covered containers, fencing, wind monitoring,
and periodic cleaning. The fugitive waste plan is included as Appendix K.

I.d.8

Description of maintenance of installed equipment (R315-302-2(2)(i))
The operator shall perform inspection and maintenance activities to assure the
structural integrity and effectiveness of all installed equipment (i.e., leachate and gas
collection systems, and groundwater monitoring systems).
Leachate Collection and Recovery System (LCRS)
The operator shall ensure that leachate collection and control is managed to prevent
public contact and control vectors, and odor-related nuisances. LCRS side-slope
risers and sump pumps will be inspected, operated, maintained, and tested regularly.
Based on the results of the inspection activities, repairs and/or replacement of
components of the LCRS will be made as necessary.
Identified worn or
malfunctioning elements of the LCRS will be repaired or replaced, as appropriate.
Groundwater Monitoring Network
The groundwater monitoring network will be inspected each time groundwater
samples are collected from the wells. The sampling technician will inspect well caps,
casings, and protective post-structures for signs of damage or deterioration and
missing padlocks. Depending upon the extent of deterioration or damage, the
monitoring well will be either repaired or replaced as soon as practical after detecting
the problem. Damaged or inoperative caps and locks will be replaced as required.
Other repairs, including possible well abandonment and redrilling, will be conducted
in accordance with regulatory standards.
Landfill Gas Collection System
Upon installation, the landfill gas management system will be inspected with a focus
on well head assemblies, pipeline couplings, connections, pipeline leaks (which may
be indicated by a gas odor, hissing sounds, elevated gas concentrations in surface
air samples or elevated oxygen readings in the collection system), pipeline breakage,

Promontory Point Landfill
22
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 cracking, abnormalities, or deformations. Regular inspections of the blower/flare
station mechanical and electrical system will also be conducted.
Routine inspection and maintenance of the landfill gas extraction system will include
adjustment of valves, testing of well pressures, temperature and oxygen levels,
checking for gas leakage at the well head, and checking the integrity of well
penetrations through the final cover. Cracked, broken, or malfunctioning portions of
the landfill gas collection system will be repaired upon detection in accordance with
industry standards. Landfill gas well repairs are dependent on the nature and extent
of damages to the landfill gas collection system and may include removal and
replacement of solid-wall sections of polyethylene (PE) pipe, soil backfill, bentonite
grout, and/or geomembrane boots. If it is determined that landfill gas wells are
damaged beyond repair, they will be abandoned and/or re-drilled. Repairs to the LFG
headers may include removal and replacement of damaged header pipe.
I.d.9

Procedures for excluding the receipt of prohibited hazardous or PCB containing
wastes (R315-302-2(2)(j))
A waste acceptance program designed to evaluate the non-hazardous waste streams
to be disposed at the Site will be implemented. The program is designed to protect
human health and the environment, as well as, protect the health and safety of the
employees and general public.
The program requires the generators to characterize their waste prior to acceptance
for disposal at the Site. Characterization can comprise of one or more of the
following: generator knowledge, analytical testing, generating process, etc. Wastes
deemed acceptable will be approved for disposal. Wastes that are not deemed
acceptable will not be accepted.
In addition to waste characterization the wastes will be visually inspected prior to
acceptance and at the working face to ensure that the waste conforms with the
characterization provided. If the material/waste does not conform, the customer will
be contacted to discuss the discrepancy and remedial measures. Depending on the
discussion the waste may be re-characterized and approved for disposal or the load
may be rejected.

I.d.10 Procedures for controlling disease vectors (R315-302-2(2)(k))
Various procedures will be incorporated into the operation of the Site to control
vectors. The use of daily cover is necessary to control vectors and the subsequent
spread of disease. Site personnel, to the extent possible, will inspect the Site for
signs and indications of vectors. If observed, the Landfill Manager would be
contacted immediately and appropriate steps would be taken depending on the
specifics of the situation.
Rodent Control: The primary method of rodent control is to eliminate conditions
favorable for the reproduction of rodents through properly compacting wastes and
Promontory Point Landfill
23
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 placing daily cover. If Site personnel see signs of rodents, more-frequent application
of cover soils will be considered. If the primary method of rodent control does not
produce satisfactory results, pest control specialists would be contracted to address
the issue.
Bird Control: As with rodent control, the primary method of controlling birds is to
control the conditions favorable to their existence. The following methods will be
used as needed:





Minimize the size of the working face and utilize effective compaction. This is the
most effective method of controlling birds, since it reduces the area and amount
of food available for feeding.
Minimize the accumulation of water in depressions, ponds, or other features near
the active working face. The lack of water makes a landfill a less attractive
feeding area for birds.
Use noise or other frightening techniques. These techniques cause a short-term
reduction in the number of birds feeding at a landfill.
If the primary methods do not produce satisfactory results, other methods will be
investigated and implemented.

I.d.11 A plan for alternative waste handling (R315-302-2(2)(l))
If the Site is closed or unable to dispose of the waste, the waste that is in transit may
be stored in the containers within the landfill boundaries and will be designated as
temporary handling. The location will be as close to the working face as practicable
while maintaining safety.
The Site is designed for all incoming waste to be in containers so stockpiling is
unlikely. In the event that waste would need to be stockpiled the waste will be
placed on ground which is close to the working face or on ground which is approved
for disposal of solid waste.
If it is necessary to store or stockpile waste on a non-approved disposal area for the
safety or general welfare of the public, a temporary storage area/stockpile area will
be located on an area that is proposed for future landfill construction. There is
approximately 1,000 acres of buffer area around the landfill and 137 acres near the
rail spur if an occasion should arise that require temporary storage of waste.
In the event that the entire landfill is closed an alternate Site will be located for the
temporary solid waste handling and stockpile facility would be required as an
emergency measure.
I.d.12 A general training plan for site operations (R315-302-2(2)(o))
Each employee at the Site will be trained to have a working knowledge of the
maintenance and operational techniques necessary to operate and maintain the Site
Promontory Point Landfill
24
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 in a manner to preserve human health, safety, and the environment. Training will be
accomplished through on-the-job training (OJT) and classroom training sessions. The
Landfill Manager, or a designated trainer, will be in charge of directing the training
programs. Initial training will be completed within three months of employment
followed by an annual review.
The Landfill Manager will be required to pass the SWANA Manager of Landfill
Operations (MOLO) course or equivalent. In addition, operators are required to take
one or both of the following SWANA training courses; Landfill Operator Training, and
Waste Screening or equivalent. Continuing education efforts include the following:
Introductory Training
Synopsis of solid waste regulations, record keeping, and transporter requirements:
• Requirement
All Personnel
• Method
On The Job Training
• Review
Quarterly
Policies and Procedures
Security, inspections and emergency response:
• Requirement
All Personnel
• Method
Lecture/Video Course, OJT
• Review
Quarterly
Safety
Personal protection, hazardous waste recognition, hazardous material handling,
emergency response, and first aid:
• Requirement
All Personnel
• Method
Classroom/Video Course
• Review
Annual
Training documents will be kept in the operating record.
I.d.13 Any recycling programs planned at the facility (R315-303-4(6))
Recycling is not planned for this Site at this time.
I.d.14 Closure and post-closure care Plan (R315-302-2(2)(m))
The owner/operator shall provide closure and post-closure activities for continued
facility maintenance and monitoring of gases, land, and water for 30 years or as long
as the Director determines is necessary for the facility or unit to become stabilized
and to protect human health and the environment. Post-closure activities will
commence after closure activities have been completed. The Director may direct
that post-closure activities cease until the owner or operator receives a notice from
the Director to proceed with post-closure activities.

Promontory Point Landfill
25
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Maintenance of the facility, the facility structures that remain after closure, and
monitoring systems for their intended use will be performed as part of post-closure.
The table below provides a schedule for conducting inspections and maintenance.
The owner/operator will be responsible for conducting inspections, scheduling
maintenance and recording these activities.
Frequency of Inspection and Maintenance of Facilities during the
Post-Closure Care Period
Landfill Facility

Inspection

Frequency

Landfill Cell

Final cover integrity

Quarterly

Settlement

Quarterly

Vegetation

Quarterly

Perimeter fence integrity

Quarterly

Stormwater

Run-on/run-off control system integrity

Quarterly

Leachate Collection System

Leachate evaporation pond integrity

Quarterly

Groundwater monitoring
system

groundwater well integrity

Semi-Annually

Landfill gas
collection/monitoring system

Landfill gas collection well and line
integrity.

Quarterly

Landfill gas monitoring system integrity

Quarterly

Entrance/main gate integrity

Quarterly

Facility Roads

Quarterly

Equipment maintenance

As-needed

Other Appurtenances

I.d.15 Procedures for the handling of special wastes (R315-315)
Special wastes consist of asbestos, ash, coal combustion residual (CCR), bulk
wastes, sludge, dead animals, PCB containing wastes meeting the criteria of R315315-7, petroleum contaminated soils, and waste asphalt. Special wastes shall be
handled and disposed of in a manner that will minimize exposure. All special wastes
shall be disposed only on areas designated and assigned to receive special wastes
and shall only be disposed by those properly trained to handle the special wastes.

Promontory Point Landfill
26
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Asbestos wastes
Asbestos waste shall be handled, transported, and disposed in a manner that will not
permit release of asbestos fibers into the air and must comply with CFR Title 40, Part
61, Section 154. Asbestos packaging shall be inspected to ensure of proper
containerization, labeling including the waste generator, location where the waste
was generated, and provided with a warning label indicating that the container
contains asbestos. All vehicles transporting asbestos to the landfill shall also be
properly labeled with warning signs as specified in 40 CFR Part 61.149(d)(1)(iii). The
Site will follow the procedures described in R315-315-2.
Disposal of properly wetted and containerized asbestos waste shall be accomplished
by trenching or otherwise providing a depressed area where the asbestos will be
disposed, placing the containerized asbestos in the trench or depressed area in such
a manner that will avoid causing damage to the packaging, and covering the
asbestos with a minimum of six (6) inches of soil, or soil type waste that will prevent
dispersal of the asbestos fibers. Compaction of materials shall only be allowed after
adequate cover thickness has been placed to ensure that the asbestos fibers are not
disbursed into the air.
Access to areas where asbestos is disposed shall be limited to Site personnel and
those contracted by the Site to survey or provide other tasks at the facility requiring
access.
Bulky Waste
Bulky waste consisting of automobile bodies, furniture, and appliances shall be
crushed prior to final disposal. Disposal will only be allowed in areas that are below
existing ground surface grade or within the central portion of the waste pile so as to
not be under the perimeter slopes of the waste pile.
Ash wastes
Ash wastes shall be transported and disposed in a manner that will prevent fugitive
dust or liquid emissions.
Coal Combustion Residual
All CCR material received at the Site will be assessed for moisture content. All
material with a high propensity for dust generation (i.e., low moisture content) will be
wetted prior to final placement on the working face. All material handling will comply
with the Fugitive Dust Plan as presented in Appendix J.
Sludge wastes
Sludge wastes from water treatment plants, digested wastewater treatment
processes, or septage shall not be allowed to contain free liquids. All sludges
meeting the requirements of R315-303-3(1) for disposal in a Class V landfill shall be
disposed near the bottom of the working face and covered with other solid waste or
suitable daily cover materials in a manner that prevents contact with Site personnel
or users of the Site.

Promontory Point Landfill
27
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Dead Animals
Dead animals shall be managed and disposed to minimize odors and attraction,
harborage, or propagation of insects, rodents, birds, or other animals. Dead animals
will be disposed near the bottom of the working face or in a trench prepared for the
receipt of dead animals and immediately covered with a minimum of 2 feet of other
waste. Dead animals placed in trenches will be covered with six (6) inches of soil
cover material at the end of each working day that carcasses are received.
PCB Containing Waste
PCB containing waste will only be accepted for disposal that meet the requirements
of R315--315-7.
Petroleum Contaminated Soils
Petroleum contaminated soils that are within constituent levels provided in R315315-8 and that are not classified as a hazardous waste will be accepted for disposal.
Waste asphalt that has been ground and that is not recycled may be used for roads,
accesses, and staging areas.
I.d.16 Plans and operation procedures to minimize liquids (R315-303-3(1))
The landfill operator must minimize liquids admitted to the active fill areas of the
landfill. This will be achieved by the following:
 The operator shall, at the close of each day of operation, completely cover the
waste with at least six (6) inches of soil or an alternative daily cover as allowed in
Subsections R315-303-4(4)(b) through (e).
 The operator will prohibit the disposal of containerized liquids larger than
household size, non-containerized liquids, sludge containing free liquids, or any
waste containing free liquids in containers larger than household size.
 A solidification area is incorporated into the design plans to address liquid wastes
and any excess liquids generated during wash out of containers. All liquid wastes
will be evaluated in the same manner described above and solidified prior to
disposal.
The Site has been designed to prevent run-on and control, collect, and treat runoff
from a 25-year storm as discussed in Section II.c.8.
I.d.17 Plans and procedures to address the requirements of R315-303-3(7)(c) through (i)
and R315-303-4
Weighing or Estimating Tonnage of Incoming Waste (R315-303-3(7)(c))
The operator will operate scales for waste entering the Site. Waste will be delivered
by commercial truck or rail. All vehicles will be weighed and the transactions will be
recorded.

Promontory Point Landfill
28
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Entrance Sign R315-303-3(7)(d)
A sign will be placed at the Site entrance which identifies the name of the Site, the
hours during which the Site is open for public use, unacceptable materials, and
emergency contact information.
Fire Protection (R315-302-2(2)(d)) and R315-303-3(7)(e))
A fire suppression area shall be designated as the location for any burning materials
to be moved to or to be consolidated on for fire suppression activities. These areas
shall not be located within 150 feet of any exposed HDPE liner or gas collection
system piping or within 5 vertical feet of any existing liner. This area may move from
time to time to be in close proximity of the working area of the landfill operations.
Vehicle Fires
In the event that a disposal vehicle carrying a burning or smoldering load of waste
enters the Site, the following procedures will be instituted:
1. The vehicle should be directed to the designated fire suppression area as
previously outlined above.
2. Once burning waste is removed from the vehicle, the application of cover material
by landfill equipment or the application of water by the on-site water truck will be
used to extinguish the fire. Smothering with soil will be the primary method used
to extinguish a fire.
3. Vehicles and any equipment in the "fire zone" will be inspected and sprayed with
water, as needed, while working to quench the fire.
4. Precautions should be taken throughout the entire fire-fighting operation
including using a hot-spot observer.
5. If, at any time, additional assistance is required, local fire-fighting units will be
contacted per pre-arranged agreement.
Ground Fire/Below Cover Fire
In the event that waste placed on the ground or waste that was previously covered
erupts into fire, the following procedures will be instituted:
1. It will be isolated from previously deposited waste immediately. This will be done
by either moving burning waste to the designated fire suppression area or by
concentrating the burning waste in one spot using landfill equipment.
2. Once burning waste is separated from other exposed waste, the fire will be
extinguished by the application of cover material by landfill earth moving
equipment or the application of water by the on-site water truck. Smothering with
soil will be the primary method used to extinguish fire.
3. Vehicles and any equipment in the "fire zone" would be inspected and sprayed
with water, as needed, while working to quench the fire.
4. Precautions should be taken throughout the fire-fighting operation, including
using a hot-spot observer.
5. If, at any time, additional assistance is required, local fire-fighting units will be
contacted.

Promontory Point Landfill
29
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Explosion
In the event that an explosion should occur at the Site or in any structure associated
with the Site, the following will be done:
1. All personnel and equipment in the area, including those in surrounding buildings
will be evacuated immediately to the emergency staging area.
2. All Site personnel will be accounted for.
3. Local emergency personnel will be contacted by dialing 911.
4. The Landfill Manager will be informed of the situation if he/she is not already at
the Site.
5. The explosion area will be restricted to all personnel until cleared for reentry by
local emergency personnel.
6. Precautions should be taken throughout the entire emergency response
operations.
7. The President of Promontory Point Resources, LLC or his/her designee will be the
only person authorized to make statements to the media.
Preventing Harborage of Rats and Other Vectors (R315-303-3(7)(f))
The use of daily cover is necessary to control vectors and the subsequent spread of
disease. Site personnel, to the extent possible, will inspect the Site for signs and
indications of vectors. If observed, the Landfill Manager would be contacted
immediately and appropriate steps would be taken depending on the specifics of the
situation. If vectors were to become a problem, pest control specialists would be
contracted to address the issue.
Rodent Control: The primary method of rodent control is to eliminate conditions
favorable for the reproduction of rodents through properly compacting wastes and
placing daily cover. If Site personnel see signs of rodents, more-frequent application
of cover soils will be considered. If the primary method of rodent control does not
produce satisfactory results, pest control specialists would be contracted to address
the issue.
Bird Control: As with rodent control, the primary method of controlling birds is to
control the conditions favorable to their existence. The following methods will be
used as needed:




Minimize the size of the working face and utilize effective compaction. This is the
most effective method of controlling birds, since it reduces the area and amount
of food available for feeding.
Minimize the accumulation of water in depressions, ponds, or other features near
the active working face. The lack of water makes a landfill a less attractive
feeding area for birds.
Use noise or other frightening techniques. These techniques cause a short-term
reduction in the number of birds feeding at a landfill.

Promontory Point Landfill
30
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 If the primary methods do not produce satisfactory results, other methods will be
explored and implemented.
Unloading Area/Working Face Size (R315-303-3(7)(g))
Equipment operators will maintain the working face so that it is as small as practical
but will still allow for efficient and safe unloading of waste.
Traffic Control (R315-303-3(7)(h))
An all-weather access road will be constructed from the entrance to the area of the
first landfill cell. Temporary internal access roads will be constructed to access the
bottom of the Cell, initially; and the roads rerouted as waste is placed in the landfill
and waste fill grades change. Drivers will be directed to the working face where the
driver will be instructed to discharge the load.
Communication (R315-303-3(7)(i))
Telephone service is currently not available through landlines. All communication on
and off the Site will be by cell phone or radio. Site personnel will be provided with 2way radios for communicating while on Site.
Control of Fugitive Dust (R315-303-4(2)(a))
Fugitive dust from the working area will be controlled by timely spraying water or
leachate periodically on the tipping deck. Haul roads will be maintained by
maintaining positive drainage and removing excessive trackout on paved roads
within the property boundary and on entrance roads. Sprayed water or a dust
palliative will be applied as needed on unpaved roads. Disturbed areas not
immediately needed for landfill operations will be revegetated if they are causing
excessive dust. See Appendix J for the detailed Fugitive Dust Plan.
Litter Control (R315-303-4(2)(c))
Operations at the working face will not take place without fencing to control fugitive
waste. Tipping operations at the open face will be limited to one area at a time to
control the amount of exposed waste. Appendix K contains a detailed fugitive waste
plan.
Daily and Intermediate Cover (R315-303-4(4))
Daily and intermediate cover will be generated from borrow areas within the buffer
zone or from processing operations. A minimum of 1,000 cubic yards of cover
material will be available in stockpiles or accessible from borrow areas at all times.
This adequately covers the anticipated maximum size working face by a factor of two
which leaves excess material available for contingencies. Alternative daily cover
material may also be utilized as allowed in R315-303-4(4)(b) through (e). The
following are approved for use as alternative daily covers:

Promontory Point Landfill
31
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 









Non-hazardous contaminated soil;
Tarps;
Plastic sheets, when designed for landfill cover use;
Foam products, when designed for landfill cover use;
Products created from cement kiln dust, when designed for landfill cover use;
Incinerator ash;
Non-hazardous auto shredder residue not otherwise regulated by 40 CFR Part
761;
Chipped waste tires; and
Spray-on materials, when designed for landfill cover use.

Prior to use of any of the above alternative daily covers (except non-hazardous
contaminated soil) the owner/operator will establish a schedule for use of the
approved alternative cover based on the alternative cover's performance in
controlling vectors, fires, odors, blown litter, and scavenging. The schedule shall
include the following requirements:






Any schedule established by the Site owner or operator must provide for the
placing of six inches of soil cover at least once per week;
No approved alternative daily cover may be used on the day preceding a day the
landfill will be closed;
No alternative daily cover may be used on an area of the landfill that will not be
covered with waste or an intermediate cover, as required in Subsection R315303-4(4)(g), within two days; and
The Director may require the use of six inches of soil cover upon finding that use
of an alternative cover is not controlling vectors, fires, odors, blowing litter or
scavenging.
The landfill operating record will document the days when an alternative cover
was used and the days when soil cover was used.

If an area of the working face of the landfill will not receive waste for a period longer
than 30 days, the owner/operator shall cover the area with a minimum of 12 inches
of soil as an intermediate cover or an alternative intermediate cover as approved by
the Director.
General Standards for Maintenance and Operation (R315-303-4(2)(b), (d) through
(f) and R315-303-4(3))
As required in R315-303-4(2)(b) and (d), the following is prohibited:



Open burning
Scavenging

Promontory Point Landfill
32
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 At least two Site personnel trained in landfill operations will be present at the Site
(one at the active face) when the Site is open. Boundary posts will clearly mark the
active area boundaries authorized in the permit by placement of permanent posts or
by using an equivalent method clearly visible for inspection purposes. Borrow area
reclamation will be performed in an orderly manner and in a way that does not
interfere with the Site operation.
I.d.18 Any other site-specific information pertaining to the plan of operation required by the
Director (R315-302-2(2)(p))
No specific information required at this time.

I.e

Special Requirements for New or Laterally Expanding Class V Landfill
(R315-310-3(3))

I.e.1

Submit information required by the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act
Subsections 19-6-108(9) and 19-6-108(10) (R315-310-3(2)(a))
Roads
A letter from DOT indicating that the Site does not impact the safety, operation or
conditions of the roads is provided in Appendix L-2 along with a traffic impact study
(Appendix L-3). Additionally, PPR is working with the county on public access
requirements through the County CUP approval process. Upon issuance of the CUP,
Box Elder County will have authorized road and rail access to the Site.
Needs
The needs study showing the need for the Site is presented in Appendix L-1.

II

Facility Technical Information

II.a.

Maps for All Class I and V Landfills

II.a.1 Topographic map drawn to the required scale with contours showing the boundaries
of the landfill unit, groundwater monitoring well locations, gas monitoring points, and
the borrow and fill areas (R315-310-4(2)(a)(i))
See Figures C-801, C-803, and C-808.
II.a.2 Most recent U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, 7-1/2 minute series, showing
the waste facility boundary; the property boundary; surface drainage channels; any
existing utilities and structures within one-fourth mile of the site; and the direction of
the prevailing winds (R315-310- 4(2)(a)(ii))
See Figure C-802.

Promontory Point Landfill
33
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 II.b

Geohydrological Assessment
(R315-310-4(2)(b))

for

All

Class

I

and

V

Landfills

II.b.1 Local and regional geology and hydrology including faults, unstable slopes and
subsidence areas on site (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i))
The Site is situated at the southerly end of Promontory Point, which is a peninsula
extending southward from the northerly shore of the Great Salt Lake. The Promontory
Mountains occupy this peninsula, forming one of the mountain blocks of the Basin
and Range geomorphic province. Much of the Site is occupied by a broad valley
containing Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of the ancient Lake Bonneville, and
flanked by Late Proterozoic and Early Paleozoic metasedimentary outcrops. The axis
of the valley drains from northeast to southwest at an approximate grade of seven
percent. Some of the surrounding outcrops (where once submerged by Lake
Bonneville) possess a partially-eroded coating of tufa, observed to be as much as one
foot thick.
Generalized geologic cross sections (Cross Section numbers A-A’ and B-B’) were
constructed across the project area in generally north-south and east-west directions,
respectively, and are shown on Plate A-1 (see Appendix S-3). Cross Section A-A’
extends roughly down the central axis of the broad valley comprising the proposed
1,000-acre disposal area; and Cross Section B-B’ extends from the westerly quarry,
across the valley at roughly elevation 4,440 feet, and terminates in the metamorphic
outcrops to the southeast.
Significant geologic features, faults, and unstable areas are shown on Plate A-1 (see
Appendix S-3).
II.b.2 Evaluation of bedrock and soil types and properties including permeability rates
(R315-310-4(2)(b)(ii))
Six geologic units were mapped at the Site and are described from youngest to oldest
in the following sections.
1. Fill – Historical (Qaf): Located in the westerly portion of the Site on the east flank
of a metasedimentary bedrock outcrop is a fill platform comprised of quarried or
mined bedrock, primarily quartzite, ranging in size to large angular boulders.
The fill platform extend some 150 feet wide by 400 feet long and is located
approximately 800 feet west of Test Pit Number PT-05.
2. Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits (undivided) – Quaternary (Qla): Includes mixed
alluvial and lacustrine deposits of marl, silt, sand and gravel. Also includes
topsoil as well as pre- Bonneville alluvial deposits. This is the primary unit
explored within the depths of the test pit excavations and forms the surface
across which the seismic refraction profiles were performed.

Promontory Point Landfill
34
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Holocene alluvium deposits are likely thin and discontinuous, occurring within the
incised ephemeral stream channels that drain generally southwesterly across the
Site. Such deposits were not observed in sufficient quantity to substantiate a
separate mapped interval, and therefore are included with the Quaternary unit.
Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville was the primary unit
encountered by the test pit excavations during the field exploration. A Log of Test
Pits is provided in Appendix G, which provides summary descriptions and depth
distribution of various soil types encountered in the excavations, as well as a
graphic depiction of the sampled intervals. The maximum depth of test pit
penetration into these deposits was 12 feet, limited by the reach of the backhoe.
Two boreholes advanced by AGEC (2003) for use as monitoring wells
encountered quartzite or dolomite bedrock at depths of 42 to 43 feet. Three
additional borings were advanced to a maximum depth of 98 feet without
encountering bedrock.
In general, the lacustrine and alluvial deposits were observed to consist of the
following:
Silty SAND and Silty SAND with GRAVEL - Brown to yellowish brown, generally fine
to coarse, loose to medium dense, generally dry, with scattered to abundant
GRAVEL, cobbles or boulders, occasional carbonate-cemented zones. Where
encountered, clasts were observed to be subrounded to subangular and
consisted primarily of quartzite.
Poorly-graded SAND and poorly-graded SAND with GRAVEL – Very pale brown to
light gray, fine to coarse, loose to medium dense, generally dry and commonly
occurring with cemented zones or lenses.
Sandy SILT with GRAVEL – Yellowish brown with fine SAND, dense, dry, with
scattered GRAVEL to 2-inch diameter, partially cemented with secondary clay
films.
Silty Marl – Cemented sandy SILT, moderate orange pink to grayish orange pink,
well- cemented with calcite or aragonite, slightly clayey. Although not encountered
in the test pits, this unit was observed in 2 of the smaller quarries along the
southwesterly margin of the Site as an approximately 2 to 7 feet thick interval.
The marl was observed to be overlain unconformably by a variable thickness of
cemented lacustrine gravel. The depth below the Site grade at the top of the
quarry to the top of the silty marl is estimated to range between 12 and 17 feet
near the quarry margin. This material was sampled at an outcrop as PM047 G-01.
Silty GRAVEL – Clasts are predominantly composed of quartzite, generally
subrounded to subangular, generally fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles and
boulders as noted in the log. Clasts occur in a loose to medium dense silty matrix
with accessory SAND or CLAY. This unit was portions of PT-02, PT-03, and PT-04,
Promontory Point Landfill
35
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 was generally dry and uncemented.
Poorly-graded GRAVEL - Clasts are predominantly composed of quartzite,
generally subrounded to subangular, fine to coarse, with cobbles or boulders as
noted in the log. The matrix is poorly-graded SAND or silty SAND, medium dense
to dense, dry, commonly occurring with zones of carbonate cementation. Where
observed near the westerly quarries this unit is clast-supported, cemented and is
inclined toward the south at approximately 10 to 15 degrees.
Well-graded GRAVEL – With cobbles and boulders composed primarily of
quartzite, generally subangular with a matrix of poorly graded SAND (where
present), generally uncemented where encountered in PT-05 and PT-06.
Pre-Bonneville deposits were encountered in a test pit excavation at PT-02
beneath a zone of cobbles and boulders at a depth of 4 feet. The deposit
encountered at that location consists of well- graded GRAVEL and is interpreted
to be an ancient talus slope, based on the angularity and uniformity of the
quartzite clasts. The unit was observed to be strongly cemented within the upper
2 to 3 feet, grading to a weakly-cemented condition near the bottom of the
excavation at a depth 11.5 feet.
3. Limestone and Shale - Middle and Lower Cambrian (ϵls): The youngest
metasedimentary bedrock unit at the Site consists of an interbedded thin-bedded
medium-gray limestone and olive shale. Carbonate rocks in the upper part of the
unit include one or more beds from 1 to 3 m (3.3 to 9.6 feet) thick of pale gray to
nearly white laminated dolomite enclosed in limestone. Limestone intervals in the
lower part of the unit consist of medium gray limestone marked by wavy tan silty
wisps characteristic of the Cambrian. Shale intervals correlated with the Wheeler
Shale and Spence Shale occur within the limestone and shale unit. At its base is
intensely-folded, dense, yellowish-gray cherty argillite and medium-gray to pinkish
limestone, which is highly deformed as a result of shearing along the contact with
the underlying quartzite unit (Crittenden, 1988).
The “Limestone and Shale” unit occurs in outcrop along the northerly and easterly
portions of the Site where it is shown to be in fault contact with the Geertsen
Canyon Quartzite (AGEC, 2003; Crittenden, 1988). Dolomite was reported to have
been encountered in the bottom of 3 of AGEC’s test pits, including TP-6 in the
northeasterly portion of the Site, in TP-16 near a smaller quarry on the
southwesterly perimeter, and in TP-21 in the southerly portion of the project.
4. Geertsen Canyon Quartzite - Lower Cambrian (ϵgc): The uppermost 100 m (330
feet) consists of deep reddish-black hematitic quartzite. The main body consists
of pale-gray, pinkish- gray or light-brown quartzite, commonly with pebble-sized
clasts, dominantly of vein quartz. A zone of pebble- to cobble-conglomerate a few
tens of meters thick is recognized about a third of the way up in the formation.
The basal 50 to 100 m (165 to 330 feet) is commonly coarse-grained and
contains abundant angular fragments of salmon-colored microcline.
Promontory Point Landfill
36
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Consequently, the basal zone is relatively non-resistant compared with the
remainder of the formation and the underlying vitreous quartzite of the Browns
Hole Formation (Crittenden, 1988).
Outcrops of the Geertsen Canyon Quartzite occur in the easterly portion of the
Site, where it is observed to occur as massive to pebbly, as well as laminated or
cross-laminated with alternating creamy-white to dark reddish-brown laminations.
The formation is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed and is cut by a series of
northwest-trending high-angle faults. A zone of tight folding and brecciation was
observed in an outcrop in the southeasterly portion of the Site, indicative of
ductile shear. The upper contact with the overlying limestone and shale unit is
covered at the Site by the lacustrine and alluvial deposits, and is mapped as a
fault contact in the easterly portion of the Site (AGEC, 2003; Crittenden, 1988).
The basal contact with the underlying Browns Hole Formation is similarly
obscured by the overlying lacustrine and alluvial deposits. Quartzite was
encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers PT-04 and PT-05 (this study), in
most of the AGEC test pits that encountered bedrock and possibly in 2 of the
AGEC drill holes as W-1 and W-5; although the specific formation was not
identified.
5. Browns Hole Formation - Late Proterozoic (Ƶbh): The Browns Hole Formation
consists of pale-gray very-fine-grained vitreous quartzite. Both the grain size and
color allow this unit to form a marked light-colored band that contrasts with the
quartzites of the overlying and underlying units. Exposures at the Site exhibit
intense ductile folding characteristic of a ductile shear zone. The upper contact
with the overlying Geertsen Canyon Quartzite is obscured beneath the Quaternary
Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits. The unit is observed to be highly- to intenselyfractured/jointed. Quartzite was encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers
PT-04 and PT-05 (this study), in most of the AGEC test pits that encountered
bedrock and possibly in 2 of the AGEC dill holes as W-1 and W-5; although the
specific formation was not identified.
6. Mutual Formation - Late Proterozoic (Ƶm): The mutual formation consists of thickbedded coarse-grained quartzite with a few beds of siltstone and shale. The unit
is well-exposed in the large quarry on the westerly property margin, at the west
end of Cross Section B-B’. Quartzite from this formation was purportedly used as
rip-rap on the Southern Pacific Causeway across the western arm of the lake. The
formation is cut by numerous dark-brown-weathered igneous dikes, some of
which were previously exploited during prospecting in the early days. The Mutual
Formation at the Site is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.
Several steeply-dipping open fractures were observed in the Mutual Formation
quartzite within 20 to 40 feet of the top of the quarried face (Photo DSCN2074,
Appendix F of Appendix S-2). These fractures are likely a result of blasting during
one of the large (~1-million ton) quarry blasts in the late 1950’s (MorrisonKnudsen, 1959).

Promontory Point Landfill
37
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Quartzite was encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers PT-04 and PT-05
(this study), in most of the AGEC test pits that encountered bedrock, and possibly
in two of the AGEC drill holes as W-1 and W-5; although the specific formation
was not identified.
II.b.3 Depth to groundwater (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iii))
According the discussion included in Section 3.2.2 of the August 2008 Class I
Landfill Permit Application, the depth to groundwater at the Site ranges from 33-35
feet near the south end of the proposed Site, 250 feet near the center, and about
500 feet near the northern end of the Site. Depth of groundwater throughout the
Site was estimated using information from the monitoring wells that were installed
during the 2003 Site investigation. A map and well logs from the previous
investigation are provided in Appendix G.
II.b.4 Direction and estimated flow rate of groundwater (R315-310-4(2)(b)(iv))
Groundwater in the Promontory Point area is not considered a discrete hydrologic
unit. It is most uniformly available from the rocks of Cenozoic age (Hood, 1972).
These reservoirs of water consist in sedimentary rocks both consolidated and
unconsolidated. Other groundwater reservoirs are located in consolidated rock of the
Paleozoic and Precambrian age. The groundwater reservoirs in the consolidated
rocks are thought to be connected hydraulically and receive flows from areas to the
north.
The aquifer is not considered as a sole source aquifer as designated in 40 CFR 140
and the groundwater is not classified as a Class IB under Section R317-6-3.3. The
general direction of groundwater movement is from the recharge areas westward
toward the Rozel Flat and thence southward toward the Great Salt Lake.
groundwater is also thought to move eastward from the Promontory Point Mountains
and southward from the Blue Creek Valley area toward Bear River Bay see
Appendix M for the general direction of groundwater movement.
II.b.5 Quantity, location, and construction of any private or public wells on-site or within
2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(v))
There are six water wells located on the Site. There is one private well within 2,000
feet of the Site boundary (WIN 20954). The water well logs and a map showing the
locations of the wells that are registered with the Utah Division of Water Rights are
provided in Appendix N.
II.b.6 Tabulation of all water rights for groundwater and surface water on-site and within
2,000 feet of the facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vi))
A water right search of the area surrounding the proposed Site using the Utah
Division of Water Rights database was initiated to identify proximate water right

Promontory Point Landfill
38
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 applications on file in the State Engineer's office. Four water rights were identified
within 2,000 feet of the Site boundary.
These water sources, location map and water right information, are provided in
Appendix O.
Water Rights
Water Right #

Point of Diversion

13-2072
13-2774
13-3679
13-3990
13-3989

Underground, N1900 W350 S4 25 6N 6W SL
Underground, N2700 W100 SE 25 6N 6W SL
Spring, N308 E296 SW 30 6N 5W SL
Underground, S900 E1300 NW 19 6N 5W SL
Underground, N2150 E600 SW 18 6N 5W SL

II.b.7 Identification and description of all surface waters on-site and within one mile of the
facility boundary (R315-310-4(2)(b)(vii))
There are no perennial streams located near the Site Intermittent flows occur on the
Site and surrounding areas during times of rainfall or snowmelt. Most of storm runoff
at the Site is received from the hills to the north and northeast. The nearest
perennial stream is Blue Creek, located approximately 20 miles to the northeast,
which flows most of the year and is fed by large springs discharging an estimated
peak flow of 3 cubic feet per second.
II.b.8 Background groundwater and surface water quality assessment and, for an existing
facility, identification of impacts upon the groundwater and surface water from
leachate discharges (R315-310-4(2)(b)(viii))
The majority of the water from Promontory Point is very hard, consisting of dissolved
salt concentrations as high as 25,000 milligrams per liter. The high salt
concentration creates a hazard for irrigation. The limited fresh water available on
Promontory Point is obtained through wells and springs on the northern exposures of
Promontory Mountains with salt concentrations as low as 300 milligrams per liter.
The primary use of water on Promontory Point is livestock watering.
Groundwater in the Promontory Point area is not considered a discrete hydrologic
unit. It is most uniformly available from the rocks of Cenozoic age (Hood, 1972).
These reservoirs of water consist in sedimentary rocks both consolidated and
unconsolidated. Other groundwater reservoirs are located in consolidated rock of the
Paleozoic and Precambrian age. The groundwater reservoirs in the consolidated
rocks are thought to be connected hydraulically and receive flows from areas to the
north.

Promontory Point Landfill
39
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 The aquifer is not considered as a sole source aquifer and the groundwater is not
classified as a Class IB under Section R317-6-3 3. The general direction of
groundwater movement is from the recharge areas westward toward the Rozel Flat
and thence southward toward the Great Salt Lake. Water is also thought to move
eastward from the Promontory Point Mountains and southward from the Blue Creek
Valley area toward Bear River Bay. The general direction of groundwater movement
is shown on the map in Appendix M.
There are no perennial streams located near the Site. Intermittent flows occur on the
Site and surrounding areas during times of rainfall or snowmelt. Most stormwater
runoff at the Site is received from the hills to the north and northeast. The nearest
perennial stream is Blue Creek, located approximately 20 miles to the northeast,
which flows most of the year and is fed by large springs discharging an estimated
peak flow of 3 cubic feet per second.
II.b.9 Groundwater Monitoring (R315-303-3(7)(b) and R315-308)
Groundwater Monitoring Network
The groundwater monitoring network at the Site consists of five (5) monitoring wells,
one upgradient (MW-5) and four downgradient (MW-1, MW-2, MW-3 and MW-4).
Monitoring well locations are shown on Figure C-803. Well construction logs are
provided in Appendix G. The following table summarizes the well construction
details.
Groundwater Monitoring Wells
Well I.D.

Casing Material

Top of Casing Elevation
(ft. AMSL)

Screen Interval (ft.
BGS)

MW-1

2-inch, Sch.40 PVC

4,240

21 – 41

MW-2

2-inch, Sch.40 PVC

4,238

25 – 64

MW-3

2-inch, Sch.40 PVC

4,238

23 – 63

MW-4

2-inch, Sch.40 PVC

4,240

25 – 65

MW-5

2-inch, Sch.40 PVC

4,440

200 - 240

Notes: Above mean sea level (AMSL), below ground surface (BGS)
The current condition of the wells is not known. Prior to any sampling activities, each
of the wells will be located and inspected to verify its condition. This will include
inspection of the wellhead for damage or vandalism and measuring the depth to
water and total depth of each well to ensure that no obstructions obvious or downhole damage to the well casing has occurred. The condition of the well will be photodocumented. Water levels measured in the wells will be used to generate an
updated groundwater contour map to confirm that the monitoring network is
Promontory Point Landfill
40
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 adequate. Should a well not be locatable, the need for replacement of that well will
be evaluated based on the updated contour map and the results of sampling and
analyses.
Should evidence of tampering or vandalism be discovered, the liquid in the well will
be screened for evidence of possible dumping using an oil/water interface probe and
disposable bailer. Samples for analytical testing will be collected on an as-needed
basis. Should a down-hole obstruction be encountered, or other evidence of casing
damage or sediment accumulation be discovered, the need for well redevelopment,
down-hole video inspection or well destruction will be evaluated. As necessary, a
work plan will be prepared detailing any proposed modifications to the existing well
network.
Groundwater Sampling Plan
During the first year of Site operation, the upgradient well will be sampled a total of
eight times in order to establish a statistical data set. Downgradient wells will be
sampled quarterly during this same period. All collected samples will be analyzed for
the constituents listed in UAC Section R315-308-4.
Following the initial year of monitoring, sampling will be conducted semi-annually in
the spring and fall from all up-gradient and downgradient wells.
During each sampling event (including the initial eight events), water levels will be
recorded in each of the Site monitoring wells prior to initiation of any purging or
sampling activities at any Site wells. The depth-to water measurements will be
collected using an electronic water level meter (sounder) with cable markings
stamped at 0.01-foot increments. The water level will be measured by lowering the
probe into the monitoring well. Depth to water will be recorded to the nearest 0.01foot on a Water Level Survey Record Sheet. The water level meter will be
decontaminated by rinsing with non-phosphate detergent and deionized water at the
beginning of each day and between wells. The volume of water present in each well
casing will be calculated using the depth-to-water measurement and the total well
depth.
Wells will be sampled using dedicated pneumatic bladder pumps following low-flow
sampling techniques. The pump intake must be situated within the screened portion
of the well, isolating the screened interval from any overlying stagnant casing water,
if present. During purging, flow rates will be set according to the following
requirements:
Flow rates will be selected such that drawdown in the well is minimized (i.e.,
observed drawdown is less than 0.1 meter [0.33 feet]):



Initial flow rates during purging will be no more than 500 milliliters per minute
(mL/min); and
Flow rate will be adjusted downward as required to minimize drawdown.

Promontory Point Landfill
41
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 The following indicator parameters will be monitored during purging using a flowthrough cell:







pH
Specific conductance
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
Oxidation/reduction potential (ORP)
Temperature
Turbidity

For each reading interval, the field parameters, along with time of recording, depth to
water, volume of water purged, and pumping rate will be recorded on a Low-Flow
Water Sample Field Data Sheet for each well purged. A reading will be taken within
the first 500 mL of purging to ensure that the early variability of the initial parameters
is recorded.
Purging will be considered complete, when, at a minimum, three measurements have
been recorded and, regardless of the amount of water removed from the well, the
indicator parameters have stabilized. Stabilization of water quality parameters is
indicative of the presence of formation water. Stabilization is considered to be
achieved when three consecutive readings are within the limits listed below. In
general, stabilization should be achieved in the following order:







pH (±0.1 unit);
Temperature (10%);
Specific conductance (10%);
ORP (±10 millivolts);
DO (10% for values greater than 0.5 mg/L. If three DO values are less than 0.5
mg/L, consider the values as stabilized) ; and
Turbidity (10% for values greater than 5 NTU. If three Turbidity values are less
than 5 NTU, consider the values as stabilized).

Sampling may begin once purging is considered complete. Samples will be collected
directly from the dedicated discharge tubing into the appropriate sample containers.
The sample flow rate may remain at the established purge flow rate or lowered as
needed to minimize aeration, bubble formation, or turbulent filling of sample
containers. Groundwater samples are to be collected in-line from the sampling pump
from a point prior to the flow-through cell used to measure water quality parameters.
Tubing shall be clean, and the length of tubing shall be minimized between the intake
point and the sample container. In accordance with Utah Administrative Code
Section R315-308, no filtering of samples will be conducted, initially. However,
should metals data indicate that filtering of samples would provide a more accurate
representation of the groundwater conditions at the, a request may be made to the
Director to modify the program.

Promontory Point Landfill
42
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 In addition to the samples collected from the wells, QA/QC samples will also be
collected and will consist of:






Duplicate Samples - Duplicate samples collected at a rate of 1:10 (i.e., 1
duplicate sample collected for every 10 primary samples). A minimum of one
duplicate sample will be collected for each monitoring event where multiple wells
are sampled. To assess variability of the laboratory measurement process, the
location where the duplicate was collected will be noted on the sampling log, and
the sample time will be omitted on the duplicate sample label and chain-ofcustody entry. Duplicate samples will be analyzed for the same analytes as the
primary sample.
Trip Blanks - One laboratory-supplied trip blank will accompany each sample
shipment. The trip blank(s) is used to evaluate whether VOC contamination
occurred during sample transport or storage. Trip blanks will be analyzed for
VOCs.
Field Blanks - One field blank will be prepared each day of sampling. The field
blank will be prepared at a location of a sampling point, by pouring de-ionized
water directly into the laboratory-supplied VOAs. The location where the field
blank was prepared will be noted on the sampling log. The field blank(s) will be
used to evaluate the potential for airborne VOCs to impact samples during
sample collection. Field blanks will be analyzed for VOCs.

Details of sample collection at each sampling point will be recorded on the
corresponding Low-Flow Water Sample Field Data Sheet.
Samples will be collected in laboratory-supplied containers appropriate for the
requested analyses. Samples will be labeled with their well identification number,
sealed in plastic bags, stored on ice and transported by courier to the selected statecertified laboratory in a cooler maintained at a temperature of 4 degrees C until
received by the lab.
Analyte-specific hold times will be reviewed to ensure that samples will be received
by the laboratory within the appropriate time-frame.
A chain-of-custody form will be used to record possession of the samples from the
time of collection to arrival at the laboratory. The individual who collects the samples
will prepare them for shipment, complete the chain-of-custody form and sign the form
when transferring the samples to the laboratory courier. The samples will be
released to the laboratory by signature on the chain-of-custody form. The laboratory
control officer will verify all samples listed on the chain-of-custody form are present,
verify sample integrity and verify that proper sample preservation procedures are
utilized.
All collected samples will be analyzed for the constituents listed in UAC Section
R315-308-4. Results of analytical testing will be evaluated using the methodology
established following the first year of monitoring. Should that evaluation, indicate
evidence of impacts attributable to the landfill, notifications will be made and further
Promontory Point Landfill
43
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 assessments will be initiated in accordance with R315-308.
For each monitoring event following information shall be placed in the Site's
operating record and a copy submitted to the Director. Groundwater monitoring
results will be included in the Site annual report required and will, at a minimum
include:










A description of the monitoring and sampling procedures utilized;
Results of quality control/quality assurance sample analyses (blanks and
duplicates);
Field measurements recorded during monitoring activities;
Field forms, including completed Chain of Custody forms;
Laboratory data reports including laboratory QA/QC data;
Tabulated analytical results;
Tabulated water level data;
Groundwater flow directions and rates; and
Statistical analysis of the results of the groundwater monitoring.

II.b.10 Statistical method to be used (R315-308-2(8))
Upon completion of the initial year of sampling and analysis the data will be
evaluated to determine the most appropriate statistical or non-statistical basis for
establishing groundwater quality protection standard for each of the down gradient
wells at the Site.
II.b.11 Calculation of site water balance (R315-310-4(2)(b)(ix))
Modeling of potential leachate was performed using the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) version
3.07. A copy of the HELP modeling is included in Appendix P.
The HELP Model was developed to provide landfill designers and regulators with a
tool for rapid, economical screening of alternative designs. The computer program
uses climatologic, soil, and design data to produce daily estimates of water
movement across, into, through and out of the landfill. To accomplish this; daily
precipitation, runoff, infiltration, surface evaporation, subsurface evapotranspiration,
stored soil moisture, percolation, and subsurface lateral drainage are modeled to
maintain a water balance. The model utilizes daily climatic data to develop a daily
water balance for up to thirty years.
The HELP Model was used to evaluate the total head on the liner. There are two
proposed base liner sections, the selection of the liner section is dependent on
material availability, and therefore both section were analyzed. Two options consist
of the following layers from bottom-to-top:

Promontory Point Landfill
44
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Option 1 (see Detail 2 on Sheet C-501 – Appendix Y):
 Prepared subgrade
 Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)
 60 mil HDPE geomembrane (textured both sides)
 18 inches of coarse sand
Option 2 (see Detail 3 on Sheet C-501 – Appendix Y):
 Prepared subgrade
 Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)
 60 mil HDPE geomembrane (textured both sides)
 Cushion geotextile
 9 inches of LCRS gravel
 Filter geotextile
 18 inches of Protective Cover Soil (PCS)
The refuse thickness varies depending on the area of the landfill analyzed, the edges
of the landfill are relatively shallow while the total thickness in the middle is designed
to be approximately 970-feet thick. The refuse thickness also varies over time as
the landfill is developed, waste is placed in approximately 20-foot lifts. Leachate
generation is highest during the initial lift, simply because the leachate has less
vertical distance to travel. In order to analyze the worst case scenario the model was
run with only one lift of refuse, referred to as the initial condition, to show how
leachate generation slows as refuse placement advances. An interim condition was
also modeled with 200 feet of refuse.
A review of historic climatic records from nearby weather stations revealed that the
largest amount of rain in one year was 33.93 inches recorded at Brigham City waste
plant in 1983. The Brigham City waste plant is approximately 24 miles northeast of
PPL. The 33.93 inch annual rainfall was used and HELP synthetically generated
precipitation for a five year period for the initial condition to determine the worst case
scenario, or highest leachate generation rate to be expected. For the interim
condition the default weather data from Salt Lake City was used, and modeled for a
30 year period to determine the range of leachate generation to be expected.
The input used in the HELP to model the proposed liner design profiles are listed on
the first couple pages of each HELP Model output file. The input listing shows layer
type, thickness, and soil characteristics. The soil characteristics are default values
suggested by the HELP Model to simulate the soils to be used in the proposed
design. The drainage layer was modeled with a three percent slope and drainage
length of 200 feet. The HDPE layer was assumed to have a pinhole density of three
(3) per acre and installation defect of three (3) per acre, and a placement quality of
“3” or “good”.

Promontory Point Landfill
45
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 The following table summarizes the main input values and results for the various
scenarios.
HELP Results

Duration
(years)

Peak Head
Over Liner
(inches)

Liner Section

Condition

Refuse
Thickness (feet)

Base Option 1

Initial

20

5

2.29

Base Option 2

Initial

20

5

1.04

Base Option 1

Interim

200

30

1.56

Base Option 2

Interim

200

30

0.43

As shown in the table above the maximum peak head of leachate over liner is 2.29
inches which is well below the regulatory maximum of one foot.
The main components of the leachate collection system are the drainage layer and
the LCRS collection pipes, as shown in Detail 4 and 5 on Sheet C-502 (see Appendix
Y). The leachate will percolate vertically through the refuse mass, be conveyed
laterally through the coarse sand or gravel drainage layer towards the LCRS collection
pipes. The LCRS pipes are laid out in a dendritic network, with the main line running
centrally below the waste mass and the laterals branching outwards. As modeled in
the HELP analysis the maximum spacing for the laterals will be 200 feet. The
mainline gravity drains to the gravel sump as shown in Detail 6 and 9 on Sheet C-501
(see Appendix Y), and is then pumped into tanks as shown Detail 1 on Sheet C-506
(see Appendix Y).
There is no proposed leachate treatment system, the leachate will be used in one of
the following methods:





II.c

Dust control within lined cells
Recirculated into the landfill via injection wells
Destroyed in the LFG flare
Evaporated in lined basins

Engineering Report - Plans, Specifications, and Calculations for All Class I
and V Landfills

II.c.1 Documentation that the facility will meet all of the performance standards of
R315- 303-2
Groundwater (R315-303-2((1)
The Class V disposal cell was designed to protect the waters of the state from
Promontory Point Landfill
46
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 degradation by pollutants or contaminants by minimizing percolation of water
through the landfill and providing a containment system and leachate control and
removal system. The proposed disposal cell will be separated by phases. The
phases will be developed using the area fill method of construction. This method
involves excavation of a defined area, installation of a liner, leachate collection
system, select waste layer, and placement of refuse in conjunction with the
installation of a gas collection system. Select waste will exclude any items that may
compromise the liner system. Select waste is typically obtained from residential
MSW collection. Refuse will be placed in layers and compacted to minimize the
potential for settlement. A drainage berm will be constructed around the module to
help divert run-on away from the refuse.
The refuse will be covered daily with interim cover soil or with a Director approved
alternative daily cover. Soil will be the primary means for daily cover and will be
obtained from either exhumed soil from future modules or imported soils from the
borrow areas or other nearby sites. Gravel for the leachate piping and possible
import fill could be obtained at or near the Site in the surrounding gravel pits. An
intermediate cover consisting of 12 inches of soil or an approved alternative will be
applied to any working face not receiving waste for a period exceeding 30 days.
The proposed Class V Landfill will be equipped with a leachate monitoring and
collection system. The system is comprised of a network of drains which gravity flow
to centrally located sumps positioned at the lowest points of the landfill cell. Risers
will be placed along critical areas of the main leachate trunk line for monitoring and
maintenance. The collection system will be constructed with perforated drainpipe
encased within a 24 inch gravel layer overlain by a geotextile mat for separation
between the MSW and leachate collection system. The collection system piping will
be designed to handle the specific Site loading conditions. To help protect the
collection system, the gravel protection layer will be thickened near the sumps.
Leachate will be pumped on an as-needed basis to maintain a head level of less than
one (1) foot of leachate over the liner system. Sump areas will be constructed and
may have more than one (1) foot of head within that area to enhance leachate
extraction with pumps. The removed leachate will either be use as a suppressant for
fugitive dust and compaction water on areas of the landfill that are overlaid by an
approved liner system or pumped to tanks. Cleaning of the leachate collection
system will be conducted on an as needed basis.
Air Quality (R315-303-2(2))
As the Site is developed a landfill gas collection system will be installed consisting of
landfill gas extraction wells and flare(s) to destroy the collected landfill gas. This
system will be operated in order to prevent violation of any ambient air quality
standard at the property boundary or emission standard from emissions of landfill
gases, combustion or any other emission associated with the Site.
Explosive Gas Emissions (R315-302-2(2)(f) and R315-303-2(2))
Methane gas releases would be detected using a methane detection meter capable
of measuring methane levels below the 25% lower explosive limit (LEL) (1.25%
Promontory Point Landfill
47
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 methane by volume in air). Gas monitoring will be conducted in perimeter probes
around the disposal area and in any of the Site structures on a quarterly basis. Upon
detection of explosive gases equal to or above the LEL in perimeter probes (5%
methane by volume in air) or 25% of the LEL inside structures, the Owner or Operator
would take the following steps:
1. Immediately upon detection, steps would be taken to protect human health.
These steps would include, as applicable, accounting for all Site personnel
providing adequate ventilation, moving all equipment and personnel away from
the release area, shutdown of any electrical devices that could cause ignition,
monitoring the release area and surrounding areas with a combustible gas
indicator and document reading for placement into the operating record,
determination of the cause of explosive gas levels, and keep the area off limits
until corrective actions are taken.
2. Within 24 hours the Director would be notified.
3. Within seven days of detection, the explosive gas levels would be recorded in the
operating record along with a description of the steps taken to protect human
health.
4. Within 60 days of detection, a remediation plan that had been approved by the
Director would be implemented and a copy of the plan placed in the operating
record. Upon implementation, the Director would be notified.
Surface Waters (R315-302-2(2)(f))
If the surface water run-off collection system were to fail, the following actions would
be taken:
1. As necessary, construct berms and ditches or take other appropriate actions to
divert water around the collection system failure area using Site soils or readily
available materials and equipment;
2. Analyze and evaluate the extent of damage to the run-off collection system.
3. Identify the mechanism of failure;
4. If warranted call a qualified professional to discuss possible solutions; and
5. Develop and implement corrective actions.
Surface Water Discharge Requirements (R315-303-2(3))
The draft construction stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) has been
prepared for the Phase 1 landfill cell in accordance with Utah Administrative Code
R317-8-3.9. The Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) requires
construction stormwater permits for construction activities that disturb one acre or
more. The permit requires submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) by creating an
account on the Utah.gov website. The construction general permit must be renewed
annually and the online account can be used to renew the permits. An owner or
operator may submit a Notice of Termination (NOT) form at the end of the
construction activity. A draft construction SWPPP is included in Appendix Q. The
draft construction SWPPP may be modified by the contractor in order to comply with
the DEQ stormwater regulations.
Promontory Point Landfill
48
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Operators of facilities that have industrial stormwater discharges are covered by the
General Multi-Sector Industrial Stormwater Permit. Coverage is based on the Site’s
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code which is 4953 for Refuse Systems. The
permit requires submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) by creating an account on the
Utah.gov website. The general permit cycle is for 5 years and the online account can
be used to renew the permits. A draft industrial SWPPP is included in Appendix R.
The draft industrial SWPPP may be modified by the contractor in order to comply with
the DEQ stormwater regulations.
II.c.2 Engineering reports required to meet the location standards of R315-302-1 including
documentation of any demonstration or exemption made for any location standard
(R315-310-4(2)(c)(i))
The Rules require that Class V Landfills comply with certain location standards.
These standards are intended to minimize potential impacts to surrounding lands,
the environment, surface and groundwater resources, cultural and social resources,
and human health. Environmental and cultural resource studies are included in
Appendices E and F.
Land Use Compatibility
The landfill and related facilities conform to the general location standards outlined
in R315-302-2. Figures included within this Permit Application show the approximate
boundary of the disposal cell. Some of the location standards have been identified
below:
1. The Site is not located within 1,000 feet of a national, state or county park,
monument, or recreational area, designated wilderness or wilderness study area,
or wild or scenic river area.
2. The Site is not located in an ecologically and scientifically significant natural area,
including public wildlife management areas and habitat for threatened or
endangered species as designated pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of
1982l
3. The Site is not in farmland classified or evaluated as "prime," "unique," or of
"statewide importance" by the U S Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation
Service under the Prime Farmland Protection Act.
4. The Site is not within a quarter mile of any existing permanent dwellings,
residential areas, and other incompatible structures such as schools or churches.
The nearest dwelling is several miles away.
5. A cave/rockshelter was located near the cell development area. The Owner has
selected to include the cave/rockshelter within the buffer area to ensure its
preservation. The Owner will not be conducting mining of soils near the
cave/rockshelter and will try to protect it from vandals by close observations. See
Figure C-801 for general location.
6. The Site is not within 10,000 feet of any airport runway used by turbojet aircraft
or within 5,000 feet of any airport runway used by only piston-type aircraft. A
landing strip used by the brine shrimp operations is located approximately 8,000
feet southeast of the Site. The landing strip is utilized by piston-type aircraft and
Promontory Point Landfill
49
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 primarily only during the brine shrimp harvest season.
7. The Site is not within 1,000 feet of any public highway. The nearest state
highway is almost 16 miles from the Site.
8. The Site is not located on any public land that is being used by a public water
system for municipal drinking water purposes. The Site is not located within a
watershed used by a water system.
9. The Site is not located in a 100-year floodplain.
10. The Site will not violate any applicable state water quality standard or section 307
of the Clean Water Act
11. The Site is not located in any wetlands and thus will not contribute to significant
degradation of wetlands.
Geology
A Geotechnical and Geologic Study was performed for the Site by Applied
Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc. in July 2003 (see Appendix S-1). The
following were reviewed in regards to location standards:
Dam Failure Flooding: There are no dams upgradient of the Site. Thus, dam failure
flooding is not considered a hazard.
Mining Activity: The Promontory Mountains have been mined for lead in the past.
There are mine prospects northeast of the Site at and around Lead Mountain Gravel
and riprap for construction for the railroad causeway have been mined in the
northwest portion of the property. There are some mine prospects in igneous dikes
which cut through the Mutual Formation in the northwest portion of the Site. Most
mine prospects in the area appear to be shallow explorations with no evidence of
significant underground mining due to the lack of mine spoil piles of significance.
Two mine shafts were identified by the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining in 1986
just east of the gravel quarries in the northwest portion of the Site. These shafts
were approximately 42 feet and 102 feet deep, respectively. Both shafts were filled
in 1986. Mine related hazards are not considered a concern for the proposed
development.
Salt Domes and Beds: Based on a reconnaissance of the Site and subsurface
exploration, there is no evidence for significant salt deposits on the property. Salt
deposits are not expected with the type of bedrock encountered at the Site. Salt
domes and salt beds are not considered a hazard for the proposed development.
Seismic Impact Zone: The regulations state that municipal landfills must be
designed to withstand seismic accelerations if they are located in a seismic impact
zone. A seismic impact zone is defined as an area with a 10% or greater probability
that the maximum horizontal acceleration in lithified material would exceed 0-10 g in
250 years. According to Blake, T F, et al (2002), there is a 10% probability of ground
acceleration exceeding 0-55 g in a 250-year period at the Site. The Site is therefore
located in a seismic impact zone. The proposed cell has been designed to remain
stable while undergoing the predicted maximum earthquake accelerations. The
results from Tetra Tech “Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation” (see Appendix T) indicate
Promontory Point Landfill
50
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 the following:









The static factors of safety for the proposed Phase 1-Subphases 1A through 1C
landfill configurations are above the minimum required of 1.5 using the lowest
large displacement shear strength for the slope liner components and the lowest
peak shear strength for the base liner.
The static factors of safety for the proposed Phase 1-Subphases 1A through 1C
landfill configurations are above the minimum required of 1.0 using the lowest
large displacement shear strength parameters for both the slope and base liner
components.
The static factor of safety for the assumed final configuration of the landfill is
above the minimum required of 1.5 using the lowest large displacement shear
strength for the slope liner and the lowest peak shear strength parameters for the
base liner.
The maximum design earthquake-induced permanent seismic displacement for
the proposed landfill Phase 1 is estimated to be about 2.8 inches for the
Subphase 1A configuration, which is considered acceptable.
The design earthquake-induced permanent seismic displacement is estimated to
be negligible for the assumed final landfill configuration of the whole landfill.

Surface Water
The Site is not located on any public land that is being used by a public water system
for water shed control for municipal drinking water purposes. The Site is not located
in a 100-year floodplain.
Wetlands
No wetland habitats, stream channels or other jurisdictional waterways were
identified within the boundary of the Site.
Groundwater
Groundwater in the Promontory Point area is not considered a discrete hydrologic
unit. The aquifer is not considered as a sole source aquifer and the groundwater is
not classified as a Class IB under Section R317-6-3 3.
II.c.3 Anticipated facility life
(R315-310- 4(2)(c)(ii))

and

the

basis

for

calculating

the

facility's

life

Estimates of landfill airspace capacity were made using AutoDesk Civil 3D software.
Quantity take-off comparisons were made between: (1) proposed base grading plan
presented herein and (2) the proposed final grading plan presented herein.
Projected municipal solid waste and special waste tonnage provided by Promontory
Point Resources, LLC were used to estimate the rate of airspace consumption.
Taking into account airspace to be consumed by base liner, slope liner, and the final
cover system, it is estimated that approximately 775 million cubic yards (656 million
tons) of airspace is available at the Site under the Site development plans presented
herein. Based on this Site airspace capacity and other variables discussed below,
Promontory Point Landfill
51
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 the landfill Site life is expected to be exhausted in approximately 125 years.
The Site life is based on an assumed in-place density of 2,000 pounds per cubic yard
for municipal solid waste and 1,350 pounds per cubic yard for special waste with an
assumed waste-to-cover ratio of 7:1. Projecting the Site life is an estimate and is
affected by many factors including population and demographic changes, local and
regional economic activity affecting waste generation, advances in waste handling
and disposal technology, recycling efforts, compaction efforts, settlement, soil cover
and alternate daily cover (ADC) use, contractual arrangements for waste deliveries,
and future revisions to permit conditions. Refer to Appendix U for all assumptions
and further details.
II.c.4 Cell design to include liner design, cover design, fill methods, elevation of final cover
including plans and drawings signed and sealed by a professional engineer
registered in the State of Utah (R315-303-3(3), R315-303-3(6) and (7)(a), R315310-3(1)(b) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))
See Figures C-806 and C-807, as well as Phase 1 Plans (Appendix Y) and the
following discussion in Section II.c.5.
To minimize the potential for damage to the liner system resulting from initial waste
disposal operations initial waste fill operations will include a uniform 10 to 20 foot
initial lift of select waste. This lift of waste will be placed to protect the operations
layer. In addition, the first lift of waste and associated daily cover will be graded to
direct clean stormwater and surface water run-off away from the phase and to
minimize stormwater infiltration into the refuse prism. Filling operations will then
proceed with typical lifts of approximately 20 feet, thereafter.
II.c.5 Leachate collection system design and calculations showing system meets the
requirements of R315-303-3(2)
Modeling of potential leachate was performed using the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) version
3.07. A copy of the HELP modeling is included in Appendix P.
The HELP Model was developed to provide landfill designers and regulators with a
tool for rapid, economical screening of alternative designs. The computer program
uses climatologic, soil, and design data to produce daily estimates of water
movement across, into, through and out of the landfill. To accomplish this; daily
precipitation, run-off, infiltration, surface evaporation, subsurface evapotranspiration,
stored soil moisture, percolation, and subsurface lateral drainage are modeled to
maintain a water balance. The model utilizes daily climatic data to develop a daily
water balance for up to thirty years.
The HELP Model was used to evaluate the total head on the liner. There are two
proposed base liner sections, the selection of the liner section is dependent on
material availability, and therefore both section were analyzed. Two options consists
of the following layers from bottom-to-top:
Promontory Point Landfill
52
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Option 1 (see Detail 2 on Sheet C-501 – Appendix Y):
 Prepared subgrade
 Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)
 60 mil HDPE geomembrane (textured both sides)
 18 inches of coarse sand
Option 2 (see Detail 3 on Sheet C-501 – Appendix Y):
 Prepared subgrade
 Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)
 60 mil HDPE geomembrane (textured both sides)
 Cushion geotextile
 9 inches of LCRS gravel
 Filter geotextile
 18 inches of Protective Cover Soil (PCS)
The refuse thickness varies depending on the area of the landfill analyzed, the edges
of the landfill are relatively shallow while the total thickness in the middle is designed
to be a maximum of approximately 970-feet thick. The refuse thickness also varies
over time as the landfill is developed, waste is placed in approximately 20-foot lifts.
Leachate generation is generally highest during the initial lift, since the leachate has
less vertical distance to travel. In order to analyze the most conservative scenario
the model was run with only one lift of refuse, referred to as the initial condition, to
show how leachate generation slows as refuse placement advances. An interim
condition was also modeled with 200 feet of refuse.
A review of historic climatic records from nearby weather stations revealed that the
single largest amount of rain in one year was 33.93 inches recorded at Brigham City
waste plant in 1983. The Brigham City waste plant is approximately 24 miles
northeast of PPL. The 33.93 inch annual rainfall was used and HELP synthetically
generated precipitation for a five year period for the initial condition to determine the
worst case scenario, or highest leachate generation rate to be expected. For the
interim condition the default weather data from Salt Lake City was used, and
modeled for a 30 year period to determine the range of leachate generation to be
expected.
The input used in the HELP to model the proposed liner design profiles are listed on
the first couple pages of each HELP Model output file. The input listing shows layer
type, thickness, and soil characteristics. The soil characteristics are default values
suggested by the HELP Model to simulate the soils to be used in the proposed
design. The drainage layer was modeled with a three percent slope and drainage
length of 200 feet. The HDPE layer was assumed to have a pinhole density of three
(3) per acre and installation defect of three (3) per acre, and a placement quality of
“3” or “good”.

Promontory Point Landfill
53
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 The following table summarizes the main input values and results for the various
scenarios.
HELP Results
Liner Section

Condition

Refuse
Thickness (feet)

Duration
(years)

Peak Liner
Head (inches)

Base Option 1

Initial

20

5

2.29

Base Option 2

Initial

20

5

1.04

Base Option 1

Interim

200

30

1.56

Base Option 2

Interim

200

30

0.43

As shown in the table above the maximum peak head of leachate over liner is 2.29
inches which is well below the regulatory maximum of one foot.
The main components of the leachate collection system are the drainage layer and
the LCRS collection pipes, as shown in Detail 4 and 5 on Sheet C-502 (see Appendix
Y). The leachate will percolate vertically through the refuse mass, be conveyed
laterally through the coarse sand or gravel drainage layer towards the LCRS collection
pipes. The LCRS pipes are laid out in a dendritic network, with the main line running
centrally below the waste mass and the laterals branching outwards. As modeled in
the HELP analysis the maximum spacing for the laterals will be 200 feet. The
mainline gravity drains to the gravel sump as shown in Detail 6 and 9 on Sheet C-501
(see Appendix Y), and is then pumped into tanks as shown Detail 1 on Sheet C-506
(see Appendix Y).
There is no proposed leachate treatment system, the leachate will be used in one of
the following methods:





Dust control within lined cells
Recirculated into the landfill via injection wells
Destroyed in the LFG flare
Evaporated in lined basins

II.c.6 Equipment requirements and availability (R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))
The following table shows the anticipated equipment for landfill operations.
Compactors will be used to move and compact the waste and for placement of daily
cover. The dozer will be used for various general Site operations. The excavator will
be used for excavation and loading if necessary.

Promontory Point Landfill
54
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Landfill Equipment
Type of Equipment

Model

Dozer

CAT 8

Articulating Truck

CAT 740

Vacuum Truck

TBD*

Compactor

CAT 836

Excavator

CAT 375

Loader

CAT980

Water Truck

TBD

Motor Grader

TBD

Backhoe

TBD

Skid Steer

TBD

4-Wheel Pick Up Truck

TBD

*TBD - To be determined.
II.c.7 Identification of borrow sources for daily and final cover and for soil liners (R315310-4(2)(c)(iv))
Daily and intermediate cover will be generated from either excavated soil from future
phases or from soil like material from approved industrial waste. The final cover will
be acquired from on-site cell excavation soil material, see Figure C-808.
II.c.8 Run-On and run-off diversion designs (R315-303-3(1)(c), (d) and (e))
Run-on and run-off of stormwater will be controlled during both the open and closed
phases of the disposal cells. Drainage swales will be used to divert water around the
modules to an interim perimeter drainage system. Final cover run-off will be routed
to the perimeter drainage swales and discharged to the desilting basins on the
property in such a manner to minimize erosion and capture sediment prior to
discharge. Run-off along the access roads will be controlled by sloping the road to
one side. If required, culverts will be strategically placed along the access road. See
the Phase 1 Plans in Appendix Y.
All stormwater that comes in contact with waste must remain within the boundaries
of the landfill liner system and be managed as leachate. All stormwater that does not
come in contact with waste is not considered leachate and will be diverted so as to
Promontory Point Landfill
55
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 not allow it to enter the landfill. During initial filling of cells leachate collection
system piping to collect any precipitation that fell directly onto the cell.
For permitting purposes, a drainage analysis was completed for the entire site. Areas
within the Site that do not contribute run-on to the landfill cell or environmental
controls were not analyzed. The area contributing run-on flow to the Site is shown on
Figure C-804 and Figure C-805.
The quantity of flow expected for developed conditions was determined by using
precipitation depth in a 25-year, 24-hour storm event of 2.25 inches from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) precipitation frequency
data server. The hydrologic soil types and boundaries were determined from United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) web soil survey data. The peak flow
generated was determined by applying the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Technical
Release Number 55 (SCS TR 55) method.
Details of the input parameters and the model output are included in Appendix V. As
the cells are developed, the Site drainage paths are lengthened reducing the peak
discharge rate from its original condition.
II.c.9 Leachate collection, treatment, and disposal and documentation to show that any
treatment system is being or has been reviewed by the Division of Water Quality
(R315-310-4(2)(c)(v) and R315-310-3(1)(i))
There is no proposed leachate treatment system, the leachate will be used in one of
the following methods:





Dust control within lined cells
Recirculated into the landfill via injection wells
Destroyed in the LFG flare
Evaporated in lined basins

II.c.10 Groundwater monitoring plan that meets the requirements of Rule R315-308
including well locations, design, and construction (R315-310-4(2)(b)(x) and R315310-4(2)(c)(vi))
Groundwater Monitoring Network
The groundwater monitoring network at the Site consists of five (5) monitoring wells,
one upgradient (MW-5) and four downgradient (MW-1, MW-2, MW-3 and MW-4).
Monitoring well locations are shown on Figure C-803. Well construction logs are
provided in Appendix G. The following table summarizes the well construction
details.

Promontory Point Landfill
56
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Groundwater Monitoring Wells
Top of Casing
Screen Interval
Elevation (ft. AMSL)
(ft. BGS)
MW-1
2-inch, Sch.40 PVC
4,240
21 – 41
MW-2
2-inch, Sch.40 PVC
4,238
25 – 64
MW-3
2-inch, Sch.40 PVC
4,238
23 – 63
MW-4
2-inch, Sch.40 PVC
4,240
25 – 65
MW-5
2-inch, Sch.40 PVC
4,440
200 - 240
Notes: Above mean sea level (AMSL), below ground surface (BGS)

Well I.D.

Casing Material

The current condition of the wells is not known. Prior to any sampling activities, each
of the wells will be located and inspected to verify its condition. This will include
inspection of the wellhead for damage or vandalism and measuring the depth to
water and total depth of each well to ensure that no obstructions obvious or downhole damage to the well casing has occurred. The condition of the well will be photodocumented. Water levels measured in the wells will be used to generate an
updated groundwater contour map to confirm that the monitoring network is
adequate. Should a well not be locatable, the need for replacement of that well will
be evaluated based on the updated contour map and the results of sampling and
analyses.
Should evidence of tampering or vandalism be discovered, the liquid in the well will
be screened for evidence of possible dumping using an oil/water interface probe and
disposable bailer. Samples for analytical testing will be collected on an as-needed
basis. Should a down-hole obstruction be encountered, or other evidence of casing
damage or sediment accumulation be discovered, the need for well redevelopment,
down-hole video inspection or well destruction will be evaluated.
As necessary, a work plan will be prepared detailing any proposed modifications to
the existing well network.
Groundwater Sampling Plan
During the first year of facility operation, the upgradient well will be sampled a total of
eight times in order to establish a statistical data set. Downgradient wells will be
sampled quarterly during this same period. All collected samples will be analyzed for
the constituents listed in UAC Section R315-308-4.
Following the initial year of monitoring, sampling will be conducted semi-annually in
the spring and fall from all up-gradient and downgradient wells.
During each sampling event (including the initial eight events), water levels will be
recorded in each of the Site monitoring wells prior to initiation of any purging or
sampling activities at any Site wells. The depth-to water measurements will be
collected using an electronic water level meter (sounder) with cable markings
stamped at 0.01-foot increments. The water level will be measured by lowering the
probe into the monitoring well. Depth to water will be recorded to the nearest 0.01Promontory Point Landfill
57
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 foot on a Water Level Survey Record Sheet. The water level meter will be
decontaminated by rinsing with non-phosphate detergent and deionized water at the
beginning of each day and between wells. The volume of water present in each well
casing will be calculated using the depth-to-water measurement and the total well
depth.
Wells will be sampled using dedicated pneumatic bladder pumps following low-flow
sampling techniques. The pump intake must be situated within the screened portion
of the well, isolating the screened interval from any overlying stagnant casing water,
if present. During purging, flow rates will be set according to the following
requirements:




Flow rates will be selected such that drawdown in the well is minimized (i.e.,
observed drawdown is less than 0.1 meter [0.33 feet]);
Initial flow rates during purging will be no more than 500 milliliters per minute
(mL/min); and
Flow rate will be adjusted downward as required to minimize drawdown.

The following indicator parameters will be monitored during purging using a flowthrough cell:







pH
Specific conductance
Dissolved oxygen (DO)
Oxidation/reduction potential (ORP)
Temperature
Turbidity

For each reading interval, the field parameters, along with time of recording, depth to
water, volume of water purged, and pumping rate will be recorded on a Low-Flow
Water Sample Field Data Sheet for each well purged. A reading will be taken within
the first 500 mL of purging to ensure that the early variability of the initial parameters
is recorded.
Purging will be considered complete, when, at a minimum, three measurements have
been recorded and, regardless of the amount of water removed from the well, the
indicator parameters have stabilized. Stabilization of water quality parameters is
indicative of the presence of formation water. Stabilization is considered to be
achieved when three consecutive readings are within the limits listed below. In
general, stabilization should be achieved in the following order:

Promontory Point Landfill
58
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 






pH (±0.1 unit);
Temperature (10%);
Specific conductance (10%);
ORP (±10 millivolts);
DO (10% for values greater than 0.5 mg/L. If three DO values are less than 0.5
mg/L, consider the values as stabilized) ; and
Turbidity (10% for values greater than 5 NTU. If three Turbidity values are less
than 5 NTU, consider the values as stabilized).

Sampling may begin once purging is considered complete. Samples will be collected
directly from the dedicated discharge tubing into the appropriate sample containers.
The sample flow rate may remain at the established purge flow rate or lowered as
needed to minimize aeration, bubble formation, or turbulent filling of sample
containers. Groundwater samples are to be collected in-line from the sampling pump
from a point prior to the flow-through cell used to measure water quality parameters.
Tubing shall be clean, and the length of tubing shall be minimized between the intake
point and the sample container. In accordance with Utah Administrative Code
Section R315-308, no filtering of samples will be conducted, initially. However,
should metals data indicate that filtering of samples would provide a more accurate
representation of the groundwater conditions at the, a request may be made to the
Director to modify the program.
In addition to the samples collected from the wells, QA/QC samples will also be
collected and will consist of:






Duplicate Samples - Duplicate samples collected at a rate of 1:10 (i.e., 1
duplicate sample collected for every 10 primary samples). A minimum of one
duplicate sample will be collected for each monitoring event where multiple wells
are sampled. To assess variability of the laboratory measurement process, the
location where the duplicate was collected will be noted on the sampling log, and
the sample time will be omitted on the duplicate sample label and chain-ofcustody entry. Duplicate samples will be analyzed for the same analytes as the
primary sample.
Trip Blanks - One laboratory-supplied trip blank will accompany each sample
shipment. The trip blank(s) is used to evaluate whether VOC contamination
occurred during sample transport or storage. Trip blanks will be analyzed for
VOCs.
Field Blanks - One field blank will be prepared each day of sampling. The field
blank will be prepared at a location of a sampling point, by pouring de-ionized
water directly into the laboratory-supplied VOAs. The location where the field
blank was prepared will be noted on the sampling log. The field blank(s) will be
used to evaluate the potential for airborne VOCs to impact samples during
sample collection. Field blanks will be analyzed for VOCs.

Details of sample collection at each sampling point will be recorded on the
corresponding Low-Flow Water Sample Field Data Sheet.
Promontory Point Landfill
59
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Samples will be collected in laboratory-supplied containers appropriate for the
requested analyses. Samples will be labeled with their well identification number,
sealed in plastic bags, stored on ice and transported by courier to the selected statecertified laboratory in a cooler maintained at a temperature of 4 degrees C until
received by the lab.
Analyte-specific hold times will be reviewed to ensure that samples will be received
by the laboratory within the appropriate time-frame.
A chain-of-custody form will be used to record possession of the samples from the
time of collection to arrival at the laboratory. The individual who collects the samples
will prepare them for shipment, complete the chain-of-custody form and sign the form
when transferring the samples to the laboratory courier. The samples will be
released to the laboratory by signature on the chain-of-custody form. The laboratory
control officer will verify all samples listed on the chain-of-custody form are present,
verify sample integrity and verify that proper sample preservation procedures are
utilized.
All collected samples will be analyzed for the constituents listed in UAC Section
R315-308-4. Results of analytical testing will be evaluated using the methodology
established following the first year of monitoring. Should that evaluation, indicate
evidence of impacts attributable to the landfill, notifications will be made and further
assessments will be initiated in accordance with R315-308.
For each monitoring event following information shall be placed in the Site's
operating record and a copy submitted to the Director. Groundwater monitoring
results will be included in the Site annual report required and will, at a minimum
include:










A description of the monitoring and sampling procedures utilized;
Results of quality control/quality assurance sample analyses (blanks and
duplicates);
Field measurements recorded during monitoring activities;
Field forms, including completed Chain of Custody forms;
Laboratory data reports including laboratory QA/QC data;
Tabulated analytical results;
Tabulated water level data;
Groundwater flow directions and rates; and
Statistical analysis of the results of the groundwater monitoring.

Promontory Point Landfill
60
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 II.c.11 Landfill gas monitoring and control plan that meets the requirements of Subsection
R315-303-3(5) (R315-310-4(2)(c)(vii))
Gas monitoring will be conducted around the disposal area and in any of the Site
structures on a quarterly basis.
Upon detection of explosive gases equal to or above the lower explosion limit, the
Owner or Operator would take the following steps:
1. Immediately upon detection, steps would be taken to protect human health.
These steps would include accounting for all landfill personnel and moving all
equipment and personnel away from the release area, shutdown of any electrical
devices that could cause ignition, notify emergency personnel (fire, police) and
advise them of the situation, monitor the release area and surrounding areas with
a combustible gas indicator and document reading for placement into the
operating record, determination of the cause of explosive gas, and keep the area
closed until corrective actions are taken.
2. Within 24 hours the Director would be notified.
3. Within seven days of detection, the explosive gas levels would be recorded in the
operating record along with a description of the steps taken to protect human
health.
4. Within 60 days of detection, a remediation plan that had been approved by the
Director would be implemented and a copy of the plan placed in the operating
record. Upon implementation, the Director would be notified.
Methane gas releases would be detected using a methane detection meter capable
of measuring methane levels below the 25% lower explosive limit (LEL) (1.25%
methane by volume in air). Gas monitoring will be conducted in perimeter probes
around the disposal area and in any of the Site structures on a quarterly basis. Upon
detection of explosive gases equal to or above the LEL in perimeter probes (5%
methane by volume in air) or 25% of the LEL inside structures, the Owner or Operator
would take the following steps:
1. Immediately upon detection, steps would be taken to protect human health.
These steps would include, as applicable, accounting for all landfill personnel
providing adequate ventilation, moving all equipment and personnel away from
the release area, shutdown of any electrical devices that could cause ignition,
monitoring the release area and surrounding areas with a combustible gas
indicator and document reading for placement into the operating record,
determination of the cause of explosive gas levels, and keep the area off limits
until corrective actions are taken.

Promontory Point Landfill
61
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 2. Within 24 hours the Director would be notified.
3. Within seven days of detection, the explosive gas levels would be recorded in the
operating record along with a description of the steps taken to protect human
health.
4. Within 60 days of detection, a remediation plan that had been approved by the
Director would be implemented and a copy of the plan placed in the operating
record. Upon implementation, the Director would be notified.
II.c.12 Slope stability analysis for static and under the anticipated seismic event for the
facility (R315-310-4(2)(b)(i) and R315-302-1(2)(b)(ii))
A slope stability analysis, which was based on site-specific geotechnical field
investigations, proposed liner materials and calculations for static and pseudostatic
slope stability, was prepared for the Phase 1 design. The methods and results of this
work are documented in a report titled Slope stability Evaluation, Promontory Point
Landfill Cell 1, Phase 1A, Ogden Utah (see Appendix T). Static and pseudostatic slope
stability calculations were completed for subgrade, liner, interim fill, and final fill
slope geometries for Phase 1.
II.c.13 Design and location of run-on and run-off control systems (R315-310-4(2)(c)(viii))
Run-on and run-off of stormwater will be controlled during both the open and closed
phases of the disposal cells. Drainage swales will be used to divert water around the
modules to an interim perimeter drainage system. Final cover run-off will be routed
to the perimeter drainage swales and discharged to the desilting basins on the
property in such a manner to minimize erosion and capture sediment prior to
discharge. Run-off along the access roads will be controlled by sloping the road to
one side. If required, culverts will be strategically placed along the access road. See
the Phase 1 Plans in Appendix Y.
All stormwater that comes in contact with waste must remain within the boundaries
of the landfill liner system and be managed as leachate. All stormwater that does not
come in contact with waste is not considered leachate and will be diverted so as to
not allow it to enter the landfill. During initial filling of cells leachate collection
system piping to collect any precipitation that fell directly onto the cell.
For permitting purposes, a drainage analysis was completed for the entire site. Areas
within the Site that do not contribute run-on to the landfill cell or environmental
controls were not analyzed were excluded. The area contributing run-on flow to the
1,000-acrel Site is shown on Figure C-804 and Figure C-805. The entire drainage
area was evaluated in both pre-developed and developed conditions.
The quantity of flow expected for pre-developed and developed conditions was
determined by using precipitation depth in the 25-year, 24-hour storm event of 2.25
inches from the (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
precipitation frequency data server). The hydrologic soil types and boundaries were
Promontory Point Landfill
62
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 determined from United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) web soil survey
data. The peak flow generated was determined by applying the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service Technical Release Number 55 (SCS TR 55) method. Details of
the input parameters and the model output are included in Appendix V.

II.d Closure Plan for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310-3(1)(h))
II.d.1 Closure Plan (R315-302-3(2) and (3))
The Site will be constructed over time and will be composed of several landfill cells.
Portions of the landfill will be closed over time as areas of the fill reach maximum
capacity. Soil from newly excavated landfill cells will be stockpiled onsite and used
for cover materials as areas are closed. The owner/operator will notify the Director of
the intent to implement the closure plan in whole or part, 60 days prior to the
projected final receipt of waste. Final closure of each area will begin once it reaches
the maximum permitted height and within 30 days of the last receipt of waste. Final
closure will be completed within 180 days after closure activities begin. These
closure activities will minimize the need for further maintenance, and minimize or
eliminate the threat to human health and the environment from post-closure escape
of solid waste constituents, leachate, contaminated run-off or waste decomposition
products to the ground, groundwater, surface water or the atmosphere.
Grading plans, including final grades, can be seen on conceptual engineering plans
(Figure C-806). In general, the final cover will be graded so that the deck slopes at
least 2% to provide positive drainage and the side slopes will not be greater than 3 to
1 gross slope (horizontal to vertical).
Drainage channels will be constructed around the cell as indicated by the drawings to
help prevent erosion and divert any run-on and convey run-off in a controlled manner.
Berms will be placed and used as needed to direct surface flows.
Revegetating the cover will consist of using an appropriate seed mix. The cover will
be prepared to a clean, firm, and consistent seedbed. The seeds will be drilled 1/2
to 1/4 inch deep or broadcasted in areas where drilling is found to be impractical.
II.d.2 Closure schedule (R315-310-4(2)(d)(i))
Phased closure of the Site will be completed within two years of the final receipt of
waste.
II.d.3 Design of final cover (R315-303-3(4) and R315-310-4(2)(c)(iii))
The closure and post-closure care plan will be updated annually to account for
changing conditions of the landfill. The status of closure and post-closure care
funding will be reported to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) with
the landfill’s annual reports.
Promontory Point Landfill
63
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 An alternative to the prescriptive final cover is proposed as allowed in UAC R315303-3(4)(c) which allows the director to approve an alternative cover design if it can
be documented that the alternative cover achieves an equivalent reduction in
infiltration as achieved by the standard design and the alternative final cover
provides equivalent protection from wind and water erosion as achieved by the
standard design. The proposed alternative design will consist of a monolithic soil
evapotranspiration cover for placement on final fill slopes which will be designed to a
depth and soil type which will perform equivalently to the prescriptive standard in
UAC R315-303-3(4). Detailed design and support calculations will be presented prior
to closure when final cover materials have been selected and modeled. The deck
final cover will be either the prescriptive final cover as prescribed in UAC R315-3033(4) or the proposed alternative monolithic soil evapotranspiration cover.
II.d.4 Capacity of site in volume and tonnage (R315-310-4(2)(d)(ii))
Estimates of landfill airspace capacity were made using AutoDesk Civil 3D software.
Quantity take-off comparisons were made between: (1) proposed base grading plan
presented herein and (2) the proposed final grading plan presented herein.
Projected municipal solid waste and special waste tonnage provided by Promontory
Point Resources, LLC were used to estimate the rate of airspace consumption.
Taking into account airspace to be consumed by base liner, slope liner, and the final
cover system, it is estimated that approximately 775 million cubic yards (656 million
tons) of airspace is available at the Site under the Site development plans presented
herein. Based on this Site airspace capacity and other variables discussed below,
the landfill site life is expected to be exhausted in approximately 125 years.
The Site life is based on an assumed in-place density of 2,000 pounds per cubic yard
for municipal solid waste and 1,350 pounds per cubic yard for special waste with an
assumed waste-to-cover ratio of 7:1 (the densities of designated widely vary and
these are only assumed weights). Projecting the Site life is an estimate and is
affected by many factors including population and demographic changes, local and
regional economic activity affecting waste generation, advances in waste handling
and disposal technology, recycling efforts, compaction efforts, settlement, soil cover
and alternate daily cover (ADC) use, contractual arrangements for waste deliveries,
and future revisions to permit conditions. Refer to Appendix U for all assumptions
and further details.
II.d.5 Final inspection by regulatory agencies (R315-310-4(2)(d)(iii))
The owner/operator will notify the Director of the intent to implement the closure
plan in whole or part, 60 days prior to the projected final receipt of waste. Final
closure of each cell will begin once the landfill reaches the maximum permitted
height and within 30 days of the last receipt of waste. Final closure will be
completed within 180 days after closure activities begin. When closure construction
is completed, the owner/operator will submit to the Director, within 90 days or as
required by the Director, the following:
Promontory Point Landfill
64
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 


Facility or unit closure plans, signed by a professional engineer registered in the
state of Utah, and modified as necessary to represent as-built changes to final
closure construction as approved in the closure plan; and
Certification by the owner or operator, and, a professional engineer registered in
the state of Utah, that the Site or unit has been closed in accordance with the
approved closure plan.

Inspection will include cell cover design, run-on and run-off control, proper final
grading to promote run-off, and restriction of access to the Site by fencing. No later
than 60 days after certification of closure, submit plats and a statement of fact
concerning the location of any disposal Site will be given to the county recorder to be
recorded as part of the record of title. Proof of record of title then will be submitted
to the Director.

II.e

Post-Closure Care Plan for All Class I and V Landfills (R315- 310-3(1)(h))

II.e.1. Post-Closure Plan (R315-302-3(5) and (6))
The owner/operator shall provide post-closure activities for continued facility
maintenance and monitoring of gases, land, and water for 30 years or as long as the
Director determines is necessary for the facility or unit to become stabilized and to
protect human health and the environment. Post-closure activities will commence
after closure activities have been completed. The Director may direct that postclosure activities cease until the owner or operator receives a notice from the
Director to proceed with post-closure activities.
The post-closure land use of the Site will be open space. When post-closure activities
are complete, as determined by the Director, the owner or operator shall submit a
certification to the Director, signed by the owner or operator, and a professional
engineer registered in the state of Utah stating why post-closure activities are no
longer necessary (i.e., little or no settlement, gas production, or leachate generation).
If the Director finds that post-closure monitoring has established that the facility or
unit is stabilized, the Director may authorize the owner or operator to discontinue any
portion or all of the post-closure maintenance and monitoring activities.
II.e.2 Site monitoring of landfill gases, groundwater, and surface water, if required (R315310-4(2)(e)(i))
Landfill Gas Monitoring
Landfill gas will be monitored on a quarterly basis.
Groundwater Monitoring
Groundwater will be monitored on a semiannual basis, or other schedule as
determined by the Director.

Promontory Point Landfill
65
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 Surface Water Monitoring
Surface water, if required, will be monitored on the schedule specified by the
Director.
II.e.3 Changes to record of title, land use, and zoning restrictions (R315-310-4(2)(e)(v))
Appropriate documentation will be submitted no more than 60 days after closure.
II.e.4 Maintenance activities to maintain cover and run-on/run-off control systems (R315310-4(2)(e)(iii))
The final cover will be inspected for erosion or other maintenance problems. Any
problems detected during routine Site inspections will be corrected as soon as
practicable. All eroded areas will be re-covered with suitable soil to establish erosioncontrol and infiltration layers and to provide positive drainage that will maintain the
integrity of the final cover. All bare areas in the final cover will be revegetated as
necessary.
Periodic inspections will determine whether the final cover system needs to be
repaired due to differential settlement or subsidence by evaluating whether the final
cover in the affected area has been impaired. Any areas where the integrity of the
final cover has been compromised will be repaired as necessary.
Eroded areas in drainage ditches will be repaired and re-graded. Sediment
accumulation will be removed from areas where flow is restricted. Temporary
stormwater control structures will be constructed and maintained as needed.
II.e.5 List the name, address, and telephone number of the person or office to contact
about the facility during the post-closure care period (R315-310-4(2)(e)(vi))
Jon Angin, President and CEO
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111

II.f

Financial Assurance for All Class I and V Landfills (R315-310- 3(1)(j))

II.f.1

Identification of closure costs including cost calculations (R315-310-4(2)(d)(iv)) and
(R315-302-2(2)(n))
The closure cost estimate has been prepared as of 2016 rates and reflects the costs
of placement of the proposed alternative final cover on the final fill slopes and the
prescriptive cover on the deck areas.
The cost estimate assumes that closure activities will be implemented as each phase
within the Site is completed. These closure activities will minimize the need for
further maintenance, and minimize or eliminate the threat to human health and the

Promontory Point Landfill
66
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 environment from post-closure escape of solid waste constituents, leachate,
contaminated run-off or waste decomposition products to the ground, groundwater,
surface water or the atmosphere.
This cost estimate assumes the initial closure phase (Phase 1A) will consist of
approximately 16 acres; therefore, the cost estimate is based on closure of the first
16 acres of the Site. Table A provided in Appendix W presents the cost and
supporting documentation. The closure cost has been prepared as required by UAC
R315-309-2 and in accordance with UAC R315-309-2(3)(a).
II.f.2

Identification of post-closure care costs including cost calculations (R315-3104(2)(e)(iv))
The post-closure cost estimate has been prepared as of 2016 rates and reflects the
appropriate maintenance costs for each final cover type (i.e., alternative and
prescriptive).
The cost estimate assumes that post-closure activities will be implemented as each
phase within the Site is completed. These closure activities will minimize the need
for further maintenance, and minimize or eliminate the threat to human health and
the environment from post-closure escape of solid waste constituents, leachate,
contaminated run-off or waste decomposition products to the ground, groundwater,
surface water or the atmosphere.
This cost estimate assumes the initial closure phase will consist of 31 acres;
therefore, the cost estimate is based on closure of the first 31 acres of the Site.
Table B provided in Appendix W presents the cost and supporting documentation.
The post-closure cost has been prepared as required by UAC R315-309-2 and in
accordance with UAC R315-309-2(3)(b).

II.f.3

Identification of the financial assurance mechanism that meets the requirements of
Rule R315-309 and the date that the mechanism will become effective (R315-3091(1))
The financial assurance mechanism, a Standby Trust Agreement, that was approved
for the Class I permit will be the mechanism used for this permit application. A copy
of the agreement is in Appendix X.

Promontory Point Landfill
67
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 References
Advanced Environmental Engineering, Inc. (AEEI), 2008, “Promontory Landfill LLC Class I
Landfill Permit Application”, dated August 2008, sections as pertains.
Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AGEC), 2003, “Geotechnical and
Geologic Study, Promontory Landfill, LLC Class I Landfill”, Project No. 1020875, dated
July 21, 2003.
Black, B.D., Christenson, G.E., DuRoss, C.B., Hecker, S., compilers, 2004, Fault number
2369a, East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Promontory section, in Quaternary fault and
fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazard s/qfaults, accessed 08/28/2015 12:01 PM.
Crittenden, et al., 1988, Bedrock Geologic Map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder
County, Utah”, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 88-646, map scale
1:100,000.
Currey, et al., 1984, “Major Levels of Great Salt Lake and Lake Bonneville”, State of Utah,
Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey, prepared in
cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey, Map 73, scale 1:750,000.
Morrison-Knudsen, 1959(?), “Mariners in Hard Hats”, 30-minute documentary film
highlighting
causeway
construction
and
quarry
activity,
url:
https://archive.org/details/bliptv-2013101
5-012128-Black5videoMarinersInHardHats660, viewed on 2015-09-22 6:22 PM.
Nelson, D.T., and Jewell, P.W., 2015, “Geologic Map of Unconsolidated Deposits in the
Hogup Bar Quadrangle, Box Elder County, Utah”, Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous
Publication 15-2DM, 20 p.
Oviatt, C.G., 2014, “The Gilbert Episode in the Great Salt Lake Basin”, Utah Geological
Survey Miscellaneous Publication 14-3, 16 p. and map, scale 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, “Promontory Point, Utah 2014”, 7.5-Minute
Series Quadrangle Map, scale 1:24,000, The World Map, U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

Promontory Point Landfill
68
Application for a Permit to Operate a Class V Landfill
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\ClassVPermitApplication.docx
Tetra Tech BAS

 FIGURES

x

P

P

x

0'
100

P

x

P

EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD

x

0
1000

x

x

x
CHM

APPROVED BY :

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

MAR 2017

x

x
x

x

x

x

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
COUNTY ZONING

VHY

ANP

DRAWN BY :

DATE:

x

CHECKED BY :

VHY

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE
DESIGNED BY :

x

x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

EXISTING LAND USE

P

EXISTING
RAILROAD
1000'
PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

x

P

P
x

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

P

x

P
P

x

CAVE/ROCK
SHELTER

x

P

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-801 Existing Land Use

x

x

PROPOSED
REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-801

 1
4

LE
MI

P

x

P

P
EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD

x

PREVAILING WIND
DIRECTION PER
NATIONAL WIND SERVICE

0
1000

x
CHM

APPROVED BY :

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

MAR 2017

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

x

x

x

x
x

x

x
PROPOSED REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

VHY

ANP

DATE:

x
EXISTING
FENCE

CHECKED BY :

DRAWN BY :

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE
VHY

MILE
DESIGNED BY :

x

x

EXISTING UTILITIES & FENCING

1
4

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

x

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

EXISTING
POWER POLES

x

P

P

EXISTING
RAILROAD

x

x

P

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-802 Existing Utilities & Fencing

x

P

x

P
x

P

x

P
P

x

x

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-802

 1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

BAS
x

x

x

TP-2

TP-1

TP-3

x

TEST PITS
(TYP)

GAS MONITORING
LOCATION (TYP)

x

P
TP-5
42

(I)

50

x

(I)

GROUNDWATER CONTOUR (TYP)
(I) DENOTES INTERPOLATED
(E) DENOTES EXTRAPOLATED

x

x

x

x

30

P

(I)

42

25

42

20

(E
)

(I)

TP-17

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE

TP-19

TP-18
TP-16

WELL NO. 5

42

15

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

CHM

x

42

APPROVED BY :

TP-15
TP-14

VHY

TP-13

TP-12

ANP

(I)

CHECKED BY :

35

DRAWN BY :

x

42

DATE:

P

TP-11

VHY

TP-10

TP-9

DESIGNED BY :

(I)

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

424
0

TP-8

MAR 2017

x

x

424
5

x

PROPOSED
REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

TP-7

TP-6

TP-4

(E

)

P

x

42

TP-22

10

TP-20

(E

TP-21

)

42

P
TP-24
TP-25

x

P

TP-A-8

TP-A-6
TP-A-9

WELL NO. 3

x
WELL NO. 2

TP-26
TP-27

P

P

P

WELL NO. 1

P

TEST PITS
(TYP)

EXISTING
ACCESS ROAD

x

x

x

EXISTING
RAILROAD
GROUNDWATER
MONITORING
WELLS (TYP)

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-803 Monitoring Locations

x

TP-A-7

TP-A-3

MONITORING LOCATIONS

P

TP-A-5
TP-23

x

)
(E

x

TP-A-2

TP-A-4
WELL NO. 4

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

05

TP-A-1

0

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

1000

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-803

 P

x

x

P

P

P

x
x

x
PROPOSED REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE

P

x

EXISTING
ACCESS ROAD

x
0
1000

x
PRE-DEVELOPMENT
HYDROLOGY

PREDEVELOPED
FLOW PATH

ANP
VHY
CHM

CHECKED BY :
APPROVED BY :

VHY
DRAWN BY :

DESIGNED BY :

CONTRIBUTING
DRAINAGE AREA

x

x
x

x

x
MAR 2017
PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

DATE:

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

x

>
x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

x

P

EXISTING
RAILROAD
P

>

P

x

x

P

x

P

x

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

x

>

P

>

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-804 Pre-Development Hydrology

>

x
x

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-804

 x

>
P

P

P

x
x

RB3

RA6
RB2

>
x
DEVELOPED
FLOW PATTERN

x

x

x

x
x

x

x
PROPOSED REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE

P

x

EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD
0
1000

ANP
VHY
CHM

DRAWN BY :
CHECKED BY :
APPROVED BY :

VHY

MAR 2017
PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

DATE:

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

CONTRIBUTING
DRAINAGE AREA

POST-DEVELOPMENT
HYDROLOGY

>
RB1

DESIGNED BY :

x

>
x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

x

P

EXISTING
RAILROAD

>

RB4

x

x

>

P

x

P
P

x

P

x

P
RA5

x

RA2

RA4

x

>

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

x

RA3

>

P

>

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-805 Post-Development Hydrology

RA1

x

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-805

 x

x

x
x

3
16 OZ/SY GEOTEXTILE

1
OV
EC

x

x

44
0
450 0
0
4600

x

0

430

P

0
432

x

60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
(TEXTURED BOTH SIDES)

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

x

0

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
ORIGINAL
PERMIT LIMIT

ER

L
SOI

24"

x

434

1 BASE LINER

ANP

P

0

x

0
436

OPTION 2

DRAWN BY :

12 OZ/SY CUSHION
GEOTEXTILE

LINER SUBGRADE

MAR 2017

x

x

x

x

438

x

GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER (GCL)

DATE:

18"

x
x
x

LCRS GRAVEL

CHM

x
x

x
x

450
460 0
470 0
480 0
0

x

0

0

0
440

3:1

PROTECTIVE COVER SOIL

9"

x
x

x

0

446

444

0
442

P

x

3%

8 OZ/SY FILTER FABRIC

VHY

x

x

60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
(TEXTURED BOTH SIDES)

DESIGNED BY :

x
3:1

OPTION 1

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

x

x
44 8

x

45 4600
00

LINER
SUBGRADE

x

x

P

x

x

00
44

GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER (GCL)

APPROVED BY :

x

x

x

x

4800
4700
4600
4500

COARSE SAND

VHY

x

P

PROPOSED REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

CHECKED BY :

x

18"

x

x

x

x

PROPOSED
FENCING

x

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

BAS

60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
(TEXTURED BOTH SIDES)

IV

x

T
TEC
PRO

P

x

P

x

P

EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD

x

x

EXISTING
RAILROAD

x

x

x

x

0

750

x

1500

SCALE:1''=1500'

x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

P

P

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
x
PROPERTY
LINE

x

P

x
x

LCRS SUMP
(TYP)

x

x

x

x

x

x

2 SLOPE LINER

PROPOSED EXCAVATION PLAN

x

x

LINER SUBGRADE

P

x

GEOTEXTILE-BACKED GCL

x

x

P

x

x

x

PROPOSED
LEACHATE
COLLECTOR

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

x

P

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-806 Proposed Excavation Plan

x
PROPOSED
CELL 1
LOCATION

FIGURE C-806

 x

3'
MIN

MONO LAYER

x
6"
MIN

x
3'

CHM
APPROVED BY :

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112
ANP

x

P

1'
MIN

RIM

E
INT

MAR 2017

x

x
EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD

x

EXISTING
RAILROAD

ER
LAY

YER

N LA

MIN

x

P

x

P

ONO

L
SOI

ER
COV

UN

/ FO

IO
DAT

FOUNDATION LAYER
(CONTRACTOR TO
VERIFY EXISTING
THICKNESS)

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

x

1

P

x

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
x
PROPERTY
LINE

DATE:

3

SOIL/COMPOST,
6" THICK

M

DRAWN BY :

3:1

P

x

x

x

x

x

0

750

x

1500

SCALE:1''=1500'

x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-807 Proposed Fill Plan

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

18"

P

0

x
P

P

LINER GRADE

VHY

x

x

4800
4700
4600
4500

REFUSE

DESIGNED BY :

0

0

0

SITE SOIL

1 FINAL COVER ON DECK

x

P

GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER (GCL)

VHY

1'
MIN

x

448

446

OPTION 1
BI-PLANAR GEOCOMPOSITE
40 MIL VERY FLEXIBLE
POLYETHYLENE (VFPE)

x

x

x

x

x

REFUSE

P

P

FOUNDATION LAYER
(CONTRACTOR TO
VERIFY EXISTING
THICKNESS)

INTERIM SOIL COVER / FOUNDATION LAYER

0

46
450 00
480
440 0
0
0
490
0
500
0
510
0
520
530 0
540 0
0

3:1

OPTION 2

434

0
432
0
430

PROPOSED
CELL 1
LOCATION

444

442

P

0
00
440
54 300 0
0
5
52 100 0
0
5 00 0
438
0
5
49 800 0
0
4 70 0
436
0
4
46 500 0
4 40
4
3:1

x

x

P

4800 4900
47005000
46005100
4500
5200
5300
5400

CHECKED BY :

x

x

P

PROPOSED REVISED
LIMIT OF WASTE

PROPOSED FILL PLAN

x

6"
MIN

x

x

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

BAS

SOIL/COMPOST, 6
INCHES THICK

2 FINAL COVER ON SLOPE

FIGURE C-807

 x

P

P

P
x

x
EXISTING
COUNTY ROAD

x

0
1000
CHM

APPROVED BY :

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

MAR 2017

x

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

x PROPOSED REVISED

VHY

ANP

DRAWN BY :

DATE:

x

CHECKED BY :

VHY

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE
DESIGNED BY :

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

x

x

x

x

x

x

x
x

x

PROPOSED
RAILROAD

x

EXISTING
RAILROAD

x

POTENTIAL BORROW AREAS

P

P

PROMONTORY POINT - PERMIT CLASS V

POTENTIAL
BORROW AREA

x

P

P
P

x

P

x

P

x

P

x

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Master\CAD\SheetFiles\Permit Class V\C-808 Potential Borrow Areas

POTENTIAL BORROW
AND MINING AREA

x

x

LIMIT OF WASTE

2000

SCALE:1''= 2000'

FIGURE C-808

 APPENDIX A
CLASS I SOLID WASTE PERMIT

Department of
Environmental Quality
Alan Matheson
Executive Director

State of Utah

DTVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT

GARY R. HERBERT

AND RADIATION CONTROL

Governor

Scott T. Anderson

Director
SPENCER J. COX
Lieutenant Governor

March 15.2017

Eric Urbani
Promontory Point Resources
32East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111

RE:

Permit Modification
Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder Countv

Dear Mr. Urbani:
Enclosed is the approved permit modification for Promontory Point Landfill Facility, in Box Elder
County, Utah. This modification addressed the new owners and operators, a new landfill design and a
new financial assurance mechanism. The public comment period on the permit modification request
began November 2,2016 and ended on Decemb er 7 ,2016. Comments were received and responses
were provided by this office.

Prior to acceptance and disposal of any solid waste at Promontory Landfill Facility, the following items
must be submitted to the Division for review and approval.
' '

1.

Ground Water monitoring requirements outlined in Section III.F of the Permit.

2.

Final Standby Trust Agreement, to fuIfill financial assurance mechanism, as addressed in Section
IV.D. The proposed changes that were made to the text of our Standby Trust Agreement for
your financial assurance mechanism cannot be approved. A copy of the approved Standby Trust
Agreement is enclosed with this letter. A revised Standby Trust Agreement must be resubmitted
with the appropriate signatures with approved payment bonds.

3.

Contracts with local governments must be approved prior to receipt of solid waste as outlined in
Section I.B, Acceptable Waste and Section V.G, Contract, of the permit.

The expiration date of this permit remains August 31,2021as shown on the permit page. If renewal of
this permit is desired, a renewal application should be submitted 180 days prior to the permit expiration
date.
DSHW-2017-001090

195 North 1950 West. Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144880 . Salt lake City, UT 84114-4880
Telephone (801) s36-0200. Fax (801) 536-0222. T.D.D. (801) 903-3978

tnaw.deq.utah.goo
Printed on 100% recycled paper

 If you

have any questions, please call Matt Sullivan at (801) 536-0241.

Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
STA/MBSIKI
Enclosure:

c:

Permit Modification
DSHW-2O16-0011981
DSHW-2O16-0011982
DSHW-2O16-0011983
DSHW-2O16-0011984
DSHW-2O16-0011985

Lloyd C. Berentzen, MBA, Health Officer, Bear River Health Department
Grant Koford, EHS, Environmental Health Director, Bear fuver Health Department

 DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RADIATION CONTROL
PERMIT RENEWAL
Promontory Point Landfill
CLASS I LANDFILL
Pursuant to the provisions of the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act,Title 19, Chapter 6,Part
l, Utah Code Annotated (UCA) 1953, as amended (the Act) and the Utah Solid Waste Permitting
and Management Rules, Utah Administrative Code (UAC) R315-301 through 320 adopted
thereunder, a Permit is issued to

Promontory Point Resources, LLC
as owner and operator

to own, construct and operate the Promontory Point Landfill located at and around the
surrounding vicinities of Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian, Box Elder County, Utah as shown in the permit renewal application that was
determined complete on May 25,2011, Tracking Number 2008.02932.
Promontory Point Resources, LLC (Permittee) is subject to the requirements of UAC R315-301
through 320 and the requirements set forth herein.

All

references to UAC R315-301 through 320 are to regulations that are in effect on the date that
this Permit becomes effective.

This Permit became effective: September 1. 2011
This Permit shall expire at midnight August 31" 2021
Closure Cost Revision Date: Auzust 31.2016

Permit signed

the

Modification signed

1"
the

day

of

September ,20L1

'slwy

s1

,2017

Division of Waste Manasement and Radiation Control

Page 1 of 17

 FACILITY OWIIER/OPERATOR INFORMATION
LANDFILL NAME:

Promontory Point Landfill

OWNER NAME:

Promontory Point Resources, LLC

OWNER ADDRESS:

32Bast Exchange Place
Suite 100
Salt Lake City,Utah 84111

OWNER PHONE NO.:

(43s) 414-9880

OPERATOR NAME:

same as owner

OPERATOR ADDRESS:

same as owner

OPERATOR PHONE NO.:

same as owner

TYPE OF PERMIT:

Class I

PERMIT NUMBER:

0202R1

LOCATION:

Landfill site is located in Township

Landfill

6 North, Range 5 West,

Section 19, SLBM, Box Elder County (and all other
geographical coordinates as outlined in the application);
Latitude: 4lo L2'55", Longitude: lT2o 28' 5".

DIRECTIONS TO FACILTY:

Location of site is on the west side of the southern tip of the
Promontory Point Peninsula. Access routes considered to the
landfill are by way of the Union Pacific Railroad causeway, a
private dike or a county road from the north connecting to State
Route 83.

PERMIT HISTORY:

Permit was signed September l,20ll.
Permit Modification #1 was approved on July 16, 2015. This
was a minor modification in accordance with UAC R315-3112(a)(ix) changing the name of the owner and operator from
Utah Landfill & Ballast, LLC to Promontory Landfill, LLC.
Permit Modification #2 was approved on March 15,2017.
This was a major modification in accordance with UAC R3153ll-2(l)(d) changing the name of the owner and operator and
landfill name fromPromontory Landfill, LLC andPromontory
Landfill to Promontory Point Resources, LLC and Promontory
Point Landfill, respectively. It also included modifications to
the landfill design, construction and closure and post-closure
cost estimates.
Page 2 of 17

 The term "Permit," as used in this permit is defined in UAC R315-301-2(55). The term
"Director" as used in this permit, refers to the Director of the Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control.
The renewal application September 8, 2008, Promontory Landfill LLC Class I Landfill Permit
Application. Tracking Number 2008.02932, was deemed complete on the date shown on the
signature page of this Permit.
Attachments to this permit are hereby incorporated into this Permit. All representation made in
the attachments are part of this Permit and are enforceable under UAC R315-301-5(2). Where
differences in wording exist between this Permit and the attachments, the wording of this Permit
supersedes that of the attachments.
Compliance with this Permit does not constitute a defense to actions brought under any other
local, state or federal laws. This Permit does not exempt the Permittee from obtaining any other
local, state or federal approvals required for the facility operation.
The issuance of this Permit does not convey any property rights, other than the rights inherent in
this Permit, in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges other than those
inherent in this Permit. Nor does this Permit authorize any injury to private property or any
invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local laws or regulations,
including zoning ordinances.
The provisions of this Permit are severable. If any provision of this Permit is held invalid for any
reason, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect. If the application of any
provision of this Permit to any circumstance is held invalid, its application to other circumstances
shall not be affected-

By this Permit, the Permittee is subject to the following conditions.

Page 3

of

17

 PERMIT REQTIIREMENTS
I.

GENERAL COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES
A.

General Operation
The Permittee shall operate the landfill in accordance with all applicable
requirements of UAC R315-302 and 303 for a Class I landfill that are in effect as
of the date of this Permit unless otherwise noted in this Permit. Any permit
noncompliance or noncompliance with any applicable portions of UCA 19-6-101
through 125 and applicable portions of UAC R315-301 through 320 constitutes a
violation of the Permit or applicable statute or rule and is grounds for appropriate
enforcement action, permit revocation, modification, or denial of a permit renewal
application.

B.

Acceptable Waste

This Permit is for the disposal of non-hazardous solid waste that may include:

1. Municipal solid waste;

2.

Commercial waste:

3. Industrial waste:

4. Construction/demolition

waste;

UAC R315-315 and authorizedin Section ItrI of this Permit and limited by this section; and

5. Special waste

as allowed by

6. Conditionally exempt, small quantity generator

hazardous waste as defined

by UAC R315-303-a(7)(a)(i)(B) and PCBs as defined by UAC R315-3157(2).
Acceptable wastes are restricted to wastes that are received under sole contracts
with local govemments, within lJtah, for waste generated within the boundaries
the local government. Each contract shall be approved by the Director prior to
acceptance of the waste at the landfill.
C.

of

Prohibited Waste

l.

Hazardous waste as defined by UAC R315-1 and R315-2;

2. Containers larger than household size (five gallons) holding any liquid,
non-containerized material containing free liquids or any waste containing
free liquids in containers larger than five gallons; or
Page 4 of 17

 a

J.

PCBs as defined by UAC R315-301-2, except as allowed in Section IB
(Acceptable Waste) of this Permit.

4. Regulated asbestos-containing material.

5. All wastes not received by contracts approved by the Director are
prohibited.

Any prohibited waste received and accepted for treatment, storage or disposal at
the facility shall constitute a violation of this Permit, of UCA 19-6-101 through
125 and of UAC R315-301 through 320.
D.

Inspections and Inspection Access
The Permiuee shall allow the Director or an authorized representative of the
Division or representatives from the Bear River Health Department to enter at
reasonable times and:
1.

Inspect the landfrll or other premises, practices or operations regulated or
required under the terms and conditions of this Permit or UAC R315-301
through 320;

2.

Have access to and copy any records required to be kept under the terms
and conditions of this Permit or UAC R315-301 through 320;

a

Inspect any loads of waste, treatment facilities or processes, pollution
management facilities or processes, or control facilities or processes
required under this Permit or regulated under UAC R315-301 through320;
and

4.

Create a record of any inspection by photographic, videotape, electronic or
anv other reasonable means.

J.

E.

Noncompliance

If monitoring, inspection or testing indicates that any permit condition or any
applicable rule under UAC R315-301 through 320 may be or is being violated, the
Permittee shall promptly make corrections to the operation or other activities to
bring the facility into compliance with all permit conditions or rules.

In the event of any noncompliance with any permit condition or violation of an
applicable rule, the Permittee shall promptly take any feasible action reasonably
necessary to correct the noncompliance or violation and mitigate any risk to the
human health or the environment. Actions may include eliminating the activity
causing the noncompliance or violation and containment of any waste or
Page 5

of

17

 contamination using barriers or access restrictions, placing of warning signs or
permanently closing areas of the facility.
The Permittee shall:
1.

2.
3.

Document the noncompliance or violation in the operating record on the
day the event occurred or the day it was discovered;
Notiff the Director by telephone within 24 hours or the next business day
following documentation of the event; and
Provide written notice of the noncompliance or violation and measures
taken to protect public health and the environment within seven days of
notification.

Within thirty days of the documentation of the event, the Permittee shall submit to
the Director a written report describing the nature and extent of the
noncompliance or violation and the remedial measures taken or to be taken to
protect human health and the environment and to eliminate the noncompliance or
violation. Upon receipt and review of the assessment report, the Director may
order the Permittee to perform appropriate remedial measures including
development of a site remediation plan for approval by the Director.
Lr an enforcement action, the Permittee may not claim as a defense that it would
have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain
compliance with UAC R315-301 through 320 and this Permit.
Compliance with the terms of this Permit does not constitute a defense to actions
brought under any other local, state or federal laws. This Permit does not exempt
the Permittee from obtaining any other local, state or federal permits or approvals
required for the facility operation.
The issuance of this Permit does not convey any property rights, other than the
rights inherent in this Permit, in either real or personal property, or any exclusive
privileges other than those inherent in this Permit. Nor does this Permit authorize
any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any
infringement of federal, state or local laws or regulations including zoning
ordinances.
The provisions of this Permit are severable. If any provision of this Permit is held
invalid for any reason, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and
effect. If the application of any provision of this Permit to any circumstance is
held invalid, its application to other circumstances shall not be affected.
F.

Revocation

This Permit is subject to revocation if any condition of this Permit is not being
met. The Permittee will be notified in writing prior to any proposed revocation
Page 6

of 17

 action and such action will be subject to all applicable hearing procedures
established under UAC R3I5-I2 and the Utah Administrative Procedures Act.

As part of the revocation the Director shall exercise the option to require payment
of funds under the financial assurance mechanism held bv the Director.

G.

Attachment Incorporation
Attachments to the Permit Application are incorporated by reference into this
Permit and are enforceable conditions of this Permit, as are documents
incorporated by reference into the attachments. Language in this Permit
supersedes any conflicting language in the attachments or documents incorporated
into the attachments.

tr.

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

A.

Design and Construction
The Permittee shall construct any landfill cell, waste treatment facility and final
cover in accordance with Attachment 1 and the Utah Solid Waste Permitting and
Management Rules (UAC R315-301 thru 320).

Prior to construction of any landfill cell, engineered control system, waste
treatment facility or final cover, the Permittee shall submit construction design
drawings and a Construction Quality Control and Construction Quality Assurance
(CQC/CQA) Plan to the Director for approval.
The Permittee shall notiff the Director of completion of construction of any
landfill cell, engineered control system, waste treatment facility or final cover.
Landfill cells may not be used for treatment or disposal of waste until all
CQC/CQA documents and construction related documents including as-built
documents are approved by the Director. The Permittee shall submit as-built
drawings for each construction event that are signed and stamped by an engineer
registered in the State of Utah.
The Permittee shall notiff the Director of any proposed incremental closure,
placement of any part of the final cover or placement of the full final cover.
Construction of any portion of the final cover shall be considered as a separate
construction event and shall be approved separately from any other construction
or expansion of the landfill. Design approval must be received from the Director
prior to construction and shall be accompanied by a CQC/CQA Plan for each
construction season where incremental or final closure is performed.

A qualified paq, independent of the owner, shall perform the quality

assurance

function on liner components, cover components and other testing as required by
PageT oflT

 the approved CQC/CQA Plan. The results shall be submitted as part of the asbuilt drawings to the Director.

All engineering drawings submitted to the Director shall be stamped
by

a

and approved

professional engineer with a current registration in Utah.

If ground water is encountered during excavation of the landfill, the Director shall
be notified immediately and a contingency plan implemented or alternative
construction design developed and submitted for approval.

B.

Run-On Control
Drainage channels and diversions shall be constructed as specified in Attachment
2 andmaintained at all times to effectively prevent runoff from the surrounding
area from entering the landfill.

C.

Equivalent Design

An equivalent design described in Attachment 1 which uses a geosynthetic clay
liner in place of the liner required by UAC R315-303-3(3Xa)(ii) has been
approved by the Director.

u.

LANDFILL OPERATION
A.

Plan of Operation
The Plan of Operation included in Attachment 3 and the solid waste permit issued
by the Director shall be kept onsite at the landfill or at the location designated in
Section Itr. K of this Permit. The landfill shall be operated in accordance with the
Plan of Operation in Attachment 3. If necessary, the facility owner may modiff
the Plan of Operation, provided that the modification meets all of the
requirements of UAC R315-301 through 320 is as protective of human health and
the environment in accordance with UAC R3 I 5-3 1 1-2. Any modification to the
Plan of Operation shall be noted in the operating record.

Any modification to the Plan of Operation must be submitted to the Director for
approval and is considered a minor permit modification in compliance with UAC
R315-311-2(1)(a)(xiii) unless the Director determines the change should be
subject to public comment under UAC R315-3 1 1-2(lxb).
B.

Securitv
The Permittee shall operate the Landfill so that unauthorized entry to the facility is
restricted. All facility gates and other access routes shall be locked during the
time the landfill is closed. At least two persons employed by the Permittee shall
be at the landfill during all hours that the landfill is open. Fencing and any other
Page 8 of 17

 access controls as shown in Attachment 3 shall be constructed to prevent access

of

persons or livestock by other routes.
C.

Training
The Permittee shall provide training for onsite personnel in landfill operation,
including waste load inspection,hazardous waste identification and personal
safety and protection.

D.

Burning of Waste
Intentional buming of solid waste is prohibited and is a violation of UAC R315303-4(2)(b). All accidental fires shall be extinguished as soon as reasonably
possible.

E.

Daily Cover
The solid waste received at the landfill shall be completely covered at the end of
each working day with a minimum of six inches of earthen material. At the end of
each day of operation, the amount of cover placed shall be recorded in the
operating record and certified by the operator.

An attemative daily cover material may be used when the material and operation
meets the requirements of UAC R315-303-4(4Xb) through (d) or when the
alternative daily cover meets the requirement of UAC R315-303-a(a)(e).
F.

Ground Water Monitoring
The Permittee shall monitor the ground water underlying the landfill in
accordance with the Ground Water Monitoring Plan and the Ground Water
Monitoring Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan contained in Attachment 4. If
necessary, the facility owner may modiff the Ground Water Monitoring Plan and
the Ground Water Monitoring Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan, provided
that the modification meets all of the requirements of UAC R315-301 through 320
and is as protective of human health and the environment in accordance with
UAC R315 -3lI-2. Any modification to the Ground Water Monitoring Plan and
the Ground Water Monitoring Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan shall be
noted in the operating record. Plan changes that are found by the Director to be
less protective of human health or the environment than the approved plan are a
major modification and are subject to the requirements of UAC R3 1 5-3 1 1 .
The Permittee shall submit a detailed Ground Water Monitoring Quality
Assurance/Quality Control Plan prior to receipt of waste.

G.

Gas Monitoring
Page 9

of

17

 The Permittee shall monitor explosive gases at the landfill in accordance with the
Gas Monitoring Plan contained Attachment 4 and shall otherwise meet the
requirements of UAC R315-303-3(5). If necessary, the Permittee may modiff the
Gas Monitoring Plan, provided that the modification meets all of the requirements
of UAC R315-301 through 320 andis as protective of human health and the
environment in accordance with UAC R315-311-2(1). Any modification to the
Gas Monitoring Plan shall be noted in the operating record. Plan changes that are
found by the Director to be less protective of human health or the environment
than the approved plan are a major modification and are subject to the
requirements of UAC R315-311.
gases at any of the facility structures, at the
property boundary or beyond the property boundary ever exceed the standards set
in UAC R315-303-2(2)(a), the Permittee shall immediately take all necessary
steps to ensure protection of human health and notiff the Director. Within seven
days of detection, the Permittee shall record in the operating record the explosive
gas levels detected and a description of the immediate steps taken to protect
human health. The Permittee shall also implement a remediation plan that meets
the requirements of UAC R315-303-3(5Xb). The plan shall be approved by the
Director prior to implementation.

If the concentrations of explosive

H.

Waste lnspections
The Permittee shall visually inspect incoming waste loads to verifr that no wastes
other than those allowed by this Permit are disposed in the landfill. A complete
waste inspection shall be conducted at a minimum frequency of lYo of incoming
loads, but no less than one complete inspection per day. Loads to be inspected are
to be chosen on arandombasis. The operatingrecord shall contain
documentation that each load is received under a contract approved by the
Director.
one or more containers capable of holding
more than five gallons of liquid shall be inspected to ensure that each container is

All loads suspected or known to have
empty.

loads that the operator suspects may contain a waste not allowed for disposal
at the landfill shall be inspected.

All

Complete random inspections shall be conducted as follows:

1.

The operator shall conduct the random waste inspection at the working
face or an area designated by the operator.

2.

Loads subjected to complete inspection shall be unloaded at the designated
area:
Page 10

of 17

 J.

Loads shall be spread by equipment or by hand tools;

4.

A visual inspection of the waste shall be conducted by personnel trained in
hazardous waste recognition and recognition of other unacceptable waste;
and

5.

The inspection shall be recorded on the waste inspection form found in
Attachment 3. The form shall be placed in the operating record at the end
of the operating day.

Disposal of Special Wastes

If incinerator ash is accepted for disposal, it shall be transported in such a manner
to prevent leakage or the release of fugitive dust. The ash shall be completely
covered with a minimum of six inches of material, or other methods or material, if
necessary, to control fugitive dust. Ash may be used for daily cover when its use
does not create a human health or environmentalhazard.

Animal carcasses may be disposed in the landfill working face and must be
covered with other solid waste or earth by the end of the operating day in which
they are received. Alternatively, animal carcasses may be disposed in a special
trench or pit prepared for dead animals. If a special trench is used, animals placed
in the trench shall be covered with six inches of earth by the end of each operating
day.
J.

Self lnspections
The Permittee shall inspect the facility to prevent malfunctions and deterioration,
operator effors and discharges that may cause or lead to the release of wastes or
contaminated materials to the environment or create a threat to human health or
the environment. These general inspections shall be completed no less than
quarterly and shall cover the following areas: waste placement, compaction,
cover, cell liner, leachate collection system, fences and access controls, roads, runon/run-off controls, ground water monitoring wells, final and intermediate cover,
litter controls and records. A record of the inspections shall be placed in the daily
operating record on the day of the inspection. Areas needing correction, as noted
on the inspection report, shall be corrected in atimely manner. The corrective
actions shall be documented in the daily operating record.

K.

Recordkeeping
The Permittee shall maintain and keep on file at the field office on-site, a daily
operating record and other general records of landfill operation as required by
UAC R315-302-2(3). The landfill operator, or other designated personnel, shall
date and sign the daily operating record at the end of each operating day.
Page 11

of17

 t.

The daily operating record shall include the following items:

a.

The number of loads of waste and the weights or estimates of
weights or volume of waste received each day of operation and
recorded at the end ofeach operating day;

b.

Major deviations from the approved plan of operation recorded at
the end of the operating day the deviation occurred;

c.

Results of other monitoring required by this Permit recorded in the
operating record on the day of the event or the day the information

is received;

d.

2.

L.

Records of all inspections conducted by the Permittee, results of
the inspections and corrective actions taken shall be recorded in the
record on the day of the event.

The general record of landfill operations shall include the following items:

a.

A copy of this Permit including the Permit Application;

b.

Results of inspections conducted by representatives of the Division
and/or representatives of the Bear River Health Department, when
forwarded to the Permittee:

c.

Closure and Post-closure care plans;

d.

Records of employee training; and

e.

Results of groundwater monitoring; and

f.

Results of landfill gas monitoring.

Reporting
The Permittee shall prepare and submit to the Director an Annual Report as
required by UAC R315-302-2(a). The Annual Report shall include: the period
covered by the report, the annual quantity of waste received, an annual update of
the financial assurance mechanism, any leachate analysis results, all ground water
monitoring results, the statistical analysis of ground water monitoring results, the
results of gas monitoring, the quantity of leachate pumped and all training
programs completed.

M.

Roads and Routes

Page 12

of 17

 All access roads and routes, within the landfill boundary, used for transporting
waste to the landfill for disposal shall be improved and regularly maintained as
necessary to assure safe and reliable all-weather access to the disposal area.
ry.

CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
A.

Closure
The final cover of the landfill shall be as shown in Attachment 5. The final cover
shall meet, at a minimum, the standard design for closure as specified in UAC
R315-303-3(4) plus sufficient cover soil or equivalent material to protect the low
permeability layer from the effects of frost, desiccation and root penetration. A
quality assurance plan for construction details of the final landfill cover shall be
submitted to and approved by the Director prior to construction of any part of the
final cover at the landfill. A qualified person not affiliated with the landfill owner
shall perform permeability testing on the recompacted clay placed as part of the
final cover.

B.

Title Recording
The Permittee shall meet the requirements of UAC R315-302-2(6)by recording
with the Box Elder County Recorder as part of the record of title that the property
has been used as a landfill. The recording shall include waste locations and waste
types disposed.

C.

Post-Closure Care
Post-closure care at the closed landfill shall be done in accordance with the PostClosure Care Plan in Attachment 5. Post-closure care shall continue until all
waste disposal sites at the landfill have stabilized and the finding of UAC R315302-3(7)(c) is made.

D.

Financial Assurance

UAC R315-309,
proposed
by
the Permittee,
covering closure and post-closure care costs shall be
submitted to the Director and approved prior to receipt of waste. The Permittee,
prior to receipt of waste, shall establish the approved mechanism and fund it as
required. The financial assurance mechanism(s) shall be adequately maintained to
provide for the cost of closure at any stage or phase or anytime during the life of
the landfillor the permit life, whichever is shorter and shall be fully funded within
ten years of the date waste is first received at the landfill. The Permittee shall
keep the approved financial assurance mechanism in effect and active until
closure and post-closure care activities are completed and the Director has
released the facility from all post-closure care requirements.

A financial

assurance mechanism that meets the requirements of

Page 13

of17

 If a trust fund is chosen as the financial assurance mechanism, the first payment to
the fund will be 10% of the estimated closure and post-closure care costs. If a
trust fund is used, annual payments shall be determined by the following formula:

NP:ICE_CV]/Y
where NP is the next payment, CE is the current cost estimate for closure and
post-closure care (updated for inflation or other changes), CV is the current value
of the trust fund and Y is the number of years remaining in the pay-in period.
The Permittee shall notiff the Director of the establishment of the approved
financial assurance mechanism and must receive acknowledgment from the
Director that the established mechanism complies with applicable rules.
E.

Financial Assurance Annual Update

An annual revision of closure and post-closure costs for inflation and financial
assurance funding as required by UAC R315-309-2(2) shall be submitted to the
Director as part of the annual report.
F.

Closure Cost and Post-Closure Cost Revision
The Permittee shall submit a complete revision of the closure and post-closure
cost estimates by the Closure Cost Revision Date listed on the signature page of
this Permit any time the facility is expanded, any time a new cell is constructed or
any time a cell is expanded.

V.

ADMINIS TRATTVE REQUIREMENTS

A.

Permit Modification

Modifications to this Permit may be made upon application by the Permittee or by
the Director. The Permittee will be given written notice of any permit
modification initiated by the Director.
B.

Permit Transfer

This Permit may be transfened to a new permittee or new permittees by meeting
the requirements of the permit transfer provisions of UAC R3 1 5-3 10- 1 I .
C.

Expansion

This Permit is for a Class I Landfill. The landfill shall operate according to the
designs in Attachment 1 and Plan of Operation described in Attachment 3. Any
expansion of the current footprint designated in the description contained in
Attachment 1, but within the property boundaries designated in the Permit
Page 14

of L7

 Application, shall require submittal of plans and specifications to the Director.
The plans and specifications shall be approved by the Director prior to
construction.

Any expansion of the landfill facility beyond the property boundaries designated
in the description contained in Attachment 1 shall require submittal of a new
permit application in accordance with UAC R315-310.
Any addition to the acceptable wastes described in Section 1B shall require
submittal of all necessary information to the Director and the approval of the
Director. Acceptance for PCB bulk product waste under UAC R3 15-315-7(3Xb)
can only be done after approval by the Director and modification of Section IC of
this Permit.
D.

Expiration

Application for permit renewal shall be made at least six months prior to the
expiration date, as shown on the signature (cover) page of this Permit. If a timely
renewal application is made and the permit renewal is not complete by the
expiration date, this Permit will continue in force until renewal is completed or
denied.
E.

Status Notification

Eighteen months from the date of this Permit, the Director shall be notified in
writing of the status of the construction of this facility unless construction is
complete and operation has commenced. If construction has not begun within
18 months, the Permittee shall submit adequate justification to the Director as to
the reasons that construction has not commenced. If no submission is made or the
submission is judged inadequate by the Director, this Permit will be revoked.
F.

Construction Approval and Request to Operate
The Permittee shall meet each of the following conditions prior to receipt
waste:

of

1.

Notiff the Director that all the requirements of this Permit

2.

Submit to the Director, for approval, documentation that all local zoning
requirements and local govemment approvals have been obtained for
operation of this landfill.

a
J.

Submit to the Director, prior to the construction of any portion of the
landfill, including offices, fences, and gates, documentation that the

have been met
place
as required.
and all required facilities, structures and accounts are in

Page 15

of

17

 Permittee owns or has a lease that allows this property to be used as a

landfill.

4.
G.

Shall not construct any portion of the landfill where the bottom elevation
is less than five feet above the historic high ground water level.

Contract Approval
The Permittee must receive waste only from local governments that have contracts
with the facility owner. All new contracts and changes in existing contracts must
be reviewed and approved by the Director prior to receipt of waste.

Page 16

of17

 List of Attachments
Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 File: -

Design & Construction
Run-on & Run-off Controls
Plan of Operation
Monitoring Plan
Closure & Post-Closure

Pemit i0202Rl

PageLT of17

 Attachment 1

Design Construction

2.O PERMIT MODIFICATION REOUEST AND UPDATES

1

This section describes the proposed design modification elements previously listed in
Section t.2 as compared to those elements included in the Promontory Landfill LLC Class I
Landfill Permit Application. Also, as required in the Solid Waste Renewal permit, this section
presents the closure and post-closure cost estimate revision which is due by August gt,20!6.

2.t

LINER ALTERNATIVES

Alternatives to the permitted liner design are proposed in order to gain flexibility in
construction as certain materials meeting performance requirements become
available that may be utilized in the finer construction. These alternatives are
proposed for Phase l and future phases, as applicable.

2.1.1

PERMITTED LINER DESIGN

The permitted composite liner design consists of a clay layer and a HDPE layer. A clay
layer consisting of a geocomposite clay layer (GCL) has been previously approved as

the low permeable soil component. The HDPE layer would be 60 mil or thicker to
minimize puncture risk. The HDPE would be protected from site soils by the clay layer.
The leachate collection system would consist of a geonet. Overlaying the leachate
collection layer would be a 20 ounce/yard nonwoven filter geotextile mat. The purpose
of this mat is to separate the leachate collection system and the waste. A protective
soil layer will be placed on top of the geotextile mat to protect the mat and geonet from
protrusions and to also provide a buffering and filtration function. The protective layer
will consist of a homogenous material with an average particle size less than Vz-inch
diameter, and a maximum particle size less than 1 inch diameter.

2.1.2

PROPOSED LEACHATE COLLECTION I-AYER ALTERNATIVES
In order to utilize construction materials as they become available, two lateral drainage

layer alternatives are presented one which includes soil operations layer, geotextiles
and $ravel, while the second consisting of only a thick layer of course sand. The two
alternatives are described below. Detailed design and support calculations are
included in the Desi$n Report portion of this document included in Section 3.0.

2.1,.2.1 ALTERNATIVE 1
Alternative 1 includes the following from bottom to top (see Figure C-501, Detail 3):

o

Prepared liner subgrade;

Promontory Landfi ll Facility
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit Mod-Design Rpt.docx

 o
o
o
r
o
o
2.T.2.2

GCL (non-woven);

60-MlL HDPE Geomembrane (textured on both sides);
Cushion geotextile;
Nine (9) inch graveldrainage layer;
Non-woven geotextile filter fabric; and
Minimum l8-inch protective soilcover.

ALTERNATIVE 2

Alternative 2 includes the following from bottom to top (see Figure C-501, Detail 2):

o
o
r
r
2.2

Prepared liner subgrade;
GCL;

60-MlL HDPE Geomembrane (textured on both sides); and
Minimum 18-inch coarse sand.

LINER LOW-PERMEABILITY I.AYER SUBSTITUTTON
An alternative to the permitted low-permeability layer of the liner design is proposed in

order to gain flexibility in construction as certain materials become available that may
be utilized in the liner construction. This alternative is proposed for Phase 1 and future
phases, as applicable.

2.2.1

PERM]TTED LOW-PERMEABILITY LAYER

The permitted composite liner design consists of a clay layer and a HDPE layer. A clay

"

2.2.2

layer consistin$ of a GCL, is presented in the permit document and is also allowed in
Section ll.C of the Solid Waste Permit Renewal issued September 1, 2011 (see
Appendix A). Section l].C indicates that the facility has been approved for an equivalent
design which uses a geosynthetic clay liner in place of the liner required in Utah
Administrative Code (UAC) R315-303-3(3XaXii).
PROPOSED LOW-PERMEABILITY LAYER

The low-permeability layer portion of the liner is proposed to utilize clay soils in lieu of
a GCL, at the owner's option should appropriate materials become available. The clay

layer will meet the prescriptive requirements of UAC R315-303-3(3)(aXii) which
requires that the lower finer be constructed of at feast two feet of recompacted clay or
other soil material with a permeability of no more than 1 x 10'z cm/sec. Detailed
design and support calculations are included in the Design Report portion of this
document included in Section 3.O.
Promontory Landflll Facility

Permit Modification and Design Report

2-2
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Permit Mod-Design Rpt.docx

Tetra Tcch BAS

 2.3

BASE GRADE MODIFICATION

An alternative to the permitted base grade is proposed for stability and operational
concerns. This alternative is proposed for Phase l and future phases, as applicable.
It is proposed that the base grades be excavated to the maximum extent possible
maintaining a five-foot seperation between the historical high level of groundwater and
the bottom of the lowest liner component, along with a three percent sheet grade as
opposed to the currently permitted five percent grade (see Figures C-101 and C-301).
The proposed grade decrease is still within the allowed base grade in UAC R315-3033(3Xa)(ii) which allows for base grades as flat as two percent. lt is proposed that
flowlines of the leachate collection pipes be greater than one percent. Detailed design
and support calculations are included in the Design Report portion of this document
included in Section 3.0.

2.4

LEACHATE UTILIZATION

An alternative to leachate utilization is proposed. The currently permitted use/disposal

of leachate is for either dust controly'compaction water on lined areas or pumped to
evaporation basins. lt is proposed that the leachate may also be recirculated into the
waste thus increasing anerobic digestion and landfill gas production which may be
used to generate electricity. Leachate recirculation is allowed by UAC
R315-303-3(2Xb) on landfills with composite liners like the PLF. Leachate
recirculation would only occur in lined portions of the facility. Leachate production

.
2.5

would be closely monitored to ensure that the moisture holding capacity of the refuse
is not exceeded.
FILLSLOPE MODIFICATION

Modification of the design of the finalfill slopes is proposed. The currently permitted
final fill slopes are set at 4:L (horizontal:vertical) gross or approximate 3.5:1 slopes
between 1S-foot benches. The proposed modification to the final fill slopes will be
gross 3:1 or 2.5:1, slopes between 1S-foot benches (see Figure C-L02). This design
modification is supported by the stability analysis provided in Appendix E and
disucssed in Section 3.1.4. This modification is proposed for Phase 1 and future
phases, as appllicable.

2.6

ALTERNATIVE FINAL COVER DESIGN

The current permitted final cover design for the PLF is as follows (from bottom to top):

Permit Modification and Design Repod

Promontory Landfill Facility

2-3
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Permit Mod-Design Rpt.docx

fetra Toch BAS

 O

o
o
o

GCL;

40 MIL Very Flexibte polyethytene

(VFpE);

Bi-planarGeocomposite;and

18 inches of site soils.

An alternative to the permitted final cover is proposed as allowed in

UAC

R315-303-3(4XaXi) and (ii) which allows the director to approve an alternative cover
desi$n if it can be documented that the alternative cover achieves an equivalent
recluction in infiltration as achieved by the standard design and the alternative finat
cover provides equivalent protection from wind and water erosion as achieved by the

standard design. The proposed alternative design will consist of a monolithic soil
evapotranspiration cover for placement on final fill slopes which will be designed to a
depth and soil type which will perform equivalently to the prescriptive standard in UAC
R315-303-3(4). Detailed design and support calculations will be presented atthe time
of closure when final cover materials have been selected and modeled.

2.7

CLOSURE AND POST€LOSURE MATNTENANCE COST ESTTMATE REV S ON/UPDATE

As required in the Solid Waste Renewal Permit, the closure cost estimate
revision/update is due by August 31, 2016. ln light of the design of phase 1, the
cfosure and post+losure cost estimates have been updated from 2008 to 2eI6 rates
and reflects the costs of placement of the proposed alternative final cover on the final

fillslopes and the prescriptive cover on the deck areas. The post-closure costs reflect
the appropriate maintenance costs for each final cover type.
The cost estimates assume that closure activities would be implemented as each
phase within the disposal site is completed. These closure activities would minimize

the need for further maintenance, and minimize or eliminate the threat to human
health and the environment from post-closure escape of solid waste constituents,
leachate, contaminated run-off or waste decomposition products to the ground,
groundwater, surface water or the atmosphere.
The previous cost estimate prepared as part of the permit application assumed the
first module to close to be 20 acres. The redesign of the landfittdevelopment provides
for the initial phase to consist of 31 acres; therefore the cost estimates are based on
closure of the first 31 acres of the PLF. Table A and B presents the revised/updated
costs, and supporting documentation is included in Appendix G. The closure and postclosure costs have been prepared as required by UAC R315-3Og-2 and in accordance
with UAC R315-309-2(3Xa) and (b).

Permit Modification and Design Report

2-4

J:\Promontory Point\permit Revision\perma Mo&Design Rpt.docx

Totra Tech BAS

 3.0

PHASE 1. DESIGN

This section describes the design and proposed construction of Phase 1 which meets the
desi$n requirements of UAC R315-303 for Class I tandfilts as weff as the Sotid Waste permit
Renewal conditions for the PLF. Design elements include the liner design configuration,
design criteria and supporting calculations. Construction design elements include the
excavation, subgrade preparation, composite liner system, leachate collection and removal
system (LCRS), operations layer, and surface water drainage control system. In addition, this
section summarizes the cQA plan and operational requirements for phase 1.

3,1

DEStcN

3.1.1

LINER CONF GURATION

The Phase 1 development area will be the initial phase in the development of the pLF
(see Figure C-100). The limits of disturbance for the Phase area is approximately 43

!

acres, of which approximately 34 acres are to be lined. Within this configuration, the
ffoor area consists of approximately 26.6 acres and the slopes 4.2 acres. The liner
plans for Phase 1 is shown on C-101, C-103 and G105 of the Construction plans
(Appendix B).
The base of Phase 1 is designed at a minimum three (3) percent sheet flow gradient
and the LCRS mainline is at two (2) percent. Subgrade elevations were set to maintain
positive gravity flow of liquids through the LCRS to the sump. A pump will be installed
in the sump and leachate will be pumped into tanks located to the south west of the
cell. The excavation slopes are comprised of a maximum of 3:1 (horizontal:vertical)
slope grades.

3.1.2

DESIGN CRTTERIA

The Phase 1 liner system reflects current design criteria requirements in UAC R31S303-3(3). These criteria are discussed in the following applicable construction
element sections.

3.1.3

DESIGN CALCULATIONS

Desi$n calculations were performed for various elements of the Phase 1 liner system.
The following calculations are included in Appendix D.

o

Liner and LCRS Pipe Calculations:

o

Geotextile cushion;
Permit Modification and Design Repon

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit Mod-Design

r*j.?

Tetra Tech BAS

 o
o
3.1.4

o
o
o

LCRS pipe strength;
LCRS pipe capacity;
LCRS pipe spacing;

Hydrologic and hydraulic calculations for stormwater drainage systems; and
Leachate Generation - HELp Modeling.

SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

Analysis of slope stability is mandated for subgrade slopes by 40 cFR, part 25g.15,

which requires the operator to ensure against landfilling over unstable areas which
may compromise the integrity of fandfifl structural components. Final refuse fill
slope
stability is governed in UAC R315-302-1(2Xb).

A slope stability analysis, which was based on sit+specific geotechnical field
investigations, proposed liner materials and calculbtions for static and pseudostatic
slope stability, was prepared forthe Phase l design. The methods and results
of this
work are documented in a report titled Slope stability Evaluation, promontory point
Landfill Cell 1, Phase 14, Ogden Utah (see Appendix E). Static and pseudostatic
slope
stability calculations were completed for subgrade, liner, interim fill, and final fill slope
geometries for phase 1.

3.1.5

CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS

3.1.5.1

EXCAVATION

The geometry for the Phase 1 excavation is shown on Sheets c-101,
c-103, and G105

of the Construction Plans (Appendix B). The excavated soils will be stockpiled onsite,

used within the cell or exported. Total excavation is approximately 7g5,OOO cubic
yards, see the break down by phase in Table 1.

3-6

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit Mod-Design Rpt.docx

Permit Modification and Design Report

Totra Toch BAS

 Table 1
Earthwork Volumes

Phase

3,T.5.2

Excavatlon(GY)

Phase 1A

448,OOO

Phase 18

228,000

Phase 1C

109,000

Total

785,000

COMPOSITE LINER

For the liner construction, a composite liner system (two-layer low-permeability
systems) and an LCRS are proposed, which meet the requirements specified in UAC
R315-303-3(3)(a) and (b) and the Promontory Landfill LLC Class I Landfitl Permit
Application document. The UAC contains design requirements for a prescriptive liner
system and also allow an operator to develop and submit for approval, an alternative
liner design in accordance with UAC R315-303-3(3Xb). An alternative tiner and LCRS
were approved by the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board forthe PLF which
allows a GCL in lieu of the two-foot low-permeability soil layer. Dependent upon
materials availability either the prescriptive low-permeability soil layer or GCL may be
utilized in the composite liner construction.
Appendix D contains design support calculations for the composite liner system. The
calculations check the integrity of the liner material to resist puncture, shearing and
tearing. Appendix D also includes calculations for the leachate collection and recovery
system design.
Where the ed$es of the Phase 1 composite liner system meet future liner systems of
adjacent phases, the soil and geosynthetic components from each liner system will be
appropriately joined and/or welded together to form a continuous liner between the
phases as shown in the Construction Plans. A representative of the geosynthetic

installation contractor and CQA personnel will approve the condition of the subgrade
prior to plaoement o-f geosynthetic materials.

The liner design consists of the side slope and bottom areas as described in the
followi ng two sections.

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Permit Mo&Design Rpt.docx

 J

g.r.s.2.tside stopes
The composite liner system for the slope liner section is comprised of the following
(from bottom to top as shown below in Figure G501, Detail 4):

o
o
o
.
o

Prepared liner subgrade;

Geotextile-backed GCL or two-foot low-permeability soil layer (with
conductivity less than or equal to LxLtT cm/sec);

a

hydraulic

60-MlL HDPE Geomembrane (textured on both sides);
16 ounce cushion geotextile;and
24-inch protective soil cover.

The composite liner system has been designed to prevent migration of leachate into
the underlying ground and facilitate leachate collection by the LCRS.

3.7.5.2.2 Floor Areas
The composite liner system for the bottom liner section (gradients less than 5:1) is
comprised of the following (fiom bottom to top as shown below in Figlure C-501, Details
2 and 3):

,}

o
.
r
o
r
o
o

Prepared liner subgrade;

Geotextile-backed GCL or twcfoot low-permeability soil layer (with
conductivity less than or equal to 1x1O7 cm/sec);
6O-M L HDPE Geomembrane (textured on both sides);
Cushion geotextile;

a

hydraulic

Six (6) inches gravel drainage layer;
Non-woven geotextile filter fabric; and

18-inch protective soil cover.

Or

.
o
r
o

Prepared liner subgrade;

Geotextile-backed GCL or twefoot low-permeability soil layer (with
conductivity less than or equal to 1x10z cm/sec);
60-MlL HDPE Geomembrane (textured on both sides);and

a hydraulic

18-inch coarse sand.

The composite liner system has been designed to prevent the migration of leachate
into the underlying ground and facilitate leachate collection by the LCRS.

The HDPE geomembrane or flexible membrane liner (FML) will be textured on the
surface placed over the finished subgrade and will be overlain by geotextile. This
allows the geote)dile to move above the FML without affecting the integrity of the lowPromontory Landfill Facility

Permit Modmcation and Design Repon

3-8
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revbion\Permit MoGDesign RpLdocx

Tetra Tech 8AS

 permeability performance of the waste containment system. The floor FML will be
textured on both sides to provide the highest possible friction inteface on the floor
and increase the stability of the waste prism.
The construction drawings contain details for anchoring of the liner materials at the
top of slope. These anchors provide restraint against pull out, which is not likely to
occur given the proposed uniform waste filling operation which will provide buttressing

and support of the liner system. All anchor trenches shall be monitored during
construction and density tests shall be completed in accordance with the CQA plan.

3.1.5.3

LEACHATE COLLECTION AND REMOVAL SYSTEM

A LCRS shall be installed above the FML on the floor, bench, and slope areas. The
LCRS was designed in consideration of the following criteria:

o
o

Provide for efficient collection and removal of leachate by gravity flow; and
Limit the maximum amount of hydraulic head on the primary liner to less than 12
inches.

Modelingof potential leachate was performed usingthe United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) version
3.07. The HELP model output files for each run are included in Appendix D.
The HELP Modelwas developed to provide landfilldesigners and regulators with a tool
for rapid, economical screening of alternative designs. The computer program uses

climatologic, soil, and design data to produce daily estimates of water movement
across, into, through, and out of the landfill. To accomplish this; daily precipitation,
runoff , infiltration, surface evaporation, subsurface evapotranspiration, stored soil
moisture, percolation, and subsurface lateral drainage are modeled to maintain a
water balance. The model utilizes daily climatic data to develop a daily water balance
for up to thirty years.
The HELP Model was used to evaluate and design of both base liner section options

and the slope liner for conformance with regulatory requirements. Specifically, the
HELP Model was used to evaluate the total head on the liner and to determine leachate
generation rates for use in Oesigning and sizing the leachate pipes and storage tanks.
A review of historic climatic records from nearby weather stations revealed that the
largest amount of rain in one year was 33.93 inches recorded at Brigham City waste
plant in 1983. The Bringham City waste plant is approximately 24 mile north east of
PPL. The 33.93 inch annual rainfall was used and HELP synthetically generated
precipitation for a five year period forthe intermediate condition to determine the worst
Permit Modification and Design Repon

Promontory Landfill Facility

3-9
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Permit Mod-Design Rpt.docx

Totra Tech BAS

 case scenario, or highest leachate generation rate to be expected. The default weather

data from Salt Lake City was used for the final condition, with 200 feet of refuse over
30 year duration to determine the range of leachate generation to be expected.
The input used in the HELP to modelthe proposed liner design profile are listed in the
first section of each HELP Model output file: The input listing shows layer type,

thickness, and soil characteristics. The soil characteristics are default values
suggested by the HELP Modelto simulate the soils to be used in the proposed design.
The HDPE layer was assumed to have a pinhole density of 3 per acre and installation
defect of 3 per acre, and a placement quality of "3-good".
The following table summarizes the main input values and results for the various
scenarios.
Table 2
HELP Results

Refuse

Uner
Sectlon

Thlckness

MaxHead Peak
Over Llner Leachate

Duratlon
(years)

(lnches)

(feet)

Average
Annual
Leachate

Generatlon

Total

lct/acl

lct/ac/yearl
lil&E*rn Gomffilfi

20.5

Base Alt. 1

Cois

eaEe A{t. Z

base

i

.i

105

Slope

Base Alt.

t.o4

1

Alt.2

Slope

:

Zoo

!

30

'-

100

i

4,698.91

3s6:3

4'ffibff

286.74

4,759.77

203.64

933.43

a

3.91

nao

2OO-

i

3139
.

,,' .

503.66

'

t0

t-56

288,32

30

8.73

135.90

i

tiC.eg
3,59t.77

3.!.5.3.1 Leachate Tank SlzIhE
The HELP results were used to size the leachate tank for the initial phase. Cell 1 will
have approximately 15 acres of base finer and 4 acres of slope liner, using the average

leachate generation rates listed in Table 2 results in a total leachate flow of
approximately 1,860 gallons per day. The leachate tanks have a capacity of 8,700
each, two tanks will be installed during Phase 1 construction (see Sheet G5O4) for a
total capacity of t7,4OO gallons; therefore, the tanks will have to be emptied every 9
days on average. However, the yield values in the HELP analysis are conservative as
they do not account for phasing over time and closure of certain areas. Therefore, the
and Design Report

3-10
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Permit ModDesign RpLdocx

Tetra Te.fi BA{t

 Promontory l-andfill LLC
Class I Landfrll Permit Application

Facility Cha racte rization

CHAPTER

II

FACILITY CHARACTERIZATION

2.1

GENERAL SETTING

The landfrll site is not currently zoned. A Conditional Use Permit was issued by Box Elder

County Planning Departnrent and is included in Appendix
would be located

2.2

at4lol2'55" north latinrde

and

B.

ll2o28'05"

The entrance of the facility
east longitude.

FACILITY DESCRIPTION

Figure 2.1 shows the boundary of the 2006-acre facility covered by this Pemrit Application.
The figure indicates the proposed buffer and disposal areas. The disposal area covers

approximately 1000 acres and is bounded by a 1006-acre buffer area meeting State and
Federal requirements.

2,3

PROOF OF OWNERSHIP AND FACILITY I.EGAL DESCRIPTION

Figure 2.1 also details the ownership of lands sungunding the proposed landfill facility. As
the figure indicates, Chournos Promontory and Young Resources, hold title to much of the

adjacent properry. Both of these owners are participants in Promontory Landfill

of ownership is included in Appendix C. The following is

a

LIf.

Proof

property description of the

proposed landfill facility:

PROMONTORY LAI{DFILL PARCEL.2OO6 ACRES.
Property Description"
The real propea.y situated in Box Elder County, Utah, more particularly described as follows:
The East half of the Northwest Quarter, Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt
I-ake Base and Meridian.

The Southwest Quarter, Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.

.AGA

2-1

August 2008

 Promontory LandfillUC
Landfill
Class I Landfill Permit Application
F ac il ity C h a racte i zati o n

The Southwest Quarter, Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.
The West half of the Northeast Quarter, Section 30, township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt

[,ake Base and Meridian.
The West half of the Northwest Quarter, Section 30, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt

Lake Base and Meridian.
The Southeast Quarter, Section 13, Township 6 Norttr, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.
The Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 14,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.
The Norttreast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 14,
Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.
The South half of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 23, Township 6
North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.
The Southeast Quafier of the Northeast Quarter, Section 23, Township 6 North Range 6
West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.
Less: The existing County Road and all the land lying Westerly of said County Road.
The Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, Section 23, Township 6 North, Range 6
West, Salt kke Base and Meridian.
Irss: The existing County Road and all land lying Westerly of said County Road.
The Southeast Quart€r of the Southeast Quarter, Section 23, Township 6 North, Range 6
West, Salt I-ake Base ahd Meridian.
Irss: The existing County Road and all land lying Westerly of said County Road.
The Northeast Quarter, Section

Z,

Township 6 North, Range 6 West" Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.
The South hal{ Section 24, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.
The Northeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt l^ake Base and

Meridian.
The Southeast Quarter, Section 25, Township 6 Norttr, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.
L,ess: The existing County Road and

^AGA

all land lying Southerly of said County Road.
August 2008

 Promontory Landfill LLC
Landf i II Facilitv

P ro mo nto ry

Class I Landfill Permit Application
F acility Chancte i ati o n

The Southwest Quarter, Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt [,ake Base and

Meridian.

kss:

The existing County Road and all land lying Southwesterly of said County Road.

The Northwest Quarter, Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.

Irss:

The existing County Road and all land lying Southwesterly of said County Road.

The West half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt
Lake Base and Meridian.
The Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 6 North, Range 5
West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.

The West half of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 6

North, Range 5 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian.

TheSoutheastQuarterof theNortheastQuart€rof thesouthwestQuarterof Section 18,
Township 6 North, Range 5 West, SaltI-ake Base and Meridian.

The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 19, Township'6 North, Range 5
'West,

Salt Lake Base and Meridian.

The Southwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and

Meridian.
I-ess: The Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section
13, Township 6 North, Range 6 West" Salt Lake Base and Meridian.

The Northwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and

.Meridian.
Together with alt improvements, appurtenances and any water rights thereto

.AG=

b9loq"g.
August 2008

 Attachment 2

Run-on Run?off Controls

 

3.1.5.4

STORMWATER DRAINAGE CONTROL

Stormwater is water that does not come into contact with the refuse. Stormwater
drainage can be described as being either run{n - stormwater flows entering the
developed portion of the site from adjacent undeveloped areas, or runoff - stormwater
flow coming from the developed portion of the site that has not had contact with refuse,
i.e. stormwater flows over native cut slopes or intermediate cover.. All stormwater that

comes into contact with refuse is considered leachate and must remain within the
boundaries of the landfill liner and be managed as leachate. The landfill runoff will be
kept separated from the runon flows.
The diversion channels are designed to handle the 2Syear,24-hour storm event. The

quantity of flow expected for the run-on condition of the Phase 1 landfitl cell was
determined by usingthe precipitation rainfalf depth of 2.25 inches (NOAA precipitation
frequency data server Atlas 14). The Runoff Curve Number varies across the tributary
area from 63 for soil type A and 88 for Wpe D soils. The areas of the various hydrologic
soil types was determined using the Web Soil Survey website from the USDA.
Vegetation was assumed to be poor condition desert shrub. The 48 acre tributary is
divided into eastern and western. The time of concentration was calculated using
Kirpich and Manning's equations for sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and
channelized flow accordingly. The peak flow generated was determined by applying
the US Soil Conservation Science Technical Release 55 (TR-55) method. Details of the
input parameters and model output are included in Appendix D. Table 3 shows the
peak discharge generated from the runon.
Table 3

2$Year, 2fiHour Peak Flow

ft€k Bffirgb

8ub€rea
A1(Western Run€n)

14.68

81(Eaetern Run'4n)

47.72

(o{s)

The diversion channels that convey the runon around the site consist of earthen
swales that are lined with an erosion control blanket. The channels were sized using
Flowmaster hydraulic software from BenUey Systems Inc.
The runoff from the Phase l landfillcellwill be managed through temporary drainage
facilities consisting of benches, down drains, and drainage swales. Runoff from the
landfill as well as the onsite facilities will be routed through the detention basin to

3-L2
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit MoGoesign RpLdocx

lGtra T€ch BAS

 capture sediment and pollutants prior to the stormwater discharging from the site. lf
required, culverts will be placed along the access road as needed.
Stormwater that collects inside of the landfill cell but does not come into contact with

refuse will drain to an earthen lined pond located in the northern portion of the cell.
As the landfill expands through the phases 1A, 18, and 1C the pond will be
reconstructed to accommodate the runoff volume of the subsequent interim drainage
conditions. The 2 year,24 hour storm event of 1".32 inches was multiplied by the
tributary area to determine the size of the ponds. Figures D-2 through D4 show the
various pond configurations and calculations (Appendix D). Stormwater that
accumulates at the interior basin will be allowed to settle prior to pumping to site
drainage facilities.

3.1.5.5

CONSTRUCTION SWPPP

The draft construction stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) has been
prepared for the Phase 1 landfill cell in accordance to Utah Administrative Code R317&3.9. The Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) requires construction
stormwater permits for construction activities that disturb one acre or more.
The permit requires submission of a Notice of Intent (NOl) by creating an account on
the Utah.gov website. The construction generaf permit must be renewed annually and
the online account can be used to renewthe permits. An owner or operator may submit

a Notice of Termination

(NOT) form

at the end of the construction activity. A draft

construction SWPPP is included in Appendix H.

3.1.5.6

.

INDUSTR]AL SWPPP

Operators of facilities that have industrial stormwater discharges are covered by the
General Multi-sector Industrial Storm Water Permit. Coverage is based on the facility's

Standard Industrial Classification (Sl0) code which is 4953 for Refuse Systems.
The permit requires submission of a Notice of Intent (NOl) by creating an account on
the Utah.gov website. The general permit cycle is for 5 years and the online account
ian be used to renew the permits. A draft industrial SWPPP is included in Appendix l.

3.1.6

CONSTRUCTION OUALITY ASSURANCE

To veriff that the liner installation has been completed in accordance with the
Construction Plans and Specifications and that the work meets applicable regulatory
requirements, cbnstruction will be monitored in accordance with the procedures and
Permit Modification and Design Repon

Promontory Landfi ll Facility

3-13
J:\Promontory Point\Permil Revbion\Permit Mod-Design Rptdocx

Tetra T€dl BAS

 Attachment 3

Plan of Operation

Prwrcntory landfrll lJ.O
Class I lanffill

PetrnltAflletion
Planot@entlut

comPactors. Waste wiU be placcd and compactcd in a manor to optimize bottr
production and compaction.

Operations at the tipping face

will not

take placc

wibout temporary 12' highfencing

to control fugitive waste. Said fence shall move with ttre operation being placed

within 200 feet or less from the tipping face. Tipping operations will be limircd to
one arca at a time to contrrol the amount of exposcd wastc. Thc size of the working
face will be minimized and anticipatcd to be less than one-half acre.

Daily and intcrmediatc cover will be gencrarcd from borrow areas within the buffer
zone or from processing operations in Little Valley. A minimum of 1000 cubic yards

of covcr materid will be available in stockpile or acccssible from borrow areas at all
tirnes. This adequatcly covers the anticipated modmum size working face by a factor

of nvo which leaves plenty of material availablc for contingencies. The cover
material will be loaded, transported, and deposircd on the refusc with rubbcr-tired
whecl sctapcrs, fine

graM with bulldozcn

(as necdcd), and compactcd with the

landfill compactor (or a soil compactor at tbe direction of ttre Landfill Opcrator).
an area is not to bc actively landfill morc that 30 days, intormediate covcr

applied. Intermediate cover shall havc

.

a

If

will be

minimum &ickness of 12 inches.

Thc final covcr for ttre Class I cell would be designed using Bentomat (ST), 40 mil
VFPE, bi-planar drainage not and 18 inchcs of site soils. The covcr would then be
seed€d and lightly compacted to support vegetrtion and rcduce crosion.

5.2.2

Equipmcnt

The Owner would maintain the rrcessary equiprncnt to off-load, spread and compact
waste, control dust" and perform othcr facility operations. The following Table 5.1 is
a

prcliminary list of the possible equipment that may be uscd on the site.

^A(EA

$3

Augusl 2008

 nonrntuyLurtrttl/'.C
HorrcnoryLandfril
Class I

Fdity

Lanffifl tufltttAppllcatur
Planof Watims

Tebh 5.1
Y
Equlpmcnt Dgcriotion

LIST
No of Plcccs

hrpor

Front-end Loadcr

I

Flardle MSW at unloading

Afi iculatatad off-road ruclq
Cat Dl00E size

2

Self-loading scraper, Cat 623

2

Haul solid wase fiom rail
sidine to cells
Excavate for cellq haul
covcrcd matcrial
Placc solid wastc in cclls

frilitv

size

Track mounted dozcr Cat Dt
sizs
Track mounted dozer Cat D9

sirc
Landfill compactor, Cat t36G
size
MototErader, Cat l40G size

Ccll and cover material
excavadon
Compact solid urste

l-2
I

ConstnrcUmaintain haul roads

I

utd cclls
Handle bail garbage;

Truck mounted 4000 Clon
walcr tand

l

rcad/bcrm consfruction
Ehst contnol

Tnctormountcd 10,CI0

I

Dnst contnol

Frcnt+nd loadcr, Cu 96617
sizc

gallon waterwason
Supcr suckcr vacuum tnrck

Chon rail can

Stoan boiler
Railrcad locomotive

5.3

Ilcat water !o clcan railcars

I

Mow milcars

ON.SITE SOLID WASTEHAIIDLINC PR@EDI.'RES

Daily operuion of the Class I Lanilfill and related facilities would be under the diroction of the

LErdfill Manager. [n the event of thc Landfill Murageds

ab'senc€, a Scnior

Operdor would bc

thc dcsignee in charge ofthe landfill.

A landfill

€nEance sigt

will

be constructod and

will providc thc landfill

name, hours

of

oPcratiotl, list of materials not a€ccptcd by tlrc tardfill, and emcrgency contact information.

At thc bcginning of

each worting day, ttrc Landfill Muragcr would bc rcsponsiblc

for

informing opcrcors of any spocial ofr-loading conditionq for eithcr tnrcks or the railroa4
and whcrc to dircst solid wastr for disposal. Thc Landfill lr{anagcr or Scnior Opcrator would
be responsible for directing each ransport vehicle to the proper location for disposat

.AGE

s4

ofits

Revlsed Ocbb€r2009

 Prcnwtory Lanffiil UC
p.*t*
UmU f*ltv

_

Class I l-andf,ll Permlt Appllcatlan

PlanotOpention

waste, This could altcrnatively be accomplishcd through the placement of directional signs.
The t-andfill Manager or the Senior Opcrator would bc at the landfill during all opcrating
hours.

The Owner probably would elect to construct scales for drc Class I

landfill.

Thc scale

operator would perform load counts on a daily basis and malce a record of thc load source.

lncoming refuse direct€d toward the landfill would be dcposited at the working face under
direction the Iandfill Managcr or Senior Operaor.

5.4

MOMTORING SCHEDTJLE

A Monitoring Plan has bccn developcd to hclp in the prcvcntion of problems that may
Preventable through carcful monitoring and inspection The schcdule provides details on

groundwatcr monitoring, lcacharc monitoring, and landfill gas monitoring. A copy of the

Monitoring Plan is includcd in Appendix M.

5.5

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAI.I

The Emergency Opcrations Plan for the proposod facility is included in Ap.pendix

N. The

Emergency Operations Plan provides protocols for landfill employees in casds of emcrgency.
Should 8n cmergency bappcn, the DEQ rnay elcct to waivc daily covcr rcquiremenb on C

&

D Materials.

5.6

CONTINGENCY PI.AT.I

Tlle Contingercy Plan is designed to minimize hazards to human hoalth or thc environment
from any unplanned suddcn or non-sudden dischargc to air, soil, surfacc, or groundwatcr.
The provisions of 6is plan would be canied out irffnediaEly upon an emergency situation or
r€lease, which could threatcn human health or thc environment. Emergency evacuation

^AGA

95

of

Augusl 200E

 Prornottory la nclfiU LLC

erwnarv mmA
Class

facniU

I l-andfril Pemlt Apptkntion
Plan ol Opantion

the site could be necessary given thc nanrr€ of the waste materials stored and processed at the

site. Incidents at the landfill could be caused by firc, cxplosion, or toxic vapor gcncration.

-5.6.1 Fire or Explosion
A fire supprcssion arca shall bc designarcd

as tbc location for any burning

maarials

to be moved or to bc consolidarcd on for fire suppression activities. This arcas shall

not be located within 150 fcct of any exposed HDPE liner or within 5 vertical feed of
any cxisting liner. Ttris arca may move from timc to timc to be in close proximity to
the working area of thc landfill operations.

Vehicle Fires: In the ovent that a disposal vehicle carrying

a burning or smoldering

load of waste entcrs thc lurdfill site:

l.

Thc vchicle should be dir€cted

o

the designarcd fire zuppression arca as

previously outlincd above.

2. Once burning waste is rcmovcd frorn the vehicle, thc application of covcr matcrial
by landfill cquiprnent or thc application of water by ttre on-sirc water truck
be used

3o

extinguish the

fire. Suffocation with cover material will

will

be the

primary method used to extinguish firo.

3. Vehicles

and any cquipment in the "fire zone"

will

be inspectcd and sprayed

with

warcr while working to qrrcnch thc fire.

4.

Precautions should be aken throughout

tlp entire fire-figtrting operation including

using a hot-spot obscrvcr.

5. If,

at any time, additional assisancc is requircd, local firc-fighting units

will be

conactcd.

Ground Firc/Below Cover Fire: In the evcn that wastc placed on the ground or waste
that was previously covercd crupts into firc:

.AGA

5-6

Argust 2008

 PrwrcntorylatdfrllUC
PmimplntoflLandffiFadhtv
Class I landfril

-

l.

Pemlt Apdbatton
PlanotOpention

h will be isolated from prcviously deposited waste immediately. This will be
done by either moving burning waste to the designarcd fire suppresion area or by

concentrating the burning waste in one spot using landfill equipment.

2.

Once burning wastc is separatcd from other exposcd waste, the fire

wi[

be

cxtinguished by tbe application of covcr material by landfill earth moving
equipment or ttre application of water by the on-site water truck. Suffocation
using cover matcrid wiu be the primary method uscd o extinguish fue.

3. Vehicles

and any equipment in the

'frre zonc'would

be inspected and sprayed

with water while working to quell the fire.

4.

Prccautions should be aken throughout the firc-fighting opcration, including using
a hot-spot obscrver.

5. If, at any timc, additional

assistanac is rcquired" local fue-fighting unie

witl

be

contacted.

Exglosion: In the event that an cxplosion should occur at thc landfill or in any
suilcture associatcd with tbe landfill sitc:

1. All personnel and equipment in thc arca, including drosc in surrounding buildings

will

be evacuatcd immediarcly.

2. Nl landfill pcrsonncl will
3. t ocal em€rgency

4.

The

t$dfill

bc accountsd

personnel

Supervisor

will

will

ftr.

be contact€d.

be informed of thc situation

if hc/shc is not

alrready at

the site.

5.

,The

cxplosion area will bc rcsticted

o

all personnel until clearcd for recnry by

local emergency pcrsonnel.

6.

Precautions should bc bken tbroughout the entirc erncrgcncy rcsporulc opcrations.

7. The Prresident of homontory Landfill, LLC orhis/bcrdcsignee wiII be the only
p€rson au&orizcd to make statcments to the media.

.AGA

s7

AuguBl 2006

 PronmntoryLandfill

Ctasst

5.6.2

UC

t-andfrtrr;Effim

Explosive Gas Relcase

Methane gas rclease would be detectcd using a methanc dcrcction metcr capable
measuring methane levels below the25%

of

lower Explosion Limit. Gas monitoring

would bc conducted around the disposal area and in any of the facility structurcs.
Upon detection of explosive gascs equal to or above thc lowcr explosion limit, the
Owner or Operator would take the following steps:

t. Immediately upon detection, stcps would

be taken to protect human heatth. These

srcps would include accounting for all landfill pcrsonnel and moving

equipment and personnel away

tom

all

the relersc area, shutdown of any electical

devices that could causc ignition, notify emerg€ncy pcrsonncl (firc, potice) and
advise them of the situation, rnonitor thc releasc area urd sunounding areas with
a combustiblc gas indicator and document rcading for placcment into

th

operating rEcord, dctermination of the causc of explooive gas, and keep tbe arca

closcd until corrective actions are hken.
2.

Within 24 hours the Exccutive Sccrctary would be notified.

3.

within scven days of dctcction, thc erplosive

gas

lcvds would bc rccordcd in tbc

operating record along wittr a dcscription of &c steps takcn to protsct human
hcalth.
4.

Within 60 days of dctection,

a

renpdiation plan that had becn approved by the

Executive secretary would bc implcmcntcd and a copy of
operating rpcord. Upon impleurcnbtion,

th

tb plur placcd in the

Bxecutive Secretary would be

notificd.

5.6.3

Failure of Drainage Containmcnt Systcm

If the containnrent system wer€ to hil, thc following actions would be uken:

l.

Construct berms and dirchcs to divcrt water around thc containment failure area
using site soils or readily available materials.

t

^AGA

&E

Arlgust 200E

 Promontorylandfril
Claas I Lanclfll

5.6.4

UC

Pemtt'4pplkntim
Planof apntim

2.

Analyze and evaluate the extent of damage to the containment system.

3.

Identify &e mechanism of failure.

4.

If wananted call a qualified profcsiond to discuss possible solutions.

5.

Dcvclop and implement con€ctive actions.

Temporary Equipmcnt Brcakdown / Exteme Wcathcr Events

The Operator owns nurnenous pieces of equipment trat could be promply mobilized

if warranted. If this equipment were

not available, rcntal equipment is rcadily

accessible along the Wasatch Front. Should an exbemc weathercvcnt @cur, waste

entcring the facility would be temporarily stored in tbc Eansfer building. Haulers
would be notified to t€mporarily stop shipping

wartc.

Waste would thcn be briefly

stot€d at the Transfer Stations until the cvcnt passed. Transfer Stations are designed

for adcquarc sbrage for rcmporary ertremc events like this.

5.7

ALTERNATTVE WASTE HANDLING AI{D DISPOSAL PI-AN

In the event of

a major equipnrcnt

failure, solid wastc would bc loadcd and shipped to an

alrcrnuivc wastc disposal frcility such as Box Elder Coung, Elko Cornty,

s

other available

landfills in the area. A contract will be negotiarcd for an alternative disposal location prior to
the facility operating.

5.8

PROCEDTJRES FOR CONTROLLING DISEASE VECTORS

The use ofdaily cover and the exclusion ofspecific types ofsolid waste arc necess8ry to

control vectors and the subsequent spread of disease. Spccial wast€ sueh as infectious wasre,

liquid wasrc and tires, which may directly carry disease or lead to the propagation of disease

^AGA

5.9

Angust 2006

 Pronontotylandfill UC

p ro np nb N Landfrll FactlN
Class I tandfril

pemitApplkntin
Ptan of

vectors' would be immediarcly covered at the working face.

I$dfill

@eatlon

personnel to the extent

possible would inspect the site for signs and indications of discase vectots. If obscrvations
were made thc t-andfill Manager would be contacted immediately. If discasc vectors were
become a problem, pcst control spccialists would be conacted to reduce the spread

to

of

disease.

5.9

PROCEDURES FOR H(CLIJDING TIIE RECEIPT OF HAZARDOUS WASTE

A 'hohibit€d Waste" control program dcsigned to detect and dcrct' arempts !o dispose of
bazardous and othcrunacccptable wastc would be implementcd at the proposed promontory

LandfiU Facility. The program is desigrd to protcst ttre hcalth and safcty of employees,
customers, and thc gcncral public, as well as protect against conrrrqination of the

environment. Thc lfidfill Manager woutd be in charge of hazardous waste activities.
The wasrc disposcd at the prroposcd

lurdfill uould bo visually

inspecrcd prior O

ftral

placemcnt. The wastc would bc inspectcd at ofr-sirc Eansfer s&ations and on-sitc. Rutber
information about each of these inspection rocations arc listed below:

o

Thc proposed landfiU only accepts wastc fiom any ransfer stations that have a wasle
inspection plan approved by the Executive Secretary. Operators at the tansfer
stations would visually inspect wasle for bazardous matcrials beforc loading for
transit.

o

On-sitc inspcction would bc conducrcd at thc wor&ingface. Landfill operators

will

bc trained in tbe rccognition of prohibited wastc. A random testing program would
bc condrrctcd of all wastc that has not already bcen inspectcd at transfcr stations.
These inqpections would bc conducted on orc percent

ofall

loads not obtaincd from

transfer stations with a wastc inspcction plan approved by ttre Executive Secretary.
sample form for these inspcctions has becn included in Appendix

A

O. All waste would

be visually inspected" as it is being placed, spread and compacted in thc ccll and upon

finding any unscccptrable wastc the following stcps would be taken;
I

.Al=a

$10

Augud APB

 P rornutory Lancllill LLC

ctass t Landft tt

l.

r;g,ffifzi

Using landfill cquipmcnt such as an excavator or a l@dcr, scpante he
questionable wastc from 6e othcr waste in the load. Move tbc qucstionable
waste away from the operating area of thc tipping floor or tipping face so that

operatiors can continue.
2.

Noti$

thc

trndfill

supcrvisor immediately of the problem and thc Generator

of

the waste and wait for direction
3. Keep all othcr

landfll pcrsonnel and equipmcnt away from the questionable

wastcs until notified by 6e

landfiu supervisor or his/her &signee o do

otherwise.
4. The Landfill supcrvisor shall notify tbe gcncrator of the problem and allow the
Generator 24 hours to tcmove thc material from thc premises.
5.

If the Generator

does not respond in a timely fashiorL rernove the wasrc from the

Landfill and dispose of it in a facility appropriatc for the typc of waste. Notc the
details of all actions in frc Operating Rccord.

5.IO

GENERALTRAINING AND SAFETY PI.AI{

Each employee at the landfill facitity would bc traincd to have a working knowledge of the

maintenancc and opcrational techniEres rrccessary to opcrat€ and maintain the landfill facility

in a manner to prcsenvc human hcalth, safety, and the enviroment Training'would be
accomplished through ou-thc-job tnining (OJT) and classroom naining sessions. Tbe

kndfill

Murager, or

a desigaated professional

raincr, would be in charge of directing the

training Programs. Initial treining would bc complcrcd within tbree months of cmployurent

followed by an annual review of basic wase rnanagement skills.

5.10.1 Training Schcdule

The Landfill lv{anago would bc requircd to pass thc SWAI{A Manager of Landfill
Opcrations (MOLO) soute orequivatent. In addition, operato$ are rcquircd to take

.AGA

5-1

1

Augusl 2008

 Promontory LarFlfit

UC

frwrnrvUmU f*nV

,-_

Class I landfrll Permil

ApplknttuI

PhnotOpention
one or both of the SWANA raining cources: Landfill OperatorTraining, and lVaste
Scrcening or equivalcnl Continuing education cfforts includc the following:

Introductory Training
Synopsis of solid wastc regulations, r@ord keeping, and transporrcr requirements.

r Requiremcn[ All Personnel
. Method: OJT
. Review: Quarterty
Policies and Proccdures
Security, inspcctions and emergcncy rcspon$.

. Requirenrcnt All Personnel
r Method: Lecturefl/ideo C.oursc, OJT
r Rcview: Quararly
Safety
Personal protcction, hazardous wastc recognition, hazardous matcrial handling,

emergencyresponsq and first aid.

. Requiremcnn All Personncl
r Method: ClassroomA/ideo Coursc
. Review: Annual
A Safety Training rrceting is held onoe a wcek aking a minimum of 15 minutes.
Training documents would be kept with the Plan of Opcration for

a

rolling five ycar

perid.

.AGA

&12

August 2008

 Prwnontory Landftllll-.C
Ptontr,ntory LandtillFacilitv

_

Class l landfrll

PermitApptmlion
Plan of

5.I

I

Openion

RECORD KEEPING A}.ID REPORTTNG

The Landfill,Manager would maintain tbe following operating records for the landfill:

I
r
r
r
r
.
.
r
r

Records of maintcnucc
Records of raining and notification procedures

Recordsofgroundwatcrmonitoring
Records of landfill gas moniroring
Records of wcighs and volume, number of trucks and railcars

Deviations

fron

the plan of operation

Records of placemcnt or recirculation of leacharc

Recordsofanygascondcnsatc
Preparc an annual report and place the report in the facility's operating record.

Samplc forms for maintenance and gas monitoring are providcd in Appendix O.

^AG=

$13

Augusl 20Og

 Promontory Landlill LLC
ctass t Laantt

APPENDT'(

Permftifltrlf:;

L

FUGITTVE WASTEPI,AN

Introduction
Promontory Landfill LLC is committed to use nranagement, engineering, process, and
personnel conuols to aggressively limit the occurrence of fugitive waste.

Description of potential frrgitive waste generatons and prevention and control steps
Waste loads entcring the landfill must bc covercd. Promontory IffdfiU LLC will purchase
containers that are equipped with covers. In the unlikely event of receiving an unc-overed
Ioad, it will be stopped for corrective actions. First time violators will reccive a one-time
warning. Repeat violators will be subject to increased disposal fees.

Upon entering the site, w*te loads will be taken to an enclosed transfcr station. The transfer
station will specifically be designed with prevcntion of fugitive wastc in mind. The transfer
of waste from incoming containers cither by truck or rail will be contained within the transfer
station. Incoming containers would be rernoved and loaded to onsitc haul trucks for transit
and unloading at the working face. Empty containen wiU be cleancd either at the working
face, inside the transfer building, or in a fenced compound bcfore being placed back into
service. Waste inside tbe transfer station will be picked up daily with though cleaning
conductcd weekly.
The closest weather station to Promontroy landfill sits atop thc mountain above the landfill.
Per Dr. Hohnc Horel of the Departnent of Metcorolgy at the University of Utah, the wind
data generated frome this weather station is not necessarily representative of the conditions at
the landfill site due to the difference in elevation and topo-graihy. The applicant therrfore,
will construct and operate a weather station at the landfilt iitc. information fr:om the weather
station will be recorded into the Daily Operating Record. From this information, the
applicant will be able to ascertain what wind evlnts (velocity, duration, and direction)
compromise the effectiveness of applicant's fugitive waste control rrcasures.
fr-om the applicant's weather station will be initially collccted for one ycar. Within 60
of the end of the first ycar's operations, applicant will prcsent to the Eiecutive Secretary
for approval a protocol outlining wind threshoids (vclociry,iuration, and direction) requiring
D- ata

days

possible ccssation ofoperations at the tipping face.

During the first year while applicant is developing is data base and protocol applicant will
ygluntarily cease placing waste at the tipping face during any wind event in which ttrc

following occur:

r
o

Wind direction is from due north to due east.
Wind velocity cxceeds 35 mph for 30 minures or longcr.

^AG=

L-1

August 20OB

 PrnnntoryLarrffilllJ,C
ctass t t-anctfltt Permit

tr*if:il

Prior to implementation of a protocol, the applicant will take necessary preventative actions
to stop fugitive wastc during cessation of opcrations cause by wind events.
The buffer area around the disposal area will bc given special attention, as it is the final
opportunity to prevent fugitive waste from leaving the site. A five-foot high berm would be
built and topped with a lS-foot high fence. The fence and berm combination would begin on
the hill along the east side, wrap around thc south side of thc property and thcn run along the
wcst sidc to a point where ttre property bcgins to gain significant elevation. The remainder of
the property would be fenced with a Gfoot high fence. Fencing would be inspecrcd weekly
and waste cleanup and repair of the fence would occur as necessary. Positive control of
fugitive waste will include the cleanup of the site, including buffer arcas on a weekly basis,
and afrer wind cvcnts from due north to duc east during which the tipping facc is exposcd in
excess of 35 mph that last more than thirty minuas to minimizc tbc amount of wasrc rcaching
the perimeter fcnce. The drivers of the haul uucks will inspect haul roads and spills will be
cleaned up as reported. Spills inside the site would be cleaned up as dctected. Any waste
that escapes the sirc would be collecrcd and disposed of before thc end of the next ivorking
day.

At the working face, frrgitive wastc will be minimized in multiple ways. First thc working
face will be reduced to the smallest workable area as possible. It is anticipated the working
face will be about a half acre. Next tcmporary 12' high fencing will be placed around the
working face to keep fugitive waste from moving out onto the site. Other temporary fencing
will be erected if necessary to contain waste on site.

.AG=

L-2

August2008

 Pronwttory LanffillUC

Pronontorvta iltil FacilN
C/ass I landfill Permit

&plicalion

Emergency Opentions Plan

APPENDX N

-

EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAII
This document provides landfill employees with infomration on how to respond and
what to expect in the case of a major disaster, such as an earthquake. The Promontory
Landfill Facility (hereafter refened to as the Facility), in an effort to respond to
various disasters that could seriously tlueaten lives and property, has developed this
Emergency Operations Plan. This Plan in not meant as a stand-alone plan; the intent
is to usc this plan in conjunction with State, County, and Local Emergency
Operations Plans. The Dcpartment of Environmental Quatity may elect to waive
requiremens for daily cover on constnrction and demolition materials duing an
emergency.

ASSIJMPTIONS

l.

The Facility is expected to continue normal operation and must maintain normal
daily operation besides handling the disposal of emergency, nonhazardous rubble
material. Because of the location of the Facility and the types of structures
Iocated on the premises, the Facility is expected to be minirnally affected by most
major disasters.

2.

The Facility will be most heavily impacted approximately 72-hours after an
emergency, when the clean up, removal and disposal of rubble begins. The
Facility may then need to be open amund the clock (24-hour operation). All
the Facility personnel and equipment will be needed to run the operation.

3.

of

The primary responsibility of Landfill resources would be the Rail Transfer
Area/Landfi ll operations.

FIRST RESPONSE

D{.'RING WORKING HOTJRS

l.

Remain calm and rcassure others. Avoid objects that could fall. Do not touch
downed power lines or objects touching downed power lines. Ihis is especially
significant at the Landfill.

2.

Report your location, physical condition, and area damage to your supervisor.

3.

Provided the Facility areas are not severely damaged or inaccessible, continue
with normal duties. In the event that certain areas are severely damaged, perform
other duties as assigned by the Supervisor.

4.

The Supervisor should check all areas for structure damage and also check on
site utilities. If necessary, turn these utilities off. Call the Weber and Box Elder
County dispatch at (801) 399-841I and (435) 734-38W to report findings.

^AGA

N-1

August 2008

 Prcmontory LandfrllLLC
Promontow Latrdftll FaciliV
Class I Landfill Permit Apdiation
Enn rgency OPe rettion s P la n

5.

All efforts will

be made to contact Facility employees' families and others that
employees have listed on the Family Notification List. Employees will be
notified of family stafts as soon as possible.

AFTER WORKING HOURS

l.

Contact the Facility and gve your location, status, and availability.
unable to get to the Landfill notify the supervisor.

2.

The first person to arrive at the Landfill should check dl structures for damage
and check utilities (power, sewer, gas and water) lines. If necessary, turn these

If you are

off.

3.

After all strctures and utilities have been inspected, perform normal duties
unless otherwise assigned by the Supervisor.

4. The Supervisor

should check all areas for struchrre damage and also check on site

utilities. If necessary, turn these utilities off. Call the Weber and Box Elder
County dispatch at (801) 399-8411 and (435) 73+38ffi to report findings.

FACIUTY OPERATIONS

1.

The Landfill will maintain regularly scheduled working hours.

2.

When the emergency cleanup begins, approximately 72-hours later, the Facility
may need to be open 24-hours per day.

3.

When 24-hour operation begins, all Facility personnel and equiprnent will be
needed to run the Rail Transfer Area and l-andfill operations.

4.

During the clean up and disposal of rubble, City/County and State Health
DeparEnent inspectors will need to be at the clean-up site to determine if the
substance being disposed of contains hazardous material. If so determined, then
the goveming authorities (federal, state or local) must arnnge for proper disposal
at a designated hazardous waste disposal facility (not the Promontory Landfill
Facility).

5.

During 24-hour operation employees should expect to work l2-hour shifu.
Management will decide which employees take the first shift and which
employees take the second shift according to ernployee availability.

^AGA

N-2

August 2008

 RAI{DOM INSPECTION FORM

Time:_

Date:

Inspected by

Load Origin:

How was the inspection conducted?

What was found during inspection?

Is corrective action necessary?

If

so what?

 QUARTERLY INPECTION LOG
Promontory Landfill LLC

Area of Insocctlon

Ne.d3

Dete

Repalr

Rcpair

Off-loading Area

Scale House

Run-ory'Run-off

Roads

{alborage

Leachate Collection

Gas Gollectbn

Perimeter Fencing and
{ccess Gates
Fugitive Waste collection
System

:ugitive Waste

Cetl

fate:

nspector:

Note: Annual Feport due before March 1.

ot
Commente

 FAI,fiLY NOTIFICATION LIST
Promontory Landfill LLC
Emergency Contact

Ernployee Name

t

t

Namc I Telephone #

Address

 Attachment 4

Monitoring Plan

APPENDIX M
MONITORING PLAN

The purpose of this monitoring schedule is to help prevent problems that may be preventable

through identification and prompt remediation efforts. A sample schedule for monitoring and
inspection of the landfill facilities to ensure proper operation and maintenance is provided in
the Appendix O. Listed below are monitoring guidelines for groundwater monitoring, leachate

monitoring and control system, and landfill gas monitoring system.

1.

Groundwater Monitoring System

Background concentrations of the constituents will be established using a statistical analysis

method approved by the Executive Secretary. Eight independent samples will be obtained and
analyzed during the first year immediately after the permit is issued and prior to the receipt of
MSW from the up gradient and down gradient wells. After background concentrations have

been determined, groundwater monitoring would be conducted semi-annually in the spring and

fallfrom the up-gradient and down-gradient wells. The well locations and

a typical well design

are shown in the attached Figure l-L,l-2,1-3, and l-4. Groundwater samples will be analyzed

detection of constituents per the Utah State Administrative Code R315-308 Ground Water
Monitoring Requirements. The list of constituents provided below are current as of August
2009 for detection monitoring. The Landfill Operator shall be responsible for insuring
compliance with current regulations for detection monitoring.
A detalled, site-specific groundwater monitoring plan, including well logs, well design, and

updated sampling and analysis procedures will be submitted and approved after the initial
monitoring well development and prior to facility operation.

t

for

 Groundwater Detection Monitoring

Groundwater

lnorganic Constatuents

Ammonia (as N)
Ca

cAs
76544L-7

rbonate/Bica rbonate

Calcium
Chemical Oxygen Demand {COD)
Chloride

lron

7439-89-5

Magnesium
Manganese

Nitrate (as N)
pH

Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

(

7439-96-5

Detection Limits

Protection

EPA

Cold

Standard

6020

VaporAAS

(mcll)

(msll)

(msll)

 Hear4y Metals

Antimony

74r';O-36-O

0.006

0.003

Arsenic

7MO-38-2

0.01

0.005

Barium

7440-39-3

2

0.005

Beryllium

7MO-4t-7

0.004

0.001

Cadmium

7440-43-9

0.00s

0.001

0.1

0.005

Chromium
Cobalt

7440-48-4

2

0.03

Copper

7440-50-8

1.3

0.012

0.015

0.003

Lead

Mercury

7439-97-6

0.002

Nickel

7440-02-0

0.1

0.01

Selenium

7782-49-2

0.0s

0.001

Silver

7MO-22-4

0.1

0.002

0.002

0.001

Thallium

0.0002

Vanadium

7440-62-2

0.3

0.03

Tinc

7M0-66-6

5

0.03

67-64-L

4

0.005

0.005

Acrylonitrile

707-73-t

0.1

0.01

0.0s

Benzene

71-43-2

0.00s

0.000s

0.001

Organic Constituents
Acetone

 Bromochloromethane

74-97-5

0.01

0.0005

0.001

75-27-4

0.1

0.0005

0.001

Bromoform'

7s-25-2

0.1

0.0005

0.001

Carbon disulfide

75-15-0

4

0.000s

0.001

Carbon tetrachloride

56-23-5

0.005

0.0005

0.001

Chlorobenzene

108-90-7

0.1

0.0005

0.001

Chloroethane

75-00-3

15

0.0005

0.001

Chloroforml

67-66-3

0.1

0.0005

0.001

Dibromochloromethane'

124-48-t

0.1

0.0005

0.001

1,2-Di bromo-3-chioropropane

95-12-8

0.0002

0.000005

0.00001

1,2-Dibromoethane

706-93-4

0.00005

0.000005

0.00001

1,2-Dichlorobenzene (ortho)

95-50-1

0.6

0.0005

0.001

1,4-Dichlorobenzene (para)

to6-46-7

0.075

0.0005

0.001

trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene

110-57-6

0.01

0.02

1,1-Dichloroethane

75-34-3

4

0.0005

0.001

1,2-Dichloroethane

107-06-2

0.005

0.0005

0.001

1,1-Dichloroethytene

75-35-4

0.007

0.0005

0.001

cis-1, 2-Dich loroethylene

156-59-2

0.07

0.000s

0.001

trans-1,2-Dich loroethylene

155-60-5

0.1

0.0005

0.001

1,2-Dichloropropane

78-87-5

0.005

0.000s

0.001

10061-01-5

0.002

0.0005

0.001

Bro mod ich lo ro met

han

e'

cis-1,3-Dich loropropene

(.

 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene

10061-02-5

0.002

0.0005

0.001

Ethylbenzene

100-41-4

o.7

0.0005

0.001

2-Hexanone

591-78-5

1.5

0.005

0.01

Methylbromide

74-83-9

0.01

0.000s

0.001

Methylchloride

74-87-3

0.003

0.0005

0.001

Methylene bromide

74-95-3

o.4

0.000s

0.001

Methylene chloride

75-09-2

0.00s

0.001

0.00s

Methylethyl ketone

78-93-3

0.17

0.005

0.01

Methyliodide

74-88-4

0.001

0.01

4-Methyl-2-pentanone

108-10-1

3

0.005

0.01

Styrene

100-42-5

0.1

0.000s

0.001

L,1,1,2-T etr ach lo roetha ne

530-2G6

0.07

0.000s

0.001

L,t,2,2-T etr ach

79-34-5

0.005

0.000s

0.001

Tetrachloroethylene

L27-78-4

0.005

0.0005

0.001

Toluene

108-88-3

L

0.000s

0.001

l-Trichloroethane

71-55-5

0.2

0.000s

0.001

7J,2-frichloroethane

79-00-5

0.005

0.0005

0.001

Trichloroethylene

79-0t-6

0.005

0.0005

0.001

Trich lorofluorometha ne

75-69-4

10

.0.0005

0.001

1,2,3-Trichloropropa ne

95-18-4

0.04

0.000s

0.001

Vinylacetate

108-05-4

37

0.005

0.01

1,1,

L

I

o

roet ha n e

 VinylChloride
Xylenes

75-OL-4

0.002

0.0005

0.005

1330-20-7

10

0.0005

0.001

ground water protection standard of 0.1 mg/l is for the total of Bromodichloromethane,

Bromoform, Chloroform, a nd Dibromochlorometha ne.

The water samples would be collected using currently accepted and approved techniques
and

technologies. The protocols for sampling would consist of water level measurements, detection
of immiscible layers, well purging, field measurements, sample collection, sample handling and
preservation, and sample custody. Samples would be tested using a state certified laboratory.
Each sampling protocol is discussed'in detail below.

Water level measurements would be read to the nearest 0.O1foot. Elevations at each well
would be known for cross-references and determination of ground water levels in the area.
Measurements would be taken from the same location at each well.
Detection of immiscible layers would begin with screening organic vapors with a monitor

prior to any evacuation of water. lf concentrations were to exceed 25 percent of the lower
explosive limit, landfill personnel would immediately contact the Landfill Manager.

lf

concentrations were betow 25 percent of the lower explosive limit, an interface probe

would be lowered into the well to detect and measure the thickness of any possible
immiscible layer that may develop. The probe would further be lowered to the bottom of

the well to register the presence of any dense organic liquids. lf any immiscible layers were
found, samples would carefully be retrieved.
.

The water level and interface probes will be cleaned prior to use and between each

sampling point by washing with soapy (Alconoxo) water solution; spraying de-ionized water
on the outside surfaces; and wiping the outside surface with a paper towel.
Each well would be equipped

with

a dedicated low

flow pump designed to be non-aerating

or non-leaching. In preparation.for taking water samples, each monitoring well would be
micro:purged to obtain a fresh sample. Micropurging of a well would be performed by
removing water from the well using the low flow pump. when purging a well, purging would

continue until the pH, conductivity, turbidity, and water temperature have stabilized or until

t

 at least three wellvolumes of waterwould be purged from the well. Stabilization would
occur when pH, conductivity, turbidity, and water temperature readings do not exceed 10
percent deviation over at least three measurements. lf the well is purged dry, samples
will
be taken as soon as a sufficient volume of ground water has entered the well.
Field measurernent samples would be collected in a clean beaker once the well was properly

purged' All probes or instruments would be kept in designated containers to prevent
cross

contamination between samples. All instruments would be cleaned according to
manufacturer's recommendations after and prior to taking any measurements. The
dedicated pumps will likely be powered by a gas-powered generator. care will be taken
during sampling to ensure that the generator is located downwind of the sampling area to
prevent contamination from the generator exhaust.
Field measurements and field notes would include:

,\'

. name of collector
r time of sample
. . weatherconditions
. air temperature
o date of sample
. monitoring well identification number
. lower explosive limit
o immiscible layers found with thickness information
. static water level
. water temperature
o turbidity
o elecricalconductivity
.pH
o dissolved oxygen
o wellyield
o sampling procedures and methods
. sampling identification number
preservatives used

t_

 a

containers used

a

parameters requested

a

daily instrument drift
general comments section.

This information would be recorded on the water Sample Worksheet (included at the end

of

this document) and kept in a field notebook. All measurement instruments would be calibrated
at the beginning of the day and reghecked after all the sampling was complete to record any

possible instrument drift.
The pumping rate shall not exceed 100 millimeter/minute. The degree of sensitivity

to

pH or volatilization would determine the order in which parameters are sampled.
Sampling containers and procedures for preparations of samples would be provided by

the testing laboratory.
Quality assurance samples will include, but not be limited to a trip blank, field blank, and

field duplicates. The trip blank will be

a

vial of reagent grade water included in each

cooler during sampling and shipping. This blank is used to provide an indication of

contamination introduced

as a

consequence of the sampling and shipping procedure.

The field blank will be a vial of reagent grade water filled in the field along with other
samples taken at a selected well. This blank is used to provide an indication of

contamination induced during the sampling process. Field duplicates will be collected at
a rate of 10 percent. lf fewer than 10 samples are collected one field duplicate will be

included.
Once the samples were cotlected and prepared to laboratories recommendations, the

sample would be immediately labeled, recorded in the field book, and ptaced in a
sampling cooler. The samples would be recorded on a chain-of-custody and remain with

the sampler untilformally released to another individual.
custody of the samples would be documented on a chain of custody form. samples
would remain in the custody of the sampler until samples are checked in and
relinquished to the laboratory or untilthey were relinquished for transport to the
laboratory.

I

t

 All data received would be reviewed to assess data validity. Each data report would be checked

to insure the following:

r
o
e
.
o
o
o

ldentification numbers of the samples match.
chain of custody and field notes matches the sample information.
Sample analysis was performed using requested methods and acceptable time limits.

Reporting limits conform to current detection limits.
Blank results have been included and are acceptabte.

MS/MSD results are representative and are included.
All AA/aC sampling results are included and acceptable.

lf there were any potential problems with the data reports or discrepancies, the laboratory

would be notified immediately. lf necessary, new samples would be collected and tested. Data
would be analyzed by:

o

Concentrations of naturally occurring constituents would be plotted at each we1 on

control charts for that specific well. Each constituent would be analyzed to determine
whether groundwater is being impacted.

r

Look for the presence of non-naturally occurring compounds. lf these compounds were

reported, the validity of the results would be reviewed. lf results appear to be
potentially valid, new samples would be collected and tested.
Semi-annual reports would be prepared and would include the following in an electronic format:

r

Description of procedures, including the quality assurance/quality control, followed
during the collection of samples.

o
o

Results of field measured parameters.
Chain of custody and quality assurance/quality control procedures followed by the

laboratory.

o
r

Laboratory results with detection limits and testing methods used.
Statistical analysis of the laboratory results.

After background constituent and levels have been established, the Owner would determine
what statistical method would be used to determine whether a significant change has occurred

L

compared to the background water quality.

 (

2. Leachate

Monitoring and Control System

The proposed Class I Landfilf would be equipped with a leachate monitoring and
controlsystem.
The system is comprised of a network of piping providing gravity flow to centrally tocated
su mps

positioned at the lowest elevation of the cell. The sumps would be activated if
more than one

foot of standing leachate

is detected above the liner. The leachate would be pumped at a low

flow rate to an evaporation basin or sprayed back on the surface ofthe landfill to suppress
fugitive dust. Evaporation basins would accommodate peak flows. lf the evaporation basins
were unable to meet the demand generated by the leachate collection system, additional
evaporation basins would be constructed.

3.

Landfill

Gas

Monitoring System

Rule R315-303 Landfilling Standards require landfill gases to be monitored to protect
air quality

and limit explosive gas emissions. A hand-held field explosive gas meter woutd be used
for
recording at the site. The meter would be calibrated as recommended by the manufacture
by
using a methane standard. Concentrations would not be allowed to exceed 25%
of the lower

limit in facifity structures and

1:oo%

of the lower timit around the disposat area boundary.

Quarterly monitoring would be performed at the locations indicated on Figure 4.5 and within all
facility structures. Readings would be taken at the ground level. lf a monitoring event were

to

exceed the regulatory limit, procedures would be taken as noted in section 5.2

I

 Water Sampling Worksheet
Site

Sample Date

:

Sample ID

:

Sample

l-l crounowater

Icrau
Well Drilled Depth

ft.

Static Depth to Water

ft.*

Calculated Purge Volume

gal.

lJ

 

Tme

gat.

:

Surface water

 

sal.lft. *

3

case volumes

=

Convercion Factors- Well Casing Size
tn

Actual Volume Removed

:

?,'

Att

O.16 oal./ft. 0.36 oal./ft 0.65 qal./ft.

Comments:

Water Quality Measurements

Conductivity

Turbid

Temperature

Comments:

Instruments used

I

:

Calibration Date

:

Sampled

By:

 Landfill Gas Quafterly Monitoring Results
Promontory Landfill LLC

Year_ Quarter_

Date:

Time:

Name of Gas Sample Collector

Temperature

Weather

Monitoring device should be calibrated prior to initiating sampling.

Accomplished?

Yes_ No_

Methane Monitoring Location

Measured
o/"

LEL

Flequlatorv
Action Limit

f/.

o

LEL)

1. Administrative Building

25

2. SW Corner of Rotary Dump

25

3. SW Corner of Bottom Dump Area

25

4. SE Corner of lntermodal Area

25

5. NW Corner of the Scale House

25

6. North Boundary

100

7. South Boundary

100

Gas Sample Collector: lf measured o/oLEL equals or exceeds internal action limit,
contact the facility manager.

.

Facility Manager: lf measured o/oLEL equals or exceeds regulatory action limit, notily
the State Director in compliance with 40 CFR 258.23(c).

Comments:

I

 Attachment 5

Closure Past-Closure

2.3

BASE GRADE MODIFICATION

An alternative to the permitted base grade is proposed for stability and operational
concerns. This alternative is proposed for Phase and future phases, as applicable.
It is proposed that the base grades be excavated to the maximum extent possible

l

maintaining a five'foot seperation between the historical high levet of groundwater and
the bottom of the lowest liner component, along with a three percent sheet grade as
opposed to the currently permitted five percent grade (see Figures C-101and C-301).
The proposed grade decrease is stillwithin the allowed base grade in UAC R315-3033(3XaXii) which allows for base grades as flat" as two percent. lt is proposed that
flowlines of the leachate collection pipes be greater than one percent. Detailed design
and support cafculations are included in the Design Report portion of this document
included in Section 3.0.

2.4

LEACHATE UTILIZATION

An alternativeto leachate utilization is proposed. The currently permitted use/disposal

of leachate is for either dust contro/compaction water on lined areas or pumped to
evaporation basins. lt is proposed that the leachate may also be recirculated into the
waste thus increasing anerobic digestion and landfill gas production which may be

to

generate electricity. Leachate recirculation is allowed by UAC
R315'303-3(2Xb) on landfills with composite liners like the PLF. Leachate
recirculation would only occur in lined portions of the facility. Leachate production

used

would be closely monitored to ensure that the moisture hotding capacrty of the refuse
is not exceeded.

2.5

FILL SLOPE MODIFICATION

Modification of the design of the final fill slopes is proposed, The currently permitted
finalfill slopes are set at 4:1 (horizontat:vertical) gross or approximate 3.5:1 stopes
between ls-foot benches. The proposed modification to the final fill slopes will be
gross 3:1 or 2.5:t slopes between lS-foot benches (see Figure C-LO2). This design

modification is supported by the stability analysis provided in Appendix E and
disucssed in Section 3.1".4. This modification is proposed for Phase 1 and future
phases, as appllicable.
2.6

ALTERNATIVE

FIML COVER DESIGN

The current permitted final cover design for the PLF is as follows (from bottom to top):
Promontory Landfi ll Facility

Permit Modification and Design Repon

2-3
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit MoGDesign Rpldocx

TotraTsch BAS

 .
.
o

GCL;

40 MIL Very Flexible Polyethylene

(VFPE);

Bi-planar Geocomposite; and

18 inches of site soils.

An alternative to the permitted final cover is proposed as allowed in

UAC

R315-303-3(4XaXi) and (ii) which allows the director to approve an alternative cover
design if it can be documented that the alternative cover achieves an equivalent
reduction in infiltration as achieved by the standard design and the alternative final
cover provides equivalent protection from wind and water erosion as achieved by the
standard design. The proposed alternative design will consist of a monolithic soil
evapotranspiration cQver for placement on final fill slopes which will be designed to a
depth and soil type which will perform equivalently to the prescriptive standard in UAC
R315-303-3(4). Detailed design and support calculations will be presented at the time
of closure when final cover materials have been selected and modeled.

2.7

CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE MATNTEMNCE @ST ESTTMATE REVIS ON/UPDATE

As required in the Solid Waste Renewal Permit, the closure cost estimate
revision/update is due by August 3L,20!6. In light of the design of Phase 1, the
closure and post-closure cost estimates have been updated from 2008 to 2016 rates
and reflects the costs of placement of the proposed alternative final cover on the final
fill slopes and the prescriptive cover on the deck areas. The post+losure costs reflect

the appropriate maintenance costs for each final cover type.
The cost estimates assume that cfosure activities woutd be implemented as each
phase within the disposalsite is completed. These closure activities would minimize

the need for further maintenance, and minimize or eliminate the threat to human
health and the environment from post+losure escape of solid waste constituents,
leachate, contaminated run-off or waste decomposition products to the ground,
groundwater, surface water or the atmosphere.

The previous cost estimate prepared as part of the permit application assumed the
first module to close to be 20 acres. The redesign of the landfill development provides
for the initial phase to consist of 31 acres; therefore the cost estimates are based on
closure of the first 31 acres of the PLF. Table A and B presents the revised/updated
costs, and supporting documentation is included in Appendix G. The closure and postclosure costs have been prepared as required by UAC R315-309-2 and in accordance
with UAC R315-3O9-2(3)(a) anct (b).

2-4
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\permit Mod-Des(n Rptdocx

Totra Tech BAS

 TABLE A
PROMONTORY TANDFILL LLC
PRELIMIMRY CLOSURE COST ESTIMATE

a

ru,covBblllzation/Demobillzati

1_

liminary Grading/Sub!
t (Ileck)

1,357,000

MIL VFPE Uner (Oeck)

191,353

191,353
191,353

lglvegetative Cover 18' Thick
plrdu"r

191,3s3
123,342

C"""istrp*,Ii-

Monument Installation

2

:ll{at govER oot{slBucnofl Quru,ryAssuRAllcE

-r

5

4.4
26.4

$si?66-'
$370,025
$1,500

ls I

$5O.OOO

6C

$10,ofi)

ac
ac

2su&otat

$2,100
2,500

9300.000
9g0o,0oo
$9,240
$67.000

bnrffii

szs:no

OL

30
4

ea

30

ac

ea

$o
$1"200
$36,000
879
$3,515
ltcm 4 Subtotat Sgg,sto

DffA TASE OOiTTROL SVSTGiI

$12.Oq)

Itm
rrRrrcruRE

oIlsTRUCnOil rn lAcilEilT
,;onsutruon Management

t

ls

30

ac

$360.OOO

il

RflovAl/AB xDoilnEilT

)ernolition€cale House/Salvage S€bs 63
,e@mm6$ontng ot Envtronmental control sy€tem
7

$L24.379

;T--Goo-

Itcm

lydroseeding

DIaloeEe Control Svstem (incl, bernB. downdmire- lnlets. etc-I50

6

30

DillSeeqing

Ylonitoring and Control SElems ''o
lalse LFG Well Heads
tynth€uc Boots (D€ck)
E

$153,OE2

$0.5"0

gnosDr @rrnot (newogrenol)'"

4

$200,000
$135,700
$143,515

$2O0,O00

-

lilonitoring lrcp€ctlng, Testing and Reporting

3

ls  

;-f
$oro
$o?5
sf  
$0.8o
"-f
rrTjoss
?T
$po
tT

s960,000

$50,000

$50,000
$0

$12.OOO

$360.000

m
TOTALPREUMINANY cLosuRE

cosr

se42g3ct

Footnotes*:
1.O Assumes all soil necessary for do$rre is stockpiled on site.
1.1 Includes noc€€sary permits, health & safety plan, swPPP, bid bond, office equlpment, traller, ufllities, ofrtce support, goneral labor, and
miscellaneous charges to be incurred by the cont actor. Based on approximately 7% of total construcuon cost including flnal cover,
Eas
system modification and drainage improvements.
1.2 Includes: scarirying and recompacting the interim cover and subgrade prgFration, assum€s 1, of material b in place,
1.3 Evapotranspirative cover is based on a 4foot thick cover sectlon, \olume of earthwofk assumes 1-foot of co\€r is in plac€.
2.O Based on the Final Cover CeA procedures included wittr the permit revigon.
3.0 Assumes the usage of native plant species that o(hibits low longtem maintenance needs, thus eliminating the need for an irrigation
system.
No cost is included in this category because the gas monitoring sl/ stem, goundwater monitoring system and teachate collection sy€tem
will be inflace at clo6ure.
4.1 Assumes one LFG extraction well pet acer will ne€d to be extended through the flnal cover, lvells in th3 lin€r area will also requrre a
synthetic booL
5'O Costs for consttucting downdrains, inlets, bench channels and top deck berm. Does not include perlmeter drainage and bashs, that wlll
be in place prior to closufe.
6.0 cost assumes tie removal of scales and the scale house, any required backftll. and disconnecting electrical components.
6.1 Assumes that no environmental control qEtems will be decommissioned/abandoned at clo6ure.
7.o Cost (including final teport) for consttuction management services includes thi.d party construction management throughout the duration
of construction.

4.o

C:\B^S\Prmontory\Clorure C6t5\p.m_Cl6ccrE t (OO2)

TITRATTCH 8AS

 TABLE B
PROMOI{TORY LANDFITL

lIC

PREUMINARY ANNUAL POST4LOSURE MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE -

L

ER6totr ootfTRovlrEcETAIIl,E tltER tAil{tEt{AxcE
{ydroseeding
r'egetaqve La!€rlFinal Grading Maintenance L0

luartedv Insoections

-'

2

148 qourcnowco{flRovtoillToRffrtc
Jua.terly lnspcctions

3

-EACHATE

Rfl

s80

Itom 2
2

ea

32

hT

8
8
40

e€

$1-250
$&4,152

t

Subtotal

$r-280
596.08:l

$At2O

$1,300
$2,600
$80
$2.560
ttcm g Surtotal------5*1tb-

TO'IITORII{G SYSIEM AXO SURFA
irou ndwater SamdingAnalf8is/lnspectlel1
CROIJI{OWATER

Monitoring and Statlstical Analt6is

{r

Surface Water Samdlng,/Analysis,llnsp€cdons
Repair and Mainten€nce (assuoe replac€ment of a well every 5 years)

,RA iASE
2ra

!!Ep

ea

40

hr
hr

1

ls

$200
$1.280
$80
$80
$10.000

L

ac

$12.om-l

$1,600
$10,24A
$3,200
$3,200

312 o(}O

$2,OOO

rAttrrEf,  lCE4tpROl'EllEXlS

Maintena ncellmpro\rements

IEFORTIilS

tnnudSumma&Bepad

f

hr

$2,s00
$fi16.608

EDU$tOlyOoilfRoL

Semi-Anoual SamplindA

6

16

ac

gy$Em

Lab Anahclsa

5

ac

Iteml.suDtdt

-eachate Collecflon/Removal System Sampling&o
Juarterlv Insoections "1

4

0.5
0.25

,ffi

qq_

80 l

nrs

f

$a- ---T_----$6h-

I'rrilrB(;rtvE agr ofr
rrrective Actlon

TOTAL 30 IEAR PREUIIIiUIRY

FOSI€LoSffi

naa

Footnotos*:
1.o cover stabllizatlon, s€tdement repair and eroslon control. cost based on closure cost estimate, converted to a cost per acre, indudG mob, survey and
all cov6l components.
1.1 Includes co6t for quartErly inspoctions for cover ero€lon. s€t{ement, f€ncing and vegetation.
2.0 All monltoring frequonctes are in accordanoe wlth the t tah AdminiEtrative Code Rule R315;3O3.
3.0 Assumes that leachate generation will b€ a negligbl€ following clo6ure.
3.1 Cost include quarterly Inspectbns of the sumps and clean out pipes.
4'o Assumes gtound$,6ter system conslsts of 4 wells €ach sampled seml€nnually for a total of 8 sampl€s p€r y€ar. cost inoludes sema€nnual sampling
and lab analysis of the groundw€ter tnonitoting slstem. Refer to Appendix M of tn€ Permit Application for
ahe groundwater monitoring plan and list of
constltuents.
4.1 Cost includes samding. anaDsis and quartedy insp€ctions of the surface water monitoring slstem.
5.O Based on dosure oost €stimatg assumes 1 ac of d ainsge will be repalred each ye€r.
6.0 C06t includes annual reports for gas collectiovcontrol system, leachate collectbn system and groundwater/surface water fionnortng system.
7.o lhe site is not currendy constructed, thercfore there are no known releases of contaminants

C

:\845\Prdnoto.y\O@re CGb\P.m_p6c1oc6rtrr

((x)2)

TETM TICH

BAS

 APPENDIX 
PROOF OF SITE OWNERSHIP

When recorded, mail to:

Bradley R. Cahoon, Esq.

SNELL WILMER L.L.P.
Gateway Tower West

15 West South Temple, Suite 1200
Salt Lake City, Utah 8410]

APN: 01?012-0160 Space Above for Recorder?s Use

SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED

ALLOS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, LLC, ika Promontory Point Resources, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company (?Grantor?), for the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable
consideration, hereby conveys to PROMONTORY POINT RESOURCES, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company (?Grantee?), the real property described in Exhibit attached hereto (the
?Property?), situate in Box Elder County, State of Utah.

SUBJECT TO: Existing taxes, assessments, liens, encumbrances,
covenants, conditions, restrictions, rights-of?way and easements of
record.

And Grantor warrants the title against all who claim by, through or under Grantor and none

other, subject to the matters set forth above.

[Remainder of Page Left Intentionally Blank. Signature Page Follows]

19939889

WITNESS, the hand of said Grantor, this day of March, 2017.

ALLOS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, LLC
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
a Delaware limited liability company

BY: PPR MANAGER, LLC
a Delaware limited liability company
its sole manager

 
By:  

Name: MA [in 
Title: Authd ed Signatory

STATE OF UTAH 
ss.
COUNTY OF SALT LAKE 

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and executed before me this 1st day of March, 2017
by Jon Angin, the authorized signatory of PPR MANAGER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the
sole manager of ALLOS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, LLC, fka Promontory Point Resources, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, on behalf of such limited liability company.

Notary Public
Resident of the State of Utah

 

My Commissio Expires:
a? I do

 

MINDI MORDUE

Notary Public State 0! Utah

My Commission Expires on:
October 31, 2020

Comm. Number: 691610

 

 

 

 

19939889

EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

That certain real property located in Box Elder County, State of Utah, more particularly described
as follows:

A parcel of land lying and situate in Sections 18, 19 and 30, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, Salt Lake
Base and Meridian and Sections 13, 14, 23, 24 and 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base
and Meridian. Comprising the 2,025.42 acres described in that certain Special Warranty Deed recorded
as Entry 362739, in Book 1290, at Pages 848 through 853 of the Box Elder county Records. Basis of
Bearing for subject Parcel being Geodetic North as determined by GPS. Subject parcel being more
particularly described as follows:

Commencing at the Southeast Corner of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base
and Meridian, which is a number four rebar and cap with a plastic cap stamped set in
a mound of stones, thence North 01?38? 18? West 622.15 feet coincident with the east line of said Section
25 to a number ?ve rebar and plastic cap stamped monumentalizing a point on the
northerly right of way line of a sixty-six foot wide Box Elder County Road and the TRUE POINT OF
Thence the following twenty-four (24) courses coincident with the northerly and easterly
right of way line of said County Road

1) North 71?14?37? West 137.1 1 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped
356548?; 2) Westerly 356.24 feet along the arc of a 1416.00 foot radius curve to the left (center
bears South 18?45?23? West) through a central angle of 14?24?52? to a point of tangency and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 3) North 85?39?29? West 535.18 feet to a point of curvature
and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 4) Northwesterly 182.12 feet along the arc of a
434.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears North 04?20?31? East) through a central angle of
24?02?33? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 5) North
61?36?56? West 359.46 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 
356548?; 6) Northwesterly 144.66 feet along the arc of a 1059.00 foot radius curve to the right (center
bears North 28?23?04? East) through a central angle of 07?49?35" to a point of tangency and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 7) North 53?47?21? West 447.84 feet to a point of curvature
and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 8) Northwesterly 197.60 feet along the arc of a
3459.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears North 36?12?39? East) through a central angle of
03?16?23? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 9) North
50?30?58? West 434.87 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 
356548?; 10) Northwesterly 9.13 feet along the arc of a 934.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears
North 39?29?02? East) through a central angle of 00?33?37? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve
rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 11) North 49?57?21? West 76.98 feet to a point of curvature; 12)
Northwesterly 122.11 feet along the are of a 1316.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears South
40?02?39? West) through a central angle of 05? 1 8?59? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and
cap stamped 356548?; 13) North 55?16?20? West 7.82 feet to a point of curvature and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 14) NorthWesterly 12.18 feet along the arc of a 434.00 foot
radius curve to the right (center bears North 34?43?40? East) through a central angle of 01?36?28? to a
point of tangency and a number ?Ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 15) North 53?39?52? West
1099.38 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 16)
Northwesterly 435.25 feet along the arc of a 1384.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears North
36?20?08? East) through a central angle of 18?01 ?07? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and
cap stamped 356548?; 17) North 35?38?45? West 823.97 feet to a point of curvature and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 18) Northerly 250.37 feet along the arc of a 11566.00 foot

[9939889

radius curve to the left (center bears South 54?21 15? West) through a central angle of 01?14?25? to a
point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 19) North 36?53?10? West
641.50 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 20)
Northerly 149.95 feet along the arc of a 1934.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears North
53?06?50? East) through a central angle of 04?26?32? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and
cap stamped 356548?; 21) North 32?26?38? West 136.46 feet to a point of curvature and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 22) Northerly 340.82 feet along the arc of a 1684.00 foot
radius curve to the right (center bears North 57?33?22? East) through a central angle of 11?35?45? to a
point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 23) North 20?50?53? West
242.98 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 24)
Northerly 253.93 feet along the arc of a 2091.00 foot radius curve to the left (Center bears South
69?09?07? West) through a central angle of 06?57?29? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and
cap stamped 356548?; 24) North 27?48?22? West 118.96 feet to a number ?ve rebar and cap
stamped 356548?; Thence leaving said right of way, North 00?41?58? East 32.10 feet coincident
with the west line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 25 to the Northwest Comer thereof which is a
number four rebar set in a mound of stones; Thence North 89?34?25? West 1742 feet coincident with the
south line of the Southeast Quarter of Section 23, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian to a point on the easterly right of way line of said County Road and a number ?ve rebar and cap
stamped 356548?; Thence the following thirteen (13) courses coincident with said easterly right of
way line 1) Northerly 590.00 feet along the arc of a 5066.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears
South 62?00?00? West) through a central angle of 06?40?22? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve
rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 2) North 34?40?22? West 317.77 feet to a point of curvature and a
number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 3) Northerly 14.03 feet along the arc of an 84.00 foot
radius curve to the right (center bears North 55?19?38? East) through a central angle of 09?34?15? to a
point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 4) North West
304.86 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?Ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 5) Northerly
222.99 feet along the arc of a 2766.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears South 64?53?53" West)
through a central angle of 04?37?09? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped
356548?; 6) North 29?43? 1 6? West 237.17 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and
cap stamped 356548?; 7) Northerly 719.56 feet along the arc of a 1317.00 foot radius curve to the
right (center bears North 60? 1 6?44? East) through a central angle of 3 1?18? 16? to a point oftangency and
a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 8) North 01?35?00? East 188.35 feet to a point of
curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 9) Northerly 357.01 feet along the arc
of a 1783.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 88?25?00? West) through a central angle of
11?28?20? to a point of tangency and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 10) North
09?53?20? West 103.89 feet to a point of curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 
356548?; 1 1) Northerly 360.36 feet along the arc of a 2533.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears
South 80?06?40? West) through a central angle of 08?09?04? to a point of reverse curvature and a number
?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?;; 12) Northerly 397.36 feet along the arc of a 2717.00 foot
radius curve to the right (center bears North 71?57?36? East) through a central angle of 08?22?46? to a
point of reverse curvature and a number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 13) Northerly 102.49
feet along the arc of a 1283.00 radius curve to the left (center bears South 80?20?22? West) through a
central angle of 04?34?36? to a point on the west line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 23 and a
number ?ve rebar and cap stamped 356548?; Thence the following twenty-seven (27) courses
coincident with aliquot subdivisional section lines 1) North 00?41 ?45? East 321.05 feet to the NE 1/16th
Corner of Section 23, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
356548?; 2) North 00?41?45? East 677.79 feet to the C-N-NE 1/64th Corner of said Section 13,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 3) South 89?30?19? East 659.98 feet to the
NE-NE 1/64th Corner of said Section 23, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 4)
North 00?41 ?51? East 647.45 feet to the E-E 1/64th Comer of said Section 23, which is a number 5 rebar

19939889

and cap stamped 356548?; 5) North 00?17?08? West 652.53 feet to the SE-SE- 1/64th Comer of
Section 14, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 
356548?; 6) North 89?22?46? East 660.38 feet to the 8-8 1/64th of said Section 14, which is a number 5
rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 7) North 00?15?58? West 653.48 feet to the 1/16th Corner of
Section 13, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 
356548?; 8) North 00?15?58? West 653.47 feet to the 1/64th Corner of said Section 13, which is a
number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 9) North 89?10?56? East 659.68 feet to the NW-SW
1/64th Corner of said Section 13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 10) North
00?06?15? West 654.82 feet to the l/64th Corner of said Section 13, which is a number 5 rebar
and cap stamped 356548?; 11) North 89004?01? East 661.54 feet to the C-W 1/16th Corner ofsaid
Section 13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 12) North 89?04?01? East
1323.07 to the 1/4 Corner of said Section 13, which is a iron pipe; 13) North 89?54?49? East
2614.38 feet to the 1/4 Corner of said Section 13, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 
356548? with a chiseled stone alongside; 14) South 89?46?59? East 1325.38 feet to the C-W 1/16th
Corner of Section 18, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
356548?; 15) South 89?46?59? East 662.69 feet to the C-E-W 1/64th Corner of said Section 18,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 16) South 00?20?22? West 667.77 feet to the
1/64th Corner of said Section 18, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 17)
South 89?40?56? East 661.42 feet to the 1/64th Corner of said Section 18, which is a number 5
rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 18) South 00?26?49? West 668.94 feet to the OS 1/16th Corner of
said section 18, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 19) South 002649? West
1337.88 feet to the ?4 Corner of Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a number 5
rebar and cap stamped 356548? with remains of stone mound alongside; 20) South 00?40?55" West
5285.67 feet to the 1/4 Corner of Section 30, Township 6 North, Range 5 West, which is a stone
monument with 1/4 chiseled on face and a rivet set on top. 21) South 89?57?56? West 649.34 feet to the
E-W 1/64th Corner of said Section 30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 22)
South 02?03?04? East 672.21 feet to the NE-NW 1/64th Corner of Said Section 30, which is a number 5
rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 23) South 02003?04? East 672.21 feet to the 1/64th
Corner of said Section 30, which is a copper rivet set in a limestone stone outcrop; 24) North 89?40?33?
West 652.70 feet to the NW 1/16th Corner of said Section 30, which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped
356548?; 25) South 01?54?52" East 1340.22 feet to the C-W 1/16th Corner of said Section 30,
which is a number 5 rebar and cap stamped 356548?; 26) North 89?19?l6? West 1312.18 feet to
the 1/4 Corner of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, which is a number 5 rebar and cap
stamped 356548?; 27) South 01?38?18? East 2041.54 feet to the point of beginning.

19939889

APPENDIX 
PROOF OF INTEREST IN GWSC PARCEL

When recorded, mail to:
Bradley R. Cahoon, Esq.
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
Gateway Tower West
15 West South Temple, Suite 1200
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Space Above for Recorder’s Use

APN: 01-012-0021, 01-012-0022, and 01-012-0023
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED

GWSC PROPERTIES, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, grantor, of Salt Lake City, Utah, hereby
conveys and warrants against all who claim by, through, or under the grantor to PROMONTORY POINT
RESOURCES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, grantee, of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the sum of Ten
Dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the tract of land in Box Elder County, Utah, as described in
Exhibit A attached hereto.
WITNESS, the hand of said Grantor, this __ day of ___________, 2017.

GWSC PROPERTIES, LLC
a Utah limited liability company

By:
Name:
Title:

STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF _______________

)
: ss.
)

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged and executed before me this __ day of _________, 2017 by
_____________________________, the ______________________ of GWSC PROPERTIES, LLC, a Utah limited
liability company, on behalf of such limited liability company.

_________________________________________
Notary Public
Resident of the State of Utah
My Commission Expires:
____________________

 Exhibit A
Legal Description
Parcel 1:
A parcel of land lying and situate in the Sections 25 and 26, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian lying south and west of a sixty-six foot wide Box Elder County Road; Comprising the more or less 129.09
acres contained in the three (3) parcels of land described in that certain Warranty Deed recorded November 17, 2006
as Entry 236747, in Book 984, at Page 278 of the Box Elder County Records. Basis of Bearing for Subject parcel
being South 01°38’18” East 5327.38 feet between the Northeast and Southeast Corners of said Section 25. Subject
Parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of Section 26, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian, which is a number 4 rebar in a mound of stones, thence North 89°36’21” West 92.59 feet to a point on the
southwesterly right of way line of a sixty-six foot wide Box Elder County Road and a number 5 rebar and plastic cap
stamped “PLS 356548” monumentalizing the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence the following twenty-seven
(27) courses coincident with said right of way 1) Southeasterly 52.64 feet along the arc of a 5000.00 foot radius
curve to the right (center bears South 61°35’26” West) through a central angle of 00°36’11” to a point of tangency;
2) South 27°48’22” East 138.28 feet to a point of curvature; 3) Southeasterly 245.92 feet along the arc of a 2025.00
foot radius curve to the right (center bears South 62°11’38” West) through a central angle of 06°57’29” to a point of
tangency; 4) South 20°50’53” East 242.98 feet to a point of curvature; 5) Southeasterly 354.18 feet along the arc of
a 1750.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 69°09’07” East) through a central angle of 11°35’45” to a
point of tangency; 6) South 32°26’38” East 136.46 feet to a point of curvature; 7) Southeasterly 155.06 feet along
the arc of a 2000.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 57°33’22” East) through a central angle of
04°26’32” to a point of tangency; 9) South 36°53’01” East 641.50 to a point of curvature; 10) Southeasterly 248.94
feet along the arc of an 11500.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears South 53°06’50” West) through a
central angle of 01°14’25” to a point of tangency; 11) South 35°38’45” East 823.97 feet to a point of curvature; 12)
Southeasterly 456.00 feet along the arc of a 1450.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 54°21’15” East)
through a central angle of 18°01’07” to a point of tangency; 13) South 53°39’52” East 1099.38 feet to a point of
curvature; 14) Southeasterly 14.03 feet along the arc of a 500.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North
36°20’08” East) through a central angle of 01°36’28” to a point of tangency; 15) South 55°16’20” East 7.82 feet to a
point of curvature; 16) Southeasterly 115.99 feet along the arc of a 1250.00 foot radius curve to the right (center
bears South 34°43’40” West) through a central angle of 05°18’59” to a point of tangency; 17) South 49°57’21” East
76.98 feet to a point of curvature; 18) Southeasterly 9.78 feet along the arc of a 1000.00 foot radius curve to the left
(center bears North 40°02’39” East) through a central angle of 00°33’37” to a point of tangency; 19) South
50°30’58” East 434.87 feet to a point of curvature; 20) Southeasterly 201.37 feet along the arc of a 3525.00 foot
radius curve to the left (center bears North 39°29’02” East) through a central angle of 03°16’23” to a point of
tangency; 21) South 53°47’21” East 447.84 feet to a point of curvature; 22) Easterly 153.67 feet along the arc of an
1125.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 36°12’39” East) through a central angle of 07°49’35” to a
point of tangency; 23) South 61°36’56” East 359.46 feet to a point of curvature; 24) Easterly 209.81 feet along the
arc of a 500.00 foot radius curve to the left (center bears North 28°23’04” East) through a central angle of 24°02’33”
to a point of tangency; 25) South 85°39’29” East 535.18 feet to a point of curvature; 26) Easterly 339.63 feet along
the arc of a 1350.00 foot radius curve to the right (center bears South 04°20’31” West) through a central angle of
14°24’52” to a point of tangency; 27) South 71°14’37” East 161.65 feet to a point on the east line of said Section 25;
Thence South 01°38’18” East 551.72 feet coincident with said section line to the Southeast Corner o said Section
25; Thence continuing South 01°38’18” East 253.96 feet coincident with the east line of Section 26, Township 6
North, Range 1 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian to a point on the northerly right of way line of the Southern
Pacific Rail Road’s Lucin Cutoff, said right of way line lying 200 feet northerly of the centerline of the main track;
Thence the following eleven (11) course coincident with said northerly right of way line, 1)North 68°34’27” West
230.30 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the right; 2) North 68°17’37” West 1142.96 feet to a pcs; 3) North
67°43’33” West 513.15 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the right to a psc; 4) North 67°14’46” West 79.63
feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the right to the ps thereof; 5) North 67°12’33” West 133.79 feet along a
tangent line to a PT; 6) North 67°20’55” West 80.01 feet along the chord of a curve to the left to the pos of a spiral
curve to the left; 7) North 67°41’22” West 286.08 feet along the tangent of said curve to a psc; 8) North 68°05’31”
West 220.53 feet along the chord of a spiral curve to the left to a pc; 9) North 68°21’03” West 455.39 feet; 10)
North 68°24’16” West 559.19 feet to a pcs; 11) North 70°52’58” West 340.11 feet along the chord of a spiral curve

 to the left to the point of intersection with said 200.00 foot right of way line and the meander line of the Great Salt
Lake; Thence the following four (4) courses coincident with said meander line, 1) North 39°54’43” West 2388.32
feet; 2) North 07°39’43” West 1248.70 feet; 3) North 02°00’23” East 391.86 feet; 4) North 13°59’37” West 685.79
feet to a point on the north line of said Section 26; Thence South 89°36’21” East 72.42 feet coincident with said
section line to the point of beginning.
Parcel 2:
A parcel of land lying and situate in the Sections 25 and 26, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian lying south of a four hundred foot wide Southern Pacific Railroad Right of Way; Comprising the 6.54
acres, more or less, being openly, notoriously and adversely possessed by GWSC Properties, LLC since November
16, 2006. Basis of Bearing for Subject parcel being South 01°38'18” East 5327.38 feet between the Northeast and
Southeast Corners of said Section 25. Subject Parcel being more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast Corner of Section 36, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, Salt Lake Base and
Meridian, which is a number 4 rebar in a mound of stones with the original stone and "T" post alongside, thence
South 01°38'18” East 685.92 feet to a point on the point of intersection with the southwesterly right of way line of a
four hundred foot (400.00') wide Southern Pacific Railroad Right of Way and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
Thence continuing coincident with said east section line South 01°38'18" East 185.44 feet to a point on the
Meander Line of the Great Salt Lake; Thence the following five (5) courses coincident with said Meander Line, 1)
North 55°52'04" West 332.59 feet;
2) North 72°52'04" West 665.17 feet; 3) North 62°22'04" West 665.17 feet;
4) North 72°13'22" West 651.32 feet; 5) North 48°21'58" West 400.05 feet to the point of intersection with
said Railroad Right of Way; Thence easterly coincident with said southerly right of way line, approximated by the
following seven (7) courses,
1) South 67°39'29" East 244.35 feet; 2) South 67°20'58" East 79.03 feet;
3) South 67°12'33" East 133.79 feet; 4) South 67°15'21" East 83.24 feet;
5) South 67°43'41" East 517.11 feet; 6) South 68°17'38" East 1144.91 feet;
7) South 68°56'20" East 399.55 feet to the point of beginning.
Parcel 3:
That portion of the following which lies SOUTH and WEST of a currently existing County Road commonly known
a[s] Promontory Road: Lots 1, 2 EAST 2 of Northwest 4, Northeast 4, Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 North 2 of Southeast 4 of
the Southeast 4 of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 6 West, lying north of a line 200 feet NORTH of the center
line of a railroad track, Exclusive of Res for spurs.

 APPENDIX 

LE1TER T0 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF THE
SITE

 .3
MK. - I

DOINI

 oasancrr
"1-529 


March 16, 2017

SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Rial Services LLC
1740 Combe Road, Suite 1
South Ogden, UT 84403

Re: Notice of Intent
Class Landfill Permit Application
Promontory Point Landfill
18900 W. East Promontory Road
Promontory, Utah 89307

To whom it may concern:

Promontory Point Landfill is a permitted Class I landfill located on southern Promontory Point at
the address referenced above. The current Class I permit allows for the acceptance of municipal
solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construction and demolition waste, special
waste, and other conditionally exempt waste from under contract with local Utah governments.
The facility will not accept RCRA hazardous waste.

You are being provided, as specified by law, with this notice that Promontory Point Resources
intends to submit an application for a Class permit. The waste types accepted under the Class
permit will not change; however, the Class permit will allow Promontory Point Landfill to
accept non-hazardous waste from any origin or business entity.
Ifyou have questions, please contact Brett Snelgrove or Ann Garner at 435.414.9880.
Sincerely,
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

?8
Jon an Angin
President 8: CEO

32 East Exchange Place Suite 100 Salt Lake City. Utah 84] ll

$m?a

PROMONTORY POINT

6

0





 

GREAT



I- van 
?1 may. Afr

 

  
  
    

 

aomwm C) oer. -WILLE
?h

(E) 3"
0 PENROSE
HMEWILLE
(D 
am
RIVER RISWLLE
- POINT .. I 
?Elks-pk,  

 





 

SITE

    

OGDEN
CED (E)
(E) 0605?
Hoop 

0
?'03


mom '3

 

 

 

VICINITY MAP
NTS

32 East Exchange Place - Suite 100 Sait Lake City, Utah 84111





-- a.

PROMONTORY PO l?J'l'



March 16, 2017

SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Young Resources LTD Partnership
5010 
Brigham City, UT 84302

Notice of intent

Class Landfill Permit Application
Promontory Point Landfill

18900 W. East Promontory Road
Promontory, Utah 89307

Re:

To whom it may concern:

Promontory Point Landfill is a permitted Class landfill located on southern Promontory Point at
the address referenced above. The current Class I permit allows for the acceptance of municipal
solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construction and demolition waste, special
waste, and other conditionally exempt waste from under contract with local Utah governments.
The facility will not accept RCRA hazardous waste.

You are being provided, as specified by law, with this notice that Promontory Point Resources
intends to submit an application for a Class permit. The waste types accepted under the Class
permit will not change; however, the Class permit will allow Promontory Point Landfill to
accept non?hazardous waste from any origin or business entity.
If you have questions, please contact Brett Snelgrove or Ann Garner at 435.414.9880.
Sincerely,
Promontory Point Resources, LLC



. If)

an Angin
President CEO

32 East Exchange Place Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

PROMONTORV POINT
R1. 2 a

 

aomwm MC) oer. WILLE


(D 

 

(E)
0 FE NROSE
HONEYWLE
BEA-R 6
?5316 wt RIVER CITY

 

mr
Rom. HAY

moo-ta

   

ROMONTO 
POINT 

 

PROJECT SITE

 

 

 

 

MAP
NTS

32 East Exchange Place - Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

P:

 

DPOMON 

.Y?g

.1) 





March 16, 2017

SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Chournos Promonotry LLC
590 1600 
Tremonton, UT 84337

Re: Notice of Intent
Class Landfill Permit Application
Promontory Point Landfill
18900 W. East Promontory Road
Promontory, Utah 89307

To whom it may concern:

Promontory Point Landfill is a permitted Class 1 landfill located on southern Promontory Point at
the address referenced above. The current Class permit allows for the acceptance of municipal
solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construction and demolition waste, special
waste, and other conditionally exempt waste from under contract with local Utah governments.
The facility will not accept RCRA hazardous waste.

You are being provided, as specified by law, with this notice that Promontory Point Resources
intends to submit an application for a Class permit. The waste types accepted under the Class
permit will not change; however, the Class permit will allow Promontory Point Landfill to
accept non?hazardous waste from any origin or business entity.

If you have questions, please contact Brett Snelgrove or Ann Garner at 435.414.9880.

Sincerely,

Promontory Point Resources, LLC

 

Jo an Angin
Presi ent CEO

32 East Exchange Place Suite 100 Salt Lake City. Utah 8411 

 

PROMONTORY POINT

6

0

k'

 

 

 

 

    
   
  

SVILLE

 

 

 

32 East Exchange Place - Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

60THWEU.

(ID
a PENROSE
990$me my am
085!? .-
mu?

Wm
ROMONTO 
POINT
PROJECT SITE


NTS

  
PROMONTODY PCHNIT
?ea a  

.I ?g

March 16, 2017

SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Southern Pacific Trans. Co.
1400 Douglas Street, Suite 1640
Omaha, NE 68179

Re: Notice of Intent
Class Landfill Permit Application
Promontory Point Landfill
18900 W. East Promontory Road
Promontory, Utah 89307

To whom it may concern:

Promontory Point Landfill is a permitted Class I landfill located on southern Promontory Point at
the address referenced above. The current Class permit allows for the acceptance of municipal
solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construction and demolition waste, special
waste, and other conditionally exempt waste from under contract with local Utah governments.
The facility will not accept RCRA hazardous waste.

You are being provided, as specified by law, with this notice that Promontory Point Resources
intends to submit an application for a Class permit. The waste types accepted under the Class
permit will not change; however, the Class permit will allow Promontory Point Landfill to
accept non-hazardous waste from any origin or business entity.

If you have questions, please contact Brett Snelgrove or Ann Garner at 435.414.9880.

Sincerely,

Promontory Point Resources, LLC



President CEO

32 East Exchange Place Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 841 1 

PROMONTORV POINT
a. a 5

0

 

aomwm  -WILLE

(I, a

WHY-105E

 

HCNEWILLE

v? hm am .3:

mm: mm RNLR CHY 

  

0854?

muv


- POINT

PROJECTSITE - 
lliTON

 

 

 

VICINITY MAP
NTS

32 East Exchange Place - Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 841 1 1

53:30 MOHTOQY HO INT

 a .ol'ucrs

 

March 16, 2017

SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

 

Peery Calvin Henry
6015 Balfern Avenue
Lakewood, CA 90713-1245

Re: Notice of Intent
Class Landfill Permit Application
Promontory Point Landfill
18900 W. East Promontory Road
Promontory, Utah 89307

To whom it may concern:
Promontory Point Landfill is a permitted Class landfill located on southern Promontory Point at
the address referenced above. The current Class permit allows for the acceptance of municipal
solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste, construction and demolition waste, special
waste, and other conditionally exempt waste from under contract with local Utah governments.
The facility will not accept RCRA hazardous waste.
You are being provided, as specified by law, with this notice that Promontory Point Resources
intends to submit an application for a Class permit. The waste types accepted under the Class
permit will not change; however, the Class permit will allow Promontory Point Landfill to
accept non-hazardous waste from any origin or business entity.
If you have questions, please contact Brett Snelgrove or Ann Garner at 435.414.9880.
Sincerely,
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

Mfr?
Jon an Angin
President CEO

32 East Exchange Place Suite 100 Salt Lake City. Utah 84111





5

0

.





 

GREAT

DRY

Roxann-

meow

G)

gamma?! Iblf?l

?5 

  
 
 
 
 
 

RQMONTO . 

POINT

 

 

l' SITE

 

rm 09?0%qu
Rivii?xgu?1mm
?17
I. HIT
war:
.. 

I  ocean
(m 
wow. 09:) 0608
Q0 
9G) mom '17

 

 

 

VICINITY MAP

NTS

32 East Exchange Place - Suite 100 Salt Lake City, Utah 841] 

APPENDIX 
HISTORIC INFORMATION

State of Utah
Department of Community and Economic Development
Division of State History
Utah State Historical Society
Micliflel O LeQ\i(t
Cu rrnor
MnxtJ Fvnns
Director

300 RIO t ronde
Snil I nkp Tily Ulnli 84101 I1B2
(801)5n CillO FAX r.33 TIOI TOO m i 15(12
unhH^hialorj nlate lit
lillfi //lii'ilory ulnli org

October 16, 2001
Gar W Workman, Project Coordinator
Apphed Ecological Services, Inc
Clock Tower Building, STE 302
550 North Main
Logan UT 84321
RE Landfill Development on the Southwest Comer of Promontory
in Reply Please Refer to Case No 01-1596
Dear Mr Workman
The Utah Slate Histonc Preservation Office has reviewed our cultural resource files for the
above requested project area No known historic properties have been recorded within the
project area because no historic properties' surveys have been conducted
A survey of the area may identify Iiistonc properties, some of which may be eligible for the
National Register of Histonc Places It is your responsibility to determine further actions, such
as field surveys, to identify histonc properties
This information is provided on request to assist in identifying historic properties, as specified in
§36CFR800 for Section 106 consultation procedures If you have questions, please contact me al
(801) 533-3555 My email address is jdykman@history state ut us

James L ykmann
Compliail e Archaeologist
JLD 01-1596 OR

Preserving and Shanng Utah s Past for the Present and Future

 P
^

TJT A w n m n t i P V
Jv\n
yiOOCyL.f-UttJO, i r i L .

2759 South 300 West, Smte A
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115-2955

Cultural Resource Consultants

(801) 467-5446

August 5, 2003
Mr Michael J Forrest
Special Projects
Pacific West LLC
1515 South 2200 West, Suite C
Salt Lake City, UT 84119
RE Cultural resources reconnaissance of the Promontory Landfill Area m Box Elder
County Cultural Resources Report 5204-01-20311
Dear Mr Forrest
As per the subcontract agreement between Pacific West and P-III Associates (dated July
16, 2003), our firm conducted a cultural resources reconnaissance of approximately 2000 acres
of pnvate land associated with the Promontory Landfill project in Box Elder County A cultural
resources reconnaissance inventory is designed to identify major archeological sites in the area
One major archeological site was found m the parcel This site is located within the 2000-acr6
buffer zone and will not be impacted by landfill activities
Pnor to the fieldwork, P-III Associates staff archeologist Greg H Miller conducted a file
search at the State Histonc Preservation Office on July 15,2003 to determine if any previously
recorded sites or properties existed within the project area The file search did not identify any
previously recorded sites within the project area, although a number of known important cave
and rockshelter sites have been recorded m and around the Promontory region
On July 25, 2003, two staff archeologistsfi-omP-III Associates conducted reconnaissance
of the entire project area Using a four-wheel-dnve vehicle, the crew did a bnef visual
reconnaissance of the project area and then stopped and performed on-foot inspections of areas
of high relief m the eastern and western parts of the parcel, searching for rock art, prehistonc
caves and rockshelters, histonc mimng camps, and any other type of cultural resource site One
archeological site was discovered by the crew This site is a small rockshelter overlooking
Gunnison Bay to the west The site consists of a rockshelter located in a quartzite outcrop and an
associated midden The shelter measures 5 0m deep by 2 4 m wide by 2 0 m high and the
entrance faces southwest at a 220° azimuth Approximately 20 pieces of obsidian debitage
(mostly bifacial thmmngflakes),1 gray chert core reductionflake,and a small projectile point
(likely a Desert Side-notched) were noted on the surface of the midden The only artifact visible
withm the shelter itself is an obsidian bifacial thinning flake The midden extends out
approximately 5 mfiromthe shelter entrance and appears to be at least 1 m deep The shelter roof
appears to exhibit smoke blackening This site is located on the eastern edge of the high-relief
area It is in excellent condition, is undisturbed, and has not been looted because the site is not
visiblefiromthe road that passes below Evaluation by our field team suggests that the site
contains information that is significant to the Protohistonc penod and earlier times of prehistonc

 occupation This site is potentially eligible for inclusion m the National Register of Histonc
Places (NRHP)
Because the site is potentially eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, measures should be
taken to protect it from any damage dunng construction and use of the landfill and to ensure that
the site is not disturbed or looted If the site cannot be protected in situ, it is recommended that a
data recovery project be implemented to recover the sigmficant archeological data
We appreciate the opportunity to conduct this project for you Please feelfireeto call me
if you have any questions
Sincerely,

t4Uy^„
(^lank Schroedl
Semor Consultant
ARS/sel
Enclosure

Photos of rockshelter site
U S G S map showing the locations of the project area and the rockshelter

  

 

9'10!? 

 

 

?Hagan
- . a .

 

 






 

 

 

 

 

fismS: .

o. 

 

APPENDIX 
WILDLIFE INFORMATION

F-1 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE REPORT (OCTOBER 2003)

Environmental Consultants

I
FRONTIER CORPORATION USA

ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE REPORT
PROMONTORY LANDFILL SITE
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

Prepared for
PACIFIC WEST, LLC
1515 South 2200 West, Suite # C
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119

Prepared by
Frontier Corporation USA
221 N Spring Creek Parkway, Suite B
Providence, Utah 84332

October 2003

 Table of Contents
Page
1 0 INTRODUCTION
1 1 Site Description

1
1

2 0 METHODS

1

3 0 HABITAT CLASSIFICATION
4 0 WILDLIFE CONDITIONS
4 1 Big Game
4 2 Game Birds
4 3 Raptors and Migratory Bu-ds
4 4 Furbearers and Small Mammals
4 5 Reptiles and Amphibians

4
8
8
8
8
8
8

5 0 THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES

9

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Ownership Map
Figure 3 Promontory Landfill Facility Baselme Habitat Delmeation

4
5
7

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Acreages of habitat types delineated at the Promontory Landfill Project Area
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Wildlife Species Observed durmg August & September 2003 Surveys

6

 1 0 INTRODUCTION
Promontory Landfill LLC is proposing to construct and operate a private landfill site at
Promontory Pomt in Box Elder County, Utah The Project Area encompasses approximately
2,006 acres and is located approximately 23 miles west of Ogden on the southwestern side of the
Point, immediately north of the existmg Union Pacific railroad line (Figure 1) The Project Area
covers parts of Sections 18, 19, and 30 in T6N, R5W, and Sections 13, 14,23, 24, and 25 in T6N,
R6W (Figure 2) The Project Area is intended to be used as a regional landfill for municipalities
m northern Utah It will include a 1,000-acre Disposal Area for municipal waste and a 1,006acre Buffer Area for wildlife habitat conservation
Promontory Landfill LLC prepared an initial environmental report for the proposed landfill
project The initial report was reviewed by the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) In response to potential issues identified by the
USFWS and UDWR, Frontier Corporation USA was retained to conduct a baseline inventory of
existing habitat types and wildlife conditions within the Project Area The purpose of the
baselme inventory was to identify and map habitat types, and to assess habitat values for various
wildlife

11 Site Description
The Project Area is located on the southern point of the Promontory Mountain Range The
Promontory mountains form a narrow peninsula that extends into the northcentral portion of the
Great Salt Lake
The entire Project Area is located on private property Surrounding properties are also privately
owned The Project Area is bounded by steep, rocky terrain on the north, east, and west, and by
the Union Pacific Railroad to the south The elevation of the Project Area varies between 4,220
and 5,200 feet above sea level The general slope of the Project Area isfiromnorth to south, and
it has two primary drainages
The Project Area is comprised of semiand grassland and rock outcrops Certain areas have been
recently disced to create linear firebreaks The disced areas have been cleared of grass and
sagebrush at a width of approximately 15 feet The disced areas appear to he situated along the
eastern boundary of the Project Area and along a fence line m the northern portion of the Project
Area The disced areas have been seeded with wild sunflower {Helianthus annuus)

2 0 METHODS
The Project Area was visited on three separate occasions in August and September 2003 A
wildlife biologist and a wetlands ecologist conducted
•
General habitat mapping,
•
An assessment for the presence of wetlands and other water-related features,
•
Raptor and migratory bird surveys, and
Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

  

TWE 10/24/2003 . .
. - .

 

COUNTY
ROAD
PROJECT SITE

?3
t;
PRIVATE
DIKE

 

SCALE: 

 

?0


 

 

EE-

fl;


VICINITY MAP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WILLARD BAY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

154?1

n'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SCALE: N.T.S.

LOCATION MAP

 

 

   

 

 

. ..
I  I 1J1, .-
73 I . 
.  

PROMONTORY LANDFILL LLC REVISIONS DESIGN: CAH

A No. DATE TWE

A PROMONTORY LANDFILL FACILITY CHECKED: 
BASELINE DATA COLLECTION SCALE:  Swim

VICINITY MAP one; saw. 2003

ENGINEERS 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- PROJECT
LOCATION
SCALE IF BAR DOES
NOT MEASURE 1"

 

DRAWING IS NOT TO

 

 

 

 

FIGURE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 f

\

5

3

liJ

S o o

0^

2

-'C

\
4231

\

w ••. \ \ (•
i

:-;;••}• • • I I - : . V

MORE! o f i^^si

7i o

JAMES WHtTAKEft
HAtVEBSON
m,

>

>- Q UJ

o^ i
t;: ^, o
THELMAS
U S A INC.

. Eie^tad Aqucouc:

Pror Jtory Pohrt..

CALVIN
HENRY
f>eRBV

I

-I
ETUX

1

.f

•/

/

.
LU g 5

5 ^

APPROXIMATE DISTANCE
BETWEEN UNDFILL AND
SURROUNDING PROPERTY
- VARIES FROM 250 - 2500 FT. -^t ^ ^

TtflEtMAS
USA INC.

I

1

J

0

i/J

1

DRAWING IS NOT TO
SCALE IF BAR DOES
NOT MEASURE 1"

FIGURE:

 •

General wildlife observations

The Project Area was inventoried by walking or driving transects where roads were available In
addition, the two major drainages were walked and cliff and rock outcrops were glassed with
binoculars and spotting scopes for nests and wildlife activity During the field inspections, the
approximate locations of habitat boundaries were hand-drawn onto copies of aenal photography
Aqua Engineering digitized the habitat mapping and incorporated it mto the Project's
AUTOCAD database to estimate acreages and to produce maps

3 0 HABITAT CLASSIFICATION
The Project Area is a very rocky site with mostly semiand grassland dominated by Idaho fescue
{Festuca idahoensis) and cheatgrass {Bromus tectorum) Areas with substantial rock outcrops,
sagebrush {Artemesia tridentata), or greasewood {Sarcobatus vermiculatus) cover were
delineated separately (Figure 3) An itemization of habitat acreages that were delineated within
the Disposal Area and Buffer Area are shown in Table 1 below
Table 1

Acreages of habitat types delineated at the Promontory Landfill Project Area

Habitat Types

Disposal Area (Acres)

Buffer Area (Acres)

Total Facility (Acres)

Grassland
Sagebrush/Grassland

731
210

620
70

1,351
280

Greasewood/Grassland

21

2

23

Rock Outcrop/Grassland
Rock Outcrop
Total

5

230
84
1,006

235
117
2,006

33
1,000

Vegetative cover is very sparse throughout the Project Area Factors limitmg vegetative cover
appear to mclude the rocky geologic nature of the site, the semiarid environment, lack of
pereimial and/or intermittent water sources, and a long history of heavy grazmg pressure by
cattle and sheep
The Project Area is an extremely dry site No wetland habitats, stream charmels or other
jurisdictional waterways were identified withm the boundaries of the Project Area No riparian
areas, livestock ponds or watermg troughs were observed within the Project Area However,
there are twq^deeply mcised drainages within the central portion of the Project Area These
dramages generally lack channels witH^efiSed beds, banks, and ordmary high-water marks
These dramages are also discontinuous m several locations and dissipate on the lower terraces
withm the Project Area without any direct surface connections to the Great Salt Lake

Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

 TIT

LEGEND

FACILITY BOUtoARY
.r

HABITAT TYPES

DISPOSAL AREA
(ACRES)

BUFFER AREA
(ACRES)

TOTAL FACILITY
(ACRES)

GREASEWOOD - GRASSLAND

21

2

23

SAGE - GRASSLAND

210

70

280

ROCK OUTCROP

33

84

117

ROCK OUTCROP - GRASSLAND

5

230

235

731

620

1351

1000

1006

2006

TOTAL

5i £

ail
Ul

I

O

<

o

M

 4 0 WILDLIFE CONDITIONS
During the August-September baseline collection period, all wildlife species observed were
recorded Any evidence or signs of recent wildlife use were also recorded A list of wildlife
species observed during the surveys is contained m Appendix A
Both direct and indirect observations of wildlife use were recorded throughout the Project Area
Wildlife observations included big game, raptors and other migratory birds, furbearers and small
mammals, and reptiles A general description of the wildlife observations are provided below
4 1 Big Game
According to UDWR, the Project Area is considered spring, summer, and autumn hahitat for
mule deer The Project Area is within the Promontory Point Cooperative Wildlife Management
Unit Boundary Very little mule deer sign was observed within the Project Area One grouping
of pellets was found on the westem portion of the Project Area Five mdividual deer were
observed in the eastem boundary of the buffer area No deer observations or other sign were
observed elsewhere in the Project Area
4 2 Game Birds
No game birds were observed m or near the Project Area

4 3 Raptors and Migratory Birds
The Project Area is used by several species of raptors All raptor observations made durmg the
field surveys were recorded Cliffs located on the eastem portion of the Buffer Area provide
excellent nestmg opportunities for raptors A limited amount of jumper trees also provide
nesting opportunities The cliffs and trees were glassed with a spotting scope and binoculars
Raptors observed in the Project Area durmg the surveys included Amencan kestrel, red-tailed
hawks, and turkey vultures No nests were observed However, the absence of raptor nesting
sites cannot be completely discounted at this time because the baselme study was conducted
outside of the nestmg season In addition, two burrowing owls were observed utilizing badger
digs along the terrace slopes of the main drainages Because the digs did not exhibit long-term
use by the owls, it is assumed that these two individuals were probably migrants
4 4 Furbearers and Small Mammals
Coyote sign was not observed m the Project Area, probably as a result of eradication measures
for livestock grazing Badger digs were noted along the two mam drainages in the Project Area
Numerous observations of jackrabbits were observed in the sagebrush/grassland community
Numerous small mammal digs were found throughout the gentle sloping areas and dramages in
the Project Area
4 5 Reptiles and Amphibians
Few reptiles (small lizards and one homed lizard) were observed No permanent water sources
were observed on or near the Project Area No amphibians were observed during the surveys
and there appears to be no available habitat present capable of supportmg amphibians within the
Project Area
Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

 5 0 THREATENED, ENDANGERED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES
The USFWS and Utah Division of Wildlife Resources websites provide the federal lists of
threatened, endangered and/or candidate species Listed species that may be present withm Box
Elder County, Utah include
June sucker {Chasmistes liorus) - Endangered
Lahontan cutthroat trout {Oncohynchus clarki henshawi) - Threatened
Bald eagle {Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - Threatened
Fat-whorled pondsnail {Stagnicola bonneviUensis) - Candidate
Yellow-billed cuckoo {Coccyzus americanus) - Candidate,
There are no perenmal streams, ponds, wetland complexes or other permanent water bodies
within the Project Area Therefore, there is no habitat withm the Project Area for the fat-whorled
pondsnail, June sucker or Lahontan cutthroat trout In addition, there are no drainages with large
nparian trees (cottonwoods, willows, boxelder) that would provide the habitat requirements for
yellow-billed cuckoo
Bald eaglesfi-equentopen bodies of water to forage on fish and waterfowl, although they will
also forage on carrion Bald eagle nests are usually built m large trees Although it is possible
that a migratory eagle may occasionally visit the Project Area, the absence of fish-beanng
waterbodies, waterfowl habitat and large trees within or near the Project Area probably preclude
the regular usage of the area by bald eagle

Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

 APPENDIX A
WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED
DURING AUGUST & SEPTEMBER 2003 SURVEYS
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL PROJECT AREA
BOXELDER COUNTY, UTAH

Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

10

 BIRDS
Species

Habitat, Comments

Turkey vulture
{Cathartes aura)

Several birds observed over Project Area

Red-tailed hawk
{Buteo jamaicensis)

Three individuals observed flying in the eastem portion

Moummg dove
{Zenaida macrovra)

Two bird flushed from drainage, central Project Area

Common raven
{Covus corax)

Several mdividuals observed flying over area

Shnke species
{Lanius spp )

Several individuals observed m sagebrush

Sage sparrow
{Amphispiza belli)

Several observed in sagebmsh

American kestral
{Falco sparverius)

One individual observed m western portion

Burrowing owl
{Athene cuniculana)

Two individuals observed in drainages

Cliff swallow
{Hirundo pyrrhonota)

Several individuals observed m southern portion

Westem meadow lark
{Sturnella neglecta)

Several individuals observed m area

Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

 MAMMALS
Species

Habitat Comments

Mule Deer
{Odocoileus hemionus)

One pellet groups in northwestern portion, 5 individuals
observed in eastern portion of the buffer zone

Badger
{Taxidea taxus)

Numerous digs on drainage side slopes

Kangaroo rat
{Dipodomys spp )

Numerous burrows throughout Project Area

REPTILES
Species

Habitat Comments

Side blotched lizard
(JJta stansburiana)

Several individuals observed m sage areas

Desert homed lizard
{Phrynosoma platyrhinos)

One individual observed in southwest portion

Promontory Landfill Project
Environmental Baseline Report

October 2003
Frontier Corporation USA

 F-2 WILDLIFE ASSESSMENT REASSESSMENT (FEBRUARY
2017)

   

 

FRONTIER COHPOTION USA
Environmental Consultants

February 13, 2017

Brett Snelgrove

Director of Business Development
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111-2712

Subject: Promontory Point Land?ll, Box Elder County, UT
Wildlife Assessment Reassessment

Dear Mr. Snelgrove:

Per your request, Frontier Corporation USA (Frontier) reassessed the wildlife studies that
Frontier completed in 2003 for Paci?c West LLC for the Promontory Land?ll project located in
Box Elder County, Utah. The land?ll project has since been acquired by Promontory Point
Resources, LLC. The purpose of the reassessment is to determine whether the 2003 wildlife
studies are still applicable to the site and the plan to establish a land?ll at the site.

The 2003 wildlife studies addressed three main issues:
1. Potential for increased gull populations and depredation on nearby bird colonies.
2. Potential effects to big game and other wildlife species.
3. Potential effects to federally listed threatened and endangered species.

There has been no land development at the land?ll site since the 2003 studies were completed.
Comparing recent aerial imagery available through GoogleEarth, the types and amounts of
wildlife habitat identi?ed in the 2003 studies appear to be virtually unchanged. The re-
assessments are therefore based on the premise that there have been no signi?cant habitat
changes at the land?ll site.

Gull Populations and Depredation

The concern was that the land?ll would provide food sources that would result in increased gull
populations and activity that could result on increased gull depredation on nearby bird colonies.

The amount and types of plant communities for potential wildlife habitat at the land?ll site are
not the drivers that would attract gulls to the site. The main factor for gulls is the organic content
of potential food sources in the land?ll material, and the amount of land?ll material and period
of time land?ll material would be exposed to gulls on a day?to-day basis. It is my understanding
that the amount of exposed land?ll will not vary from the original plans, and may even be less.
Exposed land?ll material will be covered with earthen material every day to minimize the
amount of and time potential food items could be available to gulls. It is also my understanding
that the land?ll current land?ll plans would have more industrial waste compared to municipal

Frontier Corporation USA
221 N. Gateway Drive, Suite 
Providence, Utah 84332
(435) 753-9502

Mr. Brett Snelgrove
February 13, 2017
Page 2 of 4

household waste. Industrial waste typically has less organic content than household waste,
which would be fewer food items to attract gulls.

There would be no increase in the gull use as was predicted in original 2003 gull assessment.
Rather, there could be a decrease in the predicted gull use if smaller areas of land?ll are exposed
at any given time, and if the industrial land?ll material contains fewer amounts of organic
material as potential food items for gulls.

General Wildlife Habitat

A 2.006-acre project site was assessed in 2003, consisting of a 1,000 acre disposal area and a
1,06 acre buffer area. The 2003 wildlife study assessed habitat for big game, game birds, raptors
and migratory birds, furbearers and small mammals, reptiles and amphibians. The assessments
found little wildlife habitat potential due to the sparse vegetative cover the rocky geologic nature
of the site, the semiarid environment and lack of perennial or intermittent sources of fresh water,
and past history of sheep and cattle grazing. There would be no changes to these assessments
because there has been no land development at the site would affect either the quantity or quality
of existing habitat. Thus, the 2003 wildlife assessments would remain unchanged for the current
site conditions.

Threatened and Endangered Species

The US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is responsible for identifying species protected
under the federal Endangered Species Act. In 2003, the USFWS listing of protected species for
Box Elder County, Utah included: June Sucker (Endangered), Lahontan cutthroat trout
(Threatened), Bald Eagle (Threatened), Fat?whorled pond-snail (Candidate species), Yellow?
billed cuckoo (Candidate species).

Frontier obtained a current listing of federally protected species from the USFWS (dated
February 9, 2017, copy attached) that could potentially occur in the vicinity of the Promontory
Pointe Land?ll project site.

The current listing only identi?es Yellow-billed cuckoo (Threatened). The other species
identi?ed in 2003 have either been removed from the of?cial listing or are no longer considered
to be within the general geographic area of the project site.

Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) is a riparian?dependent bird species. It was a
candidate species and 2003, but has since been elevated to endangered status. The yellow-billed
cuckoo is a migratory bird species that spends the winter in South America and the summer in
the low elevation riparian forests and river ?oodplains of western North America. Nesting
habitat for the yellow?billed cuckoo is classi?ed as large blocks of dense lowland riparian forest
along low?gradient rivers and streams in open riverine valleys that provide wide ?oodplain
conditions. These riparian forest blocks need to be at least 50 acres in size in arid and semi-arid
landscapes, but optimal size of habitat patches for the species are generally greater than 200
acres (USFWS 2013, USFWS 2014). The habitat is characterized by bottomland forest with a

Mr. Brett Snelgrove
February 13, 2017
Page 3 of 4

dense sub?canopy or scrub/shrub layer in areas with sufficient stream ?ow processes for the
regeneration of canopy trees, willows, or other riparian shrubs (USFWS 2014). Overstory in
these habitats may be either large gallery-forming trees 33-90 feet tall, or developing trees 10-33
feet tall, usually cottonwoods. Nesting habitats are found in low? to mid-elevations at 2,500 
6,000 feet in Utah.

The project site is dominated by semi?arid plant communities and does not contain any suitable
habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo. No tracts of bottomland riparian forests occur at or near the
project site.

Historically, two con?rmed breeding pairs have been recorded in Utah: one along the Green
River at the Ouray National Wildlife Refuge, and one at the Matheson Wetland Preserve near
Moab site (USFWS 2011). Eight units of critical habitat have been proposed in southern and
eastern Utah in areas that are believed to have been consistently occupied by western-yellow
billed cuckoos during the breeding season (USFWS 2014). The units are located in Uintah,
Duchesne, Grand, San Juan, Summit, Wayne and Washington Counties. No units were proposed
for Box Elder County. The units consist of long continuous segments of riparian ?oodplain
habitat along the stream corridors of perennial rivers and creeks. The smallest unit is 3 miles
long and covers 579 acres. The closest unit is located hundreds of miles distance ?om
Promontory Point.

The land?ll would have no have an adverse effect on yellow-billed cuckoo for the following
reasons. The project site does not contain any suitable habitat for yellow-billed cuckoo, and
there are no known breeding pairs of yellow-billed cuckoo inhabiting the project site.
Additionally, no work associated with the development of the landfill would affect any critical
habitat designations for yellow-billed cuckoo.

In summary, based on no changes to habitat conditions at the project site, and no changes in the
operation of the landfill that would result in increased gull attractions, the ?ndings of the 2003
wildlife studies should remain unchanged except for the threatened and endangered species
assessment. The updated USFWS listing for the project site only includes one threatened
species, yellow?billed cuckoo, and there is no suitable habitat for this riparian?dependent bird
species at the project site.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the reassessment of the 2003
wildlife studies for the Promontory Point Landfill project site.

Sincerely,
Frontier Corporation USA


Dennis C. Wenger 
Senior Ecologist
Principal

Mr. Brett Snelgrove
February 13, 2017
Page 4 of 4

References Cited

US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) . 2011. US. Fish and Wildlife Service Species
Assessment and Listing Priority Assignment Form, Coccyzus americanus. April 28,
2011. Accessed February
2017.

 

USFWS. 2013. 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Proposed
Threatened Status for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow?billed
Cuckoo (Coccyzus americamts); Proposed Rule. Department of the Interior, US. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Federal Register, Vol. 78. No. 192.

USFWS. 2014. 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed
Cuckoo; Proposed Rule. Department of the Interior, US. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Federal Register, Vol. 79. No. 158.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Utah Ecological Services Field Office
2369 WEST ORTON CIRCLE, SUITE 50
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT 84119
PHONE: (801)975-3330 FAX: (801)975-3331
URL: www.fws.gov; www.fws.gov/utahfieldoffice/

Consultation Code: 06E23000-2017-SLI-0155
Event Code: 06E23000-2017-E-00401
Project Name: Pomontory Landfill Site

February 09, 2017

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of
your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills
the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of
the Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can
be completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed
list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and
the ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2)
of the Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required
to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and
endangered species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered
species and/or designated critical habitat.

 A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation,
that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF
Please be aware that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require
development of an eagle conservation plan
(http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/eagle_guidance.html). Additionally, wind energy projects
should follow the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing
impacts to migratory birds and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at:
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;
http://www.towerkill.com; and
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Hazards/towers/comtow.html.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office.
Attachment

2

 United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Project name: Pomontory Landfill Site

Official Species List
Provided by:
Utah Ecological Services Field Office
2369 WEST ORTON CIRCLE, SUITE 50
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT 84119
(801) 975-3330
http://www.fws.gov
http://www.fws.gov/utahfieldoffice/

Consultation Code: 06E23000-2017-SLI-0155
Event Code: 06E23000-2017-E-00401
Project Type: LAND - DISPOSAL / TRANSFER
Project Name: Pomontory Landfill Site
Project Description: The Project Area encompasses approximately 2,006 acres and is located
approximately 23 miles west of Ogden on the southwestern side of the Point, immediately north of
the existing Union Pacific railroad line. The Project Area
covers parts of Sections 18, 19, and 30 in T6N, R5W, and Sections 13, 14,23, 24, and 25 in T6N,
R6W.
Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it
may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code
matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by'
section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/09/2017 05:10 PM

1

 United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Project name: Pomontory Landfill Site

Project Location Map:

Project Coordinates: The coordinates are too numerous to display here.
Project Counties: Box Elder, UT

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/09/2017 05:10 PM

2

 United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Project name: Pomontory Landfill Site

Endangered Species Act Species List
There are a total of 1 threatened or endangered species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in
an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain
fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the
Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your
project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS
office if you have questions.

Birds

Status

Has Critical Habitat

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus

Threatened

Proposed

americanus)
Population: Western U.S. DPS

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/09/2017 05:10 PM

3

Condition(s)

 United States Department of Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Project name: Pomontory Landfill Site

Critical habitats that lie within your project area
There are no critical habitats within your project area.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 02/09/2017 05:10 PM

4

 APPENDIX 
LOG OF TEST PITS AND BORING LOGS

MW 1
A s installed

4245
2

Schedule 4 0 P V C Pipe

A s dnlled

4245

Eiev 4 2 4 0

, 4240

4240

18/12

4235

 85/11

4230

4235

WC = 3
DD = 124
+ 4 = 26
2 0 0 = 11

4230

80/12

4225

4225

—

4220

—

4215

—

83/12

. 4220

114/12

. 4215

]

VVC = 13
DD = 120
+ 4 = 23
2 0 0 = 36

80/11

— 4210

4210
146
90/12

4205

4205

[61/12

• 4200

WC = 8
+ 4 = 43
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I 50/ 5

4195

4195

—

4190

—

I 50/6

4190

150/3

— 4185

4185

' 4180

4180
Quartzite
Bedrock

I — 4175

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

4175

-

8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Log of Monitor Well M W 1

Figure 3

 MW 2

2

A s installed
Schedule 4 0 P V C

,— 4240

A s drilled
Elev 4 2 3 8

4240

4235

4235

—I

35/10

4230

1

4230

50/6

4225

85/12

4220

Wc = 6
DD = 114
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 21

50/6

4210

60/4

4205

50/5

—

4220

90/12

4215

4225

WC = 6
DD = 117
+ 4 = 52
2 0 0 = 24

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

MW 3
ICont)
A s installed

4200

50/5

VVC = 7
+ 4 = 65
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I—

A s drilled

4170-

4170

50/5

• 4195

50/6

4195

4190

50/4

4190

4165—1

— 4165

—

4160 —

— 4160

180/9

—

4185

—

4180

^150/4

j 2 50/2

• 4175

• 4170
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

4185

150/4

—

4150

+ 4 = 53
2 0 0 = 14

4175

4170—
= 8

—

4155 —

4155

3 50/3

4145-

4145

1— 4 1 4 0

4150—

50/3

4140-

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Log of Monitor Well M W 2

Figure 4

 MW 3
2

A s installed
Sctiedule 4 0 P V C

A s dnlled

4240

4240
Elev

4238

. 4235

1

4235
150/1

—

4230

422S

4220

—

180/12

4230

50/6

422S

50/3

4215

— 4210

4205

—

4220

—

—

93/10

WC = 4
DD = 119
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 15

4215

50/5

+ 4 = 62
2 0 0 = 16

4210

MW 3
(Cont)

4205

I 50/4

A3 installed
—

4200

—

4195

—

4190

—

4185

—

4180

72/7

: ] 95/10

:3

50/2

:^

50/1

WC = 7
+ 4 = 40
200 = 6

A s drilled
4170-

4200

4170

4195

4165

181/8

4165 —

4190

4160

150/4

4160—

4185

—

4180

—

4175

—

J 75/12

50/1

4155

4155 —

J
]72/10

4175

—

4170

1

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

C D 50/4

4170 .
= 8

_

4150

150/5

4150-

4145

50/2

4145-

4140

ffitn

50/4

4140 —

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Log of Monitor Well M W 3

Figure 5

 2

MW 4
A s installed
A s drilled
Schedule 40 P V C

Elev

r

4240

4240

4240

''7}""

4235

/I

4235

31/12

4230

—

4230

i

4225

63/12

4225

65/12

—

WC = 3
DD = 120
+ 4 = 60 4220
200 = 7

4220

85/12
—

%

4215

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

80/12
4210

D 50/6
4205

MW 4

tCont)
46/12

A s installed

4200

4200

]

4195

I 50/5

4195

i

—

WC = 8
DD = 132
+ 4 = 25 4190 - \
200 = 15

4190

[ 38/12
—

4185

150/3
—

I 77/11

WC = 13
DD = 124
+ 4 = 31 4185
200 = 22

4150

50/4

1020875

W C = 11
DD = 130
+ 4 = 39 4 1 5 0 —
2 0 0 = 21

150/5
4175

1

4155-

4155

4180 — ]

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

4160—

4160

77/12

• 4180

' — 4170

4165 —

4165

40/12

4175

4170—I

• 4170

59/12

54/12
—

A s dnlled

—

4145-

4145

150/5
83/10
4170= 8

' — 4140

4140 —
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 4

Figure 6

 MW 5
As installed

As dnlled
Elev 4440

•—

4440

—

4440

16/12

•4 Schedule
40 PVC

4435

4435 —

/ "112/1:
—

4430

4430

\
/ ]

69/11

4425

4425

18/12
4420

—

4416

4420 —

;] 48/12
23/12

—

4410

—

4405

—

4400

4415

WC = 18
DD = 113
200 = 72

4410 —

,49/12
4405

181/11
4400 •

,50/1
—

4395 —

4335

:zi

•
4390

43 SO —

4385

4385 —

—

4380

4380

—

4375

4375 —

4370 •

1— 4370
Approximate Vertical Scale 1 = 8
1020875

Continued on next figure
Log of Monitor Well MW 5

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Figure 7

 M W 5 (Continued)

A s installed

—

4370 — ,

4365

4365 .

4360

4360-

4246

4245 —

i

4240

4240 —

4235

4235 •

4230

4230 •

4225

4225 —

—

4220

4220 •

—

4215

4215 —

4210

4210 •

4205

4205 •

—

>oi

A s drilled

4370

-

(Ouartzlte
Bedrock

4200 —

4200

Bottom Depth 243 Feet
4195 •

4195

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8

Log of Monitor Well M W 5

Figure 8

 Elev

A 1
4310

Elev

A 2
4305

Elev

A 3
4302

Elev

A 4
4378

Elev

Cemented

Cemented
Quartzite
Bedrock
• —

Quartzite
Bedrock

10

/:=i

Refusal in
Cemented Soil

15

A 5
4282

10 •

a::

15

20

20

Elev

A 6
4283

Elev

A 7
4250

A 8
Elev 4 2 6 0

Elev

A 9
4262

so

S2

5 —

Cemented

=3

/S3
10
Cemented '
Refusal In
Cemented Soil

15

Refusal in
Cemented Soil or
Bedrock

15

Cemented \

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 9

 TP 2
Elev 4 8 7 0

TP 1
Elev 4 8 1 0

TP 3
Elev 4 9 8 0

TP 4
Elev 4 7 8 0

TP 5
Elev 4 8 2 5
0

1—1

WC = 9
DD = 74
2 0 0 = 96
LL = 2 6
PI = 6

—

+ 4 = 39
2 0 0 = 14

WC = 8
DD = 8 7
200 = 63

Cemented '

10

10 -

15

15

20

20 •

TP 7
Elev 5 0 4 5

TP 6
Elev 4 9 0 0

-

—1

5

TP 8
Elev 4 6 8 0

TP 9
Elev 4 6 9 0

Dolomite
Bedrock

T P 10
Elev 4 7 5 5

+ 4 = 47
200 = 3

5

-

10

Cemented \
16

15 •
Refusal in
Cemented Soil

I—

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

20 —
= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 10

 TP 12
Elev 4 5 2 0

T P 11
Elev 4 8 7 5

T P 13
Elev 4 S 3 0

T P 15
Elev 4 6 5 0

T P 14
Elev 4 5 8 5

3

7 r3

—

I

W C = 14
DD = 98
200 = 90

W C = 15
DD = 102
200 = 73

10

0

A

—I

10 .

/=3
-

Quartzite
Bedrock

15

15

20 •

20

T P 17
Elev 4 4 2 5

T P 16
Elev 4 3 3 0

TP 18
Elev 4 4 6 2

Cemented .

10

• I]
^

TP 2 0
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 19
Elev 4 6 0 0

WC = 6
DD = 97
2 0 0 = 35

+ 4 = 53
200 = 2

+ 4 = 6
2 0 0 = 51
LL = 19
PI = 5
M D D = 118 5
OMC = 1 1 5
K = 1x10 5

10

Cemented '

u 1=1
15

15
Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

Quartzite
Bedrock
20

= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 11

—

 TP 22
Elev 4 4 6 0

TP 21
Elev 4 3 5 0

I
i—1

10

+4 = 37
2 0 0 « 36
LL = 3 4
Pi = 15
M D D » 124
O M C <= 9

TP 2 3
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 2 4
Elev 4 3 2 5

>=3

+ 4 = 44
2 0 0 = 26

(13
+ 4 = 35
200 = 1

r

I

Quan
Bedrock

+ 4 = 56
2 0 0 = 10

W C = 17
DD = 107
2 0 0 = 72

10 •

uartzita

Dolomite
Bedrock

Quartzite
Bedrock

15

15 —

20

20

TP 25
Elev 4365

— 5

10

f
Quartzite
Bedrock

• 20
1020875

TP 27
Eiev 4280

*=3

+ 4 = 10
2 0 0 = 20

Cemented 4

Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

10 -

15 •

15

Approximate Vertical Scale

TP 26
Elev 4260

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

1 = 8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 12

 NOTES

Legend of Boring and Test Pit Logs

§

The bonngs for monitor wells M W 1 to M W 4 were dnlled and installed on January
2 3 2 4 27 28 and 29 2 0 0 3 with a 4 inch odex drilling system Monitor well M W 5
was drilled and installed M a y 14 to M a y 21 2 0 0 3 with 8 inch Odex/Air Rotory
methods The test pits were excavated on December 11 12 13 16 and 2 3 2 0 0 2
with a track excavator

Topsoil Silty and clayey sand and gravel to lean clay cobbles and occasional boulders
slightly moist brown roots
Lean Clay (CL) small to moderate amount of gravel porous in Test Pits TP 1 T P 2 and
A 1 cobbles and occasional boulders up to 3 feet in size stiff to very stiff slightly moist
w e t at depth in borings brown to reddish brown to grayish brown

•

Q

Clayey Sand with Gravel ( S O clayey gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders up to
1 / feet in size medium dense to dense slightly moist to moist brown

ry\
J[i
uCJ

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) clayey layers and gravel layers occasional cemented layers
cobbles and occasional boulders medium dense to very dense slightly moist brown to
reddish brown

•

Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders
occasional cemented layers medium dense to very dense slightly moist to moist wet
at depth in the borings brown to grayish brown to reddish brown
Clayey Gravel with Sand and Clayey Sand with Gravel (GC/SC) Interlayered cobbles and
occasional boulders occasional clay layers dense to very dense slightly moist to moist
w e t at depth in the borings brown to gray

Locations of the bonngs and tost pits were measured epproximately by a hand held G P S
Elevations of the borings and test pits were estimated based on interplation between
P
/^ntniire e
h u m r ^ on
nn P
irtiir. O
contours
shwon
Figure
2
I

The boring and test pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to
the degree implied by the method used

>

The lines between the matenals s h o w n on the boring and test pit logs represent the
approximate boundanes between material types and the transitions may be gradual

3

No free water was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavating Water
level readings shown on the monitor well logs were made at the time and under the
conditions indicated Fluctuation in the water level will occur with time

7

W C = Water Content (%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
+ 4 = Percent Reteined on No 4 Sieve
2 0 0 = Percent Passing No 2 0 0 Sieve
LL = Liquid Limit (%)
Pi = Plasticity Index (%)
M D D = Maximum Dry Density determined by A S T M D 6 7 8 (pet)
O M C = Optimum Moisture Content determined by A S T M D 678 (^l
K = Permeability (cm/sec)

Clayey Gravel w i t h Sand ( G O clayey sand layers occasional clay layers cobbles end
boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size occasional cemented layers medium dense to
very dense sliglitiy moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grey
K \

Silty Gravel w i th Sand (GM) silty send layers cobbles up to approximately 1 foot in size
occasional cemented layers dense to very dense slightly moist brown

^

Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GPI sand layers occasional cemented layers cobbles
and boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size medium dense to vary dense slightly
moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grayish brown

LEGEND OF WELL INSTALLATION
I—I

Concrete

Bedrock quartzite and dolomite hard to very hard dry to wet grayish white to grey to
purple

•

Bentonite Seal (3/8

1

10/12

P
1020875

California Dnve sample teken The symbol 1 0 / 1 2 indicates that 10 blows from a
1 4 0 pound hammer failing 3 0 inches were required to drive the sampler 12

chips)

Bentonite Grout

inches

Indicates relatively undisturbed hand drive sample taken

Sand pack around well screen

Indicates disturbed sample taken

indicates Schedule 4 0 P V C flush threaded pipe installed

indicates practical refusal

Indicates machine slotted schedule 4 0 P V C flush treaded pipe with 0 01
inch openings installed

indicates the depth of subsurface water and the number of days after dnlling the
measurement w a s taken

Indicates steel protective casing installed The casings are 4 inch diameter for
M W 1 through M W 4 The casing is 8 inch square for M W 5

Legend and Notes of Exploratory Borings Test Pits and Monitor Wells

10 2 0 Silica Sand

FlQiira 1 3

 APPENDIX 
FLOOD WATERS INFORMATION

The Rising Level of the Great Salt
Lake: Impacts and Adjustments

Peter M. Morrisette

National Center for Atmospheric Research?
Boulder, Colorado 80307

 

Abstract

Societal responses to climatic ?uctuations can be dif?cult and costly.
The recent case of the rising level of the Great Salt Lake indicates that
resource managers are often unpreparedto respond to climate related
impacts, except in an ad hoc and costly fashion. Precipitation in the
Great Salt Lake drainage basin between 1982 and 1986 averaged 134
percent of normal, resulting in a rise in the level of the Great Salt Lake
of 3.66 (12 ft) to a new historic record high level of 1283.77 
(4211.85 ft). This rise in the level 'of the lake has had widespread
adverse impacts, forcing resource managers to implement costly emer-
gency ?ood mitigation measures. Policymakers, however,_have been
unwilling to implement long~term policies aimed at adapting to ?uc-
tuating lake levels, relying instead on crisis management while hoping
that the lake will soon recede. The water level of the Great Salt Lake,
its impacts and adjustments, and an assessment of the long-term ad-
justment options are discussed.

1. Introduction

Scientists and policymakers alike have become increasingly I

aware of the impact that fluctuations in climate have on sen-
sitive social and economic systems. The growing literature on
climate impacts offers both conceptual and methodological
frameworks for understanding climate and society interactions
Kates et al., 1985). Recent case studies have demon-
strated how sensitive modern society can be to ?uctuations in
climate (Riebsame, 1988), and might be to the potential impacts
from a trace?gas induced global warming (Glantz, 1988). How-
ever, societal respOnses to climatic ?uctuations can be difficult
and costly. For example, recent cases of lake-level rise and
?ooding have indicated that policymakers and resource man?
agers are often unprepared to respond, except in an ad hoc and
costly fashion; long-term policy adjustments have been lacking
(see Changnon, 1987; Mtnrisette, 1988).

Changnon (1987) discussed the dif?cult problems that have
confronted policymakers in Illinois and the Great Lakes region
as a result of record high lake levels on the Great Lakes. Societal
adjustment has been dif?cult because of the diverse impacts,
and the fact that both interstate and international jurisdictions
are involved. While resource managers have been searching
for solutions, they have been forced to rely on local structural

adjustments. Changnon (1987) argues, however, that effective .

policy solutions will likely require resolution at the regional
level.

The Great Lakes are not the only lakes in North America
that have experienced record high levels this decade. Several
of the closed basin lakes in the western United States have
been at or near modem?day record high levels in the past sev-

Sponsored by the National Science Foundation.

1988 American Meteorological Society

1034

eral years, most notably Utah?s Great Salt Lake (Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, 1986a). The Great Salt Lake has
risen 3.66 (12 ft) since 1982, setting a new historic high
record of 1283.77 (4211.85 ft). This rapid rise in the level
of the lake has been directly tied to increased precipitation in
the lake?s drainage basin. The resulting ?ood from the rising
lake has had widespread adverse impacts on public and private
facilities and on activities along the shore of the lake. This
?ooding has forced resource managers and policymakers to
implement emergency mitigation measures and to investigate
the possible implementation of large-scale adjustment strate?
gies.

Decision makers, however, have been unwilling to imple~
ment ?exible long-term adjustments, relying instead on short-
term structural altematiVes (see Morrisette, 1988). It took the
record high lake level of 1986 to force the state legislature to
fund the west desert pumping project that is designed to slow
the rate of rise. Policymakers have adopted a wait-and?see
approach with respect to lake?level rise. Ad hoc adjustments
have been made only as rising lake levels have forced a re-
sponse. However, as with the Great Lakes, effective adjustment
will likely reqitire a long-term regional policy. While this has
been proposed in the form of designating a special development
zone around the lake, no such action has yet been taken. The
problem of the rising level of the Great Salt Lake, including
impacts and adjustments, and an assessment of long?term ad-
justment options are given here. The Great Salt Lake case
clearly illustrates the difficulty that resource management in?
stitutions have in adjusting to climatic ?uctuations.

2. Lake-level and climate fiuctuatidns

The Great Salt Lake is a terminal saline lake located in an
enclosed drainage basin in northern Utah (Fig. 1). The modem-
day lake is a remnant of Pleistocene Lake Bonneville that began
forming about 30 000 years ago, reaching a peak elevation of
1551.43 (5090 ft) (the rim of the enclosed basin) about
16 000 years ago, and then declining to 1295.40 at (4250 ft)
about 10 000 years ago. The Great Salt Lake, as the Holocene
remnant of Lake Bonneville, has also ?uctuated markedly be-
tween nearly dry conditions and levels between 1285.34 and
1292.35 (4217 and 4240 ft). Recent research has indicated
that the lake has reached an elevation of 1285.34 (4217 ft)
as many as five times in the past 500 years (Mckenzie and
Eberli, 1985). The estimated ?normal? leVel of the present-
day lake,- de?ned as the historic average (based on a 140-year
record from 1847 to the present), is approximately 1280.16 
(4200 ft) (Arnow, 1984).

Because the lake is located in a shallow basin, a small change
in lake level can have a substantial impact on the shape of the
shoreline and the surface area of the lake. The nearly 3.66-m
(12-ft) rise in the level of the lake since 1982 has resulted in

Vol. 69, N0. 9, September 1988

Bulletin American Meteorological Society

 



GREAT

 

 

 

I 
SALT
,1 I 03L
OGDEN
Causeway I I

I
Fremont Weber Co.
LAKE Inland 
.
I 



as: Elder co. Antennae
i A Inland
Towels Co. 




AMAX I 



UPRR 


I 
a 5 ?5 "90 SALT
LAKE
0 5 10 15 20 I

CITY

1



I

9001

Railroad 

.09 

.no at



County Lino

Mineral lnuuntly I

 

 

 

FIG. 1. Great Salt Lake drainage basin (from Amow, 1984).

signi?cant ?ooding of shoreline property. In 1982, with the
lake at an elevation of 1280.16 (4200 ft), it covered ap-
proximately 4403 km2 (1700 square miles); however, in 1986
with the lake at 1283.77 111 (4211.85 ft), the surface area was
approximately 6475 km2 (2500 square miles), an increase of
47 percent. In addition, the terrain of the basin is an important
factor in?uencing lake-level rise. For example, if the lake reaches
an elevation between 1284.43 and 1284.73 (4214 and 4215
ft) it will cross the ?rst of three topographic thresholds between
1284.43 and 1285.34 (4214 and 4217 ft) that will allow the
lake to ?ow into successively larger basins to the west and
south of the present lake, greatly increasing the size of the lake
(Atwood, 1986).

The level of the Great Salt Lake is maintained by a balance
between precipitation, runoff, and evaporation. Runoff is the
largest source of in?ow into the Great Salt Lake, accounting
for 66 percent of the lake?s average annual in?ow. The Bear,
Weber, and Jordan rivers are the lake?s principal tributaries,
with the Bear River accounting for 59 percent of all runoff.
Precipitation directly on the lake accounts for 31 percent of the
average annual in?ow, and groundwater contributes the re-
maining 3 percent. Under equilibrium conditions, the combi-
nation of precipitation, runoff, and evaporation should maintain
a stable lake level within .3 to .6 (1 to 2 ft) (Amow, 1984).
However, the level of the Great Salt Lake during the period of
historic record has been anything but stable (Fig. 2).

During the past 140 years the Great Salt Lake has ?uctuated
more than 6.10 In (20 ft) between high and low lake levels. In
June 1986, as a result of a prolonged period of increased pre-

1035

cipitation over northern Utah, the Great Salt Lake reached an
historic high of 1283.77 (4211.85 ft), surpassing the old
record of 1283.70 (4211.6 ft) reached in 1873. The historic
record low level for the lake of 1277.52 (4191.35 ft) occurred
in 1963, and since 1963 the lake has risen 6.25 (20.5 ft).
The lake rose steadily between 1963 and 1976, reaching a level
of 1280.77 (4202 ft) for the ?rst time since the 19205, before
declining again. However, since the fall of 1982 the lake has
risen over 3.54 (12 ft). This included rises of 1.55 (5.1
ft) in 1983, 1.52 (5.0 ft) in 1984, and 1.07 (3.5 ft) in
1986?the three largest single-season rises in the historic rec-
ord. In 1987, as a result of a dry winter, the lake just reached
the previous year?s record level of 1283.77 (4211.85 ft) and
fell to a low of 1283.04 (4209.45 ft). Part of this decline
was due to the recently implemented west desert pumping proj-
ect.

Recent research on the climate of northern Utah shows a
direct relationship between precipitation in the Great Salt Lake
drainage basin and lake-level rise (Karl and Young, 1986; Kay
and Diaz, 1985b; Williams, 1985; Amow, 1984). The climate
record indicates that the Great Salt Lake Basin has been in a
wet period for some years, with the last several years being
the wettest on record. Figure 3 shows, for ten index stations,
the percent of normal precipitation in the Great Salt Lake Basin
from 1951 to 1986.2 Since 1963, precipitation has been above
normal for 18 of the last 25 years. Precipitation as a percent
of normal for the period 1980 to 1986 has been 129, 112, 150,
180, 133, 107, and 129 percent of normal, respectively. Karl
and Young (1986), using a record for the Great Salt Lake
drainage basin from 1864 to 1984, identi?ed the wet spell of
1981 to 1984 as the most extreme period on record, and Eis-
cheid et a1. (1985), using 90 years of record, identi?ed 1983
as the wettest year on record. Similarly, runoff into the Great
Salt Lake has been 265, 330, 190, and 300 percent of normal
for the water years 1983 to 1986, respectively.

Individual weather events over the past several years have
been as anomalous as the annual precipitation and runoff totals.
For example, on 27 September 1982, Salt Lake City Intema?
tional Airport recorded 5.77 cm of rain (2.27 in), the most it
ever recorded in a single day. The 17.88 cm (7.04 in) of
precipitation for September 1982 was also a record for a single
month. In addition, records for precipitation have been
set at many stations throughout the basin in 1982, 1983, 1984,
and 1986, and the late spring snowpack in the Wasatch Moun-
tains has been as much as 500 percent of normal. This increased
precipitation over the past several years has affected more than
just the level of the Great Salt Lake. Extensive stream ?ooding,
mud?ows, and landslides occurred along the Wasatch Front in
the spring of 1983 and 1984. The floods and landslides of the
spring of 1983 were the most severe on record (Utah Division
of Comprehensive Emergency Management, 1985).

Two questions that have been raised by policymakers are
whether the climate is changing and what might future climate
and lake-level trends be. Karl and Young (1986) argue that
while the increased precipitation of the last several years is
highly anomalous, it is not unprecedented in the long-term
climate record of the region. Using the extended record for the

2 Normal is de?ned as the 1951-?l980 30-year average at these sta-
teous of 45.47 cm (17.9 in).

1036

Vol. 69, N0. 9, September 1988

LEVELS OF THE GREAT SALT LAKE, 1847?1987

 

 

 

 

4215
- 1284
4210 
A ?1283 9
9
- 1282 
4205 
g, -1281 F),
0 a:
4200 . 1280 -J
3 03

.1 -1279 3
4195 
-1278
4190 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980
Year

FIG. 2. Historical lake-level record for the Great Salt Lake (data from USGS).

GREAT SALT LAKE BASIN PRECIPITATION, 1951-86
190 I
1501?
1709
150?
150?
140~
130?
120?

1101950 1955 1980 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

Year

 

Percent of Normal

 

 

 

 

FIG. 3. Percent of normal precipitation in Great Salt Lake Basin,
1951?1986.

Great Salt Lake drainage, they estimated the return period for
the record wet period of 1981 to 1984 to be 118 years. They
also argue that there is a 50 percent chance of having asirnilar
wet spell in any given IOU-year period. Karl and Young (1986,
p. 357) conclude that the record ?tends to suport the hypothesis
that the time series contains climate ?uctuations, but the evi-
dence for a ?runaway? change in climate in recent years is not

convincing.? It is likely, therefore, that the recent lake?level 

rise occurred as a result of normal climatic variability, rather
than from a change in long-term climatic conditions.
Predicting future lake-level and climate trends has proven to
be an uncertain and risky task. Past efforts have not met with
much success. In response to the current crisis, a conference
entitled ?Problems of and Prospects for Predicting Great Salt
Lake Levels? was held in Salt Lake City in March 1985.
Predictions from participants attending the conference were
quali?ed and relatively conservative, calling for the lake to
continue to rise for several more years, perhaps to a level of
1285.34 111 (4217 ft), before declining (Kay and Diaz, 1985a).

With a dry year in 1987, the lake has at least temporarily leveled
off. With the existence of drier conditions in the basin during
the winter and spring of 1988, prospects for the lake declining
in 1988 look good. However, even if the lake begins to recede,
it will probably take 10 years or more for the lake to fall to
1280.16 (4200 ft). A return to wetter conditions during this
period would likely result in the lake?s level rising once again.

3. Impacts and mitigation efforts

The rising level of the Great Salt Lake has resulted in wide-
spread impacts on public and private facilities, and on activities
along the shore of the lake. Most notable have been the impacts
on mineral and industrial operations, highways and railroads,
and wildlife and recreation areas. Each of these impacts has
resulted in mitigation efforts. To date, the costs of impacts and
adjustments has exceeded $300 million.

Solar pond mining operations along the shore of the lake
have been particularly vulnerable to rising lake levels. Through
1986, mineral companies had invested $84.7 million to protect
their property and maintain their operations in the face of rising
lake levels (US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986). However,
their Operations still remain vulnerable, and it is uncertain at
which lake level these companies will be forced to close com-
pletely.

Flood damage to major highways and railroads that pass near
or over the Great Salt Lake has been signi?cant (Utah De-
partment of Transportation, 1986). The most seriously threat?
ened routes have been Interstate 80 and the Union Paci?c
Railroad, which pass to the south of the lake, and the Southern
Paci?c Railroad causeway, which divides the north and south
arms of the lake (Fig. 4). The raising and diking of highways
and railroads have been among the most visible of all flood
mitigation efforts. For example, sections of Interstate 80 have -
been raised to an elevation between 1284.43 and 1284.73 

Bulletin American Meteorological Society

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 4. Map of Great Salt Lake and vicinity showing facilities
affected by rising lake levels.

(4214 and 4215 ft) at a cost of over $25 million. However, for
structual reasons, the interstate could not be raised further, and
it was forced to close for short periods of time during the spring
of 1986 because of storm surges and high waves. Other state
and local roads have also experienced ?ooding, including the
north and south causeways to Antelope Island, which are under
ten feet of water.

Damage to the Union Paci?c Railroad and to the Southern
Pacific Railroad has likewise been significant (Utah Department
of Transportation, 1986; Utah Division of Comprehensive
Emergency Management, 1985). The Union Pacific Railroad
has raised its tracks along the southern shore of the lake four
times at a total cost of over $23 million, and the Southern
Paci?c Railroad has invested $70 million to raise and protect
its causeway. The causeway can currently withstand a lake
level of only 1283.70 (4211.6 ft), and it was forced to close
for several months in the summer of 1986 after being severely
damaged by waves during a storm. The Southern Pacific Rail-
road cannot raise its tracks further because the lake bed cannot
support the additional weight. It is also unlikely that the Union
Paci?c will raise its tracks further.

Waterfowl refuges, state parks and other recreation areas,
and agricultural lands adjacent to the lake have also been
?ooded. Other public facilities that have been impacted by the
rising level of the lake include wastewater treatment plants,
landfills, underground telephone lines, and overhead electrical
power lines. Although most of these immediately threatened
public facilities wastewater treatment plants and landfills)
have been protected by dikes, major residential and industrial?
commercial areas in Salt Lake, Davis, and Weber counties,
and Salt Lake City International Airport would be threatened
if the lake continues to rise.

In addition to the numerous direct impacts from the rising
level of the Great Salt Lake, there are also potential long-term,
indirect impacts that include serious disruptions in highvVay,
rail, and even air transportation, and losses of both jobs and
tax revenue. Major disruptions in transportation have already
occurred. For example, the Southern Paci?c Railroad has been
forced to close its causeway and reroute traffic for extended
periods of time. Interstate 80 has been forced to close during
storms. If the lake continues to rise, the Southern Paci?c Rail?
road would be forced to permanently close the causeway. In

1 037

addition, Interstate 80 and the Union Pacific Railroad would
both have to be rerouted south of the take at substantial cost.
Such disruptions in transportation would have a widespread
impact on the economy of Utah. Also threatened, if the lake
continues to rise, are the jobs and tax revenues generated by
large companies such as AMAX, Great Salt Lake Minerals,
and the Southern Paci?c Railroad. While these companies have
been able to maintain their operations despite the 3.66-m (12
foot) rise in the level of the lake, it is questionable whether
they would remain in operation if the lake were to rise much
above 1283.82 (4212 feet).

Damages and capital investments from the 3.66-m (12-ft)
rise in the level of the Great Salt Lake since 1982 have been
substantial and widespread. They are likely to increase at an
accelerated rate if the lake continues to rise. In terms of impacts,
the lake is at or near a threshold at which critical facilities such
as highways and railroads will be lost, and heavily developed
residential and commercial areas are threatened if the lake should
continue to rise at rates similar to those of the last few years.
Mitigation efforts, however, have been directed primarily to-
ward protecting isolated facilities and offsetting impending
crises, rather than toward implementing long-term adjustment
strategies.

4. Efforts at large-scale adjustments

The rapid rise in the level of the Great Salt Lake over the past
several years and the resulting impacts have forced resource
managers and policymakers to respond. This response has been
in two forms: first, the implementation of emergency ?ood
mitigation efforts to protect immediately threatened facilities
(discussed in the preceding section), and second, the investi-
gation of larger scale lake-level control and ?ood mitigation
efforts and the review of potential long-term planning strate-
gies. While the state has been forced to dike and protect threat-
ened public facilities or lose them, it has been less willing to
tackle the larger issue of how to adjust in the long-run to a
rising lake. The state, however, has investigated an array of
structural lake-level control strategies, and has recently started
pumping water from the lake into the desert west of the lake.
Yet even this decision was based more on the need to offset
an impending crisis (the rapidly rising lake in 1986), rather
than on the basis of the need for implementing long-term ad?
justments.

Much of the dif?culty the state has had in adjusting to the
current crisis is due to the fact that it was completely unprepared
to deal with the problem of rising lake levels. Past experience
(prior to 1982) with managing the lake, and models of the
lake?s hydrologic system that were developed in the 19705,
suggested that lake levels above 1280.77 (4202 ft) were
highly unlikely and a lake level of 1283.77 (4211.85 ft) was
widely perceived to be impossible (Morrisette, 1988). The lake
was at record low levels in the early 1960s and had not been
above 1280.77 (4202 ft) since the 19205. Discussions of
lake-level control and ?oodplain management had surfaced in
the 19703 when the lake reached a peak of 1280.77 (4202
ft) (Utah Division of Great Salt Lake, 1976); however, the lake
soon receded and so did efforts at planning for lake-level var-
iability. Even as the lake began rising rapidly in the early 19805,
the widely held belief was that it would soon recede. In the

1038

past, policymakers and resource managers have been most con-
cerned with developing the lake for economic and recreational
benefits, and not with managing it as a variable resource that
someday might represent a serious hazard. With the continual
rise of the lake since 1982, the state of Utah has reluctantly
been forced to deal with the lake-level rise problem. Large-
scale efforts at lake-level control and ?ood mitigation were
beyond the means and authority of local governments, and the
federal government has ruled that existing authorities did not
allow its involvement in any lake?level control project (Utah
Division of Comprehensive Emergency Management, 1985;
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1986b). However,
some federal assistance has been provided through FEMA and
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In responding to the lake
level rise problem, the state has essentially adopted a wait-and-
see approach, doing only what is immediately necessary and
hoping that the lake will soon recede. It was not until May
1986, with the lake at a record high level, that decision makers,
who were faced with the prospect of even more-severe ?ooding,
?nally committed themselves to a major structural adjust-
ment?the west desert pumping project.

a. Structural adjustments: efforts at lake-level control
The ?rst measure taken by the state to attempt to control the
level of the Great Salt Lake was the breaching of the Southern
Paci?c Railroad causeway in the summer of 1984 (Utah Di-
vision of Comprehensive Emergency Management, 1985). The
railroad causeway divides the lake into a northern arm and a
larger southern arm. Because most of the in?ow occurs in the
southern arm of the lake, the effect of the causeway had been
to create higher brine concentrations in the northern arm of the
lake and a higher lake level in the southern arm. However, the
causeway breach was a relatively small project. It cost $3.7
million, and had only a one-time effect on the lake, lowering
the south arm by 30.48 cm (1 ft). Yet at the time the project
was being debated, it was highly controversial. Many politi-
cians, for example, questioned whether the project was nec-
essary, and one of the larger mineral companies and the Southern
Pacific Railroad were initially opposed for economic reasons.
The state also investigated several larger structural lake-level
control projects (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1984, 1986a;
US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986). Included among these
were plans to increase upstream storage on the Bear River (the
lake?s principal tributary), and the diversion of water from the
Bear River into the Snake River in Idaho. Increased storage
on the Bear River, however, would have only a minimal effect
on lake levels, and the diversion of Bear River water would
be costly and would face serious institutional and legal con-
straints (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1986a). A third
proposal involved the construction of protective dikes along
the shore of the lake; however, this was seen as being too costly
to be effective (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1986a).
Two different plans to create eastshore embayments were
also proposed (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1986a; US
Army Corps of Engineers, 1986). The larger and more popular
of these two plans, inter-island diking, involved the construc-
tion of a series of deep water dikes that would connect the
south shore of the lake with Antelope Island, Freemont Island,
and the north shore of the lake at Promontory Point. The idea
was to separate the east shore of the lake from the main body
of the lake by creating a fresh water embayment in which the

Vol. 69, N0. 9, September 1988

water level could be controlled by pumping into the main lake.
The project, however, would do nothing to protect the south
and west shores of the lake, and in fact, would leave these
areas more vulnerable to future lake?level ?uctuations. In ad-
dition, serious questions remain concerning the technical fea-
sibility of creating a fresh water embayment (US Army Corps
of Engineers, 1986; Utah Division of Water Resources, 1986a).
Nevertheless, it remains a popular idea because of the potential
economic and recreation bene?ts associated with a fresh water
embayment. In fact, the political motivation behind the project
is more to encourage lake development than to control the lake-
level. The project has long been popular among east shore
community leaders and politicians for this reason.

While the state has investigated numerous large-scale struc?
tural adjustments, it has been reluctant to follow through on
any of these projects, hoping instead that the lake would recede
naturally. In early 1985, however, after two years of record
lake-level rise, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 97 that
authorized $96 million for ?ood mitigation and lake-level con?
trol (Utah Code 73-10e). Twenty?million dollars was allocated
immediately for ?ood mitigation measures. The remaining funds
were to be allocated during a special session of the Legislature
later that spring. However, during the spring of 1985 it became
clear that the lake would peak far below its predicted level due
to drier than anticipated conditions in the basin. The legislature,
thinking that the lake-level rise problem was over, decided not
to hold a special session in order to allocate the remaining funds
it had authorized for ?ood mitigation and lake-level control.

In 1986, however, the lake began rising rapidly again, and
the state was confronted with another crisis. While diking public
facilities and raising highways had worked in the past, the lake
was reaching a level at which such adjustments would no longer
work. Policymakers were finally forced to consider a larger
solution. The legislature opted for the west desert pumping
project becausc it was determined to be the most practical and
cost effective of the many alternatives investigated (US Army
Corps of Engineers, 1986) and it could be implemented in a
relatively short period of time. The decision to fund the west
desert pumping project was made during a special session of
the Utah Legislature in May 1986. This decision was not with-
out political controversy. For example, many legislators fa-
vored inter-island diking because of its potential economic
bene?ts, and still others were concerned about the need for the
project and about funding. However, perhaps most important
was the general opposition to funding a $60-million project
that was designed speci?cally to remove water from the lake,
when the lake could start to recede naturally making the project
unnecessary. This has, in fact, happened as drier conditions
have prevailed over northern Utah since 1987.

The idea behind the $60-million west desert pumping project
is to increase the rate of evaporation by arti?cially increasing
the size of the lake (Utah Division of Water Resources, 1986b;
US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986). The project utilizes three
large diesel pumps to carry water from the lake into a large
evaporation pond located in the desert west of the lake (Fig.
5). A return canal brings highly concentrated brine back to the
lake to be used by mineral companies. It is estimated that the
project will increase evaporation by 1011.47 106 m3 (820,000
acre-ft) annually, and under normal climatic conditions, reduce
the level of the lake by 32.51 cm (12.8 in) during the ?rst year
of operation and 16.76 cm (6.6 in) in each additional year of

Bulletin American Meteorological Society

112' m?
I 

  
   


OF DRAINAGE BASIN
Duhcd Mum 

I 31] MILES


. . 

 

 

 

FIG. 5. West desert pumping project (after Utah Division of Water
Resources, 1986a).

operation. Construction on the project began in the summer of
1986, and it became operational in the late spring of 1987.
Approximately 30.48 cm (1 ft) of the 1987 decline in the level
of the lake has been attributed to the pumping project.

West desert pumping, however, cannot be considered a final
solution to the lake-level rise problem. To begin with, the
design of the project and the natural rate of evaporation limit
the amount of water that can be removed. For example, if input
into the lake is above 200 percent of normal, the lake will
continue to rise (input was at or above 200 percent of normal
from 1983?1986). The project is only operational with lake
level below 1284.73 (4215 ft), at which point the lake begins
to flow into a series of basins west of the lake (including,
eventually, the basin used for west desert pumping). Thus,
while west desert pumping will help to alleviate the problem,
the fact remains that if the precipitation pattern of the recent
past persists, the lake will continue to rise.

1). Non-structural adjustments3

In addition to west desert pumping and the other structural
measures discussed above, the state also investigated one non-
structural approach to the lake-level rise problem. This ap-
proach was based on designating the lake?s ?oodplain as a
Beneficial Development Area or BDA (Utah Division of Com-

3 Much of the information in this section and the following section
was derived from structured interviews with key Utah policymakers
conducted during the summer 1986. For a complete description and
documentation of these interviews see Morrisette (1987).

1039

prehensive Emergency Management, 1985; Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 1986b). The BDA was ?rst proposed by
FEMA in its hazard mitigation reports, and FEMA has since
tied future federal funding to the implementation of the BDA
concept (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1986b).
The BDA concept is based on restricting development within
the ?oodplain by implementing ?exible land-use policies that
would allow for only those developments that can withstand
damages from high lake levels. The BDA would include all
shoreland between the lake and 1285.34 (4217 ft). The
1285.34 (4217 ft) level was chosen based on recommen-
dations from the scientific conference held in March 1985, and
on the fact that it had been identified as relatively stable high
level for the lake during the past 500 years (Utah Division of
Comprehensive Emergency Management, 1985). While the
BDA would do little to mitigate the existing problem, it could
curtail potential future losses from rising lake levels. Thus the
BDA could be used as the foundation of a long?term program
for lake management and development, and in fact, it has been
endorsed by most of the state?s resource management agencies
for this purpose.

However, the BDA has not been implemented. While local
governments have implemented some zoning restrictions, they
are reluctant to surrender their authority over land use. In ad-
dition, some at the local and state government levels feel that
the BDA is being forced on them by FEMA. There is also
opposition to restricting development on valuable industrial
lands adjacent to the lake. The BDA has also received little
support from the governor or the legislature. Both would prefer
to support a structural solution to the problem rather than restrict
development around the lake. The hope is that the lake will
soon recede either naturally, or with the aid of west desert
pumping, or both.

c. Crisis decision making

Decision makers in Utah have had much difficulty in dealing
with the rising level of the Great Salt Lake. Policymakers have
been making decisions on a wait-and-see basis by responding
only to impending crises, and relying on short?terrn structural
solutions. The raising of the interstate, breaching the Southern
Paci?c Railroad causeway, and even the west desert pumping
project were ad hoc responses to crisis conditions and not part
of a rational plan for dealing with rising lake levels. This is
not to say that these projects were not necessary; however, it
does point to the lack of coordinated long?term planning. De-
cisions have been based on a hope that the lake will soon recede
thus making further action unnecessary.

Given this crisis decision-making process, it has been nearly
impossible to address the long-term problem of lake?level var-
iability. Although the state has investigated the option of desig-
nating a special development zone around the lake, it has not
done so. Even traditional structural measures such as the west
desert pumping project have been difficult to justify given the
short-term and crisis nature of the decision-making process. In
1986, the state turned to west desert pumping to mitigate what
at that time was perceived to be a serious crisis. However, with
the onset of drier conditions in 1987 and 1988, the west desert
pumping project has attracted much criticism. The present con?
cern centers on whether the project was necessary. Clearly,
concern about the lake comes and goes as the lake level rises
and falls.

1040

The short-term crisis nature of the decision-making process
for the Great Salt Lake has not been well suited to making
rational long-term management decisions. While the state has
been able to weather the current crisis, it has done little to
prepare for lake-level rise problems in the future. Thus, despite
the 3.66 (lZ?ft) rise in the level of the lake and the extensive
?ooding of lakeshore facilities and prOpeity since 1982, Utah
continues to remain vulnerable to the rising and ?uctuating
level of the Great Salt Lake. A ?exible long-term approach to
the problem of varying lake levels not only needs to include
structural measures such as those already implemented, but it
also needs to be based on a planning process that recognizes
the potential for future lake-level ?uctuations. This second
point is crucial and points to the need for decision makers to
implement coordinated comprehensive planning for the lake,
rather than relying on short-term crisis management if they
want to reduce societal vulnerability to a fluctuating Great Salt
Lake.

5. Summary

The rapid rise in the level of the Great salt Lake since 1982
has been due to a prolonged period of increased precipitation
over northern Utah. Eighteen of the past twenty-three years
have had above normal precipitation, and precipitation for the
period 1980?1986 averaged 134 percent of normal. In the past
six years, the Great Salt Lakehas risen to record levels. The
1.52 (5-ft) rises in the level of the lake in 1983 and again

References

Amow, T., 1984: Water-Level and Water-Quality Changes in Great
Salt Lake, Utah 1847?1983. Geological Survey Circular 913, US
Geological Survey, Washington, DC.

Atwood, G. 1986: How High will Great Salt Lake Rise? Survey Notes,
20.

Changnon, S. A., 1987: Climate Fluctuations and Record-High Levels
of Lake Michigan. Bul. Amer. Meteor. Soc.. 68, 1394?1402.

Eischeid, J. K., R. S. Bradley, and X. Shao, 1985: Secular Climate
Fluctuations in the Great Salt Lake Basin. Problems of and Prospects
for Predicting Great Salt Lake Levels, Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake
City, 111?23.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1986a: Closed-Basin Lake
Flooding: Case Studies and Mitigation Opportunities. FEMA, Den-
ver.

Federal Emergency Management Agency 1986b: Post-Flood Recovery
Progress Report, March 14, Denver.

Glantz, M. ed. 1988: Societal Responses to Regional Climate Change:
Forecasting by Analogy. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo., Forth-
coming.

Karl, T. R. and P. J. Young, 1986: Recent Heavy Precipitation in the
Vicinity of the Great Salt Lake: Just How Unusual? J. Climate Appl.
Meteor., 25, 353?63.

Kates, R. W. J. H. Ausubel, and M. Berberian, 1985: Climate Impact
Assessment. John Wiley, New York.

Kay, P. A. and H. F. Diaz, eds., 1985a: Problems of and Prospects
for Predicting Great Salt Lake Levels: Papers from a Conference
held in Salt Lake City March 26?28, 1985 . Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake
City. .

Kay, P. A. and H. F. Diaz, eds., 1985b: Synoptic Climatological
Relationships Bearng on Lake Level Fluctuations. Problems of and
Prospects for Predicting Great Salt Lake Levels, Univ. of Utah, Salt
Lake City.

Vol. 69, N0. 9, September 1988

in 1984 were unprecedented in the 140-year historical record.
The rising lake has ?ooded valuable lakeshore property and
threatened major transportation routes. Impacts and resulting
mitigation efforts have exceeded $300 million. If the lake rises
above levels reached in 1986 and 1987, additional damages
would be significant, including the loss of major railroads and
highways.

Existing policies and resource management institutions have
not been able to easily deal with a rapid rise in the level of the
Great Salt Lake. Decision makers have adopted a wait-and-see
approach, and crisis management has become the mode of
decision making. Policymakers have only been willing to take
those actions that have been immediately necessary to protect
threatened facilities. Initially, this involved diking public fa-
cilities and raising threatened highways. More recently, it has
involved controlling the level of the lake and the rate of rise
through west desert pumping. While the state has investigated
long-term adjustments such as the proposed BDA, none have
been implemented. However, effective adjustment to the ?ue-
tuating level of the Great Salt Lake will likely require a ?exible
long-term policy for managing and developing the lake.

Acknowledgements. Partial support for this research was provided
by NSF grant ATM-8409007, f?Climate Impacts, Perception and Ad-
justment Experiment (CLIMPAX) and the Natural Hazards Research
and Application Information Center at the University of Colorado. I
am also grateful to Kathleen Miller, Donald Borock, and Barbara
Brown for comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

Mckenzie, J. A. and G. P. Eberli, 1985: Late Holocene Lake?Level
Fluctuations of the Great Salt Lake (Utah) as Deduced from Oxygen-
Isotope and Carbonate Contents of Cored Sediments. Problems of
and Prospects for Predicting Great Salt Lake Levels, Univ. of Utah,
Salt Lake City, 25?39.

Morrisette, P. M., 1987: Perception, Public Policy, and Societal Ad-
justment to Fluctuations in Climate: A Case of the Rising Level of
the Great Salt Lake. dissertation, University of Colorado.

Morrisette, P. M., 1988: The Stability Bias and Adjustment to Climatic
Variability: The Case of the Rising Level of the Great Salt Lake.
Applied Geography, in press.

Riebsame, W. E., 1988: Adjusting Water Resources Management to
Climate Change. Climatic Change, in press.

US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986: Great Salt Lake Utah: Recon-
naissance Report. Sacramento, Calif.

Utah Dept. of Transportation, 1986: Findings of the Task Force on
Rising Level of the Great Salt Lake Impact on Utah Transportation,
Salt Lake City.

Utah Div. of Comprehensive Emergency Management. 1985: Hazard
Mitigation Plan: Utah 1985. Utah Dept. of Public Safety, Salt Lake
City.

Utah Div. of Great Salt Lake, 1976: Great Salt Lake Comprehensive
Plan. Utah Dept. of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City.

Utah Div. of Water Resources, 1984: Great Salt Lake Summary of
Technical Investigation for Writer Level Control Alternatives. Utah
Dept. of Natural Resources, Salt Lake City.

Utah Div. of Water Resources, 1986a: Alternatives for Controlling
Flooding around the Great Salt Lake, Memo, April 25, Salt Lake
City.

Utah Div. of Water Resources, 1986b: Brie?ng Paper on Great Salt
Lake and West Desert Pumping, Salt Lake City.

Williams, 6., 1985: Some Relationships of Precipitation and Great
Salt Lake Elevations, Past, Present, and Near Future. Problems of
and Prospects for Predicting Great Salt Lake Levels, Univ. of Utah,
Salt Lake City. 0

https://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/VERTCON/vert_con2.prl

Questions concerning the VERTCON process may be mailed to

Latitude:

NGS

41.22403

Longitude: 112.47172

NGVD 29 height:

Datum shift(NAVD

4211.85 FT

88 minus NGVD 29):

Converted to NAVD 88 height:

1 of 1

3.074 feet

4214.925 feet

1/27/2017 1:41 PM

  

NOTES TO USERS

This map is for use in administering the National Flood Insurance Program. It does
not necessarily identify all areas subject to ?ooding. particularly from local
drainage sources of small size. The community map repository should be
consulted f0!? possible updated 01? additional 11000 hazard infonnalicn.

To obtain more detailed infon'nation in areas where Base Flood Elevations
andfor floodways have been detenninedi users are encouraged to consult
the Flood Pro?les and Flocdway Data andror Summary of Stilwater Elevations
tables contained within the Flood Insurance Study report that accompanies
this FIRM. Users should be aware that BFEs shown on the FIRM represent
rounded whole-foot elevations. These BFEs are intended for ?ood insurance rating
purposes only and should not be used as the sole source of ?ood elevation
information. Accordingly, flood elevation data presented in the FIS report should be
utilized in conjunction with the FIRM for purposes of construction andior floodplain
management.

Boundaries of the ?oodways were computed at cross sections and interpolated
between cross sections. The were based on hydraulic considerations
with regard to requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program. Floodway
widths and other pertinent headway data are provided in the Floodway Data table
shown on this FIRM.

Serialn areas not in Special Flood Hazard Areas may be protected by ?ood
control structures. Refer to Section 2.4 "Flood Protection Measures" of the Flood
Insurance Study report for inforrnetion on tlood control structures for this
jurisdiction.

The projection used in the preparation of this map was State Plane Utah North
4301 Horizontal datum was NAD SS, spheroid. Differences in datum.
spheroid. projection or UTM zones used in the production of FIRMs for adjacent
jurisdictions may result in slight positional differences in map features across
jurisdiction boundaries. These differences do not affect the accuracy of this FIRM.

Flood elevations on this map are referenced to the North American I.r'ertical Datum
at 1953. THESE 000d elevations be compared t0 structure and ?f?uftd
elevations referenced to the same vertical datum. For information regarding
conversion between the National Geodetic ?v?ertical Datum of 1929 and the North
American Vertical Datum of 193B, visit the National Geodetic Survey website at
or contact the National Geodetic Survey at the following
address:

NGS Infon'nation Services

NOAA, 

National Geodetic Survey

SSMC-S. #3202

1315 East-West Highway

Silver Spring. Maryland 20910-3232
{301} 213-3242

T0 obtain current elevation. description. afidfdf location for bench
merits shown on this map, please contact the Information Services Branch of the
National Geodetic Survey at {301} 213-2242. or visit its website at



Base map information shown on this FIRM was provided in digital format by the
US. Farm Service National Agriculture Imagery Program dated summer
200B. and by the US. Geological Survey Digital Drthophotc Quadrangles dated
1903 and later. produced at a scale of 1:24000. The data was obtained from the
State Geographic Information Datasat maintained by the Automated
Geographic Reference Center 

Based on updated topographic information. this map re?ects more detailed and
up-to-date stream channel con?gurations and ?oodplain dallneations than
those shown on the previous FIRM for this judsdiction. As a result. the Flood
Pro?les and Flcodway Data tables may re?ect stream channel distances that differ
from what its shown on the map. N50. the road t0 ?oodplain relationships for
unrevised streams may differ from What iS shown 00 previous maps.

Corporate limits shown on ti'liS map are based on the best data available at the
time of publication- Because changes due to annexations or deannerretions may
have occurred after this map was published, map users should contact appropriate
community officials to verify current corporate limit locations.

Please refer to the separately printed Hap Indert for an overview map of the
county showing the layout of map panels: community map repository addresses;
and a Listing of Communities table containing National Flood Insurance Program
dates for each community as well as a listing of the panels on which each
community is located.

Contact the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-300-35B-Qetd for information on
available products associated with this FIRM. Available products may include
previously issued Letters of Map Change. a Flood Insurance Study report. and for
digital versions of this map. The FEMA Map Service Center may also be reached
by Fax at 1-000-353-9520 and its website at 

If you have questions about this map or questions conceming the National Flood
Insurance Program in general, please call MAP or

visit the FEMA website at 

 

 

 

30' Ff 112? 22' 30'
13?? FT 1330000 FT JOINS PAN EL 1250 133500;} FT
139m FT
41? 30' 1395000 FT 1400000} FT

    

     
   

    
 
   
 
    
   
 
      

41* 30'00?

159595001?

32115-000 Fl"

?94%

dropped ?down

3605000 FT

1591000m


Great Soft Loire

3590000 FT

JOINS PANEL 21rd



2

JOINS PANEL 2225

 
   
   

cascade
admit
erm?N
3530000 Fl"

ssrsotlc FT
453503111?
arm?N
FT
assaulted?
FT
esmN
413'r'ri'it?e same team! 3critics ies'i'i'i'hs isome ?S-immE 3liti"?""?E
JOINS PANEL 2625
112? 22' 30"

SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS SUBJECT TO
INUNDATION B?l" THE 1% ANNUAL

The 1% annual chance flood t? 100-year ?ood}, also known as the base flood, Is the flood that
has a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded In any given year. The Special Flood Hazard
Area Is the area subject to flooding by the 1% annual chance ?ood. Areas of Special Flood
Hazard Include 2ones A, AE, AH, AD, AR, ABS, if, and ME. The Base Flood Elevation is the

LEGEND

watervsu rface elevation of the 1% annual chance ?ood.

zone A lilo Base Flood Elevations determined.

EDDIE AE Base Flood Elevations 

EDHEAH Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet [usually areas of pending}: Base Flood
Elevations determined.

Ad Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet usually sheet flow on sloping terrain); average
depths determined. For areas of alluvial fen flooding, velocities also
determined-

IDHE Alt Special Flood Hazard Area formerly protected from the 1% annual chance
?ood by a flood control system that was subsequently decortI?ed. zone AR

indicates that the former flood control system is berng restored to provide
protection from the 1% annual chance or greater hood.

zoiiE Asa Area to be protected from 1% annual chance flood by a Federal flood
protection system under construction; no Base Flood Elevations

determined.

ZUHE 'll' Coastal ?ood zone with velocity hazard [wave action}; no Base Flood

Elevations determined.

Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard {wave action}: Base Flood

Elevations determined.

AREAS IN ZONE AE

The ?oodway Is the channel of a sb'eam plus any adjacent ?oodplain areas that must be kept free
of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance ?ood can be carried Without substantial increases

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

in ?ood heights.

 DTHER asses

zone it Areas of 0.2% annual chance ?ood; areas of 1% annual chance ?ood with
average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1
square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance ?ood.

AREAS
IDIIE 1t Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance ?oodplain.
IDNE Areas in which ?ood hazarm are undetermined, but possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

areas and DFAs are nonnally located within or adjacent to Special Hood Hazard Areas.

m? Boundary dividing Special Flood Hazard Areas of different Base
Flood Elevationsr ?ood depths or flood velocities.

513 Base Flood Elevation line and value; elevation in feet?

ear]

NV COASTAL seamen scsousces svsren (case) AREAS
.33 .7: OTHERWISE psorscreo asses 

1% annual chance ?ood plain boundary
0.2% annual chance ?ood plain boundary
Floodway boundary

Zone 0 boundary

CBRS and SPA boundary

Base Flood Elevation value where uniform
In feet*

1? Referenced to the North American 1IfErtlcal Datum of 19BS


azise'so'


600000 FT

citssic 
a rats

Cross section line
?Ii'ansect line

Geographic coordinates referenced to the
of 1933 53}

1000-meter UnivErsal 'li?ansverse Mercator grid values zone 12

SBBD-foot grid ticks: Utah State Plane coordinate
system. north zone e301], Lambert Conformal Co 

orgiectlon

Bench marlt (see explanation in Notes to Users section of this

Filtr-t panel}
River r-tile

MAP REPOSITORT

Refer to listing of Map Repositories on Map Indert

EFFECTIVE OF TO THIS PANEL

For community map revision history prior to countywide mapping, refer to the Community Map
History table located in the Flood Insurance report for this jurisdiction.

To dolemiine if ?ood inarrance is available in this comm unity. contact your insurance agent or call

EF FEOTWE DATE OF 
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP

SEPTEMBER ES. 2010

the national Hood Insurance Program at 

1000



MAP SCALE 1" I 2000?
0 2000 4000

 



HANCE FLOOD

I?l FEET

within zone; elevation

14th American Datum

 

METERS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

600 0 B00 1200
PANEL 2200C 
a FIRM
rLocc INSURANCE RATE 
or?
BOX ELDER COUNTY,
UTAH

 

 

 

 

 

taste a VIE

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

d?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


i. 

the utije ct cor?nl?l'l i ty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AND INCORPORATED AREAS

PANEL 2200 OF 3500
{see use INDEX FDR FIRM PANEL 

MAINS
MB Add. seas
BOX ELDER ASBOBS 2200 El

Notice to User' The Map Number shown below should be
used when placin map orders: the Community Number
shown above shou be used on insurance applications for

EFFECTIVE DATE
SEPTEMBER 29, 2010

Federal Emergency Management Agency

MAP NUMBER
4900302200D

 



 

APPENDIX I
SAMPLE FORMS

RANDOM INSPECTION FORM
Date
Inspected by
Load Origin
How was the inspection conducted'^

What was found during inspection'^

Is corrective action necessary*? If so what*?

Time.

 QUARTERLY INFECTION LOG
Promontory Landfill LLC

Area of Inspection

Needs
Repair

Date of
Repair

Off loading Area

Scale House

Run-on/Run-off

Roads

Harborage

Leachate Collection

Gas Collection
Perimeter Fencing and
Access Gates
Fugitive Waste collection
System
Fugitive Waste

Cell
Date

Inspector

Note Annual Report due before March 1

Comments

 Landfill Gas Quarterly Monitoring Results
Promontory Landfill LLC
Year
Quarter
Date

Time

Name of Gas Sample Collector.
Temperature

Weather

Momtonng device should be calibrated prior to initiating sampling
Accomplished'? Yes

No

Methane Monitoring Location

•

Measured
% LEL

Requlatorv
Action Limit
(% LEL)

1 Administrative Building

25

2 SW Corner of Rotary Dump

25

3 SW Corner of Bottom Dump Area

25

4 S E Corner of Intermodal Area

25

5 NW Corner of the Scale House

25

6 North Boundary

100

7 South Boundary

100

Gas Sample Collector

If measured % LEL equals or exceeds internal action limit,

contact the facility manager
•

Facility Manager

If measured %LEL equals or exceeds regulatory action limit, notify

the State Director in compliance with 40 CFR 258 23(c)
Comments

 Date:
Time:

Date

Report Daily Average

Report Total

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Total Daily Average

Type

Tickets/ Vehicles

Estimated Volume

Estimated Weight

Inbound materials only for the period ___________ - ___________
SUMMARY REPORT

Material Receipt Report By Date

PROMONOTORY POINT LANDFILL

Actual Weight

 APPENDIX 
FUGITIVE DUST PLAN

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL FACILITY
FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL PLAN MEASURES
1 Introduction
Box Elder County has requested that Promontory Point Resources, LLC (PPR) prepare a
Fugitive Dust Control Plan for the PPR landfill and rail haul facility site as part of the approval
for the Conditional Use Permits application. The Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Air Quality Division (DEQ) has determined that a site specific fugitive Dust Control Plan will
not be needed to submit to operate the facility. This plan has been prepared per the standard
state regulations for areas outside the nonattainment area to prevent or minimize fugitive
dust and the adverse effects upon the character of the site, specifically conditions regarding
air quality.
The Facility will comply with all applicable regulations found in Rule R307-205 of the Utah
Administrative Code. This document describes dust minimization measures for the landfill
and rail haul operations at the Promontory Point Resources Facility (Facility). Below is a site
specific plan for compliance:

2 Best Management Practices
Applicable to Both Landfill and Rail Haul Operations
The following Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented as needed to minimize
dust emissions at the Facility.
Roads – All onsite traffic will be limited to specific designated roads. Off-road travel will only
be authorized by the site manager on a case-by-case basis (e.g., access to a remote
monitoring well, etc.). Traffic on the stockpiles will be limited to designated roads to minimize
disturbance of previously treated/stabilized areas. Traffic speed will also be limited to an
appropriate level on all designated roads. All designated unpaved roads will be considered as
potential dust source areas, and as such, will be a priority for dust controls utilizing chemical
suppressants, watering, or gravel.
Hours of Operation – This plan will be in effect during all hours of operation at the Facility.
During non-business hours, there will be no activities generating dust; therefore, dust control
actions will be restricted to hours of operation only. However, as a best management
practice, if high winds are evident at the close of a business day (or immediately prior to a
weekend, holiday, etc.), site personnel should evaluate vulnerable areas and implement
controls as appropriate to minimize off-hours emissions.
Use of Chemical Suppressants – Use of various chemical dust suppressants shall be done in
accordance with the recommended end-uses for those products. Site personnel shall not
1 Page
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\Appendices\Appendix J Fugitive Dust Control Plan for LF and Rail.docx

 exceed the manufacturer recommended application rates. Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) for all
dust suppressant materials used at the Facility shall be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Prior to application, site personnel shall
determine and evaluate if the use of the dust suppressant could interfere with other site
monitoring activities, or cause other harm to the environment. The SDSs for dust
suppressants to be used, will be included in the SDS Binder for the Facility.

3 Landfilling and Rail Haul Activities - Sources of Specific Dust Control
Measures
3.1 Haul Road and Access Roads
Description:
Haul trucks will be transporting excavation area materials and waste to the stockpile and
active working face of the landfill, respectively.
Control Measures:
Dust control measures proposed for the haul roads include application of water and/or
commercial dust suppressants as needed, determined by monitoring of road and
meteorological (dry) conditions. Site speed limit of 15 mph on unimproved roads.

3.2 Stockpiles
Description:
Excavation area soil and product stockpiles.
Control Measures:
The driving and haulage areas around the stockpiles will be sprayed with water as needed to
minimize dust. The stockpile itself will be monitored for dust generation as appropriate and
wetted with water as necessary. Stockpiles projected to remain inactive for an extended
period of time will be evaluated for application with a commercial dust suppressant as
appropriate.

3.3 Disturbed Surfaces/Landfill Working Face
Description:
Waste will be unloaded at the landfill working face. Waste such as sawdust and other fine
dry materials sometimes require special handling because they can become airborne when
unloaded.
Control Measures:
The drop heights will be minimized to reduce dust from unloading operations. The water
truck will also be used to spray water on the tipping pad, the fill face, and cover stockpiles
areas when needed. Water will not be sprayed on powdery wastes if the identity is unknown,
2 Page
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\Appendices\Appendix J Fugitive Dust Control Plan for LF and Rail.docx

 as some materials react violently when brought in contact with water. An additional control
measure includes the placement of a wind screen downwind of operations.
The spreading of dry construction debris, such as plaster demolition waste, tends to generate
dust. Powdery waste will evaluated for disposal if the operation conditions at the time of
receipt (e.g., high wind conditions) could cause safety, health, or environmental hazard due
to dust generation and transport. To minimize the chance of these hazards occurring, site
personnel, through the load checking program, will encourage making appointments to
dispose powdery waste. This will enable site personnel to establish the contents of the
material and advise the discharger if site conditions are acceptable.
Areas of the landfill which reach final grade and receive final cover will be re-vegetated with
native vegetation.

3.4 Vehicular Track-out
Description:
Vehicular track-out at access points, starting from the point of intersection with a paved
public roadway.
Control Measures:
After paving of the County Road the following will be applicable. At all access points, a gravel
pad at least 30 feet wide, 50 feet long, and 6 inches deep will be installed. If the gravel is not
sufficient to prevent track-out rumble grates may also be used (shaking of the vehicle as it
drives across the device knocks dust and dirt off the tires and chassis). If needed, public
roadways used to access the Facility will be cleaned using a street sweeper.

3.5 Transport of Materials
Description:
The receipt of waste at the Facility will likely occur via transfer truck (open top covered with
tarp) or waste collection vehicles (completely enclosed). Wastes received from the rail haul
area will be loaded into transfer trucks within the waste receiving building that will be
equipped with dust suppression systems.
Control Measures:
Any trucks hauling waste into the Facility will be tarped and covered to minimize loss of
materials in-transit. All loads will be inspected to ensure that they are properly covered prior
to ingress to the Facility. Materials transported within the Facility will be enclosed, covered,
watered, or otherwise treated as needed to minimize loss of material to wind and spillage.

3 Page
J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Final Class V Permit Doc\Appendices\Appendix J Fugitive Dust Control Plan for LF and Rail.docx

 APPENDIX 
FUGITIVE WASTE PLAN

Fugitive Waste Plan
Promontory Point Landfill is committed to using management, engineering, process, and
personnel controls to aggressively limit the occurrence of fugitive waste.
Promontory Point Landfill requires that all waste loads entering the landfill must be covered.
In the unlikely event of receiving an uncovered load the truck will be stopped for corrective
actions.
Waste will be received via containers either by truck or by rail. Waste from incoming trucks will
remain covered until they are unloaded at the working face. Waste from incoming rail will be
unloaded from the rail cars into trucks in an enclosed building or will be directly transported to
the working face for unloading. Waste inside the building will be picked up dally with thorough
cleaning conducted weekly.
Prevailing winds are generally from due north to due east; however, the closest weather station
is located on the mountain to the north. The wind data generated from this site is not
necessarily representative of the conditions at the landfill due to the difference in the elevation
and topography. Promontory Point will have a weather station at the site to collect weather
data and record that information on the Daily Operation Record.
The buffer area around the disposal area will be given special attention, as it is the final
opportunity to prevent fugitive waste from leaving the site. A litter fence between 15 and 40
feet high will be constructed on the south-southeast side of the working face of the landfill
cells. A 15-foot temporary fence will be available to move around the site as needed. The
weather data will be utilized to ascertain what wind events (velocity, duration, and direction)
compromise the effectiveness of the fugitive waste control measures and alterations to the
litter fence will be made as necessary.
A five-foot fence will be placed around the perimeter of the property. Fencing would be
inspected weekly and waste cleanup and repair of the fence would occur as necessary.
Positive control of fugitive waste will include the cleanup of the site, including buffer areas on
a weekly basis. The drivers of the haul trucks will inspect haul roads and spills will be cleaned
up as reported. Spills inside the site would be cleaned up as detected Any waste that
escapes the site would be collected and disposed of before the end of the next working day.
Fugitive waste will be minimized at the working face will be reduced to the smallest
workable area as possible. It is anticipated the working face will be about a half acre.

 APPENDIX 
CLASS INFORMATION

L-1 PPR CLASS NEEDS ASSESSMENT

PROMONTORY POINT
RESOURCES
Class V Needs Assessment Report
March 2017
Title 19.6.108 10-11 Compliance Submission

P.O. Box 74873 ~ Phoenix Arizona USA
Ph. 480.241.9994 ~ E-mail: admin@wihrg.com
Website: www.wihrg.com

 Table of Contents

Legal Disclaimer .............................................................................................................................. 1
Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 1
Objective ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.0

Report Purpose .................................................................................................................... 3

2.0

Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 10(a) ............................................. 3

3.0

Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 10(b)........................................... 10

4.0

Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 11 ............................................. 132

5.0

Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………15

 Legal Disclaimer
This report was prepared by the Project Team of WIH Resource Group, Inc. (“WIH”), expressly for the sole
use of Promontory Point Resources, LLC (“PPR”) in accordance with the terms of the services agreement
between WIH and PPR, specifically about the Promontory Point Landfill facility, which is owned by PPR and
currently under development.
This report was prepared using the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised by consultants and
accountants under similar circumstances. PPR (1) WIH prepared this report subject to the scope limitations,
budgetary and time constraints, and business objectives of the client; (2) information and data provided by
others may not have been independently verified by WIH; and (3) the information and data contained in this
report are time sensitive and changes in the data, applicable codes, standards, and acceptable practices may
invalidate the findings of this report. Any use or reliance upon this report by third parties shall be at their sole
risk.

Limitations
The preparation of this report was undertaken in full conformity with accepted professional consulting
practices and fully as allowed by law we expressly disclaim all warranties, express or implied, including
warranties of merchantability or fitness for a purpose.
The report herein (including opinions, conclusions, suggestions, etc.) was prepared based on the situations
and circumstances as found at the time, location, scope, and goal of our performance and thus should be
relied upon and used by PPR recognizing these considerations and limitations. WIH shall not be liable for the
consequences of any change in environmental standards, practices, project estimates, or regulations
following the completion of our work and there is no warrant to the veracity of information provided by third
parties, or the partial utilization of this work product.

Objective
This project required the Project Team to review information provided by Promontory Point Landfill as well
as regulatory filings and reports, market information, industry interviews and other available information
researched by the Project Team for the purpose of reaching an overall conclusion on the ability of PPR to
establish a long-term outlook and identification of waste volumes within an economically viable geographic
area (defined as the economically viable and within the Western United States) to support the further
development of the project and the issuance of a Class V Landfill Operating Permit.

Methodology
Our methodology to provide this review, is intended to validate the information prepared by PPR for the
development of the facility, as well as to assess the Greater Salt Lake Area, State of Utah and Western United
States Regional waste shed and disposal market. This included and analysis of current truck and rail
transportation logistics that may enable waste to be transported from local waste generators to the
Promontory Point Landfill facility for disposal.

P a g e  1

  

 

WIH RESOURCE GROUP
mm

II 

 

 

 

Page 2

1.0 Report Purpose
As part of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (“DEQ”) Class V Landfill application process,
Promontory Point Resources LLC (“PPR”) is submitting this “Needs Assessment” report in compliance with
Utah Code, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 10 and 11. This report discusses in detail, the need for
the Class V designation for the Promontory Point Landfill, allowing the facility to receive public or privately
contracted industrial and municipal solid waste from outside the State of Utah in addition to the waste types
it may already take under the current Class I permit.

2.0 Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 10(a)
(10)
The director may not approve a commercial nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste operation plan
that meets the requirements of Subsection (9) unless it contains the information required by the board,
including:
(a)
evidence that the proposed commercial facility has a proven market of nonhazardous solid or
hazardous waste, including:
(i)
information on the source, quantity, and price charged for treating, storing, and disposing of
potential nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste in the state and regionally;
(ii)
a market analysis of the need for a commercial facility given existing and potential generation
of nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste in the state and regionally; and
(iii)
a review of other existing and proposed commercial nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste
facilities regionally and nationally that would compete for the treatment, storage, or disposal of the
nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste;
Located approximately twenty-five miles west of Ogden, Promontory Point Landfill is within direct
transportation hauling or long-haul range of several metropolitan statistical areas in the North Salt Lake
Region. The area includes Box Elder, Weber, Cache, Davis,
and Morgan Counties. Disposal of municipal solid waste
(“MSW”) in the State of Utah has traditionally been a local
service provided by municipalities, beginning with the first
permitted facility established in the early 1950’s. Today,
there are seven permitted Class I landfills within Salt Lake
region that accept MSW within a fifty -mile radius of Ogden
and two Class V landfills.
Within the northeastern area of the Salt Lake Region, two of
the current Class I landfills will soon reach capacity; Logan
City / Cache County Landfill and the Davis Landfill. Reported
tonnage disposed in 2015 at both facilities was 250,070
Northern Utah Counties
tons. Future landfill airspace is a concern because the
projected population increases within this area will require
additional disposal capacity. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”),

P a g e  3

 waste generation per person per day was 4.44 pounds.1 According to population projections from the Utah
Governor’s Office of Management and Budget, the population of the Northeastern Region will increase by
more than 60% by 20602. Table 1 details the expected increase in waste generation within the immediate
area of Promontory Point Landfill.
Increasing population also means increased commercial and industrial waste generation. With Utah’s leading
position as a business-friendly state, expansion of waste management facilities will provide the region a
viable, long-term option for waste disposal.
Table 1: Population and Waste Generation in the Northeaster Salt Lake Region
County Population

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

Box Elder

54,571

59,437

64,704

70,501

77,030

Weber

258,423

300,477

349,009

398,699

449,053

Davis

356,968

391,933

426,392

465,664

503,985

Cache

139,228

168,136

196,559

232,468

273,817

Morgan

11,945

15,013

17,926

20,654

24,234

Total Population

821,134

934,996

1,054,590

1,187,986

1,328,119

Annual Waste Tons

665,365

757,627

854,534

962,625

1,076,175

Promontory Point Landfill’s current permitted capacity is 642 million cubic yards, or the equivalent of
approximately 340 million tons of waste. At the current levels of waste generation in the North Salt Lake
Region, the facility has the capacity to provide all municipal solid waste disposal needs for Box Elder, Cache,
Weber, Davis, and Morgan Counties for the next six hundred years. The proposed MSW tip fee will be
comparable to other Utah regional landfills. Table 2 summarizes the current tip fee charged to commercial
customers.
Table 2: Current Commercial Tip Fees Charged by Salt Lake Region Landfills
Class

County

Posted Commercial
Tip Fee

Box Elder County

Class I

Box Elder

$29 per ton

Logan / Cache County Landfill

Class I

Cache

$29 per ton

Wasatch IWMD Landfill

Class I

Davis

$30 per ton

Bountiful City MSW Landfill

Class I

Davis

Not Accepted

Salt Lake SWM Landfill

Class V

Salt Lake

$31.35 per ton

Trans Jordan MSW Landfill

Class I

Salt Lake

$29 per ton

Wasatch Regional Landfill

Class V

Tooele

Not Posted

Landfill Name

1

Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2014 Fact Sheet, November 2016, page 2.
Governor's Office of Management and Budget / Demographic and Economic Analysis,
http://gomb.utah.gov/budget-policy/demographic-economic-analysis/
2

P a g e  4

 Regionalization of waste disposal generally carries with it reduced costs and improved services to the benefit
of the rate payer and the environment. Small, local landfills across the Western United States are closing and
being replaced by transfer stations to improve efficiencies through economies of scale. Waste tons from
these transfer stations are being transported to regional landfills designed to provide safe and reliable
disposal of solid waste. Technical changes in the engineering and construction of modern landfills have
significantly reduced, if not eliminated, the risk of groundwater pollution as well as leachate management
issues. Methods and effectiveness of methane capture produced from disposed waste have provided
opportunities to generate alternative, low cost sources of clean energy.
The higher volumes of waste coming into the regional landfills typically reduces operating costs per ton and
results in more predictable costs to rate payers. In addition, larger landfills are built as multi-generational
facilities, which allow them to amortize capital costs and closure reserves over longer periods of time, also
resulting in lower per ton disposal fees. Further, larger regional facilities like Promontory Point Landfill can
guarantee air space capacity and rate stabilization to local communities for significantly longer periods of
time than local legacy facilities that are at or near the end of their useful lives.
Transfer stations are primarily utilized as consolidation points from the collection of waste volumes within a
small geographic region. Transfer stations are the cost-effective alternative to owning and operating a low
volume landfill. Consolidating and transferring waste also effectively eliminates long-term environmental
risks associated with landfill closure and post-closure compliance. Promontory Point Landfill is pursuing
collaborative partnerships with municipalities where they would continue to provide collection services to
residential customers, and benefit from the facility’s relatively low estimated cost of disposal. The
municipalities will continue to generate revenue for these services while Promontory Point Landfill would be
responsible for providing transportation and disposal of waste collected within the community and assuming
the long-term airspace capacity guarantees and environmental risk relative to disposal.
Many landfill owners and municipalities within the Salt Lake Region are currently planning for end of life
issues such as closure and long-term monitoring costs, waste disposal alternatives, increasing transport costs,
future disposal capacity, and regulatory oversight. There are economies of scale in the consolidation of tons;
however, each landfill owner will be impacted differently. Promontory Point Landfill can tailor a unique longterm solution that meets the needs of virtually any solid waste authority with aggregation, transportation,
and disposal alternatives that are cost effective and adapted to meet their specific needs. Many municipal
waste disposal contracts contain provisions that allow for more effective solutions to be implemented for the
benefit of the “system”, including the early termination of a contract with a more cost effective option. Based
on the facility’s estimated cost basis relative to the contract terms, Promontory Point Landfill expects to be
able to offer pricing that is materially lower than many of the existing contracts within the Northern Salt Lake
Region wasteshed, on an overall “system cost” basis. Because PPR and Promontory Point Landfill is a private
company, local municipalities will not be locked into long-term intergovernmental agreements that require
participation and regulatory oversight.
Promontory Point Landfill is believed to be the only major United States Class I, Subtitle D landfill located
directly adjacent to the main trunk of the Union Pacific Railroad line. The Class V designation will allow the
facility and its operators to not only provide market disposal services to local independent commercial
haulers and industrial generators, but also to customers outside of Utah. The availability for rail as a growth
mechanism ultimately accomplishes several things, including: 1) reducing the truck traffic on Promontory

P a g e  5

 Point Road; 2) providing long-term solutions for Utah and Western United States industrial customers who
provide significant economic engines for the country’s economy and 3) providing a much lower carbon impact
alternative to over the road truck traffic.

Market Competitiveness Factors for Promontory Point Facility
The available capacity in the Greater Salt Lake Area is in part a function of the cost of collection,
transportation, and disposal, which are the key relevant factors in determining the competitiveness of and
public need for the Promontory Point Landfill. The system fee dynamics associated the existence of Special
Service Districts further complicate the analysis, but should be evaluated as a subsidized system from which
the District collects fees to support a wide variety of programs. The actual cost to the consumer is
substantially higher than the posted tipping fee, in most cases.
Promontory Point Landfill has several unique features which provide competitive advantages relative to the
municipal-owned facilities within the region:
o

Unlike the existing Class I landfills, which have an average age of over twenty-five years, the
Promontory Point Landfill is a greenfield project with no environmental legacies and uses the best
available technologies and practices.

o

Promontory Point Landfill is the only privately owned Class I facility in the region and will benefit
from the efficiencies of private ownership without the financial burden of a large administrative staff
and overhead.

o

The senior leadership team of Promontory Point Landfill has over one hundred-fifty years of
combined waste industry experience, which will be leveraged to optimize the economic performance
and cost competitiveness of the operation. The experience is directly associated with the services
and solutions that Promontory Point Landfill will offer.

o

Promontory Point Landfill will have the largest capacity of any Class I or Class V facility in Utah with
a permitted volume of three hundred-forty (340) million tons, which will provide unmatched
economies of scale, while also translating into the ability to guarantee capacity and stabilize rates –
both very attractive features for municipalities and industrial customers.

o

Promontory Point Landfill, unlike the public-sector facilities, intends to accept industrial waste
volumes as well as MSW, which provides for significantly more efficient asset utilization in the form
of compaction ratio per cubic yard of airspace and corresponding fill plans.

o

The existence of Promontory Point Landfill makes the solid waste system in the Greater Salt Lake
area more efficient, in that it allows certain legacy landfills to wind down operations in an orderly
fashion while still collecting necessary revenues to fund closure and environmental mitigation
programs.

o

The secluded location of Promontory Point Landfill will not be encroached upon by future
development, yet is near the Ogden/Layton metropolitan areas.

o

Presently, many of Utah’s largest industrial facilities operate their own industrial landfills rather than
risk economic exposure with a municipally owned facility. Promontory Point Landfill will offer those

P a g e  6

 same industrial customers, and all Utah industrial facilities, with an alternative to continuing to
manage and incur additional environmental exposure and costs.

The Local and Regional Need for the Promontory Point Landfill Facility
A demonstration of need is one of the key criteria necessary prior to issuance of a landfill permit by DEQ. The
original Class I permit application approved by DEQ for Promontory Point Landfill included the following
description for “Purpose and Need”:
“The need for the landfill results from the expanding waste disposal requirements of the rapidly
growing population in Northern Utah. Many of the existing landfills along the Wasatch Front are
nearing closure or are under scrutiny due to encroachment of expanding urban areas. The proposed
landfill would provide an alternative disposal option for the municipalities and counties of Utah, while
offering the advantages of low operational cost, long-term capacity, and relatively low transportation
costs.”3
Despite the availability of capacity at existing Class I landfills in the Greater Salt Lake Area, the cost of
transportation and disposal is relatively high compared to what Promontory Point Landfill can offer local
communities for disposal of their residential waste. The following summarizes the need for the Promontory
Point Landfill as a regional disposal facility for residentially collected wastes in the various surrounding
jurisdictions (cities and counties):


The Promontory Point Landfill facility is a state of the art designed landfill that will provide reliable
disposal services while maximizing environmental protection by utilizing a synthetic liner system to
protect groundwater, effectively manage leachate, efficiently capture methane for highest and best
use and utilize infrastructure to control air emissions, operate at the highest safety standards of the
industry and exceed all environmental compliance thresholds.



Promontory Point Landfill’s permitted disposal volume guarantees long-term disposal capacity for all
North Salt Lake jurisdictions while ensuring safe, economical, and reliable disposal for the region.



The size of the Promontory Point Landfill operation encourages leveraging economies of scale and
allows for the long-term amortization of capital expenditures, providing a more predictable longterm cost of operations that translates into the ability to stabilize customer disposal rates.



Promontory Point Landfill’s location is ideally suited for its intended purpose as it is an isolated site,
yet geographically desirable from a transportation standpoint.



The Promontory Point Landfill site characteristics include ideal geology to with a rock sub-base that
further protects the water table, and provides the opportunity to mine aggregate for use in other
regional projects.



Promontory Point Landfill is collaborating with local governmental and regional jurisdictions to meet
their specific and unique disposal needs and views itself as a long-term partner within the waste
system, with the ability to participate in regional solutions.

3

Promontory Point Resources LLC Class I Landfill Permit Application, August 2008, page 1-3.
http://www.deq.utah.gov/businesses/I/IntermountainPower/docs/2011/06Jun/Promontoryapplication.pdf

P a g e  7

 

Promontory Point Landfill is the only privately owned Class I facility in the State of Utah and is not
encumbered by the additional administrative cost overhead or formal approval process of a
governmental entity.



Whether Promontory Point Landfill collaborates with the municipality, or replaces an existing
disposal contract, the facility can offer disposal pricing that is beneficial to local jurisdictions and
therefore ultimately, to rate payers.



Promontory Point Landfill offers a regionalized approach to waste disposal to assist jurisdictions that
are facing their end of life landfill challenges by consolidating and transferring wastes within the
regional wasteshed, thereby eliminating the long-term liability of landfill closure and post-closure
that typically exceed thirty years for local jurisdictions.



Promontory Point Landfill is a greenfield project with no environmental legacies that utilizes the best
available design technologies, operating practices, and highly experienced engineering principals.



At the current levels of waste generation in the North Salt Lake Region, Promontory Point Landfill
has the capacity to provide all municipal solid waste disposal needs for Box Elder, Cache, Weber,
Davis and Morgan Counties for the next six hundred years.

Waste-by-Rail
Most heavy process manufacturing facilities are rail served; thereby, providing a cost-effective alternative for
transporting waste long distances. With large concentrations of industrial facilities located throughout the
State of California, Promontory Point Landfill is strategically located to provide disposal solutions to these
industries due to the proximity of the Union Pacific Railroad’s main line. The California market provides a
unique opportunity due to overregulated waste disposal requirements. All states recognize the federal
schedule of hazardous wastes; however, California has enacted additional standards beyond Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) that are applicable to in-state waste. These standards are known in
in the waste industry as California Hazardous Wastes (“Cal-Haz”). While most other states regulate non-RCRA
wastes for disposal into Subtitle D landfills, including Utah, the California standards require that these waste
materials must be disposed into a Subtitle C hazardous waste landfill4. California’s classification of hazardous
waste is very broad and the application of the standard presumes that all waste other than Municipal Solid
Waste (“MSW”) and construction and demolition (“C&D”) is hazardous waste; thereby artificially increasing
the cost for disposal. With only two landfills cited in California to accept Cal-Haz waste, neither of which are
rail served, Promontory Point Landfill has the capacity to provide safe, reliable and cost effective disposal
services.
One time projects such as dredging and soil remediation require large amounts of waste to be moved in a
short period. Under California’s current regulations, most contaminated soil is designated as Cal-Haz. Soil
ranges in weight from 2,100 pounds to 3,000 pounds per cubic yard.5 Moving soil to one of the two Subtitle
C landfills in California is cost prohibitive. The estimated cost to transport waste over the three-hundred-mile
roundtrip route from Los Angeles to the closest landfill is approximately forty dollars ($40) per ton. Including

4
5

22 CCR § 66268.100 Waste Specific Prohibitions.
Source: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/cdi/Tools/Calculations.htm

P a g e  8

 the approximate disposal fee of eight dollars ($80) per ton, the expected all in pricing per ton is estimated to
be approximately one hundred-twenty dollars ($120) per ton.
Typical Cal-Haz (non-RCRA) wastes include remediation soils contaminated with low level metals, low level
Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (“PAH’s”) and manufactured gas residuals and plant generated materials,
including spent catalysts, air pollutions control dust, oily solids, steel production dust, tank bottoms, ash, and
other production waste. Reported disposal (which is likely not an exhaustive compilation of all such industrial
waste volumes generated) for remediated soil and ash from incineration in Northern and Southern California
in 2014 and 2015 in Table 3 illustrate a portion of the market opportunity for a rail served Class V facility in
Utah.
Table 3: Waste Generation in Northern and Southern California 2014-15
Waste Generation

2014

2015

Northern California - Remediated Soil

200,450

387,769

Northern California - Incinerator Ash

5,487

2,297

Southern California - Remediated Soil

623,014

175,950

Southern California - Incinerator Ash

132

2,054

829,083

568,070

Total California Tons

Large quantity generators in the Western United States, generated more than 647,000 tons of RCRA
hazardous waste in the last USEPA Biennial Report6. Facilities such as these generally produce from one to
two times the “special/industrial” waste volume compared to RCRA hazardous waste. This places the
special/industrial waste volumes at more than 1,280,000 tons per year from large process industries.
Newly established USEPA regulations require ash from coal fired power plants to be disposed into facilities
meeting Subtitle D standards. There are more than forty coal fired power plants that are either directly
served or could be served, by the Union Pacific Railroad. The majority of this volume offers potentially viable
opportunities for Promontory Point Landfill as these facilities make short-term and long-term waste handling
and disposal decisions. Table 4 summarizes the estimated coal ash generated annually along the Union Pacific
Railroad system in the Western United States.
Table 4: Annual Coal Ash Generation along the Western Union Pacific Railroad System

6

State

Annual Tons

Iowa

48,000

Nebraska

22,000

Wyoming

32,000

https://rcrainfo.epa.gov/rcrainfoweb/action/modules/br/national;jsessionid=F5AFFA3C5A80CE66C46A0B4809EE4222

P a g e  9

 Colorado

4,000

Nevada

28,000

Utah

23,000

Total Tons

157,000

In addition to the current generation of coal ash, there are more than forty coal fired power plants located
in the Western United States that are in various states of operation, or that are currently being
decommissioned. These facilities have coal ash in on-site management units. There is a combined estimate
of 46,770,000 metric tons of coal ash located at these facilities. Many of these facilities may dispose of the
ash on-site; however, many will not be able to continue this practice because of local public opposition,
regulatory requirements, or specific local site issues. Table 5 summarizes the locations and estimated coal
ash tons. Promontory Point Landfill will be working with the facilities to assist with the best long-term disposal
alternatives.
Table 5: Estimated On-site Coal Ash by State
Facilities

On-site
Metric Tons

Facilities

On-site
Metric Tons

Arizona

4

5,012,000

Nebraska

7

3,510,000

California

5

235,000

Nevada

3

5,082,000

Colorado

6

3,903,000

Oregon

1

758,000

Iowa

3

6,181,000

Utah

6

4,923,000

Idaho

2

42,000

Washington

1

8,080,000

Kansas

2

567,000

Wyoming

5

8,477,000

State

State

Waste-by-Rail Remediation
Promontory Point Landfill (and PPR) has collaborated with regional and national engineering and remediation
firms to provide turn-key disposal solutions for contaminated soil. Working in conjunction with the Union
Pacific Railroad, soil will be transported and disposed of at the facility. Large contaminated solid remediation
projects require significant numbers of trucks and trailers to move material quickly and efficiently; however,
long hauls of one hundred-fifty miles or greater can tie up one truck for five to eight hours. Utilizing the
Promontory Point Landfill facility could greatly reduce costs and expedite the time need to move remediated
soil. A gondola railcar has a maximum weight capacity of one hundred-ten tons, almost five times the capacity
of an over the road tractor-trailer combination.

P a g e   10

 According to the Environmental Research and Education Foundation, the average disposal price for soils or
solids in the US is $48.27 per ton. The following table summarizes tipping fees charged by region7. (Note: the
term “tipping fees” is not relevant to special/industrial waste. Special/industrial wastes are individually
quoted and there will NOT be a ‘posted’ average rate for these materials).
Table 6: United States Regional Disposal Prices
Average
Disposal Price

Minimum

Maximum

UTAH, CO, MT, ND, SD, WY

$43.38

$21.00

$110.00

Pacific

CA, AZ, NV, OR, WA, AK, HI, ID

$61.20

$24.00

$108.00

Midwest

IL, IN, IA, KS, MI, MN, MO, NE,
OH, WI

$39.64

$14.47

$85.00

Southeast

AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN

$44.46

$19.75

$119.00

Northeast

CT, DE, ME, MD, MA, NH, HJ,
NY, PA, RI, VT, VA, WV

$58.20

$17.00

$114.00

$48.27

$14.47

$119.00

Region

States

Mountain / Plains

National Average

Within the Greater Salt Lake Region, there are two Class V landfills that could compete for waste volumes
from outside the State of Utah; Salt Lake SWM Landfill and the Wasatch Regional Landfill. The Salt Lake SWM
Landfill is a municipally owned facility that is open to commercial haulers; however, it doesn’t actively seek
incoming industrial waste volumes from within or outside the State of Utah. Wasatch Regional Landfill is
located on the west side of the Great Salt Lake and is may compete with Promontory Point Landfill for certain
regional industrial tons; however, most the incoming waste volumes to Wasatch Regional are generated in
Salt Lake County. Wasatch Regional does not have direct rail access.
Transfer and transport costs of waste within the region impacts the amount ultimately paid by the ratepayer
for disposal. While regional tipping fees for commercial customers average approximately $30 per ton,
transfer and transport can increase the total amount of disposal past $40 per ton. The closer the landfill, the
lower the total cost of disposal, transfer, and transport to the ratepayer.
ECDC Environmental (“ECDC”) is a double lined, non-hazardous waste, Subtitle D landfill with a chemical
waste permit. Most of the tons disposed at ECDC are classified as out-of-state Cal-Haz that is not regulated
in Utah. ECDC is the only rail served Subtitle D landfill in Utah. ECDC is located approximately one hundredeighty miles southwest of Promontory Point Landfill in the town of East Carbon, Utah. While there may be
competitors for non-RCRA remediated soil from out-of-state generators, most of ECDC’s waste stream
originates in California and is classified as Cal-Haz waste and polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) waste.
There are several markets for qualified waste for disposal at Promontory Point Landfill. Table 7 summarizes
the various waste streams covered in this report and currently available for disposal.

7

Source: Waste 360, http://www.waste360.com/operations/west-coast-boasts-highest-average-tip-feesnation

P a g e   11

 Table 7: Waste Steams Available for Disposal at Promontory Point Class V Landfill
Waste Stream

Tons

Annual Regional Commercial and Industrial Waste

150,000

Annual Interstate Coal Ash Generation

157,000

Annual Interstate Remediation Projects

500,000

Annual Cal Haz Waste

699,000

Annual Interstate Industrial Waste

1,280,700

On-Site Coal Ash

46,770,000

3.0 Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 10(b)
(b)

A description of the public benefits of the proposed facility, including:
(i) The need in the state for the additional capacity for the management of nonhazardous solid or
hazardous waste;
(ii) The energy and resources recoverable by the proposed facility;
(iii) The reduction of nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste management methods, which are less
suitable for the environment, that would be made possible by the proposed facility; and
(iv) Whether any other available site or method for the management of hazardous waste would be less
detrimental to the public health or safety or to the quality of the environment; and

(c)
compliance history of an owner or operator of a proposed commercial nonhazardous solid or
hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility, which may be applied by the director in a
nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste operation plan decision, including any plan conditions.
With the Governor's Office of Management and Budget estimating that Utah will double today’s population
by adding another 2.5 million people by 2050, Utah faces a mountain of challenges.
One often-overlooked issue is managing waste produced by more citizens and businesses, particularly in
Northern Utah. Maintaining our quality of life requires a modern approach that both expects and encourages
environmentally safe practices at modern facilities with innovative technologies and the most cost-effective,
resource-efficient plan to transport and manage non-hazardous municipal solid waste. With this expected
growth also comes the opportunity to attract large process industries, which act as a robust job creation
engine. However, this new industry will generate significantly more waste that must be managed safely and
effectively. Forward-thinking industry will have infrastructure and service expectations, which include the
way in which their waste is handled. Modern landfill facilities like Promontory Point Landfill, will serve as the
model of materials management that the State of Utah can be proud of.
Promontory Point Landfill expects to receive for disposal, non-hazardous waste including municipal solid
waste (“MSW”), commercial waste, industrial wastes, construction, and demolition (“C&D”), incinerator ash,

P a g e   12

 dewatered sludge, petroleum contaminated soils that are not a classified as hazardous waste, waste asphalt
and other acceptable waste materials.
Hazardous waste, as identified and regulated under the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Part 261, will
not be accepted for disposal at Promontory Point Landfill.
The project’s owner and operator, Promontory Point Resources, LLC (“PPR”), is implementing an entirely
different solution for customers’ needs. Unlike a traditional landfill, Promontory Point Landfill is a Resource
Processing Facility that will be [primarily] powered by renewable energy, designed to efficiently capture and
clean methane to produce transportation fuels and built to “store” certain municipal solid waste and nonhazardous industrial wastes for current and future beneficial re-use applications.
Promontory Point Landfill is a greenfield project with no adverse environmental legacies. The facility will be
constructed in a bedrock formation that is up to two hundred (200) feet below the ground surface and will
include geo-technical barriers and a leachate collection system designed to thoroughly protect the
surrounding environment. The potential utilization of this facility by municipalities and industrial customers
that may currently be experiencing groundwater contamination or other issues requiring environmental
mitigation, could substantially reduce future risk profiles. Captured landfill gas will be utilized to generate onsite electricity as well as cleaned and compressed to manufacture transportations fuels and power natural
gas fueled vehicles.
The Promontory Point Landfill facility will not accept hazardous waste.
The founding partners and senior leadership of Promontory Point Resources, who will manage the site, do
not have any record, notice of action of noncompliance violation with the State of Utah (or any other State)
Local or Federal Local Enforcement Agency (“LEA”) or agency regarding compliance with nonhazardous
and/or hazardous waste treatment, storage or disposal facility. The senior leadership of PPR and Promontory
Point Landfill has more than one hundred-fifty years of combined waste industry experience, specifically
involving the handling of municipal solid waste and industrial waste. This experience will be critical to
ensuring compliance with State of Utah and Federal environmental laws and regulations. Further, the senior
management of PPR and Promontory Point Landfill has had responsibility for more than two dozen landfills
in the United States and Canada and can boast of exemplary environmental, safety and operational records
at some of the largest landfill facilities in North America.

4.0 Utah Statue, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part 1, Section 108, § 11
(11)
The director may not approve a commercial nonhazardous solid or hazardous waste facility operation
plan unless based on the application, and in addition to the determination required in Subsections (9) and
(10), the director determines that:
(a)
The probable beneficial environmental effect of the facility to the state outweighs the probable
adverse environmental effect; and
(b)

there is a need for the facility to serve industry within the state.

Despite the availability of capacity at existing Class I and V landfills in the Greater Salt Lake Area, the cost of
transportation and disposal is relatively high compared to what Promontory Point Landfill can offer local

P a g e   13

 communities and industry for long-term disposal. Further, this Class V Needs Assessment requires the
applicant to also demonstrate the regional need, which is dictated by the economic viability of both
transporting and disposing of waste. The following further summarizes the need for a facility like the one
being developed by PPR and Promontory Point Landfill, not only for local disposal, but also for regional, and
out-of-state waste disposal.


The Promontory Point Landfill is a state of the art designed landfill that will provide reliable disposal
services while maximizing environmental protection by utilizing a synthetic liner system to protect
groundwater, thus offering additional environmental benefits to the State of Utah and the Region.



The Promontory Point Landfill maintains a permitted disposal volume that guarantees long-term
disposal capacity while ensuring safe, economical, and reliable disposal for the region.



The size of the Promontory Point Landfill creates the space availability to “store” certain materials
for future beneficial re-use, creating a significant long-term benefit for the State of Utah and the
Region.



The Promontory Point Landfill is located on the Union Pacific Railroad’s main line, which will result in
a significant reduction in truck traffic, thereby reducing the potential carbon emissions impact and
vehicle miles travelled (“VMT’s”) that contribute to the inversion, among other environmental
impacts.



The Promontory Point Landfill will be a state-of-the-art disposal and materials management center,
operated by highly experienced personnel, who will ensure proper disposal, recovery and tracking of
industrial waste entering the site.



The location of the Promontory Point Landfill is ideally suited for its intended purpose as it is an
isolated site, yet geographically desirable from a transportation standpoint.



Promontory Point Landfill is collaborating with local government, regional waste districts and
jurisdictions and out-of-state customers to meet their specific and unique disposal needs.



The Promontory Point Landfill offers a regionalized approach to waste disposal to assist jurisdictions
that are facing their end of life landfill challenges by consolidating and transferring wastes within the
regional waste shed, thereby eliminating the long-term liability of landfill closure and post-closure
that exceed thirty years for local jurisdictions.



The Promontory Point Landfill is a greenfield project with no environmental legacies that utilizes the
best available design technologies, operating practices, and engineering principals.



The Promontory Point Landfill core management team has more than one hundred-fifty years of
combined senior level experience in the waste industry, specifically in the management of municipal
solid and industrial waste.



The Promontory Point Landfill has three hundred-forty million tons of waste disposal capacity.

P a g e   14

 5.0 Summary
In summary, we believe the points raised in this document, demonstrate that the development of this facility
is consistent with the long-term solid waste handling needs and objectives of the State of Utah and the
Region. The Promontory Point Landfill facility effectively meets the requirements and has identified a
substantial available market of industrial and municipal solid waste volumes that also meet the economic
viability test relative to transportation and disposal components, where the facility can attract the requisite
volumes to operate profitably. There are an estimated fifty-six (56) million tons of acceptable waste volumes
generated annually in the Western United States that can be moved either by truck or rail to the facility at
competitive rates to the generator. The Promontory Point Landfill will have both a disposal cost advantage
and a transportation cost advantage over various forms of competition within the region, in addition to
innovative value-based offerings that will provide market differentiation and custom solutions. The
Promontory Point Landfill is also committed to leveraging an experienced senior leadership team to bring
innovation to the forefront rather than using the traditional landfill business model. The company is
committed to effective and safe materials management and highest and best use while combining the latest
landfill best practices. Resource management, including the integration of renewable energy and clean water
components, are of the highest priority. The Promontory Point Landfill will not only provide a cost effective
long-term disposal solution for the Region, but do so in an innovative and environmentally responsible
manner.

P a g e   15

 L-2 UDOT LE1TER OF APPROVAL

31'-


m"n

6 WmState of Utah

GARY R. HERBERT

Governor

SPENCER COX

Lieutenant Governor

Brett Snelgrove

 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CARLOS M. BRACERAS, P.E.

Exec arrive Director

SHANE M. MARSHALL, P.E.
Deputy Director

March 6, 2017

Director of Business Development
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111-2712

Subject: Access Grant Application and Traffic impact Study, Approval Request

Dea r. Snelgrove,

Based on your letter dated February 24, 2017, the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) will not
require Promontory Point Resources, LLC (Promontory) to make improvements, at this time, to any of
the state highways on Promontory?s access route to their facility. This decision is based on the
generated traffic volumes stated in the letter and that the trucks meet the weight limit requirements on
state highways. However, UDOT is concerned about Promontory?s trucks accessing the facility via [-84
(Exit 26), proceeding south on then turning right from SR-83 to Golden Spike Drive (12000 North).
Due to the 65 speed limit on SR-83 and Promontory?s trucks slowing in the travel lane, there is a
potential for front-to?rear crashes at the intersection of SR-83 and Golden Spike Drive. if front-to-rear
crashes involving Promontory?s trucks increase at this intersection, Promontory will be required to
construct a right-turn deceleration lane on Also, UDOT expects Promontory to meet the
requirements of securing loads and preventing the materials being hauled to the landfill to litter and

potentially damage the state highway system.

If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact me at 801-620?1607 or

dfristrupQutahgov.

Sincerely,

(Be/Data

Darin K. Fristrup, P.E.
Region Traffic Operations Engineer

Region One Headqualters - 166 West Southwell Street - Ogden, Utah 84404
telephone (801) 620?1600 - facsimile (801) 620-1665 0 

L-3 TRAFFIC STUDY

Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
Landfill
Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah

March 8, 2017

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

Contents
1

Project Information .............................................................................................................................. 1

2

Haul Routes ......................................................................................................................................... 1

3

Traffic Volumes and Vehicles .............................................................................................................. 4

4

Traffic Impacts ..................................................................................................................................... 4

5

4.1

Safety ........................................................................................................................................ 4
4.1.1 General Safety Procedures .......................................................................................... 4
4.1.2 East Promontory Road Safety Improvements .............................................................. 4

4.2

Operations ................................................................................................................................. 6

4.3

Roadway Conditions ................................................................................................................. 6
4.3.1 State Highways ............................................................................................................ 6
4.3.2 County Roadway .......................................................................................................... 6

Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 7

Figures
Figure 1. Haul Routes ................................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Example Warning Signs ................................................................................................................ 5

Appendices
Appendix A. Coordination ..........................................................................................................................A-1

March 8, 2017   i

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

This page is intentionally left blank.

ii   March 8, 2017

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

1

Project Information
Promontory Point Resources, LLC (Promontory) is developing a new, non-hazardous
solid waste facility on Promontory Point, Utah. The proposed location is the southwest
portion of the Promontory peninsula (Township 6N, Range 6W, Sections 12, 24, and 25,
and Township 6N, Range 5W, Sections 18, 19, and 30). The landfill is currently
authorized by the Utah Division of Solid Waste and Radiation Control (DSWRC1) as a
Class I facility. Promontory received a permit for the landfill from DSWRC in September
2011.2 Promontory also received a conditional-use permit from Box Elder County in
2003.3
Through the 2016 Utah House Joint Resolution 20, Promontory received legislative
approval to construct and operate a Class V landfill. Promontory is now working to
secure a new conditional-use permit with Box Elder County and a new Class V
nonhazardous solid waste permit from DSWRC. Pursuant to Utah Code 19-6-108(9)(g),
“a traffic impact study is needed to evaluate the safety, operation, and condition of
roadways serving the facility.” The referenced code requires the approval of the Utah
Department of Transportation (UDOT) and the local highway authority (the Box Elder
County Road Department) as part of the landfill’s solid waste operating plan. The
remainder of this report provides information for the traffic impact study.

2

Haul Routes
The landfill would be served primarily by rail via an industrial rail spur constructed off
Union Pacific Railroad’s Great Salt Lake causeway (Lucin Cutoff) at the southern tip of
Promontory Point. However, some waste would be delivered by trucks from areas in
northern Utah and surrounding states, where truck transport is more cost-effective or
when the total tonnage is small.
The haul route to the landfill would be around the north side of the Bear River Bay of the
Great Salt Lake (see Figure 1). Two approaches to this route, using Interstate 15 and
Interstate 84, are described following the figure.

1

Formerly the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste.

2

Fact sheet: https://deq.utah.gov/businesses/I/IntermountainPower/PromontoryClassILandfill.htm

3

Planning Commission Staff report found at:
https://siterepository.s3.amazonaws.com/65/promontorylandfill1_19_2017attiv.pdf
March 8, 2017   1

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

Figure 1. Haul Routes

LEGEND

Haul Routes

State Roads
County Roads

., Municipaiities



 

7;


.
aid",

E?E?Prc-monto
I

- 




.Wigl?)? 


.
w_ '1

 

2 March 8,2017

Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

When coming from Interstate 15:


Trucks would exit Interstate 15 at Promontory Road in Brigham City and turn onto
State Route 13 (SR 13, Route 0013, or Promontory Road).



Trucks would travel west for 3.5 miles on SR 13 to the town of Corrine.



West of Corrine, trucks would stay heading west and northwest on SR 83
(Route 0083 or Iowa Springs Road/6800 West) for about 13 miles.



Trucks would then pass the intersection of SR 83 and SR 102, which is southwest of
Penrose, at which point SR 83 becomes Golden Spike Drive.



At about 3.5 miles past the intersection, trucks would turn off SR 83 at Lampo
Junction and head west on what is now Promontory Point Road (Route 1076, which
ultimately runs west to the Golden Spike National Historic Site).

When coming from Interstate 84:


Trucks would exit Interstate 84 at SR 83 (17200 West or Faust Valley Road).



Trucks would travel south about 7 miles on SR 83 and make a right turn where
SR 83 becomes Golden Spike Drive (12000 North) south of Howell.



On Golden Spike Drive, trucks would continue west and south for about 7 miles on
SR 83 to Lampo Junction and would turn right onto Promontory Point Road
(Route 1076).

Accessing the landfill:


After traveling about 2 miles on Route 1076, trucks would turn south onto East
Promontory Road, a Box Elder County facility that is a Class B road and that runs for
about 30 miles along the east and south sides of Promontory Point.

East Promontory Road is a rural road in an agricultural and ranching setting. The road is
used primarily by residents and a few existing businesses on Promontory Point. It
currently consists of a 22.3-mile paved section and a 14.9-mile graded gravel section.
An alternative to using existing roads would be to expand a maintenance road adjacent
to rail tracks on Union Pacific Railroad’s Great Salt Lake causeway. Because of the
frequency with which Union Pacific uses the maintenance road, Union Pacific would
require a completely separate road for waste haul trucks. Therefore, a new causeway
would have to be constructed adjacent to the existing maintenance road. Because of
settlement concerns, difficult regulatory permitting, and construction costs, this
alternative is not feasible.

March 8, 2017   3

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

3

Traffic Volumes and Vehicles
Promontory’s truck-haul customers would come from northern Utah, southern Idaho, and
western Wyoming. The typical residential waste-collection vehicles would likely not
deliver directly to the landfill. Promontory anticipates that most waste deliveries would be
consolidated into larger truck-trailer combinations. Therefore, Promontory anticipates that
a maximum of only about 20 to 30 trucks per day would access the landfill.
These trucks will be single-tractor units with 52-foot trailers. They would not exceed
8 feet 6 inches wide or an overall length of 65 feet. Waste would be hauled in enclosed
trailers that would be enclosed with tarps and tied down. Truck and trailer weights would
meet UDOT’s bridge formula requirements.

4

Traffic Impacts
As mentioned, Pursuant to Utah Code 19-6-108(9)(g) “a traffic impact study is needed to
evaluate the safety, operation, and condition of roadways serving the facility.” The
referenced code requires approval of UDOT and the local highway authority (the Box
Elder County Road Department) as part of the landfill’s solid waste operating plan.

4.1

Safety

4.1.1

General Safety Procedures
Drivers would be instructed to follow all traffic laws and Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations and UDOT’s Motor Carrier rules.4 These rules include requirements for
trucking companies (insurance, maintenance records, and hazardous materials
identification, for example) as well as for individual drivers (commercial licenses and drug
and alcohol testing are required), for individual trips (pre-trip and post-trip inspections),
and for maintaining emergency equipment (fire extinguishers, flares, and reflective
cones).
Promontory would also weigh each haul vehicle at the landfill to check that it is not
carrying more weight than the legal limit.

4.1.2

East Promontory Road Safety Improvements
Starting at Golden Spike Road in the north, East Promontory Road currently consists of a
22.3-mile paved section and a 14.9-mile graded gravel section. Promontory and Box
Elder County are working on a phased roadway improvement plan that will upgrade East
Promontory Road to a condition that will better accommodate haul trucks and anticipated
traffic to and from the landfill. For more information about the phased roadway
improvement plan, see Section 4.3.2, County Roadway.

4

40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 300 to 399

4   March 8, 2017

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

In order to maintain the safety and health of people using Box Elder County rights-ofway, Promontory would implement the following measures.
Pilot Cars. The existing East Promontory Road is narrow in some locations. To address
the safety of approaching cars, pilot cars would be used to guide larger trucks and to
alert other motorists of the presence of the waste-haul trucks. The pilot car and haultruck would maintain constant radio contact. This would be a temporary safety measure
used until critical road improvements are completed.
Speed Limits. Box Elder County could choose to post reduced speed limits or add
advisory speed signs where sight distances and turning radii are substandard5 compared
to the roadway’s overall posted speed limit (40 miles per hour).
Warning Signs. In addition to speed limits and advisory speed signs, additional warning
signs could be incorporated along the roadway. These signs could include curve signs,
turn direction chevrons, reverse curves, and/or winding road warning signs as prescribed
by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. See Figure 2 for examples of these
warning signs.

Figure 2. Example Warning Signs

Traffic Signals. Temporary traffic lights could also be used to stop traffic in one direction
and create a controlled one-way road. These would be used for short segments only so
that the wait times for stopped vehicles are not too long.
Soil Stabilization and Dust Control. Over the 14.9-mile graded gravel section of East
Promontory Road, Promontory will apply binding agents to stabilize and help maintain
the integrity of the graded gravel road segment and to minimize the generation of dust.
Promontory will periodically reapply binding agents according to the manufacturers’
recommendations and based on the observed condition of the gravel road.

5

Based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) A Policy
on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
March 8, 2017   5

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

4.2

Operations
From a traffic-operations standpoint, no impacts are anticipated. Promontory has
coordinated with UDOT regarding impacts to traffic operations on and the conditions of
state highways. Promontory sent a letter to UDOT6 requesting approval to use state
routes. The letter pointed out that the landfill would not generate much traffic nor would it
lead to change in surrounding land uses that would generate any additional traffic. Of
particular interest to UDOT was the existing left-turn lane off of SR 83, which is an
important feature to maintain traffic flows on SR 83. Therefore, because the landfill would
generate traffic volumes less than 100 average daily traffic (ADT), UDOT agreed that a
detailed assessment of traffic operations was not required.7 UDOT concluded that, given
the low volume of expected traffic, the existing traffic-control devices and roadway
features along state highways were appropriate, and no changes were required.8 See
Appendix A, Coordination, for relevant correspondence.
A minor amount of traffic currently uses East Promontory Road. There are no
intersecting roads and no major land uses with access points along East Promontory
Road. Box Elder County has not identified the need for permanent stop signs, traffic
signals, or turn lanes on East Promontory Road.

4.3

Roadway Conditions

4.3.1

State Highways
Promontory has coordinated with UDOT regarding impacts to the conditions of and traffic
operations on state highways. UDOT did not mention any pavement or structural
deficiencies along the haul routes, and, because the landfill would not generate a
significant increase in truck traffic, no improvements to state highways were required.

4.3.2

County Roadway
Improvements to East Promontory Road would be required. This Box Elder County road
currently consists of a 22.3-mile paved section and a 14.9-mile graded gravel section.
Neither Box Elder County nor Promontory is in a financial position to complete all
anticipated improvements before the landfill is constructed. Therefore, Promontory is
working with Box Elder County on a phased roadway improvement plan to spread the
cost of roadway improvements over time. The general approach to the phased plan is
described below.
Phase 0 – Road Improvement Planning. Box Elder County has completed a geotechnical
evaluation for the surface and subsurface conditions along the entire length of East
Promontory Road. This investigation resulted in preferred roadway cross-sections for
various segment of the road. Box Elder County has also evaluated the existing horizontal
curvature of the roadway to evaluate sight distances, speed limits, and the need for

6

Letter to Darin Fistrup, UDOT Region 1 Traffic Operations Engineer, February 24, 2017.

7

The anticipated traffic is below a 100 ADT thresholds, which is referenced in UDOT’s Administrative
Rules (R930-6, Access Management), and a detailed application was not required.

8

Email from Darin Fistrup, February 27, 2016, confirming that no improvements are required.

6   March 8, 2017

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

signs. The result of this current phase will be a definition of the necessary roadway
improvements, a schedule, and the responsibilities of each party to complete the
improvements.
Phase 1 – Short-Term Improvements. This phase would include an asphalt overlay on
portions of the 22.3-mile segment that has existing pavement. These improvements
would be required by Box Elder County before the start of landfill operations to reduce
the deterioration of the existing pavement by haul trucks and improve the safety of the
road. Phase 1 could also include minor grading, leveling, and the application of binding
agents for soil stabilization and dust control along parts of the 14.9-mile graded gravel
segment. Improvements in Phase 1 could also include some of the permanent safety
improvements described in Section 4.1.2, East Promontory Road Safety Improvements.
Phase 2 – Mid-Term Improvements. Additional Improvements would be completed in the
years that follow the start of landfill operations. These improvements would focus on the
highest-priority improvements (grading and paving) to the gravel section of road as well
as any improvements within the 22.3-mile paved section that were deferred from
Phase 1. During Phase 2, Promontory would perform planned maintenance activities, the
reapplication of binding agent, and spot repairs to any damaged Phase 1 improvements
if the damages were caused by waste-hauling operations.
Phase 3 – Long Term. This long-term phase would occur over the course of landfill
operation. The lower-priority roadway improvements would be completed, any damage to
the improvements made in previous phases would be repaired, and roadway
maintenance activities would continue.

5

Conclusions
The operation of Promontory’s landfill will not induce truck traffic to an extent that will
impact traffic patterns nor alter the conditions of State highways. Improvements to East
Promontory Road are needed. Promontory is working with Box Elder County to define a
phased improvement plan that will address safety and the conditions of this County road.

March 8, 2017   7

 Traffic Impact Study
Promontory Point Resources, LLC

Appendix A. Coordination

March 8, 2017   A-1

 February 14, 2017

Darin Fristrup
Region Traffic Operations Engineer
UDOT Region 1
166 West Southwell Street 
Ogden, Utah 84404-4194 
Subject: Access Grant Application and Traffic Impact Study, Approval Request
Dear Mr. Fristrup,
Promontory Point Resources LLC (Promontory) is developing a new, Class V non-hazardous solid waste
facility on Promontory Point, Utah. This landfill will primarily be served by rail with an industrial rail spur
constructed off Union Pacific Railroad’s Great Salt Lake Causeway at the southern tip of Promontory
Point. However, some waste would be delivered by trucks from areas in northern Utah and surrounding
states, where truck transport is more cost effective or when the total tonnage is small. Pursuant to Utah
Code (19-6-108(9)(g)) “a traffic impact study is needed to evaluate the safety, operation, and condition of
roadways serving the facility”. Referenced code requires approval of the Utah Department of
Transportation (UDOT) and local highway authority (Box Elder County Road Department) as part of our
solid waste operating plan.
The purpose of this letter is to request approval for the use of State Routes from UDOT pursuant to solid
waste rules. During our pre-application meeting (phone conversation on October 18, 2016) you requested
this letter summarizing the haul route, the type and amount of truck traffic that is expected to travel to the
landfill, and to address the requirements of Administrative Rule 930 (Transportation, Preconstruction)
specifically, Rule 930-6 (Access Management).
Haul Routes
The primary haul route to the landfill would be around the north side of the Bear River Bay of the Great
Salt Lake (see attached exhibit), and is described as follows:
If utilizing Interstate 15: 







Trucks would exit interstate at Promontory Road in Brigham City and on to State Route 13 (SR
13, Route 0013, or Promontory Road). 
Travel west for 3.5 miles on SR 13 to the town of Corrine. 
West of Corrine, trucks would stay heading west and northwest on SR 83 (Route 0083 or Iowa
Springs Road/6800 West) for about 13 miles. 
Trucks would then pass the intersection of SR 83 and SR 102, which is southwest of Penrose, at
which point SR 83 becomes Golden Spike Drive.
At about 3.5 miles past the intersection, trucks would turn off SR 83 at Lampo Junction and head
west on what is now Promontory Point Road (Route 1076 that ultimately runs west to the Golden
Spike National Historic Site).

When coming from Interstate 84:


Trucks would exit I-84 at SR 83 (17200 West or Faust Valley Road).

 


Trucks would travel south about 7 miles on SR 83 and make a right hand turn where SR 83
becomes Golden Spike Drive (12000 North) south of Howell, UT.
On Golden Spike Drive, trucks would continue west and south for about 7 miles on SR 83 to
Lampo Junction and turn right onto Promontory Point Road (Route 1076).

Accessing the landfill


After traveling about 2 miles on Route 1076, trucks would turn south onto East Promontory Road,
a Box Elder County facility which is identified as a Class B road and runs for about 30 miles along
the east and south side of Promontory Point.

Anticipated Truck Traffic
As mentioned the landfill will primarily be served by rail. We are working with Union Pacific on the design
or the rail spur. This spur would no cross and UDOT roads and no offsite rail improvements will be
needed. We anticipate that a maximum of about 20-30 trucks per day would access the landfill.
Promontory’s truck-haul customers would come from northern Utah, southern Idaho and western
Wyoming. Trucks will be single tractor units with 52’ trailers. They will not exceed 8’ 6” wide or the overall
length of 65’ bumper to bumper. Waste will be hauled in enclosed trailers that will be tarped and tied
down. Weights will meet current bridge formula requirements.
Access Management
As described above, landfill customers will use existing roadways. Promontory is not requesting any new
access points, driveways, or proposing modifications to existing state highway roadway elements. Please
note that there is an existing left turn lane on SR-83, which you indicated was important for traffic flow on
SR 83 and which you did not think would have to be modified. In addition, no modifications to the local
roadway (Promontory Point Road) where it accesses the state highway (SR-83) are anticipated. The
landfill is not expected to change surrounding land use type or intensities with no single family or
apartments unit, and no lodging, large office, or retail is included. Therefore, the landfill would generate
traffic volumes less than 100 average daily traffic (ADT).
Considering the information presented above, Application Level I thresholds, as defined in R390-68(4)(f)(i), are not exceeded. Therefore, we respectfully request that you provide written approval to satisfy
solid waste regulations and so that we can include the approval in our solid waste permit application.
If you have any questions or concerns or require any additional information please let me know. I can be
reached at (801) 940-4900 or brett@promontorypt.com. Or you can contact Terry Warner at HDR
Engineering, 801-743-7812 or terry.warner@hdrinc.com.
We appreciate you and your staff’s time spent reviewing this letter and providing your approval, if
appropriate.
Sincerely,
Promontory Point Resources,

Jon Angin
CEO Promontory Point Resources

 From:
To:
Subject:
Date:

Brett Snelgrove
Warner, Terry; Ann Garner
FW: Promontory Point Resources Landfill
Monday, February 27, 2017 9:35:53 AM

UDOT response below.
 
I will ask for a formal letter in letterhead. Anything else you think we need?
 
From: Darin Fristrup [mailto:dfristrup@utah.gov]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 9:32 AM
To: Brett Snelgrove <brett@promontorypt.com>
Subject: Re: Promontory Point Resources Landfill

Mr. Snelgrove,
Based on your letter, UDOT will not require Promontory Point Resources, LLC to make
improvements to any of the State highways if you adhere to the traffic volumes stated in the
letter and the trucks meet the weight limit requirements on State highways. Also, UDOT
expects Promontory Point Resources, LLC to meet the requirements of securing loads and
preventing the materials being hauled to the landfill to litter and potentially damage the State
highway system. If you have any other questions or concerns, let me know.
Sincerely,
Darin K. Fristrup, P.E.
Traffic Operations Engineer
Utah Department of Transportation
Region One
Office: 801-620-1607
Cell: 801-940-2239

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Brett Snelgrove <brett@promontorypt.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Fristrup
As you may recall a few months back, myself and Terry Warner from HDR spoke with
you on the phone regarding our landfill project out on Promontory Point in Box Elder
County. As discussed one of the items for our class V application is to request approval for
the use of State Routes from UDOT pursuant to solid waste rules.
 
Please see attached letter stating the routes, anticipated traffic, and map of the route. Please confirm
receipt of this email and let me know if you have any questions.
 
Thank you for all your help.
 
Sincerely,
Brett Snelgrove   Director of Business Development
Promontory Point Resources, LLC
32 East Exchange Place • Suite 100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111-2712
Main- 435-414-9880

 APPENDIX 
GROUNDWATER MOVEMENT FIGURE

 AQUA ENGNEEWNG.

INC.

RN

92005 Wool\00001_PromonIoty Point WATER 

 

   

NOTE:

USING WATER ELEVATIONS AT MONITORING WELLS
#4 AND THE HYDRAULIC GRADIENT WAS
CALCULATED AT 0.023 ff/fI. THE GROUND
WATER FLOW RATE IS EXPECTED TO RANGE FROM
0.3 - 0.00001 gpm/fI sq AT THE SITE DUE TO
THE VARIABILITY OF ROCK AND ALLUVIAL FILLS.

I

ROZEL
FLAT

GREAT SALT LAKE

 

o?

CREEK
I

BLUE RIDGE






I 
I

I





VBHV 83013 X08 

MOVEMENT

ESNMATED GROUNDWATER

 

SCALE IF BAR DOES
NOT MEASURE 1"

DRAWING IS NOT TO

1/2

 

HANSEL
VALLEY

VALLEY

BLUE CREEK

 



 

 

 

PROMONTORY LANDFILL FACILITY

 

ADVANCED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

PROMONTORY LANDFILL DESIGN

 

@1315"

I975 N. MAIN. SUITE LAVTON UTAH OLOLI

 

mamnummuum
0 1R 1




GROUND WATER MOVEMENT

PNONI: OOIJNJISO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX 
UTAH DIVISION OF WATER WELL LOGS AND LOCATION MAP

2/15/2017

Map

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

3

3

3

3
Log: 13-3733
2

3

3 3

Log: 0313002M00

Log: 0313001M00
Log: 0313001M00

2
Log: 13-2774

Log: 0313001M00
2

Log: 0313001M00

0
http://maps.waterrights.utah.gov/EsriMap/map.asp

0.2

0.4mi
1/1

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90704k0.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/12/2003 06:07 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

2700 ft W

100 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 25 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: Lee & Sons Drilling
START DATE: 09/07/1972
COMPLETION DATE: 12/15/1972
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
200
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
5
5
74
74
178
178
198
198
200

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
8

Elevation:

LICENSE #:

feet

11

Drilling Fluid

CABLE

Lithologic Description

Color

CLAY,SAND
CLAY,BOULDERS
OTHER
OTHER
OTHER

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
12/15/1972

Time

CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
200

BEDROCK
BEDROCK FRACT.
BEDROCK SOLID
Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
169.00

Material

STATIC
Diameter(in)

.250

Test Method

12/15/1972

Status

Gage(in)

CONSTRUCTION - SCREENS/PERFORATIONS:
Depth(ft) Screen(S) or Perforation(P)
From
To
180
195
PERFORATION
WELL TESTS:
Date

Rock Type

Yield (CFS)

BAILER TEST

.058

8
Slot/Perf. siz
.25
Drawdown (ft)

Screen Diam/Length Perf(in)

Screen Type/# Perf.

1.50

150

Time Pumped (hrs)
.30

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90704k0.htm

1/1

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90704rt.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/12/2003 07:12 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
S

535 ft E

2112 ft from NW CORNER of SECTION 20 T

6N R

5W BASE SL

DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: NELSON DRILLING COMPANY
START DATE: 11/08/1999
COMPLETION DATE: 11/09/1999
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
20
20
240
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
2
2
38
38
73
73
139
139
162
162
240

Diameter(in) Drilling Method

Drilling Fluid

12.2
7.87

NONE
NONE

AIR ROTARY
AIR ROTARY

Elevation:

feet

LICENSE #: 596

Lithologic Description

Color

Rock Type

LOW-PERMEABILITY,OTHER
LOW-PERMEABILITY,CLAY,GRAVEL
LOW-PERMEABILITY,OTHER
LOW-PERMEABILITY,OTHER
LOW-PERMEABILITY,OTHER
LOW-PERMEABILITY,OTHER
NOT A DROP OF WATER, NOT EVEN ANY DAMP GROUND.

BRN

OVERBURDEN

RED
RED
RED
RED

SOFT
HARD
SOFT
HARD

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
11/09/1999
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
+1
20

Time

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
.00

Status

Material

Gage(in)

STEEL A 53

.250

CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
20 BENTONITE PELLETS

SHALE
SHALE
SHALE
SHALE

Amount

Diameter(in)
8
Density(pcf)
500

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION:
Well Head Configuration: dry well
Casing: pulled casing & plugged hole
ADDITIONAL DATA NOT AVAILABLE

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90704rt.htm

1/1

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070935.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/13/2003 05:06 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

1300 ft W

2300 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 25 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

Elevation:

feet

OWNER(S):
OWNER: Promontory Landfill LLC
ADDRESS: 1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
CITY: Salt Lake City
STATE: UT ZIP: 84119
REMARKS:
8019722727Mark Easton
DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: EARTHCORE INC
START DATE: 01/23/2003
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
62
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
8
8

12

12

30

30

40

40

62

LICENSE #: 575
COMPLETION DATE: 01/23/2003

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
6

Drilling Fluid

O-DEX

NONE

Lithologic Description

Color

HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
DRY
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL
DRY
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
DRY
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,CLAY,SILT,SAND
DAMP
WATER-BEARING,HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES,BOULDERS
WET

LIGHT BROWN

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
01/23/2003
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
42

Time

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
43.00

LIGHT BROWN
BROWN
LIGHT BROWN

STATIC

Gage(in)

SCH 40 PVC

.025

Diameter(in)
2

CONSTRUCTION - SCREENS/PERFORATIONS:
Depth(ft) Screen(S) or Perforation(P)
From
To
42
62
SCREEN

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070935.htm

LIGHT BROWN

Status

Material

CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
40 BENSEAL BENTONITE
40
62 10/20 SILICA SAND

Rock Type

Slot/Perf. siz
.010

Amount

Screen Diam/Length Perf(in)
2

Screen Type/# Perf.
86 SLOT/FT.

Density(pcf)

300 LBS
350 LBS

1/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070935.htm

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION
Well Head Configuration: 4-inch upright
Casing Joint Type: flush
Perforator Used: none, well screen
Surface Seal: yes, 40'
Dirve Shoe: no
Surface Seal Placement Method: tremmie
Additional Data Not Available

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070935.htm

2/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070936.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/13/2003 05:06 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

2400 ft W

3075 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 25 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

Elevation:

feet

OWNER(S):
OWNER: Promontory Landfill LLC
ADDRESS: 1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
CITY: Salt Lake City
STATE: UT ZIP: 84119
REMARKS:
8019722727Mark Easton
DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: EARTHCORE INC
START DATE: 01/24/2003
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
65
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
20
20

40

40

65

LICENSE #: 575
COMPLETION DATE: 01/24/2003

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
6

Drilling Fluid

O-DEX

NONE

Lithologic Description

Color

HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
DRY
WATER-BEARING,HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
WET
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
WET

LIGHT BROWN

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
01/24/2003
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
25

Time

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
39.00

LIGHT BROWN
LIGHT BROWN

Status
STATIC

Material

Gage(in)

SCH 40 PVC

.250

Diameter(in)
2

CONSTRUCTION - SCREENS/PERFORATIONS:
Depth(ft) Screen(S) or Perforation(P)
From
To
25
65
SCREEN
CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
23 BENSEAL BENTONITE
23
65 10/20 SILICA SAND

Rock Type

Slot/Perf. siz
.010

Amount

Screen Diam/Length Perf(in)
2

Screen Type/# Perf.
86 SLOT/FT

Density(pcf)

200 LBS
550 LBS

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION
Well Head Configuration: 4-inch upright
Casing Joint Type: flush

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070936.htm

1/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070936.htm
Surface Seal: yes, 23'
Drive Shoe: no
Surface Seal Placement Method: tremmie
Additional Data Not Available

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070936.htm

2/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070937.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/13/2003 05:06 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

3060 ft W

3750 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 25 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

Elevation:

feet

OWNER(S):
OWNER: Promontory Landfill LLC
ADDRESS: 1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
CITY: Salt Lake City
STATE: UT ZIP: 84119
REMARKS:
8019722727Mark Easton
DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: EARTHCORE INC
START DATE: 01/27/2003
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
65
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
18
18

23

23

35

35

65

LICENSE #: 575
COMPLETION DATE: 01/27/2003

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
6

Drilling Fluid

O-DEX

NONE

Lithologic Description

Color

HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
DRY
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
DRY
WATER-BEARING,HIGH-PERMEABILITY,CLAY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
WET
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
WET

LIGHT BROWN

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
01/27/2003
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
25

Time

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
34.00

LIGHT BROWN
LIGHT BROWN
LIGHT BROWN

Status
STATIC

Material

Gage(in)

SCH 40 PVC

.250

Diameter(in)
2

CONSTRUCTION - SCREENS/PERFORATIONS:
Depth(ft) Screen(S) or Perforation(P)
From
To
25
65
SCREEN
CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
23 BESCAL BENTONITE
23
65 10/20 SILICA SAND

Rock Type

Slot/Perf. siz
.010

Amount

Screen Diam/Length Perf(in)
2

Screen Type/# Perf.
86 SLOT/FT.

Density(pcf)

200 LBS
550 LBS

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070937.htm

1/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070937.htm
Well Head Configuration: 4-inch upright
Casing Joint Type: flush
Perforator Used: none, well screen
Surface Seal: yes, 23'
Drive Shoe: no
Surface Seal Placement Method: tremmie
Additional Data Not Available

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070937.htm

2/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070938.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/13/2003 05:07 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

3840 ft W

4300 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 25 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

Elevation:

feet

OWNER(S):
OWNER: Promontory Landfill LLC
ADDRESS: 1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
CITY: Salt Lake City
STATE: UT ZIP: 84119
REMARKS:
8019722727Mark Easton
DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: EARTHCORE INC
START DATE: 01/28/2003
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
65
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
19
19

25

25

35

35

65

LICENSE #: 575
COMPLETION DATE: 01/28/2003

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
6

Drilling Fluid

O-DEX

NONE

Lithologic Description

Color

HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
DRY
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
DRY
WATER-BEARING,HIGH-PERMEABILITY,CLAY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
WET
HIGH-PERMEABILITY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL,COBBLES
WET

LIGHT BROWN

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
01/28/2003
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
25

Time

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
29.00

LIGHT BROWN
LIGHT BROWN
LIGHT BROWN

Status
STATIC

Material

Gage(in)

SCH 40 PVC

.250

Diameter(in)
2

CONSTRUCTION - SCREENS/PERFORATIONS:
Depth(ft) Screen(S) or Perforation(P)
From
To
25
65
SCREEN
CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
23 BENSEAL BENTONITE
23
65 10/20 SILICA SAND

Rock Type

Slot/Perf. siz
.010

Amount

Screen Diam/Length Perf(in)
2

Screen Type/# Perf.
86 SLOT/FT.

Density(pcf)

200 LBS
550 LBS

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070938.htm

1/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070938.htm
Well Head Configuration: 4-inch upright
Casing Joint Type: flush
Perforator Used: well seal
Surface Seal: yes, 23'
Drive Shoe: no
Surface Seal Placement Method: tremmie
Additional Data Not Available

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e9070938.htm

2/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90709ni.htm
Search

WELLPRT Well Log Information Listing
Version: 2003.09.18.00         Rundate: 10/13/2003 07:58 AM

Utah Division of Water Rights

Water Well Log

LOCATION:
N

1380 ft W

2900 ft from SE CORNER of SECTION 24 T

6N R

6W BASE SL

Elevation:

feet

OWNER(S):
OWNER: Promontory Landfill LLC
ADDRESS: 1515 West 2200 South Ste C
CITY: Salt Lake City
STATE: UT ZIP: 84119
REMARKS:
8019722727Mark Easton
DRILLER ACTIVITIES:
ACTIVITY # 1 NEW WELL
DRILLER: LAYNE CHRISTENSEN COMPANY
START DATE: 05/14/2003
COMPLETION DATE: 05/21/2003
BOREHOLE INFORMATION:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
243
LITHOLOGY:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
20
20
41
222

41
222
243

Diameter(in) Drilling Method
8

LICENSE #: 626

Drilling Fluid

ODEX / AIR ROTARY

AIR

Lithologic Description

Color

CLAY,SILT,SAND,GRAVEL
DENSE
CLAY,GRAVEL

BROWN
PINK/WHITE

HARD
WATER-BEARING
HARD

WATER LEVEL DATA:
Date
05/16/2003
CONSTRUCTION - CASING:
Depth(ft)
From
To
0
200

Time

Rock Type

QUARTZITE

GREEN/PURPLE QUARTZITE

Water Level (feet)
(-)above ground
222.00

Material

Status
STATIC

Gage(in)

SCH. 40 PVC

Diameter(in)

CONSTRUCTION - FILTER PACK/ANNULAR SEALS
Depth(ft) Material
From
To
0
191 BETONITE GROUT
191
197 1/4" BENTONITE PELLETS
197
243 10-20 SILICA SAND

4
Amount
28
2
20

Density(pcf)
50
50
50

GENERAL COMMENTS:
CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION:
well head configuration: above grade
casing joint type: flush thread
perforator used: n/a
surface seal installed: yes

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90709ni.htm

1/2

 2/15/2017

waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90709ni.htm
depth of seal: 197'
drive shoe: yes
placement method: tremie bentonite pellets / bentonite grout
PUMP:
no data
NATURE OF USE:
monitor well
no additional data available.

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://waterrights.utah.gov/docSys/v907/e907/e90709ni.htm

2/2

 APPENDIX 0
WATER RIGHT LOCATION MAP AND INFORMATION

2/15/2017

Map

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

3

3

3

3
Log: 13-3733
2

3

3 3

Log: 0313002M00

Log: 0313001M00
Log: 0313001M00

2
Log: 13-2774

Log: 0313001M00
2

Log: 0313001M00

0
http://maps.waterrights.utah.gov/EsriMap/map.asp

0.2

0.4mi
1/1

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-2072)

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

Search all of Utah.gov »

Select Related Information

(WARNING: Water Rights makes NO claims as to the accuracy of this data.) RUN DATE: 02/15/2017
WATER RIGHT: 13­2072 
APPLICATION/CLAIM NO.:              CERT. NO.:
====================================================================================================================================
OWNERSHIP***************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NAME: Young Resources Limited Partnership
ADDR: 4990 North Highway 38
Brigham City UT 84302
INTEREST: 100%
====================================================================================================================================
DATES, ETC.*************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT?
COUNTY TAX ID#:
FILED:
 PRIORITY:
/ /1930 PUB BEGAN:
 PUB ENDED:
 NEWSPAPER:
ProtestEnd:
 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [
] ActionDate:
 PROOF DUE:
EXTENSION:
 ELEC/PROOF:[
] ELEC/PROOF:
 CERT/WUC: 03/30/1968 LAP, ETC:
 LAPS LETTER:
RUSH LETTR:
 RENOVATE:
 RECON REQ:
 TYPE: [
]
PD BOOK: [13-3
] MAP: [232
] PUB DATE:
*TYPE -- DOCUMENT -- STATUS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Type of Right: Diligence Claim
Source of Info: Proposed Determination
Status:
====================================================================================================================================
LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT***(Points of Diversion: Click on Location to access PLAT Program.)*********MAP VIEW
***************
====================================================================================================================================
FLOW: 0.015 cfs
SOURCE: Underground Water Well
COUNTY: Box Elder
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Promontory Point
POINT OF DIVERSION -- UNDERGROUND: (Click Well ID# link for more well data.)
(1) N 1900 ft W 350 ft from S4 cor, Sec 25, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL:
ins. DEPTH:
to
ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
====================================================================================================================================
USES OF WATER RIGHT******** ELU -- Equivalent Livestock Unit (cow, horse, etc.) ******** EDU -- Equivalent Domestic Unit or 1 Family
(The Beneficial Use Amount is the quantity of Use that this Water Right contributes to the Group Total.)
====================================================================================================================================
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 6255. Water Rights Appurtenant to the following use(s):
13-1947(DIL),2072(DIL),3679(CERT)
....................................................................................................................................
STOCKWATER: Beneficial Use Amt: UNEVALUATED ELUs
Group Total: 810.0000
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
************************************************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************E N D
O F
D A T A********************************************************
************************************************************************************************************************************

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah  84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-2072

1/1

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-2774)

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

Search all of Utah.gov »

Select Related Information

(WARNING: Water Rights makes NO claims as to the accuracy of this data.) RUN DATE: 02/15/2017
WATER RIGHT: 13­2774 
APPLICATION/CLAIM NO.: A41097       CERT. NO.:
====================================================================================================================================
OWNERSHIP***************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NAME: Lake Crystal Salt Co.
ADDR: 720 Exchange Lane P.O. Box 1149
Ogden UT 84402
====================================================================================================================================
DATES, ETC.*************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT? No
COUNTY TAX ID#:
FILED:
01/28/1972 PRIORITY: 01/28/1972 PUB BEGAN:
 PUB ENDED:
 NEWSPAPER:
ProtestEnd:
 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [
] ActionDate:06/19/1972 PROOF DUE:
EXTENSION:
 ELEC/PROOF:[Election] ELEC/PROOF:07/11/1974 CERT/WUC: 01/31/1975 LAP, ETC:
 LAPS LETTER:
RUSH LETTR:
 RENOVATE:
 RECON REQ:
 TYPE: [
]
PD BOOK: [13] MAP: [232
] PUB DATE:
*TYPE -- DOCUMENT -- STATUS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Type of Right: Application to Appropriate
Source of Info: Water User's Claim
Status: Water User's Claim
====================================================================================================================================
LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT***(Points of Diversion: Click on Location to access PLAT Program.)*********MAP VIEW
***************
====================================================================================================================================
FLOW: 0.011 cfs
SOURCE: Underground Water Well
COUNTY: Box Elder
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Promontory Mountains

POINT OF DIVERSION -- UNDERGROUND: (Click Well ID# link for more well data.)
(1) N 2700 ft W 100 ft from SE cor, Sec 25, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 70
to 100 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No
WELL ID#: 20673
====================================================================================================================================
USES OF WATER RIGHT******** ELU -- Equivalent Livestock Unit (cow, horse, etc.) ******** EDU -- Equivalent Domestic Unit or 1 Family
(The Beneficial Use Amount is the quantity of Use that this Water Right contributes to the Group Total.)
====================================================================================================================================
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 6587.
....................................................................................................................................
IRRIGATION: 1.0 acres
PERIOD OF USE: 04/01 TO 10/31
....................................................................................................................................
DOMESTIC:
4.0000 EDUs
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
....................................................................................................................................
###PLACE OF USE:
*-------NORTH WEST QUARTER------*-------NORTH EAST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH WEST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH EAST QUARTER-* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  S
Sec 25 T 6N R 6W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______  1.0000 ___
GROUP ACREAGE T
====================================================================================================================================
OTHER COMMENTS**********************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
The applicant has a lease agreement with D.H. Adams for 50 years with a option
to renew.
************************************************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************E N D
O F
D A T A********************************************************
************************************************************************************************************************************

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah  84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-2774

1/1

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-3679)

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

Search all of Utah.gov »

Select Related Information

(WARNING: Water Rights makes NO claims as to the accuracy of this data.) RUN DATE: 02/15/2017
WATER RIGHT: 13­3679 
APPLICATION/CLAIM NO.: A70944       CERT. NO.: CERTIFICAT
CHANGES: a35549
(Filed: 05/12/2009) Withdrawn
====================================================================================================================================
OWNERSHIP***************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NAME: Young Resources Ltd. Partnership
ADDR: 4990 N. Highway 38
Brigham City, UT 84302
====================================================================================================================================
DATES, ETC.*************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT? Yes
COUNTY TAX ID#:
FILED:
05/30/1997 PRIORITY: 05/30/1997 PUB BEGAN: 06/18/1997 PUB ENDED: 06/25/1997 NEWSPAPER: The Leader
ProtestEnd:07/15/1997 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [Approved] ActionDate:08/19/1997 PROOF DUE: 08/31/2009
EXTENSION:
 ELEC/PROOF:[Proof
] ELEC/PROOF:08/31/2009 CERT/WUC: 04/21/2011 LAP, ETC:
 LAPS LETTER:
RUSH LETTR:
 RENOVATE:
 RECON REQ:
 TYPE: [
]
PD BOOK: [ 13] MAP: [
] PUB DATE:
*TYPE -- DOCUMENT -- STATUS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Type of Right: Application to Appropriate
Source of Info: Certificate
Status: Certificate
====================================================================================================================================
LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT***(Points of Diversion: Click on Location to access PLAT Program.)*********MAP VIEW
***************
====================================================================================================================================
FLOW: 0.0274 cfs
SOURCE: Springs (8)
COUNTY: Box Elder
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Promontory Point

POINTS OF SPRING:
(1) N 1303 ft W 394 ft from S4 cor, Sec 29, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Sing Sing Spring (Airport)
(2) S 247 ft E 399 ft from NW cor, Sec 29, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Rocoso Spring (Vista)
(3) N 308 ft E 296 ft from SW cor, Sec 30, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Pasture Pond Spring
(4) S 588 ft W 605 ft from NE cor, Sec 31, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: New Pasture Pond Spring
(5) N 2126 ft W 1273 ft from S4 cor, Sec 01, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Little Valley Spring (Pit Water)
(6) S 676 ft W 705 ft from E4 cor, Sec 29, T 7N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Upper Little Valley Spring
(7) N 1816 ft W 152 ft from S4 cor, Sec 32, T 7N, R 5W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Doppler Spring (Little Valley Spring)
(8) N 296 ft E 465 ft from S4 cor, Sec 36, T 7N, R 6W, SLBM
Diverting Works:
Source: Small Canyon Water Spring
====================================================================================================================================
USES OF WATER RIGHT******** ELU -- Equivalent Livestock Unit (cow, horse, etc.) ******** EDU -- Equivalent Domestic Unit or 1 Family
(The Beneficial Use Amount is the quantity of Use that this Water Right contributes to the Group Total.)
====================================================================================================================================
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 6255. Water Rights Appurtenant to the following use(s):
13-1947(DIL),2072(DIL),3679(CERT)
....................................................................................................................................
STOCKWATER: Beneficial Use Amt: 0.0 ELUs
of the Group Total of 810.0000
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
*===========================================================================================================================================*
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 6434. Water Rights Appurtenant to the following use(s):
13-33(CERT),2243(DIL),2244(DIL),2245(DIL),2257(DIL)
2258(DIL),2259(DIL),2260(DIL),2261(DIL),2262(DIL)
2263(DIL),2264(DIL),2265(DIL),2266(DIL),2267(DIL)
2268(DIL),2269(DIL),2305(DIL),2308(DIL),3679(CERT)
....................................................................................................................................
STOCKWATER: Beneficial Use Amt: 0.0 ELUs
of the Group Total of 906.0000
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
*===========================================================================================================================================*
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 7244. Water Rights Appurtenant to the following use(s):
13-3543(CERT),3679(CERT),3988(CERT)
....................................................................................................................................
STOCKWATER: Beneficial Use Amt: 0.0 ELUs
of the Group Total of 160.0000
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
*===========================================================================================================================================*
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 7272. Water Rights Appurtenant to the following use(s):
13-3570(CERT),3679(CERT)
....................................................................................................................................
STOCKWATER: Beneficial Use Amt: 0.0 ELUs
of the Group Total of 73.0000
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
Water Right Number 13-3679 is an auxiliary right with a sole supply of zero acre-feet.
....................................................................................................................................
###PLACE OF USE:
*-------NORTH WEST QUARTER------*-------NORTH EAST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH WEST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH EAST QUARTER-* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  S
Sec 30 T 7N R 5W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 _______ X
 _______*_______ _______ _______ ___
====================================================================================================================================
PLACE OF USE for STOCKWATERING******************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NORTH-WEST¼
NORTH-EAST¼
SOUTH-WEST¼
SOUTH-EAST¼
NW NE SW SE
NW NE SW SE
NW NE SW SE
NW NE SW SE
Sec 06 T 6N R 5W SLBM
* : : X: *
* : : : *
* : : : *
* : : : *
Sec 29 T 6N R 5W SLBM
* : : X: *
* : : : *
* : X: : X*
* : : : *
Sec 30 T 6N R 5W SLBM
* : : : *
* : X: : *
* : : X: *
* : : : *
Sec 31 T 6N R 5W SLBM
* : : : *
* : X: : *
* : : : *
* : : : *
Sec 01 T 6N R 6W SLBM
* : : : *
* : : : *
* : X: : *
* X: : : *

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-3679

1/2

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-3679)

Sec 29 T 7N R 5W SLBM
* : : : *
* : : : X*
* : : : *
* : : : *
Sec 32 T 7N R 5W SLBM
* : : : *
* : : : *
* : X: : *
* : : : *
Sec 36 T 7N R 6W SLBM
* : : : *
* : : : *
* : : : X*
* : : X: *
====================================================================================================================================
OTHER COMMENTS**********************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
This is an auxiliary right with a sole supply of zero acre-feet which is used
with other water rights for livestock watering.
====================================================================================================================================
APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME WITHIN WHICH TO SUBMIT PROOF********************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
FILED:
08/30/2000 PUB BEGAN:
 PUB ENDED:
 NEWSPAPER:
ProtestEnd:
 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [Approved] ActionDate:09/15/2000 PROOF DUE: 08/31/2004
====================================================================================================================================
FILED:
08/31/2004 PUB BEGAN:
 PUB ENDED:
 NEWSPAPER: No Adv Required
ProtestEnd:
 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [Approved] ActionDate:01/20/2005 PROOF DUE: 08/31/2007
====================================================================================================================================
FILED:
07/19/2007 PUB BEGAN:
 PUB ENDED:
 NEWSPAPER: No Adv Required
ProtestEnd:
 PROTESTED: [
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [Approved] ActionDate:09/10/2007 PROOF DUE: 08/31/2009
====================================================================================================================================
************************************************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************E N D
O F
D A T A********************************************************
************************************************************************************************************************************

Utah Division of Water Rights         1594 West North Temple Suite 220, P.O. Box 146300, Salt Lake City, Utah  84114­6300         801­538­7240
Natural Resources   Contact   Disclaimer   Privacy Policy   Accessibility Policy

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-3679

2/2

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-3989)

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

Search all of Utah.gov »

Select Related Information

(WARNING: Water Rights makes NO claims as to the accuracy of this data.) RUN DATE: 02/15/2017
WATER RIGHT: 13­3989 
APPLICATION/CLAIM NO.: A80786       CERT. NO.:
====================================================================================================================================
OWNERSHIP***************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NAME: Promontory Point Resources, LLC
ADDR: 32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
====================================================================================================================================
DATES, ETC.*************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT? Yes
COUNTY TAX ID#: 01-012-0160
FILED:
12/30/2016 PRIORITY: 12/30/2016 PUB BEGAN: 02/08/2017 PUB ENDED: 02/15/2017 NEWSPAPER: The Box Elder News Journal
ProtestEnd:03/07/2017 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [
] ActionDate:
 PROOF DUE:
EXTENSION:
 ELEC/PROOF:[
] ELEC/PROOF:
 CERT/WUC:
 LAP, ETC:
 LAPS LETTER:
RUSH LETTR:
 RENOVATE:
 RECON REQ:
 TYPE: [
]
PD BOOK: [ 13] MAP: [
] PUB DATE:
*TYPE -- DOCUMENT -- STATUS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Type of Right: Application to Appropriate
Source of Info: Application to Appropriate
Status: Unapproved
====================================================================================================================================
LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT***(Points of Diversion: Click on Location to access PLAT Program.)*********MAP VIEW
***************
====================================================================================================================================
FLOW: 56.0 acre-feet
FULL SUPPLY EQUIVALENCE:
0.0%
SOURCE: Underground Water Wells (6)
COUNTY: Box Elder
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Promontory Point,western slope

POINT OF DIVERSION -- UNDERGROUND: (Click Well ID# link for more well data.)
(1) N 2150 ft E 600 ft from SW cor, Sec 18, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 3
(2) S 900 ft E 1300 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 6
(3) S 2050 ft E 1200 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 5
(4) S 2200 ft E 900 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 4
(5) N 1350 ft W 450 ft from SE cor, Sec 13, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 2
(6) N 1900 ft W 550 ft from SE cor, Sec 13, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 1
====================================================================================================================================
USES OF WATER RIGHT******** ELU -- Equivalent Livestock Unit (cow, horse, etc.) ******** EDU -- Equivalent Domestic Unit or 1 Family
(The Beneficial Use Amount is the quantity of Use that this Water Right contributes to the Group Total.)
====================================================================================================================================
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 638975.
....................................................................................................................................
INDUSTRIAL:
Industrial use for a landfill
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
Acre Feet Contributed by this Right for this Use: 56.0
....................................................................................................................................
###PLACE OF USE:
*-------NORTH WEST QUARTER------*-------NORTH EAST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH WEST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH EAST QUARTER-* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  S
Sec 18 T 6N R 5W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 19 T 6N R 5W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 30 T 6N R 5W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 13 T 6N R 6W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 14 T 6N R 6W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ X
Sec 23 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 24 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 25 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
====================================================================================================================================
OTHER COMMENTS**********************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
This water will be used for the operation of a landfill. Applicant`s
consulting hydrogeologist has identified 6 potential well sites. Applicant may
not drill all six wells, depending on the water conditions that are found when
test wells are drilled.
====================================================================================================================================
SEGREGATION HISTORY*****************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
This Right as originally filed:
FLOW IN
QUANTITY IN *----------------------------------W A T E R
U S E S----------------------------------*
CFS
ACRE-FEET
IRRIGATED
STOCK
DOMESTIC
MUNICIPAL
MINING
POWER
OTHER
ACREAGE
(ELUs)
(FAMILIES)(*-------------------ACRE-FEET--------------------*)
56.0
************************************************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************E N D
O F
D A T A********************************************************
************************************************************************************************************************************

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-3989

1/2

 2/15/2017

W R P R I N T (13-3990)

Utah.gov
Utah.gov Services

Agencies

Search all of Utah.gov »

Select Related Information

(WARNING: Water Rights makes NO claims as to the accuracy of this data.) RUN DATE: 02/15/2017
WATER RIGHT: 13­3990 
APPLICATION/CLAIM NO.: T80787       CERT. NO.:
====================================================================================================================================
OWNERSHIP***************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
NAME: Promontory Point Resources, LLC
ADDR: 32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
====================================================================================================================================
DATES, ETC.*************************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT? Yes
COUNTY TAX ID#: 01-012-0160
FILED:
12/30/2016 PRIORITY: 12/30/2016 PUB BEGAN: 02/08/2017 PUB ENDED: 02/15/2017 NEWSPAPER: The Box Elder News Journal
ProtestEnd:03/07/2017 PROTESTED: [No
] HEARNG HLD:
 SE ACTION: [
] ActionDate:
 PROOF DUE:
EXTENSION:
 ELEC/PROOF:[
] ELEC/PROOF:
 CERT/WUC:
 LAP, ETC:
 LAPS LETTER:
RUSH LETTR:
 RENOVATE:
 RECON REQ:
 TYPE: [
]
PD BOOK: [ 13] MAP: [
] PUB DATE:
*TYPE -- DOCUMENT -- STATUS--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Type of Right: Temporary Application
Source of Info: Application to Appropriate
Status: Unapproved
====================================================================================================================================
LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT***(Points of Diversion: Click on Location to access PLAT Program.)*********MAP VIEW
***************
====================================================================================================================================
FLOW: 112.0 acre-feet
FULL SUPPLY EQUIVALENCE:
0.0%
SOURCE: Underground Water Wells (6)
COUNTY: Box Elder
COMMON DESCRIPTION: Promontory Point,western slope

POINT OF DIVERSION -- UNDERGROUND: (Click Well ID# link for more well data.)
(1) N 2150 ft E 600 ft from SW cor, Sec 18, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 3
(2) S 900 ft E 1300 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 6
(3) S 2050 ft E 1200 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 5
(4) S 2200 ft E 900 ft from NW cor, Sec 19, T 6N, R 5W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 4
(5) N 1350 ft W 450 ft from SE cor, Sec 13, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 2
(6) N 1900 ft W 550 ft from SE cor, Sec 13, T 6N, R 6W, SLBM
DIAMETER OF WELL: 6 ins. DEPTH: 500 to 1500 ft. YEAR DRILLED:
WELL LOG? No WELL ID#:
Comment:
Well No. 1
====================================================================================================================================
USES OF WATER RIGHT******** ELU -- Equivalent Livestock Unit (cow, horse, etc.) ******** EDU -- Equivalent Domestic Unit or 1 Family
(The Beneficial Use Amount is the quantity of Use that this Water Right contributes to the Group Total.)
====================================================================================================================================
SUPPLEMENTAL GROUP NO.: 638976.
....................................................................................................................................
INDUSTRIAL:
Industrial use for a landfill
PERIOD OF USE: 01/01 TO 12/31
Acre Feet Contributed by this Right for this Use: 56.0
....................................................................................................................................
###PLACE OF USE:
*-------NORTH WEST QUARTER------*-------NORTH EAST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH WEST QUARTER------*-------SOUTH EAST QUARTER-* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  SE
* NW
  NE
  SW
  S
Sec 18 T 6N R 5W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 19 T 6N R 5W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 30 T 6N R 5W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ ___
Sec 13 T 6N R 6W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 14 T 6N R 6W SLBM *_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ _______*_______ _______ _______ X
Sec 23 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 24 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
Sec 25 T 6N R 6W SLBM *X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
*X
 X
 X
 X
====================================================================================================================================
OTHER COMMENTS**********************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
This water will be used for the operation of a landfill. Applicant`s
consulting hydrogeologist has identified 6 potential well sites. Applicant may
not drill all six wells, depending on the water conditions that are found when
test wells are drilled.
====================================================================================================================================
SEGREGATION HISTORY*****************************************************************************************************************
====================================================================================================================================
This Right as originally filed:
FLOW IN
QUANTITY IN *----------------------------------W A T E R
U S E S----------------------------------*
CFS
ACRE-FEET
IRRIGATED
STOCK
DOMESTIC
MUNICIPAL
MINING
POWER
OTHER
ACREAGE
(ELUs)
(FAMILIES)(*-------------------ACRE-FEET--------------------*)
56.0
************************************************************************************************************************************
*******************************************************E N D
O F
D A T A********************************************************
************************************************************************************************************************************

http://www.waterrights.utah.gov/cblapps/wrprint.exe?wrnum=13-3990

1/2

 APPENDIX 
HELP MODEL INFORMATION

 

!
"
#

$
$
$
$
$
$

+

,- ,-

$%&'&
$%&'&
$%&'&
$%&'&
$()*
$()*

.

BASE OPTION 2 - INTERMEDIATE CONDITION

BASE OPTION 1 - INITIAL CONDITION

/

////////
/
"
#

-0
0
0
0
0
0
&23

,
,
,
,

1
1 +
1

-

/

,

 ////////
/
"
#

1
0
0
0
0
0
0

.
- -

,
,
,
,

+

/ -

,

////////
- /
"
#

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
,
,
,
,

+
1
+

,
-

////////
/

"
"

#

+
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

4

.
,
,
,
,
.
-

/ ,
,

,

/

,

/

+
////////
/
"
#

0
0
0
0
0
0
&23 -

+
+
++

,
,
,
,

++
-

 5
////////////////////////////////////////
"

6--

7

- 8
-

9

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

5
5
5

. +
.
+ 1
.1

+ 1
+ 1

,

///////////////////////////////////
#
"

"
9

!

9

!

5
-

4
4
4
4

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

.
-1
.
1 1
.

8
8
8
8

1
.+

#
!
9 ,9
///////
1
+

,
///////
1
-

,
///////

,
///////

+

-

1

,
///////
-.
-

9 ,
///////
. -.

#
!
&23

 9 ,9
///////
-1 .
+

,
///////

,
///////

,
///////
+

.+

,
///////
+1 1

9 ,
///////
.1

#
0

.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////
-

//////////
-. 1 --

.

. 1-

.
.

-.
,

#

..
.

///////

-++

+

-

-

1

+

/

-

/ . 1-

+ 1

- + .

+

- +

/

-+

-

+

+

&23

-

 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////
1
.-

.

+++

.

- ,

#

//////////
1 1+ -

+

+

1

///////

-+1

.

+-

.

-.+

+ 1

+

+
.

--1.

+

1

- +
+

-

. 1

..

-+
+

1

+ 1-

+

.
.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////
-- +

//////////
1.

++

+

-

+ +

1,

#

+

-

-

-

///////
+

.- +

1+

-

.
1

-

&23 +

1

1 1

-

+

-

+

-

-.1

- +

1

-

 . 1

+ 1-

+

1--

+ -

1

-+
-

--

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////
--

//////////
- -

.

1-. -

1 +1-

.
.

,

#

1

///////
+1

.

/

+

+-

1 -

+
/- 11
-

-.1

--

-

1--

1

/

.+

-

- +
.. .1
+ -

1

-

+.

-

+
1

+

+
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
&23 .

 ////////
-.

//////////
++ +
-

+

.+ . 1.

+

+- 1
+

,

#

///////
1 --

. -

-

-

+

++

1

+

.

1
- 1

1

--

-

+

-

+

.. .1
+

.
+.

+

+ 1. -1
/

+
+

+
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
9 ,9
///////

,
///////

,
///////

,
///////

,
///////

9 ,
///////

/////////////
-

.

+
1

- -+
- -

-+
1

+
+1

-1

1.
.

+
1
-

1

+
1

//////
..
++

.1
+

-

-

1

1

-

.-

-

.+.-

+

.

-

1
1-

1

.
1

1-

-

//////////////////
1
-

- -.

1
+
.1
&23

1
-

-

-.
-+
-

-

. 11
+

 ////////////////////////////////////////
+.
- -1
+

+-

.
.

.
+

-1+

+

+

1
+

-

.

1
-+-

,
#
+
////////////////////////////////////

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
!
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

/////////////////////////////////////
-

--

11

+1
-

- .

-

1

.

.

:
!
+
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///////////////////
.
1 !
+
.

.

+

-..!

-

1 --!

-1 1
,

/////////////
-

+

+ -1 !

#

1

.
..

/////////

+
-

!

.
1

-

+
-

!
11.1!

 

&23 1

-+1 1+

--

+

 #
+
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
!
!
//////////
/////////////
-.
1
1
- ..-

..- .+-

. ,

#

1.

+
-+

"

- -1
"
!

+ +.

"

,

!

,

!

&;<=)= >3&%? &(3 @A=B)'3% )?<*2
3E3(3*@3

-

.

+1
@ *(A3C? 3D)&'<A*?

&;<=)= &')(&'3% 3B'> AF3( &*%E<GG <*3(
HI ()@3
@ *(A37 *<F3(?<'I AE #&*?&?
9A)(*&G AE *F<(A*=3*'&G *2<*33(<*2
AG
7 A -7 &(@>
7 BB -.-/-

 

+
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
!
,
!
/////
////////
/////////
- .+
+
-

.

+

-1

1

+

+

- +

&23

++

  . OUT

Page 10

 

!
"
#

$
$
$
$
$
$

+

+

/+ /+

$%&'&
$%&'&
$%&'&
$%&'&
$(&)*+
$,-.

0

BASE OPTION 1 - INTERMEDIATE CONDITION

BASE OPTION 2 - INITIAL CONDITION

1

11111111
1
"
#

++
2
2
2
2
2
2
&5*

+
/
/
/
/

3
3 4
3

+

1

/

 +
11111111
1
"
#

3
2
2
2
2
2
2

+
0
+ +

/
/
/
/

+
4

1 +

/

1

/

11111111
1
"
#

++
2
2
2
2
2
2

3
/
/
/
/

3
3

+

11111111
+ 1
"
#

+
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

/
/
/
/

+
4
+

/

+

4
11111111
1

"
"

#

6

4
2
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
+
2
2
1
&5* +

/
/
/
/
0

1 +
/
/

/

 0
11111111
1
"
#

4
4
44

2
2
2
2
2
2

/
/
/
/

+
44
+

1

/

7
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111
"

8++

9

+ :
+

;

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

7
7
7

0 4
0
4 3
+
03

+
3
3

340
340
/

11111111111111111111111111111111111
#
"

"
;
;
7
+

!
!

6
6
6
6

&5*

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

0
+3
0
3 3
0
3
04

:
:
:
:

 #
!
; /;
1111111
3
4

/
1111111
3
+

/
1111111

/
1111111

4

+

/
1111111
+0
+

3

; /
1111111
0 +0

#
!
; /;
1111111
+3 0
4

/
1111111

/
1111111
04

/
1111111
+
4

/
1111111
43 3

; /
1111111
03

#
2

0

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111
+

1111111111
+0 3 ++

0

0

0 3+

0
3

/

#

0

1111111

++

00

44

3

4

4

+
+4

+

4

+
1
3
3

&5*

1+3
340

34+

+

4

+

++0 4

1

+4

 0

4

+
4

+

+
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111
3

1111111111
3 34 +

0+

0

444

0

+ ++
/

#

0

+

1111111

+43

0

4+

0

3

4

+

4 30

++ 4 +34

00

+

4

+
0 +
3

+
0

0 3

++0 4

+3 4

4 3+

4

1

0
0

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111
++ +
&5* 4

1111111111
3+
0

1111111

 4

44

4

+

4 4

3+
/

#

+

+

+

4

0+ 4

34

0

0
4

3
+

3

3

3 3

0

+3 4

+3

+304

+

+

0+

0 3

4 3+

4

3++

4 +

3

+4
+

++

4

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111
+
++

1111111111
+ +
+

0

3+0 +

3 43+

0
0

/

#

3

1111111
43

0

1

4

4+
+

3 4

0

4

4

3
1+ 33
3

1

04

+3

+304

+0

+

3++

+
0+
+

4 +

3

+

40

+

+
&5* 0

 3

4
3

4

4
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
11111111
+0

1111111111
44 4
+

4

04 0 30

4

4+ 3
4

/

#

3 ++

0 +

+

0

+

1111111

44

3

4

0

0

4
+ 3

3

+0

+

0

+3 4

4
+

40
4 30 +3

4
4

1

4
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
; /;
1111111

/
1111111

/
1111111

/
1111111

/
1111111

; /
1111111

1111111111111
+

0
4

3
+

3
&5*

4
3

+ +4
+ +

+4
3

4
43

+3

30
0

4
3

 111111
00
44

03
4

+

+

0+
40+

3

3

+

0+

+

+
4

0

+

3
3+

3

0
3

3+

+

111111111111111111
3
+
+

+ +0

+

3
4

3
+

03

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111
3 3
+0

++
0

+

0 +
33

+4
+

++
3

4

0
4

43

+

3
4

3

4

4

+0

/
#
0
111111111111111111111111111111111111

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
!
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
4
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
0

0

+
+

0+
+

0+

3+
4

40

++
4
++

<
!
4
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1111111111111111111
0
3 !
4
0

0

4

+00!
3 ++!

+

4
&5* 3

1111111111111
+

0!

+
4

0
0 3

111111111

3
4

0
3

 /

#

!

0

0
0!
4
0+

33 3!

++

33

0

 

#
4
111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
!
!
1111111111
1111111111111
+0
3
3
+ 00+

00+ 04+

3 4
/

#

4

04

0

0
4

"

+
4

4

4

"
!
4 40
"

/

!

/

!

&=>?-? @*&%) &,* AB?C-'*% -)>.5
*F*,*.A*

+

0

43
A .,B*D) *E-&'>B.)

&=>?-? &'-,&'*% *C'@ BG*, &.%F>HH >.*,
(I ,-A*
A .,B*9 .>G*,)>'I BF #&.)&)
;B-,.&H BF .G>,B.?*.'&H .5>.**,>.5
BH
9 B +9 &,A@
9 CC +0+1+

 

4
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
!
/
!
&5*

 

m?.Amww o.~moA
m.m~mo o.wowo
A o.~mmo c.0wwo
0.0000 0.0000
o.~wmo o.mmoo

MZOE E>%mw H.AOH

 

!
"

#

#$
#$
#$
#$
#$
#$

#
#
#
#
#

#

# /

#

,01 01

$%&'()*+
$%&'()*+
$%&'()*+
$%&'()*+
$-(.
$-(.

,

/

BASE OPTION 2 - FINAL CONDITION

BASE OPTION 1 - INTERMEDIATE CONDITION

#

#
2

22222222
2
!
"

11
3
3
3
3
3
3

1
22222222
2
)5&

1
,

0
0
0
0

4
4

1

2 ,

0

 !
"

4
3
3
3
3
3
3

1,
/
1 1

0
0
0
0

1

2 1

0

22222222
1 2
!
"

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

4
,

0
0
0
0

,
4
,

0
1

,
22222222
, 2

!
!

"

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

6

/
0
0
0
0
/
1

2 1
0
0

0

2

0

2

22222222
2
!
"

3
3
3
3
3
3

0
0
0
0

,
1
1

7
)5& 1

 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222
#
!

811

9

1 :
1

;

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

7
7
7

/
/
,

,

1
1 ,/4
, 4/,
0

22222222222222222222222222222222222
#
"
!

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

!
;
;
7
6
6
6
6

1
,

,

1
14
/
4 4

/
,4
/

:
:
:
:

#
"

; 0;
2222222

0
2222222

1

1

0
2222222
1
4

0
2222222
1 1
,

0
2222222
,
11

; 0
2222222

0
2222222
4 4

; 0
2222222
/4

#
"

; 0;
2222222
14 /

0
2222222
,
,

0
2222222
,
/

0
2222222
, 1
)5&

 #
"
,

3

1

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
1

2222222222
, 44/
,

/,

/

4/,

"

,
44

,,
0

2222222

4,/
1

,

/

,
1 ,
, 4/,

1

4/

,

1

4

,

1

4

/ ,

4

,

/ ,

4

,

2

/,

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/

2222222222
/4
,

4

1

1

, /
,

0

/ 4

"

11 44
/

/

4//
1

,

2222222

1
14

/

/
2 ,41
)5& ,

2

,

,1,

2

4

 ,

,

1

, /1

4

1
/ ,

4

2

1

/

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222

2222222222
,
4 4

2222222

, /
1

1

4/
0

"

4 41

,
1

4

/

,
2

1

2

, /1
4/

,

21 4/

1
1

1

,/

1

, , 4/

/

1

,
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
4 14

2222222222
// / , /

, 4 ,
1
)5&

41

/
,/

2222222

4

1/

/ /

/

1

 ,
0

/

"

1

4

/

,
4

1

4/

1

, 4 ,

1

,/

1
1

11

1

4/ 1
, , 4/

,

4

4

1/
/1

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
1 /

2222222222
,/ 4

1 1,,

4 ,/

/

1/ /
1 ,
0

"

2222222

4, ,

44 /

1

1
,

,
2

21 ,1
, 4 ,

1

4/ 1

,

1

/ 1

,

,

2, /

4

2

/
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
)5& /

 22222222

2222222222
/
14

1

4,
4 /

,

11 1,1

"

1
,

/ ,

1

/
0

2222222

/

1
4

,

,
,

,

1

/ 1

1

/

44

/

1,

, 44

1

4 ,

,
2

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,
1

2222222222
,1/4
4

1

4/
,

0

"

1
/

,

4
1

/

,4
1

,

2222222

/

,
2

2
,

,
44

1

,
/

1

1
,

1,

4/ 4
2

)5&

1

1

4 ,
,

2/

4
//

1/

 4
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
1 11

2222222222
,, 4 / 1

1

4

1 ,

/

,,

4 1

,
1
0

,

2222222

//

"
,

,
, 4

4

44

114

1

, 4

,

4

1

1

4, 4

,

4/ 4

1

,,/

, ,4
1

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222

2222222222
/ 4
,

/

4/ 4

44,

,
4

0

2222222

"

1 1

,4,
14

14

/
,

1
,

1/
2

,

2

11 /

, 4

1

4, 4

,

1

41

1
)5& 4

,,/

21 ,/

1

1

 ,

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
, /

2222222222
,
4

1

4
,

,

"

1

4/ 14

/
0

2222222

4

4

4

4

1
,
/

/

,

1

,

1

1 ,

1

,

41
/11 1

/

,

1

2

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/ /

2222222222
/ 1 ,

11

0

1 4/

"

1
,

2222222
1

, 1,

/ 1

/

,

1
4

/

4

/
1
)5&

1

 ,

1

, 4

1

/11 1
4/41

1 ,

/

,
4

1

2

4

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222

2222222222
,
1
/

1 1

4 1

1 ,

,

/ 4

1

4
0

2222222

4/

1

"

11

1
,

/
/1

4

1/
2

,/

2 /44

, 4

1

4/41

, 14,

1

/

/

2

1
4
/,

1

,1

4 4
,1

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,
1 ,

4 14
4

)5&

2222222222
,44 /

1/

2222222

1

4
/

/

 1
0

4 4,

,

"
,

1
11

1/11 //,

, 14,

1

/

1

/

1
/

1

/,

4 4

,

/

/

2

,,

,
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,

2222222222
4 /

1 11
1,

4

,4

, 4

41
/

0

"

44
4

1 4

1

2222222

1
1 /4

/

,

, /
,
/ 4

/

/ 1

1

/

1

1

4 ,
/

1

/

1 4

1
, /

/4

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
)5&

 22222222
/4

2222222222
, / 4 ,

,,

,

,,4

,4

"

/
441

1
,

11 1

1/
1

0

2222222

//

4

1
4
, /

,
1

,

4 ,

1 /

/ 4

4

1

1 4

, 4

1 1

/
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,

2222222222
1
, /

1 1

41

1 1/

0

4

,, 14 , ,
1,

2222222

1

4/
4

/,

"
,

4
2

/,
,
, /4/

21
1 /
1

,
4

4

2

)5&

1

44
1

2

,4

 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
, 1
1

2222222222
4 1 /

4

4

/

//, /4

41
0

"

/ 4

1

2222222
1

1,
,

4

/

1

/

,
/ 4

1 44

, /4/

1

4

, 441

1

4 1

,/1

11

, /

1

/

1
2

/4

4
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
4

2222222222

,

4
/

1

,

1

/

/

2 ,1 4 4

2

/,

,

,

,4

1 /,
0

2222222

4

"
,

44
2

1/
, 441

1

4,

1

,/1
)5&

4 1

1

, / 1
/

1

1

 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222

2222222222
1 1,
1
/11

4 /

0

, 4

14

11

2222222
4
4/

4

"

/

1 ,/

1
,

1
2

/ ,

21,,/

1

4,

1

, / 1

4

1

4

,

1

1 /

2

/

,

//

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
4 ,

2222222222
/ 4,4 1

, 1,
1

,
,

, , / 41

/
0

1

1, 11/

2222222
1
/
,

"
,

1
/
)5&

,

, 1

,4

 ,

4
/

1

4

1 /
1

1 /

/

4

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,

2222222222
1 /

,

1,4

1

/

4

4

,/

,1,
,/
0

2222222

144, ,

"
,

1 1
2

2,1,/
/

24

,

1 /

, ,,

1

1

,

1

4
2

,

11
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/
1 4/

,
4

)5&

2222222222
4 /

, 4 1

1

2222222

 1 /
0

"

/

1
,
/

4/

, ,,
,

/

1

1

1

44,

,

44,
1

4

1 4

,

/

1 1,
2

4
,

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
1 ,4

2222222222
, ,1

/

4

/4

/

1

1
1

1
/

/1,
0

2222222

/

, 4,

"
,

1
2

2,
,
,

/
1
1 4
,1

/1

1

44,

1

4

/ 1

,

1 1,

2/ /

/

1

,
/

1

1,
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
)5&

/

 22222222
,,

2222222222
/ , 1

,

,/ 4

4

,1 44 11

14
0

2222222

"

,

/

,

1/

1
,
4
,

1

1

1

4

1

/

4

/ 1
41

1

,1

1

1

1

1
1

//

1

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
,

2222222222
144

1

4

1

4

2222222

/

,,1

/ /

4
4

1

1 4
0

"

,

1
,

41
2

,
4
,
1

2 4//
1

41

1

41,,

/

2

1

1

1

/,4 /

1
,

)5&

/

 1/
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/

2222222222
4,,

4
1

4/
1

, / , 44

4/
0

1

/

"

2222222
1
, //

/

1

/

/

,
,

,

,
,

1
/

4

1

41,,

1
/,4 /

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/

2222222222
4 4
4

2222222

/
4

,

,

/
0

"

4
,

, ,//
1

/

4

,
,
,

)5&

4

1

/

1

11

1

1 1/,

, /

 ,44
2

/

14
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/ /

2222222222
/ 4,

4/

4 ,,

/

, 1

441
0

"

2222222
1

,/

,

/4

/

/

1

,

,

,
/ /
11

1

,

1 /

4

14 1

,44

1

//

14

4

1

1

2

1
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
/ //

2222222222
/ ,
4 1

//
/

1 /
,

/
144/

0

2222222

1

1

,/

4
/

,

"
,

1 1
2
)5&

, ,

2 1

24

 ,

1 /

, , 1

1

14 1
/

//

14

4

1 1

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
22222222
1 4
1

2222222222
,,
, /

,

,

/
,

/
0

2222222
,

4

/

"
,
,

1

, , 1

1

/

, 4

1

4, 1 1

1

2

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
; 0;
2222222

0
2222222

0
2222222

0
2222222

2222222222222
/

1
)5& 1

1

,

0
2222222

; 0
2222222

 /

4

/
,4

4

4,

,/

,
/

4
41

/4

,

, /
11

1

,,
/

222222
1/

1
4

1

,,
1 /

/

1

1

/,
4

1,

,
/

4 ,

11

,

1 4
1 /

/

,

222222222222222222
,
/,4

/
/

1 /
/

1
1

/

/

/

/

//

4

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222
1
1

1

,
/,

,
,

4

/

1/4
/

4

,

/1

/
,

0
"
222222222222222222222222222222222222

2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
,
2222222222222222222222222222222222222
,1
1

/4
,

,

1

4
/

/

11

4
4

1
1,
1

<
2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2222222222222222222
, 44
1 ,
)5& 1

2222222222222
,
/

222222222

 1/

1

/

1,

1
0

4

,

,1

1

,

,1

4

4

, 1

141

"
4

1

,
2

,

21/ /4

2

,

 

"
222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
2222222222
//

2222222222222
/ 1 4

/

/4
/

0

/ ,

1 4

4,4

"

1

!

,

4 4

,

/,

!
1
!

,

0

,4

0

,

)=>?(? @&)%A )-& BC?D(+&% (A>.5
&'&-&.B&#

/

B .-C&EA &F()+>C.A

)=>?(? )+(-)+&% &D+@ CG&- ).%'>** >.&HI -(B&
B .-C&9 .>G&-A>+I C' ").A)A
;C(-.)* C' .G>-C.?&.+)* .5>.&&->.5
C*
9 C 19 )-B@
9 DD 1/121

 

)5& 11

/4

 2222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
0
22222
22222222
222222222
/
4
1

/
4

1
,

,
1

)5& 1

  

!

"

"#
"#
"#
"#
"#
"#

"
"
"
"
"

"

."12

"

+3. 3.

#$%&'()*
#$%&'()*
#$%&'()*
#$%&'()*
#,(-%.&
#/'0

+

2

BASE OPTION 1 - FINAL CONDITION

BASE OPTION 2 - INTERMEDIATE CONDITION

"

"
4

44444444
4
..
!

5
5
5
5
5
5

.
44444444
4
(7%

.
+

3
3
3
3

6
6

.

4 +

3

 6
!

5
5
5
5
5
5

.+
2
. .

3
3
3
3

.
1

4 .

3

4 +

3

44444444
4
..
!

5
5
5
5
5
5

6
+

3
3
3
3

6
6

.

+
44444444
. 4
.
!

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

3
3
3
3

.
.
.

3

.

1
44444444
+ 4
1
!

8

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

2
44444444
(7% .

2
3
3
3
3
2
.
4

4 .
3
3

3

 4
!

1
1
11
+
.
11

5
5
5
5
5
5

3
3
3
3
.

4

3

9
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
"
:..
;

. <
.

=

5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

9
9
9

2 1
2
+

+

.
. +26
1
626
+
3

44444444444444444444444444444444444
"
!
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5

=
=
9
.
+

8
8
8
8

+

.
.6
2
6 6

2
+6
21

<
<
<
<

"
!

= 3=
4444444

3
4444444

3
4444444

3
4444444
(7%

3
4444444

= 3
4444444

 1
.

.
.

. .

6

+
..

+

"
!

= 3=
4444444
.6 2
1

3
4444444
+
+

3
4444444
+
21

3
4444444
+ .
1

3
4444444
16 6

= 3
4444444
26

"
5

!
+

.

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
.

4444444444
+ 662
+

2+1
+
3

!

1

2

62+

++

4444444

1
1 61

2

+
66

1
+

+

1
.1+
626
6

.

16

.1 26.. .1
.1

2 1

1

2 +

6

+1

1

2 +

6

+1

4

22

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
(7% +

 44444444
1 21

4444444444
126
1 +

16

.

.
+
3

!

2 6

.. 66

+ 2 1

2

622

1

+

+.+

1 +

4444444

2

.
.6

2
1

12
4

+6.
6
2

4
.1

4

6

2 1

.1 1 2.
1

2 +

6

4

.

+

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444

4444444444
+
6 6
+12

1
+
3

!

1.

.

62

4444444
6 6.
1

2

6

2
1
4

. 1
2

4

+

4. 62

.1 1 2.

6

.1

+2

+11

1

+ + 62
.1

(7% 1

2

 +
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
6 .6

4444444444
22 12 + 2

+ 6 +
.

6.

+
3

!

21 6
+2

+

4444444
.2

2 2

2

.

1

6

2

+

1

.
16

.

6

.1
6 6

.
+11

..

1

.1 261

+2

+ + 62

+

1

6

6
.2

2

1
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
. 2

4444444444
+2 6

. .++

+
3

!

6 +2

. +

4444444

2

1

.2 2 1

6+ +

66 2

. 1

2
1

1
4

1

4. +. 1+

6 6
1
+
(7% 2

.1 261
.1 +661 1
6

4+ 2

 4

12

2
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
.

4444444444
21
.61

1

6+

6 2
+
3

!

1

4444444
2 +

1.

2

+

.. .

2
1
6

+

1

166

2

1

.1 +661 1

1 6

.1 16+.

6 +

+

.+

4

+ 66

2

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+ 1
.

4444444444
1+.26 1 6

.

62

1
+
3

!

+
+

2
1
(7%

.
21
+6

4444444
1 6

.

2

 4

1
1 6
6 6

4

11

+

42

.

.1 16+.
.1

.

1

6 +

+

1+

.+

1 61

62 6 1

22

4

.2

6
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
. ..
.

4444444444
++ 16 2 .

1
11

+
3

!

4444444

6 1 .1+

2

++

6 .

+
.

+

2

2
1
+ 6
6 6

.1

6 +

6

..6

.

1

.1 22.

+

6

.1

1+

62 6 1

.

++2 1.1

+ +6

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
1

4444444444
2 6
1 +

1 1 2
66+
(7% 6

4444444

62 6
+

+6+

. .
2

 +
3

!

6

.6

+

2

+

1
4

+

4 1.. 2

4. +2

6 +

.1 22.

.1

1

.1 11+

.1

.

++2 1.1

.

+

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+ 2

4444444444
1 +
6 1

.

6
+

+
3

!

4444444

+

.

62 .6

2

6

6 1 6

2

6
6

+

1
2

1

1

.1 11+

16

.1 1 6

. +

2

. 1+

.1

21 +1

.

4

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
(7%

 44444444
2 2

4444444444
2 . +

1..

. 62 11

1

!

2

2

.
6

2

+6

.

1

.

+ .+1 21.

+
3

4444444

2

.
1

.

16

.1 1 6

6 1

.1 26+2

. +

.

1

21 +1

11

6
4

1.
1

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444

4444444444
+ 11.
2

. .

6 .

. +
+
3

!

+

6

4444444

11

2 6

.1

62

. 1

2
2.

2

+

1
4

+21

4 266

2

6 1

.1 26+2

1

.66

.1 +

+

1

6

1.

+.

6 6

1

11
2+

(7%

4

11

 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+
. + 1

6 .6

.1

6

1.2

2

+
3

!

4444444444
+66 2

1.

4444444
61
2

1

6 61

+

2
1
..
.66
+

.2.. 22+
.1 +
.1

+
6

2

1
1

2+
+1

1

2
4

6 6
12
++

+
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+

4444444444
1 612

. ..1

6

.+
+
3

!

4444444

1 +6

+ 6
1

1 66

6.
2

6

.+1

2

.
. 26

+

1

+
2 1 2 .
+
2
+1
(7%

.1

6

1

.1 2.

1
2

12

.

.

 216

. 6

+ 2
2+

1
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
26

4444444444
+ 216 +

++

+

++6

.2

+
3

!

+6

.

4444444
.. .1
2

66

2

22
1

1
6

1+

2

.1 2.

+11

.1 6 1

216

. 6

1

+ 6

.

2
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+ 1
. . 1
. .2
+
3

!

1 .+

2

4444444444
1.
+ 2
6.1

6

1 62

++1.6 + +

61 +6

.

21
1

1

2
(7%

.

4444444

 4

2+

4.

+

+11

.1 6 1

2

.1 2

66

41

1 .1

4

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+ .
.

+
3

!

4444444444
1 6 . 2

6

6

2

22+ 26

6.

2 6

.

4444444
.

.+
+

6 +

2

2
1
216

. 66 1..

2

.1 2

662

.1 2666

+2.

2 1

+ 2

1 .1

4

.
26

6
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
1 6

4444444444
1
1

+

6
2

(7%

+

+6

4444444

+1

.

+

.

2

2

 +
3

!

. 2+

61

1

2
1
4

.2

4 +. 616

662
66

4

2+

.1 2666
.1

2.

+2.

1

2 1

.

.

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444

4444444444
. .+
.

1

2..1 + 6

6 2
+
3

!

.6

..

1
6

4444444
6
62

12.

2

2

. +2

+

1

.+
4

2 +

4.++2

66

.1

6.

.1

.

2.

.

4

+

1

26 1

. 2

12

22

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
(7% +

 44444444
6 +

4444444444
216+6 .

+ .+

!

. 1

. 1 +

+1+ 2 6.

2

.+ ..

+
3

1+

4444444
.
2
+

2
1
12

+ .

6.

.1

+6

26 1

.16
.

6 1
. 2

12

6

12

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+

4444444444
1. 2

+

1 .+6
1

+
3

!

+.+

+2

2

6

.66+ + 6
.

1

4444444
.

2

6

+2
1 1

2

6
4

4+.+2 1
.16
++

1+

6 1

.1 1.

1

116
4

(7%

1

46

+

+

 ..
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
2

4444444444
16 2

. 621
1 6

+

1

+ 6 .

.

1

. 2+

2

+
3

!

4444444

2

+

1
2

162

++

66+

.1 1.

.

1

.1

1

1+

116

. 6

+

2

. .+
4

6
6

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
. +6
1

2

6

1 26

12

+
3

!

4444444444
+ +.

1

2

.

.1 .
.

2 12

1 1 2++
.

1

4444444

+ 6+

2

2
4

(7%

1

2

4+

.

.1

.1

.1 2

. 6

+

1

2.

42 2

1

. .+

2

+

 +.

1 1

.

4

2
+

.+
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
1 ++

4444444444
12 + .

+

+2 6

6
+
3

!

4444444

+. 66 ..

.6

+

2

+

+

2
1
16

.

.1

2

.1 2
.1

.

+.

1 1

.1

.

.

. 1 .

22

2

.1
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
+ 1
.

6

.
+
3

!

4444444444
1.66

6
1

++.

1

2
2 2

. 6

2
2.
(7%

1 6
6

.
+

+

1

4444444

 4

1 +

4 622
.1

11

2

4

1

.

.1 2+

.1

. 1 .

2

2+6 2

.
.

.2
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
2

4444444444
16++

61
.
+
3

!

62

.

.

+ 2 + 66

62

4444444
.
+ 22

2 1

2

2
1

.
+
11

+1 6

.1

.1 2+
.1

.

1

2+6 2

1

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
2

4444444444
16 6
6

4444444

1 2
61
(7%

6

+ 1

6
+

+

 +
3

!

1+ 2 6

2

2

+

1
+

.
.1

.

.
.

+.

+ 2

1

.1 6 ++ .1

+66

1

1
2

.6
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
2 2

4444444444
2 16+
1

162

6 ++

2
+
3

!

2

.

+ . 1 +21

+221

1 .

11

+

.+

4444444
+

26

2

6

.

1

12
.2
.

.1 6 ++ .1

2 1

.1

1 + .1

+66
22

12

1
.6

.
6

.

.

4

.
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
(7%

 44444444
2 22

4444444444
2 + 1 6 .

22

. 2

211
+
3

!

+ 12

2

.

.

+21

6

.6 +.1

2

.

1

4444444

1 1

2

6
4

1 1

41

6 +

2 1

.1

+ 2

.1 1 ++ 1

4

+2

1 + .1

22

.6

6

. .

.

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
44444444
. 6
.

4444444444
++
+ 2

+

+
1

+
3

!

2 1+

1

+1

2

6

1 2 2

2

.

1
+

1 .

+ 2

.1 1 ++ 1

6.

.1 2212

4

(7% .

4444444

1.

1

 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
= 3=
4444444

3
4444444

3
4444444

3
4444444

3
4444444

= 3
4444444

4444444444444
2

2

.
61

1
6+

.

+
1

2
+6

1+
6

6
6.

26

2

1.
6

1.

.

+ 2
..

1
. 1

++
12

++1
. 2

+

1

. 6
. 2

2

11
+

+2
+
1

444444
.2

2
.

2+
6

.+

+
2

6 +

..

444444444444444444
11+
2+6

2
21

.12
2

1

.

.

2
1

+
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444
.
6
..
1
1

1
6

2
122

+
6+
1

12

2
6

+

26

1

2
1

2

++
.
6
212

3
!
2
444444444444444444444444444444444444

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
1
4444444444444444444444444444444444444
1

.

(7% .

.

2
1

 +

+

..2
.

.

6

.

6

>
4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
4444444444444444444
+ 66
. + 1
.2

4444444444444
1+
2

.

2

61 +.

1.+

.1

+

444444444
.

+.

+
6

2

+ 1

.6.6

+
3

!

+

2
+
1
4

6 .

4.2 26

4

+

 

!
444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
4444444444
22

4444444444444
2 .1 6

2
+
3

!

12

26

2 +

.

2++

2
1

..

1

+.
+
+
.

2

+ 1 26

3

+6

3

1+
(7% ..

 (?@A'A B%($- (/% CDAE'*%$ '-@07
%&%/%0C%"

C 0/D%F- %G'(*@D0-

(?@A'A (*'/(*%$ %E*B DH%/ (0$&@)) @0%/
,I /'C%
C 0/D%; 0@H%/-@*I D& !(0-(=D'/0() D& 0H@/D0A%0*() 07@0%%/@07
D)
; D .; (/CB
; EE .2.4.

 

4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
3
44444
44444444
444444444
2 1
6
.

2

.

1 1.2
+

.66

.

1
2

. 1

(7% .

11

 APPENDIX 

DRAFT STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN 
CONSTRUCTION

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
for:
Promontory Facility Landfill
SE Promontory Road
Unincorporated, Box Elder County, Utah
Site Telephone Number:

Operator:

D
RA

FT

Promontory Point Resources, LLC
Steven Prows
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

SWPPP Contact:
Company Name:
Name:
Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

SWPPP Preparation Date:
05 / 02 / 2016
Estimated Project Dates:
Project Start Date: 01 / 02 / 2018
Project Completion Date: 09 / 30 / 2018
i
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Contents

D
RA

FT

SECTION 1: CONTACT INFORMATION/ RESPONSIBLE PARTIES......................................................1 
1.1 
Owner(s), Operator, Contractors ................................................................................................... 1 
1.2 
Storm Water Team ........................................................................................................................ 2 
SECTION 2: SITE EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT, & PLANNING ............................................................... 3 
2.1 
Project/Site Information ................................................................................................................. 3 
2.2 
Nature of Construction Activity ...................................................................................................... 4 
2.3 
Construction Site Estimates .......................................................................................................... 4 
2.4 
Soils, Slopes, Vegetation, and Current Drainage Patterns ............................................................ 4 
2.7 
Site Features and Sensitive Areas to be Protected ....................................................................... 6 
2.8 
Maps ............................................................................................................................................. 7 
SECTION 3: POLLUTION PREVENTION STANDARDS........................................................................7 
3.1 
Potential Sources of Pollution........................................................................................................ 7 
3.2 
Non-Stormwater Discharges ......................................................................................................... 8 
3.3 
Natural Buffers or Equivalent Sediment Controls .......................................................................... 8 
SECTION 4: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS ..........................................................................9 
4.1 
Minimize Disturbed Area and Protect Natural Features and Soil ................................................... 9 
4.2 
Establish Perimeter Controls and Sediment Barriers .................................................................... 9 
4.3 
Retain Sediment On-Site ............................................................................................................... 9 
4.4 
Establish Stabilized Construction Exits ....................................................................................... 10 
4.5 
Protect Slopes ............................................................................................................................. 10 
4.6 
Stockpiled Sediment or Soil......................................................................................................... 11 
4.7 
Minimize Dust .............................................................................................................................. 11 
4.8 
Topsoil......................................................................................................................................... 11 
4.9 
Soil Compaction .......................................................................................................................... 12 
4.10 
High Altitude/Heavy Snows ......................................................................................................... 12 
4.11 
Linear Activities ........................................................................................................................... 13 
4.12 
Chemical Treatment .................................................................................................................... 13 
4.13 
Stabilize Soils .............................................................................................................................. 13 
4.14 
Final Stabilization ........................................................................................................................ 13 
SECTION 5: POLLUTION PREVENTION ...........................................................................................14 
5.1 
Spill Prevention and Response ................................................................................................... 14 
5.2 
Construction and Domestic Waste .............................................................................................. 15 
5.3 
Washing of Applicators and Containers used for Concrete, Paint or Other Materials.................. 15 
5.4 
Establish Proper Building Material Staging Areas ....................................................................... 15 
5.5 
Establish Proper Equipment/Vehicle Fueling and Maintenance Practices................................... 16 
5.6 
Control Equipment/Vehicle Washing ........................................................................................... 16 
5.7 
Pesticides, Herbicides, Insecticides, Fertilizers, and Landscape Materials ................................. 16 
ii
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

D
RA

FT

Other Pollution Prevention Practices ........................................................................................... 17 
5.8 
SECTION 6: INSPECTIONS & CORRECTIVE ACTIONS.....................................................................17 
6.1 
Inspections .................................................................................................................................. 17 
6.2 
Corrective Actions ....................................................................................................................... 20 
6.3 
Delegation of Authority ................................................................................................................ 21 
SECTION 7: TRAINING AND RECORDKEEPING ..............................................................................22 
7.1 
Training ....................................................................................................................................... 22 
7.2 
Recordkeeping ............................................................................................................................ 22 
7.3 
Log of Changes to the SWPPP ................................................................................................... 23 
SECTION 8: WATER QUALTIY .........................................................................................................24 
8.1 
UIC Class 5 Injection Wells ......................................................................................................... 24 
8.2 
Discharge Information ................................................................................................................. 24 
8.3 
Receiving Waters ........................................................................................................................ 25 
8.4 
Impaired Waters .......................................................................................................................... 25 
8.5 
High Water Quality ...................................................................................................................... 26 
8.6 
Dewatering Practices .................................................................................................................. 26 
8.7 
Control Stormwater Flowing onto and through the Project .......................................................... 26 
8.8 
Protect Storm Drain Inlets ........................................................................................................... 27 
SECTION 9: POST-CONSTRUCTION BMPs ......................................................................................27 
SECTION 10: CERTIFICATION .........................................................................................................28 
SWPPP APPENDICES ...............................................................................................................29 
Appendix A – General Location Map
Appendix B – Site Maps
Appendix C – Construction General Permit & MS4 Ordinance
Appendix D – NOI and Acknowledgement Letter from State and MS4
Appendix E – Inspection Reports
Appendix F – Corrective Action Log
Appendix G – SWPPP Amendment Log
Appendix H – Subcontractor Certifications/Agreements
Appendix I – Grading and Stabilization Activities Log
Appendix J – Training Log
Appendix K – Delegation of Authority
Appendix L – Erosivity Calculations
Appendix M – BMP Specifications

iii
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 1: CONTACT INFORMATION/ RESPONSIBLE
PARTIES
1.1

Owner(s), Operator, Contractors

Site Supervisor(s):
TBD

D
RA

Operator(s) & Project Manager(s):
TBD

FT

Owner(s):
Promontory Point Resources, LLC:
Stephen Prows
32 East Exchange Place, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

1
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

This SWPPP was Prepared by:
TetraTech, BAS
Caleb H. Moore
1360 Valley Vista Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
(909) 860-7777
Fax: (909) 860-8017

D
RA

Subcontractor(s):
Company Name:
Name:
Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

FT

SWPPP Contact(s):
TBD Company Name:
Name:
Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

Emergency 24-Hour Contact:
Company or Organization Name:
Name:
Telephone Number:

1.2

Storm Water Team

SWPPP Preparer
Civil Engineer
Caleb H. Moore
(909) 860-7777
cmoore@bas.com
2
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Role or Responsibility:
Position:
Name:
Telephone Number:
Email:
Insert Role or Responsibility:
Insert Position:
Insert Name:
Insert Telephone Number:
Insert Email:

Project/Site Information

D
RA

2.1

FT

SECTION 2: SITE EVALUATION, ASSESSMENT, & PLANNING

Project/Site Name: Promontory Facility Landfill
Project Street/Location: SE Promontory Road
City: Unincorporated
County or Similar Subdivision: Box Elder County

State: Utah

ZIP Code: NA

Latitude/Longitude (Use one of three possible formats, and specify method)
Latitude:
Longitude:
41º 12' 58'' N (degrees, minutes, seconds)
112º 28' 22'' W (degrees, minutes, seconds)
Method for determining latitude/longitude:
USGS topographic map (specify scale:
Other (please specify): Google Earth

)

EPA Web site

GPS

Is the project located in Indian country?
Yes
No
If yes, name of Reservation, or if not part of a Reservation, indicate "not applicable."
Is this project considered a federal facility?

Yes

No

UPDES project or permit tracking number*:
*(This is the unique identifying number assigned to your project by your permitting authority after you have applied
for coverage under the appropriate National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) construction general
permit.)

3
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

2.2

Nature of Construction Activity

Describe the general scope of the work for the project, major phases of construction, etc:
The initial phase of construction of Cell C-1 of the Promontory Point Landfill involves
excavation of 24 acre landfill cell. The cell is to be lined with geosynthetic clay liner and
HDPE geomembrane to protect the groundwater resource. A geotextile cushion layer is
installed and leachate collection gravel is filled over the geotextile to a depth of 12 inches. The
leachate collection system drains to a single point where a pump is used to draw the leachate
into a tanker truck for collection and treatment or recirculation over the limit of refuse. A
geotextile filter is placed prior to protective cover soil. During the construction of the initial
phase, all runoff is contained within the landfill cell and pumped into the site detention basin
for desilting prior to discharge. A diversion channel uphill from the cell will be constructed to
redirect run-on around the landfill and infrastructure. The construction will also include a the
placement of a daily cover soils stockpile and a railroad loading/unloading yard

2.3

Linear

D
RA

FT

What is the function of the construction activity?
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Road Construction
Utility
Other (please specify):
Estimated Project Start Date:
01 / 02 / 2018
Estimated Project Completion Date:
09 / 30 / 2018

Construction Site Estimates

The following are estimates of the construction site.
Total project area:
Construction site area to be disturbed :
Percentage impervious area before construction:
Runoff coefficient before construction:
Percentage impervious area after construction:
Runoff coefficient after construction

2.4

1010+ acres
32.0 acres
100%
88
100 %
94

Soils, Slopes, Vegetation, and Current Drainage Patterns

The onsite site soils consist of silt, sand, gravel, and various combinations of the three.
Outcroppings of limestone, shale and quartzite are also found within the site boundary. The
4
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

hydrologic description of these soils varies and consists of Type A, Type B and Type D. The
boundaries of the various soils have been determined using data from the soil web survey
website and the areas of various soil types were included in the hydrologic calculations.
The northern slopes of the site are moderately steep at 5:1 and towards the south become more
gradual at 6%. Natural drainage patterns across the site consist of sheet flow, shallow
channelized sheet flow, and rills formed from erosion caused by surface runoff. Natural
channelization is not encountered.
Construction of the landfill cell will involve diverting run-on flows into a temporary channel
which flows around the landfill cell. As the landfill expands towards the north, the temporary
diversion will be reconstructed and a permanent channel will be built to convey the flows
around the perimeter of the final landfill footprint. The permanent diversion channel will
convey the flows towards existing pond areas to the north of the Union Pacific rail road. The
existing ponds overflow towards the west and discharge into the northern portion of the Great
Salt Lake.

2.5

D
RA

FT

Vegetation on the site consists of desert shrub. In the upper northern portions of the tributary
area, the vegetation is well developed and becomes sparser towards the south where it is
poorly developed in the project boundary.

Emergency Related Projects

Emergency-Related Project?

2.6

Yes

No

Phase/Sequence of Construction Activity

Phase 1A





Phase 1A involves excavation of 500,000 cubic yards of material over a 20 acre
area. Excavated materials will be stockpiled to the east and a diversion channel will
be constructed to protect the disturbed area from run-on coming from the north. A
total of approximately 32 acres would be disturbed including an entrance facility,
scales, administration building, parking lot, and earthen detention basin.
The initial phase of construction would begin in January 2018 and be complete by
September 2018.
The initial landfill cell would not discharge stormwater. A holding pond will be
constructed at the toe of the northern slope to contain stormwater that collects in the
landfill cell. Silts would be allowed to settle and the pond is to be pumped into the
detention basin after storm events. Exposed disturbed surface areas, including the

5
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

stockpile area, will be protected from erosion using fiber rolls, silt fence, and gravel
bag chevrons. Erosion control mat is to be used in the flowline of the diversion
channels. Rock rip rap will be used in the ultimate diversion channel and any area
where channelized stormwater would encounter erosive velocities.
Disturbed areas which require temporary stabilization are to be protected using
erosion control mattress, or wood mulch.


Phase 1B


Phase 1B involves excavating to expand the initial cell towards the north and west.
The excavation area will be a borrow source for daily cover during refuse
placement operations. The diversion channel would be relocated towards the north
to protect the disturbed area from run-on coming from the north. A total of
approximately 14 acres would be disturbed in Phase 1B.
The excavation and completion of Phase IB would take place over the course of
several years beginning in year 2018.
The second phase of the landfill cell would not discharge stormwater. A holding
pond will be constructed at the toe of the northern slope to contain stormwater that
collects in the landfill cell. Silts would be allowed to settle and the pond is to be
pumped into the detention basin after storm events. As the landfill is filled, the
refuse will be covered with interim cover and drainage conveyances will be directed
towards the detention basin. Exposed disturbed surface areas will be protected from
erosion using fiber rolls, silt fence, and gravel bag chevrons. Erosion control mat is
to be used in the flowline of the diversion channels. Rock rip rap will be used in the
ultimate diversion channel and any area where channelized stormwater would
encounter erosive velocities.
Disturbed areas which require temporary stabilization are to be protected using
erosion control mattress or wood mulch.



D
RA

FT





Additional Future Phases


As the landfill is filled, the refuse will be covered with interim cover and drainage
conveyances will be directed towards the detention basin. Additional Phases of the
landfill cell are expected to tie into the previous phases and expansion will
generally continue in a northwestern direction. The temporary diversion channel
will continue to be reconstructed to protect the cell and disturbed areas that are
subject to runoff will be protected from erosion using the same BMPs. As the
landfill rises vertically, deck berms, benches, and downdrains will be constructed to
direct drainage towards the southeastern detention basin. Finalized slopes will be
stabilized with final cover and protected from erosion using fiber rolls and
hydroseed.

2.7

Site Features and Sensitive Areas to be Protected

6
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

The site is ideally located and does not contain any natural streams, wetlands, historic properties
or endangered species. Native vegetation is sparse and will be replaced by hydroseed once slopes
are finalized. The native soil is not highly erodible and the slopes are moderate to gradual in
steepness. The nearest natural waterbody is the Great Salt Lake. Measures to prevent pollution
leaving the site will be taken and all flows will enter the detention basin before being allowed to
leave the site.

2.8

Maps

Included site maps are found in Appendix A.

SECTION 3: POLLUTION PREVENTION STANDARDS

3.1

D
RA

FT

Pollution prevention BMPs that will be implemented to control pollutants in stormwater
include but are not limited to waste management, material staging and storing areas,
concrete washout, stabilized construction entrance, storm drain inlet protection, detention
basin maintenance, secondary containment, employee training, good housekeeping,
vehicle/equipment maintenance and fueling, clean paved surfaces, spill response, erosion
control mats, silt fence, fiber rolls, gravel bag chevrons, hydroseed, mulch, and fugitive
dust suppression.

Potential Sources of Pollution

Potential sources of sediment to stormwater runoff:
Exterior slopes and disturbed areas outside of the landfill cell have the potential to produce
sediment in stormwater runoff.
Potential pollutants and sources, other than sediment, to stormwater runoff:

Pollutant-Generating
Activity

Industrial Processes
Material Storage

Pollutants or Pollutant
Constituents
(that could be discharged if
exposed to stormwater)

Landfill Gas Condensate and
Leachate
Landfill Gas Condensate and
Leachate

Dust and Particulate
Generated Activities

Dust and Particulate Matter

Significant Spills and Leaks

Landfill Gas Condensate and
Leachate

7
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

Location on Site
(or reference SWPPP site map where
this is shown)

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Soil Erosion

Sediment

Equipment Maintenance

Oil and Grease

Solid Waste Disposal

Wind-Blown Litter

Parking Lot
Equipment and Vehicle
Fueling

Oil and Grease

3.2

Fuel

Non-Stormwater Discharges

Potable water including line flushing.
Uncontaminated air conditioning
condensate.

D
RA

Landscape irrigation.

Comments
When possible pump potable water into a water
truck for reuse in dust suppression instead of
allowing it to discharge.
Keep contaminants clear of air conditioning
condensate discharge lines.
Adjust irrigation to prevent runoff and avoid
over application of fertilizers and pesticides.

FT

Authorized Non-Storm Water Discharges

BMP Description: Non-Stormwater Discharges
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

BMP Description: Spill Prevention, Control, Cleanup
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

3.3

Natural Buffers or Equivalent Sediment Controls

Buffer Compliance Alternatives
Are there any surface waters within 50 feet of your project’s earth disturbances?
8
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

YES

NO

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 4: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS
4.1

Minimize Disturbed Area and Protect Natural Features and
Soil

The site boundary contains more than 1,010+ acres. The initial cell consists of 20 acres of
excavation area. The remaining 12 acres of disturbed area consist of landfill operations and
administrative facilities. The remaining 980+ acre is to remain undisturbed until the time of
further buildout and expansion. The undisturbed area is to be fenced off from unauthorized
access. Topsoil is preserved by diverting and controlling run-on and run-off in conveyance
channels that either discharge into the site detention basin or into existing depression areas with
little chance of erosive velocities.

4.2

Establish Perimeter Controls and Sediment Barriers

D
RA

FT

Silt fence will be installed along the toe of exterior slopes to capture sediments in areas where
flow velocities are at a minimum. Fiber rolls are to be installed at regular spacing and equal
elevations along slopes to allow continuous sheet flow from becoming shallow concentrated flow
in rills and gullies.
BMP Description: Silt Fence
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:
BMP Description: Fiber Roll
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.3

Retain Sediment On-Site

The site detention basin will begin as an earthen structure with a concrete overflow weir to allow
large storm events to pass safely without causing damage to the basin. A perforated standpipe
will be used to drain the basin at a rate which allows sediment particles to fall out of suspension
within the storm water. As the size of the landfill becomes larger, the basin capacity would need
to be expanded and the deposited sediments would need to be removed. In the ultimate condition
the basin would be expanded to meet the goals of the closure requirements and the basin would
9
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

be lined with geomembrane and concrete to allow equipment to remove sediment and maintain
the condition of the basin.

BMP Description: Detention Basin
July 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.4

Establish Stabilized Construction Exits

D
RA

FT

A stabilized construction entrance constructed of wash bars and/or a stone pad will be
constructed and maintained at the point where vehicular or construction traffic enters the paved
roadway. The location of the construction exit may shift depending on traffic and the phase of
construction. It may be necessary to have more than one.

BMP Description: Stabilized Construction Exit
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.5

Protect Slopes

Erosion control blankets such as coconut mat will be used to protect the sloped berm and
flowline of the temporary diversion channels. For permanent slopes, hydroseed would be used to
reestablish native vegetation.
BMP Description: Erosion Control Blankets
July 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:
BMP Description: Hydroseed
December 2018
Installation Schedule:
10
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.6

Stockpiled Sediment or Soil

Surplus material from excavation of the Phase 1A may need to be stockpiled onsite. A diversion
channel will be constructed along the uphill perimeter of the stockpile to allow a drainage path
for run-on to flow around the stockpile. The slopes of the stockpile would be protected from
erosion using fiber rolls and sediment which does become mobilized will be trapped by silt fence
along the toe of slope.

FT

BMP Description: Diversion Channel
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.7

D
RA

BMP Description: Fiber Rolls and Silt Fence
July 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

Minimize Dust

Access roads, haul routes, excavations, and fill areas are likely sources of dust generation. Water
trucks will need to apply water to these working areas at regular intervals to prevent fugitive dust
from blowing from the site.
BMP Description: Dust Suppression
Continuous except for wet weather conditions.
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.8

Topsoil

The existing topsoil will be preserved by minimizing the disturbed footprint and utilizing
diversion channels to control run-on and runoff. During stockpiling activities, the excavated
11
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

material should be selected and placed in separate stockpiles of rocky material to be use for
interim cover and top soil to be used for final cover and vegetative areas.
BMP Description: Diversion Channel
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.9

Soil Compaction

The site areas that are outside of the initial phases of construction will remain undisturbed to
prevent erosion and loss of top soil. Fencing and signage will be installed to prevent
unauthorized access into these areas.

D
RA

FT

BMP Description: Fencing and signage
January, 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.10 High Altitude/Heavy Snows

The high elevation of the site means that snowfall in the winter is a possibility although large
snow event are very rare for this region. Detention basin overflows will be size for the additional
flow that can occur during melt events such as precipitation over snow.
Date Snow is Expected
November, 2018

Date of High Altitude/Heavy Snow
Conditions BMPs to be Installed
Scheduled: September, 2018
Actual:

BMP Description: Detention Basin
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

12
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

Date of First Heavy Snow

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

4.11 Linear Activities
The project is not a linear project and perimeter controls are necessary.

4.12 Chemical Treatment
No treatment chemicals are anticipated to be used during the course of this project.

4.13 Stabilize Soils

Temporary

D
RA

BMP Description: Hydroseed
Permanent
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

Temporary

FT

BMP Description: Mulch
Permanent
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

4.14 Final Stabilization

Final stabilization procedures are anticipated to be placement of final cover material followed by
hydroseed.
BMP Description: Hydroseed
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

13
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 5: POLLUTION PREVENTION
5.1

Spill Prevention and Response

FT

Any discharges in 24 hours equal to or in excess of the reportable quantities listed in 40 CFR
117, 40 CFR 110, and 40 CFR 302 will be reported to the National Response Center and the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) as soon as practical after knowledge of the spill is known to
the permittees. The permittee shall submit within 14 calendar days of knowledge of the release a
written description of: the release (including the type and estimate of the amount of material
released), the date that such release occurred, the circumstances leading to the release, and
measures taken and/or planned to be taken to the Division of Water Quality (DWQ), 288 North
1460 West, P.O. Box 144870, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870. The Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan must be modified within14 calendar days of knowledge of the release to provide
a description of the release, the circumstances leading to the release, and the date of the release.
In addition, the plan must be reviewed to identify measures to prevent the reoccurrence of such
releases and to respond to such releases, and the plan must be modified where appropriate.
Agency

Phone Number

Material

(800) 424-8802
(801)-231-1769
(801) 536-4123

D
RA

National Response Center
Division of Water Quality ( DWQ)
24-Hr Reporting
Utah Department of Health
Emergency Response

(801) 580-6681

Media Released To

Reportable Quantity

Engine oil, fuel, hydraulic &
brake fluid

Land

25 gallons

Paints, solvents, thinners

Land

100 lbs (13 gallons)

Water

Visible Sheen

Air, Land, Water

100 lbs (13 gallons)

Air

1 lb

Engine oil, fuel, hydraulic &
brake fluid
Antifreeze, battery acid, gasoline,
engine degreasers
Refrigerant

14
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

5.2

Construction and Domestic Waste

Solid waste is to be handled in accordance to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act section
D.
BMP Description: Refuse Disposal
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

5.3 Washing of Applicators and Containers used for Concrete,
Paint or Other Materials

Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

5.4

D
RA

FT

Concrete washout can be handled at the working face of the landfill. Prior to development of the
landfill, concrete washout should be performed in a leak proof container.
BMP Description: Concrete Washout
January 2018
Installation Schedule:

Establish Proper Building Material Staging Areas

Hazardous building materials such as paints, solvents, pesticides, fuel, and oil shall be stored in a
manner which minimizes risk of exposure to storm water such as indoors or under cover or in an
areas with secondary containment to prevent spills from spreading across the site.
BMP Description: Material Storage
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

15
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

5.5

Establish Proper Equipment/Vehicle Fueling and
Maintenance Practices

Equipment/vehicle fueling and maintenance shall occur only in designated areas.
BMP Description: Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance and Repair
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

5.6

FT

BMP Description: Vehicle and Equipment Fueling
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

Control Equipment/Vehicle Washing

D
RA

Vehicle and equipment washing shall occur only in designated areas. Wash water containing
detergents shall be collected and disposed.
BMP Description: Vehicle and equipment washing
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

5.7 Pesticides, Herbicides, Insecticides, Fertilizers, and
Landscape Materials
Pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, and fertilizers shall not be stored in a manner which does not
allow contact with stormwater.
BMP Description: Landscaping
September 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:
16
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

5.8

Other Pollution Prevention Practices

After placement of refuse, landfill gas will begin to accumulate due to the anaerobic conditions
within the landfill. Methane gas will require extraction via wells, collectors, laterals, and headers.
BMP Description: Landfill Gas Well Monitoring
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:
SECTION 6: INSPECTIONS & CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

Inspections

FT

6.1

TBD

2.

D
RA

1.
Inspection Personnel: Identify the person(s) who will be responsible for conducting
inspections and describe their qualifications:

Inspection Schedule and Procedures:

Describe the inspection schedules and procedures you have developed for your site (include
frequency of inspections for each BMP or group of BMPs, indicate when you will inspect,
e.g., before/during/and after rain events, spot inspections):
TBD

Describe the general procedures for correcting problems when they are identified. Include
responsible staff and time frames for making corrections:
TBD
Attach a copy of the inspection report you will use for your site.

17
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 D
RA

FT

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

18
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 D
RA

FT

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

19
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Reduction in Inspection Frequency (if applicable)
For the reduction in inspections resulting from stabilization:

For reduction in inspections due to frozen conditions: November through April

6.2

Corrective Actions

D
RA

FT

Corrective Action Log:

20
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

6.3

Delegation of Authority

FT

Duly Authorized Representative(s) or Position(s):
Company or Organization Name:
Name:
Position:
Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone Number:
Fax/Email:

D
RA

Attach a copy of the signed delegation of authority form in Appendix K.

21
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 7: TRAINING AND RECORDKEEPING
7.1

Training

Individual(s) Responsible for Training:

Describe Training Conducted:
 General stormwater and BMP awareness training for staff and subcontractors:

Detailed training for staff and subcontractors with specific stormwater responsibilities:

D
RA

FT



Training Attendee Name

Title of Training

Duration

Date of Training

Additional training documentation should be included in Appendix J.

7.2

Recordkeeping

Records will be retained for a minimum period of at least 3 years after the permit is
terminated.
22
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Date(s) when major grading activities occur:

Date(s) when construction activities temporarily or permanently cease on a portion of the site:

Date(s) when an area is either temporarily or permanently stabilized:

7.3

Log of Changes to the SWPPP

D
RA

FT

Log of changes and updates to the SWPPP

23
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 8: WATER QUALTIY
8.1

UIC Class 5 Injection Wells

French Drain
Commercially Manufactured pre-cast or pre-built subsurface infiltration system
Drywell(s), seepage pit(s), improved sinkhole(s)

Local Requirements:

8.2

D
RA

DWQ contact information:
Name:
Date:
Additional information:

FT

Description of your Class V Injection Well:
No injection wells are anticipated as being used on this project.

Discharge Information

Does your project/site discharge stormwater into a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
Yes
No
(MS4)?
 List the MS4 that receives the discharge from the construction project:

Are there any surface waters that are located within 50 feet of your construction disturbances?
Yes
No
List the water body:

24
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

8.3

Receiving Waters

 Table 1 – Names of Receiving Waters (see http://wq.deq.utah.gov)
Name(s) of the first surface water that receives stormwater directly from your site and/or from
the MS4. (note: multiple rows provided where your site has more than one point of discharge
that flows to different surface waters)
1.The Great Salt Lake

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

8.4

Impaired Waters

D
RA

FT

(see http://wq.deq.utah.gov look in the bottom half of the left hand column)
If you answered yes, then answer the following:
Is this surface
water listed as
Pollutant(s) for which
Has a TMDL
What pollutant(s) are
"impaired"?
there is a TMDL
been
causing
the
completed?
impairment?
1.
Yes
Yes
No
No
2.
Yes
Yes
No
No
3.
Yes
Yes
No
No
4.
Yes
Yes
No
No
5.
Yes
Yes
No
No
6.
Yes
Yes
No
No

25
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

8.5

3.
4.
5.
6.

FT

2.

Table 3 – High Water Quality
(see http://wq.deq.utah.gov look in the bottom half of the left hand column)
Is this surface water
If you answered yes, specify
designated as High Water
which category the surface
Quality?
water is designated as?
(see Appendix C)
1.
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2
Yes
No
Category 1
Category
2

8.6

D
RA




High Water Quality

Dewatering Practices

Dewatering will be needed within the landfill cell. Runoff from the surrounding slopes will be directed to an earthen
basin within the landfill cell and not allowed to comingle with leachate. The water will sit for a period of time to desilt
and then pumped into the detention basin.

BMP Description: Dewatering
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

8.7

Control Stormwater Flowing onto and through the Project

All site run-on will be routed through diversion channels and not allowed to comingle with site runoff.

BMP Description: Diversion Channels
Installation Schedule:
January 2018
26
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

8.8

Protect Storm Drain Inlets

The site drainage will be conveyed using open channel drainage. Windblown litter will need to be removed on a
regular basis from the channels.

BMP Description: Litter
Installation Schedule:

January 2018

Maintenance and
Inspection:

FT

Responsible Staff:

SECTION 9: POST-CONSTRUCTION BMPs

D
RA

Permanent site BMPs will need to be maintained throughout the life of the project. The detention
basin will need to be cleaned free of sediment and resized on an annual basis. Permanent slopes
will need to be protected from erosion by constructing permanent drainage features.
BMP Description: Detention Basin
January 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

BMP Description: Slope Protection
September 2018
Installation Schedule:
Maintenance and
Inspection:
Responsible Staff:

27
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SECTION 10: CERTIFICATION
Professional/SWPPP Author
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person
or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name: Caleb H. Moore

Title: Civil Engineer
Date: March 17, 2017

D
RA

FT

Signature:

28
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Facility Landfill, March 2017

SWPPP APPENDICES
Attach the following documentation to the SWPPP:

Appendix A – General Location Map
Appendix B – Site Maps
Appendix C – Construction General Permit
Appendix D – NOI and Acknowledgement Letter from
EPA/State/MS4
Appendix E – Inspection Reports
Appendix F – Corrective Action Log (or in Part 5.3)

FT

Appendix G – SWPPP Amendment Log (or in Part 6.2)
Appendix H – Subcontractor Certifications/Agreements

D
RA

Appendix I – Grading and Stabilization Activities Log (or in Part
6.1)
Appendix J – Training Log

Appendix K – Delegation of Authority
Appendix L – Additional Information (i.e., Other permits such as
dewatering, stream alteration, wetland; and out of date swppp
documents)
Appendix M – BMP Specifications

29
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix A – General Location Map

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

31

 DEWEYVILLE

BOTHWELL
THATCHER

PENROSE
HONEYVILLE
PROMONTORY

BEAR
RIVER CITY

GOLDEN SPIKE NAT'L
HISTORIC SITE

BRIGHAM
CITY
NORTH BAY

PERRY
SOUTH BAY
GREAT
WILLARD

SALT

D
RA

4/4/2016 9:52 AM

LAKE

P:\PROM PT LLC\PROM PT LF\MASTER\DOCS\REPORTS\INDUSTRIAL SWPPP\VICINITY MAP.DWG

WILLARD BAY

BEAR RIVER
BAY

INDIAN COVE

PROJECT SITE

FT

ROZEL BAY

PROMONTORY
POINT

PLEASANT
VIEW
PLAIN CITY
HARRISVILLE
RAILROAD
CAUSEWAY

OGDEN
WEST HAVEN

SOUTH OGDEN

HOOPER

CLINTON

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

VICINITY MAP
APPENDIX A

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix B – Site Maps

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

32

  

 

   

 

1000 2000  DIVERSION I I I
CHANNEL
DETENTIO  
kk 
BASIN DISC ARGE

7?92? 
I f/A-m I 0  I . EXISTING 
-   A 

I


I.
)4

0

  
  
  

  

 

LEGEND

PROPERTY LINE
10 EXISTING CONTOUR
1O PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

DRAINAGE PATTERN

 

 

 

 

 

 


THE GREAT 

SALT LAKE APPENDIXB

DRAFT

 

 

 

 

NT, LLC
1% TETRA TECH BAS SITE MAP
BY DLL FILE Site Map.dwg

 

 

 

 

I DrIve, Diamond Bar, CA 9 765 DRAWN By; I 


 

sta
909 860.7777 FAX 90936030 7

 

 

 

 

E: AS SHOWN
FIGURE 1

 

 

 

 

 



  

 

 ?3


?3 
I II  

0 1000 2000

 

 


Wig

 
  
 

:r 



II


I
Ur.

I

2000'

  
  

800ONSTO 


EQUIPME  
STORAGEARE 

  
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
 

DIVERSION  
 
I EROSION
CONTROL
BLANKET

DETENTION
3 BASIN

 

 

EXISTING
RAILROAD -

  
  

 

LEGEND

 

 

 

 

PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING CONTOUR
A 10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

  

A A DRAINAGE PATTERN

 

 

PT PT MAP.DWG 3/16/2017 9:14 AM

DRAFT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AP IX 
PROMONTORY POINT, LLC
11: TETRA TECH BAS SITE MAP
DESIGNE . FILE Site Map.dwg
I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765 DRAWN BY: PV ANP DATE: 4-2016 SCALE: AS SHOWN
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80I7
I 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix C – Construction General Permit

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

33

 FILE COPY

STATE OF UTAH
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES)
General Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities
UPDES Permit No. 

This Permit is issued in compliance with the provisions of the Utah Water Quality Act, Title 19,
Chapter 5, Utah Code Annotated 2004, as amended (the and the federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 1251 et. seq., as amended by 
4), and the rules and Regulations made pursuant to -

a 1n

   
 
  
   
 
 
 
  
 
 

   

mination System (UPDES) general

permit, to discharge pollutants in accordance ent limitations and conditions set forth

herein. Permit coverage is required from the
Appendix A) until ??nal stabilization?

This permit becomes effective 21-

I harge expire at midnight on June 30, 2019.

Signed thy/day of June, 2014

    

 

alter . 

Director

>15?

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

  
   
   
 
 
  
  

Table of Contents

HOW TO OBTAIN PERMIT COVERAGE UNDER THE UTAH CGP .. 1
1.1. ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS REQUIRED OF ALL PROJECTS. .. 1
1.2. ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS THAT APPLY DEPENDING ON TYPE OF

PROJECT .. 3
1.3. TYPES OF DISCHARGES AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PERMIT .. 4
1.4. SUBMITTING YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT (N 01) AND PERMIT FEE. .. 5
1.5. REQUIREMENT TO POST A NOTICE OF YOUR PERMIT COVERAGE .. 8
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL DISCHARGES FROM
CONSTRUCTION SITES (including support activities). .. 9
2.1. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. .. 9
2.2. STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS .. 19
2.3. POLLUTION PREVENTION REQUIREMENTS. .. 23
WATER EFFLUEN LIMITATIONS .. 29
3.1. GENERAL EFFLUENT LIMITATION TO MEET APPLICABLE WATER

QUALITY STANDARDS. .. 29
3.2. DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS FOR IMPA I WATERS .. 29

3.3. DISCHARGES TO WATERS IDENTIFI - CATEGORY 1 or2.  30

INSPECTIONS. .. 3 1
4.1. SITE INSPECTIONS. .. 31
4.2. INSPECTIONS BY DWQ OR MS4 SDICTION. .. 35
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS .. 37
5.1. DE I. 37
5.2. REQUIREMENTS FORT 37
5.3. CORRECTIVE ACTIO 1 37
5.4. CORRECTIVE ACTIO JP 37
STAFF TRAINING mu: 7  . 39
STORM WATERPO 4 a 
7.1. GENERAL RE 1' - TS. .. 40
7.2. CONTEN .. 40
7.3. AVAILAB TY OF YOUR .. 47
7.4. REQUIRED MODIFICATIONS. .. 48
HOW To TERMINATE COVERAGE. .. 50
8.1. MINIMUM INFORMATION REQUIRED IN NOT. .. 50
8.2. CONDITIONS FOR TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE. 51
8.3. FINAL INSPECTION ASSOCIATED WITH TERMINATION .. 52
8.4. HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR NOT. .. 52
8.5. DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING NOTS. .. 52
8.6. EFFECTIVE DATE OF TERMINATION OF COVERAGE. .. 52

Appendix A De?nitions and Acronyms

Appendix Small Construction Waivers and Instructions

Appendix List with Information onUtah?s Waters

Appendix Buffer Guidance

Appendix List of MS4S with Municipal Storm Water Permits

Appendix 2 Year, 24 Hour Storm Frequencies in Utah and Average Annual Rainfall in Utah
Appendix Standard Permit Conditions

Appendix Notice of Intent Form (NOI)

Appendix I. Notice of Termination (NOT)

 General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Visual Monitoring Form

Appendix Erosivity Waiver Form

Appendix Example Self-Inspection Form

Appendix Notice for New Owner/General Contractor Operations


a
.

9%

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

1. HOW TO OBTAIN PERMIT COVERAGE UNDER THE UTAH CGP.
To be covered under this permit, you must meet the eligibility conditions and follow the
requirements for applying for permit coverage in this Part.

Discharges referred to in this permit are discharges that are typical to construction activity,
as described in the following section, that outfall to a surface water in the State of Utah.
Typical discharges associated with construction activity present a risk of contaminants for
soil, sediment, silt, including soil nutrients (phosphorus and possibly nitrogen), and
including chemical pollutants (chemicals in the construction process, and/0r
oils/grease/fuels). The focus of the EPA and DWQ for the most part is risk of pollution to
surface waters.

Construction activity that presents risks of fuel and other normal quantities and types of
construction chemicals present a risk of pollution of surface and groundwaters.

Construction activity that presents risks of quantities and types of chemicals that are not
normal to typical construction activity may need to pursue permit coverage under an
individual UPDES permit.

If storm water is contained on the site (coupled w' a rat 1 containment plan with
calculations to back it up) no permit is necessa ec th will be no discharge from
the site, excluding those sites that present a risk undwater as said above.

1.1. ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS REQU PROJECTS.
Only those parties and projects that -- a all the lowing eligibility conditions may be
covered under this permit:

 
  
    

. . n:nnm.? 
1.1.1. Parties that must s17 - the parties bhuWu bcluw L11 re 1 ivolVeu with

construction acti tion project.

  
 
 

a. Owner: The pa ., wns/leases the land on which the construction activities
occur and has ultim control over the project and the destiny of a project. The
owner has control over construction plans and specifications, including the
ability to make modi?cations at the highest level, to those plans and
speci?cations.

b. Operator: The party (usually the general contractor) that has day-to-day
operational control of those activities at a project that are necessary to ensure
compliance with the permit conditions they are authorized to direct
workers at a site to carry out activities required by the permit).

Note: In the case of land development there may be sub-projects (such as construction of a house
in a residential development) associated with the main project. In the case that the parcel of land
for the subordinate project is sold to another owner, it must be covered under a separate permit
and cannot be covered under the same permit for the development. If the developer is the owner
of the development and owner of houses being built in the development (this would be for a
house(s) built for speculation unless the prospective owner of the house has not secured
ownership yet), the house building may continue to be covered under the original development
permit provided the for the main project covers the details concerning the activities of
the subardinate project.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Note: Only one N01 permit application can provide coverage for one area under one owner and
one operator. If a development gets to the point where lots are sold and another party(ies) takes
over control and ownership on sub-project(s) in the development, a new permit must cover the
area for the new owner. The developer ?5 original permit can no longer cover that area and the
original owner/developer must submit a partial NOT for the area that is sold.

c. Operators must provide information, coordination, and/or contract
obligations so that all parties involved in the project perform by (see
Part 7.) and permit requirements.

1.1.2. The Project:

a. A project covered by this permit will disturb 1 or more acres of land, or will
disturb less than 1 acre of land but be part of a common plan of development or
sale that will ultimately disturb or more acres of land; or

b. A project?s discharges have been designated by the Executive Secretary as
needing a permit under UAC or UAC 

1.1.3. A project is located within the state of tah, except for Indian Country (Storm
water permits for Indian Country within the State must be acquired through EPA
Region except for facilities on the Navajo Reservation or on the Goshute
Reservation which must acquire storm water permits through EPA Region 

1.1.4. Discharges from a project area cannot;

a. already have coverage under the UPDES CGP or an individual storm water
permit for construction activity; or

Note: There can be another UPDES wastewater permit for wastewater generated at the site in a
discharge separate ??om the storm water discharge, and/or other industrial storm water permit
coverage for industrial storm water discharged at the site. There cannot be double coverage
under this CGP for the same area for construction activity.

b. be in the process of having coverage under a different UPDES permit for a
storm water (from construction activities) discharge denied, terminated, or


1.1.5. Endangered Species Act (ESA): This permit does not diminish from or alter in any
way a permittees responsibility under the ESA. It is the permittees responsibility to
comply with the BSA as it pertains to your project?s construction activities. There
are no requirements in this permit concerning the ESA.

 

1 Parts l.l.4.a. and l.l.4.b. do not include sites currently covered under UTR100000 or UTR300000, which
are in the process of obtaining coverage under this permit, and sites covered under this permit which are
transferring coverage to a different operator.

2 Notwithstanding a project being made ineligible for coverage under this permit because it falls under the
description of Parts l.l.4.a or l.l.4.b, above, DWQ may waive the applicable requirement after speci?c
review if it determines that coverage under this permit is appropriate.

2

1.2.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

1.1.6. National Historic Preservation Act WHPA):

The permit does not diminish from or alter in any way a permittees
responsibility under the NHPA. It is the permittees responsibility to comply
with the NHPA as it pertains to your proj ect?s construction activities. There
are no requirements in this permit concerning the NHPA.

ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS THAT APPLY DEPENDING ON TYPE OF
PROJECT. The following conditions (Parts 1.2.1 through 1.2.4), if applicable, must also
be satis?ed in order to obtain coverage under this permit.

1.2.1.

1.2.2.

Eligibility for Emergency-Related Construction Activities. If you are conducting
earth-disturbing activities in response to a public emergency natural disaster,
widespread disruption in essential public services), and the related work requires
immediate authorization to avoid imminent endangerment to human health, public
safety, or the environment, or to reestablish essential public services, your
requirements are:

a. If the emergency related activity is accomplis ed within 30-days you are waived
from the normal requirements to submit an I and prepare a but you
must submit a report to DWQ within 45-

   
 

i. the nature of the emergency wo er

ii. a description of earth distu

 
 
    

ters of the US, and what was done (if
during the emergency work, and

the proximity of th

 

discharge on the 10n that a complete and accurate N01 is submitted within
30 calendar days after commencing earth-disturbing activities establishing that
you are eligible under this permit. You are also required to provide
documentation in your to substantiate the occurrence of the public
emergency (see 7.2.3.).



Water Quality Standards Eligibility for New Sources. If you are a ?new source?
(as de?ned in Appendix A), you are not eligible for coverage under this permit for
discharges that have the reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an excursion
above any applicable water quality standard. Where such a determination is made,
DWQ may notify you that an individual permit application is necessary in
accordance with Part 1.4.5. However, your coverage under this permit will be
acceptable if you have included appropriate controls and implementation procedures
designed to bring your discharge into compliance with water quality standards. In
the absence of information demonstrating otherwise, DWQ expects that compliance
with the storm water control requirements of this permit, including the requirements
applicable to such discharges in Part 3 .2, will result in discharges that will not cause,
have the reasonable potential to cause, or contribute to an excursion above any
applicable water quality standard.

1.2.3.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Discharging to Waters with High Water Quality Eligibility for New Sources.
If you are a ?new source? (as de?ned in Appendix A), you are eligible to discharge
to a Category 1 water if your discharge is temporary and limited and where best
management practices will be employed to minimize pollution effects, to a Category
2 water only if your discharge will not lower the water quality of the applicable
water. In the absence of information demonstrating otherwise, DWQ expects that
compliance with the storm water control requirements of this permit, including the
requirements applicable to such discharges in Part 3.3.2, will result in discharges
that will not lower the water quality of the applicable water. Please refer to
Appendix or look up your receiving waters for water quality information at


Note: Your project will be considered to discharge to a Category 1 or 2 water the ?rst surface
water to which you discharge is identi?ed by the state as a Category 1 or 2 water. For discharges
that enter a storm sewer system prior to discharge, the ?rst surface water to which you discharge
is the water body that receives the storm water discharge from the storm sewer system.

1.2.4.

Use of Cationic Treatment Chemicals. If you plan to use cationic treatment
chemicals (as de?ned in Appendix A), you are ineligible for coverage under this
permit, unless you notify DWQ in advance and DWQ authorizes coverage under this
permit (in writing) after you have included appropriate controls and implementation
procedures designed to ensure that your use of cationic treatment chemicals will not
lead to an impairment of the natural life cycle of any aquatic organism 

1.3. TYPES OF DISCHARGES AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PERMIT.
The following is a list of discharges that are allowed under this permit provided that
appropriate storm water controls are designed, installed, and maintained:

1.3.1.

1.3.2.

1.3.3.

Storm water discharges, including stOrm water runoff, snowmelt runoff, and
surface runoff and drainage, associated with construction activity under UAC R317-
8-3 or UAC 

Storm water discharges designated by DWQ as needing a permit under UAC
or UAC 

Storm water discharges from construction support activities concrete or
asphalt batch plants, equipment staging yards, material storage areas, excavated

material disposal areas, borrow areas) provided:

a. The support activity is directly related to the construction site required to have
permit coverage for storm water discharges;

b. The support activity does not serve multiple unrelated construction projects;

c. The support activity does not continue to operate beyond the completion of the
construction activity at the project it supports; and

d. Storm water controls are implemented in accordance with Part 2 and, if
applicable, Part 3, for discharges from the support activity areas.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

1.3.4. The following non-storm water discharges from your construction activity are
allowed under this permit, provided that you comply with all applicable
requirements for these discharges in Part 2:

a.

b.



1.3.5.

Discharges from emergency ?re-?ghting activities;
Fire hydrant ?ushings;
Properly managed landscape irrigation;

Water used to wash vehicles and equipment, provided that there is no discharge
of soaps, solvents, or detergents used for such purposes;

Water used to control dust;
Potable water including uncontaminated water line ?ushings;

Routine external building washdown that does not use detergents, or that have
received chemicals to alter pH;

 
   
  
  

Pavement wash waters provided spills
have not occurred (unless all spill
detergents (including Biodegradable
are not used. You are prohibite om d1
into any surface water, storm dr

@t ing
111? i 

ean oils and Biodegradable detergents)
ing pavement wash waters directly

    
   

Uncontaminated air 

   
 

Uncontaminate .

or spring wa

Foundation 0 ains where ?ows are not contaminated with process
materials such as ents, contaminated ground water, or sediment from

construction activity; and

v.4, .

 

Discharges of storm water listed above in Parts 1.3.1, 1.3.2, and 1.3.3, or authorized

non-storm water discharges in Part 1.3.4 above, commingled with a discharge
authorized by a different UPDES permit and/or a discharge that does not require
UPDES permit authorization.

a.

Construction dewatering must be permitted under UTG070000 (Construction
Dewatering and Hydrostatic Test Permit), and the MS4 (of jurisdiction) noti?ed
of the discharge. It does not need to be permitted under UTG070000 if the
construction dewatering does not leave the site (it is percolated into the ground
at some place on the project site),

1.4. SUBMITTING YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT (N OI) AND PERMIT FEE.
Except for permittees with existing permit coverage (permittees with existing coverage
from a CGP that was issued earlier and that has now expired just prior to the issuance of

5

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

this permit, who are automatically covered under this permit see 1.4.3.), to be covered under
this permit, you must submit to DWQ a complete and accurate N01 and the permit fee prior
to commencing construction activity. The permit fee is a yearly fee. To remain covered
under the permit the permit fee must be submitted again once every year on the yearly
anniversary of the submission date of the N01 along with a permit fee until the project is
completed.

The N01 certi?es to DWQ that you are eligible for coverage according to Part 1.1 and 1.2,
and provides information about your construction operation and discharge.

There is one exception to the requirement. It is for an emergency-related project. For this
type of project, the N01 must be submitted within 30 calendar days after the
commencement of earth disturbing activities (see Part 1.2.1).

In every case a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan consistent with Part 7
must be completed prior to submitting your N01 for coverage under this permit. Failure
to develop a and or have a suf?cient on site can result in ?nes and or work
stoppages.

All NOI applications and project storm water compliance plans must be coordinated with
storm water regulated MS4s (municipalities with storm water jurisdiction that are regulated
with a municipal storm water permit, see the list of regulated MS4s in Appendix E). MS4s
that are regulated under a municipal storm water permit are required to oversee construction
activity on disturbances over an acre (or less than an acre if part of a common plan of
development that is over an acre) within their jurisdiction. Utah DWQ directly reviews and
inspects permittees in all other areas of Utah (except ?Indian country?).

1.4.1. How to Submit Your N01, 01s must be entered on electronic N01 and
storm water system. This can be done on If
you do not have access to the internet or are having continual problems with the use
of the N01 (CGP permit application) system, contact the DWQ Of?ce at 801-536-
4300, and submit a hard copy of the N01 form which can be found on the DWQ
construction storm water web site
-- see footnote 3
next page). DWQ advises that at some point you create an account for the on-line
storm water permit data base so that you can track your permit and have the options
to renew and/or terminate your permit (actions that should be done on-line).

1.4.2. Start and End of Permit Coverage and Deadlines. Except for projects initiated
for emergency situations (for which either the N01 requirement is waived or the
N01 must be submitted within 30-days after the commencement of soil disturbing
activities, see paragraph 1.2.1), the construction storm water permit must be
obtained before soil disturbing activities can begin on a construction site. This
permit will of?cially cover construction activity on a project site immediately after
the N01 has been successfully entered into the storm water data base,"3 and the

 

3 All storm water NOIs are electronically entered into the SW data base. The vast majority are entered
electronically by permittees in the on?line application process. For cases where a perrnittee is not able to
electronically enter an NOI the perrnittee must submitted a paper form of the N01 to DWQ where it will be
entered electronically by DWQ staff.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

permit fee is paid. Coverage will remain active contingent on all of the following
conditions:

a. The permittee purposely terminates the permit:

i. a notice of termination (NOT) is submitted electronically (preferably) or in
paper form to DWQ.

ii. where the permitted site is within a regulated MS4 jurisdiction (see
Appendix E) the permittee must contact the local MS4 to inform that the
project is completed and request a ?nal inspection,

Note: Termination of the project is not complete without approval through a?nal inspection.

1.4.3.

1.4.4.

b. the yearly permit fee is kept current and renewed year by year for the period of
construction activity,

0. when this general permit expires it is assumed at this point that
coverages will automatically transfer to a su eding permit, but if not the
permittee will have to apply for continued erage under a new or reissued
replacement permit,

   
  
  

oked for the project site for
ee will be noti?ed in writing, or

d. coverage under the CGP is rescinde

administrative reasons for whi .: the pe
e. in the case, if or when all orm arges for the site are permitted under

DES permit. For which case this permit is
it coverage begins.



  
  

 

ater permit, and which projects had active and
TR3 00000 at the time of expiration of that general

legitimate coverage un:
permit, or that received coverage before this permit was issued. Existing projects
are automatically ?covered? under this permit. The same permit tracking number
given under UPDES general storm water permit UTR3 00000 will continue to
identify permit coverage for an existing project under this permit. Existing projects
have 6 months from the issuance date of this permit to update site storm water
controls and the site to meet requirements in this permit.

Continuation of Coverage for ?Existing Permits? After this Permit Expires. If
this permit is not reissued or replaced by the expiration date of the general permit, it
will be administratively extended by the Director and remain in force and effect until
issuance of a comparable CGP replacement. Permit coverage will continue under
this permit until the earliest of:

a. authorization of, and an application process, is provided for coverage under a
reissued or replacement version of this permit; or

b. the permittee?s submittal of a Notice of Termination; or

1.5.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

c. the issuance of an individual permit or denial of coverage (see part 1.4.5 below)
for the project?s discharges; or

d. A ?nal permit decision by DWQ not to reissue a general permit, at which time
DWQ will identify a reasonable time period for covered dischargers to seek
coverage under an alternative general permit or an individual permit. Coverage
under this permit will terminate at the end of this time period.

DWQ reserves the right to modify or revoke and reissue this permit under UAC3 17-8-
5.6, in which case you will be noti?ed of any relevant changes or procedures to which
you may be subject.

1.4.5. Procedures for Denial of Coverage. Following your submittal of a complete and
accurate NOI, you may be noti?ed in writing by DWQ that you are not covered, and
that you must either apply for and/or obtain coverage under an individual UPDES
permit or an alternate general UPDES permit. This noti?cation will include a brief
statement of the reasons for this decision and will provide application information.
Any interested person may request that DWQ consider requiring an individual
permit under this paragraph.

If you are already a permittee with coverage under this permit, the notice will set a
deadline to ?le the permit application, and will include a statement that on the
effective date of the individual UPDES permit or alternate general UPDES permit,
as it applies to you, coverage under this general permit will terminate. DWQ may
grant additional time to submit the application if requested. If you are covered under
this permit and fail to submit an individual UPDES permit application or an N01 for
an alternate general UPDES permit as required by DWQ, then the applicability of
this permit to you is terminated at the end of the day speci?ed by DWQ as the
deadline for application submittal. DWQ may take appropriate enforcement action
for any unpermitted discharge. If you submit a timely permit application, then when
an individual UPDES permit is issued to you or you are provided with coverage
under an alternate general UPDES permit, your coverage under this permit is
terminated on the effective date of the individual permit or date of coverage under
the alternate general permit.

REQUIREMENT TO POST A NOTICE OF YOUR PERMIT COVERAGE. You
must post a sign or other notice conspicuously at a safe, publicly accessible location in close
proximity to the project site. At a minimum, the notice must include the UPDES Permit
tracking number and an operator contact name (or designee) and phone number and/or
email address for obtaining additional UPDES permit, and/or project information.
The notice must be located so that it is visible from a public access point that is nearest to
the active part of the construction site, and it must use a font large enough to be readily
viewed from a public right-of-way. The posted contact number must have a person
available for response during business hours. An inquiry made to the posted email address
must receive a response within 24-hours week days.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

2. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL DISCHARGES FROM
CONSTRUCTION SITES (including support activities).

Note: If your project is an ?existing project? (see Part 1.4.3) or if you are a ?new
owner/operator of an existing project? (see Part 1.4.3), and it is infeasible for you to comply with
a specific requirement in this Part because (I) the requirement was not part of the permit you
were previously covered under i. the 2003 or 2008 CGP), you are required to document this
fact in your and are waived ?om complying with that requirement. his flexibility
applies only to the requirements in Parts 2. I, and 2.3.3 through 2.3.5 (except for Parts 2. 3.3. a,
2.3. 3. b. ii, 2. 3. 3.c. 1 and 2. 3. 3d). This only applies to those portions of your site that have
already commenced earth-disturbing activities or where storm water controls implemented in
compliance with the previous permit have already been installed.

This section includes the following types of requirements:
- Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements (Part 2.1)

- Stabilization Requirements (Part 2.2)
- Pollution Prevention Requirements (Part 2.3)

 
   
  
  
  
  
   

NTS.
maintained to minimize the

2.1. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REQU
Erosion and sediment controls must be designed, 
discharge of pollutants from earth-disturbing a

2.1.1. General Requirements Applicab

ired minimize the amount of disturbed
activities.

a. Area of Disturbance. .
and exposed soil duri 

b. Design Requir -- 7- . 

portions or items required that makes it to where many if not all
must include a P.E. in its lopment. It is not required for a PE. to stamp the entire
because Operators must have the ?exibility to modijy a There may be facilities
in a that need to be stamped and would require a review and to be re-stamped by a P.E.
again if modi?cations occur. For the most part should be designed so that operators
have the flexibility to make modi?cations and updates in the field as is necessary so that
improvements can be made for the protection of disturbed soils and the quality of storm water
runo? plans prove to be ine?ective, or if the conditions at the site turn out to be
di?erent than expected. A P. E. knows what is not safe without a stamp.

Note: Although many aspectsp a do not require a P.E., there are significant

i. Storm water controls must be installed to handle what is estimated as
normally expected for the area including seasonal considerations.
Considerations include storm water run-0n and run-off, ?ow from
impervious surfaces, slopes, in?ltration potential, and site drainage features.

ii. For temporary/permanent sediment basins and channelized ?ows design
must consider the following factors for storm water controls.

1) expected frequency, intensity, and duration of precipitation;

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

2) peak ?owrates and total storm water volume to minimize 
channel and streambank erosion in the immediate vicinity of the
discharge points; and

3) the range of soil particle sizes expected to be present on the site.

The permittee must preserve naturally vegetated areas where possible
and if feasible use these areas to maximize in?ltration and to reduce
pollutant discharges. The use of velocity dissipation devices may be
necessary to prevent erosion.

0. Installation Requirements.

i. Unless infeasible storm water controls must be installed before
commencing each phase of earth-disturbance buffers or equivalent
sediment controls, perimeter controls, exit point controls, storm drain inlet
protection) that control discharges from the initial site clearing, grading, and
excavating.

Note: Where it is infeasible to install storm water controls prior to the beginning of earth
disturbing activities such controls must be installed immediately following the initial earth
disturbance.

ii. All storm water controls must be installed in accordance with good
engineering and construction practices and manufacturer?s
speci?cations including applicable design speci?cations.

Note: Design speci?cations may be found in manufacturer speci?cations and/or in applicable
erosion and sediment control manuals or ordinances. Any departures from such speci?cations
must re?ect good engineering practice, good construction practices and must be explained in
your 

(1. Maintenance Requirements.

i. All erosion and sediment controls required in this Part must remain in
effective operating condition during permit coverage and be protected from
activities that would reduce their effectiveness.

ii. All erosion and sediment controls must be inspected in accordance with the
applicable requirements in Part 4.1, For problems discovered during
inspections replacement, repairs, or maintenance must be done immediately
following the inspection or in a timely manner as identi?ed in the 
The permittee must maintain all preserved vegetation, erosion and sediment
control measures and other protective measures identi?ed in the in
effective operating condition for all precipitation events, or before if
required by DWQ or M84 oversight inspectors. . If maintenance prior to the
next anticipated storm event is impracticable, maintenance must be
scheduled and accomplished as soon as practicable.

Maintenance needs identi?ed by means other than inspections shall be
accomplished before the next anticipated storm event, or as necessary to

10

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

maintain the continued effectiveness of storm water controls. A description
of procedures to ensure the timely maintenance of these measures shall be
identi?ed in the 

2.1.2. Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements Applicable to All Sites.

a. Natural Buffers or Equivalent Sediment Controls. (These requirements only
apply when a surface water is located within 50 feet of your project?s earth
disturbances, and in the case of intermittent waters, only to surface waters that
have visible water ?owing or that typically ?ow continuously more than two
months out of the year).

Note: Areas that you do not own or that are otherwise outside your operational control may be
considered areas of undisturbed natural bu?er for purposes of compliance with this part.

You must ensure that any discharges to surface waters through the area between
the disturbed portions of the property and an urface waters located within 50
feet of your site are treated by an area of turbed natural buffer and/or
additional erosion and sediment contro to achieve a reduction in
sediment load equivalent to that ach'
Appendix (Buffer Guidance) for i
this requirement, and to Part 2. 2.a.v.

  
     
  
  

tion to assist you in complying with
xceptions to this requirement.

i. Compliance Alterna 'ves. ca omply with this requirement in one of
the following way 

  
  
  

1) Provide .

  

Note: If your earth disturban 5 0 feet or further ?om a surface water, then you
have complied with this alternati i 

2) Provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer that is less than 50
feet that is supplemented by additional erosion and sediment controls,
which in combination achieves the sediment load reduction equivalent
to a 50-foot undisturbed natural buffer (see Appendix or

3) If it is infeasible to provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer
of any size, you must implement erosion and sediment controls that
achieve the sediment load reduction equivalent to a 50-foot undisturbed
natural buffer (see Appendix D).

Note: For the compliance alternatives in Parts 2. 1.2a. i. I) and i. 2), you are not required
to enhance the quality of the vegetation that already exists in the buffer, or provide vegetation if
none exists (cg, arid and semi-arid areas). You only need to retain and protect ?'om disturbance
the natural bu?er that existed prior to the commencement of construction. Any preexisting
structures or impervious surfaces are allowed in the natural bu?er provided you retain and
protect ?om disturbance the natural bu?er area outside the preexisting disturbance. Similarly,
for alternatives 2. 1.you are required to implement and maintain sediment
controls that achieve the sediment load reduction equivalent to the undisturbed natural bu?er

ll

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

that existed on the site prior to the commencement of construction. In determining equivalent
sediment load reductions, you may consider naturally non-vegetated areas and prior
disturbances. See Appendix for a discussion of how to determine equivalent reductions.

ii.



iv.

You must document the compliance alternative you have selected in your
and comply with the applicable additional requirements described
in Parts 2.1.2.a.ii. below.

The compliance alternative selected above must be maintained throughout
the duration of permit coverage, unless you select a different compliance
alternative during your period of permit coverage, in which case you must
modify your to re?ect this change.

Additional Requirements for the Compliance Alternatives in Parts
2.1.2.a.i.1) and If you choose either of the compliance
alternatives in Parts 2.1.2.a.i. 1) or 2.1.2.a.i.2) above, throughout your period
of coverage under this permit, you must comply with the following
additional requirements:

1) Where there is a concentrated storm water discharge leaving the site?s
disturbed area and crossing the natural buffer area (whether the buffer
area is a full 50 feet or less than 50 feet with additional
BMPs (2.1 the concentrated ?ow must have treatment or BMPS
to minimize sediment transport, found in the area generating the ?ow
and not just as it crosses the buffer area. Additionally, velocity
dissipation devices must be used where erosion is caused by the ?ow as
it crosses the buffer area;

2) Document in your the natural buffer width retained on the

property, and show the buffer boundary on your site plan; and;

3) Delineate, and clearly mark off, with ?ags, tape, or other similar

marking device all natural buffer areas.

Additional Requirements for the Compliance Alternatives in Parts
2.1.2.a.i.2) and For compliance alternatives in Parts 2.1.2.a.i.2)
and you must document in your the erosion and
sediment control(s) you will use to achieve an equivalent sediment reduction,
and any information you relied upon to demonstrate the equivalency.

Additional Requirement for the Compliance Alternative in Part
For compliance alternative in Part you must also
include in your a description of why it is infeasible for you to
provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer of any size.

Exceptions.
1) If there is no discharge of storm water to surface waters through the area

between your site and any surface waters located within 50 feet of your
site, you are not required to comply with the requirements in this Part.

12

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

This includes situations where you have implemented control measures
such as a berm or other barrier that will prevent such discharges.

2) Where no natural buffer exists due to preexisting development
disturbances structures, impervious surfaces) that occurred prior to
the initiation of planning for the current development of the site, you are
not required to comply with the requirements in this Part, unless you
will remove portions of the preexisting development.

Where some natural buffer exists but portions of the area within 50 feet
of the surface water are occupied by preexisting development
disturbances, you are required to comply with the requirements in this
Part. For the purposes of calculating the sediment load reduction for
either Part 2.1.2.a.i.2) or 2.1.2.a.i.3) above, you are not expected to
compensate for the reduction in buffer function from the area covered by
these preexisting disturbances. See Appendix for further information
about compliance alternatives in Part 2.1.2.a.i.2) or 2.1.2.a.i.3) above.

  
   
  

ny portion of these preexisting
deducted from the area treated as

If during your project, you will distur
disturbances, the area disturbed wi
natural buffer.

5)

3) For ?linear construction pro see Ap endix A for a de?nition), you
are not required to co 1y wit requirements in this Part if site
constraints limite f- prevent you from meeting any of
the compliance alternati 2.1.2.a.i, provided that, to the extent

bances within 50 feet of the surface water

   
  
    
  

4) For ?small residential lot? construction a lot being developed for
residential purposes that will disturb less than 1 acre of land, but is part
of a common plan of development or sale that will ultimately disturb
greater than or equal to 1 acre), you have the option of complying with
the requirements in Appendix D, Part D23.

5) The following disturbances within 50 feet of a surface water are exempt
from the requirements in this Part:

0 Construction approved under a CWA Section 404 permit; or
0 Construction of a water-dependent structure or water access area
pier, boat ramp, trail).

You must document in your if any of the above disturbances will
occur within the buffer area on your site.

b. Perimeter Controls.

13

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

i. Installation Requirements: You must install sediment controls along those
perimeter areas of your site that will receive storm water from areas where
earth disturbing activities are occuring4 For linear projects with rights-of-
way that restrict or prevent the use of such perimeter controls, you must
maximize the use of these controls Where practicable and document in your
why it is impracticable in other areas of the project.

ii. Maintenance Requirements: You must remove sediment before it has
accumulated to the point where storm water controls becomes ineffective.
Often that is one-half of the above-ground height of any perimeter control.
The permittee must follow maintenance speci?cations for the BMP used.

c. Sediment Track-Out. You must minimize the track-out of sediment onto off-
site streets, other paved areas, and sidewalks from vehicles exiting your
construction site. To comply with this requirement, you must:

i. Restrict vehicle use to properly designated exit points;

ii. Use appropriate stabilization techniques5 at all points that exit onto paved
roads so that sediment removal occurs prior to vehicle exit;

Where necessary, use additional controls6 to remove sediment from vehicle
tires prior to exit; and

iv. Where sediment has been tracked-out from your site onto the surface of off-
site streets, other paved areas, and sidewalks, you must remove deposited
sediment before it accumulates signi?cantly and is tracked beyond the
immediate- vicinity of the project (that may be several times a day or once a
week, whatever is required to control off site tracking). You must remove
the track-out by sweeping, shoveling, or vacuuming these surfaces, or by
using other similarly effective means of sediment removal. You are
prohibited from hosing or sweeping tracked out sediment into any storm
water conveyance, storm drain inlet, or surface water.

Note: DWQ recognizes that some fine grains may remain visible on the surfaces of off-site streets,
other paved areas, and sidewalks even a?er you have implemented sediment removal practices.
Such ?staining? is not a violation of Part 2. 1 .2. c.

(1. Control Discharges from Stockpiled Sediment or Soil. For any stockpiles or
land clearing debris composed, in whole or in part, of sediment or soil

 

4 Examples of perimeter controls include, but are not limited to, natural buffer zones (on the site or off);
vegetative ?lter strips; silt fences; ?lter berms such as staked or weighted straw wattles, other wattles (sand,
gravel, or those that are of a proprietary design); and temporary diversion dikes.

5 Examples of appropriate stabilization techniques include the use of aggregate stone with an underlying
geotextile or non-woven ?lter fabric, or turf mats.

6 Examples of additional controls to remove sediment from vehicle tires include, but are not limited to,
wheel washing, rumble strips, and rattle plates.

14

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Note: For the purposes of this permit, sediment or soil stockpiles are de?ned as the storage for
multiple days of soil or other sediment material to be used in the construction project. If a
sediment or soil pile is used within a short period of time a day or three days especially
during dry days), it does not fall under the requirements of this part.

You must comply with the following requirements:

i. Stockpiles must be located outside of any natural buffers established under
Part 2.1.2.a.i and physically separated from other storm water controls (such
as perimeter controls or inlet protection) implemented in accordance with
Part 2.1, but must be contained within the BMP protected area of the site;

ii. Protect from contact with storm water (including run-on) using a temporary
perimeter sediment barrier;7

Where practicable, provide cover or appropriate temporary stabilization to
avoid direct contact with precipitation or to minimize sediment discharge;

  
    
 
  
    
 

Note: For 2. 1.2.d. the objective is to minimize sediment di
the pile; the second best BMP is to stabilize the surface of

arge, the best BMP is to cover
ile, the third best is to set filter

suggested BMPs applied. The degree of effort must
that could a?ect water quality.

iv. Do not hose down or sweep

v. Where pract' .

e. Minimize to avoid pollutants from being discharged into surface
waters you must ze the generation of dust through the appropriate
application of wate other dust suppression techniques (as required in your air
quality permit for those that are required to have air quality permits).

    

i. Minimize the Disturbance of Steep Slopes. You must minimize the
disturbance of ?steep slopes? (see de?nition in Appendix A).

Note: The permit does not prevent or prohibit disturbance on steep slopes. For some projects,
disturbance on steep slopes may be necessary for construction a road cut in mountainous
terrain). If a disturbance to steep slopes is required for the project, DWQ would recognize that it
is not economically achievable to avoid the disturbance to steep slopes. However, in cases where
steep slope disturbances are required, minimizing the disturbances to steep slopes consistent with
this requirement can be accomplished through the implementation of a number of standard
erosion and sediment control practices, such as by phasing disturbances to these areas and using
stabilization practices designed to be used on steep grades.

f. Preserve Topsoil. You must preserve native topsoil on your site, unless
infeasible. Preserving topsoil is not required where the intended function of a

 

7Examples include berms, dikes, ?ber rolls, silt fences, sandbag, gravel bags, or straw bale.

15

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

speci?c area of the site dictates that the topsoil be removed, and/or that the
?nished surface will be stabilized by a means other than re-vegetation.

Note: Some projects may be designed to be highly impervious after construction, and therefore
little or no vegetation is intended to remain. In these cases, preserving topsoil at the site would
not be feasible. Some sites may not have space to stockpile topsoil on site for later use, in which
case, it may also not be feasible to preserve topsoil.

Note: Stockpiling of topsoil at off-site locations, or transfer of topsoil to other locations, is an
example of a practice that is consistent with the requirements in this Part.

g.

Minimize Soil Compaction. In areas of your site where ?nal vegetative
stabilization will occur or where in?ltration practices will be installed, you must
either (minimizing soil compaction is not required where the intended function
of the speci?c area of the site dictates that it be compacted):

i. Restrict vehicle equipment use. Restrict vehicle and equipment use in
these locations to avoid soil compaction (except for equipment used for
seeding or cat tracking); or

ii. Use soil conditioning techniques. Prior to seeding or planting areas of
exposed soil that have been compacted, use techniques that loosen or
condition the soils to support vegetative growth, if necessary and feasible.

Protect Storm Drain Inlets. If you discharge to any storm drain inlet that
carries storm water ?ow from disturbed areas of your site directly to a surface
water, and you have authority to access the storm drain inlet, you must:

i. Installation Requirements. Install inlet protection measures8 that remove
sediment from your discharge prior to entry into the storm drain inlet.

Note: Inlet protection measures can he removed in the event of flood conditions or to prevent

erosion.

ii. Maintenance Requirements. Clean, or remove and replace, storm water
protection measures as sediment accumulates, the ?lter becomes clogged,
and/or performance is compromised. Inlet protection measures should be
maintained in effective working conditions at all times, but particular
attention must be given to prepare inlets for a forecasted precipitation event.

Areas of High Altitude/Heavy Snow Conditions. You must attempt to prepare
for the heavy snows by deploying storm water controls prior to the ?rst heavy
snow, and have appropriate storm water control measures designed to handle
snow melt before heavy snows occur. Dates when snow is expected should be
noted in the and updated as construction commences into the snow
season. Stabilization measures should be deployed at the same time (see Section
2.2.1 

 

8 Examples of inlet protection measures include fabric ?lters, sandbags, gravel with ?lter fabric and
concrete block barriers, weighted ?ber rolls, wattles of ?lter fabric ?lled with sand/gravel, and proprietary
devices designed for inlet protection.

16

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

2.1.3. Requirements Applicable Only to Sites Using These Speci?c Storm Water
Controls. You are required to comply with the following requirements if you will
install any of the following storm water controls at your site:

a. Constructed Storm Water Conveyance Channels. Design storm water
conveyance channels to avoid unstabilized areas on the site and to reduce
erosion, unless infeasible. Minimize erosion of channels and their embankments,
outlets, adjacent streambanks, slopes, and waters during discharge
conditions through the use of erosion controls and velocity dissipation devices9
within and along the length of any constructed storm water conveyance channel,
and at any outlet to provide a non-erosive ?ow velocity.

b. Sediment Basins. If you install a sediment basin you must comply with the
following:

i. Design requirements:
1) Provide storage for either (1) the ca ated volume of runoff from a 2-

year, 24-hour storm (see Append" or (2) 3,600 cubic feet per acre
drained;

   
  
   
 
 
   
  
   
     

2) When discharging from the 
withdraw water from i 

ent basin, utilize outlet structures that
order to minimize the discharge of

the top is warm ase ere you have a TMDL or water
sensitive to ould be better to take it from the middle)

Note: DWQ believes that the 
this manner are rare. Excepti 

outlets may not be feasible du
used during other periods). If you
you must provide documentation in

areas with extended cold weather, where surface
ime periods (although it is expected that they would be



ur to support your determination.

3) Prevent erosion of the sediment basin using stabilization controls
erosion control blankets), and (2) the inlet and outlet using erosion
controls and velocity dissipation devices; and

4) Sediment basins must be situated outside of surface waters and any
natural buffers established under Part 2.1 and must be designed to
avoid collecting water from wetlands.

ii. Maintenance requirements. Keep basins in effective operating condition
and remove accumulated sediment when the basin reaches 1/2 of the design
capacity of the sediment basin.

 

9Examples of velocity dissipation devices include check dams, sediment traps, riprap, or grouted riprap at
outlets. Although piped slope drains and geotextile reinforced channels do not control velocity they prevent
erosion on slopes.

17

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Use of Treatment Chemicals. If you plan to use cationic polymers and/or
?occulants you must have an approval letter from DWQ. Otherwise you must
comply with the following minimum requirements:

ii.



iv.

vi.

vii.

Use conventional erosion and sediment controls prior to and after the
application of treatment chemicals. Use conventional erosion and
sediment controls prior to chemical addition to ensure effective treatment.
Chemicals may only be applied where treated storm water is directed to a
sediment control sediment basin, perimeter control) prior to discharge.

Select appropriate treatment chemicals. Chemicals must be selected that
are appropriately suited to the types of soils likely to be exposed during
construction and discharged to locations where chemicals will be applied,
and to the expected turbidity, pH, and ?ow rate of storm water ?owing into
the chemical treatment system or area. If you cannot ensure the appropriate
dosage, DWQ will not approve the chemical use.

Minimize discharge risk from stored chemicals. Store all treatment
chemicals in leak-proof containers that are kept under storm-resistant cover
and surrounded by secondary containment structures spill berms,
decks, spill containment pallets). or provide equivalent measures, designed
and maintained to minimize the potential discharge of treatment chemicals
in storm water or by any other means storing chemicals in covered
area or having a spill kit available on site).

Comply with local requirements. Comply with relevant local requirements
affecting the use of treatment chemicals.

Use chemicals in accordance With good engineering practices and
speci?cations of the chemical provider/supplier. You must also use
treatment chemicals and chemical treatment systems in accordance with
good engineering practices, and with dosing speci?cations and sediment
removal design speci?cations provided by the provider/ supplier of the
applicable chemicals, or document speci?c departures from these practices
or speci?cations and how they re?ect good engineering practice.

Ensure proper training. Ensure that all persons who handle and use
treatment chemicals at the construction site are provided with appropriate,
product-speci?c training. Among other things, the training must cover
proper dosing requirements.

Comply with additional requirements for the approved use of cationic
chemicals. If you have been authorized to use cationic chemicals at your
site pursuant to Part 1.2.4, and the authorization is conditioned on your
compliance with additional requirements necessary to ensure that the use of
such chemicals will not impair the life cycle of aquatic organisms


proper documentation. You must include documentation

in your consistent with Parts 7.2.5.h. and 7.2.9.b. on the speci?c

18

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

chemicals and chemical treatment systems you will use, and how you will
comply with the requirements in this Part.

d. Dewatering Practices. You are prohibited from discharging ground water (or
any water, even storm water, see note), that is extracted from excavations,
trenches, foundations, vaults, or other similar points of accumulation, unless
such waters are covered by the Utah UPDES permit for Construction
Dewatering/Hydrostatic Testing. No additional permit is required if the water
extracted is allowed to percolate back into the ground or that is otherwise
managed where it does not have a surface discharge from the site.

Note: Water that is present at construction sites, whether it is ground water, storm water, or
from where ever, if it is heavily soiled from contact with construction activity it must be covered
under the Construction Dewatering/Hydrostatic Testing permit with a total suspended solids limit
if it is to be discharged.

2.2. STABILIZATION REQUIREMENTS.
You are required to stabilize exposed portions of your site for all areas with an annual
precipitation of over 20 inches in accordance with the irements of this Part. This Part
also includes stabilization and/or other requirements eas with 20 inches of rainfall per
year or less.

  
    

your site means areas of exposed

at expect that temporary or

intended to be left unvegetated or

utility pole pads, areas being used for
er, areas constructed for these kinds of uses
35;, ement of a suf?cient layer of soil similar to

?1 ?cit/gravel layer that is resistant to erosion), and no
on (unless gravel is used) to minimize the

Note: For the purposes of this permit, ?exposed portio
soil that are required to be stabilized. Note that r: 4 1 do
permanent stabilization measures be applied to a 
unstabilized following construction I. acc
storage of vehicles, equipment, or mat

should have a ?nished surface conditio
ran/11 l?i/n?o /nr bin/'1 nfo?m

?Ul? Mull'UlJ lIL/l ruwbu kill!

       
  
   
   
     
 

top soil or organic material, a
potential for erosion.

2.2.1. Deadlines for Initiatin- and Completing Stabilization for areas receiving an
annual precipitation of more than 20 inches a year.

a. Deadline to Initiate Stabilization. You must initiate soil stabilization measures
within 14 days of whenever earth-disturbing activities have permanently or
temporarily ceased on any portion of the site.

Note: Earth-disturbing activities have permanently ceased when clearing and excavation within
any area of your construction site that will not include permanent structures has been completed

Note: For the purposes of this permit, DWQ will consider any of the following types of activities
to constitute the initiation of stabilization:
1. prepping the soil for vegetative or non-vegetative stabilization;
2. applying mulch or other non-vegetative product to the exposed area,"
3. seeding or planting the exposed area;
4. starting any of the activities portion of the area to be stabilized, but not
on the entire area; and
5. ?nalizing arrangements to have a stabilization product fully installed in
compliance with the applicable deadline for completing stabilization in Parts

19

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

2.2. J. b. ii. This list of examples is not exhaustive.

b. Deadline to Complete Stabilization Activities. Within 14 calendar days after
the initiation of soil stabilization measures consistent with Part 2.2.1.a10, you are
required to have completed:

i. For vegetative stabilization, all activities11 necessary to initially seed or
plant the area to be stabilized; and/or

ii. For non-vegetative stabilization, the installation or application of all such
non-vegetative measures.

Note: During the days (14 days before initiating the process of stabilization) that the permittee
has to determine if a section of the project must be temporarily or permanently stabilized, there
must be perimeter controls around the area to prevent sediment transport off the site until surface
stabilization is in place.

c. Stabilization Requirements for High Altitudes and Areas Receiving Heavy
Snow. You must attempt to prepare for the heavy snows by deploying
stabilization measures on all disturbed areas prior to the ?rst heavy snow, and
have appropriate stabilization measures designed to handle snow melt before
heavy snows occur. Dates when snow is expected should be noted in the
and updated as construction commences into the snow season.
Stabilization measures should be deployed at the same time as other runoff
controls in anticipation of snow (see Section 

2.2.2. Stabilization and/or other requirements for areas receiving an annual
precipitation of 20 inches of rainfall a year or less (arid and semi-arid areas),
drought areas, and areas with seasonally dry periods.

a. Within 14 calendar days of a temporary or permanent cessation of work in any
portion of your site you must initiate installation of one of the following or
equivalent. The intensity of the application must be commensurate with the
conditions at the site soil type, steepness of slopes, weather patterns and
seasons, proximity to water body.). The goal is to arrest all sediment transport
to within the boundaries of the site up to storms with intensities of 1/2 inch/hour
or greater. The permittee must explain the strategy for stabilization in the
and times when higher or lower intense BMPs will be placed and why:

i. Preparation for seeding and seeding or planting (which should be during a
wetter season or with irrigation),

Note: It would be good in arid and semi-arid areas to plan the installation of any irrigation
system early in construction sequence so that seeding and planting ejforts will be effective.

 

1? DWQ may determine, based on an inspection carried out under Part 4.2 and corrective actions required
under Part 5.3, that the level of sediment discharge on the site makes it necessary to require a faster
schedule for completing stabilization. For instance, if sediment discharges from an area of exposed soil that
is required to be stabilized are compromising the performance of existing storm water controls, DWQ

may require stabilization to correct this problem.

11 For example, such activities might include, but are not limited to, soil conditioning, application of seed or
sod, planting of seedlings or other vegetation, application of fertilizer, and, as deemed appropriate, watering.

20

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Note: The lists found in 2.2.2.guideline. It is not necessary to deploy
exactly as prescribed, but whatever is deployed must be e?ective at minimizing erosion and
sediment transport ?'om the site.

ii. For steeper slopes geotextile blankets staked as necessary with or without
seeding (possibly with mulch under the blanket), ?ber rolls staked on the
contours every 10 (or less) apart with mulch applied to the surface between,

Shallower slopes (15% or less):

1) Cat tracking over straw mulch (moist),

2) surface roughening in loose soil or cat tracking (depending on soil,
mulch may have to be applied) with ?ber rolls staked not more than 15
feet apart on the contours, on very shallow slopes and less distance apart
for steeper slopes, (add mulch on steep end),

3) mulch, hydromulch, possibly with with tacki?er if needed,

iv. Flat areas:

  
      
  
  

roughening with larger depression
ovide many small depressions to
water, and with peripheral controls.
soil becomes hardened or

1) At minimum, loosened soil, 
areas (surface roughen'
collect storm water) to
The surface mus

dra/ 5, check dams, rip-rap, geotextile channel protection,
- oc' control and channel protection for all storm water

b. Within 14 calendar days alter the initiation of seeding/ planting, or for
application of control measure to initiate surface stabilization on inactive areas
of the site, you must complete all activities necessary to initially seed/plant,
stabilize, or control the area to protect from sediment transport?.

2.2.3. Deadlines for sites discharging to sensitive waters. For any portion of the site that
discharges to a sediment or nutrient-impaired water (see Part 3.2) or to a water that
is identi?ed as Category 1 or 2 for antidegradation purposes (see Part 3.3), you are
required to complete the stabilization activities speci?ed in Parts 2.2. 1. and/or 2.2.2.

 

12 Seed germination in the arid and semi-arid areas of Utah generally occurs in spring. Germination can
occur in early fall if a wet season (if the ?monsoons? come a weather pattern that brings moist air ?'om
the southwest late summer into fall). Late fall is a good time to plant for spring germination. Germination
timing is dictated by altitude, latitude, and often by dryer or wetter weather patterns. The application of
seed quali?es as stabilization, however to be effective, seeding (hence stabilization) should be delayed until
the spring or fall, or where irrigation can be provided.

21

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

within 7 calendar days after the temporary or permanent cessation of earth-
disturbing activities.

2.2.4. Criteria for Stabilization. To be considered adequately stabilized, you must meet
the criteria below depending on the type of cover you are using, either vegetative or
non-vegetative.

Note: Stabilization requirements are more di?icult the more arid the area. Re-vegetation from
seed in arid areas can take more than 3 years to fully develop. This permit allows termination in
arid areas even if final stabilization as de?ned in Appendix A is not met. The terms to do this are
spelled out in 2.2.4. a. ii.

a. Vegetative Stabilization.

Note: Vegetative stabilization measures for all areas, but especially in arid and semi-arid areas,
is very important. Practices such as preservation of topsoil, and the use of compatible indigenous
?ll/borrow material pays of. Good vegetative management such as preserving existing
vegetation, protecting natural buffers, and minimizing grading will prove valuable when
attempting to stabilize and terminate the site and it will leave a better product.

i. For all sites, except those located in arid. and semi-arid areas (areas with 20
inches or less of precipitation) or on agricultural lands.

1) If you are vegetatively stabilizing any exposed portion of your site
through the use of seed or planted vegetation, you must provide
established uniform ve getation evenly distributed without large
bare areas), which provides 70 percent or more of the vegetative cover
that was provided by vegetation prior to commencing earth-disturbing
activities. You should avoid the use of invasive species;

2) For ?nal stabilization, vegetative cover must be perennial; and

3) Immediately after seeding or planting the area to be vegetatively
stabilized, to the extent necessary to prevent erosion on the seeded or
planted area, you must select, design, and install non-vegetative erosion
controls that provide cover mulch, rolled erosion control products)
to the area while vegetation is becoming established. Surface
roughening or cat tracking perpendicular to the slope may also be used
as a non-vegetative measure that can be used with seeding, but must be
monitored because it may be susceptible to erosion during heavier storm
events.

ii. For sites located in arid and semi-arid areas (20 inches of precipitation or
less), or drought-stricken areas, as these terms are de?ned in Appendix A,
you are considered to have completed ?nal stabilization if both of the
following criteria are met:

1) You must attempt to reestablish a vegetative cover using topsoil (topsoil
preserved from the site and/or with additional (preferably local) topsoil
from offsite), mulch, fertilizer, and/or other methods with seeding and
planting to establish a perennial vegetative cover (preferably of an

22

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

indigenous seed mix) equivalent to the natural background cover, by
design, so that permanent stabilization is expected occur by 3 to 3 and a
half years after the project is completed with average precipitation; and

2) In addition to seeding or planting the area to be vegetatively stabilized,
you must have non-vegetative erosion controls designed and installed
either for permanent placement or temporary placement (of which
degradation and decomposition is expected to be complete leaving no
litter) that provide cover or BMP controls that are selected and designed
purposely for protecting the seed and surface from erosion as much as is
possible without active maintenance until the natural stabilizing effect
of vegetation is established.

For sites located on land used for agriculture. Disturbed areas on land used
for agricultural purposes pipelines across crop or range land, staging
areas for highway construction) that are restored to their preconstruction
agricultural use are not subject to these ?nal stabilization criteria. Areas
disturbed that were not previously used for agricultural activities, and areas
that are not being returned to preconstru agricultural use, must meet the
conditions for stabilization in this Pa

   
 
  
  
  
   
 

b. Non-Vegetative Stabilization. If ing -vegetative controls to
stabilize exposed portions of your sit if you are using such controls to
temporarily protect areas that .n tatively stabilized, you must
provide effective non-vegetativ - tabilize any such exposed portions

of your site.

2.3. POLLUTION PREVENTION 

carp rpninrpri ainta 11 effective pollution prevention measures 1?1

3. Consistent with this requirement, you must:

 
 
  
  

Vu any Aunlunlvu LU uv

order to prevent the disc ge of . 

Eliminate certain pollu ges from your site (see Part 

0 Properly maintain all pollutio prevention controls (see Part and

- Comply with pollution prevention standards for pollutant?generating activities that occur
at your site (see Part 2.3 .3).

These requirements apply to all areas of your construction site and any and all support
activities covered by this permit consistent with Part 1.3.3.

2.3.1. Prohibited Discharges. You are prohibited from discharging the following from
your construction site (this list is not a comprehensive list of prohibited discharges
but are listed to clarify that although they are common practices on construction sites
they are unacceptable to have in a discharge):

a. Wastewater from washout of concrete, (see Part 

 

13 For temporary stabilization, examples of temporary non-vegetative stabilization methods include, but are
not limited to, hydromulch, straw mulch that is crimped in by cat?tracking or netted and staked, and erosion
control blankets. For ?nal stabilization, examples of permanent nonvegetative stabilization methods include,
but are not limited to, riprap, gravel, gabions, and geotextiles.

23

d.

6.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Wastewater from washout and cleanout of stucco, paint, form release oils,
curing compounds and other construction materials, (see Part 

Fuels, oils, or other pollutants used in vehicle and equipment operation and
maintenance;

Soaps, solvents, or detergents used in vehicle and equipment washing; and

Toxic or hazardous substances from a Spill or other release.

2.3 .2. General Maintenance Requirements.

2.3.3.

a.

You must ensure that all pollution prevention controls installed in accordance
with this Part remain in effective operating condition and are protected from
activities that would reduce their effectiveness. You must inspect all pollutant-
generating activities and pollution prevention controls in accordance with your
inspection frequency requirements in Parts 4.1.2 or 3 to avoid situations
that may result in leaks, spills, and other releases of pollutants in storm water
discharges to receiving waters, and must document your ?ndings in accordance
with Part 4.1.7. If you ?nd that controls need to be replaced, repaired, or
maintained, you must make the necessary repairs or modi?cations in accordance
with the following:

i. Initiate work to ?x the problem immediately after discovering the problem,
and complete such work by the close of the next work day, if the problem
does not require signi?cant repair or replacement, or if the problem can be
corrected throug'ti routine maintenance.

ii. When installation of a new pollution prevention control or a signi?cant
repair needed, you must install the new or modi?ed control and make it
operational, or complete the repair, by no later than 7 calendar days from the
time of discovery, or as directed by the DWQ, M84, or EPA oversight
inspector. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within 7
calendar days, you must document in your records why it is infeasible to
complete the installation or repair within the 7 calendar day timeframe and
document your schedule for installing the storm water control(s) and making
it operational as soon as practicable after the 7 calendar day timeframe.
Where these actions result in changes to any of the pollution prevention
controls or procedures documented in your you must modify your
accordingly Within 7 calendar days of completing this work.

Pollution Prevention Standards. You are required to comply with the pollution
prevention standards in this Part if you conduct any of the following activities at
your site or at any construction support activity areas covered by this permit (see
Part 1.3.3):

- Fueling and maintenance of equipment or vehicles;
- Washing of equipment and vehicles;
0 Storage, handling, and disposal of construction materials, products, and wastes;

and

- Washing of applicators and containers used for paint, concrete, or other materials.

24

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

The pollution prevention standards are as follows:

a.



Fueling and Maintenance of Equipment or Vehicles. If you conduct fueling
and/or maintenance of equipment or vehicles at your site, you must provide an
effective means of eliminating the discharge of spilled or leaked chemicals,
including fuel, from the area where these activities will take place.14

To comply with the prohibition in Part 2.3.l.c, you must:

i. If applicable, comply with the Spill Prevention Control and
Countermeasures (SPCC) requirements in 40 CFR 112 and Section 311 of
the CWA.

ii. Ensure adequate supplies are available at all times to handle spills, leaks,
and disposal of used liquids;

Use drip pans and absorbents under or around leaky vehicles;

iv. Dispose of or recycle oil and oily wa accordance with other federal,

state, tribal, or local requirements;

   
   
   

es immediately, using dry clean up
the source of the spill to prevent a

   

v. Clean up spills or contaminated 5
measures where possible, 

vi. . i 3, the area down.

 

ah 4 pment and vehicle washing, wheel wash water, and
other types of shing;15 and

ii. To comply with the prohibition in Part 2.3.1.d, for storage of soaps,
detergents, or solvents, you must provide either (1) cover plastic
sheeting or temporary roofs) to prevent these detergents from coming into
contact with rainwater, or (2) a similarly effective means designed to
prevent the discharge of pollutants from these areas (such as closed
containers).

Storage, Handling, and Disposal of Construction Products, Materials, and
Wastes. You must minimize the exposure to storm water of any of the products,

 

14Examples of effective controls include, but are not limited to, locating activities away from surface waters
and storm water inlets or conveyances, providing secondary containment spill berms, decks, Spill
containment pallets)and cover where appropriate, and/or having spill kits readily available.

15 Examples of effective controls include, but are not limited to, locating activities away from surface
waters and storm water inlets or conveyances and directing wash waters to a sediment basin or sediment
trap, using ?ltration devices, such as ?lter bags or sand ?lters, or using other similarly effective controls.

25

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

materials, or wastes speci?ed below that are present at your site by complying
with the requirements in this Part.

Note: These requirements do not apply to those products, materials, or wastes that are not a
source of storm water contamination or that are designed to be exposed to storm water.

To ensure you meet this requirement, you must:

ii.



iv.

For building products?: In storage areas, provide either (1) cover 
plastic sheeting or temporary roofs) to prevent these products from coming
into contact with rainwater, or (2) a similarly effective means designed to
prevent the discharge of pollutants from these areas.

For pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers, and landscape materials:

1)

2)

In storage areas, provide either (1) cover plastic sheeting or
temporary roofs) to prevent these chemicals from coming into contact
with rainwater, or (2) a similarly effective means designed to prevent
the discharge of pollutants from these areas; and

Comply with all application and disposal requirements included on the
registered pesticide, herbicide, insecticide, and fertilizer label.

For diesel fuel, oil, hydraulic fluids, other petroleum products, and other
chemicals:

1)

2)

To comply with the prohibition in Part 2.3 . .0, store chemicals in water?
tight containers, and provide either (1) cover plastic sheeting or
temporaiy roofs) to prevent these containers from coming into contact
with rainwater, or (2) a similarly effective means designed to prevent
the discharge of pollutants from these areas spill kits), or provide
secondaly containment spill berms, decks, spill containment
pallets); and

Clean up spills immediately, using dry clean-up methods where possible,
and dispose of used materials properly. Do not clean surfaces or spills

by hosing the area down. Eliminate the source of the spill to prevent a
discharge or a continuation of an ongoing discharge.

For hazardous or toxic waste?:

1)

Separate hazardous or toxic waste from construction and domestic waste;

2) Store waste in sealed containers, which are constructed of suitable

materials to prevent leakage and corrosion, and which are labeled in

 

16 Some examples of building products that are typically stored at construction sites include, but are not
limited to, asphalt sealants, copper ?ashing, roo?ng materials, adhesives, concrete admixtures.

17 Examples of hazardous or toxic waste that may be present at construction sites include, but are not
limited to, paints, solvents, waste paints or solvents, petroleum-based products, wood preservatives,
additives, curing compounds, acids.

26

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

accordance with applicable Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) requirements and all other applicable state, or local
requirements;

3) Store all containers that will be stored outside within appropriately sized
secondary containment spill berrns, decks, spill containment
pallets) to prevent spills from being discharged, or provide a similarly
effective means designed to prevent the discharge of pollutants from
these areas storing chemicals in covered area or having a spill kit
available on site);

4) Dispose of hazardous or toxic waste in accordance with the
manufacturer?s recommended method of disposal and in compliance
with federal, state, tribal, and local requirements; and

5) Clean up spills immediately, using dry clean-up methods where possible,
and dispose of used materials properly. Do not clean surfaces or spills
by hosing the area down. Eliminate the source of the spill to prevent a
discharge or a furtherance of an on discharge.

v. For construction and domestic wa 'de waste containers 

  

vi. . 051 portable toilets so that they are secure and will

have seconda ontainment if tipped.

(1. Washing of Applicators and Containers used for Paint, Concrete, or Other
Materials. To comply with the prohibition in Parts 2.3.1 .a and 2.3.l.b, you must
provide an effective means of eliminating the discharge of water from the
washout and cleanout of stucco, paint, concrete, form release oils, curing
compounds, and other construction materials. To comply with this requirement,
you must:

i. Direct all washwater into a leak-proof container or leak-proof pit. The
container or pit must be designed so that no over?ows can occur due to
inadequate sizing or precipitation; you must segregate paint waste and oily
waste from stucco/concrete washout waste and manage the proper disposal
separately.

 

13 Examples of construction and domestic waste include, but are not limited to, packaging materials, scrap
construction materials, masonry products, timber, pipe and electrical cuttings, plastics, styrofoam,
concrete, and other trash or building materials.

27

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

ii. Handle washout or cleanout wastes as follows:
1) Do not dump liquid wastes in storm sewers;

2) Dispose of liquid wastes in accordance with applicable requirements in
Part 2.3.3.c; and

3) Washout or cleanout activities may be located near the areas where
concrete or stucco application takes place (and in accordance with local
ordinances), but it should be at least 50 feet and possibly further (where
practical) from surface waters, and to the extent practicable, designate
areas to be used for these activities and require all conducting such
activities to only in these areas.

e. Dispose of hardened concrete waste in ways that are consistent with Utah
disposal laws for inert material.

2.3.4. Emergency Spill Noti?cation. You are prohibited from discharging toxic or

2.3.5.

hazardous substances from a spill or other release, consistent with Part 2.3.1 
Where a leak, spill, or other release containing a hazardous substance or oil in an
amount equal to or in excess of a reportable quantity established under either 40
CFR Part 110, 40 CF Part 117, or 40 CFR Part 302 occurs during a 24-hour period,
you must notify the National Response Center (NRC) at (800) 424-8802 in
accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 110, 40 CFR Part 117, and 40
CFR Part 302 (the federal requirement), and 301-536-4123 (for State agencies), but
also you must look up numbers for local health departments and M84 spill and
hazardous waste release reporting as soon as you have knowledge of the discharge.
You must also, within 7 calendar days of knowledge of the release, provide a
description of the release, the circumstances leading to the release, and the date of
the release.

Fertilizer Discharge Restrictions. You are required to minimize discharges of
fertilizers containing nitrogen or phosphorus. To meet this requirement, you must
comply with the following requirements:

a. Apply at a rate and in amounts consistent with manufacturer?s speci?cations, or
document departures from the manufacturer speci?cations where appropriate in
Part 7.2.6.b ofthe 

b. Apply at the appropriate time of year for your location, and preferably timed to
coincide as closely as possible to the period of maximum vegetation uptake and

growth;

c. Avoid applying before heavy rains that could cause excess nutrients to be
discharged;

(1. Never apply to frozen ground;
e. Never apply to storm water conveyance channels with ?owing water; and

f. Follow all other state, and local requirements regarding fertilizer application.

28

3.1.

3.2.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

WATER QUALITY-BASED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS.

GENERAL EFFLUENT LIMITATION TO MEET APPLICABLE WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS.

Your discharge must be controlled as necessary to meet applicable water quality standards.
In the absence of information demonstrating otherwise, DWQ expects that compliance with
the conditions in this permit will result in storm water discharges being controlled as
necessary to meet applicable water quality standards. If at any time you become aware, or
DWQ (or a local inspector representing an M84) determines, that your discharge is not
being controlled as necessary to meet applicable water quality standards, you must take
corrective action as required in Part 5.2.1, and document the corrective actions as required
in Part 5.2.2 and Part 5.4. DWQ will also impose additional water quality-based limitations
on a site-speci?c basis, or require you to obtain coverage under an individual permit, if
information indicates that your discharges are not controlled as necessary to meet applicable
water quality standards. This includes situations where additional controls are necessary to
comply with a wasteload allocation in a DWQ established TMDL.

DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS FOR IMPAIRED WATERS.

If you discharge to a surface water that is impaired for ediment or a sediment related
parameter, such as total suSpended solids (TSS) or tu 'ty, and/or (2) nutrients, including
impairments for nitrogen and/or phosphorus, you to comply with the
requirements in Part 3.2.2.

  
   
   
     
    
  
   

Note: For the purposes of this Part, ?imp 

on the appropriate CWA Section 303 lis ith a DWQ and EPA-approved or

established MDL. Your constructio .ite co sidered to discharge to an impaired
charge is identified by DWQ or the EPA

pursuant to Section 303(d) of
or is included in a DWQ an

 

or after it is renewed. For dis -o rges that enter a storm sewer system prior to discharge,
the ?rst surface water to which you discharge is the waterbody that receives the storm
water discharge ?om the storm sewer system. If you discharge to an impaired water that is
impaired for a parameter other than a sediment-related parameter or nutrients, DWQ will
inform you if any additional limits or controls are necessary for your discharge to be
controlled as necessary to meet water quality standards, including for it to be consistent
with the assumptions of any available wasteload allocation in any applicable MDL, or if
coverage under an individual permit is necessary in accordance with Part 1.4. 5. If during
your coverage under a previous permit, you were required to install and maintain Storm
water controls speci?cally to meet the assumptions and requirements of a DWQ established
MDL (for any parameter) or to otherwise control your discharge to meet water quality
standards, you must continue to implement such controls as part of this permit.

I

3.2.1. Identify If You Discharge To An Impaired Water. If you discharge to an

impaired water, you must provide the following information in your 

- A list of all impaired waters to which you discharge;
- The pollutant(s) for which the surface water is impaired; and
- Whether a TMDL has been approved or established for the waters to which you

29

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

discharge.

3.2.2. Requirements for Discharges to Sediment or Nutrient-Impaired Waters. If you
discharge to a surface water that is impaired for (1) sediment or a sediment related
parameter total suspended solids (TSS) or turbidity) and/or (2) nutrients 
nitrogen and/or phosphorus), including impaired waters for which a TMDL has been
approved or established for the impairment, you are required to comply with the
following storm water control requirements, which supplement the requirements
applicable to your site in other corresponding parts of the permit.

a. Frequency of Site Inspection. You must conduct inspections at the frequency
speci?ed in Part 4.1.3.

b. Deadline to Complete Stabilization. You must comply with the deadlines for
completing site stabilization as speci?ed in Part 2.2.3.

3.3. DISCHARGES TO WATERS IDENTIFIED AS CATEGORY 1 or 2.

3.3.1. Identify if You Discharge to a Category 1 or Category 2 Water. If you discharge
to a water identi?ed as a Category 1 or Category 2 water, you must indicate so on
your NOI. See Appendix for information on Utah waters.

Note: For the purposes of this permit, you are considered to discharge to a Category I or 2
water if the ?rst surface water to which you discharge is identi?ed as Category I or 2. Category
1 or 2 refer to waters identi?ed by the state as high quality waters. For discharges that enter a
storm sewer system prior to discharge, the surface water to which you discharge is the ?rst
surface water that receives the storm water discharge from the storm sewer system.

3.3.2. Requirements for New Projects Discharging to Category 1 or 2 Waters. For

new projects, if you will discharge to a Category 1 or 2 water, you are required to
comply with Parts 4.1.3 (inspection frequencies) and 2.2.3. (stabilization deadlines).

30

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

4. INSPECTIONS.
4.1. SITE INSPECTIONS.
4.1.1. Person(s) Responsible for Inspecting the Site.

The person(s) inspecting your site may be a person on your staff or a third party you hire
to conduct such inspections. You are responsible for ensuring that the person who
conducts inspections is a ?quali?ed person?, and currently certi?ed.

Note: A r?qualified person is a person knowledgeable in the principles and practice of erosion
and sediment controls and pollution prevention, who possesses the skills to assess conditions at
the construction site that could impact storm water quality, and the skills to assess the
effectiveness of any storm water controls selected and installed to meet the requirements of this
permit, such as but not limited to the following:

0 Utah Registered Storm Water Inspector (RSI)
- Certi?ed Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC)
- Certi?ed Professional in Storm Water Quality (CPS
- Certi?ed Erosion, Sediment, and Storm Water Ins

   
  
   
   
   
    

- National Institute for Certi?cation in Engine
Control, Level 3 (NICET)
- Utah Department of Transportation Ero Supervisor (ECS)

4.1.2. Frequency of Inspections.
accordance with one of 
4.1.3 or Part 4.1.4:

um, ou must conduct a site inspection in
listed below, unless you are subject to Part

a. At least once 

b. Once every 1 a - days and within 24-hours of the occurrence of a storm
event of 0.5 inches greater. To determine if a storm event of 0.5 inches or
greater has occurred on your site, you must either keep a properly maintained
rain gauge on your site, or obtain the storm event information from a weather
station that is representative of your location. For any day of rainfall that
measures 0.5 inches or greater, you must record the total rainfall measured for
that day in accordance with Part 4.1.7.a.iv.

  
    
   



Note: Inspections are only required during the project ?s normal working hours, however a
rainfall event can happen a?er business hours. If a rain event occurs after hours on Friday it
does not need to be inspected until Monday.

Note: You are required to speci?z in your which schedule you will be following.

Note: ?Within 24 hours of the occurrence of a storm event? means that you are required to
conduct an inspection within 24 hours once a storm event has produced 0.5 inches, even if the
storm event is still continuing. Thus, if you have elected to inspect bi?weekly in accordance with
Part 4.1.2.b. and there is a storm event at your site that continues for multiple days, and each day
of the storm produces 0.5 inches or more of rain, you are required to conduct an inspection

31

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

within 24 hours of the ?rst day of the storm and within 24 hours after the end of the storm. Again,
inspections are only required during the projects normal working hours.

4.1.3. Increase in Inspection Frequency for Sites Discharging to Sensitive Waters. For
any portion of the site that discharges to a sediment or nutrient?impaired water (see
Part 3.2) or to a water that is identi?ed as Category 1 or 2 (see Part 3.3), instead of
the inspection frequency speci?ed in Part 4.1.2, you must conduct inspections in
accordance with the following inspection frequencies:

a. Once every 7 calendar days; and

b. Within 24 hours of the occurrence of a storm event of 0.5 inches or greater. To
determine if a storm event of 0.5 inches or greater has occurred on your site, you
must either keep a properly maintained rain gauge on your site, or obtain the
storm event information from a weather station that is representative of your
location. For any day of rainfall that measures 0.5 inches or greater, you must
record the total rainfall measured for that day in accordance with Part 4.1 .7.a.v

Note: Inspections are only required during the project?s normal working hours, however a
rainfall event can happen after business hours. If a rain event occurs after hours on Friday it
does not need to be inspected until Monday.

Note: ?Within 24 hours of the occurrence of a storm event? means that you are required to
conduct an inspection within 24 hours once a storm event has produced 0.5 inches, even if the
storm event is still continuing. Thus, if there is a storm event at your site that continues for
multiple days, and each day of the storm produces 0.5 inches or more of rain, you are required to
conduct an inspection within 24 hours of the ?rst day of the storm and within 24 hours after the
end of the storm. Again inspections are only required during the projects normal working hours.

Note: If you qualijy for any of the reduced inspection frequencies in Part 4.1.4, you may conduct
inspections in accordance with Part 4. .l . 4 for any portion of your site that discharges to a
sensitive water.

4.1.4. Reductions in Inspection Frequency. Your inspection frequency may be reduced
as follows:

a. For Temporarily Stabilized Areas. You may reduce the frequency of
inspections to once per month in any area of your site where the stabilization
steps in Parts 2.2.1.b.i, 2.2.1 .b.ii, and 2.2.2.b have been completed. When
construction activity resumes in this portion of the site at a later date, the
inspection frequency immediately increases to that required in Parts 4.1.2 or
4.1.3, if applicable. You must document the beginning and ending dates of this
period in your records.

b. For Permanently Stabilized Areas. If portions of the project area are
permanently stabilized before the entire project is completed, stabilized, and
terminated, these permanently stabilized areas no longer require an inspection,
except in the case of inlet protection for drainage received from surrounding
unstabilized areas.

c. For Frozen Conditions.

32

i.

ii.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

If you are suspending earth-disturbing activities due to frozen conditions,
you may temporarily suspend inspections on your site until thawing
conditions (see Appendix A, ?thawing conditions?) begin to occur if:

1)

2)

3)

Runoff is unlikely due to continuous frozen conditions that are likely to
continue at your site for at least 30 days based on historic seasonal
averages. However, if unexpected weather conditions (such as above
freezing temperatures or rain or snow events) make discharges likely,
you must immediately resume your regular inspection frequency as
described in Parts 4.1.2 or 4.1.3;

Land disturbances have been suspended; and

All disturbed areas of the site have been temporarily or permanently
stabilized in accordance with Part 2.2.

If you are still conducting earth-disturbing activities during frozen

conditions, you may reduce your inspect'

1)

frequency to once per month if:

   
    

weather conditions (such as above

averages. However, if unexp
events) make discharges likely,

freezing temperatures
you must immediately
described in Part

4.1.5. Areas that Need to Be Inspected. During your site inspection, you must at a
minimum inspect the following areas of your site:

a.

All areas that have been cleared, graded, or excavated and that have not yet

completed stabilization consistent with Part 2.2;

All storm water controls (including pollution prevention measures) installed at
the site to comply with this permit;

Material, waste, borrow, or equipment storage and maintenance areas that are
covered by this permit;

All areas where storm water typically ?ows within the site, including drainage
ways designed to divert, convey, and/or treat storm water;

All points of discharge from the site; and

33

f.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

All locations where stabilization measures have been implemented.

You are not required to inspect areas that, at the time of the inspection, are considered
unsafe for your inspection personnel. You are also not required to inspect areas of the
project that are permanently stabilized except for management of storm water ?ows
?owing onto the area coming from other areas that have not been permanently stabilized.

4.1.6. Requirements for Inspections. During your site inspection, you must at a minimum:

a.

g.

Check whether all erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention
controls are installed, appear to be operational, and are working as intended to
minimize pollutant discharges. Determine if any controls need to be replaced,
repaired, or maintained in accordance with Parts 2.1 . and 2.3.2;

Check for the presence of conditions that could lead to spills, leaks, or other
accumulations of pollutants on the site;

Identify any locations where new or modi?ed storm water controls are necessary
to meet the requirements of Parts 2 and/or 3,

At points of discharge and, if applicable, the banks of any surface waters
?owing within your property boundaries or immediately adjacent to your
property, check for signs of visible erosion and sedimentation sediment
deposits) that have occurred and are attributable to discharges from your site;
and

Identify any and all incidents of noncompliance observed.

If a discharge is occurring during your inspection, you are required to:

i. Identify all points of the property from which there is a discharge;

ii. Observe and document the visual quality of the discharge, and take note of
the characteristics of the storm water discharge, including color; odor;
?oating, settled, or suspended solids; foam; oil sheen; and other obvious
indicators of storm water pollutants (see the form in Appendix and

Document whether your storm water controls are operating effectively, and
describe any such controls that are clearly not operating as intended or are in

need of maintenance.

Based on the results of your inspection, initiate corrective action under Part 5.

4.1.7. Inspection Report.

a.

Requirement to Complete Inspection Report. You must complete an
inspection report within 24 hours of completing any site inspection. Each
inspection report must include the following:

i. The inspection date;

34

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

ii. The UPDES CGP permit tracking number;
Names and titles (or position) of personnel making the inspection;

iv. A summary of your inspection ?ndings, covering at a minimum the
observations you made in accordance with Part 4.1.6;

v. If you are inspecting your site at the frequency speci?ed in Part 4.1.2.b, Part
4.1.3, or Part 4.1.4.c, and you conducted an inspection because of rainfall
measuring 0.5 inches or greater, you must include the applicable rain gauge
or weather station readings that triggered the inspection; and

vi. If you have determined that it is unsafe to inspect a portion of your site, you
must describe the reason you found it to be unsafe and specify the locations
that this condition applied to.

Signature Requirements. Each inspection report must be signed in accordance
with Appendix G, Part G.l6 (Signatory Requirements) of this permit.

    
 
  

Recordkeeping Requirements. You are
inSpection reports at the site or at an 
made available at the time of an ons'
purposes of this permit, your inspect1
records are:

ii. Legally defensibl

Accessib - a
paper copy

form. 

     

the site would be, if the records were stored in paper

Note: All inspection reports completed for this Part must be retained for at least 3 years from
the date that your permit coverage expires or is terminated.

4.2. INSPECTIONS BY DWQ 0R MS4 OF JURISDICTION.
You must allow an authorized representative of DWQ, the MS4 of jurisdiction, or the 
to conduct the following activities at reasonable times:

4.2.1.

4.2.2.

4.2.3.

Enter onto areas of your site, including any construction support activity areas
covered by this permit (see Part 1.3.3.), and onto locations where records are kept
under the conditions of this permit;

Access and copy any records that must be kept under the conditions of this permit;
Inspect your construction site, including any construction support activity areas

covered by this permit (see Part 1.3.3.) and any storm water controls installed and
maintained at the site; and

35

Utah Construction, GenetaLPermit (UCQB)
4.2.4. Sample or monitor for the purpose of ensuring compliance.
4.2.5. Take photographs; videos; measurements; surveying; or other documentation to
ensure or document compliance (with consideration to the permittee for legitimate

con?dentiality concerns, and for security concerns, including national security issues,
if there are any).




cg?

36

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

5. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS.

5.l. DEFINED.
Corrective actions are actions you take in compliance with this Part to:

- Repair, modify, or replace any storm water control used at the site;
- Clean up and properly dispose of spills, releases, or other deposits; or
- Remedy a permit violation.

5.2. REQUIREMENTS FOR TAKING CORRECTIVE ACTION.
Immediately take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent the discharge of pollutants
until a permanent solution for the problem is installed and made operational.

Note: In this context, the term ?immediately? requires permittees to, on the same day a condition
requiring corrective action is found (or as soon afterward as possible considering normal work
schedule and task size), take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent the discharge of
pollutants until a permanent solution is installed and made operational.

a1, or complete the repair
storm water control(s), making
acticable.

5.2.1. Install a new or modi?ed control, make it operat'
expeditiously and based on urgency19 installi
them operational, or completing a repair as

 
  
    
    

5.3. CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED BY 
You must comply with correc
M84, or the EPA inspectors as a result of 
carried out under Part 4.2.

HE LOCAL MS4, OR THE EPA
actions required by DWQ, the local
a ons found during an inspection

 
   
   
    
 

For each corrective action taken in
an entry in a correc ive action report/log,
rmittee has devised to track corrective action,

5.4. TRACKING OF CORRECT
accordance with this Part, .
inspection reports, or ot 
which includes the appli 2

5.4.1. Within a day or so of - overing the occurrence of a storm water or pollution
control problem at your site, you must make an entry in a report/log or other devise
for monitoring corrective action of the following:

a. What condition was identified at your site that required corrective action (BMPs
were not installed, installed incorrectly, were not effective, or need repairing);

b. The date and time the condition was identi?ed and how it was identified
(inspection report, happened to notice it needed maintenance, etc.).

 

19 What is meant by expeditiously based on urgency is assessing the dif?culty of the task, the resources
available to complete the task, and the time required to complete the task while considering the urgency of
performing the task. A less urgent situation would be placing a storm water control measure in a ?at area
during a dry season of the year with no precipitation in the forecast and that is a signi?cant distance from a
water body or inlet. An urgent situation would be placing a storm water control measure on a slope with
precipitation eminent in the forecast and having a water body or inlet close by that would receive the runoff
from the area. In any case corrective action should not be put off many days. Direction given during an
inspection from DWQ or an M84 inspector may determine the immediacy needed for the action.

37

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

5.4.2. Within 7 calendar days of discovering the occurrence of a problem with a storm
water or pollution control measure at your site, you must make an entry in a
corrective action report/log (or other corrective action monitoring devise) of the
following:

a. Any follow?up actions taken to repair the problem, including the dates such
actions occurred;

b. Notice of whether modi?cations are required as a result of the condition
identi?ed or corrective action.

5.4.3. Recordkeeping Requirements. You are required to keep a current copy of all
corrective action entries at the site or at an easily accessible location, so that it can
be made available at the time of an onsite inspection or upon request by DWQ or the
local jurisdictional MS4. For purposes of this permit, your corrective action entries
may be kept electronically if the records are:

a. In a format that can be read in a similar manner as a paper record;

b. Legally defensible with no less evidentiary value than a paper equivalent; and

c. Accessible to the inspector during an inspection to the same extent as a paper
copy stored at the site would be, if the records were stored in paper form.

All corrective action entries completed for this Part must be retained for at least 3
years from the date that your permit coverage expires or is terminated.

38

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

6. STAFF TRAINING REQUIREMENTS.
Prior to the commencement of earth-disturbing activities or pollutant? generating activities,
whichever occurs ?rst, you must ensure and document that the following personnel
understand the requirements of this permit and their speci?c responsibilities with respect to
those requirements:

- Personnel who are responsible for the design, installation, maintenance, and/or
repair of storm water controls (including pollution prevention measures);

0 Personnel responsible for the application and storage of treatment chemicals (if
applicable);

- Personnel who are responsible for conducting inSpections as required in Part 4.1.1;
and

- Personnel who are responsible for taking corrective actions as required in Part 5.

Notes: (1 If the person requiring training is a new employee, who starts after you commence
earth-disturbing or pollutant-generating activities, you must ensure that this person has the
proper understanding as required above prior to assuming particular responsibilities related to
compliance with this permit. (2) For emergency-related const tion activities, the requirement
to train personnel prior to commencement of earth-disturb" ctivities does not apply, however,

  
   
  
   
  
  
    
   

You are responsible for ensuring that all activitie
of this permit. Although you are not requi
subcontractors or other outside service pro
necessary) that such personnel und
and the that may be affe 

site comply with the requirements
or document formal training for

by any requirements of the permit
rk they are subcontracted to perform.

   
  

brifn

uhv

ponsible for conductin inspections need 0

At a  personnel in 4:1! -

of their job duties 
understand how to cond 

underSfO?d flan 'Fnliniving  {In afar] fn 


bull AUJLUV l. LU DUUPU

- The location of all sto ater controls on the site required by this permit,
and how they are to be maintained;

- The proper procedures to follow with respect to the permit?s pollution
prevention requirements; and

- When and how to conduct inspections, record applicable ?ndings, and take
corrective actions.

39

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

7. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN 
7.1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.

7.1.1. Requirement to Develop a Prior to Submitting Your NOI. All
owner/operators associated with a construction project to be covered under this
permit must develop a You are required to develop your site?s 
prior to submitting your NOI. At a minimum, your must include the
information required in Part 7.2 and as speci?ed in other parts of the permit.20 You
must also update the as required in Part 7.4.

Note: Although many aspects of developing a do not require a P.E., there are significant
portions or items required in the development of a that makes it to where many if not all
must include a P.E. in its development. It is not required for a P. E. to stamp the entire
because operators must have the ?exibility to modify a There may be facilities
within a that need to be stamped and would require a review and to be re-stamped by a
P.E. again if modi?cations occur. For the most part should be designed so that
operators have the flexibility to make modi?cations and updates in the ?eld as is necessary so
that improvements can be made for the protection of disturbed soils and the quality of storm
water runo?r if plans prove to be ineffective, or if the conditions at the site turn out to be
di?erent than expected. A P.E. knows what is not safe without a stamp.

Note: You may develop an electronic that is stored on the internet as long as, I) the
can be accessed during an inspection, and 2) site personnel know how to, and regularly
access the to manage and modi?z the site and in accordance with requirements
of this permit as if it were as accessible as a hard copy on the site.

Note: If your project is an "existingpro?ect "21 or if you are a new owner and/or operator of an
existing project?, you are not required to meet the requirements of this permit until 6months after
this permit has been issued, however, vou must meet the requirements of the previous permit

UT R3 00000) during that 6 month period (see permit 1.4. 3).

7.2. CONTENTS. Your must include the following information, at a
minimum.

7.2.1. Storm Water Team. Each owner/operator, must assemble a ?storm water team,?
which is responsible for overseeing the development of the any later
modi?cations to it, and for compliance with the requirements in this permit.

The must identify the personnel (by name or position) that are part of the
storm water team, as well as their individual responsibilities. Each member of the
storm water team must have ready access to an electronic or paper copy of
applicable portions of this permit, the most updated copy of your and other
relevant documents or information that must be kept with the 

 

20The does not establish the ef?uent limits that apply to your site?s discharges; these limits are
established in this permit in Parts 2 and 3.

21 Your project started before this permit was issued, and you had active and legitimate coverage under
UTR3 00000 at the time of expiration of UTR300000.

40

7.2.2.

7.2.3.

7.2.4.

7.2.5.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Nature of Construction Activities. The must describe the nature of your
construction activities, including the size of the property (in acres) and the total area
expected to be disturbed by the construction activities (in acres), construction
support activity areas covered by this permit (see Part 1.3.3), and the maximum area
expected to be disturbed at any one time.

Emergency-Related Projects. If you are conducting earth-disturbing activities in
response to a public emergency (see Part 1.2.1), you must document the cause of the
public emergency natural disaster, extreme ?ooding conditions, etc.), provide
information substantiating its occurrence state disaster declaration or similar
state or local declaration), and provide a description of the construction necessary to
reestablish effected public services.

Sequence and Estimated Dates of Construction Activities. The must
include a description of the intended sequence of construction activities, including a
schedule of the estimated start dates and the duration of the activity, for the
following activities:

  
   
 
  
  
 
  
   
 

(1 when they will be made
sequence and schedule for

a. Installation of storm water control measures
operational, including an explanation of
installation of storm water control me
any departures from manufacturer 3

b. Commencement and duration
and grubbing, mass grading, sit
?lling), ?nal grading, a
stabilization;

c. Cessation, tem??h? anently, of construction activities on the site, or
in designate the ite;

     
 

   
      
    

(1. Final or tempora ., ization of areas of exposed soil. The dates for
stabilization must ect the applicable deadlines to which you are subject in
Part 2.2.1 and 2.2.2; and

e. Removal of temporary storm water conveyances/channels and other storm water
control measures, removal of construction equipment and vehicles, and
cessation of any pollutant-generating activities.

Note: If plans change due to unforeseen circumstances or for other reasons, the requirement to
describe the sequence and estimated dates of construction activities is not meant to ?lock in the
permittee to meeting these projections. When departures from initial projections are necessary,
this should be documented in the itself or in associated records, as appropriate.

Site Map. The must include a legible site map, or series of maps, showing
the following features of your project:

Note: Included in the project site are any construction support activities covered by this permit
(see Part 1.3.3).

41

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

a. Boundaries of the property and of the locations where construction activities
will occur, including:

i. Locations where earth-disturbing activities will occur, noting any phasing of
construction activities;

ii. Approximate slopes before and after major grading activities. Note areas of
steep slopes, as de?ned in Appendix 

Locations where sediment, soil, or other construction materials will be
stockpiled;

iv. Locations of any crossings of surface waters;
v. Designated points on the site where vehicles will exit onto paved roads;

vi. Locations of structures and other impervious surfaces upon completion of
construction; and

vii. Locations of construction support activity areas covered by this permit (see
Part 1.3.3).

b. Locations of all surface waters, including wetlands, that exist within or in the
immediate vicinity of the site. Indicate which water bodies are listed as impaired,
and which are identi?ed as Category 1 or 2 waters;

c. The boundary lines of any natural buffers provided consistent with Part 2.1 
d. Topography of the site, existing vegetative cover forest, pasture, pavement,
structures), and drainage pattern(s) of storm water and authorized non-storm
water ?ow onto, over, and from the site property before and after major grading

activities;

e. Storm water and allowable non-storm water discharge locations, including:

i. Locations of any storm drain inlets on the site and in the immediate vicinity
of the site; and

Note: The requirement to show storm drain inlets in the immediate vicinity of the site on your site
map only applies to those inlets that are easily identi?able?om your site orfrom a publicly
accessible area immediately adjacent to your site.
ii. Locations where storm water or allowable non-storm water will be
discharged to surface waters (including storm sewer systems and/or
wetlands) on or near the site.

f. Locations of all potential pollutant-generating activities identi?ed in Part 7.2.6;

g. Locations of storm water control measures; and

42

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

h. Locations where tacki?ers, polymers, ?occulants, fertilizers, or other treatment
chemicals will be used and stored.

7.2.6. Construction Site Pollutants. The must include the following:
a. A list and description of all the pollutant-generating activities22 on your site.

b. For each pollutant-generating activity, an inventory of pollutants or pollutant
constituents sediment, fertilizers and/or pesticides, paints, solvents, fuels)
associated with that activity, which could be exposed to rainfall, or snowmelt,
and could be discharged from your construction site. You must take into account
where potential spills and leaks could occur that contribute pollutants to storm
water discharges. You must also document any departures from the
manufacturer?s speci?cations for applying fertilizers containing nitrogen and
phosphorus, as required in Part 2.3 

7.2.7. Non-Storm water Discharges. The must also identify all sources of
allowable non-storm water discharges listed in Part 1.3.4. All non-storm water
discharges must be managed or treated to preve discharge of pollutants.

   
    
   
 
  
  

Note: Allowable discharges listed in section 1.3.4. mus
in?ltrated into the ground so sediment and any oil sh
appropriately (not overloading soil capacity to degra lutants), or be otherwise treated so
that pollutants are not discharged with storm a 

ed such that they are

.
1+1nn t-

 1 any 
7.2.9. Description of 
a. Storm water Cont 1 Measures to be Used During Construction Activity.
The must describe all storm water control measures that are or will be

installed and maintained at your site to meet the requirements of Part 2. For each
storm water control measure, you must document:

Control Measures.

i. Information on the type of storm water control measure to be installed and
maintained, including design information;

ii. What speci?c sediment controls will be installed and made operational prior
to conducting earth-disturbing activities in any given portion of your site to
meet the requirement of Part 

For exit points on your site, document stabilization techniques you will use
and any additional controls that are planned to remove sediment prior to
vehicle exit consistent with Part and

 

22 Examples of pollutant-generating activities include, but are not limited to: paving operations; concrete,
paint, and stucco washout and waste disposal; solid waste storage and disposal; and dewatering
operations.

43

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

iv. For projects at high altitudes that expect long seasons of heavy snow, you
must document in your when the snow season is expected so spring
runoff controls can be installed before snowfall.

V. For linear projects, where you have determined that the use of perimeter
controls in portions of the site is impracticable, document why you believe
this to be the case (see Part 2. 

b. Use of Treatment Chemicals. If you plan to use cationic polymers and/or
?occulants, you must have an approval letter from DWQ. Otherwise for
treatment chemicals at your site you must include the following in your 

i. A listing of all soil types23 that are expected to be exposed during
construction and that will be discharged to locations where chemicals will
be applied. Also include a listing of soil types expected to be found in ?ll
material to be used in these same areas, to the extent you have this
information prior to construction.

ii. A listing of all treatment chemicals to be used at the site, and why the
selection of these chemicals is suited to the soil characteristics of your site;

If you have been authorized by DWQ to use cationic treatment chemicals,
include the speci?c controls and implementation procedures designed to
ensure that your use of cationic treatment chemicals will not lead to a
violation of water quality standards or a ?sh kill;

iv. The dosage of all treatment chemicals you will use at the site or the
methodology you will use to determine dosage;

v. Information from any applicable Material Safety Data Sheets 

vi. Schematic drawings of any chemically-enhanced storm water controls or
chemical treatment systems to be used for application of the treatment
chemicals;

vii. A description of how chemicals will be stored consistent with Part 2.1 

to applicable state or local requirements affecting the use of
treatment chemicals, and copies of applicable manufacturer?s speci?cations
regarding the use of your speci?c treatment chemicals and/or chemical
treatment systems; and

ix. A description of the training that personnel who handle and apply chemicals
have received prior to permit coverage, or will receive prior to use of the
treatment chemicals at your site.

c. Stabilization Practices. The must describe the speci?c vegetative
and/or non-vegetative practices that will be used to comply with the
requirements in Part 2.2, including:

 

23 Information on soils may be obtained at 

44

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

i. If you will be complying with the stabilization deadlines speci?ed in Part
2.2.2., you must indicate in your the beginning and ending dates of
the seasonally dry period and your site conditions; and

ii. For projects at high altitudes that expect long seasons of heavy snow, you
must document in your when the snow season is expected and so
stabilization measures for spring runoff can be installed before snowfall.

7.2.10. Pollution Prevention Procedures.

a. Spill Prevention and ResPonse Procedures. The must describe
procedures that you will follow to prevent and respond to spills and leaks
consistent with Part 2.3, including:

i. Procedures for expeditiously stopping, containing, and cleaning up spills,
leaks, and other releases. Identify the name or position of the employee(s)
responsible for detection and response of spills or leaks; and

  
   
   

ii. Procedures for noti?cation of approp
response agencies, and regulatory here a leak, spill, or other
release containing a hazardous atusta  or 'n an amount equal to or in
excess of a reportable quantity with Part 2.3 .4 and established

under either 40 CFR Part 1 9 40 art 117, or 40 CFR Part 302, occurs
during a 24-hour period. Co


acility personnel, emergency

     
       
  

 

ation must be in locations that are
readily accessible aila .

    
 

of Spill Prevention Control and

Countermeasure "is developed for the construction activity under Part
311 of the 01 programs otherwise required by a UPDES
permit for the 11 activity, provided that you keep a copy of that other

plan onsite.

Note: Even if you already have an SPCC or other spill prevention plan in existence, your plans
will only be considered adequate if they meet all of the requirements of this Part, either as part of
your existing plan or supplemented as part of the 

b. Waste Management Procedures. The must describe procedures for
how you will handle and dispose of all wastes generated at your site, including,
but not limited to, clearing and demolition debris, sediment removed from the
site, construction and domestic waste, hazardous or toxic waste, and sanitary
waste.

7.2.11. Procedures for Inspection, Maintenance, and Corrective Action. The 
must describe the procedures you will follow for maintaining your storm water
control measures, conducting site inspections, and, where necessary, taking
corrective actions, in accordance with Part 2.1.1 Part 2.3.2, Part 4, and Part 5 of
the permit. The following information must also be included in your 

a. Personnel responsible for conducting inspections;

45

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

b. The inspection schedule you will be following, which is based on whether your
site is subject to Part 4.1.2 or Part 4.1.3, and whether your site quali?es for any
of the allowances for reduced inspection frequencies in Part 4.1.4. If you will be
conducting inspections in accordance with the inspection schedule in Part
4.1.2.b. or Part 4.1.3, the location of the rain gauge on your site or the address of
the weather station you will be using to obtain rainfall data;

c. If you will be reducing your inspection frequency in accordance with Part
the beginning and ending dates of frozen conditions on your site; and

(1. Any inspection or maintenance checklists or other forms that will be used.

e. for each storm water control measure you must describe the strategy and
schedule you plan to employ to maintain storm water control measures in
effective operating condition for each precipitation event or you will be
expected to replace, repair, and/or maintain problems found with storm water
control measures immediately after each inspection.

7.2.12. Staff Training. The must include documentation that the required
personnel were trained in accordance with Part 6, and all other relevant training be
documented (including training in Section 2 for projects that use treatment
chemicals).

7.2.13. UIC Class 5 Injection Wells.

a. Utah Water Quality Act Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program
Requirements for Certain Subsurface Storm Water Controls. If you are
using any of the following storm water controls at your site, as they are
described below, you must document any contact you have had with DWQ for
implementing the requirements for underground injection wells in the Safe
Drinking Water Act and implementing regulations at UAC R317-7. In
addition there may be local requirements related to such structures. Such
controls (below) would generally be considered Class UIC wells and all UIC
Class wells must be reported to DWQ for an inventory:

i. French drains (if storm water is directed to any bored, drilled, driven shaft or
dug hole that is deeper than its widest surface dimension, or has a
subsurface ?uid distribution system);

ii. Commercially manufactured pre?cast or pre-built proprietary subsurface
detention vaults, chambers, or other devices designed to capture and
in?ltrate storm water ?ow; and

Drywells, seepage pits, or improved sinkholes (if storm water is directed to
any bored, drilled, driven shaft or dug hole that is deeper than its widest
surface dimension, or has a subsurface ?uid distribution system).

Note: For the State UIC Contact at DWQ call 801-536-4300.

7.2.14. List of Impaired Waters that Receive a Discharge and the following information (see
paragraph 3.2.1):

46

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

a. A list of all impaired waters to which you discharge;
b. The pollutant(s) for which the surface water is impaired; and

0. Whether a TMDL has been approved or established for the waters to which you
discharge.

7.2.15. Certi?cation. The owner/operator must sign and date your in
accordance with Appendix G, Part G.l6.l .2 1.3.

7.2.16. Also Included in the Once you have completed the submission of your
on?line N01 (or paper submission for some), you must include the following
documents as part of your 

a. A copy of your NOI,

b. A copy of this permit (an electronic copy easily available to the storm water
team is also acceptable).

7.3. AVAILABILITY OF YOUR SWPP
You are required to maintain a current copy of
construction site where this permit is required, a

construction activity related to the project 

must be able to refer to and update  - to manage the site according to
permit requirements and as outline he 1t is not required that the be on
the site when construction worke  for - day or when there is no activity occurring
on the site, but at all times there - amvi contact information where the can
must be available within 30 minutes24 at the
during random inspections at active sites or

- tions. Requests for a copy every active
ere construction workers and
The SW Team and/or site workers

    

   
    
  
     
     
 
 
 
  
  

 

as agreed upon by the permitte and the regulatory authority at the time. DWQ may
provide access to portions of the project to a member of the public upon request.
Con?dential Business Information (CB1) may be withheld from the public, but may not be
withheld from DWQ, local regulating MS4, or the EPA.

Note: Information covered by a claim of con?dentiality will be disclosed by DWQ only to the
extent of and by means of the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part2, Subpart B. In general,
submitted information protected by a business con?dentiality claim maybe disclosed to other
employees, o?icers, or authorized representatives of DWQ and/or the EPA. The authorized

 

24 On several occasions for smaller projects it has been noted that the location of site plans happens to be
the project manager?s vehicle. On larger sites the may be in another location not close to the place
a permitting authority may appear. Thirty minutes is provided for the case where a permitting authority
shows up for an inspection and the is on the site a distance from that exact location, or it is with the
project manager who has recently left the site for a business reason, inadvertently taking the site plans
(including the with him/her. This time allowance is for noti?cation of the person who may have
taken the so it can be returned, or to locate the on the site and provide it for the permitting
authority. It is intended that be maintained at the site when the site is active. The 30-minutes is
not for retrieving the from another site where it should not be.

47

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

representatives, including employees of other executive branch agencies, may review during
the course of reviewing draft regulations. If an onsite location is unavailable to keep the 
when no personnel are present, notice of the plan ?s location must be posted near the main
entrance of your construction site.

7.4. REQUIRED MODIFICATIONS.

7.4.1. List of Conditions Requiring Modi?cation. You must modify your
including the site map(s), in response to any of the following conditions:

a. Whenever you make changes to your construction plans, storm water control
measures, pollution prevention measures, or other activities at your site that are
no longer accurately re?ected in your This includes changes made in
response to corrective actions triggered under Part 5;

b. To re?ect areas on your site map where operational control has been transferred
due to new ownership or a new operator (and the date of that transfer) since
initiating permit coverage;

c. If inspections or investigations by site staff, the M84, DWQ, or the EPA
determine that modi?cations are necessary for compliance with this
permit;

d. Where DWQ, the EPA, or the M84 determines it is necessary to impose
additional requirements on your discharge, the following must be included in
your 

i. A copy of any correspondence describing such requirements; and

ii. A description of the storm water control measures that will be used to meet
such requirements.

6. To re?ect any revisions to applicable federal, state, or local requirements that
affect the storm water control measures implemented at the site; and

f. If applicable, if a change in chemical treatment systems or chemically enhanced
storm water control is made, including use of a different treatment chemical,
different dosage rate, or different area of application.

7.4.2. Deadlines for Modi?cations. You must complete required revisions to the
within 7 calendar days following the occurrence of any of the conditions
listed in Part 7.4.1.

7.4.3. Modi?cation Records. You are required to maintain records showing the
dates of all modi?cations. The records must include the name of the person
authorizing each change (see Part 7.2.15 above this person can be a duly
authorized representative as allowed in Appendix G.l6. .2, but should be a member
of the storm water team) and a brief summary of all changes.

Note: In most cases the date the modification was made with the initials of the person making the
change is adequate.

48

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

7.4.4. Certi?cation Requirements. All modi?cations made to the consistent
with Part 7.4 must be authorized by a person identi?ed in Appendix G, Part G. 16.1 .2.






49

8.1.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

HOW TO TERMINATE COVERAGE.

Until your permit coverage is terminate, you are required to comply with all conditions and
ef?uent limitations in the permit, except that inspections can be suspended if the site has
been prepared to meet the stabilization requirements found in Section 2.2. To begin the
termination process, you must go to the DWQ on-line Storm Water data base and complete
the steps for terminating your permit, or you must submit a complete and accurate Notice of
Termination (NOT) form (that can be downloaded from the construction storm water web
page for DWQ) to the DWQ and the M84 (for all MS4s listed in Appendix E, you must
submit a paper form to the MS4), which certi?es that you have met the requirements for
termination in Part 8. At this point the permit status changes to ?uncon?rmed termination?.
The termination process is complete when DWQ or the M84 (of jurisdiction) does a ?nal
inspection and the inspection is passed. At this point the status of the permit changes to
?con?rmed termination? and the permit is fully terminated.

MINIMUM INFORMATION REQUIRED IN NOT.

You will be required to provide the following in your NOT:

8.1.1. UPDES permit tracking number provided by the DWQ when you received coverage

under this permit;

8.1.2. You must indicate if the termination request is:

a. Partial Site If the termination request is for a portion of the total area, on area
that is no longer under your ownership> you and the new owner are required to
submit an Ownership Transfer orm found in Appendix M, to DWQ (and the
M84 if a regulated M84, see Appendix E). For a partial termination you must
indicate (on the NOT) how many acres (to the hundredths) that will be
eliminated as a result of the transfer transaction, and you must describe (in
words) the area that will be transferred. A partial termination submission does
not result in a change of the permit status (the remaining area is still under your
permit tracking number with an active status);

b. Full Site -- if the termination request is the entire area, it must be handled as
follows:

i. New Ownership. A transfer of the entire site to a different owner. For this
case you and the new owner are required to submit an Ownership Transfer
Form found in Appendix M, to DWQ (and the M84 if a regulated M84, see
Appendix E). The permit status will be changed from ?active? to
?uncon?rmed termination?. DWQ or the M84 of jurisdiction will change
the permit status to ?con?rmed termination? after an inspection. Another
way to transfer is described on the Ownership Transfer Form.

ii. Project Completion. The project is completed and stabilized according to
section 2.2. The status of the project will change from ?active? to
?uncon?rmed termination? which will change to ?con?rmed termination?
after a ?nal inspection by DWQ or the local MS4 has approve the
termination in a ?nal inspection.

8.1.3. Basis for submission of the NOT (see Part 

50

8.2.

8.1.6.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

. Owner/Operator contact information;

. Name of project and address (or a description of location if no street address is

available); and

NOT certi?cation, and signature (in accordance with Appendix G, G.16.1.1 1.3).

CONDITIONS FOR TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE.
You must terminate permit coverage if one of the following conditions occurs at your site
(either 8.2.1, 8.2.2, or 8.2.3 below):

8.2.1.

8.2.2.

8.2.3.

You have completed all earth?disturbing activities at your site and, if applicable,
construction support activities covered by this permit (see Part 1.3.3), and you have
met the following requirements:

a. For any areas that (1) were disturbed during construction, (2) are not covered
over by permanent structures, you have met the requirements for ?nal vegetative
or non-vegetative stabilization in Part 2.2;

     
    
   
   

b. You have removed and properly dispose 1 construction materials, waste
and waste handling devices, and have
were used during construction, unle

termination of permit coverage;

. at are intended for long-term use following
 or those that are biodegradable to assist in

associated wi onstru on, unless needed for long-term use following your
termination of verage; and

e. If within a regulated MS4 (see appendix E), you have noti?ed the M84 that the
site is ready for a ?nal inspection; or

For the entire site or for a part of the site, if ownership changes the portion of the site
that changes ownership must be terminated.

a. If ownership changes for the entire site the party selling the site must terminate
coverage (see paragraph 8.1.2).

b. If ownership changes for a portion of the site the permit holder must terminate
only the portion of the site that changes ownership (see paragraph 8.1.2).

Completed homes that are occupied by home owners where at least temporary
sediment and erosion controls are in place are allowed to be terminated without ?nal
stabilization. If a home owner buys a newly completed house the permit can be
terminated while the property is being transferred to the home owner. The home
owner should not be involved in the permit process. If a home owner builds his/her

51

8.3.

8.4.

8.5.

8.6.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

house, they must terminate the permit when the house is approved for occupancy
where temporary storm water controls are in place on the site.
8.2.4. Coverage under an individual or alternative general UPDES permit has been
obtained.

FINAL INSPECTION ASSOCIATED WITH TERMINATION.

After submission of an NOT, for most cases, there will be a ?nal inspection by the
permitting authority (DWQ or the M84 with jurisdictional authority for the area). A NOT
is not complete until the permitting authority approves the site for termination unless the
permitting authority does not perform the inspection within a year of the submission of the
NOT after it was submitted.

HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR NOT.
8.4.1.

It is preferred that the DWQ ?on-line? NOI system be used to submit an electronic
NOT.

Access to the DWQ on-line storm water data base is found at the DWQ webpage at
A click on Online
Application Process and Search for Existing Bermits found on that page will take you to
the ?on line? storm water data base where NOIs and NOT 3 are submitted. You must
logon to the account created when the N01 was submitted and ?nd the terminate (or NOT)
button for the permit tracking number when you wish to terminate a coverage. In the case
where the permittee does not have access to the account where the N01 was submitted

the permittee must either contact DWQ and request account access or ?ll out and submit
to DWQ a paper form of the OT which can be downloaded from the same DWQ
website.

DEADLINE FOR NOT.
You must submit an NOT within 30 calendar days after any one of the triggering conditions
in Part 8.2 occur.

EFFECTIVE DATE OF TERMINATION OF COVERAGE.

Your authorization to discharge under this permit terminates at midnight of the calendar day
that a completed NOT is processed (meaning that storm water discharged from the site is
not coming from a site involved with construction activity) on the DWQ ?on-line? storm
water data base, unless the results of the ?nal inspection indicate problems that need
addressing.

52

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix A - De?nitions and Acronyms
De?nitions
?Act? is a reference to the Utah Water Quality Act, or Utah Code Annotated Title 19, Chapter 5.

?Agricultural Land? - cropland, grassland, rangeland, pasture, and other agricultural land, on
which agricultural and forest-related products or livestock are produced and resource concerns
may be addressed. Agricultural lands include cropped woodland, marshes, incidental areas
included in the agricultural operation, and other types of agricultural land used for the production
of livestock.

?Antidegradation Policy? or ?Antidegradation Requirements? - the water quality standards
regulation that requires maintenance of water quality:

Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards for the designated
uses will be maintained at high quality unless it is determined by the Board, after
appropriate intergovernmental coordination and public participation in concert with the
Utah continuing planning process, allowing lower wat uality is necessary to
accommodate important economic or social develo in the area in which the waters
are located. However, existing instream water us
water quality degradation is allowable which uld 
existing instream water uses.

   
   
  

   
    
     

In those cases where potential water quali
discharge is involved, the antidegr ion

Category 1 Waters: Water .- . been determined by the Board to be of exceptional
recreational or ecologi 'a
resource requiring prote 
designation, by the Board . I lie hearing, as Category 1 Waters. New point source
discharges of wastewater, tre or otherwise, are prohibited in such segments after the
effective date of designation. Protection of such segments from pathogens in diffuse,
underground sources is covered in R3 17-5 and R3 17-7 and the Regulations for Individual
Wastewater Disposal Systems (R3 17-501 through R3 17-515). Other diffuse sources
(nonpoint sources) of wastes shall be controlled to the extent feasible through
implementation of best management practices or regulatory programs.

  

Discharges may be allowed Where pollution will be temporary and limited after
consideration of the factors in R3 17-2-3 and where best management practices will
be employed to minimize pollution effects.

Waters of the state designated as Category 1 Waters are listed in UAC R3l7-2-12. 1.

Category 2 Waters: Category 2 Waters are designated surface water segments which are
treated as Category 1 Waters except that a point source discharge may be permitted
provided that the discharge does not degrade existing water quality. Discharges may be
allowed where pollution will be temporary and limited after consideration of the factors in
UAC R3 1 7-2-3 and where best management practices will be employed to

A-1

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

minimize pollution effects. Waters of the state designated as Category 2 Waters are listed
in UAC R317-2-12.2.

Category 3 Waters: For all other waters of the state, point source discharges are allowed
and degradation may occur, pursuant to the conditions and review procedures outlined in
in the paragraph below (Antidegradation Review).

Antidegradation Review (ADR): An antidegradation review will determine whether the
proposed activity complies with the applicable antidegradation requirements for receiving
waters that may be affected.

An antidegradation review (ADR) may consist of two parts or levels. A Level I review is
conducted to insure that existing uses will be maintained and protected.

Both Level I and Level 11 reviews will be conducted on a parameter-by?parameter basis. A
decision to move to a Level 11 review for one parameter does not require a Level 11 review
for other parameters. Discussion of parameters of concern is those expected to be affected
by the proposed activity.

Antidegradation reviews shall include opportunities for public participation, as described
in UAC R3 1 7-2-3 .Se.

?Arid Areas? areas with an average annual rainfall of 0 to 10 inches.

?Bank? stream bank or river bank) the rising ground bordering the channel of a water of
the State of Utah.

?Bluff? a steep headland, promontmy, riverbank, or cliff.
?Borrow Areas? the areas where materials are dug for use as ?ll, either onsite or off-site.

?Bypass? the intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility. See
40 CFR 

?Category 1, 2, and/or 3 Waters? see ?Antidegradation Policy? or ?Antidegradation
Requirements?.

?Cationic Treatment Chemical? polymers, ?occulants, or other chemicals that contain an
overall positive charge. Among other things, they are used to reduce turbidity in storm water
discharges by chemically bonding to the overall negative charge of suspended silts and other soil
materials and causing them to bind together and settle out. Common examples of cationic
treatment chemicals are chitosan and cationic PAM.

?Commencement of Earth-Disturbing Activities? - the initial disturbance of soils (or ?breaking
ground?) associated with clearing, grading, or excavating activities or other construction-related

activities stockpiling of ?ll material).

?Commencement of Pollutant-Generating Activities? at construction sites (for the purposes of
this permit) occurs in any of the following circumstances:

- Clearing, grubbing, grading, and excavation has begun;



Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

- Raw materials related to your construction activity, such as building materials or products,
landscape materials, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, detergents, fuels, oils, or other
chemicals have been placed at your site;

- Use of authorized non-storm water for washout activities, or dewatering activities, have
begun; or

0 Any other activity has begun that causes the generation of or the potential generation of
pollutants.

?Common Plan of Development or Sale? is a plan to subdivide a parcel of land into separate
parts for separate sale. This can be for a residential, commercial, or industrial development. The
plan originates as a single parcel which is separated into parts. This usually goes through an
approval process by a local governmental unit, but in some cases may not require that process.
The original plan is considered the ?common plan of development or sale? whether phased or
completed in steps. If a further plan is conceived that was not foreseen during the original plan,
or the original plan is added onto but the addition was conceived later and was not included in
any part of the original plan concept and/or development, and 'develops after the completion of

the construction of the entire original plan, it would be a Si . te ?common plan of development

       
  
 

initiated after October, 1992. A common plan 0 
section of the development has ful?lled 
0?

 
      

urposes g. in a residential development as
- As lots or separated sections of the
. ized, and the plan purposes are ful?lled for

.
Anmn?+ .-. .43 r.

1.. ?Inm 
the luau U1 uevelupiucuL U1 balc  a

    
  

   

that area, lot, or see ion; it is no .
home is sold in a developmen the 0 

     
 

(which are no longer part of the com on plan of development or sale), but all un?nished lots
remain part of the same common plan development or sale until they are completed, stabilized,
and ful?lled according to the purposes of the plan). Common Plans of Development or Sale can
be commercial or industrial also.

?Construction Activities? earth-disturbing activities, such as the clearing, grading, and
excavation of land.

?Construction and Development Ef?uent Limitations and New Source Performance Standards?
Rule) as published in 40 CFR 450 is the regulation requiring ef?uent limitations
guidelines(ELG?s) and new source performance standards (NSPS) for controlling the discharge of
pollutants from construction sites.

?Construction Site? the land or water area where construction activities will occur and where
storm water controls will be installed and maintained. The construction site includes construction
support activities, which may be located at a different part of the property from Where the primary
construction activity will take place, or on a different piece of property altogether. The
construction site is often a smaller subset of the lot or parcel within which the project is taking
place.

A-3

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Construction Support Activities? a construction-related activity that speci?cally supports the
construction activity and involves earth disturbance or pollutant-generating activities of its own,
and can include activities associated with concrete or asphalt batch plants, equipment staging
yards, materials storage areas, excavated material disposal areas, and borrow areas.

?Construction Waste? discarded material (such as packaging materials, scrap construction
materials, masonry products, timber, steel, pipe, and electrical cuttings, plastics, and styrofoam).

?Conveyance Channel? a temporary or permanent waterway designed and installed to
safely convey storm water ?ow within and out of a construction site.

?Corrective Action? for the purposes of the permit, any action taken to (1) repair, modify, or
replace any storm water control used at the site; (2) clean up and dispose of spills, releases, or
other deposits found on the site; and (3) remedy a permit violation.

the Clean Water Act or the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. section
1251 et seq.

?Dewatering? the act of draining rainwater and/or groundwater from building foundations,
vaults, and trenches.

?Director? the director of the Division of Water Qualit .
?Discharge? it can mean discharge of storm water or ?discharge of a pollutant.?

?Discharge of a Pollutant? any addition of any ?pollutant? or combination of pollutants to
?waters of the State? from any ?point source,? or any addition of any pollutant or combination of
pollutants to the waters of the State. This includes additions of pollutants into waters of the State
from: surface runoff which  collected or channeled by man; discharges through pipes, sewers, or
other conveyances, leading into privately owned treatment works. See 40 CFR 122.2.

?Discharge Point? for the purposes of this permit, the location where collected and
concentrated storm water ?ows are discharged from the construction site.

?Discharge-Related Activity? activities that cause, contribute to, or result in storm water and
allowable non-storm water point source discharges, and measures such as the siting, construction,
and operation of storm water controls to control, reduce, or prevent pollutants from being
discharged.

?Discharge to an Impaired Water? for the purposes of this permit, a discharge to an impaired
water occurs if the ?rst water of the State to which you discharge is identi?ed by DWQ or EPA
pursuant to Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act as not meeting an applicable water quality
standard, or is included in an EPA-approved or DWQ established total maximum daily load
(TMDL). For discharges that enter a storm sewer system prior to discharge, the water of the State
to which you discharge is the ?rst water of the State that receives the storm water discharge from
the storm sewer system.

?Domestic Waste? for the purposes of this permit, typical household trash, garbage or rubbish
items generated by construction activities.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Drainageway? an open linear depression, whether constructed or natural, that functions for the
collection and drainage of surface water.

?Drought-Stricken Area? for the purposes of this permit, an area in which the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration?s U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook indicates for the period during
which the construction will occur that any of the following conditions are likely: (1) ?Drought to
persist or intensify?, (2) ?Drought ongoing, some improvement?, (3) ?Drought likely to improve,
impacts ease?, or (4) ?Drought development likely?. See


?Earth-Disturbing Activity? or ?Land-Disturbing Activity? actions taken to alter the existing
vegetation and/or underlying soil of a site, such as clearing, grading, site preparation 
excavating, cutting, and ?lling), soil compaction, and movement and stockpiling of top soils.

?Effective Operating Condition? for the purposes of this permit, a storm water control is kept in
effective operating condition if it has been implemented and maintained in such a manner that it
is working as designed to minimize pollutant discharges.

?Ef?uent Limitations? for the purposes of this permit, any he Part 2 or Part 3 requirements.

    
   
   

?Ef?uent Limitations Guideline? (ELG) de?ned in 40
the EPA Administrator under section 304(b) of CW

.2 as a regulation published by
ise ef?uent limitations.

?Electronic Notice of Intent? online .
General Permit forms.

?Excursion? a measured value that exceeds a speci?ed limit.

?Existing Project? a construction project that commenced construction activities prior to the
issuance date of this permit.

?Existing Permit Coverage? means for a permittee that he/she had permit coverage under a
previous permit UTR3 00000), prior to the issuance of this permit.

?Exit Points? any points of egress from the construction site to be used by vehicles and
equipment during construction activities.

?Exposed Soils? for the purposes of this permit, soils that as a result of earth-disturbing
activities are disturbed and exposed to the elements of weather.

?Final Stabilization? on areas not covered by permanent structures, either (1) vegetation has
been established, or for arid or semi-arid areas, the area has been designed and prepared so that
with time it is expected to be established a uniform evenly distributed, without large bare

A-5

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

areas) perennial vegetative cover of 70 percent of the natural background vegetative cover, or (2)
non-vegetative stabilization methods have been implemented to provide effective cover for
exposed portions of the site.

?Groundwater? water that resides in the ground, even if only temporarily for the time it is in the
ground, in the voids and interstitial spaces around soil particles.

?Hazardous Materials? or ?Hazardous Substances? or ?Hazardous or Toxic Waste? for the
purposes of this permit, any liquid, solid, or contained gas that contain properties that are
dangerous or potentially harmful to human health or the environment. See also 40 CF ?261 .2.

?Impaired Water? or ?Water Quality Impaired Water? or ?Water Quality Limited Segment? for
the purposes of this permit, waters identi?ed as impaired on the CWA Section 303 list, or
waters with an EPA-approved or established TMDL. Your construction site will be considered to
discharge to an impaired water if the ?rst water of the state to which you discharge is identi?ed
by DWQ pursuant to Section 303(d) of the CWA as not meeting an applicable water quality
standard, or is included in an EPA-approved or DWQ established total maximum daily load
(TMDL). For discharges that enter a storm sewer system prior to discharge, the ?rst water of the
state to which you discharge is the water body that receives the storm water discharge from the
storm sewer system.

?Impervious Surface? for the purpose of this permit, any land surface with a low or no capacity
for soil in?ltration including, but not limited to, pavement, sidewalks, parking areas and
driveways, packed gravel or soil, or rooftops.

?Indian Country? or ?Indian Country Lands? defined at 40 CFR ?122.2 as:

1. All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United
States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights?0f
way running through the resewation;

2. All dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States whether
within the originally or subsequently acquired territory thereof; and

3. All Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including
rights-of-ways running through the same.

?Infeasible? for the purpose of this permit, infeasible means not technologically possible or not
economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry practices. DWQ notes that it
does not intend for any permit requirement to con?ict with state water rights law.

?Install? or ?Installation? when used in connection with storm water controls, to connect or set
in position storm water controls to make them operational.

?Intermittent (or Seasonal) Stream? one which ?ows at certain times of the year when
groundwater provides water for stream ?ow, as well as during and immediately after some
precipitation events or snowmelt.

?Jar test? a test designed to simulate full-scale water

treatment processes by taking into account the possible conditions.



Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Landward? positioned or located away from a water body, and towards the land.

?Level Spreader? a temporary storm water control used to spread storm water ?ow uniformly
over the ground surface as sheet ?ow to prevent concentrated, erosive ?ows from occurring.

?Linear Construction Project? includes the construction of roads, bridges, conduits,
substructures, pipelines, sewer lines, towers, poles, cables, wires, connectors, switching,
regulating and transforming equipment and associated ancillary facilities in a long, narrow area.

?Minimize? to reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable using storm water controls that
are technologically available and economically practicable and achievable in light of best industry
practices.

?Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System? or defined at 40 CFR as a
conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets,
catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm drains):

discharges to waters of the State;

 

2. Designed or used for collecting nve storm water;

3. Which is not a combined sewe

  
 

4. Which is not part of
?122.2.

wn Treatment Works (POTW) as de?ned at 40 CF 

?National Pollutant Discharge Elimi a ion System? (N PDES) defined at 40 CFR ?122.2 as the
national program for issuing, modifying, revoking and reissuing, terminating, monitoring and
enforcing permits, and imposing and enforcing pretreatment requirements, under sections 307,
402, 318, and 405 of CWA. The term includes an ?approved program.?

?Native Topsoil? the uppermost layer of naturally occurring soil for a particular. area, and is
often rich in organic matter, biological activity, and nutrients.

?Native Vegetation? the species of plants that have developed for a particular region or
ecosystem and are considered endemic to that region or ecosystem.

?Natural Buffer? for the purposes of this permit, an area of undisturbed natural cover
surrounding surface waters within which construction activities are restricted. Natural cover
includes the vegetation, exposed rock, or barren ground that exists prior to commencement of
earth-disturbing activities.

?Natural Vegetation? vegetation that occurs spontaneously without regular management,
maintenance or species introductions, removals, and that generally has a strong component of
native species.

A-7

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?New Operator of a New or Existing Project? an operator that through transfer and/or operation
replaces the operator of an already permitted construction project.

?New Project? a construction project that commences construction activities on or after July 1,
201 3.

?New Source? for the purpose of this permit, a construction project that commenced
construction activities on or after the issuance date of this permit.

?New Source Performance Standards for the purposes of this permit, NSPS are
technology-based standards that apply to construction sites that are new sources under 40 CFR
450.24.

?Non-Storm Water Discharges? discharges that do not originate from storm events. They can
include, but are not limited to, discharges of process water, air conditioner condensate,
noncontact cooling water, vehicle wash water, sanitary wastes, concrete washout water, paint
wash water, irrigation water, or pipe testing water.

?Non-Turbid? is a term used in this permit to describe water that appears visually clear and
there appears to be no evidence of silt or sediment present in the water.

?Notice of Intent? (NOI) the form (electronic or paper) required for authorization of coverage
under the Construction General Permit.

?Notice of Termination? WOT) the form (electronic or paper) required for terminating
coverage under the Construction General Permit.

?Operational? for the purpose of this permit, storm water controls are made ?operational? when
they have been installed and implemented, are functioning as designed, and are properly
maintained.

?Operator? for the purpose of this permit an operator is the party that has day-to-day operational
control of those activities at a project that are necessary to ensure compliance with the permit
conditions they are authorized to direct workers at a site to carry out activities required by
the permit). Operator in this context is generally is considered to be the general contractor for a
project.

?Ordinary High Water Mark? the line on the shore established by ?uctuations of water and
indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving,
changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, and/or the presence of litter
and debris.

?Outfall? see ?Discharge Point.?

?Owner? for the purpose of this permit an owner usually has ownership of property on which
construction activity is taking place, but it also includes ownership of a project for which
construction activity is occurring on property that is owned or leased. An owner is the party that
has ultimate control over construction plans and speci?cations, including the ability at the highest
level to make modi?cations to those plans and speci?cations. ?Owner? in this context is the
party that has ultimate control over the destiny of a project.

A-8

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Permittee? is the owner and/or operator named in the N01 for the project.

?Permitting Authority? for the purposes of this permit, DWQ, the Executive Secretary for the
Utah Water Quality Board, or an authorized representative.

?Point(s) of Discharge? see ?Discharge Point.?

?Point Source? any discernible, con?ned, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to,
any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete ?ssure, container, rolling stock
concentrated animal feeding operation, land?ll leachate collection system, vessel or other ?oating
craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged. This term does not include return ?ows
from irrigated agriculture or agricultural storm water runoff.

?Pollutant? de?ned at 40 CFR ?122.2. A partial listing from this de?nition includes: dredged
spoil, solid waste, sewage, garbage, sewage sludge, chemical wastes, biological materials, heat,
wrecked or discarded equipment, rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial or municipal waste.

   
  
   

purposes of this permit), those
s, either as a result of earth
tants that are typically found

?Pollutant-Generating Activities? at construction sites (for
activities that lead to or could lead to the generation of pol
disturbance or a related support activity. Some of the ty
at construction sites are:

0 sediment;

0 nutrients;

- heavy metals;

- pesticides and herbicides;
0 oil and grease;

- bacteria and viruses;

0 trash, debris, and soli -
0 treatment polymers; an
0 any other toxic chemicals.

 
  
  
 

?Pollution Prevention Measures? storm water controls designed to reduce or eliminate the
addition of pollutants to construction site discharges through analysis of pollutant sources,
implementation of proper handling/disposal practices, employee education, and other actions.

?Polymers? for the purposes of this permit, coagulants and ?occulants used to control erosion
on soil or to enhance the sediment removal capabilities of sediment traps or basins. Common
construction site polymers include polyacrylamide (PAM), chitosan, alum, polyaluminum
chloride, and gypsum.

?Prohibited Discharges? discharges that are not allowed under this permit, including:

1. Wastewater from washout of concrete;

Wastewater from washout and cleanout of stucco, paint, form release oils, curing
compounds and other construction materials;

Fuels, oils, or other pollutants used in vehicle and equipment operation and maintenance;
Soaps or solvents used in vehicle and equipment washing;

5. Toxic or hazardous substances from a spill or other release; and



A-9

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

6. Waste, garbage, floatable debris, construction debris, and sanitary waste from pollutant
generating activities.

?Provisionally Covered Under this Permit? for the purposes of this permit, DWQ provides
temporary coverage under this permit for emergency-related projects prior to receipt of a
complete and accurate N01. Discharges from earth-disturbing activities associated with the
emergency-related projects are subject to the terms and conditions of the permit during the period
of temporary coverage.

?Receiving Water? a ?Water of the State? is as de?ned in Utah Administrative Code R3 1 7-1?
1.34, into which the regulated storm water discharges.

?Regulatory Authority? as it pertains to this permit means EPA, DWQ, or a local MS4 that
oversights construction activity.

?Run-On? sources of storm water that drain from land located upslope or upstream from the
regulated site in question.

?Semi-Arid Areas? areas with an average annual rainfall of over 10 to 20 inches.

?Site? for construction activities, the land or water area where earth-disturbing activities take
place, including construction support activities.

?Small Construction Activity? de?ned at Utah Administrative Code R3 and
incorporated here by reference. A small construction activity includes clearing, grading, and
excavating resulting in a land disturbance that will disturb equal to or greater than one (1) acre
and less than ?ve (5) acres of land or will disturb less than one (1) acre of total land area but is
part of a larger common plan of development or sale that will ultimately disturb equal to or
greater than one (1) acre and less than ?ve (5) acres. Small construction activity does not include
routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity,
or original purpose of the site.

?Small Residential Lot? for the purpose of this permit, a lot being developed for residential
purposes that will disturb less than 1 acre of land, but is part of a larger residential project that
will ultimately disturb greater than or equal to 1 acre.

?Snowmelt? the conversion of snow into overland storm water and groundwater ?ow as a result
of warmer temperatures.

?Spill? for the purpose of this permit, the release of a hazardous or toxic substance from its
container or containment.

?Stabilization? the use of vegetative and/or non-vegetative cover to prevent erosion and
sediment loss in areas of disturbed soil exposed from the construction process.

?Steep Slopes? ?for this permit steep slopes are de?ned as those that are 15 percent or greater in
grade.

?Storm Sewer System? a conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage
systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, manmade channels, or storm
drains) designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water.



Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Storm Water? storm water runoff, snow melt runoff, and surface runOff and drainage.

?Storm Water Control Measure? - refers to any storm water control, BMP, or other method
(including narrative ef?uent limitations) used to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to
waters of the state.

?Storm Water Controls? see ?Storm Water Control measure.?

?Storm Water Discharge Associated with Construction Activity? as used in this permit, a
discharge of pollutants in storm water to waters of the state from areas where land disturbing
activities clearing, grading, or excavation) occur, or where construction

materials or equipment storage or maintenance ?ll piles, borrow area, concrete truck chute
wash down, fueling), or other industrial storm water directly related to the construction process
concrete or aSphalt batch plants), are located.

?Storm Water Inlet? an entrance or opening to a storm water conveyance system, generally
placed below grade so as to receive storm water drainage from the surrounding area.

  
 
   
 
 
  

modi?cations of the and oversight of compli
individuals on the ?Storm water Team? must be iden 

D)

from buildings and land surfaces.

CG an? A 3, 
Subcuutl?actul? 1Ul? the pur 

of a contract from the general 

 

ponds, marshes, wetlands, watercour s, waterways, springs, drainage systems, and all other
bodies or accumulations of water on the surface only. Surface water is visible water, standing or
flowing, above the surface of the ground.

(Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan) a site-speci?c, written document that,
among other things: (1) identi?es potential sources of storm water pollution at the construction
site; (2) describes storm water control measures to reduce or eliminate pollutants in storm water
discharges from the construction site; and (3) identi?es procedures the operator will implement to
comply with the terms and conditions of this general permit.

?Temporary Stabilization? a condition where exposed soils or disturbed areas are provided a
temporary vegetative and/or non-vegetative protective cover to prevent erosion and sediment loss.
Temporary stabilization may include temporary seeding, geotextiles, mulches, and other
techniques to reduce or eliminate erosion until either ?nal stabilization can be achieved or until
further construction activities take place to re-disturb this area.

?Thawing Conditions? for the purposes of this permit, thawing conditions are expected based
on the historical likelihood of two or more days with daytime temperatures greater than 
This date can be determined by looking at historical weather data.

A-ll

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Note: The estimation of thawing conditions is for planning purposes only. During construction
the permittee will be required to conduct site inspections based upon actual conditions if
thawing conditions occur sooner than expected, the permittee will be required to conduct
inspections at the regular ?equency).

?Total Maximum Daily Load? or the sum of the individual wasteload allocations
(WLAs) for point sources and load allocations (LAs) for nonpoint sources and natural
background. If a receiving water has only one point source discharger, the TMDL is the sum of
that point source WLA plus the LAs for any nonpoint sources of pollution and natural
background sources, tributaries, or adjacent segments. can be expressed in terms of either
mass per time, toxicity, or other appropriate measure.

?Toxic Waste? see ?Hazardous Materials.?

?Turbidity? when the term is used in a narrative it means a condition of water quality
characterized by the presence of cloudiness usually caused by suspended solids and/or organic
material. It refers to the visual clarity in water and is measured in a test passing light through a
sample of water and quantifying the amount oflight passing. The measurement is n_ot directly
proportional to the quantity of sediment in the water sample it is directly related to the quantity of
light that passes through the sample. Particulate size aid other factors can affect the amount of
light that passes through the sample. This measurement is called nephelometric turbidity units or
ntu.

?Uncontaminated Discharge? a discharge that does not cause or contribute to an
exceedence of applicable water quality standards.

?Upland? - the dry land area above and ?landward? of the ordinary high water mark.

?Upset? Upset means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary
noncompliance with technology based permit ef?uent limitations because of factors beyond your
reasonable control. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational
error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive
maintenance, or careless or improper operation. See 40 CF 

?Water-Dependent Structures? structures or facilities that are required to be located directly
adjacent to a waterbody or wetland, such as a marina, pier, boat ramp, etc.

?Water Quality Standards? ?are provisions of State law which consist of a designated use or uses
for the waters of the United States, water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses,
and an antidegradation policy to protect highquality waters. Water quality standards protect the
public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the Utah Water
Quality Act.

?Waters of the State? means all streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, water?courses, waterways,
wells, springs, irrigation systems, drainage systems, and all other bodies or accumulations of
water, surface and underground, natural or arti?cial, public or private, which are contained within,
?ow through, or border upon this state or any portion thereof, except that bodies of water
con?ned to and retained within the limits of private property, and which do not develop into or
constitute a nuisance, or a public health hazard, or a menace to fish and wildlife, shall not be
considered to be "waters of the state" under this definition (Section 19-5-102).

A-12

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

?Wetland? those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency
and duration suf?cient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. On-site evaluations are typically required to con?rm
the presence and boundaries of wetlands.

?Work day? for the purposes of this permit, a work day is a calendar day on which construction
activities will take place.

Acronyms

Construction Development
CGP Construction General Permit
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
Common Plan of Development or Sale
CWA Clean Water Act

DEQ Department of Environmental Quality

DDW Division of Drinking Water

DWQ Division of Water Quality

DNR Department of Natural Resources

DOGM Department of Oil, Gas, and Mining

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agen
ESA Endangered Species Act

FWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
MSGP Multi-Sector General Permit
NHPA National Historic Preservatio


NMF United States National Marine; a  
NOT Notice of Intent

NOT Notice of Termination
arge mination System

  
   
 
   
  
   

  

NPDES National Pollutant 
NRC National Response Center
NRCS National Resources Conse ion Service
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works

SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure
SW Storm Water

SWMP Storm Water Management Plan

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load

UAC Utah Administrative Code

UCA Utah Code Annotated

UCGP Utah Construction General Permit

UDOT Utah Department of Transportation

USGS United States Geological Survey

UWQA Utah Water Quality Act

WQS Water Quality Standard

A-l3

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix - Small Construction Waivers and Instructions

These waivers are only available to storm water discharges associated with small construction
activities construction activity disturbing between 1-5 acres). As the owner/operator of a
small construction activity, you may be able to qualify for a waiver in lieu of needing to obtain
coverage under this general permit based on a low rainfall erosivity factor. Each owner/operator,
otherwise needing permit coverage, must notify DWQ of its intention to employ this waiver. It is
the responsibility of those individuals wishing to obtain a waiver from coverage under this
general permit to submit a complete and accurate waiver certi?cation as described below. Where
the owner/operator changes or another is added during the construction project, the new
owner/operator must also submit a waiver certi?cation to be waived.

B.1 RAINFALL EROSIVITY WAIVER

Under this scenario the small construction project?s rainfall erosivity factor calculation in
the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation) is less than 5 during the period of construction activity.
The owner/operator must certify to DWQ that construction activity will occur only when the
rainfall erosivity factor is less than 5. The period of construction activity begins at initial earth
disturbance and ends with ?nal stabilization. Where vegetation will be used for ?nal stabilization,
the date of installation of a stabilization practice that will provide interim non-vegetative
stabilization can be used for the end of the construction period, provided the owner/operator
commits (as a condition of waiver eligibility) to periodically inspect and properly maintain the
area until the criteria for ?nal stabilization as de?ned in the construction general permit have
been met. If use of this interim stabilization eligibility condition was relied on to qualify for the
waiver, signature on the waiver with its certi?cation statement constitutes acceptance of and
commitment to complete the ?nal stabilization process. The owner/operator must submit a waiver
certi?cation to DWQ prior to commencing construction activities.

Note: The rainfall erosivityfacror is determined in accordance with Chapter 2 of
Agriculture Handbook Number 703, Predicting Soil Erosion by Water: A Guide to Conservation
Planning With the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (R USLE), pages 21?64, dated January
1997; United States Department of A griculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service.

EPA has developed an online rainfall erosivity calculator to help small construction sites
determine potential eligibility for the rainfall erosivity waiver. You can access the calculator from
website The factor can easily be calculated by
using the construction site latitude/longitude or address and estimated start and end dates of
construction. This calculator may also be useful in determining the time periods during which
construction activity could be waived from permit coverage. You may find that moving your
construction activity by a few weeks or expediting site stabilization will allow you to qualify for
the waiver. Use this online calculator or the Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver Fact Sheet
to assist in determining the Factor for your small
construction site.

If you are the owner/operator of the construction activity and are eligible for a waiver based on
low erosivity potential, you can submit the erosivity waiver electronically on the DWQ on-line
Storm Water data base or provide the following information
on the waiver certi?cation form in order to be waived from permitting requirements:

 

1. Name, address and telephone number of the construction site 

B-l

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

2. Name (or other identi?er), address, county, city (if within an incorporated city
boundary), and latitude/longitude of the construction project or site;

3. Estimated construction start and completion ?nal stabilization) dates, and total
acreage (to the nearest quarter acre) to be disturbed;

4. The rainfall erosivity factor calculation that applies to the active construction phase a
your project site; and

5. A statement, signed and dated by an authorized representative as provided in

Appendix I, Subsection 1.11, which certi?es that the construction activity will take
place during a period when the value of the rainfall erosivity factor is less than ?ve

You can access the waiver certi?cation form from website at: .
Paper copies of the form
must be sent to one of the addresses listed in Part B2 of this appendix.

Note: If the factor is 5 or greater, you cannot apply for the rainfall erosivity waiver, and must
apply for UPDES permit coverage.

If your small construction project continues beyond the projected completion date given on the
waiver certi?cation, you must recalculate the rainfall erosivi actor for the new project duration.
If the factor is below ?ve (5), you must update all appli 'nformation on the waiver
certi?cation and retain a copy of the revised waiver as
certi?cation must be submitted prior to the projected

    
   
  
  
 
 
   

is 5 or above, you must obtain UPDES permit 0
B2 WAIVER DEADLINES AND 
1. Waiver certi?cations 

act1v1ties.

rators are not prohibited from submitting waiver

certi?cations clearing, grading, excavation activities, or other
constructlon actl 9 WQ reserves the right to take enforcement for any

waiver authorization is granted.

Submittal of a waiver certi?cation is an optional alternative to obtaining permit coverage for
discharges of storm water associated with small construction activity (construction activity
disturbing 1-5 acres), provided you qualify for the waiver. Any discharge of storm water
associated with small construction activity not covered by either a permit or a waiver may be
considered an unpermitted discharge under the Clean Water Act. DWQ may notify any
owner/operator covered by a waiver that they must apply for a permit. DWQ may notify any
owner/operator who has been in non-compliance with a waiver that they may no longer use the
waiver for future projects. Any member of the public may petition DWQ to take action under this
provision by submitting written notice along with supporting justi?cation. Complete and
accurate Rainfall Erosivity waiver certi?cations not otherwise submitted electronically via
on-line Storm Water data base system must be sent
to the following address:

Construction Storm Water Waiver
Utah DWQ

PO Box 144870

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870

Utah Construction. Generachrmit (.UCGP)

Appendix List with Information on Utah?s Waters

The site has a map of watershed assessment units which can be used to
identify waters (rivers, creeks, lakes) and water quality information about them. If you can ?nd
the place on the map of the State of Utah and click where your project will occur, information
will come up in the window on the left about the watershed assessment unit.

The information available on the watershed assessment unit is:

Name of the watershed assessment unit or water body
Category of water

Bene?cial uses of the water body

If the water is impaired

If impaired, what the cause of impairment is

A contact name and phone number to obtain more information.






Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Buffer Guidance.

The following section was taken (nearly verbatim) from the EPA CGP. The EPA covers the
entire US and therefore provides information from across the US. Data and information directly
about Utah are not included. DWQ does not have the resources to modify this appendix to
generate and include information only for Utah. The entire section is included to provide
direction and help for permittees although examples within this treatise may also include areas
not similar to Utah. For purposes of the permit it will suf?ce for a site in Utah to use the data
from areas with similar climates (Idaho or New Mexico -- whichever matches the Utah site
closest) to make the prescribed calculations.

The purpose of this guidance is to assist you in complying with the requirements in Part 2.1 
of the permit regarding the establishment of natural buffers or equivalent sediment controls. This
guidance is organized as follows:

D. 1. SITES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH PART 2.1.2.8.. - - - - 

D.l.l. Step I - Determine if Your Site is Within 50 Fe
D. 1 .2. Step 2 - Determine if Any Exceptions to the

a Surface Water - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

  
   
  
  
     
   

D.2 COMPLIANCE ALTERNATIVES GUIDAN

D2. 1. Guidance for Providing and Main 
D.2.1.1 Buffer Width Measurement
D.2.1.2 Limits to Disturbanc - 'thin . .
 Discharges Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

D.2.2. Guidance for Prov I - 4 ivalent ediment Reduction as the 50?foot Bufier r-D-8.
D.2.2.1 Determin asible to Provide a Reduced Buffer - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --D-8
D.2.2.2 Design Co rovide Equivalent Sediment Reduction as 50-foot

Buffer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
a. Step 1 - Estima a Sediment Reduction from the 50?foot Buffer 
b. Step 2 - Design Controls That Match the Sediment Removal Ef?ciency of

the 50_f00t Buffer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  
c. Step 3 - Document How Site-Speci?c Controls Will Achieve the Sediment

Removal Ef?ciency of the 50-foot Buffer - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -D-12.

D.2.3 Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternatives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~D-l3.

D.2.3 .1 Step 1 Determine if You are Eligible for the Small Residential Lot
Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
D.2.3 .2 Step 2 Implement the Requirements of the Small Residential Lot
Compliance Alternative Selected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 
a. Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternative Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternative Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

D.l SITES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH PART 2.1.2.a.

The purpose of this part is to help you determine if the requirements in Part 2.1.2.a. apply
to your site.

D. 1 .1 Step 1 - Determine if Your Site is Within 50 Feet of a Surface Water

Part 2.1.2.a. applies to you only if your earth-disturbing activities will occur within 50
feet of a surface water that receives storm water discharges from your site. Figure 1
illustrates when a site would be required to comply with the requirements in Part 2.1.2.a.

due to their proximity to a surface water. If the surface water is not located within 50 feet
of the earth-disturbing activities, Part 2.1 does not apply.

Figure - 1. Example of earth-disturbing activities within 50 feet of a surface water.

 

 

 
   

Area of

Surface Water
Earth Disturbance

 

 

 

If you determine that your earth-disturbing activities will occur within 50 feet of a surface
water that receives storm water discharges from your site, the requirements in Part 2.1.2.a.
apply, except for certain circumstances that are described in Step 2.

Note that where some natural buffer exists but portions of the area within 50 feet of the
surface water are occupied by preexisting development disturbances, or if a portion of
area within 50 feet of the surface water is owned by another party and is not under your
control, the buffer requirements in Part 2.1.2.a. still apply, but with some allowances.

Clarity about how to implement the compliance alternatives for these situations is
provided in D212 and D222 below.

D.1.2

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Note that DWQ does not consider designed storm water control features storm
water conveyance channels, storm drain inlets, storm water basins) that direct storm
water to surface waters more than 50 feet from the disturbance to constitute surface

waters for the purposes of determining if the buffer requirements apply.

Step 2 Determine if Any Exceptions to the Requirements in Part 2.1.2.a. Apply.
The following exceptions apply to the requirements in Part 2.1.2.a:

0 If there is no discharge of storm water to surface waters through the area
between the disturbed portions of the site and any surface waters located
within 50 feet of your site, you are not required to comply with the
requirements in this Part. This includes situations where you have
implemented controls measures, such as a berm or other barrier that will
prevent such discharges.

- Where no natural buffer exists due to preexisting development structures g.
parking lot, building) that occurred prior to the initiation of planning for the
current development of the site, you are equired to comply with the
requirements in this Part.

  
  
   
  
   
   
   
   
   
 

Where some natural buffer exists
surface water are occupied by pree
required to comply with the 
calculating the sediment load
3 below, you are not
function that would

development structures, you are
in this Part. For the purposes of

comp nsate for the reduction in buffer
from the area covered by these preexisting
plement the compliance alternatives for
2.1.2 and D.2.2.2 below.

If during . ou will disturb any portion of these preexisting
structures, the - oved will be deducted from the area treated as natural
buffer.

0 For ?linear construction projects? (see Appendix A), you are not required to
comply with this requirement if site constraints limited right-of-way)
prevent you from complying with the requirements of the alternatives in Part
2.1 provided that, to the extent practicable, you limit disturbances within
50 feet of the surface water and/or you provide supplemental erosion and
sediment controls to treat storm water discharges from earth disturbances
within 50 feet of the surface water. You must also document in your 
your rationale for why it is infeasible for you to comply with the requirements
in Part 2.1 and describe any buffer width retained and/or supplemental
erosion and sediment controls installed.

0 For ?small residential lot? construction a lot being developed for
residential purposes that will disturb less than 1 acre of land, but is part of a
common plan of development or sale that will disturb greater than or equal to
1 acre), you have the option of complying with the requirements in Part D.2.3
of this appendix.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

The following disturbances within 50 feet of a surface water are exempt from
the requirements in this Part:

Construction approved under a CWA Section 404 permit; or

Construction of a water-dependent structure or water access areas 
pier, boat ramp, trail).

Note that you must document in your if any disturbances related to
any of the above exceptions occurs within the buffer area on your site.

D.2 CONIPLLANCE ALTERNATIVES GUIDANCE.

If in Part D.l of this guidance you determine that the buffer requirements apply to your site, you
have three compliance alternatives from which you can choose:

1. Provide and maintain a 50-foot undisturbed natural buffer (Part or

2. Provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer that is less than 50 feet and is
supplemented by additional erosion and sediment controls, which in combination
achieves the sediment load reduction equivalent to a 50?foot undisturbed natural
buffer (Part or

3. If it is infeasible to provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer of any size,
you must implement erosion and sediment controls that achieve the sediment load
reduction equivalent to a 50-foot undisturbed natural buffer (Part 2. 

The compliance alternative selected above must be maintained throughout the duration of permit
coverage.

The following provides detailed guidance for how you can comply with each of the compliance
alternatives. Part D.2. 1. below provides guidance on how to provide and maintain natural buffers
consistent with the alternatives 1 and 2, above. Part D.2.2. below provides guidance on how to
comply with the requirement to provide a 50-foot buffer equivalent through erosion and sediment
controls consistent with alternatives 2 and 3, above.

D.2.l Guidance for Providing and Maintaining Natural Buffers.

The following guidance is intended to assist you in complying with the requirements to
provide and maintain a natural buffer during construction. This part of the guidance

 

1 For the compliance alternatives in and 2, you are not required to enhance the quality of the vegetation
that already exists in the buffer, or provide vegetation if none exists arid and semi-arid areas). You
only need to retain and protect from disturbance the natural buffer that existed prior to the commencement
of construction. Any preexisting structures or impervious surfaces are allowed in the natural buffer
provided you retain and protect from disturbance the natural buffer area outside the preexisting disturbance.
Similarly, for alternatives 2 and 3, you are required to implement and maintain sediment controls that
achieve the sediment load reduction equivalent to the undisturbed natural buffer that existed on the site
prior to the commencement of construction. In determining equivalent sediment load reductions, you may
consider naturally non-vegetated areas and prior disturbances. See Part D.2.2 of this Appendix for a
discussion of how to determine equivalent reductions.

D-4

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

applies to you if you choose either alternative 1 (5 O-foot buffer) or alternative 2 (a buffer
of 50 feet supplemented by additional erosion and sediment controls that achieve the
equivalent sediment load reduction as the 50-foot buffer), or if you are providing a buffer
in compliance with one of the small residential lot compliance alternatives in Part D.2.3
below.

D.2.1.l Buffer Width Measurement

Where you are retaining a buffer of any size, the buffer should be measured
perpendicularly from any of the following points, whichever is further landward from the
water:

1. The ordinary high water mark of the water body, de?ned as the line on the shore
established by ?uctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as
a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil,
destruction of terrestrial vegetation, and/or the presence of litter and debris; or

2. The edge of the stream or river bank, bluff, or cliff, whichever is applicable.

  
  
   
      

Refer to Figure 2 and Figure - 3. You may
points is challenging if the ?ow path of the su
causing the measurement line for the buffer
the waterbody. Where this is the case, EPA su
change or deviation along the water?s 't ma

at speci?cally measuring these

3 that rather than measuring each
easier to select regular intervals

  
    

ivities will take place on both sides of a

I-.. -1.-.

ite, to tue extent you are establishing a buffer

surface water that ?ows 
around this water, it A
alternative 1 above, an ur pro ct calls for disturbances on both sides of a small
stream, you would need the full 50 feet of buffer on both sides of the water.
However, if your constructio activities will only occur on one side of the stream, you
would only need to retain the 50-foot buffer on the side of the stream Where the earth

disturbance will occur.

  
 

  
     
   

. 

Figure - 2. This image shows buffer measurement from the ordinary high water mark of the
water body, as indicated by a clear natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the
character of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, and/or the presence of litter/debris.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

 

 

Ordinary
high water mark

 

 

Surface Water

 

high water mark

 

 

Figure - 3. This image shows buffer measurement from the edge of the bank, bluff, or cliff,

whichever is applicable.

 

 

 

Surface Water

 

 

D.2.l.2 Limits to Disturbance Within the Buffer

You are considered to be in compliance With this requirement if you retain and protect
from construction activities the natural buffer that existed prior to the commencement of

D-6

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

construction. If the buffer area contains no vegetation prior to the commencement of
construction sand or rocky surface), you are not required to plant any additional
vegetation. As noted above, any preexisting structures or impervious surfaces are allowed
in the buffer provided you retain and protect from disturbance the vegetation in the

buffer outside the preexisting disturbance.

To ensure that the water quality protection bene?ts of the buffer are retained during
construction, you are prohibited from conducting any earth-disturbing activities within
the buffer during permit coverage. In furtherance of this requirement, prior to
commencing earth-disturbing activities on your site, you must delineate, and clearly mark
off, with ?ags, tape, or a similar marking device, the buffer area on your site. The
purpose of this requirement is to make the buffer area clearly visible to the people
working on your site so that unintended disturbances are avoided.

While you are not required to enhance the quality of the vegetation that already exists
within the buffer, you are encouraged to do so where such improvements will enhance
the water quality protection bene?ts of the buffer. (Note that any disturbances within the
buffer related to buffer enhancement are permitted and do not constitute construction
disturbances.) For instance, you may want to conside rgeted plantings where limited
vegetation exists, or replacement of existing veget where invasive or noxious plant

   
   
   
   
   
  
   
   

invasive or noxious species, you may want 
of native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
and hydrologic conditions on the site. 
naturally deposited leaf litter, woody deb
contributes to the ability of the 1n wa er and ?lter pollutants.

re well-adapted to the climatic, soil,
couraged to limit the removal of

is not under your con 1 
a are that is under your control. For example, if you
maintain a 50-foot buffer), but 10 feet of land

which your construction acti ties are taking place and you do not have control over that
land, you must only retain and protect from construction activities the 40-foot buffer area
that occurs on the property on which your construction activities are taking place. DWQ
would consider you to be in compliance with this requirement regardless of the activities
that are taking place in the 10-foot area that is owned by a different party than the land on
which your construction activities are taking place that you have no control over.

D.2.l .3. Discharges to the Buffer

You must ensure that all discharges from the area of earth disturbance to the natural
buffer are ?rst treated by the site?s erosion and sediment controls (for example, you must
comply with the Part 2.1.2.b. requirement to establish sediment controls around the
downslope perimeter of your site disturbances), and if necessary to prevent erosion
caused by storm water ?ows within the buffer, you must use velocity dissipation devices.
The purpose of this requirement is to decrease the rate of storm water ?ow and encourage
in?ltration so that the pollutant ?ltering functions of the buffer will be achieved. To
comply with this requirement, construction operators typically will use devices that
physically dissipate storm water ?ows so that the discharge entering the buffer is spread
out and slowed down.

D-7

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

D.2.l.4 Documentation

You are required to document in your the natural buffer width that is retained.
For example, if you are complying with alternative 1, you must specify in your 
that you are providing a 50-foot buffer. Or, if you will be complying with alternative 2,
you must document the reduced width of the buffer you will be retaining (and you must
also comply with the requirements in Part 2. to describe the erosion and sediment
controls you will use to achieve an equivalent sediment reduction, as described in Part
D.2.2 below). Note that you must also show any buffers on your site plan in your
consistent with Part 7.2.6.c. Additionally, if any disturbances related to the
exceptions in Part 2.1.2.a.v. occur within the buffer area, you must document this in the


D.2.2 Guidance for Providing the Equivalent Sediment Reduction as the 50?foot Buffer.

If you are selecting Alternative 2 (provide and maintain a buffer that is less than 50 feet
that is supplemented by additional erosion and sediment controls that, together, achieve
the equivalent sediment load reduction as the 50-foot buffer) or Alternative 3 (implement
erosion and sediment controls that achieve the equivalent sediment load reduction as the
50-foot buffer), the following guidance is intended to assist you in demonstrating that you
will achieve the equivalent sediment reduction as the 50-foot buffer.

D.2.2.1 Determine Whether it is Feasible to Provide a Reduced Buffer.

DWQ recognizes that there will be a number of situations in which it will be infeasible to
provide and maintain a buffer of any width. While some of these situations may exempt
you from the buffer requirement entirely (see D. .2), if you do not qualify for one of
these exemptions, there still may be conditions or circumstances at your site that make it
infeasible to provide a natural buffer. For example, there may be sites where a signi?cant
portion of the property on which the earth-disturbing activities will occur is located
within the buffer area, thereby precluding the retention of natural buffer areas. DWQ
believes there are likely to be other examples of situations that make it infeasible to
provide any buffer area.

Therefore, in choosing between the 2 different compliance alternatives (Alternative 2 or
3), you should only elect to comply with Alternative 2 if it is feasible for you to retain
any natural buffer on your site. (Note: For any buffer width retained, you are required to
comply with the requirements in Part D.2.l, above, concerning the retention of vegetation
and restricting earth disturbances.) Similarly, if you determine that it is infeasible to
provide a natural buffer of any size during construction, you should elect to comply with
Alternative 3. After making this determination, you should proceed to Part D.2.2.2 to
determine how to provide controls that, together with any buffer areas that is being
retained, if applicable, will achieve an equivalent sediment load reduction as the 50-foot
buffer.

D.2.2.2 Design Controls That Provide Equivalent Sediment Reduction as 50-foot Buffer

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

You must next determine what additional controls must be implemented on your site that,
alone or in combination with any retained natural buffer, achieve a reduction in sediment
equivalent to that achieved by a 50-foot buffer.

Note that if only a portion of the natural buffer is less than 50 feet, you are only required
to implement erosion and sediment controls that achieve the sediment load reduction
equivalent to the 50-foot buffer for discharges through that area. You would not be
required to provide treatment of storm water discharges that ?ow through 50 feet or more
of natural buffer. See Figure - 4.

Figure - 4 Example of how to comply with the requirement to provide the equivalent sediment
reduction when only a portion of your earth?disturbances discharge to a buffer of less than 50-feet.

 

 

   
      
 
  

Discharges through this
area are required to be treated to
provide the equivalent sediment 
reduction as the 50-foot buff

Wow Surface

 Water

I

provide the eq? -
reduction .

Area of
Earth Disturbance

 

 

 

To comply with this requirement, you are required to do the following:

Step1 - Estimate the sediment reduction expected from your site if you had retained a 50-
foot natural buffer;

Step 2 - Design controls that alone or in combination with any width of buffer retained
achieve the equivalent sediment removal ef?ciency as that expected from the 50-foot
buffer; and

Step 3 - Document in your how your controls will achieve the equivalent
sediment removal ef?ciency of the 50-foot buffer.

Guidelines to help you work through these requirements are provided below.

D-9

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Step 1 - Estimate the Sediment Reduction from the 50-foot Buffer

In order to design controls that match the sediment removal ef?ciency of a 50?foot
buffer, you ?rst need to know what this ef?ciency is for your site. The sediment
removal ef?ciencies of natural buffers vary according to a number of site-speci?c
factors, including precipitation, soil type, land cover, slope length, width, steepness,
and the types of sediment controls used to reduce the discharge of sediment prior to
the buffer. DWQ has adopted EPA calculations concerning this and DWQ has
adapted it to Utah. EPA has simpli?ed this calculation by developing buffer
performance tables covering a range of vegetation and soil types for the areas in
Utah. See Attachment Tables a 4 and - 5. Note: buffer performance values in
Tables 4 and - 5 represent the percent of sediment captured through the use
of perimeter controls silt fences) and 50-foot buffers at disturbed sites of
?xed proportions and slopes.2

Using Tables 4 and - 5 (see Attachment 1), you can determine the sediment
removal ef?ciency of a 50-foot buffer for your geographic area by matching the
vegetative cover type that best describes your buffer area and the type of soils that
predominate at your site. For example, if your site is located in moist Utah (see the
3-zone precipitation map of Utah in Appendix F), Table - 4, and your buffer
vegetation corresponds most closely with that of medium density weeds, and the
soil type at your site is best typi?ed as sand, your site?s sediment removal
ef?ciency would be 28 percent. In this step, you should choose the vegetation type

 

2 EPA used the following when developing the buffer performance tables:



The sediment removal ef?ciencies are based on the US. Department of Agriculture?s RUSLEZ
(?Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation model for slope pro?les using a IOU-foot long
denuded slopes.

Sediment removal was de?ned as the annual sediment delivered at the end of the 50-
foot natural buffer divided by the annual yield from denuded area (tons/yr/acre).

As perimeter controls are also required by the CGP, sediment removal is in part a function of the
reduction due to a perimeter control silt fence) located between the disturbed portion of the
site and the upstream edge of the natural buffer and ?ow traveling through a 50-foot buffer of
undisturbed natural vegetation.

It was assumed that construction sites have a relatively uniform slope without topographic
features that accelerate the concentration for erosive ?ows.

It was assumed that vegetation has been removed from the disturbed portion of the site and a
combination of cuts and ?lls have resulted in a smooth soil surface with limited retention of near-
surface root mass

To represent the influence of soil, EPA analyzed 11 general soil texture classi?cations in its evaluation of
buffer performance. To represent different types of buffer vegetation, EPA evaluated 4 or more common
vegetative types for each state/territory covered under the permit (DWQ is using only that which is
approximately what could be found in Utah or nearby areas). For each vegetation type evaluated, EPA
considered only permanent, non-grazed and non-harvested vegetation, on the assumption that a natural
buffer adjacent to the surface water will typically be undisturbed. EPA also evaluated slope steepness and
found that sediment removal ef?ciencies present in Tables -4 and - 5 are achievable for slopes that are
less than nine percent.



Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

in the tables that most closely matches the vegetation that would exist naturally in
the buffer area on your site regardless of the condition of the buffer. However,
because you are not required to plant any additional vegetation in the buffer area, in
determining what controls are necessary to meet this sediment removal equivalency
in Step 2 below, you will be able to take credit for this area as a fully vegetated
?natural buffer.? Similarly, if a portion of the buffer area adjacent to the surface
water is owned by another party and is not under your control, you can treat the
area of land not under control as having the equivalent vegetative cover and soil
type that predominates on the portion of the property on which your construction
activities are occurring.

For example, if your earth-disturbances occur within 50 feet of a surface
water, but the 10 feet of land immediately adjacent to the surface water is
owned by a different party than the land on which your construction
activities are taking place and you do not have control over that land, you
can treat the 10 foot area adjacent to the stream as having the equivalent
soil and vegetation type as predominates in the 40 foot area under your
control. You would then make the same assumption in Step 2 for purposes
of determining the equivalent sediment oval.

  
 
 

sediment removal equivalency standard et instead of using Tables 4 and
- 5. This calculation must be - .

foot Buffer

 
    

Once you have de

timated sediment removal ef?ciency of a 50-foot

9+
I

 
 

buffer for your 
that will providquiva nt sediment load reductions. These controls can
include the installa single designed control, such as a sediment pond,
additional perimeter rols, or other type of device. Alternatively, you may elect
to install a combination of storm water controls and to retain some amount of a
buffer. Whichever control(s) you select, you must demonstrate in your that
the controls will provide at a minimum the same sediment removal capabilities as
the 50-foot buffer (Step 1). You are allowed to take credit for the removal
ef?ciencies of your required perimeter controls in your calculation of equivalency,
because these were included in calculating the buffer removal ef?ciencies in tables
4 and 5. (Note: You are reminded that the controls must be kept in
effective operating condition until you have completed ?nal stabilization on the
disturbed portions of the site discharging to the surface water.)

To make the determination that your controls and/or buffer area achieve an
equivalent sediment load reduction as the 50-foot buffer, you will need to use a
model or other type of calculator. As mentioned above, there are a variety of
models available that can be used to support your calculation, including 
RUSLE-series programs and the WEPP erosion model, SEDCAD, SEDIMOT, or
other models. A couple of examples are provided in Attachment 3 to help illustrate
how this determination could be made. If you are retaining a buffer of less than 50
feet, you may take credit for the removal that will occur from the reduced buffer

D-ll

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

and only need to provide additional controls to make up the difference between the
removal ef?ciency of a 50 foot buffer and the removal ef?ciency of the narrower
buffer. For example, if you are retaining a 30 foot buffer, you can account for the
sediment removal provided by the 30-foot buffer retained, and you will only need
to design controls to make up for the additional removal provided by the 20-foot of
buffer that is not being provided. To do this, you would plug the width of the buffer
that is retained into RUSLE or another model, along with other storm water
controls that will together achieve a sediment reduction equivalent to a natural 50-
foot buffer. As described in Step 1 above, you can take credit for the area you have
retained as a ?natural buffer? as being fully vegetated, regardless of the condition
of the buffer area.

For example, if your earth-disturbances occur 30 feet from a surface water,
but the 10 feet of land immediately adjacent to the surface water is owned
by a different party than the land on which your construction activities are
taking place and you do not have control over that land, you can treat the
10-foot area as a natural buffer, regardless of the activities that are taking
place in the area. Therefore, you can assume (for purposes of your
equivalency calculation) that your site is providing the sediment removal
equivalent of a 30-foot buffer, and you will only need to design controls to
make up for the additional rem  provided by the 20-foot of buffer that is
not being provided.

Step 3 - Document How Site-Speci?c Controls Will Achieve the Sediment
Removal Ef?ciency of the 50-foot Burfer

In Steps 1 and 2, you determined both the expected sediment removal ef?ciency of
a 50-foot buffer at your site, and you used this number as a performance standard to
design controls to be installed at your site, which alone or in combination with any
retained natural buffer, achieves the expected sediment removal ef?ciency of a 50?
foot buffer at your site. The ?nal step is to document in your the
information you relied onto calculate the equivalent sediment reduction as an
undisturbed natural buffer. DWQ will consider your documentation to be
suf?cient if it generally meets the following:

For Step 1, refer to the table in Attachment 1 that you used to derive your
estimated 50-foot buffer sediment removal ef?ciency performance. Include
information about the buffer vegetation and soil type that predominate at your
site, which you used to select the sediment load reduction value in Tables - 4
and - 5. Or, if you conducted a site-speci?c calculation for sediment removal
ef?ciency, provide the speci?c removal ef?ciency, and the information you
relied on to make your site-speci?c calculation.

For Step 2: Specify the model you used to estimate sediment load
reductions from your site; and (2) the results of calculations showing how your
controls will meet or exceed the sediment removal ef?ciency from Step 1.

If you choose Alternative 3, you must also include in your a description of
why it is infeasible for you to provide and maintain an undisturbed natural buffer of
any size.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

 

D.2.3 Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternatives
In this part of Appendix D, EPA
provides additional compliance A small residential lot is a lot or
alternatives for owner/operators of grouping of lots being developed for
small residential lots. In accordance residential purposes that will disturb less
with Part owner/operators than 1 acre of land, but that is part of a
of small residential lots who do not larger residential project that will
pr0Vide a 50-foot bUffer are n0t ultimately disturb greater than or equal to
required to make the demonstration 1 acre.
outlined in Part D.2.2.2. Instead,

 

 

 

qualifying owner/operators can comply with the buffer requirement by choosing to
implement a set of traditional sediment and erosion controls from the menu of practices
provided in Part D23 .2. DWQ allows the (EPA developed) two different alternatives for
compliance. The following steps describe how a small residential lot owner/operator
would achieve compliance with these 2 alternatives.

D.2.3.l Step 1 Determine if You are Eligible for the Small Residential Lot Compliance
Alternatives

 
   

In order to be eligible for the small residential 1
conditions must be met:

  

a. The lot or grouping of lots meets eflni of ?small residential lot?; and

b. The owner/operator must 
including:

1y all 0 er requirements in Part 2.1.2.a,

      


1. Ensure Lu"

ii. Document in the the natural buffer width retained on the property,
and show the buffer boundary on your site plan; and

Delineate, and clearly mark off, with ?ags, tape, or other similar marking
device, all natural buffer areas.

D23 .2 Step 2 Implement the Requirements of the Small Residential Lot Compliance
Alternative Selected

You must next choose from one of two small residential lot compliance alternatives and
implement the storm water control practices associated with that alternative.

Note: The compliance alternatives provided below are not mandatory. Owner/Operators of small
residential lots can alternatively choose to comply with the any of the options that are available

to other sites in Part 2. 1.2.a. i, described in Parts D. and D.2.2 in this appendix.

a. Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternative 1

D-l3

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Alternative 1 is a straightforward tiered? technology approach that speci?es the
controls that a small residential lot must implement based on the buffer width
retained. To achieve compliance with Alternative 1, you must implement the
controls speci?ed in Table 1 based on the buffer width to be retained. See
footnote 3, below, for a description of the controls you must implement.

For example, if you are an owner/operator of a small residential lot that will
be retaining a 35 -foot buffer and you choose Small Residential Lot
Compliance Alternative 1, you must implement double perimeter controls
between earth disturbances and the surface water.

In addition to implementing the applicable control, you must also document in
your how you will comply with Alternative 1.

Table - 1. Alternative 1 Re uirernents'2

    

Double Perimeter Controls

No Additional Requirements Double Perimeter Gongs and 7_Day Site Stabilization

 

b. Small Residential Lot Compliance rnatl

Alternative 2 speci?es the controls tha uilder of a small lot must implement
based on both the buffer width ed a eir risk of sediment discharge. By
incorporating the sediment risk, ch may result in the implementation of
controls that are more a riat or the site?s speci?c conditions.

 
 
 
 

Step 1 Determin iment Risk Level

   
     

To meet the  5 of Alternative 2, you must ?rst determine your site?s
sediment disch  .v evel? based on the site?s slope, location, and soil type.
To help you to  your site?s sediment risk level, DWQ has adapted table
D-2 for areas from oist Utah, semi-arid, or arid; soil type; and different slope
conditions. On table D-2, ?rst select the slope; then select the climate (moist,

semi-arid, or arid); then select the soil type.

 

3 Description of Additional Controls Applicable to Small Residential Lot Compliance Alternatives 1 and 2:

- No Additional Requirements: If you implement a buffer of 50 feet or greater, then you are not
subject to any additional requirements. Note that you are required to install perimeter controls
between the disturbed portions of your site and the buffer in accordance with Part 2.1.2.b.

- Double Perimeter Control: In addition to the reduced buffer width retained on your site, you
must provide a double row of perimeter controls between the disturbed portion of your site and the
surface water spaced a minimum of 5 feet apart.

Double Perimeter Control and 7-Day Site Stabilization: In addition to the reduced buffer width
retained on your site and the perimeter control implemented in accordance with Part 2.1.2.b, you
must provide a double row of perimeter controls between the disturbed portion of your site and the
surface water spaced a minimum of 5 feet apart, and you are required to complete the stabilization
activities speci?ed in Parts 2.2.1 .b.i or 2.2.2.b within 7 calendar days (in place of what is
normally required) of the temporary or permanent cessation of earth-disturbing activities.

D-l4

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

All moist and semi-arid risks are low for all soil types. The only moderate
risk is arid at 9 slope to 15 slope for 3 categories of soil; and arid for
loam, silt, sandy loam, or silt loam for all slopes over The only times for
concern of a risk over ?low? is when the slope is over or when the soil is
loam, silt, sandy loam, or silt loam.

If you have a site in moist or semi-arid Utah, the risk will always be low. If you
have a site in arid Utah where the slope is 5% and the soil is sandy, your risk is
?moderate?. After you determine the ?risk level? ?low?, ?moderate?, or
?high?) that corresponds to your site?s location and predominant soil type4 you
determine the controls you must apply.

Table - 2. Risk Levels for Sites Based on the 3-Zone Precipitation Map for Utah (see Appendix F)

 

 

Soil Type

Loca?on

Moist 
Semi-Arid

Arid

Moist 
Semi-Arid

Arid

Moist 
Semi-Arid

Arid

Moist 
Semi-Arid

Arid

Cla

Silty Clay,
Loam, or
Clay-
Loam

Moderate

 

Sandy
Clay Loam,
Lo Silt,
Sandy
and, or Loam, or
Sand la ilt Loam
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate Moderate

 

Risk Levels for Sites
with Average Slopes of
3 Percent

 

Risk Levels for Sites
with Average Slopes
of 3 Percent and 6
Percent

 

Risk Levels for Sites
with Average Slopes
of 6 Percent and 9
Percent

 

Risk Levels for Sites

with Average Slopes

of 9 Percent and is
15 Percent

 

Step 2 Determine Which Additional Controls Apply

Once you determine your site?s ?risk level?, you must next determine the additional
controls you need to implement on your site, based on the width of buffer you plan

4 One source for determining your site?s predominant soil type is the Web Soil Survey located at


D-15

 

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

to retain. Table - 3 speci?es the requirements that apply based on the ?risk level?
and buffer width retained. See footnote 3, above, for a description of the additional
controls that are required.

For example, if you are the owner/operator of a small residential lot that falls
into the ?moderate? risk level, and you decide to retain a 20?foot buffer, using
Table D-3 you would determine that you need to implement double perimeter
controls to achieve compliance with Part 2.1 

You must also document in your your compliance with Alternative 2.

Table - 3. Alternative 2 Requirements2

 

 

 

 

 

 

Low Risk No Additional No Additional Double Double
Requirements Requirements erimeter Perimeter
ontrol Control
A 
Moderate Risk No Additional Double le Double
Requirements Perimeter Peri eter Perimeter
Cont Control Control and 7?
Day Site
Stabilization
High Risk No Additional ble Double Double
Requirements Perimeter Perimeter
ntro Control and 7? Control and 7-
Day Site Day Site
Stabilization Stabilization

 

 

 

 



Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

ATTACHMENT 1
Sediment Removal Ef?ciency Tables5

EPA recognizes that very high removal ef?ciencies, even where theoretically achievable by a 50-
foot buffer, may be very dif?cult to achieve in practice using alternative controls. Therefore in
the tables below, EPA has limited the removal ef?ciencies to a maximum of 90%. Ef?ciencies
that were calculated at greater than 90% are shown as 90%, and this is the minimum percent
removal that must be achieved by alternative controls.

Estimated 50-foot Bufer Performance in Seirid ad oist Aras*

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. 23
Alicabie for sites with less than nine percent slop

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I *Apicae fr siteswith less than nine percent slope.
?Characterization focuses on the under-story vegetation

 

5 The buffer performances were calculated based on a denuded slope upgradient of a 5 0-foot buffer and
perimeter controls, as perimeter controls are a standard requirement (see Part 

D-l7

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

ATTACHMENT 2
Using the Sediment Removal Efficiech Tables Questions and Answers

What if my speci?c buffer vegetation is not represented in Tables description of the type of vegetation present at your site, you should choose the
vegetation type that most closely matches the vegetation type on your site. You can contact
your local Cooperative Extension Service Of?ce for
assistance in determining the vegetation types that most closely matches your site-speci?c
vegetation.

What if there is high variability in local soils? EPA recognizes that there may be a number of
different soil type(s) on any given construction site. General soil information can be obtained
from USDA soil survey reports gov) or from individual site
assessments performed by a certi?ed soil expert. Tables D- 4 through 5 present eleven
generic soil texture classes, grouping individual textures where EPA has determined that
performance is similar. If your site contains different soil texture classes, you should use the
soil type that best approximates the predominant soil type at your site.

What if my site slope is greater than 9 percent after ?nal grade is reached? As indicated in the
buffer performance tables, the estimated sediment removal ef?ciencies are associated with
disturbed slopes of up to 9 percent grade. Where your graded site has an average slope of
greater than 9 percent, you should calculate a site-specific buffer performance.

How do I calculate my own estimates for sediment reduction at my speci?c site? If you
determine that it is necessary to calculate your own sediment removal ef?ciency using site
speci?c conditions slopes at your site are greater than 9 percent), you can do so by
choosing from a range of available mathematical models that are available to facilitate this
calculation, including RUSLE-series programs and the WEPP erosion model,
SEDCAD, SEDIMOT, or other equivalent models.

What is my estimated buffer performance if my site location is not represented by Tables D-
4 through If your site is located in an area not represented by Tables D-4 through 
you should use the table that most closely approximates conditions at your site. You may
also choose to conduct a site-speci?c calculation of the buffer performance.

What if only a portion of my site drains to the buffer area? If only a portion of your site
drains to a surface water, where that water is within 50 feet of your construction activities,
you are only required to meet the equivalency requirement for the storm water ?ows
corresponding to those portions of the site. See Example 2 below for an example of how this
is expected to work.

D-18

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

ATTACHMENT 3
Examples of How to Use the Sediment Removal Ef?ciency Tables
Example 1. Comparatively Wet Location (7.5 acre site located in Moist Utah)

The operator of a 7.5 -acre construction site in Moist Utah has determined that it is infeasible to
establish a buffer of any size on their site, and is now required to select and install controls that
will achieve an equivalent sediment load reduction as that estimated in Table 4 for their site
conditions. The ?rst step is to identify what percentage of eroded sediment is estimated to be
retained from a 50-foot buffer. For this example, it is assumed that the site has a relatively
uniform gentle slope (3 percent), so Table 4 can be used to estimate the 50-foot buffer
sediment load reduction. If the site?s buffer vegetation is best typi?ed by northern mix prairie
grass and the underlying soil is of a type best described as loamy sand, the 50-foot buffer is
projected to capture 26 percent of eroded sediment from the construction site.

The second step is to determine what sediment controls can be selected and installed in
combination with the perimeter controls already required to be implemented at the site (see Part
2.1 which will achieve the 26 percent sediment remov iciency from Table 4. For this
example, using the RUSLE2 pro?le model, it was determi 

   
 
   
 

sloped diversion ditches to convey runoff to a well-desi aintained sediment basin
provides 99 percent sediment removal. Because the . nt reduction is greater than
the required 26 percent that a 5 0-foot buffer provides, a erator will have met the buffer
requirements. See Figure D- 5. The operator co a different set of controls, as long

as they achieve at least a 90 percent sediment re

D-l9

Utah Construction, General Permit 

Figure D- 5. Example 1 Equivalent Sediment Load Reductions at a 7.5 ac Site in moist Utah.

std?. 

 

      

Diversion Dike

 

 

Example 2. Arid Location With Pre-existing Disturbances in the Natural Buffer (6.5 acre site
located in Arid Utah)

An operator of a site in Arid Utah determines that it is not practicable to provide a 50-foot buffer,
but a 28-foot buffer can be provided. Because the operator will provide a buffer that is less than
50 feet, the operator must determine which controls, in combination with the 28-foot buffer,
achieve a sediment load reduction equivalent to the 50-foot buffer. In this example, the project
will disturb 6.5 acres of land, but only 1.5 acres of the total disturbed area drains to the buffer
area. Within the 28-foot buffer area is a preexisting concrete walkway. Similar to Example 1, the
equivalence analysis starts with Step 1 (Part D.2.2.b) with a review of the Arid Utah buffer
performance (Table D- 5). The operator determines that the predominate vegetation type in the

D-20

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

buffer area is prairie grass and the soil type is similar to silt, and that the site is of a uniform,
shallow slope 3 percent grade). Although the operator will take credit for the disturbance
caused by the concrete walkway as a natural buffer in Step 2, here the operator can treat the entire
buffer area as being naturally vegetated with prairie grass. Based on this information, the operator
refers to Table 5 to estimate that the 50-foot buffer would retain 50 percent of eroded soil.

The second step is to determine, based on the 50 percent sediment removal ef?ciency found in
Table D- 5, what sediment controls in combination with the 28-foot buffer area, can be
implemented to reduce sediment loads by 50 percent or more. The operator does not have to
account the reduction in buffer function caused by the preexisting walkway, and can take credit
for the entire 28-foot buffer being fully vegetated in the analysis. For this example, using the
RUSLE2 pro?le model, the operator determined that installing a ?ber roll barrier between the silt

fc?r?l?p Ir?! pat-f F) 1 f)  011A flan  ?an?f' lniI'FFor 1111-1] nn on+imn+arl 0/1

luv \ulavuul 1V\1vu.1 V\.l UJ .I. LL 1.. J. .1.nt uu11v1 1.11 (11.1 U'l?

percent sediment removal ef?ciency. See Figure D- 6. Note that this operator is subject to the
requirement in Part 2.1.2.a.ii.l.) to ensure that discharges through the silt fence, ?ber roll barrier,
and 28-foot buffer do not cause erosion Within the buffer. The estimated sediment reduction is
greater than the required 50 percent; therefore the operator will have met the buffer alternative

requirement.
92% at a 6.5 ac Site in Arid Utah.



. 

L.
I


Figure 6. Example 2 Equivalent Sediment Load Red

   

 

1.5 acres draining to buffer areas:

 
 
   
 

   

    
   
 
   

I

  
  

  

28-ft Vegetate
I-  3? 

Concrete
. Walkway

   

 

 

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix List of MS4s with Municipal Storm Water Permits

(This appendix is not included in the public notice review as it is for help and assistance to aid
compliance and is not regulatory in nature. It may be modi?ed during the term of the permit if
the list of MS4s change during the permit term.) The M843 listed below are regulated by a
municipal storm water permit. Under the municipal storm water permit they are required to
regulate construction activity in their areas. Areas that are not covered by the M843 listed below

are directly regulated by DWQ.

Alpine
American Fork
Bluffdale
Bountiful
Cedar Hills
Centerville
Clear?eld
Clinton
Cottonwood Heights
Davis County (unincorporated area)
Draper
Farmington
Farr West City
Fruit Heights
Harrisville
Herriman
Highland

Hill Air Force
Holladay
Hooper

Hyde Park
Hyrum City
Ivins City
Kaysville
Layton

Lehi

Lindon

Logan
Mapleton
Marriott-Slaterville
Midvale
Millville
Murray

Nibley

North Logan City
North Ogden
North Salt Lake
Ogden

Orem

Plain City
Pleasant Grove
Pleasant View

Providence

Provo

River Heights
Riverdale

Riverton

Roy

Salt Lake City

Salt Lake County (unincorporated area)
Sandy

Santa Clara

Smith?eld

South Jordan

South Ogden City
South Salt Lake

South Weber
Springviile

St. George

Sunset

Syracuse

Taylorsville

UDOT

Uintah City

University of Utah
Utah State Prison
Veterans Affairs Medical Center
Washington
Washington Terrace
Weber County (unincorprated area)
Weber State University
Wellsville

West Bountiful

West Haven

West Jordan

West Point City

West Valley City
Woods Cross

Utah Construction?eneral Permit (UCGP)

 

Appendix 2-Year, 24-Hour Storm Frequencies in Utah
Average Annual Rainfall in Utah
3 Zone Precipitation Map for Utah
(See next page)
(This appendix is not included in the public notice review as it is for help and assistance to aid

compliance and is not regulatory in nature. It may be modi?ed during the term of the permit if it
is found that it can be improved on.)




9%

 

NOAA Atlas 14. Volume 1. Va

Semia?id Southwestem United states

Hepaedby US. DEPARTMENT OF OOFJEIERCE
NATIONAL 0 EANIC ND ATMOSPHERIC ADM NSIRAT IO 

Emma-um?
?mm-momma:
Irma-Emma.
Jmezoos

   - ?x I. lag41""

rslon 5
hoplu'l?als of 24 hour precipitation (inches)
with Average Recurrence Menu! of 2 years
1D 2D 30 4D 53

?is See NOMAUBS14 documentation [or factors to

convert to Annuai Exceedance Probabilitieg for

il estmutns In?ow 15 

n- 
Kat??as

 

 

)2

 

Inches

Elam-man?ij
EDBI quD1 51
El1al-12n?1 

Elm-1.me









 

 

 

 

 

 

minim?! JN


.Mln0.0-4

5L9
9.9

I more man 49.9
5




- 
BE :21 --
uxnmu:

L)
9


Precipi
3

Le
tali


on (In inc

hasS.-
.0-1 I.
8.0-9.9

9
9

Precipi

Annual Normal

 

Iation

 

 

a n. A.  .. . ., vii/H4).

 

 

Average Precipitation (inches)

Utah: Precipitation Zones

   
  
  
   

10 (Arid) 
1  1o - 20 (Semi-arid) A
20 (Moist)

i FI--:
i County Boundary

. i Major Streams

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G.l.

G.2.

G.3.

G.4.

G.5.

G.6.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Standard Permit Conditions

Duty to Comply.

The permittee must comply with all conditions of the UPDES permit. Any permit
noncompliance is a violation of the Utah Water Quality Act, as amended and is grounds
for enforcement action; permit termination, revocation and reissuance or modi?cation;
or denial of a permit renewal application.

Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions. The Utah Water Quality Act, in 19-5 -
115, provides that any person who violates the Act, or any permit, rule, or order
adopted under it is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per day of such
violation.

 

Willful Non-Compliance or Negligence. Any person who willfully or with gross
negligence violates the Act, or any permit, rule or order adopted under it is subject to a
?ne of not more than $25,000 per day of violation. Any person convicted under 19-5-
115 a second time shall be punished by a ?ne not exceeding $50,000 per day.

  
  
   
 
  
  
 
  
   
   
 

False Statements. The Act provides that any pers

material statement, representation, or certi?ca 
plan, or other document ?led or required to
this Permit, or who knowingly falsi?es, tamp
monitoring device or method required
conviction, be punished by a ?ne of no
months, or by both. Utah Code

ho knowingly makes any false

ith, or renders inaccurate, any
'ned under the Act shall upon

ontinue an activity regulated by this permit

after the ex?rratron date he permittee shall apply for and tam a new

permit as required in

Need to Halt or Reduce I ot a Defense. It shall not be a defense for a permittee
in an enforcement action tthould have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted
activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. (Upon
reduction, loss, or failure of the treatment facility, the permittee, to the extent necessary
to maintain compliance with the permit, shall control production of all discharges until
the facility is restored or an alternative method of treatment is provided.)

 

Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any
discharge or sludge use or disposal in violation of the UPDES permit which has a
reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment.

 

Duty to Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the Executive Secretary,
within a reasonable time, any information which the Executive Secretary may request to
determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating the
permit or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to

the Executive Secretary, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by the permit.

Other Information._ When the permittee becomes aware that he or she failed to submit
any relevant facts or submitted incorrect information in the Notice of Intent or in any
other report to the Director, he or she shall submit such facts or information.

G-l

G.7.

G.8.

G.9.

G.10.

G.11.

G.12.

G.13.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this Permit shall be construed to
preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the Permittee from any
responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the Permittee is or may be subject under
the "Act".

 

Proper_ty Rights. The issuance of this Permit does not convey any property rights of any
sort, nor any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property nor
any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or
regulations.

Severability. The provisions of this Permit are severable, and if any provision of this
Permit, or the application of any provision of this Permit to any circumstance, is held
invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of
this Permit shall not be affected thereby.

Records Retention.

The Permittee shall retain copies of and all reports required by this Permit,
and records of all data used to complete the Notice of Intent to be covered by this
Permit, for a period of at least three years from the date that the site is ?nally stabilized.
This period may be extended by request of the Director at any time.

After ?nal stabilization of the construction site is complete, the is no longer
required to be maintained on site, but may be maintained by the Permittee(s) at its
primary headquarters. However, access to the will continue as described in Part
3 .2.

Addresses. All written correspondence under this permit shall be directed to the Division
of Water Quality at the following address:

Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Quality

195 North 1950 West

PO Box 144870

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870

State Laws.

Nothing in this Permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action
or relieve the Permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established
pursuant to any applicable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Utah
Code Ann. 19-5-117.

No condition of this Permit shall release the Permittee from any responsibility or
requirements under other environmental statutes or regulations.

Proper Operation and Maintenance. The Permittee shall at all times properly operate and
maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances)
which are installed or used by the Permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of
this Permit and with the requirements of Proper operation and maintenance also

G-2

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

includes adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures.
Proper operation and maintenance requires the operation of backup or auxiliary facilities
or similar systems, installed by a Permittee only when necessary to achieve compliance
with the conditions of the Permit.

G. 14. Inspection and Entry. The Permittee shall allow, upon presentation of credentials, the
Director or an authorized representative:

 

1. To enter upon the Permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located
or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of this Permit;

2. Have access to and copy at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the
conditions of this Permit;

3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control
equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this Permit; and

4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit compliance
or as otherwise authorized by law, any substances 0 arameters at any location.

G. 15. Reopener Clause.

1. Reopener Due to Water Quality Impacts. If evidence indicating that the storm
water discharges authorized by this it cau ave the reasonable potential to cause
or contribute to, a violation of a water 11 rd, the discharger may be required
to obtain an individual permit or - neral permit in accordance with Part
2.3 of this Permit or the Pe di?ed to include different limitations and/or
requirements.

     
   
  
   
   
 

tion or revocation will be conducted according to
-8-6.2.

2. Reopener Guideline
UAC R317-8-5.6 an 

3. Permit Actions. This Pe ay be modi?ed, revoked and reissued, or terminated for
cause. The ?ling of a request by the Permittee for a Permit modi?cation, revocation and
reissuance, or termination, or a noti?cation of planned changes or anticipated
noncompliance does not stay any Permit condition.

G. 16. Signatory Requirements.

1. All Notices of Intent, reports, certi?cations or information submitted to the
Executive Secretary, or that this Permit requires to be maintained by the Permittee, shall
be signed as follows:

1.1. All Notices of Intent shall be signed as follows:

1.1.1. For a corporation: by a responsible corporate of?cer. For the purpose of this
section, a responsible corporate of?cer means: a president, secretary, treasurer,
or vice-president of the corporation in charge of a principal business function,
or any other person who performs similar policy or decision-making functions
for the corporation; or the manager of one or more manufacturing, production
or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or having gross

G-3

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25,000,000 (in second-quarter 1980
dollars) if authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the
manager in accordance with corporate procedures;

1.1.2. For a partnership of sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor,
respectively; or

1.1.3. For a municipality, State, Federal, or other public agency: by either a principal
executive of?cer or ranking elected of?cial. For purposes of this section, a
principal executive of?cer of a Federal agency includes (1) the chief
executive of?cer of the agency, or (2) a senior executive of?cer having
responsibility for the overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the
agency g. Regional Administrators of EPA).

All reports required by the Permit and other information requested by the
Director or by an authorized representative of the Executive Secretary shall be
signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that
person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if:

1.2.1. The authorization is made in writing by a person described above and
submitted to the Director; and

1.2.2. The authorization speci?es either an individual or a position having
responsibility for overall operation of the regulated site, facility or activity,
such as the position of manager, operator, superintendent, or position of
equivalent responsibility or an individual or position having overall
responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized
representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual
occupying a named position).

Certi?cation. Any person signing documents under this Part G.16 shall make the
following certification:

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were
prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
designed to assure that quali?ed personnel properly gathered and evaluated the
information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who
manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief
true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of?ne and imprisonment
for knowing violations.

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Notice of Intent Form (N01)

Please Obtain a copy of the N01 from the DWQ web site at







H-l

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix I Notice of Termination (NOT)

Please Obtain a copy of the NOT from the DWQ web site at





cg?

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Visual Monitoring Form

(This appendix is not included in the public notice review as it is for help and assistance to aid
compliance and is not regulatory in nature. It may be modi?ed during the term of the permit if it
is found that it can be improved on.)




cg?

VISUAL MONITORING FORM

 

Project Name:

Project Location:

 

Name of Sample Taker:

 

Date Time

 

 

Describe the location of where the sample was taken.

 

 

Describe how the sample was collected:

 



Weather conditions at time of sample taking (circl th 2%

Snowing Raining Sunny Cloudy Cold Freezing Other_

   
  
 
 

COLOR (Circle the one that apply):
Black Dark Grey Me Light Grey Dark Chocolate Brown
Medium Brown Ligh  Yellow Green Other

Comments:

 

 

INTENSITY OF COLOR: Very Intense Prominent Moderately Perceptible Hardly
Perceptible

Comments:

 

 

CLARITY (Circle the right one):

Totally Opaque Translucent Translucent Nearly Transparent Transparent/Clear

ODOR (Circle the ones that apply):

Diesel Gasoline Petroleum Solvent Musty Sewage Chlorine
Rotten Egg Sulfur N0 Odor Noxious Other
Comments:

 

 

AA

 

FLOATING SOLIDS
Styrofoam beads sticks/leaves/ grass 50% ?lm ?oating particles
(Description): 

\7

SUSPENDED AND SETTLED SOLIDS (Description)

 

 

 

FOAM, 01L, SHEEN OR OTHER OBVIOUS
INDICATORS OF POLLUTION

 

 

 

Utah Construction General Permit (U CGP)

Appendix Erosivity Waiver Form

The EPA has a web site that automatically calculates the factor that web site is:
http://cfpubl .epa. 




cg?

K-l

EROSIVITY WAIVER FORM

 

Owner:

 

Address:

 

City:

State: zip:

 

Contact Person:

 

Phone:

 

Email:

 

 

General Contractor:

Address:

 

 

City:

A

State: zip:

 

Contact Person:

<2 

 

 

Email:

m\

 



 

Project Name:




 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Address:

City: VState: zip:

Factors Needed for Calculation OFR Factor The Protect Should not Extend Past the End Date

LatitUdei If the project continues beyond the end
date submitted in the waiver the owner

LongitUd63 must recalculate the factor using the
new end date. If the new factor is 5

Start Date: or more the owner must immediately
obtain coverage under the UPDES CGP.

End Date: The waiver should only be used if the

 

Factor Value:

owner has con?dence the project can be
completed Within the start and end date

 

Hand calculated El EPA calculated 

submitted in the waiver.

 

 

 

 

 

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)
Appendix Example Self-Inspection Form
(This appendix is not included in the public notice review as it is for help and assistance to aid

compliance and is not regulatory in nature. It may be modi?ed during the term of the permit if it
is found that it can be improved on.)




cg?

CONSTRUCTION STORM WATER SELF-INSPECTION FORM
Inspection General Information

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Project Name
Date
Address/Locatlon Start Time
City State zip End Time
Contractor Name Inspector Name
Address Inspector Phone
City State zip Inspector Quali?cations
Local Jurisdiction UPDES Permit No.
Permit Coverage Date Permit Expiration Date
Weather Conditions A
Windy El Hot Cold I: Temperate El El Snowing El

Clear El Partly Cloudy El Heavy Clouds El We nditions El Dry Conditions El

 

v/


Precipitation Events Since the Last Inspection

 



 

 

 

 

 

Day of Event Duration of Eve Inches of Precip.

Inspection Schedule   

Weekly Bi-weekly El Other (specify)
Construction Phase  


Clearing/Grubbing DemolitioM Grading/Excavation Utilities/Foundation Work 
Above Ground Erection I: Landscaping/Paving El

 

Permit Requirements to Look For

 

 

Water Bodies Buffer Zones El Discharge to High Quality or Sensitive Water I:

Off site areas of the Project El Areas over 14 days w/o stabilization El Perimeter Controls El
Good House Keeping (track out, waste disposal, sanitary, washout areas) Material Storage El
planned SW controls Discharge Points El is updated with site El

Accumulations of Sediment El Places where SW controls are needed I:

 

 

Are all pollution
sources
controlled?

Do any other
problems exist?
and
Name] From

Template

and
Name] From


ewlate
and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From


Template A
and


Name] From


Template 

and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From

Template
and
Name] From

Template

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


at

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overall Site Conditions These 2: es are an ested if the ermittee chooses. The can be deleted if desired

     

  

 

Are all slopes and disturbed
areas not actively being worked
properly stabilized?

Are all water bodies 
streams, wetlands) protected
with buffers or similar 
Are perimeter controls and
sediment controls properly
installed and maintained
(anchored into soil)?

Has the sediment build up been
removed from BMPs designed to
catch sediment?

Are discharge points and
receiving waters free of any
sediment deposits?

Is all sediment that has been
deposited off site cleaned up?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are storm drain inlets properly

protected? 

Does the construction exit have a
track out pad (or other 

 

 

Is the track out pad (or other
BMP) effective in preventing

sediment from being tracked into 
the Street? 
Is trash/litter from work areas

collected and placed in covered 
dumpsters? 

Are washout facilities 
paint, stucco, concrete) available,
clearly marked, and maintained?
Are vehicle/equipment fueling,
cleaning, and maintenance areas
managed properly with no illicit
discharges?

Are fuels and construction
materials and chemicals that are
potential storm water
contaminants covered or in
secondary containment?

Are non-storm water discharges
wash water, dewatering,
wheel washing) properly
controlled?

Is run-on prevented or properly
managed?

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

Are there locations where
additional BMP's are necessary?

 

Are material piles protected from
weather and placed on hard
surfaces only day by day for
placement and not for storage?
Are all BMPs and storm water
control measures accurately
shown and updated on the
map?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1&7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signature Block

 

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance
with a system designed to assure that quali?ed personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information contained therein. Based on
my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information contained is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are signi?cant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of ?ne and imprisonment for knowing violations.

 

Print Name of Inspector Date

 

 

Signature

 

 




 

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

Appendix Notice for New Owner/ Operators

Ownership Transfer Form

Upon transfer of ownership or control of the subject property under this Permit (see
section coverage under the UPDES CGP must continue until stabilization
requirements are satis?ed according to permit requirements. This requirement may be
met by either of the following transfer options (this form is must be ?lled out and
submitted to DWQ in either case):

1. Obtaining coverage under a new and independent Notice of Intent (N 01 the
application process to procure coverage under the UPDES CGP). This results in a
new permit tracking number for the new owner.

2. Coordinating with the previous owners and the State of Utah, Department of
Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality where ownership, other
information, and signatures (including electronic ce i?cations) contained in the N01
that is current for the property is changed to re?e 6 change in ownership and
responsible parties for conducting constructio 'es (general contractor). For

  
  
 

 

 

this step the new owner would assume the ibi of the original CGP
coverage. This continues the original perml ing number.
A 
Name of Previous Owner Telephone Number

Address of Previous OwneV City State Zip

 

 

  

Ha  

 

 

 

Name of New Owner Telephone Number

 

Address of New Owner City State Zip

 

   

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

 

Name of Previous Operator Telephone Number

 

Address of Previous Operator City State Zip

 

 

Name of New Operator Telephone Number

Address of New Operator State Zip

 

 

 

 

Previous Permit Number ame of Project
Address of Project City State Zip
Longitude Latitude

 

Is this a transfer of ownership of partial or total of the permitted area? Partial 
Total 

M-2

Utah Construction General Permit (UCGP)

If this is a transfer of part of the permitted area to a new owner, describe what part:

 

 

 

Will there be a new prepared? YES NO 

Please update the General Contractor Information (see transfer options 1 or 2, ?rst page).
If this is a partial transfer the only option is 1.

This form must be submitted to the Municipality of 'sdiction and DWQ

To submit to DWQ either email to the constru on rm ter coordinator or,
FAX to 801?535-4301
Or mail to DWQ
PO Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT

   

M-3

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix D – NOI and Acknowledgement Letter

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

34

 NOI

STATE OF UTAH, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
195 North 1950 West, P.O. Box 144870, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870 (801) 536-4300
Notice of Intent (NOI) for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity Under the UPDES General Permit
No. UTRC00000.
SEE REVERSE FOR INSTRUCTIONS

Submission of this Notice of Intent constitutes notice that the party(s) identified in Section I of this form intends to be authorized by UPDES
General Permit No. UTRC00000 issued for storm water discharges associated with construction activity in the State of Utah. Becoming a
permittee obligates such discharger to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit. ALL NECESSARY INFORMATION MUST BE
PROVIDED ON THIS FORM.
Is this NOI seeking continuation for previously expired permit coverage at the same site?
Y
N
If yes, what is the number of the previous permit coverage?
Permit No. UTR_____________________

Permit Start Date
I.

(automatic)

Permit Expiration Date: _

(automatic)_____

OPERATOR INFORMATION
Name (Owner): ________________________________________________________

Phone: ____________________________

Address: ______________________________________________________________

Status of Owner/Operator: ____________

City: __________________________________________________________________

State: _____

Zip: ________________

Contact Person: ________________________________________________________

Phone: __________________________

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name (Operator): ______________________________________________

Phone: ____________________________
Status of Owner/Operator: ____________

City: __________________________________________________________________

State: _____

Contact Person: ________________________________________________________

Phone: __________________________

II.

D
RA

FT

Address: _______________________________________________________________

Zip: ________________

FACILITY SITE / LOCATION INFORMATION

Is the facility located
in Indian Country?

Name: _____________________________________________________________
Y 

N 

Project No. (if any): __________________________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________________
City: ___________________________________________________________

County: _______________

State: _____

Zip: _________________

Latitude: ________ ________ _______ Longitude: _______ _______ _______
Method (check one):  USGS Topo Map, Scale _____________  EPA Web site

III.

 GPS

 Other _______________________

SITE INFORMATION
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Operator Name: _____________________________________________________
Receiving Water Body: ________________________________________________

this is known  this is a guess 

Estimate of distance to the nearest water body? __________________________________ ft. 
Is the receiving water an impaired or high quality water body (see http://wq.deq.utah.gov/)?
List the Number of any other UPDES permits at the site: ____________________

IV.

miles. 

Yes 

No 

______________________

TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (Check all that apply)
1.  Residential

2.  Commercial

7.  Contouring, Landscaping

3.  Industrial

8.  Pipeline

4.  Road

5.  Bridge

6.  Utility

9.  Other (Please list) __________________________________________

 INSTRUCTIONS
Notice Of Intent (NOI) For Permit Coverage Under the UPDES General Permit For Storm Water Discharges From Construction Activities
Who Must File A Notice Of Intent (NOI) Form State law at UAC R317-8-3.9
prohibits point source discharges of storm water from construction activities to a water
body(ies) of the State without a Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES)
permit. The operator of a construction activity that has such a storm water discharge
must submit a NOI to obtain coverage under the UPDES Storm Water General Permit.
If you have questions about whether you need a permit under the UPDES Storm Water
program, or if you need information as to whether a particular program is administered
by EPA or a state agency, contact the storm water coordinator at (801) 536-4300.
Where To File NOI Form The preferred method of submitting an NOI to apply for the
construction general storm water permit (CGP) is electronically on-line at
http://www.waterquality.utah.gov/UPDES/stormwatercon.htm. The fee can be
submitted on line also. If on-line is not an option for you send a paper form of the NOI
to the following address:
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870

Beginning of Coverage CGP coverages are issued immediately after submitting
an NOI with the permit fee. The permittee should be aware that though you may
not have a permit in hand, if you have submitted a completed NOI with the permit
fee you are covered by the conditions in the permit and will be expected to comply
with permit conditions. You can print a copy of the CGP from the DWQ web site.

For High Quality Waters: On the web page referred to in the paragraph above on
the left hand side of the page you will see “Anti-Degradation Category”. Under
Anti-Degradation Category you will see the category of the water body. Only
categories 1 and 2 are high quality water bodies. Some waters may be both
categories 1 and 3. If your water body is both category 1 and 3 it means the
headwaters of your water body is within Forest Service boundaries, and because it
is within Forest Service boundaries it is category 1. If your project is within Forest
Service boundaries then your water body is category 1 and it is “high quality”. If
your project is not within Forest Service boundaries then your water body is
category 3 and is not “high quality”. Again, category 1 waters are high quality
waters, category 3 waters are not high quality waters.

D
RA

Length of Coverage: CGP coverage starts the day that the NOI and fee is
received at DWQ and expires a year from issuance. All CGP coverages must be
renewed within 60-days after the yearly expiration date, or be terminated with a
notice of termination (NOT) before the expiration date. To terminate the permit
the site must meet the permit conditions for final stabilization (see permit
definitions), or must continue under a different permit holder. In most cases the
DWQ or municipality of jurisdiction will perform a final inspection when a CGP
coverage submits an NOT. If the site passes the final inspection the permit is
terminated.

For Impaired Waters: Go to http://wq.deq.utah.gov and identify the water body
that will receive the storm water discharge from the permitted site, on the map
provided at the web site (zoom in for easier resolution). On the left hand side of
the page you will see “2010 Assessment” or “2013 Assessment” depending on the
year you refer to the web site (the assessment is done every 3 years). The 20XX
Assessment the will indicate if the water is impaired. If there is nothing after
20XX Assessment or the narrative after does not include the word “impaired”,
your receiving water is not impaired.

FT

Permit Fees. The permit fee is $150.00 per year. The fee is paid by Visa/Master
Card on-line when an NOI is filed (by check if submitted with a paper NOI). If
the project continues for more than one year the fee must be submitted again in a
renewal process on-line. CGP coverage will not be issued until the fee is paid.

SECTION III - SITE ACTIVITY INFORMATION If the storm water
discharges to a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4), enter the name of
the operator of the MS4 (e.g., the name of the City or County of jurisdiction) and
the receiving water of the discharge from the MS4 if it is known (if it is not known
please estimate or guess and indicate so). (An MS4 is defined as a conveyance or
system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets,
catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains) that is
owned or operated by a state, city, town, county, district, association or other
public body which is designed or used for collecting or conveying storm water).

The Storm Water General Permit for Construction Activities UTRC00000 will
expire on June 30, 2019. The Clean Water Act requires that all UPDES permits be
renewed every 5 years. If a project extends beyond the expiration date of the
Permit it must continue coverage under the renewed permit that will subsequently
be developed to continue the same or similar permit coverage for construction
activity.
SECTION I - FACILITY OPERATOR INFORMATION Supply the legal
name(s) of the person(s), firm(s), public organization(s), or any other entity(ies)
that qualifies as the owner of the project (see permit definitions). Do the same for
the operator (most commonly the general contractor) that conducts the
construction operation at the facility or site to be permitted. The owner and the
general contractor of the project may be the same.
Enter the complete address and telephone number of the owner and operator and a
contact person and number for each. Enter the appropriate letter to indicate the
legal status of the operator of the facility.
F = Federal M = Public (other than Fed or State) S = State P = Private
SECTION II - FACILITY/SITE LOCATION INFORMATION Enter the
facility name or legal name and project number (if any) of the site and complete
street address, including city, state and ZIP code. The latitude and longitude of the
facility must be included to the approximate centroid of the site, and the method of
how the Lat/Long was obtained (USGS maps, GPS, Internet Map sites [such as
Google Earth], or other).
Indicate whether the facility is located in Indian Country. If the facility is located
in Indian Country, do not complete this NOI, instead submit an application for
coverage under a storm water permit to EPA Region VIII except for facilities on
the Navajo Reservation or on the Goshute Reservation which should submit an
application to EPA Region IX.

SECTION IV - TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION Check each type of construction
that applies to this application.
SECTION V - BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Check each type of best
management practice that will be used to control storm water runoff at the job site.
SECTION VI – GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES Check each type of
good housekeeping practice that you will use on the site any time during
construction activities.
SECTION VII – ADDITIONAL Provide an estimate of the total number of
acres of the site on which soil will be disturbed (to the nearest hundredth of an
acre). An email address is required of the best contact associated with the project
for the communication needs.
SECTION VIII – CERTIFICATION State statutes provide for severe penalties
for submitting false information on this application form. State regulations require
this application to be signed as follows:
For a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer, which means: (i) president,
secretary, treasurer, or vice-president of the corporation in charge of a principal
business function, or any other person who performs similar policy or decision
making functions, or (ii) the manager of one or more manufacturing, production,
or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or having gross annual
sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second quarter 1980 dollars), if
authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in
accordance with corporate procedures;
For a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor; or
For a municipality, state, Federal, or other public facility: by either a principal
executive officer or ranking elected official.
POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN A storm water pollution prevention plan
(SWP3) is required to be in hand before the NOI can be submitted. It is important
to know SWP3 requirements (contained in the permit) even during the design
portion of the project. A copy of the permit can be obtained from the Division of
Water Quality’s storm water construction web site. Guidance material for
developing a SWP3 can be obtained from the Division of Water Quality’s storm
water construction web site.

 V.

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Identify proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce pollutants in storm water discharges (Check all that apply):
1.  Silt Fence/Straw Wattle/Perimeter Controls 2.  Sediment Pond 3.  Seeding/Preservation of Vegetation
4.  Mulching/Geotextiles 5.  Check Dams 6.  Structural Controls (Berms, Ditches, etc.)
7.  Other (Please list) ____________________________________________

VI.

GOOD HOUSEKEEPING PRACTICES
Identify proposed Good Housekeeping Practices to reduce pollutants in storm water discharges (Check all that apply even if they apply
only during a part of the construction time):

VII.

1.

 Sanitary/Portable Toilet

2.  Washout Areas

4.

 Garbage/Waste Disposal

5.  Non-Storm Water

3.  Construction Chemicals/Building Supplies Storage Area
6.  Track Out Controls

7.  Spill Control Measures

ADDITIONAL
Estimated Area to be Disturbed (in Acres): ________________________ Total Area of Plot (in Acres):__________________________
A storm water pollution prevention plan has been prepared for this site and is to the best of my knowledge in Compliance with State
and/or Local Sediment and Erosion Plans and Requirements. Y 
N 
(A pollution prevention plan is required to be on hand before submittal of the NOI.)
Enter the best e-mail address to contact the permittee: _______________________________________________________

VIII.CERTIFICATION: I certify under penalty of law that I have read and understand the Part 1 eligibility requirements for coverage

FT

under the general permit for storm water discharges from construction activities. I further certify that to the best of my knowledge,
all discharges and BMPs that have been scheduled and detailed in a storm water pollution prevention plan will satisfy requirements of
this permit. I understand that continued coverage under this storm water general permit is contingent upon maintaining eligibility as
provided for in Part 1.

Print Name (Owner):

D
RA

I also certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under the direction or supervision of those
who have placed their signature(s) below, in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly
responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and
imprisonment for knowing violations.
Date:

_______________________________________________________________
Signature:
Print Name (Operator):

_______________________________________________________________
Signature:
Amount of Permit Fee Enclosed: $_______________

______________

Date:
______________

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix E – Inspection Reports

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

35

 Updated July 2014

UPDES STORM WATER INSPECTION
EVALUATION FORM FOR
SWPPP COMPLIANCE

Click to
Add Logo

Inspection #:
Site Name:

UPDES Permit #:

Site Address:
Local Jurisdiction or County:
Permit Effective Date:
Project Type:

Inspection Cycle: High Priority
Permit Expiration Date:

Subdivision

Commercial

Total Project Area:
Industrial

Linear (Road/Pipe/Power)

7 Days

14 Days

Total Disturbed Area:
Land Disturbance

OPERATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
Operator:

Phone:

E-mail:

On-site Facility Contact:

Phone:

E-mail:

Important Contacts:

Phone:

E-mail:

Important Contacts:

Phone:

E-mail:

SWPPP PRE-SITE REVIEW INFORMATION
1. Has a pre-construction review of the SWPPP been conducted by the appropriate municipal agency?

Yes

No

2. Are contact names, positions, responsibilities, and telephone numbers of the Stormwater Team and all other site Operators listed in the SWPPP?

Yes

No

Yes

No

4. Does the SWPPP have an estimate of the area to be disturbed, a sequence of construction activities, the SW runoff coefficient before and after
construction, a description of the soil types, controls for discharges from (asphalt/concrete) batch plants if any, list UIC Class 5 Injection Well activities
and use, show wetland areas, and have a description of the nature of the construction activity?

Yes

No

5. Does the SWPPP and site map show erosion and sediment controls placement & details, buffer zone documentation (e.g.erosion blankets, mulch, slope
drains, check dams, sediment basins, grass-lined channels, fiber rolls, sediment traps, silt fence, inlet protection, curb cut-back, dust control, chemical
treatments etc?)

Yes

No

Yes

No

7. Are post-construction elements included in the SWPPP? (i.e. grass swales, detention basins, vegetated filter strips, infiltration,
depression storage, landscaping/xeriscaping, discontinuous concrete or hard surface SW conveyance, etc.)

Yes

No

8.Are the SWPPP Certifications signed by the proper and responsible officers and parties (see permit Appendix G Part G. 16,1,2 & 1.3 )

Yes

No

9. Are the NOI , a copy of the State permit, Appendix logs and forms in the SWPPP?

Yes

No

D
RA

FT

3. Does the SWPPP include a site map showing storm drains, slopes/surface drainage patterns, SW discharge points, construction boundaries, limits of
disturbance, surface waters (name of receiving water), TMDL requirements, buffer zones, structural controls, and does it define/explain non-structural
controls?

6. Does the SWPPP and site map show and describe good housekeeping controls and storage areas of polymers, flocculants or other treatment chemicals,
spill prevention and mitigation measures, staff training procedures and logs. (e.g. track out pad, street sweeping, material storage, construction waste
containment and removal, sanitary waste, concrete washout pits, etc)

NOTICE OF TERMINATION (NOT) INSPECTION
Site Name:

Evaluation Date:

Site Address:
Inspected By:

Title/Organization:

1. Has the site been properly stabilized according to permit requirements?

Yes

No

2. Have all temporary BMPs been removed?

Yes

No

3. Have post-construction (permanent storm water system) elements been
constructed and inspected in accordance with approved project drawings?

Yes

No

4. Is the site acceptably clean?

Yes

No

COMMENTS:

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that
qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly
responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Inspector (Print Name)
Title:
Signature:
Date:
Operator: (Print Name)

Title:

Signature:

Date:

Operator: (Print Name)

Title:

Signature:

Date:

 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR SWPPP COMPLIANCE
By: Date:

FT

Project Address:

D
RA

Project Name:

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix F – Corrective Action Log
Project Name:
SWPPP Contact:
Inspector
Name(s)

Description of BMP Deficiency

Corrective Action Needed (including
planned date/responsible person)

Date Action
Taken/Responsible
person

D

RA

FT

Inspection
Date

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

36

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix G – SWPPP Amendment Log
Project Name: Promontory Point Landfill
SWPPP Contact:

Description of the Amendment

Date of Amendment

Amendment Prepared by
[Name(s) and Title]

D

RA

FT

Amendment No.

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

37

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix H – Subcontractor Certifications/Agreements
SUBCONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
Project Number:
Project Title:
Operator(s):

FT

As a subcontractor, you are required to comply with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
any work that you perform on-site. Any person or group who violates any condition of the SWPPP may be
subject to substantial penalties or loss of contract. You are encouraged to advise each of your employees
working on this project of the requirements of the SWPPP. A copy of the SWPPP is available for your
review at the office trailer.

RA

Each subcontractor engaged in activities at the construction site that could impact stormwater must be
identified and sign the following certification statement:
I certify under the penalty of law that I have read and understand the terms and conditions of the
SWPPP for the above designated project and agree to follow the BMPs and practices described in
the SWPPP.

Company:

D

This certification is hereby signed in reference to the above named project:

Address:
Telephone Number:
Type of construction service to be provided:

Signature:
Title:
Date:
Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

33

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix I – Grading and Stabilization Activities Log
Project Name:
SWPPP Contact:

Description of Grading Activity

Date Grading
Activity Ceased
(Indicate
Temporary or
Permanent)

Date When
Stabilization
Measures are
Initiated

Description of Stabilization Measure and
Location

D

RA

FT

Date
Grading
Activity
Initiated

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

0

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix J – SWPPP Training Log
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Training Log
Project Name:
Project Location:
Instructor’s Name(s):
Instructor’s Title(s):

Course Location:

Date:

Course Length (hours):

Sediment Control BMPs
Non-Stormwater BMPs

Good Housekeeping BMPs

D

Specific Training Objective:

Emergency Procedures

RA

Erosion Control BMPs

FT

Stormwater Training Topic: (check as appropriate)

Attendee Roster: (attach additional pages as necessary)

No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Name of Attendee

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

Company

0

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

Appendix K – Delegation of Authority Form
Delegation of Authority
I, _______________________ (name), hereby designate the person or specifically described
position below to be a duly authorized representative for the purpose of overseeing compliance
with environmental requirements, including the Construction General Permit, at the
____________________________________ construction site. The designee is authorized to
sign any reports, stormwater pollution prevention plans and all other documents required by the
permit.

FT

________________________________________ (name of person or position)
________________________________________ (company)
________________________________________ (address)
________________________________________ (city, state, zip)
________________________________________ (phone)

RA

By signing this authorization, I confirm that I meet the requirements to make such a designation
as set forth in ____________________________________ (Reference State Permit), and that the
designee above meets the definition of a “duly authorized representative” as set forth in
____________________________________ (Reference State Permit).

D

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person
or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Name:
Company:
Title:
Signature:
Date:

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

1

 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix L – Erosivity Calculation

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

2

 Page 4

Fact Sheet 3.1 - Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver

Figure 1. Erosivity Index Zone Map

 

Fact Sheet 3.1 - Construction Rainfall Erosivity Waiver Page 6


 

Figure 3. Isoerodent Map of the Western US.

 

 

Jan
0.0
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0

0.2
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.3

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.1
0.0
0.7
9.6

0.0
0.0
7.8
5.7
1.0

1.6
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1

0.0
0.0
4.3
0.0
0.0

0.2
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.3

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.3
0.0
2.6
11.4

0.0
0.0
107545.5 x1

Mar
16

0.9
0.0
7.2
1.6
1.5

0.2
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.4

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1

0.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0

0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0

0.0
0.8
0.0
7.4
13.0

0.1
0.1
12.0
101.0
6.5
6.2

0.2
0.0
0.0
2.4
0.6

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4

1.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.0

0.0
0.1
0.9
0.0
0.0

0.0
2.1
0.0
12.4
14.4

0.5
0.4
13.3
126.7
1.0
13.9
11.0
10.1

0.4
0.2
0.1
2.7
0.8

0.6
0.4
0.0
0.7
2.4

3.1
0.6
0.8
2.4
1.3

1.3
1.0
2.9
2.2
0.4

1.3
3.6
0.9
14.4
16.3

1.1
0.9
16.3
1312.7

3.9
17.9
17.8
16.3

1.1
0.9
0.4
3.5
1.4

15.6
17.7

2.2
1.6
17.7
1418.5

9.1
22.3
24.7
23.3

6.8
5.2
2.7
7.6
3.7

17.3
18.4

3.6
1.9
18.1
1426.6
19.1
30.3
33.1
32.5

22.9
17.3

9.5
18.5
10.2

19.4
19.3

6.0
2.4
18.2
15.1
4.7

5.6
1.3
11.5
6.4
6.6

Jun
14

36.3
26.7
43.1
42.8
42.2

40.1
33.8
21.9
34.3
22.6

21.0
20.5

7.6
5.0
18.3
15.7
5.4

6.5
3.5
18.1
10.2
10.0

Jun

46.0
36.3
55.1
50.3
50.1

54.9
53.2
42.7
52.5
41.8

24.4
23.6

11.1
12.1
18.4
17.1

7.4

9.1
9.9
28.3
18.4
17.6

Jul
14

53.5
47.9
61.3
54.9
55.6

63.8
66.5
58.6
64.0
54.0

19.8
24.8
19.9
22.7
15.7

18.5
24.7
40.2
31.0
28.3

Jul
29

60.2
61.4
65.7
59.7
60.5

70.7
75.9
71.1
72.3
64.5

38.9
48.3
24.5
36.7
36.5

40.6
51.4
54.1
50.7
44.7

Aug
13

68.3
75.1
72.1
68.9
67.5

81.5
87.6
84.6
83.3
78.7

 

61.4
66.2

59.7
73.6
35.0
50.4
55.8

59.7
71.5
67.0
68.7
59.4

Aug
28

75.8
84.5
77.9
78.1
74.3

89.8
93.7
91 .9
90.0
88.4

89.5
91 .3
69.3
81 .3
87.7

88.8
92.8
93.5
79.2
81 .2

85.6
91 .6
74.8
73.2
76.7

65.1
72.6
78.3
72.1
77.2

74.4
86.5
54.4
63.6
70.3

74.0
83.6
77.2
81 .2
71 .6

Sept
12

82.6
92.3
82.6
83.6
79.4

96.3
97.5
97.1
95.1
96.0

95.6
96.5
82.6
89.2
93.8

93.8
96.8
97.2
86.7
87.9

91.7
96.2
82.1

31.9 

88.1

71.6
83.4
88.8
81.9
85.4

83.2
92.0
69.4
75.0
80.9

86.3
93.8
87.7
91.6
83.9

1,337.5

Sept
27

88.3
96.0
86.3
87.5
84.1

98.7
99.0
99.0
97.3
98.7

98.3
98.8
92.0
93.6
97.0

96.6
98.4
98.6
92.6
92.8

95.0
98.1
87.5

94.2

78.6
89.4
93.9
87.0
88.8

88.1
94.3
78.6
81.8
86.4

91.7
97.7
93.3
96.1
90.3

Oct
1 2

96.3
99.1
90.3
93.0
91.1

99.2
99.7
99.8
98.5
99.4

99.6
100.0
98.0
98.5
99.4

99.1
99.7
99.5
97.9
98.3

98.7
99.4
95.4
95.7
98.6

91.1
95.5
98.5
90.1
90.4

94.6
96.6
85.7
87.8
90.9

94.7
99.2
97.5
98.4
94.7

27

99.3
100.0
93.8
96.5
95.8

99.3
100.0
100.0

98.9

99.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
99.8
99.8
100.0

100.0
99.9
98.8
98.6

100.0

97.3
98.1
100.0
92.4
91 .3

97.7
97.9
89.2
90.8
93.4

96.0
99.8
99.1
99.2
96.7

Nov
11

99.9
100.0
98.4
99.2
99.1

99.4
100.0
100.0

98.9

99.7

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
99.9
99.9
100.0

100.0
99.9
99.7
99.4

100.0

99.3
99.6
100.0
98.1
92.7

99.4
99.5
91.9
93.2
96.4

96.7
99.9
99.6
99.8
98.8

Nov
26

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

99.4
100.0
100.0

98.9

99.8

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

99.7
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

94.8

100.0
100.0
93.9
94.9
98.1

97.3
99.9
99.8
100.0
99.6

Dec
1 1

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

99.7
100.0
100.0

99.2

99.9

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

99.7
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

97.0

100.0
100.0
97.0
97.5
99.4

98.8
100.0
100.0
100.0

99.9

Dec

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

100
100
100
100
100

Fact Sheet 3.1 - Construction Rainfall Erosivi



alver

Page 10

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Promontory Point Landfill, April 2016

D

RA

FT

Appendix M – BMPs

Utah - EPA SWPPP Template, February 18, 2016

3

 Preservation of Construction Construction
Existing Vegetation Phasing Entrances

 

- Minimize clearing and the amount of exposed soil. - Sequence construction activities so that the soil is not ex? - Remove mud and dirt from the tires of construction ve?
- Identify and protect areas where existing vegetation, such posed for long periods of time. hicles before they enter a paved roadway.

as trees, will not be disturbed by construction activity. - Schedule or limit grading to small areas. - Make sure that the construction entrance does not become
- Protect streams, stream barriers, wild wood lands, wetlands, - Install key sediment control practices before site grading buried in soil.

or other sensitive areas from any disturbance or construc? begins. - Properly site entrance BMPs for all anticipated vehicles.

tion activity by fencing or otherwise clearly marking these - Schedule site stabilization activities, such as landscaping, to

areas. be completed immediately after the land has been graded to

its final contourStorm bran. Inlet,

Fencing Protection

Inspect and maintain silt fences after each storm. - Use rock or other appropriate material to cover the storm

Make sure the bottom of the silt fence is buried. drain inlet to filter out trash and debris.

Securely attach the material to the stakes. I - Make sure the rock size is appropriate (usually 1 to 2 inches
Don't place silt fences in the middle of a waterway or use in diameter).

them as a check dam. - If you use inlet filters, maintain them regularly.

Stormwater should not flow around the silt fence.   

 

Fo i rmation on Best Management Practices

Ve  (BMP DEQ's BMPs for Construction Site at:

Bu  

For general Stormwater questions and assistance, contact

the Division of Water ualit at: . 
Protect and Install vegetative buffers along waterbodres to - Vegetate, mulch, or otherwrse stabilize all exposed areas as

slow and filter Stormwater run-off. 801_536_4300 soon as land alterations have been completed.
Maintain buffers by mowing or replanting periodically to

ensure thelr effeCtIVeneSS- To report an Environmental Emergency, call:

1-800-458-01?5

 

Equipment Fueling Waste Fugitive Dust
and Containment Management Suppression

 

Use offsite fueling stations as much as possible, or dedi-

Collect concrete and wash water in concrete washout

Apply water on haul roads.

cated fueling areas onsite. facilities, especially when operations are near water resources. - Haul materials in properly tarped or sealed containers.

- Discourage "topping-OH? of fuel tanks. Containers must be adequately sized to handle solids, wash - Restrict vehicle speeds to 10 mph.

- Dedicated fueling areas should be level, and in consider? water and possible rainfall. - Cover excavated areas and material after excavation activity
ation of drainage facilities and watercourses. - Choose smaller, covered containers and more frequent ceases.

- Protect fueling areas with berms and dikes to prevent run- collection. - Reduce the excavation size and/or number of excavations.

on, run-off, and to contain spills.
- Use vapor recovery nozzles with automatic shutoffs to
control drips as well as air pollution.

Do not allow waste to accumulate on-site.

Separate recyclable materials from waste and keep covered.
Conduct visual inspections of dumpsters and recycling bins,
removing contaminants and keeping containers covered.
Stockpile processed materials on-site separately. Place,
grade, and shape stockpiles to drain surface water. Cover to
prevent windblown dust.

Water-down equipment and excavation faces.







 e;ualuuo.lgnu3

 

 


3'5.

3
59J>13111 919 s1uaLuaJinbaJ aq11eu1aJnsua o1 p6A OAul
sawed alqgsuodsaJ "2 mm an?olegp 2 1121s 01 apgn? sgq1 asn



:12 a1e dwa1
qu aq1pugj noA ?1guued leJaua? uoi13n11suoo JnoA u! pa1e1s
s1uauJa a 9111 ?e sassaJppe molt 1eu1 amsua
dlaq pue ssaJOJd 1uaquolaAap aq1 q6nmq1 noA apgn?
dleq o1pau?isap s! a1e dwa1aql ?qem uis1ueoildde(10N)1ua1u1
10 eai1oN 10 spaau aq1 111 01 a1elduia1 ueld uog1uaAaJd
uog1n  od oguonaala (Vdg) s?aua?v uog139101d
?s?n aq1pagjipoui seq Milena) 1912M 10 uoisgnia aul

inc/f 0156uiAes1soa ui1 nsaJ ue31eq1a1seM ?uizguiguiLu
8 !qM 319111 A215 pue o1ug136 o1no/( dlaq1eq1spoq1aLu
uaAOJd dwa ?Keld o1ugau103 ?dwg JO 
1saq" op 01 moq uieldxa 1,uop Kai.? 1nq
'aoueglduioo u! aq o1 op o1aAeq no/l 1211M no/(lla1suog1eln6911sow

?asn ang q6n01q1 samnosai

Bug/uasaid 1noqe osle s! uoi1n  od aq1
pue q1 eaq oilqnd o1spiezeq aq193npaJ o1JapJo ui1uawumiAua
eq1o1ug 1ueuguie1uoa JO '1ue1nllod 'aoue1sqns snopiezeu
Kue 10 1unowe aq1 6upnpai 1noqe 5! (ad) uog1n  od

?piq 5! Dafmd 5! apin? Sun ?uisn ui?eq
o1 awg11saq aq1 ?spefmd uoi13ni1suoa 10 596215 ?e ?uunp pasn
aq ue3 apin? aq1a nge1is aq11e uoi1n  od1uaAaJd
dlaq o1noA 1015! apgn? sgq1'osnyaau16ua u?gsap J0 
uoi13nJ1su03 '1331iq31e '1013211u03qns 'JadolaAap
'Jaumo ue noA gspafmd uoipnnsuoa u! p8A OAul noA SJV

ans uog;3n.u;su03 at?.
23 uonuanaad 

uonuanaad 

 

Construction and Best Management Practices

  

Preconstruction Planning

The prebid period is the best time to plan Pollution Prevention
into your project. You will find that this type of planning will help
you conserve resources, reduce your pollution and clean?up costs,
and avoid enforcement action?all resulting in cost savings to you!

The best time to begin identifying BMPs is before a project is bid.
Remodeling and repair work requires special considerations to
ensure worker safety and environmental protection.

Good Housekeeping
El Environmental Management System (EMS)
El Traffic Plan and Haul Routes
El Noise Suppression

Waste Material Management
Material Storage
El Portable Toilets
El Recycling of Materials
Waste Disposal

Environmental Compliance Permitting Requirements
General Storm Water Permit for Construction Sites
El Fugitive Dust Control Plan
Water Source Protection, Stream Alterations, and Wetlands
CI Waste Oil Recycling
El Hazardous Waste and Materials

Washdown Areas
El Vehicles and Equipment
El Concrete Washout Area
Dust Suppressant Watering

Note: Call Utah DWQ at 1-801-536-4300 for assistance, or, to
report an environmental emergency, call the DEQ Hotline at:

1-800-458-0145

 

 

 



Mo- 4? on Site Preparation

Good 5' - ?reparation will save you both time and money
during course of the project.

Good Housekeeping
CI Establish Jobsite Standard Operating Procedures
CI Water Source Protection
Minimize Fugitive Dust

Site Stabllizatlon
CI Preservation of Existing Vegetation
CI Stabilized Construction Entrance Track-out Pad
Sequential Clearing
[3 Dust Suppression and Controls Limit Access Points

Vehicle Equipment Management
CI Washdown Areas
CI Equipment Fueling and Containment
CI Equipment Cleaning

Waste Materials Management
CI Material Separation and Recycling
CI Waste Disposal and Management
[j Portable Toilets El Spill Prevention and Containment

Construction Operations
Maintenance

It takes constant vigilance to make sure that BMPs are main-
tained and operating correctly.

Good Housekeeping
CI BMP Inspection and Maintenance

Site Stabilization

Grading and Compaction
Construction Road Stabilization
Dust Suppression and Controls
Erosion Control Blankets

Filter Strips El Mulching
Seeding and Planting



 

 

Vehicle Equipment Management
Washdown Areas
CI Equipment Fueling and Containment
Equipment Cleaning
CI Diesel Engine Emissions' Control

Waste Materials Management
Concrete Waste Management
Earth Berm Barrier

Material Use and Recycling

Spill Prevention and Cleanup
Waste Containment and Disposal
Hazardous Waste Management



Erosion Run-off Control

Check Dams Benching
Diversion Bikes 3 Slope Drains
Temporary Stream Crossings
Stormdrain Inlet and Outlet Protection
Surface Roughening

Silt Fencing 3 Sediment Traps
Vegetative Buffers

Straw Bale, or Sand Bag Barriers



Site Cleanup Restoration

Strive to leave the construction site better than it was when you
arrived.

Final Site Stabilization
CI Erosion Control Blankets
[3 Filter Strips
CI Mulching
Fl Seeding and Planting
CI Restoration of Existing Vegetation

Waste Materials Management
CI Materials Reuse and Disposal
l?l Cleanup and Final Site Reclamation
CI Waste Characterization, Containment, and Disposal

 

 

APPENDIX 

DRAFT STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN 
INDUSTRIAL

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Template
for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities (12-15)
STATE OF UTAH, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
195 North 1950 West, P.O. BOX 144870, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-4870
This template has been developed to assist facilities in Utah comply with the requirements under Utah’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) general permit and the requirements for specific industrial sectors (Appendix II). This template is not a substitute for general
permit or specific Appendix II requirements. Facilities in Utah that are commonly required to have Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans
(SWPPPs) are mines (including gravel pits), facilities that produce cement products, many wood product facilities, airports, auto salvage,
transportation facilities, bulk fueling stations, manufacturing facilities, and scrap recycling facilities. Coverage is dependent on the facility's
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code. A complete list of the SIC codes required to obtain permit coverage as well as the SIC specific
requirements can be found by selecting Storm Water on the Division of Water Quality’s website at: www. waterquality.utah.gov. Upon request,
the permittee is required to submit a Notice of Intent and a signed SWPPP to the operators of a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4)
receiving discharges from the permittee’s site. The permittee is required to allow inspection and entry by an authorized representative of the
municipal operator or the MS4 receiving discharges from the permittee’s site. The permittee is also required to submit signed copies of discharge
monitoring reports to the operator of a large or medium (serving populations of 100,000 or more) Phase I municipal separate storm sewer system
(MS4) receiving discharges from the permittee’s site.

A. Facility/Operator Information
1. Name: PROMONTORY POINT RESOURCES, LLC

2. Phone:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

3. Mailing Address a. Street: 32 EAST EXCHANGE PLACE, SUITE 100
b. City: SALT LAKE CITY

c. State: UT d. Zip Code: 84111

FT

B. Facility/Site Location Information
1. Facility Name: PROMONTORY FACILITY LANDFILL

D
RA

2. a. Street Address: SE PROMONTORY ROAD
b. City: UNINCORPORATED

c. County: BOX ELDER

d. State: UT e. Zip Code: NA

3. Is the facility located on Indian Lands?

No X

4. a. Latitude: 41° 12’ 58” N b. Longitude: 112° 28’ 22” W

5. a. Was the facility or site previously covered under a UPDES storm water permit?

No X

b. If yes, enter UPDES Permit number: ______________________________
6. a. SIC/Activity Codes: Primary: 4953

Secondary (if applicable): 3714

C. Contact Information/Responsible Parties
1. Facility Operator: PROMONTORY POINT RESOURCES, LLC
2. a. Street Address: 175 S MAIN STREET, SUITE 300
b. City: SALT LAKE CITY

c. County: USA

d. State: UT e. Zip Code: 84111
3. Telephone Number:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
4. Facility Owner: SAME AS FACILITY OPERATOR
5. a. Street Address:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
b. City:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  c. County:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
d. State:  _ _  e. Zip Code:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
3. Telephone Number:  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

 D. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Team
Use the following table to identify the staff members that comprise the facility’s storm water pollution prevention (P2) team as well as their
individual responsibilities.

Name and Title
TBD

Responsibility___________________________________

E. Industrial Activity and Associated Pollutants
Use the SWPPP Worksheet for a comprehensive list of industrial activities exposed to storm water and storm water runoff and the pollutants or
pollutant constituents (e.g., motor oil, fuel, battery acid, and cleaning solvents) associated with these activities. Refer to List of Treatment and
Pollution Prevention BMP for more information.

F. Site Map
Include a map showing the following information:

•
•
•
•
•

FT

Property boundaries;
Buildings and impervious surfaces;
Directions of storm water flow (use arrows);
Locations of structural control measures;
Location and name of the nearest defined drainage(s) which could receive runoff from the facility, whether it contains water or not;
Locations of all storm water conveyances including ditches, pipes, and swales;
Locations where the following activities are exposed to storm water:
-Fixed fueling operations;
-Vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or cleaning areas;
-Loading/unloading areas;
-Waste storage or disposal areas;
-Liquid storage tanks;
-Process and equipment operating areas;
-Storage or disposal areas for significant materials;
-Immediate access roads and rail lines used or traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste materials, or byproducts used or created by the facility;
Locations where significant spills or leaks have occurred;
Locations of all analytical and visual storm water monitoring points;
Locations of storm water inlets and outfalls, with a unique identification code for each outfall and an approximate outline of the areas
draining to each outfall;
Municipal separate storm sewer systems, where your storm water discharges to them;
Locations of all non-storm water discharges;
Locations of sources of run-on to your site from adjacent property.

D
RA

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
G. Inventory of Exposed Materials
-Refuse
-Leachate
-Oil & Grease
-Fuel
-Dust

 Use the following table to provide an inventory of the types of materials handled at the site, during the previous 3 years to the present that potentially
may be exposed to precipitation.
Description
of Materials

Location

BMPs Used to Minimize
Contact with Storm Water
Runoff
(Ex: cover with tarps, store
materials outside of drainage
pathways, etc.)
Waste Management.
Storm Drain Inlet Protection.
Detention Basin.

Working Face.

Leachate

Leachate Collection Station.

Oil &
Grease

Maintenance Building.
Parking Areas.
Drive Aisles.

Fuel

Fueling Station.

Dust

Haul Road and Access Roads.

Secondary Containment.
Employee Training.
Good Housekeeping.
Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance.
Covered Storage.
Clean Paved Surfaces.
Spill Response.
Secondary Containment.
Spill Response.
Fugitive Dust Suppression.

Soil

Stockpile

Stockpile Management

Waste
materials,
TSS, BOD,
organics,
pesticides,
and metals

Railroad Yard

Housekeeping and preventative
maintenance

D
RA

H. Spills and Leaks

Interim and daily cover of refuse. Tarps if needed.
Channelize run-on to divert flows away from working face.
Place wind screen downwind of operations. Clear channels
and drainage paths from windblown litter. Maintain
detention basin on regular basis.
Secondary containment pad and collection sump. Training
for employees to ensure good housekeeping practices.
Locate vehicle maintenance materials under covered
storage to eliminate contact with stormwater. Sweep and
clean parking and drive aisles on a regular basis. Train
employee on proper spill response procedures.
Locate fueling area in secondary containment storage area.
Train employees on proper spill response procedures.
Water truck to perform dust suppression during dry or
windy conditions to prevent fugitive dust emissions from
haul road and access points around the site. Site speed limit
of 10 mph.
Protect stockpile from drainage courses. Protect stockpiles
with perimeter sediment barriers prior to rain.
Use pump out facilities, use drip pans, do not discard
debris or waste liquids in the railroad yard.

FT

Refuse

Control Measures Used to Reduce Pollutants in Storm
Water Runoff
(Ex: oil-water separators, detention/retention ponds, etc.)

Use the following table to provide a list of any significant (25 gallons or more) spills and leaks of oil or hazardous pollutants, that occurred in the
prior 3 years, and resulted in a discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff from the permittee’s property. Significant spills and leaks are required to
be reported to DEQ.

Date

Description

Outfalls

I. Non-Storm Water Discharges
Use the following table to summarize your non-storm water discharge evaluation results. Examples of non-storm water discharges include:
discharges from firefighting activities; fire hydrant flushings; external building washdown that does not use detergents or other compounds, etc.

Date

Outfall

Method
(e.g., visual, smoke
test, die test)

J. Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report

Evaluator

Observations

Date
Corrected

 Attached is DWQ’s Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report.

K. Employee Training
Use the following table to summarize your plan for training the employees who work in areas where industrial materials or activities are exposed to
storm water, or who are responsible for implementing activities necessary to meet the conditions of this SWPPP, including all members of P2 team.
Training should be conducted at least one time per year.

Date

Trainer

Topic(s)

Attendees

(Examples: spill response, good housekeeping,
material management practices, etc.)

L. SWPPP Certification and Certification of Evaluation of Non-Storm Water Discharges

Name:_______________________________

FT

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system
designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. I certify under penalty of law that the storm
water drainage system in this SWPPP has been tested or evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges either by me, or under my
direction and supervision. And at the time this plan was completed no unauthorized discharges were present. Based on my inquiry of the person(s)
who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine or imprisonment for knowing violations.

D
RA

Signature: ________________________________________

Title:_____________________________
Date: ______________

 Promontory Point Landfill Storm Water Pollution Prevention Worksheet  (01/15)
Potential Pollutant Sources/Outfall # 
Pollutants 
(activities/materials/physical features)   

Runoff 
Potential 
(Yes/No)

Examples:  loading/unloading operations; 
Identify pollutant parameter(s). 
outdoor storage; outdoor processing; significant  Examples:  Total Suspended 
dust or particulate generating processes; areas  Solids (TSS)= dirt/sand; Total 
with high potential for soil erosion, etc.
Dissolved Solids (TDS)= 
salt/fuels/solvents, etc.

BMPs to Eliminate/Reduce Pollutants

BMPs to Manage Runoff

 Site Inspections

List of Treatment and Pollution Prevention BMPs used 
to eliminate or reduce pollutants.  Examples:  minimize 
exposure, good housekeeping, maintenance, spill 
prevention and response, etc. 

List of Treatment and Pollution Prevention BMPs  List of dates when measures and controls were 
inspected (required at least once/year).  List 
used to divert, infiltrate, or reuse runoff. 
problems found during inspection.   Identify 
Examples:  vegetative swales and practices, 
reuse of storm water, inlet controls (soil/water  corrective measures and implementation date.      
separators), etc.

Fueling station 

Diesel Fuel and Gasoline

Yes

Spill control and response measures in place and employees trained  Secondary containment around fueling station and pumps.
properly on measures. Good housekeeping of area.

NA

Maintenance Building

Oil, grease and other vehicle fluids

No

Spill control and response measures in place and employees trained  Fluids are stored under roofed areas.
properly on measures. Good housekeeping of area.

NA

Railroad Yard

Yes
Municipal refuse, sediments, Total 
Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Dissolved 
Solids (TDS), Metals, Organics, and  BOD
Sediments, Total Suspended Solids (TSS),  Yes
and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)

Spill control and response measures in place and employees trained  Oil and grease separators will be used 
properly on measures. Good housekeeping of area.

NA

RA

Tarps stockpile as necessary. Install straw waddles, silt fence, etc. as  Run storm water through basins to desilt stormwater.
needed

D

Borrow Area

FT

Run storm water through basins to desilt stormwater.
Daily Cover will be placed over refuse to minimize contact with 
stormwater.  Run ‐on flows diverted away from working face. 
Maintain channels and detention basins.
Spill control and response measures in place and employees trained  Secondary containment tanks and/or secondary 
properly on measures.
containment pad around tanks and pumps.

NA

Leachate tanks and pump station

Yes
Municipal refuse, sediments, Total 
Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Dissolved 
Solids (TDS), organics, and BOD
Leachate
No

Daily refuse disposal operations

NA

NA

  

  
 
 
  
  
  
 

 

 



4 7 
if (1,13 . 1000 2000.
ggwaa?gS?? 

 3,4 I If
i 


.4911(.DIVERSION  I41 I 
Tit?J/c/g?l

  
 
   

 

  
  
   
  

OUTF LL
MAIN ENAN

     
   

    
 
 

FUELIQLGS
. FACILITY

 

   
 
   
      

  
     

I hI?
CHANNEL   id  
DETENTIO   3" 
I 
 gN'
Iv"

52:

to:
BASIN my


2 DISC ARGE 
01?, 

 

 

   
 
    

 

LEGEND

 

 

PROPERTY LINE
1O EXISTING CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

DRAINAGE PATTERN

 

 

 

THE GREAT 

 

 

DRAFT

 

 


11': TETRA TECH BAS SITE MAP
BY: DLL FILE Site Map.dwg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I ta rIve, iamond ar,
909 860.7777 FAX 90936030 7

 

ES

- SCALE: AS SHOWN
. DATE 3-2016
BY: CHM DATE: 3-2016  1

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX 8
GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS

S-1 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
(JULY 2003 AND OCTOBER 2009)

flpplied

Geotechmcal Gngineering Consultants, Inc

October 20, 2 0 0 9

Shoshone Environmental
7 7 0 East South Temple Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 8 4 1 0 2
Attention

Tony Hiatt
EMAIL thiatt@nwbshoshone-nsn gov

Subject

Geotechnical Consultation
Response to Geotechnical-Related Comments from the State of Utah
Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County Utah
Project No 1090592

Gentlemen
Applied Geotechnical Engineenng Consultants, Inc was requested to respond to a comment
from the State of Utah relating to the draft geotechical report prepared by A G E C for the
Promontory Point Landfill permit application Our services are provided in general accordance
with our proposal dated August 26, 2009

BACKGROUND
A G E C previously provided a draft geotechnical and geologic study for A q u a Engineenng, Inc
for the Promontory Point Landfill permit application Our findings are presented in a report
dated^une 19, 2 0 0 3 under Project No 1020875
Based on an email received on Apnl 3 0 , 2009 from Advanced Environmental Engineenng, w e
understand that the State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality had the following
review comment
Long term - Closure, results of a pseudo static analysis indicate that a small to
moderate displacement of 15 cm for a 4 1 slope is likely
Please provide a brief
explanation or literature (one page or less would be sufficient) on how these
conditions and results are acceptable and are safe landfill construction standards "

600 West Sandy Parkway • Sandy, Utah 84070 • (801) 566 6399 • FAX (801) 566 6493

 Shoshone Environmental
October 20, 2009
Page 2
SCOPE
A G E C was requested to review the information presented in the above-referenced report
relative to the State's comment Literature review and a review of the analysis previously
conducted by AGEC was performed to provide a response to the comment
RESPONSE
Our analysis presented in the above referenced report indicates that up to approximately 1 5
cm (approximately 6 inches) of movement may occur for the final closure under the
considered design seismic event based on the following assumptions
•

Peak horizontal ground acceleration is 0 55g (event having a 10 percent
probability of occurring in 250 years)

•

A final closure slope of 4 honzontal to 1 vertical

•

Waste and weakest interface to have minimum strength based on a fnction
angle of 25 degrees

Literature reviewed indicates that displacement on the order of 6 inches is typically
considered acceptable for well-designed, lining systems Greater displacements of up to 12
inches may be acceptable where it is judged that the lining system can sustain this level of
movement without failure Slightly greater displacement may be considered for final cover
liners assuming that the damage can be observed and the cover is accessible for repair should
damage occur as a result of a major seismic event (Seed and Bonaparte, 1992)
Design case histories for hazardous waste landfills are discussed by Kavazanjian and
Matasovic (2001)
The information presented indicates that cover systems for the case
histones presented are designed for permanent seismic displacement of 3 0 cm (approximately
12 inches)
Based on our review of RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic Design of Municipal S o l i d Waste
Landfill Facilities (EPA, 1995, p 108), 15 to 30 cm of permanent seismic displacement is
typically used in practice for design of geosynthetic liner systems The guidance document
indicates that "for cover systems, where permanent seismic deformations may be observed
in post-earthquake inspections and damage to components can be repaired, larger permanent
deformations may be considered acceptable'
Based on our review of the analysis performed by AGEC and the review of literature as
discussed above, it is our professional opinion that the estimated seismic deformation for the
proposed landfill closure is an acceptable amount It is consistent with, and in some cases
less than what is typically used in design for municipal solid waste landfill covers

 Shoshone Environmental
October 20, 2009
Page 3
If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please call

Sincerely,
APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING C O N S U L T A N T S , INC

Jay R McQuivey, P E

Reviewed by DRH, P E , P G
JRM/dc
References
EPA (1995), " R C R A Subtitle D (258) Seismic Design Guidance for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfill Facilities', EPA/600/R-95/051
Kavazanjian, E and Matasovic, N "Seismic Design of Mixed and Hazardous Waste Landfills",
Fourth International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineenng
and Soil Dynamics and Symposium in Honor of Professor W D Liam Finn, San Diego,
California, March 2 6 - 3 1 , 2001
Seed R B and Bonaparte, R (1992), "Seismic Analysis and Design of Lined Waste Fills
Current Practice," Proc Stability and Performance of Slopes and Embankments - II, Vol 2 ,
A S C E Geotechnical Special Publication No 3 1 , Berkeley, California, pp 1521 1 5 4 5

 Applied Geotechnicol engineering Consultonts Inc

GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGIC STUDY
PROMONTORY LANDFILL, LLC
CLASS I LANDFILL
PERiVlIT APPLICATION
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

PREPARED FOR
AQUA ENGINEERING INC
533 WEST 2600 SOUTH, SUITE 275
BOUNTIFUL. UTAH 84010
ATTENTION

PROJECT NO 1020875

CRAIG NEELEY/CHET HOVEY

JULY 21, 2003

600 West Sandy Parkway • Sandy Utah 84070 • (801) 566-6399 • FAX (801) 566-6493

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE S U M M A R Y

Page 1

SCOPE

Page 3

SITE CONDITIONS

Page 3

FIELD S T U D Y

Page 4

S U B S U R F A C E CONDITIONS

Page 5

S U B S U R F A C E WATER

Page 9

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

Page 10

GEOLOGY

Page 11

A
B
C
D
E
F

Regional Geology
Stratigraphy
Structure
Tectonic Setting
Geologic Hazards
Conclusions

RECOMMENDATIONS
A
B
C

Site Grading
Stability
Settlement

Page
Page
Page
Page
Page
Page

11
12
13
13
13
16

Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 20

LIMITATIONS

Page 21

REFERENCES CITED

Page 22

FIGURES
GEOLOGIC M A P
LOCATIONS OF MONITOR WELLS A N D TEST PITS
LOG OF MONITOR WELL MW-1
LOG OF MONITOR WELL M W - 2
LOG OF MONITOR WELL M W - 3
LOG OF MONITOR WELL MW-4
LOG OF MONITOR WELL M W - 5
LOGS OF TEST PITS
LEGEND A N D NOTES OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS,
TEST PITS A N D MONITOR WELLS
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 6
FIGURE S 7 & 8
FIGURES 9 12
FIGURE 13
FIGURES 14 - 19

 Table of Contents (continued)

GRADATION TEST RESULTS
GRADATION & MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP
FOUNDATION SETTLEMENT ESTIMATE
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS

FIGURES 20 - 23
FIGURES 24 & 25
FIGURE 26
TABLE I

APPENDIX - STABILITY AND SETTLEMENT CALCULATIONS

A5y!i7

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The site is suitable for the proposed construction
The natural soil and
bedrock encountered at the site are suitable for support of the proposed
landfill
The subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits consist of topsoil
overlying clay in the upper 1 to 5 feet or sand and gravel Clay layers up to
approximately 11 % feet thick were encountered at depth in 4 of the
explorations
Bedrock was encountered below the topsoil in one exploration and at depths
of approximately 1 to 14 feet in 14 of the explorations Possible bedrock was
encountered in two of the explorations at depths of 7 and 14 feet
Subsurface conditions encountered in Monitor Well MW-1 consist of sand and
gravel extending to a depth of approximately 4 3 feet below the ground surface
overlying bedrock which extended the full depth of the monitor well,
approximately 61 >4 feet The subsurface conditions encountered in Monitor
Wells M W - 2 through M W - 4 consisted of sand and gravel with occasional thin
clay layers extending to the maximum depth investigated approximately
100 feet below the ground surface Subsurface conditions encountered in
Monitor Well M W - 5 consist of sand and gravel with occasional clay layers
extending to a depth of approximately 41 feet below the ground surface
overlying bedrock to the maximum depth of the monitor well, approximately
2 4 3 feet
No subsurface water was encountered in the test pits at the time of
excavation
Subsurface water was measured at depths of approximately
3 3 , 3 2 / 2 , 3 2 , 36 and 21 9 feet below the ground surface in Monitor Wells M W 1 through M W - 5 , respectively, based on measurements taken June 18, 2003
Excavation of the overburden soil at the site, with the exception of cemented
layers, may be accomplished with conventional excavation equipment
Cemented layers and bedrock may require heavy-duty npping or possibly
blasting to excavate significant depths into the matenal

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 2
Executive Summary Continued

The on-site matenals may be utilized for construction of the landhll Soil and
bedrock which can be adequately broken down into appropnate particle sizes
may be utilized as soil cover matenal The on site gravel may be considered
for use as drainage matenal if it has less than 5 percent passing the No 2 0 0
sieve
The slope of the waste and closure material may be constructed at slopes of
4 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter Stability analysis indicates a safety factor
of 1 9 under static conditions A pseudo-static analysis was conducted for a
seismic event having a 2 percent probability of exceedance in a 50 year
penod The analysis indicates a small to moderate amount of displacement is
likely under this seismic condition with predicted movement on the order of 15
centimeters for slopes constructed at 4 horizontal to 1 vertical Waste and
closure matenal interfaces having a fnction angle of 25 degrees or higher were
assumed
Settlement analysis was conducted for the landfill foundation assuming the
final configuration with 4 horizontal to 1 vertical slopes on the closure cap and
assuming approximately 10 feet of soil is removed Settlement on the order
of 10 inches is estimated for the central portion of the landfill area once full
loading conditions have been achieved Settlement is estimated to be less
than 2 inches around much of the penmeter of the landfill due to the presence
of shallow bedrock The predicted magnitude of settlement resulting from the
completed landfill is presented on Figure 26 A n additional 0 to 6 inches of
bedrock strain is estimated under the load of the landfill and is not included in
the settlement estimates on Figure 26
There are no geologic hazards which will be of concern for the proposed
development with the exception of strong ground shaking due to earthquake
activity
Geologic conditions, matenals and construction precautions are contained in
the report

>ag^'S7 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 3

SCOPE

This report presents the results of a geotechnical and geologic study for the permit
application for the proposed Promontory Point Landhll to be located on the southwest portion
of the Promontory Point Peninsula in Box Elder County, Utah

The report presents the

subsurface conditions encountered, laboratory test results and geotechnical recommendations
for design and construction of the proposed landfill

The study was conducted in general

accordance with our proposals dated December 18, 2002 and February 5 and February 12,
2003

A letter containing preliminary information was previously presented and is dated

December 3 0 , 2 0 0 2

Field exploration was conducted to obtain information on the subsurface conditions Samples
obtained from the field investigation were tested in the laboratory to determine physical and
engineenng characteristics of the on site materials

Information obtained from the field and

laboratory was used to define conditions at the site for our engineenng analysis and to
develop recommendations for the proposed landfill

This report has been prepared to summarize the data obtained dunng the study and to
present our conclusions and recommendations based on the proposed construction and
subsurface conditions encountered

Design parameters and a discussion of geotechnical

engineenng considerations related to construction are included in the report

SITE CONDITIONS

The following is a brief descnption of the site at the time of our field study

A P P U E D GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 4
The site is located at the southeast edge of the promontory mountains near Saline, Utah
The site consists of open range land
site

There are no existing structures or pavement on the

There is an existing water well on the site

There are several small fill piles of trash near Test Pit TP-26

Two abandoned cars are

located between Test Pits TP-21 and TP-22

Several overhead utility lines extend through the site

There are rock outcrops on the east and west portions of the site

T w o large drainages and several smaller drainages are located in the central portion of the
site

The site slopes gently to moderately down to the south/southwest

The site is vegetated with grasses, weeds and sagebrush

FIELD STUDY
Test Pits TP-1 through TP-27 were excavated at the site on December 11 12, 13, and 16,
2002

These test pits were excavated throughout a 1,000 acre area considered for the

proposed facility

Test Pits A-1 through A - 9 were excavated on December 2 3 , 2 0 0 2

The

test pits were excavated using a track-mounted backhoe provided by the client

Monitor Wells M W 1 through M W - 4 were dnlled and installed on January 2 3 , 24, 27, 28 and
2 9 , 2 0 0 3 , with 4 inch Odex dnlling system

Monitor Well MW-5 was dnlled and installed

May 14 through May 21 2003 with 8 inch Odex/air rotary methods

The monitor wells were dnlled and test pits excavated at the approximate locations indicated
on Figure 2 Test pits and monitor wells were logged and soil and bedrock samples obtained

/^£S7

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 5
by a geologist from A G E C

Logs of subsurface conditions encountered dunng dnlling of the

monitor wells and logs of the monitor wells as installed are presented on Figures 3 through
8

Logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits are presented on Figure 9

through 12

Legend and notes of the monitor wells and test pits are shown on Figure 13

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

The subsurface conditions encountered in the test pits consist of approximately 2 to 9 inches
of topsoil overlying clay in the upper 1 to 5 feet of Test Pits TP 1, TP-2, TP-8, T P - 1 1 , TP-20,
T P - 2 1 , TP-22 and A-1 and sand and gravel in the other test pits

Clay layers up to

approximately 1134 feet thick were encountered at depth in Test Pits T P - 1 1 , TP-23, A - 4 and
A-8

Bedrock w a s encountered below the topsoil in Test Pit TP-4 and at depths of approximately
1 to 14 feet in Test Pits TP-6 TP-8, TP 12, TP-15, TP-16, TP-19, TP-21 T P - 2 2 , TP 24, TP2 5 , A - 1 , A - 2 , A - 3 and A - 5 Possible bedrock was encountered in Test Pits TP-18 and TP-27
at depths of 14 and 7 feet, respectively

Subsurface conditions encountered in Monitor Well MW-1 consist of sand and gravel
extending to a depth of approximately 4 3 feet below the ground surface overlying bedrock
which extended the full depth of the monitor well, approximately 61

feet The subsurface

conditions encountered in Monitor Wells M W - 2 through M W 4 consisted of sand and gravel
with occasional thin clay layers extending to the maximum depth investigated, approximately
100 feet below the ground surface Subsurface conditions encountered in Monitor Well M W 5 consist of sand and gravel with occasional clay layers extending to a depth of
approximately 41 feet below the ground surface overlying bedrock to the maximum depth
of the monitor well, approximately 243 feet

A descnption of the vanous matenals encountered in the test pits and bonngs for monitor

/ ^ C J ^

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 6
wells IS indicated below

Topsoil - The topsoil consists of silty and clayey sand and gravel to lean clay
Cobbles and occasional boulders were encountered in the topsoil

The topsoil is

slightly moist, brown and contains roots

Lean Clay - The clay contains small to moderate amounts of gravel
porous in Test Pits T P - 1 , TP 2 and A-1
boulders up to 3 feet in size
in the bonngs

The clay is

The clay contains cobbles and occasional

It is stiff to very stiff, slightly moist and wet at depth

It is brown to reddish brown to grayish brown in color

Laboratory tests conducted on samples of the clay indicate natural moisture contents
range from 8 to 18 percent and natural dry densities range from 74 to 113 pounds
per cubic foot (pcf)

Consolidation tests conducted on samples of the clay indicate that the soil will
compress a moderate amount with the addition of moderate to heavy loads Results
of the consolidation tests are presented on Figures 14 through 19
in the upper approximate 4 feet

Some of the clay

such as in Test Pit TP-1 is moisture sensitive,

becoming more compressible when wetted

We anticipate that the upper clay will be

removed from below the proposed landfill

Clayey Sand with Gravel - The sand contains clayey gravel layers, cobbles and
occasional boulders up to 1 Vi. feet in size It is medium dense to dense, slightly moist
to moist and brown in color

Results of laboratory tests conducted on samples of the clayey sand indicate a natural
moisture content of 5 percent and a natural dry density of 90 pcf

The results of a gradation test conducted on a sample of the clayey sand are

/ ^ A ^

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 7
presented on Figure 23

The results of gradation and moisture density relationship

(Proctor) tests conducted on samples ranging from sandy silt clay to clayey gravel
with sand are presented on Figures 24 and 25

A consolidation test conducted on a sample of the clayey sand indicates that the soil
will compress a small to moderate amount with the addition of moderate to heavy
loads

Results of the test are presented on Figure 18

The upper approximate 4 feet

in some areas such as Test Pit TP-20 is moisture sensitive, becoming more
compressible when wetted

We anticipate that the upper material will be removed

from below the proposed landfill

A sample of the sandy, silty clay was remolded to 95 percent of the maximum dry
density as determined by A S T M D-698 and a permeability test conducted on a
remolded sample The test results indicate a permeability of 1 x 10 ^ centimeters per
second

Silty Sand with Gravel - The sand contains clayey layers and gravel layers
Occasional cemented layers cobbles and occasional boulcters were encountered The
sand IS medium dense to very dense, slightly moist and brown to reddish brown in
color

Laboratory tests conducted on samples of the silty sand indicate natural moisture
contents range from 3 to 6 percent and natural dry densities range from 97 to 124
pcf

The results of a gradation test conducted on a sample of the sand are presented

on Figure 21

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 8
Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel - The sand contains gravel layers, cobbles and
occasional boulders

Occasional cemented layers were encountered

The sand is

medium dense to very dense, slightly moist to moist, wet at depth in the bonngs and
brown to grayish brown to reddish brown in color

The results of laboratory tests conducted on a sample of the sand indicate a natural
moisture content of 7 percent

The results of gradation tests conducted on samples of the sand are presented on
Figures 2 0 , 21 and 22

Clayey Gravel with Sand and Clayey Sand with Gravel - The sand and gravel is
interlayered

It contains cobbles and occasional boulders and occasional clay layers

It IS dense to very dense, slightly moist to moist, wet at depth in the bonngs and
brown to gray in color

Laboratory tests conducted on samples of the sand and gravel indicate natural
moisture contents range from 4 to 13 percent and natural dry densities range from
114 to 130 pcf

Clayey Gravel with Sand - The gravel contains clayey sand layers and occasional clay
layers

Cobbles and boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size and occasional

cemented layers were encountered

The gravel is medium dense to very dense,

slightly moist to moist, wet at depth in the bonngs and brown to gray in color

Laboratory tests conducted on samples of the gravel indicate natural moisture
contents range from 8 to 13 percent and a natural dry density of 120 pcf

The results of a gradation test conducted on a sample of the clayey gravel are
presented on Figure 20

ASSCTC APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 9
Silty Gravel with Sand - The gravel contains silty sand layers, cobbles up to
approximately 1 foot in size and occasional cemented layers

It is dense to very

dense, slightly moist and brown in color

Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand

The gravel contains sand layers, occasional

cemented layers cobbles and boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size

It is

medium dense to very dense, slightly moist to moist, wet at depth in the bonngs and
brown to grayish brown in color

The results of gradation tests conducted on samples of the gravel are presented on
Figures 2 2 and 23

Bedrock - The bedrock consists of quartzite and dolomite

It is hard to very hard dry

to wet grayish white to gray to purple in color

Results of the laboratory tests are included on logs of the borings and test pits and are
summanzed on Table I

SUBSURFACE WATER

No subsurface water was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavation Subsurface
water was measured at depths of approximately 33 3 5 , 3 3 , 35 and 220 feet below the
ground surface in Monitor Wells MW-1 through M W - 5 , respectively, based on measurements
taken at the time of dnlling

There is an existing well on the site near Test Pit TP-17 which is an approximate 6 inch
diameter, steel cased well with a submersible pump

Based on the contours shown on Figure

2, we estimate the well to have an elevation of approximately 4 3 3 0 feet

j f i ^ ^

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

Water was

1020875

 Page 10
measured in the well on January 28, 2003 and again on June 18, 2003 at a depth of
approximately 120 feet below the ground surface

PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

W e understand that the facility encompasses approximately 2 006 acres and the proposed
Class 1 landfill will encompass approximately 1,000 acres

W e understand that the proposed construction will include liner systems ovedain by municipal
solid waste with a closure cap We understand that the liner system will be constructed over
the on-site soil or bedrock The liner system will consist of the following from top to bottom

non-woven geosynthetic fabric
gravel
non-woven geosynthetic fabric
geosynthetic membrane liner
geosynthetic clay liner (GCL)

Municipal waste will be placed above the liner system

The closure cap will consist of the

following from top to bottom

•

soil cover

•

geosynthetic drainage net

•

textured geosynthetic membrane liner

•

geosynthetic clay liner (GCL)

W e understand that the waste and closure cap will have a slope of 4 honzontal to 1 vertical

W e anticipate that the site will be excavated on the order of 10 to 15 feet below the existing

/^^CJ7

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 11
grade pnor to constructing the lining systems

We understand that permanent excavation

slopes for landfill lining systems will be cut at 3 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter
If the proposed construction is different from what is described above, we should be notified
to reevaluate our recommendations

GEOLOGY

A

Regional Geology

The Promontory Mountains are a part of the Basin and Range Province The province
IS made up of north/south elongated mountain blocks and valleys

The Promontory

Mountains form one of the mountain blocks in the province with the Great Salt Lake
occupying a portion of the valleys on either side

The valleys were once occupied by a large lake known as Lake Bonneville dunng the
Wisconsin Glacial penod of the Pleistocene Age The present day Great Salt Lake is
a remnant of ancient Lake Bonneville StiUstands of Lake Bonneville formed benches
along the margins of the mountain blocks

The highest level of Lake Bonneville is

marked by a bench, the Bonneville shoreline, at approximate elevation 5280 feet

The

lake remained at this high level from approximately 17,000 to 15,000 years before
present (B P ) until it dropped approximately 350 feet during a catastrophic flood
known as the Bonneville Flood (Currey and Oviatt, 1985 and Jarrett and Malde,
1987) T w o lower stiUstands of Lake Bonneville are the Provo (approximately 13,000
years B P ) and Gilbert (approximately

10,000 years B P ) which formed

at

approximate elevations 4 9 3 0 and 4 3 3 0 feet, respectively (Currey and others, 1983)
The most

recent

high-water

level, known

as the

Holocene High, occurred

approximately 2,600 years B P with an approximate elevation of 4 2 2 0 feet

The site is at an elevation ranging from approximately 4 2 3 0 feet to 5200 feet, placing

/ 5 ^ C 5 7 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 12
the site between just above the Holocene High to just below the Lake Bonneville
shoreline

B

Stratigraphy

The Quaternary sediments at the site consist predominantly of Lake Bonneville
deposits with a thin veneer of alluvium and colluvium

Bedrock in the area consists

of Cambnan and Pre-Cambnan-aged rock (Crittenden, 1988)

The Ouaternary sediments consist predominantly of sand and gravel representing
pnmanly transgressive phases of Lake Bonneville shoreline deposits

Some clay was

encountered at the site which generally represents deeper lake sediments deposited
dunng the high stands of Lake Bonneville

Four bedrock formations have been mapped within the property boundaries (see
Figure 1)

The youngest of these deposits is the middle and lower Cambnan-aged

limestone and shale consisting of interbedded, thin bedded, medium-gray, limestone
and olive drab shale

The interbedded limestone and shale is underlain by lower Cambnan-aged Geertsen
Canyon Quartzite which consists of deep reddish-black hematitic quartzite

The Geertsen Canyon Quartzite is underlain by the late Proterozoic-aged Browns Hole
Formation which consists of pale-gray, very-fine grained vitreous quartzite

The late Proterozoic-aged Mutual Formation undedays the Browns Hole Formation and
consists of thick-bedded, coarse grained quartzite intercalated with a few beds of
siltstone and shale

/S55S^

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 13
Structure

Due to the age of the bedrock, the bedrock is highly faulted, fractured and deformed
The attitude of beds vanes significantly across the site

The dip of beds northeast of

the site IS generally down toward the northeast with a dip angle ranging from 30 to
45 degrees

Tectonic Setting

The Promontory Mountains are bounded on the west by a fault known as the East
Great Salt Lake Fault (Hecker, 1993)

The fault is mapped to extend within

approximately 8 0 0 feet west of the west edge of the property

The East Great Salt

Lake Fault is considered to have had movement within the Quaternary and possibly
within the Holocene time penod

Quaternary slip rates for the fault are estimated to

be on the order of 0 4 to 0 7 millimeters per year which is approximately half the slip
rate for the Wasatch Fault (Pechmann, 1987)

A recent study (Dinter and Pechmann, 1998) using seismic reflection methods found
the East Great Salt Lake Fault to be approximately 2 miles west of the southwest
edge of the property

Geologic Hazards

Geologic hazards reviewed for the project consist of surface fault rupture, ground
shaking, landslide, debns flow, rockfall, subsidence, dam failure flood, mining activity,
salt dome and salt bed

1

Surface Fault Rupture Hazard
A s indicated above the East Great Salt Lake Fault is estimated to extend
within approximately 2 miles west of the southwest edge of the property

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 14
There is no surface evidence of the fault based on a reconnaissance of the
area

The presence of the fault is based on seismic reflection surveys

performed at the Great Salt Lake

Based on the topography of the area the East Great Salt Lake Fault would
have relative movement down on the west

We would not anticipate shallow

bedrock to be encountered on the west side of the fault

There is bedrock

exposed west of the road on the west edge of the property
reasoning, the fault is located west of the road

Based on this

The recent seismic reflection

study would indicate that the East Great Salt Lake Fault is a considerable
distance west of the road

Surface fault rupture is not considered a hazard at

the site

Earthquake Ground Shaking
Ground shaking due to large earthquakes in the area is a potential hazard at
the site Studies performed by the U S Geological Survey would indicate that
a probablistic ground motion of 0 55g would have a 2 percent probability of
occurrence in a 50 year penod (Frankel, et al, 1996)

The impact due to

seismic ground shaking should be considered in the design of the facility

Landslide
There are no mapped landslides on the property based on a review of the
landslide map of the Promontory Point 30 minute by 60 minute quadrangle
(Harty, 1992)

Some landslides are mapped north of the site in Little Valley

Based on a reconnaissance of the site and the subsurface

conditions

encountered in the test pits excavated at the site, landslide is not considered
a hazard for the proposed development

Ji^5!fiT7 APPUED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

102087 5

 Page 15
4

Debns Flow
There are no signihcant drainages which extend through the site and no source
for debns flow upgradient of the site

Debns flow is not considered a hazard

for the proposed development

5

Rockfall
The source of rock for rockfall is steep rock outcrops at Lead Mountain to the
northeast of the site and minor rock cliffs and bedrock outcrops in the
southeast portion of the site

None of these rockfall sources are significant

enough to pose a hazard for the proposed development

6

Subsidence
The

overburden

charactenstics

soil

at

the

site

generally

has

low

compressibility

The bedrock in the area consists predominantly of quartzite

which has low solubility

The limestone which is present in the northeast

portion of the site shows no evidence of caverns or other solution features of
significance

A reconnaissance of the site found no evidence of depressions

or other subsidence features

Subsidence due to dissolution of the limestone

bedrock is not considered a potential hazard at the site

7

Dam Failure Flooding
There are no dams upgradient of the site

Thus, dam failure flooding is not

considered a hazard

8

Mining Activity
The Promontory Mountains have been mined for lead in the past

There are

mine prospects northeast of the site at and around Lead Mountain

Gravel and

nprap for construction for the railroad causeway have been mined in the
northwest portion of the property

There are some mine prospects in igneous

dikes which cut through the Mutual Formation in the northwest portion of the

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 16
site

Most mine prospects in the area appear to be shallow explorations with

no evidence of significant underground mining due to the lack of mine spoil
piles of significance Two mine shafts were identified by the Utah Division of
Oil, Gas and Mining in 1986 just east of the gravel quarnes in the northwest
portion of the site and designated V O - 1 0 and VO-201 (see attached figure)
These shafts were approximately 4 2 feet and 102 feet deep, respectively
Both shafts were filled in 1986 Mine related hazards are not considered a
concern for the proposed development

9

Salt Domes and Beds
Based on a reconnaissance of the site and subsurface exploration, there is no
evidence for significant salt deposits on the property

Salt deposits are not

expected with the type of bedrock encountered at the site

Salt domes and

salt beds are not considered a hazard for the proposed development

Conclusions

Based on our geologic hazard review for the project, seismic ground shaking
represents the only geologic hazard identified as a potential concern for the proposed
development

No other geologic features were identified which could compromise the

structural integrity of the proposed facility

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on subsurface conditions encountered, the results of laboratory testing and our
understanding

of geologic conditions and the proposed construction, the following

recommendations are given

/^^S7

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 17
Site Grading

We anticipate that cuts will generally be on the order of 10 to 15 feet below the
existing grade

We anticipate that there may be deeper cuts in areas with thicker

overburden matenal

We anticipate that overburden matenal and/or excavated

bedrock will be cut and stockpiled for use as drainage and soil cover matenals
Processing of the on-site soil and bedrock will likely be needed to obtain suitable
gradations for their intended use in constructing the landfill

1

Excavation
Excavation of the overburden matenal, with the exception of highly cemented
layers,

can generally

equipment

be

accomplished with

conventional

excavation

Highly cemented soil layers and excavations extending significant

depths into the bedrock may require heavy-duty ripping and/or blasting

Temporary unretained excavation slopes m the overburden material may be
constructed at 1 Yn. honzontal to 1 vertical or flatter

Temporary unretained

excavation slopes in bedrock may be constructed at Yi. honzontal to 1 vertical
or flatter

2

Subgrade Preparation
Pnor to placing the geosynthetic clay liner, the subgrade should be cut to
undisturbed, natural soil or bedrock

Loose or disturbed soil should be

removed or compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by A S T M D-698

The moisture of the subgrade, where re-

compacted, should be adjusted to within 2 percent of the optimum moisture
content

The subgrade should be relatively smooth pnor to placing the geosynthetic
clay liner

This may result in the need for some over-excavation and

/ 5 ^ C 5 7 APPUED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 1 8
replacement with compacted fill where cobbles, boulders or significant
irregularities in the bedrock are encountered

Matenals
The on-site soil and bedrock, which can be adequately broken down may be
used in the construction

W e anticipate that on-site soils will be suitable for use as soil cover

Select

on-site material or processed material could be used for drainage layers
Drainage matenal should have no more than 5 percent passing the No 200
sieve

Compaction
Materials placed in landfill foundation areas should be compacted to at least
95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by A S T M D-698
Protective soil cover should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the
maximum dry density as determined by A S T M D-698

The fill should be

compacted at a moisture content within 2 percent of the optimum moisture
content to facilitate the compaction process

Care will be required when placing soil cover and drainage matenals over the
membrane liners

Adequate thickness of soil should be placed over the liners

pnor to using equipment above the liner

The size of equipment should be

restncted so as not to damage the liner

B

Stability

1

Short Term - Dunng Operation
We understand that landfill lining systems will be constructed on cut slopes of
3 honzontal to 1 vertical and waste placed over these areas Stability of these

>Qg^!C APPUED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 19
slopes should be maintained by extending the waste and cover materials out
laterally a sufficient distance beyond the toe of the slopes dunng construction
and operation

The friction angle between components of the lining system should be
considered in establishing the cntena for waste placement on the slopes

Long Term - Closure
W e understand that the exterior slope of the proposed landfill will have a final
slope of 4 honzontal to 1 vertical

Stability analysis was conducted assuming

the municipal solid waste to have a fnction angle of 25 degrees (Singh and
Murphy, 1990)

We have assumed that fnction angles between components

of the closure cap will be at least 25 degrees or more

The fnction angles

between components of the closure cap should be venf led and considered in
the design

An infinite slope method of analysis was used

Under static conditions, the

analysis indicates a safety factor of 1 9

A pseudo-static analysis was conducted using a peak honzontal ground
acceleration of 0 55g for a seismic event having a 2 percent probability of
exceedance in a 50 year penod (10 percent in 250 years) and estimating
deformation due to ground shaking

The results of the analysis indicate a

small to moderate displacement is likely under this seismic condition with
predicted movement on the order of 15 cm for a 4 horizontal to 1 vertical
slope

The analysis conducted is a screening analysis presented by Bray, et al , 1998,
from "Simplified Seismic Design Procedure for Geosynthetic-Lined Solid-Waste
Landfills"

/§^£S7

A 50 percent confidence threshold was used (Blake, T F , et al ,

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 20
2002)

Protection from erosion will be important for maintaining long term stability of
the closure

We understand that drainage and erosion protection are being

addressed by the design civil engineer

Results of the stability analysis are included in the Appendix

Settlement

Settlement calculations were conducted for overburden soil based on the anticipated
closure with 4 honzontal to 1 vertical slopes and assuming 10 feet of matenal is
excavated and removed

Contours representing the calculated settlement are

presented on Figure 26

The settlement does not include bedrock strain We estimate bedrock strain under the
load of the landfill to be on the order of 0 to 6 inches

Settlement calculations are included in the Appendix

A^AZ^

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 21
LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechmcal
engineenng and geology practices in the area for the use of the client for design purposes
The information presented is based on the review of geologic literature, excavation of test
pits at the approximately locations indicated on Figure 2, subsurface conditions encountered
in dnlling for five monitor wells at the approximate locations indicated on Figure 2 and the
results of laboratory testing

Variations in the subsurface matenals may not become evident

until additional exploration or excavation is conducted

If the proposed construction or

subsurface conditions are signihcantly different from those descnbed above, we should be
notified so that we can reevaluate our recommendations

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING C O N S U L T A N T S , INC

J a y R McQuivey, P E

Douglas R Hawkgs, I

Reviewed by James E Nordquist, P E

J R M DRH/dc

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

1020875

 Page 22
REFERENCES CITED

Blake, T F , Hollingsworth, R A , Stewart, J P , "Recommended Procedures for
Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating
Landslide Hazard in California", A S C E Los Angeles Section Geotechmcal Group and Southern
California Earthquake Center, June 2002
Bray, J D , Rathje, E M , Augello, A J and Merry, S M (1 998), "Simplified Seismic Design
Procedure for Geosynthetic-Lined, Solid-Waste Landfills , Geosynthetics International, Vol
5 No 1-2, pp 203-235
Crittenden, M D , Jr 1988 Bedrock geologic map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder
County, Utah, U S Geological Survey Open file Report 88-646
Currey, D R , A t w o o d , G and Mabey, D R , 1983, Major levels of the Great Salt Lake and
Lake Bonneville, Utah Geological Survey Map 73
Currey, D R and Oviatt, F G , 1985, Durations, average rates and probable cause of Lake
Bonneville expansion, stiUstands and contractions during the last deep-lake cycle 3 2 0 0 0 to
10,000 years ago, in Diaz, H F , eds Problems of and prospects for predicting Great Salt
Lake levels. Proceedings for N O A A conference, Center for Public Affairs and Administration,
University of Utah, Salt Lake City Utah
Dinter, D A and Pechmann, J C , 1998, paleoseismology of the east Great Salt Lake Fault,
U S Geological Survey External Grant Award No 9 8 H Q G R 1 0 1 3 , University of Utah
Department of Geology and Geophysics
Frankel, A Mueller, C , Barnhard, T , Perkins, D , Leyendecker, E V , Dickman N Hansen,
S , Hopper, M , 1996, "National Seismic-Hazard Maps Documentation June 1996 " U S
Department of the Intenor, U S Geological Survey, Open File Report 96-532
Harty, K M , 1 9 9 2 , Landslide map of the Promontory Point 30 X 6 0 ' quadrangle, Utah, Utah
Geological Survey Open-file Report 245
Hecker, S , 1 9 9 3 , Quaternary tectonics of Utah with emphasis on earthquake hazard
charactenzation, Utah Geological Survey Bulletin 127
Jarrett, R D and Malde, H E , 1987 Paleodischarge of the late Pleistocene Bonneville Flood,
Snake River, Idaho, computed from new evidence. Geological Society of Amenca Bulletin,
V 9 9 , p 127-134
Pechmann, J C , 1 9 8 7 , Earthquake design consideration for the interisland diking project.
Great Salt Lake, Utah, Salt Lake City unpublished technical report

/^£S7

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

102087 5

 Page 23
References (continued)

Singh, S , and Murphy B , Evaluation of the Stability of Sanitary Landfills, Geotechnics of
Waste Fills Theory and Practice, A S T M STP 1070, Arvid Landva, G David Knowles
editors, Amencan Society for Testing and materials, Philadelphia, 1990
Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, 1986, Promontory mine reclamation project,
unpublished field reports

APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC

102087 5

 sj67.r-^^- eis • *

' /nl-r--^ - els "

ToDographic dase from USGS Promontoiy Point and Pokes Point Quadrangles.
Geology from Crittenden, 1988

Promontory Landfill Site
Box Elder County, Utah

A
Approximate Scale
1 Inch = 2,000 feet

1020875

Legend:
els - Limestone and Shale (middle and lower Cambrain)
egc - Geertsen Canyon Quartzite (lower Cambrain)
zbh - Browns Hole Formation (late Proterozoic)
zm - Mutual Formation (late Proterozoic)
Contact
Fault
• VO-201 Mine Shaft filled
Geologic Map

Figure 1

 3000

6000 feet

Approximate Scale

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

Legend:
Test Pit Location
#

1020875

Locations of Monitor Wells and Test Pits

Monitor Well Location

Figure 2

 MW 1
A s installed

4245
2

Schedule 4 0 P V C Pipe

A s dnlled

4245

Eiev 4 2 4 0

, 4240

4240

18/12

4235

 85/11

4230

4235

WC = 3
DD = 124
+ 4 = 26
2 0 0 = 11

4230

80/12

4225

4225

—

4220

—

4215

—

83/12

. 4220

114/12

. 4215

]

VVC = 13
DD = 120
+ 4 = 23
2 0 0 = 36

80/11

— 4210

4210
146
90/12

4205

4205

[61/12

• 4200

WC = 8
+ 4 = 43
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I 50/5

4195

4195

—

4190

—

I 50/6

4190

150/3

— 4185

4185

' 4180

4180
Quartzite
Bedrock

I — 4175

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

4175

-

8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Log of Monitor Well M W 1

Figure 3

 MW 2

2

A s installed
Schedule 4 0 P V C

,— 4240

A s drilled
Elev 4 2 3 8

4240

4235

4235

—I

35/10

4230

1

4230

50/6

4225

85/12

4220

Wc = 6
DD = 114
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 21

50/6

4210

60/4

4205

50/5

—

4220

90/12

4215

4225

WC = 6
DD = 117
+ 4 = 52
2 0 0 = 24

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

MW 3
ICont)

A s installed
4200

50/5

VVC = 7
+ 4 = 65
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I—

A s drilled

4170

417050/5

• 4195

50/6

4195

4190

50/4

4190

— 4165

—

4165—1

4160 —

— 4160

180/9

—

4185

—

4180

^150/4

• 4175

j 2 50/2

• 4170
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

4185

150/4

—

4150

+ 4 = 53
2 0 0 = 14

4175

4170—
= 8

—

4155 —

4155

3 50/3

4145-

4145

1— 4 1 4 0

4150—

50/3

4140-

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 2

Figure 4

 MW 3
2

A s installed
Sctiedule 4 0 P V C

A s dnlled

4240

4240
Elev

4238

. 4235

1

4235
150/1

—

4230

422S

4220

—

180/12

4230

50/6

422S

50/3

4215

— 4210

4205

—

4220

—

—

93/10

WC = 4
DD = 119
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 15

4215

50/5

+ 4 = 62
2 0 0 = 16

4210

MW 3
(Cont)

4205

I 50/4

A3 installed
—

4200

—

4195

—

4190

—

4185

—

4180

72/7

: ] 95/10

:3

50/2

:^

50/1

WC = 7
+ 4 = 40
200 = 6

A s drilled
4170-

4200

4170

4195

4165

181/8

4165 —

4190

4160

150/4

4160—

4185

—

4180

—

4175

—

J 75/12

50/1

4155

4155 —

J
]72/10

4175

—

4170

C D 50/4

1

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

4170 .
= 8

_

4150

150/5

4150-

4145

50/2

4145-

4140

ffitn

50/4

4140 —

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 3

Figure 5

 2

MW 4
A s installed
A s drilled
Schedule 40 P V C

Elev

r

4240

4240

4240

''7}""

4235

/I

4235

31/12

4230

—

4230

i

4225

63/12

4225

65/12

—

WC = 3
DD = 120
+ 4 = 60 4220
200 = 7

4220

85/12
—

%

4215

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

80/12
4210

D 50/6
4205

MW 4

tCont)
A s installed

46/12
4200

4200

]

4195

I 50/5

4195

i

—

WC = 8
DD = 132
+ 4 = 25 4190 - \
200 = 15

4190

[ 38/12
—

4185

150/3
—

I 77/11

WC = 13
DD = 124
+ 4 = 31 4185
200 = 22

4150

1020875

W C = 11
DD = 130
+ 4 = 39 4 1 5 0 —
2 0 0 = 21

150/5

50/4
4175

1

4155-

4155

4180 — ]

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

4160—

4160

77/12

• 4180

' — 4170

4165 —

4165

40/12

4175

4170—I

• 4170

59/12

54/12
—

A s dnlled

—

4145-

4145

150/5
83/10
4170= 8

' — 4140

4140 —
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 4

Figure 6

 MW 5
As installed

As dnlled
Elev 4440

•—

4440

—

4440

16/12

•4 Schedule
40 PVC

4435 —

4435

/ "112/1:
—

4430

4430

\
/ ]

69/11
4425

4425

18/12
4420 —

4420

—

4416

;] 48/12
23/12

—

4410

—

4405

—

4400

4415

WC = 18
DD = 113
200 = 72

4410 —

,49/12
4405

181/11
4400 •

,50/1
—

4395 —

4335

:zi

•
4390

43 SO —

4385

4385 —

—

4380

4380

—

4375

4375 —

4370 •

1— 4370
Approximate Vertical Scale 1 = 8
1020875

Continued on next figure
Log of Monitor Well MW 5

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Figure 7

 M W 5 (Continued)

A s installed

—

A s drilled

4370

4370 — ,

4365

4365 .

4360

4360-

4246

4245 —

i

4240

4240 —

4235

4235 •

4230

4230 •

4225

4225 —

—

4220

4220 •

—

4215

4215 —

4210

4210 •

4205

4205 •

—

>oi

-

(Ouartzlte
Bedrock

4200 —

4200

Bottom Depth 243 Feet
4195 •

4195

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8

Log of Monitor Well M W 5

Figure 8

 Elev

A 1
4310

Elev

A 2
4305

Elev

A 3
4302

Elev

A 4
4378

Elev

Cemented

Cemented
Quartzite
Bedrock
• —

Quartzite
Bedrock

10

/:=i
10 •

Refusal in
Cemented Soil

15

A 5
4282

a::

15

20

20

Elev

A 6
4283

Elev

A 7
4250

A 8
Elev 4 2 6 0

Elev

A 9
4262

so

S2

5 —

Cemented

=3

/S3
10
Cemented '
Refusal In
Cemented Soil

15

Refusal in
Cemented Soil or
Bedrock

15

Cemented \

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 9

 TP 2
Elev 4 8 7 0

TP 1
Elev 4 8 1 0

TP 3
Elev 4 9 8 0

TP 4
Elev 4 7 8 0

TP 5
Elev 4 8 2 5
0

1—1

WC = 9
DD = 74
2 0 0 = 96
LL = 2 6
PI = 6

—

+ 4 = 39
2 0 0 = 14

WC = 8
DD = 8 7
200 = 63

Cemented '

10

10 -

15

15

20

20 •

TP 7
Elev 5 0 4 5

TP 6
Elev 4 9 0 0

-

—1

5

TP 8
Elev 4 6 8 0

TP 9
Elev 4 6 9 0

Dolomite
Bedrock

T P 10
Elev 4 7 5 5

+ 4 = 47
200 = 3

5

-

10

Cemented \
16

15 •
Refusal in
Cemented Soil

I—

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

20 —
= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 10

 TP 12
Elev 4 5 2 0

T P 11
Elev 4 8 7 5

T P 13
Elev 4 S 3 0

T P 15
Elev 4 6 5 0

T P 14
Elev 4 5 8 5

0

3

7 r3

—

I

W C = 14
DD = 98
200 = 90

W C = 15
DD = 102
200 = 73

10

—I

A

10 .

/=3
-

Quartzite
Bedrock

15

15

20 •

20

T P 17
Elev 4 4 2 5

T P 16
Elev 4 3 3 0

TP 18
Elev 4 4 6 2

Cemented .

10

• I]
^

TP 2 0
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 19
Elev 4 6 0 0

WC = 6
DD = 97
2 0 0 = 35

+ 4 = 53
200 = 2

+ 4 = 6
2 0 0 = 51
LL = 19
PI = 5
M D D = 118 5
OMC = 1 1 5
K = 1x10 5

10

Cemented '

u 1=1
15

15
Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

Quartzite
Bedrock
20

= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 11

—

 TP 22
Elev 4 4 6 0

TP 21
Elev 4 3 5 0

I
i—1

10

+4 = 37
2 0 0 « 36
LL = 3 4
Pi = 15
M D D » 124
O M C <= 9

TP 2 3
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 2 4
Elev 4 3 2 5

>=3

+ 4 = 44
2 0 0 = 26

(13
+ 4 = 35
200 = 1

r

I

Quan
Bedrock

+ 4 = 56
2 0 0 = 10

W C = 17
DD = 107
2 0 0 = 72

10 •

uartzita

Dolomite
Bedrock

Quartzite
Bedrock
15

15 —

20

20
TP 25
Elev 4365

TP 26
Elev 4260

TP 27
Eiev 4280

*=3
— 5

10

f
Quartzite
Bedrock

• 20
1020875

Cemented 4

Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

10 -

15 •

15

Approximate Vertical Scale

+ 4 = 10
2 0 0 = 20

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

1 = 8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 12

 NOTES

Legend of Boring and Test Pit Logs

§

The bonngs for monitor wells M W 1 to M W 4 were dnlled and installed on January
2 3 2 4 27 28 and 29 2 0 0 3 with a 4 inch odex drilling system Monitor well M W 5
was drilled and installed M a y 14 to M a y 21 2 0 0 3 with 8 inch Odex/Air Rotory
methods The test pits were excavated on December 11 12 13 16 and 2 3 2 0 0 2
with a track excavator

Topsoil Silty and clayey sand and gravel to lean clay cobbles and occasional boulders
slightly moist brown roots
Lean Clay (CL) small to moderate amount of gravel porous in Test Pits TP 1 T P 2 and
A 1 cobbles and occasional boulders up to 3 feet in size stiff to very stiff slightly moist
w e t at depth in borings brown to reddish brown to grayish brown

•

Q

Clayey Sand with Gravel ( S O clayey gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders up to
1 / feet in size medium dense to dense slightly moist to moist brown

ry\
J[i
uCJ

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) clayey layers and gravel layers occasional cemented layers
cobbles and occasional boulders medium dense to very dense slightly moist brown to
reddish brown

•

Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders
occasional cemented layers medium dense to very dense slightly moist to moist wet
at depth in the borings brown to grayish brown to reddish brown
Clayey Gravel with Sand and Clayey Sand with Gravel (GC/SC) Interlayered cobbles and
occasional boulders occasional clay layers dense to very dense slightly moist to moist
w e t at depth in the borings brown to gray

Locations of the bonngs and tost pits were measured epproximately by a hand held G P S
Elevations of the borings and test pits were estimated based on interplation between
P
/^ntniire e
humr^ n
n Figure
Pirtiir. O
contours
shwon
on
2
I

The boring and test pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to
the degree implied by the method used

>

The lines between the matenals s h o w n on the boring and test pit logs represent the
approximate boundanes between material types and the transitions may be gradual

3

No free water was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavating Water
level readings shown on the monitor well logs were made at the time and under the
conditions indicated Fluctuation in the water level will occur with time

7

W C = Water Content (%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
+ 4 = Percent Reteined on No 4 Sieve
2 0 0 = Percent Passing No 2 0 0 Sieve
LL = Liquid Limit (%)
Pi = Plasticity Index (%)
M D D = Maximum Dry Density determined by A S T M D 6 7 8 (pet)
O M C = Optimum Moisture Content determined by A S T M D 678 (^l
K = Permeability (cm/sec)

Clayey Gravel w i t h Sand ( G O clayey sand layers occasional clay layers cobbles end
boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size occasional cemented layers medium dense to
very dense sliglitiy moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grey
K \

Silty Gravel w i t h Sand (GM) silty send layers cobbles up to approximately 1 foot in size
occasional cemented layers dense to very dense slightly moist brown

^

Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GPI sand layers occasional cemented layers cobbles
and boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size medium dense to vary dense slightly
moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grayish brown

LEGEND OF WELL INSTALLATION
I—I

Concrete

Bedrock quartzite and dolomite hard to very hard dry to wet grayish white to grey to
purple

•

Bentonite Seal (3/8

1

10/12

P
1020875

California Dnve sample teken The symbol 1 0 / 1 2 indicates that 10 blows from a
1 4 0 pound hammer failing 3 0 inches were required to drive the sampler 12

chips)

Bentonite Grout

inches

Indicates relatively undisturbed hand drive sample taken

Sand pack around well screen

Indicates disturbed sample taken

indicates Schedule 4 0 P V C flush threaded pipe installed

indicates practical refusal

Indicates machine slotted schedule 4 0 P V C flush treaded pipe with 0 01
inch openings installed

indicates the depth of subsurface water and the number of days after dnlling the
measurement w a s taken

Indicates steel protective casing installed The casings are 4 inch diameter for
M W 1 through M W 4 The casing is 8 inch square for M W 5

Legend and Notes of Exploratory Borings Test Pits and Monitor Wells

10 2 0 Silica Sand

FlQiira 1 3

 Compressuon - 

Applied Engineering Consultants, Inc

 

Monsture Content 18 
Dry Unlt 113 
Sample of Lean Clay Sand

 

From 28 feet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

1 -.. No movement upon wetting
100
APPLIED PRESSURE - 

1020875 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 14

Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
Moisture Content
Dry Unit Weight
Sample of Silty Clay

9
74

pcf

From TP-1 @ 2 feet

Additional movement under
constant pressure upon wetting

10

12
o
» 14
w
V

a

I 16
18

20

22

24

26

28

30
Note Scale Change
I

01
1020875

i

l

l

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 15

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

iw 7
0)
Q.

10

11

12

13

14

15
16

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 16

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

c

i 7
(0

a>
a

J »
10

11

12

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 17

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

10

12

^ 14
(0

o
k.

Q.

i 16
u
18

20

22

24

26

28

10

10
APPLIED PRESSURE ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 18

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

17
M

2
a

Ie

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 19

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24Hr
7Hr
^^j45Mlm5Mln

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A D I N O S
BOMInlgMIn

4 MIn

1 MIn

I
«200

u s STANDARD SERIES
«toO

» s q »4(»3o

me

C L E A R SQUARE OPENINOS
lie

43
Sand
42
<>/„
Gravel.
%
Plasticity
Index.
Liquid Limit,
%
From
Sample of Clavev Gravel with Sand

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
4 MIn

1 1/z

3

Silt and Clav
%
MW-1 @ 38'

^5

s e e

C O B B L E S

o/^

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A O I N a S
e o MIn I B MIn

a/4

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SANO
GRAVEL
FINE
1
MEDIUM
[COARSE
i=INE
1 COARSE

C L A Y T O SILT

24 Hr 7 H r
.45 M i n i 5 MIn

3/a

1 MIn

i
I
•200

US STANDARD SERIES
«100

ISO «40(30

»16

...
V °
We

T

i
'
»4

CLEAR SOUARE OPENINOS
3/e

3/4

1 1/2
1

J

3

/
//
///
f/

so
eo

/f

to
20

f

70

i

30
O
Ul

eo

S

g

o.
lu

o
1
1—
1

/

1/

1
1—

^
^

1
1—

/

K —

/i
/ r '1
r
'
1

r

{1
OOl

013 2

0<3 5

OO S

OI S

O37

07 4

1 49

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

2<37

1

—r

j-J

59 0

1 1S

l2 3 8

r-n—f4 76

8 52

IS 1

3(3 1

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
GRAVEL
SAND
FINE
1
MEDIUM
jCOARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

54
40
Sand
Gravel.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity Index.
%
Sample of Poorly-graded Sand with S i l t
and Gravel

Project No 1020875

pH

1—

%
From

7« 2

Figure

2

38°

COBBLES

Silt and Clay_
%
MVI-3 @ 43'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

127

20

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24 H r

7Hr

45Mlm5Mln

SIEVE ANALYSIS

TIME READINOS
e o MIn 19 MIn

4 MIn

 
1 Mm

«200

US STANDARD SERIES
«10O

IISO

»4C»30

l>ia

We

T

C L E A R S O U A R E OPENINOS
va

3/4

11/2

3

s

e

e

lo
20
30
S

eo

S

so

-l

a

I
70

'

•o
so
005

COS

Oia

037

074

140

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

2 9 7 j 50O
420

1 19

%
From

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
4 Mm

9 52

19 1

38 1

76 2

Silt and Clay_
%
TP-3 @ 2'

12^1 2 ^ 5 °
152
I

COBBLES

14

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A D I N O S
e o MIn 1 9 MIn

4 76

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1
MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

47
39
Gravel.
Sand.
%
Plasticity Index.
Liquid Limit.
%
Sample of S i l t v Sand w i t h G r a v e l

24 Hf 7 H r
,45 M i n i s MIn

12 38
2O

I
1 MIn

»200

US STANDARD SERIES
»100

« 5 0 iM0»30

»lg

•10
ke

C L E A R S O U A R E OPENINOS
3/a

V4

1 1/2

3

5

e e

i
a.
LU
O

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
GRAVEL
SAND
FINE
1
MEDIUM
jCOARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

50
47
Sand.
%
Gravel.
Plasticity Index.
Liquid Limit.
%
Sample of Poorl v-qraded Sand with Gravel

Project No 1020875

From

COBBLES

Silt and Clay.
%
TP-10 @ 4'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

21

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24 H r
7 Hr
4 5 M l m 5 Mln

TIME

6 0 M l m 9 M l n

005

SIEVE

READINOS
4 MIn

009

US STANDARD
1 Mm

01S

037

H2O0

074

»10O

149

«SO

»4ai30

297

S90

119

53
Sand
45
Gravel.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity
Index.
%
Sample of P o o r l y - g r a d e d G r a v e l w i t h Sand

•OOl

O02

OOS

4 MIn

009

1 Min

I
I
»200

4 76

3/4

9 52

OPENINOS

1 1/2

IS 1

From

Slit and Clay
%
TP-19 g 5 '

38 1

3

074

»100

149

«50

»4ai30

«ie

297 I 590
420

1 19

76 2

3/e

4 79

S 52

3/4

127

COBBLES

OPENINOS

1 1/2

19 1

3« 1

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1 MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
I COARSE

From

e . B

2_

CLEAR SQUARE

"lO
»e

t2 3S
2O

5

ANALYSIS

USSTANDARD SERIES

64
35
Gravel.
Sand.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity Index.
%
Sample of Pnorly-graded Sand with Gravel

1020875

l2 3 »
2 O

SIEVE

O l i 037

C L A Y T O SILT

Project No

o/^

A N A L Y S I S

TIME READINGS
eoMmlOMIn

3/8

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1 MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
I COARSE

C L A Y T O SILT

24 Hr
7 Hr
• 4 5 ><1ln1 S M I n

CLEAR SQUARE

»16

420

H Y D R O M E T E R

A N A L Y S I S

SERIES

3

s e e

76 2

COBBLES

Slit and Clay.
%
TP-23 @ 4'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

tZ'n 2o8°

22

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER
24
7 Hr
_45 M i n i s MIn

ANALYSIS

'"'"'^ READINOS
e o MIn 19 MIn 4 MIn

SIEVE ANALYSIS
 
«20O

1 Mm

C L A Y TO SILT

Gravel.
Liquid Limit.

56

«10O

US STANDARD SERIES
«SO »40»30
«16

FINE

1

SAND
MEDIUM

S

50

Ul
O

40

3/4

FINE

11/2

3

s

GRAVEL
1 COARSE

e

e

COBBLES

T P - 2 4 (3 4'

From

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME READINGS
4 MIn

CLEAR SQUARE OPENINOS
3/e

Silt and Clay 12_
%

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
6 0 MIn 19 MIn

 COARSE

34
Sand.
Plasticity Index.

%
%

Sample of Vlell-graded Gravel with S i l t
and Sand

24 Hr 7 H r
.45 M i n i 5 MIn

T

l»a

US STANDARD SERIES
1 MIn

«200

0100

«50

»4a»30

»16

Tio
»8

f
»4

CLEAR SOUARE OPENINOS
3/6

3/4

1 1/2

3 ,

5

6

e*

"1

es
o.
30
20
' OOn
10

002

OOS

009

019

j

037

074

149

287

I S90
420

119

l2 38
2O

4 76

52

10 1

381

76 2

^z^
152

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L J . 1 M E T E R S
C L A Y T O SILT

10

Gravel
Liquid Limit
Sample of

%
%
C l a y e y Sand

Project No

1020875

FINE

[

SAND
MEDIUM

70
Sand.
Plasticity Index.

[COARSE

FINE

GRAVEL
I COARSE

Silt and Clav
%
From

20

COBBLES

%

TP-27 (a 2'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

23

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC
125 0

Project
Sample Location

120 0

Promontory Point
TP 20 @ 2

Maximum Dry Density
Optimum Moisture

118 5 pcf
11 5 %

Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index

19%
5%

Gradation
Gravel
Sand
Silt & Clay

5

10

15

20

25

6%
43%
51%

30

Moisture Content Percent of Dry Weight
Test Procedure A S T M D 698 A
Sample Description
Sandy Silty Clay (CL ML)

Hydrometer Analysis
Time Readings

100%

24 Hr
45 Mm

i

7 Hr
15 Mm

60Mln19l»iin

1—I—I I I I 111

4 MIn

1\

Sieve Analysis
1

U S Standard Series
1 Mm

*2O0

#100

#50 #40 #30

#16

1—I—I—\—I i   M  i—hH—I

Clear Squai^ Openings

*^''

H-

Diameter of Particle in Millimeters
Clay to Slit

Project No

1020875

Fine

Sand
1 Medium

j Coarse

Fine

Gravel
1 Coarse

GRADATION &
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Cobbles

Boulders

Figure 24

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC
125 0

Project
Sample Location

120 0

o

Promontory Point
TP-21 @ 2'

115 0

Maximum Dry Density
Optimum Moisture

1100

Atterberg Limits

124 pcf
9%

CL

Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index

c 105 0
o
O
&•
Q 100 0

34%
15%

Gradation
Gravel
Sand
Silt & Clay

95 0

37%
27%
36%

90 0

85 0

5

10

15

20

25

35

30

Moisture Content Percent of Dry Weight
Test Procedure A S T M D-698 C
Sample Description
Clayey Gravel with Sand (GC)

Hydrometer Analysis
Time Readings
24 Hr
45 MIn

100% +

001

7Hr
15 MIn

1

60 MIn 19 Mm

1 I I M I ll

4 MIn

h

Sieve Analysis
1

U S Standard Series
1 Min

#200

1 l   I I ill 11

#100

#50 #40 #30

M i l l

#16

 I I I I ill I I

*^°#8

#4

3/8

3/4

Clear Square Openings
1 1/2

3

5 6

8

II I I 1  11 I  l  I 1 1  I  l l  IL>tl  I 1 I

002
420

20

Diameter of Particle in Millimeters
Clay to Silt

Project No

1020875

Fine

Sand
1 Medium

1 Coarse

Fine

Gravel
1 Coarse

GRADATION &
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Cobbles

Boulders

Figure 25

 v.;
•:• / >v-::

•^y'^-;tmB'"-'-

3000

6000 feet

Approxinnate Scale

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

Note: The settlement estimate given is for
the proposed 4:1 (H:V) slopes shown on the
plan (Aqua Figure 4.5) dated December
2002. We have assumed 10' of soil to be
removed. Bedrock strain is not included in
the numbers shown and is estimated to be 0
to 6 inches.

Legend:
Test Pit Location
•

1020875

Foundation Settlement Estimate

Monitor Well Location

Figure 26

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENC^-ERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 1 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS
SILT/
CLAY

LIQUID
LIMIT
{%)

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

MW 1

8

3

124

26

63

11

Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt and Gravel

23

13

120

23

41

36

Clayey Sand with Gravel

38

8

43

42

15

Clayey Gravel with Sand

13

6

114

38

41

21

Clayey Sand with Gravel

33

6

117

52

24

24

Clayey Gravel with Sand

38

7

65

20

15

Clayey Gravel with Sand

53

33

14

Clayey Gravel with Sand

38

47

15

Clayey Sand with Gravel

62

22

16

Clayey Gravel with Sand

40

54

6

Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt and Gravel

MW 2

(%)

58

MW 3

23

4

119

28

MW 4

MW 5

GRAVEL

SAND

(%)

(%)

(%)

PLASTICITY
INDEX

(%)

(%)

43

7

18

3

120

50

43

7

Poorly Graded Gravel
with Silt and Sand

48

8

132

25

60

15

Clayey Sand with Gravel

53

13

124

31

47

22

Clayey Sand with Gravel

88

11

130

39

40

21

Clayey Sand with Gravel

28

18

113

72

Lean Clay with Sand

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENC^'ERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 2 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

SILT/
CLAY

LIQUID
LIMIT

PLASTICITY
INDEX

(%)

(%)

(%)

74

96

26

6

87

63

Sandy Lean Clay

47

14

Silty Sand with Gravel

50

3

Poorly Graded Sand with
Gravel

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

TP 1

2

9

TP 2

4

8

TP 3

2

39

TP 10

4

47

TP 11

9

15

102

73

Lean Clay with Sand

TP 13

2

14

98

90

Lean Clay

TP 18

4

6

97

35

Silty Sand

TP 19

5

TP 20

2

TP 21

(%)

SAND
{%)

GRAVEL
{%)

53

5

45

(%)
Silty Clay

2

Poorly Graded Gravel
with Sand

47

90

2

6

2

37

J

Clayey Sand

43

51

19

5

118 5

11 5

27

36

34

15

124

9

Sandy Silty Clay

Clayey Gravel with Sand

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENQ^ lERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 3 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

TP 23

4
7

TP 24

TP 27

NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)

17

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS

GRAVEL
(%)

SAND
(%)

SILT/
CLAY
(%)

35

64

1

107

LIQUID
LIMIT
(%)

PLASTICITY
INDEX
{%)

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

Poorly Graded Sand with
Gravel

72

Lean Clay with Sand

2

44

30

26

Clayey Gravel with Sand

4

56

34

10

Well Graded Gravel with
Silt and Sand

2

10

70

20

Clayey Sand

 APPENDIX

Stab111ty and Settlement Calculatlons

Flpplied Geotechnical €ngmeering Consultants Inc
PROJECT NO
SUBJECT

lO'ZO^'"?'^

TITLE

Lex/v-^ -X^fvA/y

Vfc^»<^ciw^:tf<-<-^ ^UN>^t-

Q ^ T E l,^//

<,-W^''V\K 

BY
SHEET

!

I

T'

,

-------

OF

'

-

tTV^^^

i

•
)

,_. !_• J ^ „ - J ? „ _ ;

U1

!

„ ,

..J

-on

TS"

— ^

-f5-t<n--^fQ:fc;»^^zidrt«=^

_

_

,

1
1

•~

1

^_
-

-i

1 —

1
1

j -

1

1

J_

1

1

1
1

1

" •

i

1

1

1
1
1

!-

i

1

1

1
1

1

t

—

r

'

1

1
1

1—-

r " '~
!
--_ _

t

t1

)

1

1

"" 1

r

—

 Recommended Procedures for Implementabon of DMG Speaal Publication 117
Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Landslide Hazards in California

08

-T

1

,

1

1

1

T

(a) u = 5 cm threshold

07
06

I 05 =
04

r= 30 km
r=20 km
r< 10 km

03
02
02

04

06

08

MHA,(g)

08

•

:

\

1

r

J
,
r- 30 km
r=20km
r<10km

(b) « = 15 cm threshold

07
06

I 05
<D

04
03
02
02

04

06

08

MH\(g)
Figure 111 Required Values o f a s Function of MHAr and Seismological Condition for
Threshold Displacements of (a) S cm and (b) 15 cm

June 2002 page 81

 Project 1020875
Promontory Point Landfill Settlement Analysis

Fill

Depth

Top

Bottom Layer

Soil

Test Pit

Existing

Bonng

Elevation Elevation height

Layer

Layer

Thicknc Type

(ft)

(ft)

(ft)

(ft)

MW5

Final

Depth

(ft)
4440

(ft)

4850

MW5

Cc

Cr

Maximum

Applied

Past

Pressure

Pressure Po

P

(psf)

(psf)

(psf)

Soil Unit Weight

120

Waste Unit Weight

110

Po+P

recomp

virgin

total

cumulative

sett

sett

sett

sett

(in)

(m)

(in)

(in)

410

0
3
10
15
20
25 5
29
31
36

3
10
15
20
25 5
29
31
36
41

3 CL
7 SM
5 SM
5 GP
5 5 CL
3 5 SP
2 CL
5 GC
5 GC

0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 004

0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

180
780
1500
2100
2730
3270
3600
4020
4620

45100

45280
45880
46600
47200
47830
48370
48700
49120
49720

0 39
0 24
010
0 07
0 09
0 01
0 01
0 00
0 00

2 58
0 36
0 26
0 26
4 84
0 18
1 77
0 26
0 25

2 97
0 59
0 36
0 32
4 92
0 20
1 78
0 26
0 25

0 00
0 00
0 36
0 68
5 61
5 80
7 58
7 84
7 83

800

0
3
10
15
20
25 5
29
31

3
10
15
20
25 5
29
31
41

3 CL
7 SM
5 SM
5 GP
5 5 CL
3 5 SP
2 CL
10 GC

0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004

0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

180
780
1500
2100
2730
3270
3600
4320

88000

88180
88780
89500
90100
90730
91270
91600
92320

0 39
0 24
0 10
0 07
0 09
0 01
0 01
0 00

3 29
0 45
0 32
0 32
6 08
0 23
2 22
0 64

3 68
0 69
0 43
0 39
6 17
0 24
2 23
064

0 00
0 00
0 43
0 82
6 99
7 23
9 46
10 10

TP 8

4680

4800

120

0
3

3
6

3 CL
3 GP

0 068
0 004

0 008
0 004

4000
4000

180
540

13200

13380
13740

0 39
0 13

1 28
0 08

1 67
0 20

0 00
0 00

TP 10

4755

5000

245

0
8
10
11
16
21
26

8
10
11
16
21
26
30

8 SP
2 CL
1 CL
5 GP
5 GP
5 GP
4 GP

0 004
0 068
0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 008
0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

480
1080
1260
1620
2220
2820
3360

26950

27430
28030
28210
28570
29170
29770
30310

0 35
0 11
0 05
0 09
0 06
0 04
0 01

0 32
1 38
0 69
0 20
0 21
0 21
0 17

0 67
1 49
0 74
0 30
0 27
0 25
0 18

0 00
0 00
0 74
1 04
1 31
1 55
1 74

 TP 12

4520

4600

80

0

3

3 GP

0 004

0 004

4000

180

8800

8980

0 19

0 05

0 24

0 00

TP 13

4530

5000

470

0
5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31
36

5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31
36
41

5 CL
5 SM
1 SM
9 GP
5 5 CL
3 5 SP
2 CL
5 GC
5 GC

0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 004

0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

300
900
1260
1860
2730
3270
3600
4020
4620

51700

52000
52600
52960
53560
54430
54970
55300
55720
56320

0 54
0 16
0 02
014
0 09
0 01
0 01
0 00
0 00

4 54
0 27
0 05
0 49
5 09
0 19
1 86
0 27
0 28

5 08
0 42
0 08
0 63
5 18
0 21
1 87
0 27
0 28

0 00
0 00
0 08
0 71
5 88
6 09
7 96
8 24
8 51

TP 14

4585

5250

665

0
5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31
36

5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31
36
41

5 SC/GP
5 SM
1 SM
9 GP
5 5 CL
3 5 SP
2 CL
5 GC
5 GC

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

300
900
1260
1860
2730
3270
3600
4020
4620

73150

73450
74050
74410
75010
75880
76420
76750
77170
77770

0 27
0 16
0 02
0 14
0 09
0 01
0 01
0 00
0 00

0 30
0 30
0 06
0 55
5 74
0 22
2 09
0 31
0 31

0 57
0 46
0 09
0 69
5 82
0 23
2 10
0 31
0 31

0 00
0 00
0 09
0 78
6 60
6 83
8 93
9 24
9 55

TP 17

4425

4700

275

0
5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31

5
10
11
20
25 5
29
31
41

5 SC/GP
5 SM
1 SM
9 GP
5 5 CL
3 5 SP
2 CL
10 GC

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

300
900
1260
1860
2730
3270
3600
4320

30250

30550
31150
31510
32110
32980
33520
33850
34570

0 27
0 16
0 02
0 14
0 09
0 01
0 01
0 00

0 21
0 21
0 04
0 39
4 11
0 16
1 51
0 45

0 48
0 37
0 07
0 53
4 20
017
1 52
0 45

0 00
0 00
0 07
0 60
4 80
4 97
6 49
6 94

TP 18

4462

5050

588

0
10

10
14

10 SP
4 SP

0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004

4000
4000

600
1440

64680

65280
66120

0 40
0 09

0 58
0 23

0 98
0 32

0 00
0 32

TP 19

4600

4700

100

0
10

10
14

10 GP
4 GP

0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004

4000
4000

600
1440

11000

11600
12440

0 40
0 09

0 22
0 09

0 62
0 18

0 00
0 18

 TP 22

4450

4700

250

0

3

3 CL

0 068

0 008

4000

180

27500

27680

0 39

2 06

2 44

0 00

TP 21

4350

4700

350

0

5

5 GP

0 004

0 004

4000

300

38500

38800

0 27

0 24

0 51

0 00

TP 24

4325

4550

225

0
10

10
11

10 GP
1 GP

0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004

4000
4000

600
1260

24750

25350
26010

0 40
0 02

0 38
0 04

0 78
0 06

0 00
0 06

TP 26

4260

4300

40

0
10
15
20
25
30

10
15
20
25
30
43

10 SC/GP
5 SC/GP
5 SC/GP
5 SC/GP
5 SC/GP
13 SC/GP

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

600
1500
2100
2700
3300
3818 4

4400

5000
5900
6500
7100
7700
8218 4

0 40
0 10
0 07
0 04
0 00
0 00

0 05
0 04
0 05
0 06
0 07
0 20

0 44
0 14
0 12
0 10
0 07
0 20

0 00
0 14
0 26
0 36
0 43
0 62

A4

4278

4350

72

0
7
10
14
20
25
30
35
40
50
60
70
80
90

7
10
14
20
25
30
35
40
50
60
70
80
90
100

7 SC/GP
3 CL
4 GP
6 CL
5 SP
5 SP
5 SP
5 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP

0 004
0 068
0 004
0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 008
0 004
0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

420
1020
1440
2040
2700
3300
3900
4188
4764
5340
5916
6492
7068
7644

7920

8340
8940
9360
9960
10620
11220
11820
12108
12684
13260
13836
14412
14988
15564

0 33
0 17
0 09
0 17
0 04
0 02
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00

0 11
0 86
0 07
1 94
0 10
0 11
0 12
0 11
0 20
0 19
0 18
0 17
0 16
0 15

0 44
1 03
0 16
2 11
0 14
0 13
0 12
0 11
0 20
0 19
018
0 17
0 16
0 15

0 00
0 00
0 16
2 26
241
2 53
2 65
2 76
2 96
3 15
3 33
3 50
3 65
3 80

A8

4260

4300

40

0
3
10
17
25
30
35

3
10
17
25
30
35
40

3 SC/GP
7 CL
7 CL
8 SP
5 SP
5 SP
5 SP

0 004
0 068
0 068
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 008
0 008
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

180
780
1620
2520
3300
3900
4188

4400

4580
5180
6020
6920
7700
8300
8588

0 19
0 48
0 26
0 08
0 02
0 00
0 00

0 01
0 64
1 01
0 09
0 07
0 08
0 07

0 20
1 12
1 28
017
0 09
0 08
0 07

0
0
1
1
1
1
1

00
00
28
45
53
61
69

 40
50
60
70
80
90

50
60
70
80
90
100

10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP
10 SP

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004
0 004

4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000

4764
5340
5916
6492
7068
7644

9164
9740
10316
10892
11468
12044

0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00

0 14
0 13
0 12
0 11
0 10
0 09

0 14
0 13
0 12
0 11
0 10
0 09

1 82
1 95
2 07
2 17
2 27
2 37

 S-2 GEOTECHNICAL DATA SUMMARY AND PRELIMINARY
GEOLOGIC MAP (OCTOBER 2015)

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

Strata Renewable Resources, LLC.
Attn: Mr. Eric Urbani
Via email: eric@stratarr.com
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL DATA SUMMARY AND
PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC MAP
Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County, Utah
INTRODUCTION
Presented herein is Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience’s summary data report for the proposed
Promontory Point landfill and quarry project, a 2,000-acre site located in Box Elder County, Utah.
The purpose of this report is to provide a preliminary summary of available data regarding:






Site geology;
General nature of on-site materials;
Quarry materials suitability for railroad ballast materials
Potential use of materials for planned landfill construction and operations
Use of on-site materials for construction of the causeway widening

The study included a review of the available data as well as initial field investigation and associated
laboratory evaluation. Given the large size of the site, the presented data, conclusions, and
recommendations are preliminary in nature and are intended to provide initial baseline information
for conceptual evaluations and decisions prior to more detailed, task-specific, investigation.
SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work included:









Review of selected documents provided in Advanced Environmental Engineering, Inc.
(AEEI), 2008 report;
Review of additional pertinent published geologic and geotechnical literature;
Preliminary field reconnaissance geologic mapping;
Field logging and sampling of 10 test pits;
Conducting 6 seismic refraction survey lines;
Laboratory evaluation of selected soil and bedrock samples recovered from the test pits and
quarry exposures;
Preparation of 2 characteristic geologic cross-sections; and
Compilation and presentation of collected data in this preliminary geotechnical data report.

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, California 91765 * Tel: 909 860 7777 * Fax: 909 860 5094

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
Available geologic literature for the site was reviewed and provided the basis for field
reconnaissance studies. Two previous site specific reports were provided by the Client, Strata
Renewable Resources, LLC (Strata) to Tetra Tech BAS Geoscience: Advanced Environmental
Engineering, Inc. (AEEI), 2008 report and Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
(AGEC), 2003 report. These data, along with the work of Crittenden (1988), present a summary
of site conditions including general surface conditions, subsurface soils, geology, groundwater and
geologic hazards. Additional data on Quaternary geologic history of Lake Bonneville is presented
in Currey, et al. (1984) and in Oviatt (2014). Nelson and Jewell (2015) provide detailed
descriptions of similar Quaternary lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville as mapped in a
proximate quadrangle. Pertinent findings collected from the review of the above reports were
complemented by the field reconnaissance. A list of reference sources is presented following the
text of this report.
FIELD MAPPING, SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Site exploratory work by Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience included reconnaissance geologic mapping,
subsurface exploration, and geophysical evaluation. Field reconnaissance mapping by Tetra Tech
BAS GeoScience personnel was conducted from August 10 to 14, 2015. During that period, 10 test
pits (PT-01 through PT-10) were excavated on August 11 with a backhoe that was furnished and
operated by a representative of Promontory Point Resources, LLC, and 6 seismic refraction survey
lines (SL-1 through SL-6) were conducted by GeoVision on August 12 and 13, 2015.
Geologic Mapping and Subsurface Exploration
Geologic mapping, logging of test pits, sample collection and coordination were field supervised
by a Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience senior engineering geologist. Test pits were field logged based
on visual classification of soils in general accordance with USCS procedures and local geologic
nomenclature. Field classification was supplemented by results of laboratory index tests performed
on selected samples from the test pits and from outcroppings. Field data included on the geologic
map were located using a consumer-grade (handheld) GPS unit in consort with an
orthophoto/topographic base map at an enlarged scale of 1:12,000 (USGS, 2014).
The interpreted site geology and locations of field explorations are presented in the “Preliminary
Geologic Map, Cross-Sections, and Field Exploration Locations”, included in Appendix A
(Plate A-1). The property boundary and the disposal area boundary were transferred from
Figure 1.2 (AEEI, 2008). Geologic contacts, unit names and fault contacts were initially
transferred from Figure 1 (AGEC, 2003) and subsequently updated based on either aerial
photographic expression, geologic interpretation or direct field observations. Some geologic
elements were transferred without direct review, and those contacts are depicted as dark brown
lines as shown in the legend.
Explorations depicted on the map include the 6 seismic survey lines and 10 test pits conducted
during this study, as well as structural orientation data collected during the mapping phase. Test

Page 2

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

pit and well locations from the earlier studies (AGEC, 2003) were transferred to the map and are
shown on semi-transparent layers.
Graphic logs of the test pits performed during the field reconnaissance are presented in Appendix B
(Figure B-1). For reference, logs of test pits, well borings and associated geotechnical laboratory
test results that were performed as part of the AGEC (2003) study are provided in Appendix C.
Geophysical Evaluation
GeoVision Geophysical Services, Inc. (GeoVision) was retained to evaluate the general velocity
characteristics of the on-site soil and bedrock materials primarily for excavatibility (rippability)
and as a first order review of soil thicknesses within the project area that may be suitable for landfill
operations. Their Report of Seismic Refraction Investigation is presented in Appendix D.
Laboratory Testing
Laboratory tests were performed to provide a basis for preliminary assessment of selected
materials for landfill construction or potential export for railroad ballast. Selected soil and bedrock
samples retrieved from the test pits or from outcrop locations were tested to determine grain size
distribution, Atterberg Limits, specific gravity, absorption, abrasion, and soundness. A brief
description of each type of laboratory test performed and specific test results are presented in
Appendix E. Geotechnical laboratory test results that were performed as part of the AGEC (2003)
study are included in Appendix C.
DESCRIPTIVE GEOLOGIC AND GEOTECHNICAL SUMMARY
Site Geology
The project site is situated at the southerly end of Promontory Point, which is a peninsula extending
southward from the northerly shore of the Great Salt Lake. The Promontory Mountains occupy
this peninsula, forming one of the mountain blocks of the Basin and Range geomorphic province.
Much of the site is occupied by a broad valley containing Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of the
ancient Lake Bonneville, and flanked by Late Proterozoic and Early Paleozoic metasedimentary
outcrops. The axis of the valley drains from northeast to southwest at an approximate grade of
7 percent. Some of the surrounding outcrops (where once submerged by Lake Bonneville) possess
a partially-eroded coating of tufa, observed to be as much as 1 foot thick.
The Great Salt Lake is a present-day remnant of the ancient Lake Bonneville, stillstands of which
resulted in topographic benches representing the ancient wave-eroded shorelines, 4 of which are
shown on the map (Plate A-1).
Generalized geologic cross sections (Cross Section numbers A-A’ and B-B’) were constructed
across the project area in generally north-south and east-west directions, respectively, and are
shown on Plate A-1. Cross Section A-A’ extends roughly down the central axis of the broad valley
comprising the proposed 1,000-acre disposal area; and Cross Section B-B’ extends from the

Page 3

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

westerly quarry, across the valley at roughly elevation 4,440 feet, and terminates in the
metamorphic outcrops to the southeast.
The highest level of Lake Bonneville is known as the Bonneville shoreline, located just beyond
the northeast property corner at an elevation of 5,276 feet, occurring 18.6 to 17.7 kiloanni (ka,
thousand years ago). This highest transgressive shoreline was mapped at the site based on its
pronounced geomorphic expression. The Provo shoreline represents an open-basin stillstand that
occurred at an estimated 17.7 to 15 ka (Nelson and Jewell, 2015). It was mapped at the toe of a
pronounced bench in the central portion of the site at an approximate elevation of 4,865 feet. The
Stansbury shoreline represents the earliest transgressive stillstand of Lake Bonneville, estimated
to have occurred between 26.2 and 24.1 ka (Currey, et. al., 1984; Nelson & Jewell, 2015). It was
mapped based on the expected isostatically-adjusted elevation range and geomorphic expression,
and is shown at an elevation of 4,619 feet. The regressive Gilbert shoreline is mapped at an
elevation of 4,250 based on recent work by Oviatt (2014), and occurred as recently as 11.6 ka.
Geomorphic expression for this feature was not readily recognized at the project site, and the
shoreline is mapped on the basis of elevation alone.
The depositional record preceding the site’s occupation by Lake Bonneville contains a substantial
hiatus, as the underlying bedrock consists of metasedimentary exposures ranging from Late
Proterozoic through Middle Cambrian. These rocks are primarily quartzite and limestone, with
minor quantities of shale. This sequence is recognized as the lowermost of 3 structural units within
the Promontory Mountains and is cut by high-angle faults that may have acted as tear faults for
the underlying Willard Thrust during the Sevier Orogeny (Crittenden, 1988). Primary
metamorphic foliation of these rocks (i.e., foliation subparallel to protolith bedding) generally dips
toward the southeast at 10o to 45o.
Site Stratigraphy and Material Descriptions
Six geologic units were mapped at the site and are described from youngest to oldest in the
following sections. Selected photographs illustrating test pit and outcrop exposures of the earth
materials encountered are included in this report as Appendix F.
1.
Fill – Historical (Qaf): Located in the westerly portion of the site on the east flank of a
metasedimentary bedrock outcrop is a fill platform comprised of quarried or mined bedrock,
primarily quartzite, ranging in size to large angular boulders. The fill platform extend some
150 feet wide by 400 feet long and is located approximately 800 feet west of Test Pit
Number PT-05.
2.
Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits (undivided) – Quaternary (Qla): Includes mixed alluvial
and lacustrine deposits of marl, silt, sand and gravel. Also includes topsoil as well as preBonneville alluvial deposits. This is the primary unit explored within the depths of the test pit
excavations and forms the surface across which the seismic refraction profiles were performed.
Holocene alluvium deposits are likely thin and discontinuous, occurring within the incised
ephemeral stream channels that drain generally southwesterly across the site. Such deposits were

Page 4

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

not observed in sufficient quantity to substantiate a separate mapped interval, and therefore are
included with this Quaternary unit.
Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville was the primary unit encountered by the test
pit excavations during the field exploration. A Log of Test Pits is provided in Appendix B
(Figure B-1), which provides summary descriptions and depth distribution of various soil types
encountered in the excavations, as well as a graphic depiction of the sampled intervals. The
maximum depth of test pit penetration into these deposits was 12 feet, limited by the reach of the
backhoe.
Two boreholes advanced by AGEC (2003) for use as monitoring wells encountered quartzite or
dolomite bedrock at depths of 42 to 43 feet. Three additional borings were advanced to a maximum
depth of 98 feet without encountering bedrock. Interpretations of the geophysical survey
conducted by GeoVision as a part of this study suggest a possible maximum depth for the Qla on
the order of 130 feet.
In general, the lacustrine and alluvial deposits were observed to consist of the following:
Silty SAND and Silty SAND with GRAVEL - Brown to yellowish brown, generally fine to
coarse, loose to medium dense, generally dry, with scattered to abundant GRAVEL, cobbles or
boulders, occasional carbonate-cemented zones. Where encountered, clasts were observed to be
subrounded to subangular and consisted primarily of quartzite.
Poorly-graded SAND and poorly-graded SAND with GRAVEL – Very pale brown to light
gray, fine to coarse, loose to medium dense, generally dry and commonly occurring with cemented
zones or lenses.
Sandy SILT with GRAVEL – Yellowish brown with fine SAND, dense, dry, with scattered
GRAVEL to 2-inch diameter, partially cemented with secondary clay films.
Silty Marl – Cemented sandy SILT, moderate orange pink to grayish orange pink, wellcemented with calcite or aragonite, slightly clayey. Although not encountered in the test pits, this
unit was observed in 2 of the smaller quarries along the southwesterly margin of the site as an
approximately 2 to 7 feet thick interval. The marl was observed to be overlain unconformably by
a variable thickness of cemented lacustrine gravel. The depth below the site grade at the top of
the quarry to the top of the silty marl is estimated to range between 12 and 17 feet near the quarry
margin. This material was sampled at an outcrop as PM047 G-01.
Silty GRAVEL – Clasts are predominantly composed of quartzite, generally subrounded to
subangular, generally fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles and boulders as noted in the log. Clasts
occur in a loose to medium dense silty matrix with accessory SAND or CLAY. This unit was
encountered in the upper portions of PT-02, PT-03, and PT-04, was generally dry and uncemented.
Poorly-graded GRAVEL – Clasts are predominantly composed of quartzite, generally
subrounded to subangular, fine to coarse, with cobbles or boulders as noted in the log. The matrix
is poorly-graded SAND or silty SAND, medium dense to dense, dry, commonly occurring with

Page 5

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

zones of carbonate cementation. Where observed near the westerly quarries this unit is clastsupported, cemented and is inclined toward the south at approximately 10o to 15o.
Well-graded GRAVEL – With cobbles and boulders composed primarily of quartzite,
generally subangular with a matrix of poorly graded SAND (where present), generally uncemented
where encountered in PT-05 and PT-06.
Pre-Bonneville deposits were encountered in a test pit excavation at PT-02 beneath a zone of
cobbles and boulders at a depth of 4 feet. The deposit encountered at that location consists of wellgraded GRAVEL and is interpreted to be an ancient talus slope, based on the angularity and
uniformity of the quartzite clasts. The unit was observed to be strongly cemented within the upper
2 to 3 feet, grading to a weakly-cemented condition near the bottom of the excavation at a depth
of 11.5 feet.
3.
Limestone and Shale - Middle and Lower Cambrian (ϵls): The youngest metasedimentary
bedrock unit at the site consists of an interbedded thin-bedded medium-gray limestone and olive
shale. Carbonate rocks in the upper part of the unit include one or more beds from 1 to 3 m (3.3
to 9.6 feet) thick of pale gray to nearly white laminated dolomite enclosed in limestone. Limestone
intervals in the lower part of the unit consist of medium gray limestone marked by wavy tan silty
wisps characteristic of the Cambrian. Shale intervals correlated with the Wheeler Shale and
Spence Shale occur within the limestone and shale unit. At its base is intensely-folded, dense,
yellowish-gray cherty argillite and medium-gray to pinkish limestone, which is highly deformed
as a result of shearing along the contact with the underlying quartzite unit (Crittenden, 1988).
The “Limestone and Shale” unit occurs in outcrop along the northerly and easterly portions of the
project site where it is shown to be in fault contact with the Geertsen Canyon Quartzite (AGEC,
2003; Crittenden, 1988). Dolomite was reported to have been encountered in the bottom of 3 of
AGEC’s test pits, including TP-6 in the northeasterly portion of the site, in TP-16 near a smaller
quarry on the southwesterly perimeter, and in TP-21 in the southerly portion of the project.
4.
Geertsen Canyon Quartzite - Lower Cambrian (ϵgc): The uppermost 100 m (330 feet)
consists of deep reddish-black hematitic quartzite. The main body consists of pale-gray, pinkishgray or light-brown quartzite, commonly with pebble-sized clasts, dominantly of vein quartz. A
zone of pebble- to cobble-conglomerate a few tens of meters thick is recognized about a third of
the way up in the formation. The basal 50 to 100 m (165 to 330 feet) is commonly coarse-grained
and contains abundant angular fragments of salmon-colored microcline. Consequently, the basal
zone is relatively non-resistant compared with the remainder of the formation and the underlying
vitreous quartzite of the Browns Hole Formation (Crittenden, 1988).
Outcrops of the Geertsen Canyon Quartzite occur in the easterly portion of the project site, where
it is observed to occur as massive to pebbly, as well as laminated or cross-laminated with
alternating creamy-white to dark reddish-brown laminations. The formation is highly- to
intensely-fractured/jointed and is cut by a series of northwest-trending high-angle faults. A zone
of tight folding and brecciation was observed in an outcrop in the southeasterly portion of the site,
indicative of ductile shear. The upper contact with the overlying limestone and shale unit is
covered at the site by the lacustrine and alluvial deposits, and is mapped as a fault contact in the

Page 6

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

easterly portion of the site (AGEC, 2003; Crittenden, 1988). The basal contact with the underlying
Browns Hole Formation is similarly obscured by the overlying lacustrine and alluvial deposits.
Quartzite was encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers PT-04 and PT-05 (this study), in
most of the AGEC test pits that encountered bedrock and possibly in 2 of the AGEC drill holes as
W-1 and W-5; although the specific formation was not identified.
5.
Browns Hole Formation - Late Proterozoic (Ƶbh): The Browns Hole Formation consists
of pale-gray very-fine-grained vitreous quartzite. Both the grain size and color allow this unit to
form a marked light-colored band that contrasts with the quartzites of the overlying and underlying
units. Exposures at the project site exhibit intense ductile folding characteristic of a ductile shear
zone. The upper contact with the overlying Geertsen Canyon Quartzite is obscured beneath the
Quaternary Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits. The unit is observed to be highly- to intenselyfractured/jointed. Quartzite was encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers PT-04 and PT-05
(this study), in most of the AGEC test pits that encountered bedrock and possibly in 2 of the AGEC
drill holes as W-1 and W-5; although the specific formation was not identified.
6.
Mutual Formation - Late Proterozoic (Ƶm): The mutual formation consists of thick-bedded
coarse-grained quartzite with a few beds of siltstone and shale. The unit is well-exposed in the
large quarry on the westerly property margin, at the west end of Cross Section B-B’. Quartzite
from this formation was purportedly used as rip-rap on the Southern Pacific Causeway across the
western arm of the lake. The formation is cut by numerous dark-brown-weathered igneous dikes,
some of which were previously exploited during prospecting in the early days. The Mutual
Formation at the project site is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.
Several steeply-dipping open fractures were observed in the Mutual Formation quartzite within 20
to 40 feet of the top of the quarried face (Photo DSCN2074, Appendix F). These fractures are
likely a result of blasting during one of the large (~1-million ton) quarry blasts in the late 1950’s
(Morrison-Knudsen, 1959?).
Quartzite was encountered in the bottom of Test Pit numbers PT-04 and PT-05 (this study), in
most of the AGEC test pits that encountered bedrock, and possibly in two of the AGEC drill holes
as W-1 and W-5; although the specific formation was not identified.
SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEY
A seismic refraction survey was conducted at the site by GeoVision on August 12 and 13, 2015 to
provide preliminary information relevant to subsurface velocity and rippability along 6 lines
designated SL-1 through SL-6. A complete copy of GeoVision’s “Final Report – Seismic
Refraction Investigation”, dated September 3, 2015 is included in Appendix D and includes
methodology, interpretation and results, including layer-based tomographic models of each
profile. The locations of the seismic survey lines are depicted on Plate A-1 (and also on Figure 1
within the GeoVision report).
The tomographic profiles consist of 2-dimensional representations of contoured P-wave velocities
over a range of depth and horizontal stationing. The P-wave velocity measurement methodology
was employed to assist with preliminary evaluation of rippability/excavatibility of on-site

Page 7

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

materials as well as to assist with delineation of material distributions. In general, 3 zones were
distinguished from the tomographic models:


An upper zone with P-wave velocities ranging from 0 to 5,000 ft/sec. This upper zone is
interpreted to consist of “rippable alluvium”, primarily belonging to Pleistocene Lacustrine
Deposits of Lake Bonneville as described in the Stratigraphy section above. These deposits
are known to contain significant cemented zones, otherwise known as “hardpan”, as well as
tufa and marl. Such cemented layers are capable of masking underlying lower-velocity layers;
and this phenomenon is described in detail in the GeoVision report. It is shown that the
profiles at SL-4 and SL-6 were the most-influenced by such high-velocity layers.
A sub-zone with P-wave velocity range of 3,500 to 5,000 ft/sec was applied to the profile at
SL-4, as relatively lower velocities were observed at somewhat greater depth, effectively
extending the vertical separation between the 3,500 and 5,000 ft/sec contours to more than 50
feet in the westerly portion of the profile. This zone was interpreted as “possible rippable
intensely weathered rock” and is discussed in detail in the GeoVision report. It is also possible
that this zone consists of marl, or other lacustrine deposits exhibiting varying degrees of
cementation.



An intermediate zone with P-wave velocities ranging from 5,000 to 7,500 ft/sec. This
intermediate zone is interpreted to consist of “marginally-rippable weathered rock”, which
could include highly- to intensely-fractured and weathered quartzite, limestone, shale, or
thoroughly-cemented lacustrine deposits such as tufa or marl. and



A high-velocity zone of greater than 7,500 ft/sec, and was observed to range to over 10,000
ft/sec in portions of the site. This high-velocity zone is interpreted as “non-rippable rock”,
likely consisting of fractured metasedimentary bedrock of the Promontory Mountains.

A summary of the seismic velocity profiles is presented below in Table 1, including the maximum
depth of exploration, P-wave velocity depth ranges and interpreted generalized lithology and
rippability.

Page 8

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

TABLE-1
Summary of Seismic Velocity Profiles (Appendix D)
P-Wave Velocity Interpreted Lithology
Depth Range (ft) and [Thickness Range (ft)]
0-5,000 ft/sec
5,000 - 7,500 ft/sec
> 7,500 ft/sec
“Rippable Alluvium”
“Marginally-Rippable
“Non-Rippable Rock”
(Lacustrine Deposits)
Weathered Rock”

Survey
Line

Explored
Depth
(ft)

SL-1

160

0-55 [41-55]

45-90 [18-47]

71-90+ [92+]

SL-2

175

0-80 [38-80]

40-140 [18-75]

>70-140+ [77+]

SL-3

115

0-55 [5-55]

5-55+ [118+]

N/A

70-130+ [>115]

N/A

1

SL-4

155

< 3,500 ft/sec:
0-80 [40-80]
1
3,500-5,000 ft/sec:
70-130 [4-70]

SL-5

170

0-55 [28-64]

30-165+ [97-125+]

>155-165+ [0-10+]

SL-6

190

0-140 [80-136]

85-185 [5-56]

>85-185+ [0-40+]

Note:

1

At SL-4, the 3,500 ft/sec tomographic contour was sufficiently separated from the
5,000 ft/sec contour to introduce an interpreted intermediate-velocity category of
“possible intensely-weathered rock” within the interval of 3,500 and 5,000 ft/sec.

Page 9

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

KEY FINDINGS
Geologic Model

Geologic mapping for this phase of exploration was primarily focused toward an understanding of
the character and likely distribution of earth materials pertinent to landfill construction. Further
studies will be required in order to refine the site geologic model, and to address specific issues
pertinent to the development.
A preliminary geologic map and cross-sections were developed and are presented herein as
Plate A-1. This map and cross-sections are intended to assist with any preliminary evaluation of
the subsurface conditions and siting of facilities at the site. Geologic contacts at the site were
updated from the earlier work, and substantial structural data were collected and recorded on the
geologic map. The cross-sections are considered to be preliminary as the actual contact between
the Browns Hole Formation and the overlying Geertsen Canyon Quartzite was not directly
observed. Likewise, the contact between the Geertsen Canyon Quartzite and the overlying
Limestone and Shale unit was not directly observed, although has been mapped as a fault contact
by the previous work (AGEC, 2003; Crittenden, 1988). Consequently, the bedrock geologic model
depicted in the cross-sections is based on the simplest interpretation in accordance with the
available data.
Railroad Ballast
Bedrock at the site consists primarily of quartzite comprising the majority of pre-Quaternary
outcrops on the property. The Limestone and Shale unit is the second most common bedrock unit
at the site, extending generally along the easterly buffer zone. The site also contains lesser amounts
of shale and igneous intrusive rocks (dikes) within the Mutual Formation. Two samples of
quartzite that were obtained from quarry talus for the purpose of preliminary qualification
screening for use as railroad ballast show favorable results, as the index properties tested (specific
gravity, absorption, abrasion, and soundness) met the UPRR specification. Considering that the
testing was performed on talus-derived samples, i.e., on samples impacted by environment, it is a
reasonable expectation that mined quartzite bedrock materials would possess even better properties
for use as ballast. The investigation and testing did not focus on processing of the bedrock
materials that would be required to manufacture specific gradation ranges. Additional
investigation and testing are recommended once the location and size of the quarry are selected.
Landfill Leachate Collection and Recovery System Gravel
Quaternary deposits overlying the bedrock range in thickness from a few feet to as much as an
estimated 130 feet, based on results of the seismic refraction survey. Gravel deposits occurring in
this unit were field-observed to be generally composed of quartzite with a wide array of size
ranges, representing a potentially favorable source for leachate-collection-and-recoverysystem (LCRS) gravel. The specific suitability will need to be evaluated also based on the presence
of calcium carbonate that was observed to occur as a cementation component in some of these

Page 10

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

deposits, which could require additional processing. Gravel derived from on-site quartzite bedrock
materials discussed above are also expected to be suitable for an LCRS.
Landfill Daily Cover
Quaternary sand and silty sand with varying amounts of gravel were pervasive in the test pits and
would constitute a source for daily cover. Considering that primary engineering requirements for
the daily cover is the ability to compact, any quaternary or mining waste soil product material is
expected to be suitable for the use as a daily cover.
Low Permeability Liner Material
Fine-grained deposits at the site were found to consist primarily of silt and silty clay of relatively
low-plasticity and are not considered to be a suitable source for the landfill liner. Although the
site was not investigated in sufficient entirety, clay for the landfill liner will likely need to be
imported from another source.
Construction Materials for Causeway Widening
Materials from the site are considered to be used for construction of the embankment for widening
of the causeway. It is expected that a broad range of materials will be required and suitable for the
construction. Specifically, boulders, cobbles, and gravels derived from the bedrock materials will
be used for stabilization of the soft foundation materials, rip rap protection, and as aggregate base
for the wearing surface. The quaternary sands can be used for the general embankment fill. It is
expected that suitable materials can be mined at the site, although the actual location, quality, and
yield will have to be investigated for the specific project configuration.

Page 11

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

ANTICIPATED ADDITIONAL STUDY
Additional studies suited for specific project tasks and components may include:







Supplementary investigation similar in methodology (i.e., test pits and geophysical
investigation) to fill in the unexplored portions of the site to refine the site geologic model.
More detailed geologic mapping of bedrock outcrops, exposures in the quarry at the northerly
property boundary, and surficially-exposed sub units within the Quaternary deposits,
Focused subsurface boring and geophysical investigation for specific elements (i.e., rail spur,
access road, quarry, etc.),
Assessment of geologic hazards including seismic hazards for design of specific structures;
Groundwater studies,
Compliance studies, as required.

Page 12

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

LIMITATIONS
The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are based on Tetra Tech BAS
GeoScience’s review of background documents, information obtained from field reconnaissance
mapping and preliminary surface geophysical and subsurface investigations, and the associated
laboratory testing. It should be noted that the scope of this study did not include evaluation of
geologic hazards, or the evaluation of the possible presence of hazardous materials on any portion
of the project.
Due to the limited nature of this preliminary study, conditions not observed and described in this
report may be present within the project site. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can
be reduced through additional subsurface exploration. It should be understood that conditions
different from those anticipated in this report may be encountered during supplemental
investigation. Additional subsurface evaluation and laboratory testing will be necessary as the
project progresses to final design.
Site conditions, including groundwater levels, can change with time as a result of natural processes
or the activities of man at the subject site or at nearby sites. Changes to the applicable laws,
regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur as a result of government action or the
broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in
part or in whole, by changes over which Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience has no control.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Tetra Tech BAS
GeoScience should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions
regarding the content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. Reliance by
others on the data presented herein or for purposes other than those stated in the text is authorized
only if so permitted in writing by Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience. It should be understood that such
an authorization may incur additional expenses and charges.
Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience has endeavored to perform its evaluation using the degree of care
and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable geotechnical professionals
with experience in this area in similar soil conditions. No other warranty, either expressed or
implied, is made as to the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report.

Page 13

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

CLOSURE
We appreciate the opportunity to provide our professional services on this project. If you have
any questions regarding this report or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to
contact the undersigned.

Respectfully submitted,
Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience

Jeff Geraci, C.E.G.
Senior Engineering Geologist

Appendices:

Peter Skopek, Ph.D., G.E.
Principal Engineer

Appendix A – Preliminary Geologic Map, Cross-Sections and Field Exploration
Locations
Appendix B – Log of Test Pits
Appendix C – Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing by AGEC, 2003
Appendix D – Seismic Refraction Survey – GeoVision
Appendix E – Laboratory Test Results
Appendix F – Log of Selected Photographs

Distribution: Eric Urbani (pdf to eric@stratarr.com)
Filename: 2015-10-06 Geo Data Summary Preliminary Report

Page 14

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

REFERENCES CITED
Advanced Environmental Engineering, Inc. (AEEI), 2008, “Promontory Landfill LLC Class I
Landfill Permit Application”, dated August 2008, sections as pertains.
Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc (AGEC), 2003, “Geotechnical and Geologic
Study, Promontory Landfill, LLC Class I Landfill”, Project No. 1020875, dated July 21,
2003.
Black, B.D., Christenson, G.E., DuRoss, C.B., Hecker, S., compilers, 2004, Fault number 2369a,
East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Promontory section, in Quaternary fault and fold database
of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazard
s/qfaults, accessed 08/28/2015 12:01 PM.
Crittenden, et al., 1988, Bedrock Geologic Map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder County,
Utah”, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 88-646, map scale 1:100,000.
Currey, et al., 1984, “Major Levels of Great Salt Lake and Lake Bonneville”, State of Utah,
Department of Natural Resources, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey, prepared in
cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey, Map 73, scale 1:750,000.
Morrison-Knudsen, 1959(?), “Mariners in Hard Hats”, 30-minute documentary film highlighting
causeway construction and quarry activity, url: https://archive.org/details/bliptv-2013101
5-012128-Black5video-MarinersInHardHats660, viewed on 2015-09-22 6:22 PM.
Nelson, D.T., and Jewell, P.W., 2015, “Geologic Map of Unconsolidated Deposits in the Hogup
Bar Quadrangle, Box Elder County, Utah”, Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous
Publication 15-2DM, 20 p.
Oviatt, C.G., 2014, “The Gilbert Episode in the Great Salt Lake Basin”, Utah Geological Survey
Miscellaneous Publication 14-3, 16 p. and map, scale 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, “Promontory Point, Utah 2014”, 7.5-Minute
Series Quadrangle Map, scale 1:24,000, The World Map, U.S. Department of the Interior,
U.S. Geological Survey.

Page 15

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

APPENDIX A
Preliminary Geologic Map, Cross-Sections and Field Exploration Locations

 Preliminary Geologic Map with Field Exploration Locations

TP-3

B

cls

B

zm

zbh

S
75

80

S

zm

50

PT-02

SL-03

6

25
16

?

90

85

Qla

zm

83

3500

0

1000

zbh
S

S

PT-05

57

PM 047

18
6

90
49
72

27
PM 045

Quarry

87

30

67

81

65

29

SL-05

zbh

46

56

zm

Qla

86

S
S

Qla

S

TP-21
G

cgc

cls

S

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000 feet

Geertsen Canyon Quartzite (Lower Cambrian): Uppermost 100 m consists of deep reddish-black hematitic quartzite. The main body consists of pale-gray,
pinkish-gray, or light-brown quartzite, commonly with pebble-sized clasts, dominantly of vein quartz. A zone of pebble- to cobble-conglomerate a few tens of
meters thick is recognized about a third of the way up in the formation. The basal 50 to 100 m is commonly coarse grained and contains abundant angular
fragments of salmon-colored microcline. Consequently, the basal zone is relatively non-resistant compared with the remainder of the formation and the
underlying vitreous quartzite of the Browns Hole Formation. Formation is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

zbh

Browns Hole Formation (Late Proterozoic): Pale-gray very-fine-grained vitreous quartzite. Both the grain size and the color allow this unit to form a marked
light-colored band that contrasts with the quartzites of the overlying and underlying units. Exposures at the site exhibit intense ductile folding characteristic of
a shear zone. Unit is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

zm

Mutual Formation (Late Proterozoic): Thick-bedded coarse-grained quartzite intercalated with a few beds of siltstone and shale. Unit is well-exposed in the
large quarry on the westerly side of the property, at the west end of Cross-Section B-B’. Quartzite from this formation was used as rip-rap for the Southern
Pacific causeway across the western arm of the lake. The formation is cut by numerous dark-brown-weathering igneous dikes, some of which were the site of
considerable prospecting activity in the early days. The formation is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

G

10

TP-A-2

TP-A-4
SL-02

TP-24

PT-09
TP-A-3

TP-A-5
st G
Ea

G

16
1

TP-A-6
TP-23

PT-03

Geologic unit descriptions of Paleozoic and Late Proterozoic rocks modified after Crittenden, et. al. (1988).

TP-25

tS

rea

Legend of Symbols

G

alt

TP-A-8

SL-01
G

ult

cgc

e
zon

W-1

TP-26
G

TP-27

G

2

TP-18

12°

G

Strike & dip of bedding

Test pit location

W-5

H

e fa

Lak

W-2

AGEC Exploration, 2003

Qla

45

TRUE NORTH

A

1000

cgc

TP-A-1

W-3

3500

?

Limesone and Shale (Middle and Lower Cambrian): Interbedded thin-bedded medium-gray limestone and olive shale. The base of the unit consists of
intensely-folded dense, yellowish gray cherty argillite and medium gray to pinkish limestone. Deformation in this zone is attributed to shearing along the
contact with the underlying quartzite.

cls

B’

77

TP-A-7

4000

?

cls

S

42

37

W-4

zbh

cls

Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits, undivided (Quaternary): Mixed alluvial and lacustrine deposits of marl, silt, sand, and gravel. Also includes
pre-Bonneville alluvial deposits.

S

Qla

PT-08

TP-20

Qla

cgc

TP-22

G

5000

Fill (Historical): Consists of excavated earth material ranging in size from fines to angular boulders, placed between approximately elevation 4550 and 4590 feet
in a localized platform approximately 800 feet west of PT-05.

77

PT-07

2
PM 040

90

57

Qaf
cgc

TP-18

TP-17

40

49

63

W-5

S

48

TP-16

Qla

Mapped Geologic Units1

74
54

Property boundary

cgc

cgc

?

P

N O RT

Quarry

79

Qla

S

88

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

B’
SE

P

TP-19

25

zm

Filled mine shaft

APPROXIMATE MEAN
DECLINATION, 2014

20

Well location

N E T IC

67

Qla

zbh

25

10000 feet

4500

4000

MAG

56

74

S

54

P

5

Qla 35

9000

S

42
88

8000

4500

0

PT-06

76

7000

cls

P

SL-06

S

16

PM 008

cgc

zbh

6000

3500

TP-14

S

TP-12

24

Quarry

85

TP-15

TP-13
SL-04

20
34

S

zbh

5000

P

Qaf

PT-10

S

PT-04

P

B

zm

cgc

S

Qla

TP-11
Elevation (feet)

S

9

TP-10

TP-9

4000

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

P

S

3000

Cross-Section Section B-B’
N61oW

5000

Qla
zm
S

TP-8

2000

B
NW

Qla
P

Qla

?

3500

1000-Acre M/L
Disposal Area
Boundary

P

P

zm

90

4000

?

TP-7

P

29
18

70
63

4000

4500

TP-6

TP-5

54

S

35

zm

?

cls

Elevation (feet)

S

zm
20

cgc

cls

?
B

zbh

TP-4

cls

zbh

5000

4500

B

Qla

Qla

A’
Qla NE

zbh

W-5 & Sec. A-A’

Quarry

Elevation (feet)

TP-2

PT-01

TP-1

B

Qla

W-5 & Sec. B-B’

5000
B

Property Boundary

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

B

A’

zbh

B

zm

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

Cross-Section Section A-A’
N29oE

A
SW

Lithologic contact

Strike & dip of primary foliation
parallel to protolith bedding

85

Fault contact

G

6
MAP LOCATION

TetraTech BAS, 2015 (This Study)

East Great Salt Lake fault zone (Black, et. al., 2004,
in USGS, 2015)

Strike & dip of joints & fractures

37

Strike & dip of fault

UTAH

G

Quaternary Faults

Trend of minor folds. Arrows
on long axes indicate direction
of plunge. Degree of plunge
shown where measured.

Ancient Lake Bonneville Shorelines
showing approximate age (ka, thousand years ago), elevation and reference

S

S

S

Stansbury, 26.8-22 ka, Elevation ~4,619 ft.
(Currey, et. al, 1984; Nelson and Jewell, 2015)

B

B

B

Bonneville, 18.6-17.7 ka, Elevation 5,276 ft.
(Currey, et. al, 1984; Nelson and Jewell, 2015)

P

P

Provo, 17.7-15 ka, Elevation 4,865 ft.
(Currey, et. al, 1984; Nelson and Jewell, 2015)

G

G

Gilbert, 11.6 ka, Elevation 4,250 ft.
(Currey, et. al, 1984; Oviatt, 2014)

Topographic and orthophoto base from USGS (2014).

SCALE 1:12 000

0

1/2
.5

0

1 MILE

1/2
.5

1 KILOMETER

References:
Advanced Environmental Engineering, Inc. (AEEI), 2008, “Promontory Landfill LLC Class I Landfill Permit Application”, dated
August 2008.
Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc (AGEC), 2003, “Geotechnical and Geologic Study, Promontory Landfill,
LLC Class I Landfill…”, Project No. 1020875, dated July 21, 2003.
Black, B.D., et. al., compilers, 2004, Fault number 2369a, East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Promontory section, in Quaternary
fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults,
accessed 08/28/2015 12:01 PM.
Crittenden, et. al., 1988, Bedrock Geologic Map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder County, Utah”, United States
Geological Survey, Open-File Report 88-646, map scale 1:100,000.
Currey, et. al., 1984, “Major Levels of Great Salt Lake and Lake Bonneville”, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey,
Map 73, scale 1:750,000.
Nelson, D.T., and Jewell, P.W., 2015, “Geologic Map of Unconsolidated Deposits in the Hogup Bar Quadrangle, Box Elder
County, Utah”, Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication 15-2DM, 20 p.
Oviatt, C.G., 2014, “The Gilbert Episode in the Great Salt Lake Basin”, Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication 14-3,
16 p. and map, scale 1:24,000.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, “Promontory Point, Utah 2014”, 7.5-Minute Series Quadrangle Map, scale 1:24,000,
The World Map, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

PT-03
PM 047

SL-04

Lithologic contact

P

Test pit location
Sample location (talus or outcrop)
Seismic survey line (GeoVision)

Fault contact, dashed where
approximately located, dotted
where concealed or inferred.

Preliminary Geologic Map, Cross-Sections, and Field Exploration Locations

G

Job No.
Date:

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County, Utah
Prepared for: Promontory Point Resources, LLC

BAS 15-99E
October 2015

Drawn By:

J Geraci

File Name:

PLATE A-1

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

APPENDIX B
Log of Test Pits

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

 PT-01

PT-02

PT-03

PT-04

PT-05

GM

G P1

PT-06

PT-07

PT-08

PT-09

PT-10

SM2

SM2

0
SM1
SM1

fine GRAVEL

GM

DEPTH (ft. b.g.s.)

SM2

COBBLES &
BOULDERS @
base of unit

5

SM1

unit is
cemented

BK-01

unit is cemented
in upper 2’ to 3’

est. 40% fines,
damp to moist

SK-01

SK-01

SK-01

GW2

SM2

COBBLES @
base of unit

G P1

GM

SM1

G P1

BK-01

SP2

BK-02
damp to moist

BK-01
cemented
5’ - 6’

SP1
Qtzt

unit is
cemented

GW1

G P1

6.3’D

G P1

6’C

SM1

SP1

G P1

ML

(cemented)

krotovina

G-03
SP2

Qtzt
BK-01

10

unit is
cemented

SP2

SM2

GW2

3.8’C

SK-01

SK-04

9.5’D

BK-02
SP2

SK-01

10’B

G P1

9.5’B
BK-02

SM1

11.5’A
12’A

12’A

12’A

Legend
BK-01
SK-04
Bulk sample: sack
G-03

11.5’A

Topsoil: generally brown sandy SILT or silty SAND, loose, dry, with scattered gravel, scattered
grass roots and small visible pores. Generally < 1’ thick.

G P1

GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subangular to subrounded, clasts are generally
fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles or boulders as noted, matrix is poorly graded SAND or silty SAND,
medium dense to dense, dry, common cemented zones or lenses.

SM1

Silty SAND: brown to yellowish brown, generally fine to coarse, loose to medium dense,
generally dry, often with scattered GRAVEL or cobbles.

GW1

Well-Graded GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally angular to subangular, clasts range
from fine to coarse gravel, matrix is poorly graded SAND or silty SAND, dense, dry, cemented within the
upper profile, decreasing in cementation with depth.

SM2

Silty SAND with GRAVEL: yellowish brown, generally fine to coarse, loose to medium dense,
generally dry, abundant GRAVEL, cobbles or boulders with clasts consisting primarily of quartzite
with trace dolomitic limestone.

GW2

Well-Graded GRAVEL, Cobbles and Boulders: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subangular,
clasts range from coarse gravel to small boulders, matrix is poorly graded SAND (where present), dry.

ML

Sandy SILT with GRAVEL: yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) with fine SAND, dense, dry, scattered
GRAVEL to 2”, partially cemented with secondary CLAY films.

SP1

Poorly-graded SAND: generally very pale brown to light gray, generally fine to coarse, loose to
medium dense, generally dry, commonly with with scattered GRAVEL or cobbles.

GM

Silty GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subrounded to subangular, clasts
are generally fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles or boulders as noted, matrix is SILT, loose to
medium dense, dry, with fine SAND or CLAY.

SP2

Poorly-graded SAND with GRAVEL: generally very pale brown to light gray, generally fine to coarse,
loose to medium dense, dry, with abundant fine to coarse GRAVEL or cobbles, often cemented or
with cemented zones or lenses.

Bulk sample: bucket

Grab sample
Test pit termination depth
Subscripts:
A: backhoe maximum reach
B: impeded by heavy caving
C: refusal in cemented layer or bedrock
D: refusal in metamorphic rock

Test pits excavated on 2015-08-11 with a Case Series 2 backhoe. Test pits were backfilled with excavation spoils.

LOG OF TEST PITS

197-2015-0112

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

10-2015
JPG

Figure B-1

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

APPENDIX C
Field Explorations and Laboratory Testing by AGEC, 2003

 MW 1
A s installed

4245
2

Schedule 4 0 P V C Pipe

A s dnlled

4245

Eiev 4 2 4 0

, 4240

4240

18/12

4235

 85/11

4230

4235

WC = 3
DD = 124
+ 4 = 26
2 0 0 = 11

4230

80/12

4225

4225

—

4220

—

4215

—

83/12

. 4220

114/12

. 4215

]

VVC = 13
DD = 120
+ 4 = 23
2 0 0 = 36

80/11

— 4210

4210
146
90/12

4205

4205

[61/12

• 4200

WC = 8
+ 4 = 43
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I 50/5

4195

4195

—

4190

—

I 50/6

4190

150/3

— 4185

4185

' 4180

4180
Quartzite
Bedrock

I — 4175

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

4175

-

8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Log of Monitor Well M W 1

Figure 3

 MW 2

2

A s installed
Schedule 4 0 P V C

,— 4240

A s drilled
Elev 4 2 3 8

4240

4235

4235

—I

35/10

4230

1

4230

50/6

4225

85/12

4220

Wc = 6
DD = 114
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 21

50/6

4210

60/4

4205

50/5

—

4220

90/12

4215

4225

WC = 6
DD = 117
+ 4 = 52
2 0 0 = 24

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

MW 3
ICont)

A s installed
4200

50/5

VVC = 7
+ 4 = 65
2 0 0 = 15

4200

I—

A s drilled

4170

417050/5

• 4195

50/6

4195

4190

50/4

4190

— 4165

—

4165—1

4160 —

— 4160

180/9

—

4185

—

4180

^150/4

• 4175

j 2 50/2

• 4170
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

4185

150/4

—

4150

+ 4 = 53
2 0 0 = 14

4175

4170—
= 8

—

4155 —

4155

3 50/3

4145-

4145

1— 4 1 4 0

4150—

50/3

4140-

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 2

Figure 4

 MW 3
2

A s installed
Sctiedule 4 0 P V C

A s dnlled

4240

4240
Elev

4238

. 4235

1

4235
150/1

—

4230

422S

4220

—

180/12

4230

50/6

422S

50/3

4215

— 4210

4205

—

4220

—

—

93/10

WC = 4
DD = 119
+ 4 = 38
2 0 0 = 15

4215

50/5

+ 4 = 62
2 0 0 = 16

4210

MW 3
(Cont)

4205

I 50/4

A3 installed
—

4200

—

4195

—

4190

—

4185

—

4180

72/7

: ] 95/10

:3

50/2

:^

50/1

WC = 7
+ 4 = 40
200 = 6

A s drilled
4170-

4200

4170

4195

4165

181/8

4165 —

4190

4160

150/4

4160—

4185

—

4180

—

4175

—

J 75/12

50/1

4155

4155 —

J
]72/10

4175

—

4170

C D 50/4

1

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020876

4170 .
= 8

_

4150

150/5

4150-

4145

50/2

4145-

4140

ffitn

50/4

4140 —

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 3

Figure 5

 2

MW 4
A s installed
A s drilled
Schedule 40 P V C

Elev

r

4240

4240

4240

''7}""

4235

/I

4235

31/12

4230

—

4230

i

4225

63/12

4225

65/12

—

WC = 3
DD = 120
+ 4 = 60 4220
200 = 7

4220

85/12
—

%

4215

4215

—

4210

—

4205

—

80/12
4210

D 50/6
4205

MW 4

tCont)
A s installed

46/12
4200

4200

]

4195

I 50/5

4195

i

—

WC = 8
DD = 132
+ 4 = 25 4190 - \
200 = 15

4190

[ 38/12
—

4185

150/3
—

I 77/11

WC = 13
DD = 124
+ 4 = 31 4185
200 = 22

4150

1020875

W C = 11
DD = 130
+ 4 = 39 4 1 5 0 —
2 0 0 = 21

150/5

50/4
4175

1

4155-

4155

4180 — ]

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

4160—

4160

77/12

• 4180

' — 4170

4165 —

4165

40/12

4175

4170—I

• 4170

59/12

54/12
—

A s dnlled

—

4145-

4145

150/5
83/10
4170= 8

' — 4140

4140 —
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

Log of Monitor Well M W 4

Figure 6

 MW 5
As installed

As dnlled
Elev 4440

•—

4440

—

4440

16/12

•4 Schedule
40 PVC

4435 —

4435

/ "112/1:
—

4430

4430

\
/ ]

69/11
4425

4425

18/12
4420 —

4420

—

4416

;] 48/12
23/12

—

4410

—

4405

—

4400

4415

WC = 18
DD = 113
200 = 72

4410 —

,49/12
4405

181/11
4400 •

,50/1
—

4395 —

4335

:zi

•
4390

43 SO —

4385

4385 —

—

4380

4380

—

4375

4375 —

4370 •

1— 4370
Approximate Vertical Scale 1 = 8
1020875

Continued on next figure
Log of Monitor Well MW 5

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Figure 7

 M W 5 (Continued)

A s installed

—

A s drilled

4370

4370 — ,

4365

4365 .

4360

4360-

4246

4245 —

i

4240

4240 —

4235

4235 •

4230

4230 •

4225

4225 —

—

4220

4220 •

—

4215

4215 —

4210

4210 •

4205

4205 •

—

>oi

-

(Ouartzlte
Bedrock

4200 —

4200

Bottom Depth 243 Feet
4195 •

4195

Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8

Log of Monitor Well M W 5

Figure 8

 Elev

A 1
4310

Elev

A 2
4305

Elev

A 3
4302

Elev

A 4
4378

Elev

Cemented

Cemented
Quartzite
Bedrock
• —

Quartzite
Bedrock

10

/:=i
10 •

Refusal in
Cemented Soil

15

A 5
4282

a::

15

20

20

Elev

A 6
4283

Elev

A 7
4250

A 8
Elev 4 2 6 0

Elev

A 9
4262

so

S2

5 —

Cemented

=3

/S3
10
Cemented '
Refusal In
Cemented Soil

15

Refusal in
Cemented Soil or
Bedrock

15

Cemented \

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

=8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 9

 TP 2
Elev 4 8 7 0

TP 1
Elev 4 8 1 0

TP 3
Elev 4 9 8 0

TP 4
Elev 4 7 8 0

TP 5
Elev 4 8 2 5
0

1—1

WC = 9
DD = 74
2 0 0 = 96
LL = 2 6
PI = 6

—

+ 4 = 39
2 0 0 = 14

WC = 8
DD = 8 7
200 = 63

Cemented '

10

10 -

15

15

20

20 •

TP 7
Elev 5 0 4 5

TP 6
Elev 4 9 0 0

-

—1

5

TP 8
Elev 4 6 8 0

TP 9
Elev 4 6 9 0

Dolomite
Bedrock

T P 10
Elev 4 7 5 5

+ 4 = 47
200 = 3

5

-

10

Cemented \
16

15 •
Refusal in
Cemented Soil

I—

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1

1020875

20 —
= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 10

 TP 12
Elev 4 5 2 0

T P 11
Elev 4 8 7 5

T P 13
Elev 4 S 3 0

T P 15
Elev 4 6 5 0

T P 14
Elev 4 5 8 5

0

3

7 r3

—

I

W C = 14
DD = 98
200 = 90

W C = 15
DD = 102
200 = 73

10

—I

A

10 .

/=3
-

Quartzite
Bedrock

15

15

20 •

20

T P 17
Elev 4 4 2 5

T P 16
Elev 4 3 3 0

TP 18
Elev 4 4 6 2

Cemented .

10

• I]
^

TP 2 0
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 19
Elev 4 6 0 0

WC = 6
DD = 97
2 0 0 = 35

+ 4 = 53
200 = 2

+ 4 = 6
2 0 0 = 51
LL = 19
PI = 5
M D D = 118 5
OMC = 1 1 5
K = 1x10 5

10

Cemented '

u 1=1
15

15
Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

20
Approximate Vertical Scale 1
1020875

Quartzite
Bedrock
20

= 8

See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 11

—

 TP 22
Elev 4 4 6 0

TP 21
Elev 4 3 5 0

I
i—1

10

+4 = 37
2 0 0 « 36
LL = 3 4
Pi = 15
M D D » 124
O M C <= 9

TP 2 3
Elev 4 2 6 5

TP 2 4
Elev 4 3 2 5

>=3

+ 4 = 44
2 0 0 = 26

(13
+ 4 = 35
200 = 1

r

I

Quan
Bedrock

+ 4 = 56
2 0 0 = 10

W C = 17
DD = 107
2 0 0 = 72

10 •

uartzita

Dolomite
Bedrock

Quartzite
Bedrock
15

15 —

20

20
TP 25
Elev 4365

TP 26
Elev 4260

TP 27
Eiev 4280

*=3
— 5

10

f
Quartzite
Bedrock

• 20
1020875

Cemented 4

Refusal in
Cemented Soil
or Bedrock

10 -

15 •

15

Approximate Vertical Scale

+ 4 = 10
2 0 0 = 20

20 •
See Figure 13 for Legend and Notes

1 = 8
Logs of Test Pits

Figure 12

 NOTES

Legend of Boring and Test Pit Logs

§

The bonngs for monitor wells M W 1 to M W 4 were dnlled and installed on January
2 3 2 4 27 28 and 29 2 0 0 3 with a 4 inch odex drilling system Monitor well M W 5
was drilled and installed M a y 14 to M a y 21 2 0 0 3 with 8 inch Odex/Air Rotory
methods The test pits were excavated on December 11 12 13 16 and 2 3 2 0 0 2
with a track excavator

Topsoil Silty and clayey sand and gravel to lean clay cobbles and occasional boulders
slightly moist brown roots
Lean Clay (CL) small to moderate amount of gravel porous in Test Pits TP 1 T P 2 and
A 1 cobbles and occasional boulders up to 3 feet in size stiff to very stiff slightly moist
w e t at depth in borings brown to reddish brown to grayish brown

•

Q

Clayey Sand with Gravel ( S O clayey gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders up to
1 / feet in size medium dense to dense slightly moist to moist brown

ry\
J[i
uCJ

Silty Sand with Gravel (SM) clayey layers and gravel layers occasional cemented layers
cobbles and occasional boulders medium dense to very dense slightly moist brown to
reddish brown

•

Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) gravel layers cobbles and occasional boulders
occasional cemented layers medium dense to very dense slightly moist to moist wet
at depth in the borings brown to grayish brown to reddish brown
Clayey Gravel with Sand and Clayey Sand with Gravel (GC/SC) Interlayered cobbles and
occasional boulders occasional clay layers dense to very dense slightly moist to moist
w e t at depth in the borings brown to gray

Locations of the bonngs and tost pits were measured epproximately by a hand held G P S
Elevations of the borings and test pits were estimated based on interplation between
P
/^ntniire e
humr^ n
n Figure
Pirtiir. O
contours
shwon
on
2
I

The boring and test pit locations and elevations should be considered accurate only to
the degree implied by the method used

>

The lines between the matenals s h o w n on the boring and test pit logs represent the
approximate boundanes between material types and the transitions may be gradual

3

No free water was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavating Water
level readings shown on the monitor well logs were made at the time and under the
conditions indicated Fluctuation in the water level will occur with time

7

W C = Water Content (%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
+ 4 = Percent Reteined on No 4 Sieve
2 0 0 = Percent Passing No 2 0 0 Sieve
LL = Liquid Limit (%)
Pi = Plasticity Index (%)
M D D = Maximum Dry Density determined by A S T M D 6 7 8 (pet)
O M C = Optimum Moisture Content determined by A S T M D 678 (^l
K = Permeability (cm/sec)

Clayey Gravel w i t h Sand ( G O clayey sand layers occasional clay layers cobbles end
boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size occasional cemented layers medium dense to
very dense sliglitiy moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grey
K \

Silty Gravel w i t h Sand (GM) silty send layers cobbles up to approximately 1 foot in size
occasional cemented layers dense to very dense slightly moist brown

^

Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GPI sand layers occasional cemented layers cobbles
and boulders up to approximately 2 feet in size medium dense to vary dense slightly
moist to moist wet at depth in the bonngs brown to grayish brown

LEGEND OF WELL INSTALLATION
I—I

Concrete

Bedrock quartzite and dolomite hard to very hard dry to wet grayish white to grey to
purple

•

Bentonite Seal (3/8

1

10/12

P
1020875

California Dnve sample teken The symbol 1 0 / 1 2 indicates that 10 blows from a
1 4 0 pound hammer failing 3 0 inches were required to drive the sampler 12

chips)

Bentonite Grout

inches

Indicates relatively undisturbed hand drive sample taken

Sand pack around well screen

Indicates disturbed sample taken

indicates Schedule 4 0 P V C flush threaded pipe installed

indicates practical refusal

Indicates machine slotted schedule 4 0 P V C flush treaded pipe with 0 01
inch openings installed

indicates the depth of subsurface water and the number of days after dnlling the
measurement w a s taken

Indicates steel protective casing installed The casings are 4 inch diameter for
M W 1 through M W 4 The casing is 8 inch square for M W 5

Legend and Notes of Exploratory Borings Test Pits and Monitor Wells

10 2 0 Silica Sand

FlQiira 1 3

 Compressuon - 

Applied Engineering Consultants, Inc

 

Monsture Content 18 
Dry Unlt 113 
Sample of Lean Clay Sand

 

From 28 feet

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

1 -.. No movement upon wetting
100
APPLIED PRESSURE - 

1020875 CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Figure 14

Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
Moisture Content
Dry Unit Weight
Sample of Silty Clay

9
74

pcf

From TP-1 @ 2 feet

Additional movement under
constant pressure upon wetting

10

12
o
» 14
w
V

a

I 16
18

20

22

24

26

28

30
Note Scale Change
I

01
1020875

i

l

l

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 15

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

iw 7
0)
Q.

10

11

12

13

14

15
16

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 16

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

c

i 7
(0

a>
a

J »
10

11

12

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 17

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

10

12

^ 14
(0

o
k.

Q.

i 16
u
18

20

22

24

26

28

10

10
APPLIED PRESSURE ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 18

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc

17
M

2
a

Ie

10

10

100

APPLIED PRESSURE ksf

1020875

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS

Figure 19

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24Hr
7Hr
^^j45Mlm5Mln

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A D I N O S
BOMInlgMIn

4 MIn

1 MIn

I
«200

u s STANDARD SERIES
«toO

» s q »4(»3o

me

C L E A R SQUARE OPENINOS
lie

43
Sand
42
<>/„
Gravel.
%
Plasticity
Index.
Liquid Limit,
%
From
Sample of Clavev Gravel with Sand

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
4 MIn

1 1/z

3

Silt and Clav
%
MW-1 @ 38'

^5

s e e

C O B B L E S

o/^

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A O I N a S
e o MIn I B MIn

a/4

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SANO
GRAVEL
FINE
1
MEDIUM
[COARSE
i=INE
1 COARSE

C L A Y T O SILT

24 Hr 7 H r
.45 M i n i 5 MIn

3/a

1 MIn

i
I
•200

US STANDARD SERIES
«100

ISO «40(30

»16

...
V °
We

T

i
'
»4

CLEAR SOUARE OPENINOS
3/e

3/4

1 1/2
1

J

3

/
//
///
f/

so
eo

/f

to
20

f

70

i

30
O
Ul

eo

S

g

o.
lu

o
1
1—
1

/

1/

1
1—

^
^

1
1—

/

K —

/i
/ r '1
r
'
1

r

{1
OOl

013 2

0<3 5

OO S

OI S

O37

07 4

1 49

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

2<37

1

—r

j-J

59 0

1 1S

l2 3 8

r-n—f4 76

8 52

IS 1

3(3 1

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
GRAVEL
SAND
FINE
1
MEDIUM
jCOARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

54
40
Sand
Gravel.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity Index.
%
Sample of Poorly-graded Sand with S i l t
and Gravel

Project No 1020875

pH

1—

%
From

7« 2

Figure

2

38°

COBBLES

Silt and Clay_
%
MVI-3 @ 43'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

127

20

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24 H r

7Hr

45Mlm5Mln

SIEVE ANALYSIS

TIME READINOS
e o MIn 19 MIn

4 MIn

 
1 Mm

«200

US STANDARD SERIES
«10O

IISO

»4C»30

l>ia

We

T

C L E A R S O U A R E OPENINOS
va

3/4

11/2

3

s

e

e

lo
20
30
S

eo

S

so

-l

a

I
70

'

•o
so
005

COS

Oia

037

074

140

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

2 9 7 j 50O
420

1 19

%
From

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
4 Mm

9 52

19 1

38 1

76 2

Silt and Clay_
%
TP-3 @ 2'

12^1 2 ^ 5 °
152
I

COBBLES

14

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME R E A D I N O S
e o MIn 1 9 MIn

4 76

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1
MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

47
39
Gravel.
Sand.
%
Plasticity Index.
Liquid Limit.
%
Sample of S i l t v Sand w i t h G r a v e l

24 Hf 7 H r
,45 M i n i s MIn

12 38
2O

I
1 MIn

»200

US STANDARD SERIES
»100

« 5 0 iM0»30

»lg

•10
ke

C L E A R S O U A R E OPENINOS
3/a

V4

1 1/2

3

5

e e

i
a.
LU
O

DIAMETER
C L A Y T O SILT

O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
GRAVEL
SAND
FINE
1
MEDIUM
jCOARSE
FINE
1 COARSE

50
47
Sand.
%
Gravel.
Plasticity Index.
Liquid Limit.
%
Sample of Poorl v-qraded Sand with Gravel

Project No 1020875

From

COBBLES

Silt and Clay.
%
TP-10 @ 4'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

21

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
24 H r
7 Hr
4 5 M l m 5 Mln

TIME

6 0 M l m 9 M l n

005

SIEVE

READINOS
4 MIn

009

US STANDARD
1 Mm

01S

037

H2O0

074

»10O

149

«SO

»4ai30

297

S90

119

53
Sand
45
Gravel.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity
Index.
%
Sample of P o o r l y - g r a d e d G r a v e l w i t h Sand

•OOl

O02

OOS

4 MIn

009

1 Min

I
I
»200

4 76

3/4

9 52

OPENINOS

1 1/2

IS 1

From

Slit and Clay
%
TP-19 g 5 '

38 1

3

074

»100

149

«50

»4ai30

«ie

297 I 590
420

1 19

76 2

3/e

4 79

S 52

3/4

127

COBBLES

OPENINOS

1 1/2

19 1

3« 1

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1 MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
I COARSE

From

e . B

2_

CLEAR SQUARE

"lO
»e

t2 3S
2O

5

ANALYSIS

USSTANDARD SERIES

64
35
Gravel.
Sand.
%
Liquid Limit.
Plasticity Index.
%
Sample of Pnorly-graded Sand with Gravel

1020875

l2 3 »
2 O

SIEVE

O l i 037

C L A Y T O SILT

Project No

o/^

A N A L Y S I S

TIME READINGS
eoMmlOMIn

3/8

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L L I M E T E R S
SAND
GRAVEL
FINE
1 MEDIUM
[COARSE
FINE
I COARSE

C L A Y T O SILT

24 Hr
7 Hr
• 4 5 ><1ln1 S M I n

CLEAR SQUARE

»16

420

H Y D R O M E T E R

A N A L Y S I S

SERIES

3

s e e

76 2

COBBLES

Slit and Clay.
%
TP-23 @ 4'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

tZ'n 2o8°

22

 Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc
HYDROMETER
24
7 Hr
_45 M i n i s MIn

ANALYSIS

'"'"'^ READINOS
e o MIn 19 MIn 4 MIn

SIEVE ANALYSIS
 
«20O

1 Mm

C L A Y TO SILT

Gravel.
Liquid Limit.

56

«10O

US STANDARD SERIES
«SO »40»30
«16

FINE

1

SAND
MEDIUM

S

50

Ul
O

40

3/4

FINE

11/2

3

s

GRAVEL
1 COARSE

e

e

COBBLES

T P - 2 4 (3 4'

From

SIEVE A N A L Y S I S

TIME READINGS
4 MIn

CLEAR SQUARE OPENINOS
3/e

Silt and Clay 12_
%

HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
6 0 MIn 19 MIn

 COARSE

34
Sand.
Plasticity Index.

%
%

Sample of Vlell-graded Gravel with S i l t
and Sand

24 Hr 7 H r
.45 M i n i 5 MIn

T

l»a

US STANDARD SERIES
1 MIn

«200

0100

«50

»4a»30

»16

Tio
»8

f
»4

CLEAR SOUARE OPENINOS
3/6

3/4

1 1/2

3 ,

5

6

e*

"1

es
o.
30
20
' OOn
10

002

OOS

009

019

j

037

074

149

287

I S90
420

119

l2 38
2O

4 76

52

10 1

381

76 2

^z^
152

D I A M E T E R O F P A R T I C L E IN M I L J . 1 M E T E R S
C L A Y T O SILT

10

Gravel
Liquid Limit
Sample of

%
%
C l a y e y Sand

Project No

1020875

FINE

[

SAND
MEDIUM

70
Sand.
Plasticity Index.

[COARSE

FINE

GRAVEL
I COARSE

Silt and Clav
%
From

20

COBBLES

%

TP-27 (a 2'

GRADATION TEST RESULTS

Figure

23

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC
125 0

Project
Sample Location

120 0

Promontory Point
TP 20 @ 2

Maximum Dry Density
Optimum Moisture

118 5 pcf
11 5 %

Atterberg Limits
Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index

19%
5%

Gradation
Gravel
Sand
Silt & Clay

5

10

15

20

25

6%
43%
51%

30

Moisture Content Percent of Dry Weight
Test Procedure A S T M D 698 A
Sample Description
Sandy Silty Clay (CL ML)

Hydrometer Analysis
Time Readings

100%

24 Hr
45 Mm

i

7 Hr
15 Mm

60Mln19l»iin

1—I—I I I I 111

4 MIn

1\

Sieve Analysis
1

U S Standard Series
1 Mm

*2O0

#100

#50 #40 #30

#16

1—I—I—\—I i   M  i—hH—I

Clear Squai^ Openings

*^''

H-

Diameter of Particle in Millimeters
Clay to Slit

Project No

1020875

Fine

Sand
1 Medium

j Coarse

Fine

Gravel
1 Coarse

GRADATION &
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Cobbles

Boulders

Figure 24

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC
125 0

Project
Sample Location

120 0

o

Promontory Point
TP-21 @ 2'

115 0

Maximum Dry Density
Optimum Moisture

1100

Atterberg Limits

124 pcf
9%

CL

Liquid Limit
Plasticity Index

c 105 0
o
O
&•
Q 100 0

34%
15%

Gradation
Gravel
Sand
Silt & Clay

95 0

37%
27%
36%

90 0

85 0

5

10

15

20

25

35

30

Moisture Content Percent of Dry Weight
Test Procedure A S T M D-698 C
Sample Description
Clayey Gravel with Sand (GC)

Hydrometer Analysis
Time Readings
24 Hr
45 MIn

100% +

001

7Hr
15 MIn

1

60 MIn 19 Mm

1 I I M I ll

4 MIn

h

Sieve Analysis
1

U S Standard Series
1 Min

#200

1 l   I I ill 11

#100

#50 #40 #30

M i l l

#16

 I I I I ill I I

*^°#8

#4

3/8

3/4

Clear Square Openings
1 1/2

3

5 6

8

II I I 1  11 I  l  I 1 1  I  l l  IL>tl  I 1 I

002
420

20

Diameter of Particle in Millimeters
Clay to Silt

Project No

1020875

Fine

Sand
1 Medium

1 Coarse

Fine

Gravel
1 Coarse

GRADATION &
MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP

Cobbles

Boulders

Figure 25

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENC^-ERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 1 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS
SILT/
CLAY

LIQUID
LIMIT
{%)

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

MW 1

8

3

124

26

63

11

Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt and Gravel

23

13

120

23

41

36

Clayey Sand with Gravel

38

8

43

42

15

Clayey Gravel with Sand

13

6

114

38

41

21

Clayey Sand with Gravel

33

6

117

52

24

24

Clayey Gravel with Sand

38

7

65

20

15

Clayey Gravel with Sand

53

33

14

Clayey Gravel with Sand

38

47

15

Clayey Sand with Gravel

62

22

16

Clayey Gravel with Sand

40

54

6

Poorly Graded Sand with
Silt and Gravel

MW 2

(%)

58

MW 3

23

4

119

28

MW 4

MW 5

GRAVEL

SAND

(%)

(%)

(%)

PLASTICITY
INDEX

(%)

(%)

43

7

18

3

120

50

43

7

Poorly Graded Gravel
with Silt and Sand

48

8

132

25

60

15

Clayey Sand with Gravel

53

13

124

31

47

22

Clayey Sand with Gravel

88

11

130

39

40

21

Clayey Sand with Gravel

28

18

113

72

Lean Clay with Sand

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENC^'ERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 2 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION
NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

SILT/
CLAY

LIQUID
LIMIT

PLASTICITY
INDEX

(%)

(%)

(%)

74

96

26

6

87

63

Sandy Lean Clay

47

14

Silty Sand with Gravel

50

3

Poorly Graded Sand with
Gravel

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

TP 1

2

9

TP 2

4

8

TP 3

2

39

TP 10

4

47

TP 11

9

15

102

73

Lean Clay with Sand

TP 13

2

14

98

90

Lean Clay

TP 18

4

6

97

35

Silty Sand

TP 19

5

TP 20

2

TP 21

(%)

SAND
{%)

GRAVEL
{%)

53

5

45

(%)
Silty Clay

2

Poorly Graded Gravel
with Sand

47

90

2

6

2

37

J

Clayey Sand

43

51

19

5

118 5

11 5

27

36

34

15

124

9

Sandy Silty Clay

Clayey Gravel with Sand

 APPLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENQ^ lERING CONSULTANTS, INC
TABLE I

Page 3 of 3

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE
LOCATION

GRADATION

BORING/
TEST
PIT

DEPTH
(FEET)

TP 23

4
7

TP 24

TP 27

NATURAL
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)

17

NATURAL
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

ATTERBERG LIMITS

GRAVEL
(%)

SAND
(%)

SILT/
CLAY
(%)

35

64

1

107

LIQUID
LIMIT
(%)

PLASTICITY
INDEX
{%)

PROJECT NUMBER 1020875

STANDARD PROCTOR
MAXIMUM
DRY
DENSITY
(PCF)

OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
CONTENT
(%)

SAMPLE
CLASSIFICATION

Poorly Graded Sand with
Gravel

72

Lean Clay with Sand

2

44

30

26

Clayey Gravel with Sand

4

56

34

10

Well Graded Gravel with
Silt and Sand

2

10

70

20

Clayey Sand

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

APPENDIX D
Seismic Refraction Survey – GeoVision

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

 FINAL REPORT
SEISMIC REFRACTION INVESTIGATION
Seismic Refraction Survey
Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County, Utah

GEOVision Project No. 15304

Prepared for
Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.
1360 Valley Vista Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765

Prepared by
GEOVision Geophysical Services, Inc.
1124 Olympic Drive
Corona, CA 92881
(951) 549-1234

September 3, 2015
Report 15304-01 Rev 0

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 2 

2 

EQUIPMENT AND FIELD PROCEDURES............................................................................ 3 

3 

METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 4 

4 

DATA PROCESSING............................................................................................................. 6 

5 

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ................................................................................................. 7 

5.1 
5.2 
5.3 
5.4 
5.5 
5.6 

P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-1 ............................................................................................ 7 
P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-2 ............................................................................................ 8 
P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-3 ............................................................................................ 8 
P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-4 ............................................................................................ 9 
P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-5 ............................................................................................ 9 
P-WAVE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINE SL-6 ............................................................................................ 9 

6 

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 11 

7 

CERTIFICATION .................................................................................................................. 12 

APPENDICES
Appendix A

Seismic Refraction Method

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1

Seismic Line Geometry

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Site Map
SL-1: Layer-Based Tomography Model
SL-2: Layer-Based Tomography Model
SL-3: Layer-Based Tomography Model
SL-4: Layer-Based Tomography Model
SL-5: Layer-Based Tomography Model
SL-6: Layer-Based Tomography Model

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
1

 1 INTRODUCTION
A seismic refraction survey was conducted on Promontory Point in Box Elder County, Utah on
August 12th and 13th, 2015. The survey was conducted on the southwest portion of the point
(Figure 1). The purpose of the seismic refraction survey was to determine the subsurface
velocity structure and rippability beneath six (6) lines designated SL-1 through SL-6.
Seismic refraction data were acquired along six profiles that were each 705 ft in length. Each
line was selected and located by Tetra Tech personnel and the final positions were selected by
GEOVision personnel based site conditions. The location of each seismic line was recorded by
GEOVision using a sub meter GPS (Table 1 and Figure 1).
The geology in the vicinity of the seismic refraction lines was expected to consist of alluvium
overlying Precambrian metasedimentary rock, reported to occur primarily as quartzite in
surrounding outcrops. Other metasedimentary bedrock reported to occur at the site could include
limestone, dolomite and shale. The physical characteristics of the metasedimentary rock, such as
fracture spacing, porosity or density, were unknown.
Ripping characteristics for quartzite are not published and, therefore, ripping characteristics of
granite are used for site characteristics. Granite is considered rippable by a Caterpillar D8R
Ripper to a velocity of 6,000 ft/s and marginally rippable to a velocity of 7,000 ft/s providing the
rock is sufficiently jointed and fractured. It should be noted that blasting may be more costeffective in marginally rippable rock due to time and equipment wear considerations. Published
data are not available for the ripping characteristics of excavators, but we typically assume that
excavators have about half the ripping ability of a D8R.
The following sections include a discussion of equipment and field procedures, methodology
data processing and results of the geophysical survey.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
2

 2 EQUIPMENT AND FIELD PROCEDURES
Seismic refraction equipment used during this investigation consisted of two Geometrics Geode
24-channel signal enhancement seismographs, 10 Hz vertical geophones, seismic refraction
cables with 20-foot takeouts and an aluminum plate.
Each seismic line consisted of a single spread of 48 geophones aligned in a linear array, with a
geophone spacing of 15 feet for total line lengths of 705 feet, as outlined in Table 1. All
geophone locations were measured using a 300-foot tape measure. Relative elevations along
each seismic line were surveyed using a Sokkia C300 automatic level. Elevations along SL-1 to
SL-6 were surveyed separately.
Sixteen (16) to seventeen (17) shot point locations were occupied on each line: off-end shots
(where possible), end shots and multiple interior shot points located between every fourth
geophone. Site conditions such as a road and topography limited some of the off-end shot
points.
The 240-lb accelerated weight drop was used as the energy source for each shot point. A
Geometrics or 3D Geophysics trigger switch inserted into the aluminum plate and coupled to the
geode via a trigger extension, was used to trigger the seismograph upon impact. The final
seismic record at each shot point was the result of stacking six (6) to twelve (12) shots to
increase the signal to noise ratio. All seismic records were stored on a laptop computer. Data
files were named with the sequential line, spread, shot number and a “.dat” extension (i.e. data
file 1105.dat is the seismic record from line 1, spread 1, shot 5). Data acquisition parameters,
file names and leveling data were recorded on field forms, which are retained in the project files.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
3

 3 METHODOLOGY
Detailed discussions of the seismic refraction method can be found in Telford et al. (1990) and
Redpath (1973).
When conducting a seismic survey, acoustic energy is input to the subsurface by an energy
source such as a sledgehammer impacting a metallic plate, weight drop, vibratory source or
explosive charge. The acoustic waves propagate into the subsurface at a velocity dependent
upon the elastic properties of the material through which they travel. When the waves reach an
interface where the density or velocity changes significantly, a portion of the energy is reflected
back to the surface and the remainder is transmitted into the lower layer. Where the velocity of
the lower layer is higher than that of the upper layer, a portion of the energy is also critically
refracted along the interface. Critically refracted waves travel along the interface at the velocity
of the lower layer and continually refract energy back to the surface. Receivers (geophones) laid
out in linear array on the surface, record the incoming refracted and reflected waves. The
seismic refraction method involves analysis of the travel times of the first energy to arrive at the
geophones. These first arrivals are from either the direct wave (at geophones close to the source)
or critically refracted waves (at geophones further from the source).
Analysis of seismic refraction data depends upon the complexity of the subsurface velocity
structure. If the subsurface target is planar in nature then the slope intercept method (Telford et
al., 1990) can be used to model multiple horizontal or dipping planar layers. A minimum of one
end shot is required to model horizontal layers and reverse end shots are required to model
dipping planar layers. If the subsurface target is undulating (i.e. bedrock valley) then layer based
analysis routines such as the generalized reciprocal method (Palmer, 1980 and 1981 and
Lankston, 1990), reciprocal method (Hawkins, 1961) also referred to as the ABC method,
Hales’ method (Hales, 1958), delay time method (Wyrobek, 1956 and Gardner, 1967), time-term
inversion (Scheidegger and Willmore, 1959), plus-minus method (Hagedoorn, 1959) and
wavefront method (Rockwell, 1967) are required to model subsurface velocity structure. These
methods generally require a minimum of 5 shot points per spread (end shots, off end shots and a
center shot). If subsurface velocity structure is complex and cannot be adequately modeled using
layer-based modeling techniques (i.e. complex weathering profile in bedrock, numerous lateral
velocity variations), then Monte Carlo or tomographic inversion techniques (Zhang and Toksoz,
1998; Schuster and Quintus-Bosz, 1993) are required to model the seismic refraction data. These
techniques require a high shot density; typically every 2 to 6 stations/geophones. Generally,
these techniques cannot effectively take advantage of off-end shots to extend depth of
investigation, so longer profiles are required.
Errors in seismic refraction models can be caused by velocity inversions, hidden layers or lateral
velocity variations. At sites with steeply dipping or highly irregular bedrock surfaces, out of
plane refractions (refractions from structures to the side of the line rather than from beneath the
line) may severely complicate modeling. A velocity inversion is a geologic layer with a lower
seismic velocity than an overlying layer. Critical refraction does not occur along such a layer
because velocity has to increase with depth for critical refraction to occur. This type of layer,
therefore, cannot be recognized or modeled and depths to underlying layers would be
overestimated. A hidden layer is a layer with a velocity increase, but of sufficiently small
thickness relative to the velocities of overlying and underlying layers, that refracted arrivals do
Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
4

 not arrive at the geophones before those from the deeper, higher velocity layer. Because the
seismic refraction method generally only involves the interpretation of first arrivals, a hidden
layer cannot be recognized or modeled and depths to underlying layers would be underestimated.
Saturated sediments, overlying high velocity bedrock can be a hidden layer under many field
conditions. However, saturated sediments generally have a much higher velocity than
unsaturated sediments, typically in the 5,000 to 7,000 ft/s range, and can occasionally be
interpreted as a second arrival when the layer does not give rise to a first arrival. A subsurface
velocity structure that increases as a function of depth rather than as discrete layers will also
cause depths to subsurface refractors to be underestimated, in a manner very similar to that of the
hidden layer problem. Lateral velocity variations that are not adequately addressed in the
seismic models will also lead to depth errors. Tomographic imaging techniques can often
resolve the complex velocity structures associated with hidden layers, velocity gradients and
lateral velocity variations. However, in the event of an abrupt increase in velocity at a geologic
horizon, the velocity model generated using tomographic inversion routines will smooth the
horizon with velocity being underestimated at the interface and possibly overestimated at depth.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
5

 4 DATA PROCESSING
The first step in data processing consisted of picking the arrival time of the first energy received
at each geophone (first arrival) for each shot point. The first arrivals on each seismic record are
either a direct arrival from a compressional (P) wave traveling in the uppermost layer or a
refracted arrival from a subsurface interface where there is a velocity increase. First-arrival
times were selected using the automatic and manual picking routines in the software package
SeisImager™ (Oyo Corporation). These first arrival times were saved in an ASCII file
containing shot location, geophone locations and associated first arrival time.
Data quality was generally good and was affected by factors such as: geophone coupling and
geologic conditions such as thin discontinuous high velocity layers. Poor source coupling in
fractured rock in some areas may have increased noise at some shot locations. Errors in the first
arrival times were variable with error generally increasing with distance from the shot point.
First arrival picking errors probably averaged about 1 ms with error probably less than 0.5 ms at
geophone locations near the shot point and up to 2 ms at distal geophone locations.
Relative elevations for each geophone location were calculated from the leveling data using a
spreadsheet and converted to approximate elevations using the elevation recorded from the GPS
at the first geophone on each line.
Seismic refraction data were then modeled using the tomographic analysis technique available in
the SeisImager™ Plotrefa software package, developed by Oyo Corporation. Refraction
tomography techniques are often able to resolve complex velocity structure (e.g. velocity
gradients) that can be observed in bedrock weathering profiles. Layer-based modeling
techniques such as the GRM are not able to accurately model the velocity gradients that can be
observed in weathered bedrock.
Tomographic analysis was conducted as outlined in the following steps. An initial layer based or
velocity gradient starting model was generated using parameters outlined by the processor using
a smooth starting model or time-term analysis. The initial model had 25 layers with the top of the
bottom layer at a depth related to the imaged depth of the model. Velocity ranges were also set
to values outside of the starting model minimum and maximum. The velocity models were
extended to permit the use of off-end shot points during the inversion. A minimum of 20
iterations of non-linear raypath inversion were then implemented to improve the fits of the travel
time curves to near-surface sediments/rock. After each set of inversions were completed, the
initial parameters were adjusted and the model was run again in an iterative process. These steps
were repeated until acceptable fits and RMS error were achieved. The final tomographic
velocity models for the seismic line were exported as ASCII files and imported into the Geosoft
Oasis montaj® v8 mapping system where the velocity model was gridded, contoured and
annotated for presentation.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
6

 5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Seismic refraction models using seismic tomography for lines SL-1 through SL-6 are presented
as Figures 2 through 7, respectively. The color scheme used on the layer-based tomography
images consist of blue-green, yellow-orange and red-pink representing low, intermediate and
high velocities, respectively. The transition from blue to green occurs at a velocity of about
3,000 ft/s and the transition from green to yellow occurs at a velocity of about 5,000 ft/s. The
transition from orange to red occurs at about 8,000 ft/s.
Tomographic inversion techniques will typically model a gradual increase in velocity with depth
even if an abrupt velocity contact is present. Therefore, if velocity gradients are not present,
tomographic inversion routines will overestimate and underestimate velocity above and below a
layer contact, respectively. To a certain extent, the layer-based starting model can reduce the
velocity smoothing inherent in tomographic velocity models. Velocity gradients can, however,
be very common in geologic environments with fractured and weathered rock, such as the
project site. It should be noted that seismic refraction technique can generally not detect velocity
inversions that can occur in sedimentary rock or in rock with a complex weathering profile. The
seismic refraction models will reflect the velocity structure of the most competent (highest
velocity) rock beneath or in close proximity to the profile.
High velocity, thin, discontinuous layers in the alluvium, likely due to “hard pan”, were observed
in the seismic data. These high velocity layers make it very difficult to accurately constrain the
average velocity of the sediments thereby increasing the error in the depth of underlying layers.
The velocity structure of underlying layers is reliable and can be used for site development
planning purposes. Seismic refraction lines SL-4 and SL-6 however were influenced the most by
these high velocity layers.
For the seismic refraction lines, time-term based starting models were used to retain the observed
layered structure while still showing velocity gradients which may indicate thinner or thicker
zones of weathering. In tomographic images, layer contacts are not clearly defined and thus,
ranges of velocities are used to interpret possible rock conditions and competency. For the
purpose of discussion, velocities of 5,000 ft/s or less are considered rippable, velocities of 5,000
to 7,500 ft/s are considered marginally rippable and velocities greater than 7,500 ft/s are
considered non-rippable using a Caterpillar D8R Ripper. If the rock is sufficiently porous that Pwave velocity increases beneath the saturated zone then saturated rock may be rippable to higher
seismic velocities.

5.1

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-1

The seismic tomography model for SL-1 is presented as Figure 2.
Three layers are imaged in the model: alluvium, weathered bedrock and competent bedrock. The
contact between the alluvium and weathered bedrock is interpreted as following the 5,000 ft/s
contour of the seismic tomography model. The interpreted depth to weathered bedrock is
approximately 45 to 55 ft beneath the line. Velocity increases to over 7,500 ft/s below a depth of
about 70 to 90 ft which reflects more competent, less weathered rock.
Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
7

 Non-rippable bedrock, with velocities greater than 7,500 ft/s, was imaged approximately 70 to 80
ft beneath the southeastern and central portion and 80 to 90 ft beneath the northwestern portion
of the line. The approximate depth of investigation for the seismic model is about 160 ft.
The alluvium beneath this line should be considered rippable to depths of 45 to 55 ft. The
weathered bedrock beneath this line should be considered marginally rippable to depths of
approximately 70 to 80 ft beneath the line, providing the rock is sufficiently jointed and
fractured.

5.2

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-2

The seismic tomography model for SL-2 is presented as Figure 3.
Seismic Line SL-2 slopes down from the northeast to the southwest. Three layers are imaged in
the seismic model: alluvium, weathered bedrock and competent bedrock. The contact between
the alluvium and weathered bedrock is interpreted as approximately following the 5,000 ft/s
contour of the seismic tomography model. The interpreted depth to weathered bedrock is
approximately 40 to 70 ft beneath the southwestern and central portions and 70 to 75 ft beneath
the northeastern portion of the seismic line. This model exhibits a thicker weathered zone on the
southwestern to central portion of the line. Non-rippable bedrock, with velocities greater than
7,500 ft/s was imaged approximately 70 to 90 ft beneath the southwestern portion, 95 to 140 ft
beneath the central portion and 90 ft beneath the northeastern portion of the line. The
approximate depth of investigation for the seismic model is about 175 ft.
The alluvium beneath this line should be considered rippable to depths of approximately 40 to 70
ft beneath the line. The weathered bedrock beneath this line should be considered marginally
rippable to depths of approximately 60 to 140 ft beneath the line, providing the rock is
sufficiently jointed and fractured. P-wave velocity of the bedrock is generally higher than 7,500
ft/s below a depth of about 70 to 140 ft, which may reflect more competent, less weathered rock.

5.3

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-3

The seismic tomography model for SL-3 is presented as Figure 4.
Two layers are imaged in the model: alluvium and weathered bedrock. The contact between the
alluvium and weathered bedrock is interpreted as following the 5,000 ft/s contour of the seismic
tomography model. The possibility cannot be discounted that the alluvium unit is underlain by
very intensely weathered rock that approximately tracks the 3,500 ft/s velocity contour.
Alternatively, the velocities in the 3,500 to 5,000 ft/s range may just reflect stiffer alluvium or
hard pan influence layers. The interpreted depth to weathered bedrock is approximately 35 to 55
ft beneath the western portion, 40 to 50 beneath the central portion and 7 to 25 ft beneath the
eastern portion of the seismic line. Non-rippable competent rock, with velocities greater than
7,500 ft/s was not imaged beneath this line. The approximate depth of investigation for the
seismic model is about 115 ft.
The alluvium beneath this line should be considered rippable to depths of 5 to 50 ft beneath the
line. The weathered bedrock beneath this line should be considered marginally rippable,
Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
8

 providing the rock is sufficiently jointed and fractured. Bedrock likely becomes more competent
and non-rippable at depths greater than imaged in the tomography model.

5.4

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-4

The seismic tomography model for SL-4 is presented as Figure 5.
Three layers are imaged in the model: alluvium, intensely weathered rock and weathered
bedrock. The contact between the alluvium and possible intensely weathered rock is interpreted
as following the 3,500 ft/s contour of the seismic tomography model and approximately 40 to 70
ft beneath the seismic line. The interpreted depth to the weathered bedrock is approximately 130
ft beneath the western portion, 75 to 130 ft beneath the central portion and 45 to 75 ft beneath the
eastern portion of the seismic line. Non-rippable bedrock, with velocities greater than 7,500 ft/s,
was not imaged beneath the line. The approximate depth of investigation for the seismic model
is about 155 ft.
The alluvium and possible intensely weathered rock beneath this line should be considered
rippable to depths of approximately 45 to 130 ft. The weathered bedrock beneath this line
should be considered marginally rippable, providing the rock is sufficiently jointed and fractured
to a depth of at least 155 ft.

5.5

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-5

The seismic tomography model for SL-5 is presented as Figure 6.
Three layers are imaged in the model: alluvium, weathered bedrock and competent bedrock. The
contact between the alluvium and weathered bedrock is interpreted as following the 5,000 ft/s
contour of the seismic tomography model. The interpreted depth to weathered bedrock is
approximately 30 to 55 ft beneath northwestern portion and 45 to 55 ft beneath the central and
southeastern portions of the seismic line. Non-rippable competent rock, with velocities greater
than 7,500 ft/s, was imaged approximately 155 to 160 ft beneath the northwestern portion, 165 ft
beneath the central portion and was not imaged beneath the southeastern portion of the line. The
alluvium velocities are generally much higher than observed beneath the other seismic lines.
There may be a thick hard pan layer beneath this line. The possibility cannot be discounted that
intensely weathered, rippable rock is located at a relatively shallow depth beneath the line. The
approximate depth of investigation for the seismic model is about 170 ft.
The alluvium and possible very intensely weathered rock beneath this line should be considered
rippable to depths of 30 to 55 ft. The weathered bedrock beneath this line should be considered
marginally rippable to depths of approximately 155 to 165 ft beneath the line, providing the rock
is sufficiently jointed and fractured. Beneath these depths, bedrock velocities are greater than
7,500 ft/s and would be considered non-rippable.

5.6

P-Wave Seismic Refraction Line SL-6

The seismic tomography model for SL-6 is presented as Figure 7.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
9

 Three layers are imaged in the model: alluvium, weathered bedrock and competent bedrock. The
contact between the alluvium and weathered bedrock is interpreted as following the 5,000 ft/s
contour of the seismic tomography model. The interpreted depth to weathered bedrock is
approximately 130 to 140 ft beneath the northwestern and central portions and 85 to 125 ft
beneath the southeastern portion of the seismic line. Non-rippable competent rock, with
velocities greater than 7,500 ft/s, was imaged approximately 175 to 185 ft beneath the
northwestern and central portion and 85 to 165 ft beneath the southeastern portion of the line. It
is possible that 5 to 20 ft of rippable, very intensely weathered rock overlies the marginally
rippable weathered rock beneath this line. The approximate depth of investigation for the
seismic model is about 190 ft.
The alluvium beneath this line should be considered rippable to depths of approximately 130 ft
beneath the northwestern and central portion of the line and 85 to 125 ft beneath the southeastern
portion of the seismic line. The weathered bedrock beneath this line should be considered
marginally rippable to depths of approximately 175 to 185 ft beneath the northwestern and
central portion and 85 to 165 ft beneath the southeastern portion beneath the line, providing the
rock is sufficiently jointed and fractured. Beneath these depths, bedrock velocities are greater
than 7,500 ft/s and would be considered non-rippable.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
10

 6 REFERENCES
Gardner, L.W., 1967, Refraction seismograph profile interpretation, in Musgrave, A.W., ed.,
Seismic Refraction Prospecting: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, p. 338-347.
Hagedoorn, J.G., 1959, The plus-minus method of interpreting seismic refraction sections,
Geophysical Prospecting, v. 7, p 158-182.
Hales, F. W., 1958, An accurate graphical method for interpreting seismic refraction lines,
Geophysical Prospecting, v. 6, p 285-294.
Hawkins, L. V., 1961, The reciprocal method of routine shallow seismic refraction investigation,
Geophysics, v. 26, p. 806-819.
Kassenaar, J. D. C., 1989-1992, VIEWSEIS seismic refraction analysis system, installation
manual, program tutorial, reference manual, 50 p.
Lankston, R. W., 1990, High-resolution refraction seismic data acquisition and interpretation, in
Ward, S. H., ed., Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysics, Volume I: Review and
Tutorial: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, p. 45-74.
Palmer, D., 1980, The generalized reciprocal method of seismic refraction interpretation:
Society of Exploration Geophysics, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 104 p.
Palmer, D., 1981, An introduction to the field of seismic refraction interpretation: Geophysics,
v. 46, p. 1508-1518.
Redpath, B. B., 1973, Seismic refraction exploration for engineering site investigations: U. S.
Army Engineer Waterway Experiment Station Explosive Excavation Research
Laboratory, Livermore, California, Technical Report E-73-4, 51 p.
Rockwell, D.W., 1967, General Wavefront Method, in Musgrave, A.W., ed., Seismic Refraction
Prospecting: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, p. 363-415.
Scheidegger, A., and Willmore, P.L., 1957, The use of a least square method for the
interpretation of data from seismic surveys, Geophysics, v. 22, p. 9-22.
Schuster, G. T. and Quintus-Bosz, A., 1993, Wavepath eikonal traveltime inversion: Theory:
Geophysics, v. 58, no. 9, p. 1314-1323.
Telford, W. M., Geldart, L.P., Sheriff, R.E., 1990, Applied Geophysics, Second Edition,
Cambridge University Press.
Wyrobek, S.M., 1956, Application of delay and intercept times in the interpretation of multilayer
time distance curves, Geophysical Prospecting, v. 4, p 112-130.
Zhang, J. and Toksoz, M. N., 1998, Nonlinear refraction traveltime tomography, Geophysics, V.
63, p. 1726-1737.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
11

 7 CERTIFICATION
All geophysical data, analysis, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations in this
document have been prepared under the supervision of and reviewed by a GEOVision California
Professional Engineer.
Prepared by

09/03/2015
Date

David Carpenter
Senior Staff Geophysicist
GEOVision Geophysical Services
Reviewed and approved by

09/03/2015
Date

Antony Martin, P.Gp. 989
Technical Director
GEOVision Geophysical Services



This geophysical investigation was conducted under the supervision of a California
Professional Engineer using industry standard methods and equipment. A high degree of
professionalism was maintained during all aspects of the project from the field investigation
and data acquisition, through data processing interpretation and reporting. All original field
data files, field notes and observations, and other pertinent information are maintained in the
project files and are available for the client to review for a period of at least one year.
A professional engineer’s certification of interpreted geophysical conditions comprises a
declaration of his/her professional judgment. It does not constitute a warranty or guarantee,
expressed or implied, nor does it relieve any other party of its responsibility to abide by
contract documents, applicable codes, standards, regulations or ordinances.

Report 15304-01 Rev b

September 3, 2015
12

 TABLES

Table 1 – Seismic Line Geometry

Notes:

Seismic Line

Geophone
Spacing
(ft)

SL-1

15

SL-2

15

SL-3

15

SL-4

15

SL-5

15

SL-6

15

Distance
(ft)

Easting
(US Feet)

Northing
(US Feet)

Approximate
Elevation
(MSL ft)

0
705
0
705
0
705
0
705
0
705
0
705

1,372,930
1,372,384
1,370,777
1,371,309
1,372,808
1,373,497
1,371,528
1,372,215
1,372,505
1,373,133
1,369,763
1,370,312

3,604,513
3,604,953
3,605,664
3,606,122
3,613,572
3,613,446
3,610,629
3,610,479
3,609,090
3,608,772
3,610,273
3,609,835

4,271
4,272
4,238
4,288
4,795
4,795
4,520
4,524
4,456
4,455
4,466
4,452

1) Coordinates in Utah State Plane, NAD83 (Conus) , North (4301), US Survey Feet.
2) Coordinates taken with a Trimble ProXRS GPS system with OmniSTAR sub meter
real time differential corrections.

 FIGURES

1372000

1374000

1376000

SL-3

0`
!

p

705`

3614000

1370000

3614000

1368000

3612000

3612000

!

0`
!

SL-4

705`

0`

3610000

!

SL
-

3610000

!

6
705`
!

P
SE

0`

yR
tor
on
rom

!

SL
-5

705`
!

3608000

3608000

d

0`

SL

3606000

3606000

705`

-2

!

!

SL
-

705`
!

1
0`

3604000

3604000

!

Southern Pacific Railroad

SE Prom
ontory R
d

3602000

3602000

Service Layer
Credits:
Source: Esri,
DigitalGlobe,
GeoEye,

0

500

1,000

1,500

Feet

1368000

1370000

1372000

1374000

1376000
FIGURE 1
SITE MAP

Legend
Seismic Refraction Line with Distances
Date:
GV Project:
NOTES:
1. Utah State Plane Coordinate System, NAD 83 North (4301), US Survey Feet
2. Image Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,
Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

8/31/2015
15304

Developed by:

D Carpenter

Drawn by:
Approved by:

T Rodriguez
A Martin

File Name:

15304_1.MXD

SITE LOCATED AT
PROMONTORY POINT
BOX ELDER COUNTY, UTAH

PREPARED FOR
TETRA TECH BAS, INC.

 Apprenin

 

4150

 

 

 

4100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Contour Interval: 500 Distance (ft)

 

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 5500 7000 T500 8000 8500 9000 9500 1000010500

P-Wave Velocity


09W

00W

 

 

 

SW NE

 

 

4300

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4250

 

 

 

 

4200

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approximate Elevation (MSL ft)

4150

 

 

4100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Contour Interval: 500 ?le Distance (ft)

 

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 1000010500

P-Wave Velocity
(ft/s)

LEGEND

Geophone Location
Interpreted Contact Between Rippable Alluvium

 

and Marginally Rippable Weathered Rock Figure 3

 

z'orz

Interpreted Contact Between Marginally Rippable

L-2: -B I
Weathered Rock and Non-rippable Rock 3 ayer asec' ?m?9rap Ode

GV Project No. 15304

 

25 0 25 50 75 100 125

Promontory Point Landfill

(feet) Box Elder County, Utah

 

 

 

Gm
geophysical services

Prepared for Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4750

 

 

 

Approximate Elevation (MSL ft)

4700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
Contour Interval: 500 ?le Distance (ft)

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 1000010500

P-Wave Velocity
(ft/S)

LEGEND

GeOphone Location

Interpreted Contact Between Rippable Alluvium
and Marginally Rippable Weathered Rock

 

Figure 4

 

SL-3: Layer-Based Tomography Model
GV Project No. 15304

45204?

 

25 0 25 50 75 100 125

 

Promontory Point

(feet) Box Elder County, Utah

 

 

 

II

II

I
Ephraim! services

Prepared for Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approximate Elevation (MSL ft)

4500

4450

4400

4350

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Contour Interval: 500 ft/s Distance (ft)

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 1000010500
P-Wave Velocity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ft/S)
LEG EN 
Geophone Location
Possible Contact Between Rippable Alluvium 
and Possible Rippable Intenser Weathered Rock Figure 5
(dlscussed the report) .  SL-4: Layer-Based Tomography Model
. . . . . . Interpreted Contact Between Possible Rippable Intenser is Gv project No_ 15304
Weathered Rock and Marginally Rippable Weathered Rock .. I 
25 0 25 50 75 100 125 Promontory Pomt Landfill
. Box Elder County, Utah
(feet)
Prepared for Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Approximate Elevation (MSL ft)

4450

4400

4350

4300

Contour Interval: 500 

150

200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Distance (ft)

550

 

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 5000 5500 ?'000 ?500 0000 8500 9000 9500 10000 10500

P-Wave Velocity
(ms)

600

650

7?00

09??

00??

098?

008?

 

 

 

 

ESEE

 

4450

 

4400

 

 

Approximate Elevation (MSL ft)
4350

 

 

4300

4250

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700
Contour Interval: 500 ?le Distance (ft)

 

1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500 8000 8500 9000 9500 10000 10500
P-Wave Velocity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(ft/s)
LEGEND
Geophone Location Interpreted Contact Between Rippable Alluvium Jib lgure
and Marginally Rippable Weathered Rock  SL-6: Layer-Based Tomography Model
- Interpreted Contact Between Marginally Rippable ?5 GV ProjeCt 15304
Weathered Rock and Non-rippable Rock 25_ 0 25 50 75 100 125  
fee)
Prepared for Tetra Tech BAS, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A

SEISMIC REFRACTION
METHOD
GEOVision conducts high-resolution seismic
refraction and seismic reflection surveys in support
of a variety of engineering, environmental, and
hydrogeologic investigations.

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Map bedrock topography
Map depth to groundwater
Map faults in bedrock
Map faults forming groundwater
barriers
Characterize landslides
Estimate bedrock rippability
Evaluate soil and rock properties

125

TRAVEL TIME DATA

TIME (milliseconds)

100

75

50

25

0

LAYER VELOCITIES
VELOCITY (feet/second)

GEOVision uses the seismic refraction
method to:

Seismic Refraction Survey in Mojave Desert, California using
XLR8 2700 lb Accelerated Weight Drop Energy Source

15000

BEDROCK VELOCITY

10000

5000

SEDIMENT VELOCITIES
0
2140

DEPTH SECTION

2100
ELEVATION (feet MSL)

When conducting seismic surveys, acoustic energy
is input to the subsurface by an energy source such
as a sledgehammer impacting a metallic plate,
weight drop, vibratory source, or explosive charge.
The acoustic waves propagate into the subsurface
at a velocity dependent upon the elastic properties
of the material through which they travel. When the
waves reach an interface where the density or
velocity changes significantly, a portion of the
energy is reflected back to the surface, and the
remainder is transmitted into the lower layer.
Where the velocity of the lower layer is higher than
that of the upper layer, a portion of the energy is
also critically refracted along the interface. Critically
refracted waves travel along the interface at the
velocity of the lower layer and continually refract
energy back to surface. Receivers (geophones),
laid out in linear array on the surface, record the
incoming refracted and reflected waves. The
seismic refraction method involves analysis of the
travel times of the first energy to arrive at the
geophones. These first arrivals are from either the
direct wave (at geophones close to the source), or
critically refracted waves (at geophones further from
the source). The seismic reflection method involves
the analysis of reflected waves, which occur later in
the seismic record.

2050

SEDIMENTS

2000

1960

BEDROCK

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

LINE POSITION (feet)

Seismic Refraction Survey to Map Bedrock Topography

1124 Olympic Drive, Corona, California 92881

ph 951-549-1234

fx 951-549-1236

www.geovision.com

 GEOVision seismic refraction equipment includes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Multiple Geometrics Geode 24-channel
seismographs
Oyo DAS-1 seismograph with 144channel capability
Seismic refraction cables with 10 to 55 ft
takeouts
4.5, 8 and 10 Hz geophones
40 and 100 kg accelerated weight drop
energy sources
Betsy downhole percussion firing rod
Seismic Source and Gisco radio trigger
modules
High-voltage blaster

100 kg Accelerated Weight Drop

Analysis of seismic refraction data depends upon
the complexity of the subsurface seismic velocity
structure. If the subsurface target is planar in nature
then the slope intercept method can be used to
Geometrics Geode Seismographs
model multiple horizontal or dipping planar layers. A
minimum of one end shot is required to model
horizontal layers and reverse end shots are required to model dipping planar layers. If the subsurface target is
undulating and exhibits an abrupt velocity increase (e.g. basement surface) then layer based analysis routines
such as the generalized reciprocal method, delay time method, time-term method, plus-minus method and
wavefront method are required to model subsurface velocity structure. These methods generally require a
minimum of 5 to 7 shot points per spread (end shots, off end shots and a center shot). If subsurface velocity
structure is complex
and cannot be
adequately modeled
using layer-based
modeling techniques
(e.g., complex
weathering profile in
bedrock, numerous
lateral velocity
variations), then
tomographic inversion
techniques are best
suited to model the
seismic refraction
data. These
techniques require a
high shot density
(typically every 2 to 6
stations/ geophones).

Seismic Refraction Survey to Map Bedrock Rippability

1124 Olympic Drive, Corona, California 92881

ph 951-549-1234

fx 951-549-1236

www.geovision.com

 GEOVision maintains several software
packages to model seismic refraction data
including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Firstpix™ by Interpex, Ltd.
IXrefraX by Interpex ,Ltd.
Viewseis™ by Viewlog Systems, Ltd.
Refract by Geogiga
Seisimager™ by Geometrics,
Inc./Oyo Corporation
Rayfract™ by Intelligent Resources,
Inc.
SeisOpt™ Pro by Optim LLC

These software packages allow processing of
seismic refraction data using the following
layer based and smooth velocity model
techniques:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Generalized reciprocal method
(GRM)
Reciprocal method/delay time
method
Time-Term method
Plus-Minus method
Wavefront method
Monte Carlo based inversion
Delta t-V tomographic inversion
Wavepath Eikonal traveltime
tomographic inversion
Nonlinear traveltime tomographic
analysis

Seismic Refraction Survey to Map Bedrock Fault

Seismic Refraction Survey to Map Depth to Groundwater (200 ft deep) and Bedrock (500 to 600 ft deep) as part of
a Groundwater Resources Investigation. Energy Source Consisted of XLR8 2700 lb Accelerated Weight Drop.
Data modeled using Nonlinear Traveltime Tomographic Analysis with a Layer-Based Starting Model.

1124 Olympic Drive, Corona, California 92881

ph 951-549-1234

fx 951-549-1236

www.geovision.com

 Drilling Shot Holes for Explosive Seismic Refraction Survey

Loading Explosive Charge

Seismic Refraction Imaging of Complex Geologic Structure consisting of Tertiary Volcanic Rocks and
Basement Rocks Thrust over Tertiary Sediments and Basement Complex. Small Explosive Charges used as
the Energy Source and Data Modeled using Wavepath Eikonal Traveltime Tomographic Inversion.

Seismic Refraction Survey to Characterize a Landslide

1124 Olympic Drive, Corona, California 92881

ph 951-549-1234

fx 951-549-1236

www.geovision.com

 Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

APPENDIX E
Laboratory Test Results

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-09-09

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-09-10

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

Note:

RE G-01 PM040

quarry wall

Sample Depth:
Brown Silt

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

1

LIQUID LIMIT

2

Number of Blows
Container ID

1

2

3

36

27

16

P8

F1

T38

T21

S5

4

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

32.80

30.40

50.30

54.50

50.90

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

29.80

27.80

46.30

49.60

46.30

Weight of Container

grams

12.40

12.40

25.80

25.50

25.70

* Moisture Weight

grams

3.00

2.60

4.00

4.90

4.60

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

17.40

15.40

20.50

24.10

20.60

* Moisture Content

%

17.2

16.9

19.5

20.3

22.3

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Liquid Limit (%)

Plastic Limit

17

Liquid Limit

21

Plasticity Index

4

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

ML

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-08-26

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-08-31

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

G-01 PM047

Note:

quarry wall

Sample Depth:
Reddish Brown Clayey Silt

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

1

LIQUID LIMIT

2

Number of Blows
Container ID

1

2

3

35

26

15

P8

F1

T38

N21

S5

4

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

24.00

23.90

53.60

53.50

51.20

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

22.00

21.80

48.20

47.70

45.50

Weight of Container

grams

12.40

12.40

25.80

25.50

25.70

* Moisture Weight

grams

2.00

2.10

5.40

5.80

5.70

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

9.60

9.40

22.40

22.20

19.80

* Moisture Content

%

24.1

26.1

28.8

20.8

22.3

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Liquid Limit (%)

Plastic Limit

22

Liquid Limit

26

Plasticity Index

4

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

ML

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-08-26

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-08-31

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

SK-01 PT-06

Sample Depth:

1.3ft to 2.3 ft

Note:
Pale Brown Silty Sand

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

LIQUID LIMIT

1

2

1

2

3

4

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

Number of Blows
Container ID
Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

Weight of Container

grams

* Moisture Weight

grams

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

* Moisture Content

%

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

Plastic Limit

NP

Liquid Limit

NP

Plasticity Index

NP

40

50
60
Liquid Limit (%)

70

80

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

90

100

SM

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0012:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2 in

100%

1 1/2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PM040

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

2μ

G-01

quarry wall

22

0

ML

1%

20%

79%

26%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0012:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2 in

100%

1 1/2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PM047

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

2μ

G-01

quarry wall

26

5

SM

1%

53%

46%

14%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

1 1/2 in

2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PT-02

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

BK-01

8.5-9.5

-

-

GW

66%

29%

4%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

1 1/2 in

2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PT-03

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

BK-01

3.1-4.5

-

-

SM

15%

65%

20%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

# 200

#80
# 100

# 50

#40

# 30

# 16

#8
# 10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2in

1 1/2 in

3 in

6 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol Boring No.
BK-01

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

PT-05

4ft-5ft

-

-

GW

58%

23%

4%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

  ERY LABORATORIES
di/IIt/E?pt?jit/t?fjf Qirr?rgr?gfn/ 

78/ E. Washington Boulevard. Los Ange/es, 9002/ 745?5333 0 Fax 749-7232

September 9, 2015 SEL File No.: 43246-1
SEL Report No.: 

Tetra Tech Bas

1360 Valley Vista Drive

Diamond Bar, California 91765
Attention: Mr. Jeff Geraci

RE: 197-2015-0112:200
Box Elder County, Utah

Gentlemen:

In compliance with your request and authorization, Smith?Emery Laboratories had completed testing of
two (2) samples one ?quartzite mix aggregate PM045 and one quartzite cobbles for degradation
ASTM C131 and ASTM C535, specific gravity ASTM C127, soundness by sodium sulfate ASTM C88,
and sieve analysis ASTM C136.

Attached are tests data and particle size distribution in plates no. A and B.
Test results are as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REPORT OF TEST
Date Sampled: 8/11?14/15 Date Received: 9/1/15
Source: Quartzite talus quarry Date Tested: 9/2/15
Sieve Analysis ASTM Cl36-06
RESULTS
Sieve Size US. Std. cumulative percentage passing
PM045
1/1/z? 6 41
3/8? 5 28
No.4 2.6 1.8

 

 

 

 

 

Note: Manually crushed using sledge hammer.

Page 1 of2

ALL REPORTS ARE SUBMITTED AS HF. CONFIDEN IAI. PROPERTY 01? CI lliN TS. ION FOR PUBLICATION OUR REPORT, CONCLUSIONS. 0R EXTRACTS

FROM OR REGARDING IS PENDING UUR WRITTEN APPROVAL AS A MUTUAL PROTEC HUN CLIENTS, HE PUBLIC AND 

 

SMITH-EMERY Laboratories

791 East Washington, Los Angeles CA 90021
Tel. No. (213) 745-5333; Fax No. (213) 741-8621

September 9, 2015 SEL File No.: 43246-1
Tetra Tech Bas SEL Report N0.: 6-15?9331
PN 197-2015-0112z200, Box Elder County, Utah

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date Received: 9/1/15 Date Tested: 9/2/15
Boring I.D. Depth (ft) Elev. (ft) Remarks
PMOOSA Quarry 4330 talus, quarry
PM045 Surface 4280 talus, SW quarry
Aggregate Quality Tests:
Results UPRR Ballast
Test Method 
PMOOSA PM04S Speci?cation
Oven Dried 2.67 2.64 2.60 min.
Speci?c Gravity ASTM C127-l2 2,68 2.65 NONE
Absorption 0.3 0.5 1.0% max.
Los Angelcs Abrasion ASTM 200 Fe?, 100 rev!? 7 8* 30 max. for
(3131* 01? (3535-12 1000 rev]  revs: 23 292i: Quanzite
Flat NA NA
Flat and Elongated Particles ASTM D4791 by 0
weighted Ave. ratio 3:1; Method A Elongated NA NA 5'0/0 max'
Flat Elongated NA NA
Material Finer Than Sieve #200 (ASTM Cl 17-13) in percentage NA NA 1.0% max.
I 4 -
Cla) Lumps and F1 lable Particles ASTM C142 10 A) by welght NA NA 0.5% max.
(5 cycles)
Soundness by Sodium Sulfate ASTM C88 0.2 1.0 5.0% max. loss

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note: Degradation test is ASTM C131
Should you have any questions regarding the contents of this report, please call.

Respectfully submitted,
TH-EMERY Laboratories
2 
ANGEL TO 
Geotechnical Laboratory Manager
Ac/ac
cc: 2-Addressee

Page 2 of2

 

Client:
Project:

Loca?on:
Materiai 

Source:
Remarks:

Wt. of egg. pass #4 

Laboratories

Sieve Analysis of Coarse and Fine Aggregate
ASTM 8136-06

Tetra Tech 833

 

197-2015-0112:200

 

Box Elder County, UT

 

Ballast Aggregate (Sledge Hammered)

 

Quartz Talus, Quarry

 

Sample tested was break down to sizes by sledge hammer

SEL Report No: (3-15-9331

SEL Fiie No:
Ref.No.:
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Date Tested:
Sampied by:

43246-1

348
8/11/15
9/1/15
22:12?

client

SESF Lab. Rei.No.: PM008A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total wt. of Agg. (9) 22683
593
Individual Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Specification
US standard Weight weight Percent Percent
Sieve Size Retained Retained Retained Passing Lower Upper
I Limit A Limit
3" 0 0 0 100
2 1/2? 1090 1090 4.8 95
2" 8070 9160 40.4 60
1 1/2? 6377 15537 68.5 32
1" 3665 19202 84.7 15
3/ 1227 20429 90.1 10
1/2" 910 21339 94.1 6
318" 284 21623 95.3 5
No.4 464 22087 97.4 3
Pan 593

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage Passing

100

Bailast Particle Size Distribution Report

it

is



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100

 

10

Sieve Sizes (mm)

 

 

 

PLATE Na: A

 

 

Form: Sieve Anaiysis of Coarse and Fine Aggregate

ASTM 013606
Date: 4l5110

 

 

 

 

Client:
Project:
Location:
Material 

Source:
Remarks:

Totai wt. of Agg. 

SMITH-EMERY Laboratories

Sieve Analysis of Coarse and Fine Aggregate
ASTM 0136-06

Tetra Tech Bas
197-2015-0112200
Box Eider County, UT

Quartz TalusBaiiast Aggregate PM045

Quartz Talus. SW Quarry

Sample tested as received
19735

SE. Report No:
SEL File No:
Ref.No.:
Date Sampled:
Date Received:
Date Tested:
Sampled by:

SESF Lab. Ref.No.:

 

 

 

 

6-15-9331

43246-1

349

8114/15

9/1l15

912/1 5

client

PMO45

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wt. of egg. pass #4 358
individual Cumulative Cumulative Cumutative Specification
US standard Weight weight Percent Percent
Sieve Size Retained Retained Retained Passing Lower Upper
I Limit A Limit
1004 1405 7.1 93
1 1/2" 1735 3140 15.9 84
1" 2645 5785 29.3 71
3/4" 2122 7907 40.1 60
1/ 3830 11737 59.5 41
3/8? 2542 14279 72.4 28
No.4 5096 19375 98.2 2
Pan 358
Baliast Particle Size Distribution Report
'111'2?

 

100



 

90

 

 

 

 

80

 

70

 

 

60

Percentage Passing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30

 

 

 

20

 

10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100

 

10

Sieve Sizes (mm)

I PLATE No.: 

1

 

 

 

Form: Sieve Analysis of Coarse and Fine Aggregate

ASTM 0136-06
Date: 405710

 

Promontory Point Landfill
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map

APPENDIX F
Log of Selected Photographs

Project No. BAS 15-99E
October 6, 2015

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-01 DSCN1919: Photo of Test Pit No. PT-01.

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-02 DSCN1932: Test Pit No. PT-02

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-01

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-03 DSCN1981: Test Pit No. PT-03

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-04 DSCN1908: Test Pit No. PT-04

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-02

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-05 DSCN1881: Test Pit No. PT-05

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-06 DSCN1869: Test Pit No. PT-06

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-03

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-07 DSCN1860: Test Pit No. PT-07

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-08 DSCN1849: Test Pit No. PT-08

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-04

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-09 DSCN1845: Test Pit No. PT-09

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

PT-10 DSCN1939: Test Pit No. PT-10

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-05

 Photo Date: 2015-08-11

DSCN1967: Sample location PM-008A at the large quarry on the easterly property boundary.
Backhoe is exposing fresh talus for sampling.

Photo Date: 2015-08-11

DSCN1942: View of large easterly quarry, looking northeast. Highly-fractured strata of the
Late Proterozoic Mutual Formation quartzite exhibit a moderate dip to the southeast. The Mutual
Formation is cut by several faults, some of which are occupied by intrusive dikes.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-06

 Photo Date: 2015-08-10

DSCN1598: Outcrop of Middle and Lower Cambrian Limestone and Shale unit in the northeast
portion of the project site.

Photo Date: 2015-08-10

DSCN1601: Talus deposit downslope of the Limestone and Shale unit exhibiting angular clasts
ranging to approximately 12-inches. The character of the talus is likely a product of high to
intense fracturing of the on-site Paleozoic and Precambrian bedrock.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-07

 Photo Date: 2015-08-10

DSCN1655: Gravel bar of Pleistocene Lake Bonneville at approximately elevation 4,820 ft.
Cobble-sized clasts have developed a coating of desert varnish due to subaerial exposure
during the past ~17ka. Photo was taken in the northwest portion of the site.

Photo Date: 2015-08-10

DSCN1663: Quartzite outcrop of the intensely-fractured Browns Hole Formation exhibiting a
coating of tufa on the order of 6 to 12 inches thick. These freshwater calcium carbonate
deposits are a common feature on outcrops that were once submerged by Lake Bonneville.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-08

 Photo Date: 2015-08-12

DSCN2005: Outcrop of Geertsen Canyon Quartzite in southeasterly portion of the site.
At this location the quartzite is laminated to cross-laminated to conglomeratic, and highly
fractured. Several tight folds are evident along with brecciated zones, indicative of semiductile shear.
Photo Date: 2015-08-12

DSCN2009: Outcrop of Geertsen Canyon Quartzite in southeasterly portion of the site.
Quartzite is more vitreous and massive than in the previous image, and intensely fractured.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-09

 Photo Date: 2015-08-13

DSCN2076: Outcrops of the Mutual Formation quartzite as seen on the westerly side of the
valley near the top of the large quarry. The exposures occur as flatirons with primary foliation
(bedding) dipping toward the southeast. The formation is highly- to intensely-fractured.

Photo Date: 2015-08-13

DSCN2074: Flatiron surface of the Mutual Formation quartzite within approximately 25 feet of
the top of the large quarry. Unit is highly- to intensely-fractured. The photo shows one of several
open fractures striking roughly N-S and dipping 63o west. Fracture has likely opened as a result
of blasting activity at the descending quarry face to the west (Morrison-Knudsen, 1959?).

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-10

 Photo Date: 2015-08-13

DSCN2098: Outcrop of Geertsen Canyon Quartzite near the southeast entry gate. This
exposure is conglomeratic and contains numerous pebbles of vein quartz.

Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2110: Smaller quarry near the site’s southwest boundary exposes lacustrine deposits
of Lake Bonneville. Cemented conglomerate is seen overlying a partially-cemented silty marl.
The silty marl was sampled at this location as PM 040.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-11

 Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2131: Pleistocene lacustrine sediments of Lake Bonneville unconformably overlie
moderately southeast-dipping quartzite beds of the Mutual Formation where exposed in one
of the smaller quarries in the southwest portion of the site.

Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2132: Talus from the Mutual Formation exposure seen in DSCN2131 was sampled for
ballast quality screening (sample location PM 045). The quartzite at this location is relatively
weathered, as compared with that exposed in the large quarry on the west side.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-12

 Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2138: Silty marl exposed in one of the quarries at the site’s southwest margin. The marl
is 2 to 5 feet thick, and occurs within higher-energy pulses of the Bonneville lacustrine
sequence.

Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2139: Sample location PM 047 (Silty Marl). This fine-grained unit is a cemented
low-plasticity clayey silt; and a low-energy deposit within the Lacustrine Sediments of Lake
Bonneville (Pleistocene).

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-13

 Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2121: Intensely-fractured quartzite of the Browns Hole Formation in the southerly
portion of the site, near the top of one of the smaller quarries.

Photo Date: 2015-08-14

DSCN2168: Panorama of the large quarry at the westerly property boundary. Rocks exposed
at the quarry face belong to the Late Proterozoic (Precambrian) Mutual Formation. Reddishbrown staining is associated with numerous faults/fractures that cut the exposure, several
along which have been intruded by igneous dikes. This brittle tectonism likely occurred
during the Late Mesozoic - Early Cenozoic Sevier Orogeny, as this portion of the Promontory
Mountains occupies the upper plate of the Willard Thrust.

LOG OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Geotechnical Data Summary and
Preliminary Geoloic Map
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT

Job No.

BAS 15-99E

Date

September 2015

Drawn by
Page No.

J Geraci
F-14

 S-3 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
(SEPTEMBER 2016)

Geotechnical Engineering ● Engineering Geology

Geotechnical Engineering Report
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL DEVELOPMENT
Box Elder County, Utah

Prepared for:

Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
c/o Pacific West
1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119

Prepared by:

Tetra Tech BAS
1360 Valley Vista Drive
Diamond Bar, California 91765
September 30, 2016
Project No. BAS 15-99E

 Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016
Eric Urbani
Managing Partner
Strata Renewable Resources, LLC.
c/o Pacific West
1515 West 2200 South, Suite C
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL DEVELOPMENT
Box Elder County, Utah
Dear Mr. Urbani:
Tetra Tech BAS is pleased to submit the results of our geotechnical evaluation for certain infrastructure
elements of the proposed Promontory Point Landfill located in Box Elder County, Utah. The purpose
of this study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions and to provide recommendations for the design
and construction of the proposed improvements at the site, including about 5,300 feet long rail spur
line, and administration and maintenance shop buildings. This report also presents evaluation of
excavatbility of bedrock materials within the proposed initial landfill cell.
This report includes a brief description of the proposed development, discussions regarding previous
studies, current field and laboratory investigative efforts, subsurface conditions, and geotechnical
conclusions and recommendations for design and construction of the proposed improvements. The
appendices to the report include logs of borings and test pits, results of laboratory tests, and results of
slope stability analyses.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide our professional services on this project. If you have any
questions regarding this report or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.

Respectfully submitted,
Tetra Tech BAS

Yonglang Li, Ph.D.
Project Geotechnical Specialist

Jeffery Geraci
Geologic Specialist

Peter Skopek, Ph.D.
Principal Geotechnical Specialist

Caleb Moore, P.E.
Division Engineer

Distribution: Addressee (4 hardcopies + pdf by email eric@stratarr.com)
Filename: Promontory Point Lanfill GEO RPT 2016-09-30.docx

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: 909-860-7777 * Fax: 909-860-8017

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1 

2. 

SCOPE OF SERVICES .......................................................................................................... 2 

3. 

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................... 4 

4. 

PREVIOUS STUDY............................................................................................................... 5 

5. 

FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING................................................. 6 
5.1. 
5.2. 

6. 

SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ...................................................... 9 
6.1. 
6.2. 
6.3. 

7. 

FAULTING ...................................................................................................................... 11 
LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ............................................................................................ 11 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 12 
8.1. 
8.2. 
8.3. 
8.4. 
8.5. 
8.6. 
8.7. 
8.8. 
8.9. 
8.10. 
8.11. 
8.12. 
8.13. 
8.14. 
8.15. 

9. 

SITE GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 9 
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 9 
SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER ......................................................................... 10 

SEISMIC HAZARDS ........................................................................................................... 11 
7.1. 
7.2. 

8. 

FIELD EXPLORATION ........................................................................................................ 6 
LABORATORY TESTING .................................................................................................... 8 

GENERAL ....................................................................................................................... 12 
CLEARING AND GRUBBING ............................................................................................ 12 
SITE PREPARATION ........................................................................................................ 12 
TEMPORARY SLOPE AND TRENCH EXCAVATIONS .......................................................... 15 
EXCAVATIBILITY AT INITIAL LANDFILL CELL ................................................................ 15 
RAIL SPUR ALIGNMENT ................................................................................................. 16 
SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS ...................................................................................... 21 
SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................... 21 
CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE ....................................................................................... 22 
DRAINAGE CONTROL AROUND BUILDINGS .................................................................... 25 
RETAINING WALLS ........................................................................................................ 26 
CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ............................................................................................. 28 
ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTIONS ................................................................... 29 
ALL-WEATHER ACCESS ROAD ...................................................................................... 30 
SOIL CORROSION ........................................................................................................... 31 

GENERAL SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 33 

10.  DESIGN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING ........................................... 35 
10.1.  PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS .......................................................................................... 35 
10.2.  CONSTRUCTION MONITORING........................................................................................ 35 
11.  LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 36 
12.  SELECTED REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 37 

i

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Plates
Plate 1 – Project Location Map
Plate 2 – Project Layout and Boring Location Map
Plate 3 – Proposed Rail Spur Line Section
Plate 4 – Geologic Map
Plate 5 – Regional Faulting Map
Appendices
Appendix A – Logs of Exploratory Borings and Test Pits
Appendix B – Results of Laboratory Testing
Appendix C – Slope Stability and Permanent Seismic Deformation Analyses

ii

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
1.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

INTRODUCTION

This report presents the results of Tetra Tech BAS’ geotechnical engineering evaluation and
recommendations for design and construction of certain infrastructure elements of the proposed
Promontory Point Landfill located north of the Lucin Cutoff of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
in Box Elder County, Utah. The approximate location of the proposed development is shown on
Figure 1 – Project Location Map.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the site and to provide
recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed rail spur and associated
improvements. Additionally, concurrent to the field investigation for the proposed rail spur, field
and engineering studies were performed to evaluate the subsurface conditions at the proposed
administration and maintenance shop buildings and to evaluate relative bedrock depth and
excavatibility of bedrock materials within the proposed initial landfill cell.
The geotechnical conclusions and recommendations presented herein are developed primarily
based on a field and laboratory investigation performed in July 2016 and on a field reconnaissance
in August 2015 (Tetra Tech BAS, 2015). This report summarizes the collected data and presents
our findings, and geotechnical conclusions and recommendations. This report is intended to be a
self-contained design and permitting document for the subject elements of the project.

1

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
2.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Tetra Tech BAS’ scope of services for this project consisted of the following tasks:


Review of available background data, including in-house and Client-provided geotechnical
data from nearby projects, geotechnical literature, geologic maps, and seismic hazard maps
relevant to the subject site.



Notification of Blue Stakes of Utah at least 2 full days prior to drilling for the clearance of
buried on-site utilities.



A subsurface evaluation, including the excavating, logging, and sampling of 7 exploratory
boring to depths ranging from about 6.5 to 51.5 feet, and 13 test pits to depths ranging from
about 9 to 15 feet below the existing grade. Soil samples obtained from the borings were
transported to a geotechnical laboratory for visual classification and testing.



Laboratory testing of selected samples recovered from the borings to evaluate geotechnical
engineering properties of the on-site soils.



Engineering evaluation of the geotechnical data collected to develop geotechnical
recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed structures. This work
including the following items:















An evaluation of general subsurface conditions and description of types, distribution, and
engineering characteristics of subsurface materials.
An evaluation of the liquefaction potential and dynamic settlement of the on-site granular
materials.
A qualitative evaluation of the suitability of on-site soils for the support of structures.
A qualitative evaluation of the bedrock depth and excavatibility within the initial landfill
cell.
Recommendations for design and construction of alignment cuts and earthen embankment
and associated box culvert for the proposed rail spur line.
Recommendations for design of conventional footing foundation system including
allowable bearing capacity, lateral resistance, and settlement estimates for the proposed
buildings and overhead excavator.
Recommendations for design of slab-on-grade for the proposed buildings.
Determination of seismic design parameters in accordance with the 2012 International
Building Code.
Recommendations for design and construction of retaining walls including allowable
bearing capacity, lateral earth pressure, and settlement estimates.
Recommendations for design and construction of concrete culvert.
Recommendations for asphalt cement concrete pavement and all-weather pavement
sections at the site.
General site grading recommendations.
An evaluation of the corrosion potential of the on-site soils to buried concrete and steel.

2

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development


Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Preparation of this report, including reference maps and illustrations, a summary of the
collected data, conclusions, and geotechnical recommendations for the design and
construction of the proposed project.

3

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
3.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND SITE DESCRIPTION

The proposed rail spur is located immediately north of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) at Lucin
Cutoff at Promontory Point in Box Elder County, Utah, which is about 26 miles east of Ogden.
Currently, the project site is an open field sparsely covered with dry vegetation. The approximate
location of the project site is shown on Figure 1 – Project Location Map.
The proposed improvements at the site involves construction of certain infrastructure elements of
the Promontory Point Landfill, including about 5,300 feet long rail spur, an initial landfill cell,
administrative and maintenance shop buildings, access road, and associated improvements. The
layout of the project components is presented in Figure 2 – Project Layout and Boring Location
Map.
Based on the plans provided by Wilson & Company, we understand that the proposed rail spur is
designated as “Track C” and includes construction of an embankment fill and cut slopes, an
overhead excavator, a culvert or similar drainage structure, and flexible pavement at vehicle track
crossings. The cross-section along the center line of the proposed rail spur provided by Wilson &
Company is included in Plate 3.
The initial landfill cell is located to the north of the proposed rail spur. At the beginning of the
investigation, two initial landfill cells were considered and investigated. Eventually, however,
only the northwestern landfill cell investigated by test pits TP-114 through 119 was selected, and
the alternative southeastern landfill cell investigated by test pits TP-107 through 113 was
abandoned. Logs of test pits excavated in both cells are provided in Appendix A for complete
reference.
Administrative and maintenance shop buildings are also proposed in this phase of the work.
Details of the buildings are not available as of this writing. It is anticipated that the buildings will
be supported on conventional footing foundations with a slab-on-grade construction.
A septic system is proposed and the suitability of the leach field was evaluated by Bear River
Health Department. In this study, test pit TP-106 was excavated in the proposed leach field for
evaluation of subsurface soil conditions. Log of TP-106 is presented in Appendix A for complete
reference.

4

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
4.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

PREVIOUS STUDY

A previous study was conducted in the area for the landfill permit application by Applied
Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc. (AGEC, 2003). Four monitoring wells were
developed along the southwest property boundary of the project area as part of that study. MW-1
is located approximately 1,100 feet northeast of the proposed rail spur’s bifurcation point
(Centerline Station 0+00), MW-2 is located approximately 365 feet east of Station 20+00, MW-3
is located approximately 140 feet southwest of Station 27+20, and MW-4 is located approximately
150 feet southwest of Station 36+00. The approximate locations of these monitoring wells are
shown on Plate 2.
Tetra Tech BAS conducted a geologic reconnaissance in August 2015 (Tetra Tech BAS, 2015)
that included 6 seismic refraction tomography lines, 11 test pits, and limited geologic mapping of
the site. One of the seismic refraction lines (SL-02) crosses the proposed rail spur alignment at
approximately Station 30+00. The seismic refraction line SL-01 is roughly parallel to the proposed
rail spur alignment, and located approximately 1,600 feet north of Station 0+00. The approximate
locations of the seismic refraction tomography lines are shown on Plate 2.

5

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
5.
5.1.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Field Exploration

The subsurface soil and groundwater conditions along the proposed rail spur line alignment were
explored on July 20 and July 21, 2016 and included the drilling, logging, and sampling of 7 borings
denoted B-100, B-101, B-101P, and B-102 through B-105 using a truck-mounted hollow stem
auger drill rig convertible to mud-rotary drilling. Mud-rotary technique was used at B-102.
Additionally, one hand-excavated pit, denoted HP-121, was excavated in the inundated low area
near the south terminus of the proposed rail spur that was inaccessible to the drill rig. The boring
locations were selected based on input from Wilson & Company and accessibility for the drill rig.
Prior to starting the field exploration program, a field reconnaissance was conducted to observe
surface conditions and mark locations of the planned borings. Blue Stakes of Utah was notified
of the boring locations at least 2 full days prior to drilling.
Thirteen test pits (Nos. TP-107 through TP-119) were excavated within the considered initial
landfill cells for the purpose of evaluating relative excavatibility of earth materials. Attempts were
made to excavate through bedrock, wherever encountered, in order to understand the bedrock’s
relative excavatibility. An additional test pit (TP-120) was excavated southwest of the proposed
administrative and maintenance shop buildings in order to observe subsurface characteristics in
the area of the seismic refraction line SL-01. Test pit TP-106 was excavated in the area of the
proposed septic system leach field near the proposed administrative and maintenance shop
buildings.
Both driven ring-type and bulk samples were retrieved at selected depths during drilling. The
driven samples were collected utilizing a California-type sampler driven by a 140-pound hammer
with a drop of 30 inches. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) was also performed using the same
hammer and drop as for the ring-type samples in general accordance with ASTM D1586. Bulk
and grab samples were obtained from selected test pits.
All borings and test pits were surface-logged by a geologist who also prepared the recovered
samples for further classification and laboratory testing. At the completion of drilling all borings
and test pits were backfilled with cuttings and tamped.
The approximate locations of the borings and test pits are indicated on Plate 2 - Project Layout and
Boring Location Map. Logs of all borings and test pits are included in Appendix A. A summary
of borings and test pits is presented in the following Table 1.

6

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Location / Purpose

Rail Spur
Alignment

Septic System Leach Field

Initially Considered Landfill
Cell (Southeastern)

Initial Landfill Cell
(Northwestern)

Near Seismic Refraction
Line SL-01

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Table 1
Summary of Field Exploration
Exploration
Boring /
Depth
Test Pit No.
(feet)

Remarks

B-100

11.5

HP-121

3.6

Hand-excavated test pit

B-101

17

Refusal encountered

B-101P

16.8

Refusal encountered

B-102

31.5

B-103

29

B-104

21.5

B-105

30.3

Refusal encountered

Refusal encountered
Used by Bear River Health
Department for permitting of the
on-site septic system

TP-106
TP-107

5

TP-108

7

TP-109

18.5

TP-110

8

TP-111

2

TP-112

5

TP-113

6

TP-114

11

TP-115

10

TP-116

15

TP-117

9

TP-118

15

TP-119

10

TP-120

11

7

This landfill cell location was
not selected but logs of test pits
are included in Appendix A for
complete reference

Calibration of seismic refraction
line SL-01

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
5.2.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Laboratory Testing

Laboratory tests were performed on selected samples to aid in the classification of soils and to
evaluate pertinent engineering properties of the foundation soils. The following tests were
performed:







In-situ Moisture Content and Dry Density;
Grain Size Distribution;
Atterberg Limits;
Consolidation;
Direct Shear; and
Soil corrosivity tests.

Testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM Standards. Results of all
laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. For ease of referral to the soil profile, laboratory
results are also presented on the logs of borings and test pits in Appendix A.

8

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
6.
6.1.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

SITE GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Site Geology

The project site is situated at the southerly end of Promontory Point, which is a peninsula extending
southward from the northerly shore of the Great Salt Lake. The Promontory Mountains occupy
this peninsula, forming one of the mountain blocks of the Basin and Range geomorphic province.
The Great Salt Lake is a present-day remnant of the ancient Lake Bonneville.
Much of the proposed landfill site is occupied by a broad valley containing Pleistocene lacustrine
deposits of the ancient Lake Bonneville, and flanked by Late Proterozoic and Early Paleozoic
metasedimentary outcrops. The slopes of the valley drains from northeast to southwest at an
approximate grade of 7 percent. Some of the surrounding outcrops (where once submerged by
Lake Bonneville) possess a partially-eroded coating of tufa, observed to be as much as 1 foot thick.
A geologic map is shown in Figure 4.
6.2.

Subsurface Conditions

Subsurface materials encountered at the project site during the Tetra Tech BAS’ field
investigations and as reported by AGEC (2003) include fill (Qaf), alluvium (Qal), Pleistocene
lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville (Qla), and metasedimentary bedrock. Descriptions of these
materials are presented in the boring and test pit logs contained in Appendix A.
6.2.1. Fill
Fill (Qaf) on the order of 8 feet thick was identified in Boring B-100 consisting of loose to medium
dense poorly graded sand, silty sand and gravel, and overlying quartzite bedrock. This fill is
interpreted as dredged spoils associated with the former evaporative salt mining operation at
Saline. Seven feet of fill was encountered in Boring B-105 consisting of loose to medium dense
poorly graded sand, silty sand and gravel; interpreted to result from mining activity in the adjacent
borrow pit. Fill of approximately 3.5 feet thick was also encountered in the hand-excavated pit
HP-121, at the proposed rail spur Station 10+55, and was observed to consist of 2.5 feet of salt
over 2 inches of organic mud and approximately 1 foot of poorly graded sand above weathered
quartzite bedrock. The sandy fill at this location is interpreted as local dredge spoils at the base of
an excavated basin associated with the former salt mining activity. The thin organic mud and salt
are included with the fill unit, although they are deposits that formed locally within the dredged
pond.
6.2.2. Quaternary Alluvium
Quaternary alluvium was encountered within Boring B-105 from 7 to 23 feet deep, consisting of
medium dense poorly graded sand and fine well graded sand. Alluvium was also encountered
within Boring B-101/B-101P within the upper 8 feet, consisting of medium dense poorly graded
sand interpreted as Holocene beach deposits of Great Salt Lake. Other occurrences of alluvium
within the project site include ephemeral drainage channels and fans.

9

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

6.2.3. Pleistocene Lacustrine Deposits of Lake Bonneville
Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville (Qla) make up the majority of the project site.
These deposits were encountered in Borings B-101 through B-105 as well as in all of the test pits
except for TP-108. These deposits consist of silty sand, silty sand with gravel, poorly graded sand,
poorly graded sand with gravel, sandy silt, clay with silt, silty gravel, poorly graded gravel and
well graded gravel. The units exhibit variable degrees of carbonate cementation and all of the
units observed exhibit reaction to mild hydrochloric acid.
6.2.4. Metasedimentary Bedrock
Metasedimentary bedrock outcrops occur on the easterly and westerly portions of the proposed
landfill site and were identified based on mapping by Crittenden (1988). These rocks include the
Late Proterozoic Mutual Formation (Zm), the Late Proterozoic Browns Hole Formation (Zbh), the
Lower Cambrian Geertsen Canyon Quartzite (Cgc) and an unnamed “limestone and shale” unit of
the Middle and Lower Cambrian (Cls). Quartzite bedrock was encountered in Borings B-100,
B-101, B-101P, B-102; and in Test Pits TP-107, TP-108, TP-110, and in TP-111 through TP-113.
Metasedimentary bedrock was likely encountered in Boring B-105 based on driving resistance,
although no sample was recovered.
6.3.

Surface Water and Groundwater

Surface water was observed within the existing dredged low area north of the UPRR at an elevation
of about 4,205 feet (between Station 7+80 and 12+90 of the proposed rail spur). This low area is
interpreted to be a former salt evaporator as part of the Saline salt works (USGS, 1968). The
hydrograph at Saline had recorded an elevation for the Great Salt Lake of 4,190 feet for the period
from July 19 through July 21, 2016 (USGS, 2016); which is approximately 15 feet below the water
surface within the existing dredged low area north of the UPRR.
Groundwater was encountered in Boring B-100 at a depth of about 6.5 feet below the existing
grade (i.e., elevation of about 4,206 feet). Groundwater was not encountered in the remaining
borings and test pits. The groundwater elevations encountered at the site are generally consistent
with the groundwater elevation range of 4,204 to 4,206 feet recorded at the monitoring wells
MW- 1 through MW-4 along the southerly site boundary (AGEC, 2003).
Based on the above discussion, surface water less than one foot depth was encountered within the
low dredged area along the proposed rail spur alignment. For the remaining portions of the rail
spur alignment, groundwater is anticipated to be at least 15 to 50 feet below the existing grades.
Groundwater within the proposed initial landfill cell and administrative and maintenance shop
buildings is anticipated to be at greater depths.
It should be noted that surface water and groundwater levels may fluctuate due to seasonal
variations, rainfall, irrigation, or other factors. Evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of
our services.

10

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
7.
7.1.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

SEISMIC HAZARDS
Faulting

There are no mapped active faults extending through the project site. The nearest mapped active
fault is the Great Salt Lake fault zone, with the Promontory Section located approximately
0.5 miles southwest of the site, the Fremont Island Section located about 2.5 miles southwest of
the site, and the Antelope Island Section located approximately 15 miles south of the site. The
Great Salt Lake fault zone is a major, generally north-trending, steeply west-dipping zone of
Holocene normal faulting that was identified from seismic reflection profiling, and has a total
length of 64 miles (Black, et. al., 2004a,b,c). Dinter and Pechmann (2014) determined a recurrence
interval of about 2800 to 5600 years for the Great Salt Lake fault. The Wasatch fault zone is the
most tectonically active structure in Utah with abundant evidence of moving during Holocene time
(Black, et. al., 2004d,e). The Wasatch fault zone (Brigham City section) is located about 25 miles
northeast of the project site, and the Weber section is located approximately 27 miles east of the
site (see Figure 5).
7.2.

Liquefaction Potential

Liquefaction of soils can be caused by ground shaking during earthquakes. Research and historical
data indicate that loose, relatively clean granular soils and low plasticity silts are susceptible to
liquefaction and dynamic settlement, whereas the stability of the majority of clayey silts, silty clays
and clays are not typically adversely affected by ground shaking. Liquefaction is generally known
to occur in saturated or near-saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower than about 50 feet.
The Pleistocene lacustrine deposits of Lake Bonneville comprise the dominant subsoil unit at the
site and generally consist of medium dense to very dense, partially-cemented sand and gravel with
occasional interbedded medium-stiff to very-stiff fine-grained silty and clayey zones. Alluvium
was encountered in the borings only at B-105 and consists of poorly graded to well graded medium
dense sand and sandy silt.
Based on the age, consistency and cementation of the on-site subsurface soils, the potential for
liquefaction at the site is considered to be minimal.

11

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
8.
8.1.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General

Based upon the results of the field exploration and engineering analyses, it is Tetra Tech BAS’
opinion that the proposed improvements at the site are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint,
provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into the design plans
and implemented during construction. Both fill and cut slopes along the proposed rail spur
alignment should be constructed at an inclination of 2(H):1(V) or flatter, although at specific
locations, where bedrock or similar competent material are present, steeper inclination may be
permissible for cut slopes.
The administrative and maintenance shop buildings and overhead excavator may be supported on
conventional footing foundations established on competent engineered fill or native soils.
For the anticipated average excavation depths, excavation at the initial landfill cell is considered
feasible with conventional grading equipment. It is notable that the bedrock within the initially
also considered landfill cell location explored with test pits TP-107 through TP-113 is not
considered rippable for grades deeper than 6 feet. This initially considered landfill cell location
was abandoned during the design process.
Based on the laboratory testing, the on-site soils are not expected to cause injurious sulfate attack
on concrete with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 2,500 psi. Based on results of
laboratory testing and our local experience with similar soils, the on-site soils are expected to
exhibit moderate corrosion potential to ferrous metals. The design recommendations presented
below reflect these conditions.
The design recommendations presented below are based on Tetra Tech BAS’ current
understanding of the project. Once the project configuration is finalized and the design is
complete, Tetra Tech BAS should review the plans and specifications to evaluate if the
geotechnical design recommendations have been incorporated as intended.
8.2.

Clearing and Grubbing

The surface should be cleared of any pavement, structures, vegetation, trash and debris, prior to
commencement of any earthwork. Any subterranean installations not to be preserved, such as
pipes, utility collectors, tanks, etc., should be abandoned in accordance with applicable regulations.
8.3.

Site Preparation

In order to create uniform bearing conditions for the proposed development the following is
recommended:


Earthen embankment for the proposed rail spur line: Site preparation for earthen embankment
should be performed as discussed in Section 8.6.

12

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016



Building Pads: The building pads should be overexcavated and recompacted to a depth of at
least 2 feet below the subgrade, or to uniform acceptable soils, whichever is deeper. To the
extent practicable, the zone of overexcavation should extend outside the perimeter of the
building areas for a horizontal distance of at least 3 feet.



Concrete flatwork: The footprints of the concrete flatwork should be overexcavated and
recompacted to a depth of at least 2 feet below the bottom of the slab, 2 feet below the existing
grade, or to uniform acceptable soils, whichever is deeper. To the extent practicable, the zone
of overexcavation should extend outside the perimeter of the building areas for a horizontal
distance of at least 2 feet.



Flexible Pavement Areas should be overexcavated and recompacted to a depth of at least
1.5 feet below the proposed subgrade elevation, or to uniform acceptable soils, whichever is
deeper. To the extent practicable, the zone of overexcavation should extend a horizontal
distance of at least 2 feet beyond the outside perimeter of the pavement.



Retaining Wall Foundations: The footing areas should be overexcavated and recompacted to
a depth of at least one foot below the bottom of the foundation, or to uniform acceptable soils,
whichever is deeper. To the extent practicable, the zone of overexcavation should extend
outside the perimeter of the footing for a horizontal distance of at least 2 feet.



Disturbed soils at structural and non-structural areas will likely occur during site grading.
These soils should be overexcavated and recompacted to the total depth of the disturbed
material.

The exposed subgrade or overexcavation grade, should be probed and accepted by the
Geotechnical Engineer, and the soils should be scarified to a depth of about 6 inches, and
compacted at a minimum of 110 percent of optimum moisture content to at least 93 percent of the
maximum dry density, as evaluated by the latest version of ASTM D1557.
Localized zones of loose and/or unstable soils may be encountered during the grading operations
at the subgrade level and should be overexcavated and recompacted. If loose/soft/wet areas are
encountered that are not practical to be excavated and processed, Table 2 below provides options
for stabilizing the subgrade. The objective is to produce at least 3 feet (2 feet) for foundations
(pavements) of competent fill to bridge over the impacted area. The specific type of remediation
and associated area limits will need to be evaluated in the field by a representative of Tetra Tech
BAS.
All fill placement associated with the replacement of the overexcavated soils, and fill placed to
achieve finish grade or subgrade should be moisture-conditioned to at least 110 percent of the
optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density, as
evaluated by the latest version of ASTM D1557. The upper one foot of soils below pavements
and any flatwork should be processed and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry
density (ASTM D1557).

13

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Excavated on-site soils may be re-used as compacted fill provided they are free of organics,
deleterious materials, debris and particles over 3 inches in largest dimension. Locally, particles
up to 6 inches in largest dimension may be incorporated in the fill soils based on specific approval
and placement recommendations provided by the Geotechnical Engineer during grading.
Table 2
Conceptual Options for Handling Unstable Materials at the Excavated Subgrade


Areas where the soils are
soft and/or unstable at the
excavation subgrade







Larger areas where the
soils are excessively soft
and/or unstable






Overexcavate at least 3 feet for foundations, 2 feet for pavement
areas
Stabilize the soft subgrade by working open-graded aggregate
material (typically 3/4” or 1.5” crushed rock, coarser for softer
subgrade) at least 4 to 6 inches into the soil.
Place non-woven geotextile, Mirafi 180N or approved equivalent,
over the stabilized subgrade.
Place and compact well-graded fill (e.g., AB, CMB) or general
approved backfill material to specified compaction over the
geotextile.
Overexcavate at least 3 feet for foundations, 2 feet for pavement
areas
Improve the soft subgrade by working in open-graded aggregate
material as much as possible/practical into the subgrade.
Place non-woven geotextile, Mirafi 180N or approved equivalent,
over the exposed soil.
Place at least 8 inches (12-18 inches preferred) of well graded
aggregate material (e.g., AB, CMB); only reasonably achievable
compaction is required.
Place non-woven geotextile, Mirafi 180N or approved equivalent,
over the aggregate layer.
Place and compact fill to specified compaction over the
geotextile.

In the event that any soil materials (including backfill or base course materials) are imported to the
site, such soils should be sampled, tested, and approved by Tetra Tech BAS prior to arrival onsite. In general, any soils imported to the site for use as fill should be predominantly granular and
have an Expansion Index less than 50. Additional recommendations for site grading are provided
in the “General Site Grading Recommendations” section of this report.

14

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
8.4.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Temporary Slope and Trench Excavations

With exception of medium-sized quartzite bedrock, the on-site soils are not expected to pose
unusual excavation difficulties, and therefore, conventional earth-moving equipment may be used.
Localized sloughing/raveling of exposed soil intervals should be anticipated. All trench
excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA regulations. The on-site soils may be
considered a Type C soil, as defined the current OSHA soil classification.
Unsurcharged excavations: Sides of temporary, unsurcharged excavations less than 20 feet deep
should be sloped back at an inclination of 1.5(H):1(V) or flatter. Where space for sloped sides is
not available, shoring will be necessary. This office can provide appropriate shoring
recommendations, once the excavation layout is known.
Surcharge setback recommendations: Stockpiled (excavated) materials should be placed no closer
than 4 feet from the top of the trench. A greater setback may be necessary when considering
surcharge loads such as heavy vehicles, concrete trucks and cranes. Tetra Tech BAS should be
advised of such heavy vehicle loadings so that specific setback requirements can be established
for the used equipment. Alternatively, a shoring system may be designed to allow reduction in the
setback distance.
Personnel from Tetra Tech BAS should observe the excavation progress so that appropriate
modifications to the excavation design may be recommended, if necessary, due to encountered
conditions differing from the design assumptions.
The bottom of any trenches that are required for underground utilities and piping should be kept
outside a zone defined by a 1(H): 1(V) plane projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing.
Backfill materials and procedures shall conform to the recommendations provided in the “Site
Preparation” and “General Site Grading” sections of this report. If any piping needs to be placed
within the zone of influence, the pipes should be designed to account for the increased surcharge
which results from the applied footing pressures, and the pipes within that zone should be protected
with concrete encasement or other suitable form of protection. The piping and encasement should
be designed to withstand differential settlements of up to 1 inch in relation to the area outside of
the zone of influence.
8.5.

Excavatibility at Initial Landfill Cell

Average excavation depth for the initial landfill cell are estimated to be on the order of 15 feet,
with deeper localized excavations on the order of 30 feet. It is anticipated that blasting will not
likely be required to achieve average excavation grades, however, blasting or alternative
excavation techniques may be required to achieve deeper grades.
Metasedimentary bedrock was not encountered in the test pits TP-114 through TP-119 excavated
within the footprint of the initial landfill cell, although the test pits did not extend entirely to the
proposed excavation grades. Test Pits TP-114, TP-115, TP-117 and TP-119 were excavated to
depths of 9 to 11 feet deep, terminating in cemented to partially-cemented zones of cobbles or
boulders. Test Pits TP-116 and TP-118 were excavated to a depth of 15 feet, terminating in zones

15

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

of caving gravel or sandy gravel. The cemented gravelly zones encountered in the test pits proved
challenging to excavate with the medium-sized Kobelco 200 excavator’s 48-inch bucket, although
it is anticipated, based on P-wave seismic velocities measured at the site for similar deposits, that
such zones will be “rippable” to “marginally-rippable” with conventional grading equipment.
As previously discussed, test pits TP-107 through TP-113 were excavated in an initially considered
alternative landfill cell. However, this location was eventually not selected and is not therefore
further discussed herein.
8.6.

Rail Spur Alignment

It is expected that fill and cut slopes up to about 15 and 40 feet high, respectively, will be needed
for the proposed rail spur. It is recommended that both the fill and cut slopes along the proposed
rail spur alignment be constructed at an inclination of 2(H):1(V) or flatter. At specific locations
where bedrock or similar competent materials are present steeper inclination may be permissible
for cut slopes.
Based on the plans provided by Wilson & Company, the proposed 5,300 feet long rail spur will
cross the existing low dredged area and follow along the side of a slope, and include the following
segments:





Embankment fill ranging from approximately 20 to 30 feet high across an existing low
dredged area from approximately Stations 5+00 to 13+50;
Embankment fill up to approximately 15 feet and minor cuts from approximately
Station 13+50 to approximately Station 25+80;
Balanced fills and cuts between Station 25+80 and 52+40. Adjacent upslope cuts are
estimated to be as high as 40 feet, with adjacent downslope fills estimated to be as high as
15 feet;
Embankment fill required at the north-westerly terminus on the order of 8 to 10 feet high
from approximate Station 52+40 to the end of the spur line at Station 52+94, where the design
alignment segment extends into a former borrow pit.

Design and construction of the rail spur embankment should be performed in general accordance
with Manual for Railway Engineering (Volume 1) prepared by American Railway Engineering
and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA, 2016).
8.6.1. Slope Stability
Static Slope Stability
It is recommended that the embankment be constructed with side slopes at an inclination of
2(H):1(V). The static slope stability was evaluated with Spencer Method using the computer
program SLOPE/W (Geo-Slope Studio 2012). Groundwater was not considered in the slope
stability analyses, although some minor groundwater conditions could be temporarily encountered
by the embankment over the low dredged area. The shear strength parameters were conservatively
assumed as shown in Table 3. The slope height considered herein is 30 feet.
16

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Table 3
Summary of Shear Strength Parameters
Material
Fill
Bedrock

Shear strength
c = 50 psf
 = 35o
c = 300 psf
 = 40o

Unit weight
125 pcf
130 pcf

The analyses yielded a Factor of Safety of 1.71, which is greater than the required Factor of Safety
of 1.5. Results of slope stability analysis are presented in Appendix C.
Permanent Seismic Displacement
Permanent seismic displacement of the proposed embankment slopes was estimated in the
following 4 steps:





Determination of the yield acceleration of the cut slopes utilizing pseudo-static slope stability
analyses using the computer program SLOPE/W;
Development of the acceleration response spectra for the maximum considered earthquake
ground motion per 2012 International Building Code;
Development of the acceleration response spectra for the design-level ground motion based on
geometric mean and without risk coefficient for estimation of permanent seismic deformation;
Estimation of permanent seismic deformation using the procedures suggested by Bray and
Travasarou (2007).

Results of permanent seismic slope displacement analyses are summarized in Table 4 below.
Details regarding the permanent seismic displacement analyses are included in Appendix C.
Table 4
Summary of Permanent Seismic Displacement Analyses
Yield Acceleration
Mean Permanent Seismic
Slope Gradient
(g)
Displacement (inches)
2(H) : 1(V)

0.267

<1.0

The analyses indicated a mean permanent seismic displacement of less than one inch, which is less
than the standard-of-practice design acceptable criterion of 6 inches. Therefore, the proposed
2(H):1(V) slopes are considered seismically stable and acceptable.

17

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

8.6.2. Settlement
The vertical settlement of fill embankment is a combination of the settlement of the foundation on
which it is resting and the settlement of the embankment fill.
Generally, the long-term settlement of a well compacted earth fill embankment ranges between
0.2 and 0.4 percent of the embankment height. Therefore, the settlement of embankment itself is
anticipated to be up to about 1.5 inches or less. Due to the generally granular nature of the
foundation soils underlying the embankment, it is anticipated that the settlement of the foundation
soils will occur during the placement of the embankment fills, and post-construction settlement of
the foundation soils will be minimal.
Based on the above discussions, the total settlement of the embankment is anticipated to be
1.5 inches or less, and a differential settlement of the embankment is about 0.75 inches or less over
a horizontal distance of 100 feet.
8.6.3. Construction Considerations
Where new fills are to be placed on an existing slopes steeper than 5(H):1(V), the existing slopes
should be benched in order to provide a notched interface between the new fill and the existing
ground. Bench widths are expected to be variable depending on the slope angle. However, the
bench height should be limited to 4 feet. A toe keyway at least 10 feet wide should be excavated
to provide support for the new fill slopes constructed against the existing slopes.
It is recommend that the proposed cut slope be excavated starting from the top towards the bottom.
All excavations should be performed in accordance with applicable OSHA regulations. The onsite soils are not expected to pose unusual excavation difficulties and therefore conventional earthmoving equipment may be used. Possible sloughing/raveling of residual soils near the existing
grade to a depth of about 5 to 8 feet should be anticipated.
To the practicable extent, embankment design should avoid having trackways straddle the cut/fill
line on side-hill sections of mainline segments to minimize the effects of potential differential
settlements.
Subgrade Preparation
Prior to any grading activities, the surface should be cleared of any existing structures, vegetation,
trash, and debris.
Embankment segments between Stations 5+00 and 13+50 extend across the currently inundated
low area. This area is subject to flooding and water about 4 to 8 inches deep was encountered
during the field explorations. The on-site soils underlying this segment consists of loose to
medium sandy soils up to depths of about 4 to 6 feet, below which very dense sandy soils or
bedrock is anticipated to be encountered. It is recommended that the on-site loose to medium
dense soils be overexcavated to very dense soils. To the extent practicable, the zone of
overexcavation should extend a horizontal distance of at least 8 feet beyond the toe of the

18

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

embankment. In order to protect against periodic flooding, the outer 5 feet of the embankment
within the low dredged area should be embedded about one foot into bedrock.
If water is present during the embankment construction, dewatering measures will be needed to
facilitate dry construction. It is anticipated that relatively shallow water would be present during
construction. A system of sandbag dikes, water collection ditches and sumps and pumps may be
sufficient to dewater the area.
The remaining embankment fill segments should be overexcavated to a depth of at least 2 feet
below the toe of the embankment or to uniform acceptable soils, whichever is deeper. To the
extent practicable, the zone of over-excavation should extend a horizontal distance of at least 5 feet
beyond the toe of the embankment.
All fill placement associated with the replacement of the overexcavated soils, and fill placed to
achieve subgrade should be moisture-conditioned to at least 110 percent of the optimum moisture
content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density, as evaluated by the
latest version of ASTM D1557.
Fill Material
The fill material is expected to be composed of excavated on-site alluvial soils. In general, any
soils used as embankment fill should be predominantly granular and have fines content between
15 and 40 percent, and liquid limit less than 30. The actual fill materials should be tested and
approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to commencement of construction. The fill should
be screened of any grain sizes greater than 3 inches; additionally fill within 3 feet of the
embankment slopes should be screened of any grain sizes greater than 1 inch.
In addition, it is recommend that the outer 3 feet of the slope face be constructed with moderately
cohesive soils having a fines content of at least 30 percent in order to minimize future erosion and
maintenance.
Fill Placement
The embankment slope inclinations should be 2(H): 1(V) or flatter. Embankment fill should be
placed in horizontal lifts not more than 8 inches in loose uncompacted thickness. In order to
adequately compact the face of reconstructed fill slopes, it is strongly recommended to overbuild
the slopes by 1 to 2 feet and to cut the slope back to the final configuration. If this method is not
practical, the contractor must be prepared to skillfully compact the outer slope edge and face to
meet the compaction requirements. The edge of the constructed slope should be placed slightly
elevated and not be allowed to roll off. All fill should be moisture-conditioned to at least
110 percent of the optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
dry density (ASTM D1557).

19

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Drainage and Erosion Protection
As a minimum, drainage should be provided for the proposed fill / cut slopes at the following
locations:




Swale on 3 feet wide bench on top of the slope;
V-ditch on an approximately 3 feet wide bench at the toe of the slope; and
Terrace bench, 6 feet wide, approximately in the middle bench of the slope, and no more
than 30 feet vertical feet apart.

Additional drainage provisions may be required by the Civil Engineer for the compliance with
applicable codes and/or during grading based on the recommendation of the Geotechnical
Engineer. Personnel from Tetra Tech BAS should observe the grading progress so that appropriate
modifications to the design may be recommended, if necessary, due to encountered conditions
differing from the design assumptions.
The rail spur alignment should have a transverse cross-slope drainage gradient of at least 4 percent,
preferably sloped toward the outer edge of the embankment slopes.
For embankments about 30 feet in height or less, a mid-slope benches may be provided for
purposes of drainage and facilitating future access for maintenance. Slope benches should be 6
feet wide minimum with 6 percent gradient toward the low end of the fill slope, and should include
a gutter channel at the drainage surface.
For embankments located within the existing low dredged area between Stations 5+00 and 13+50
where water table is potentially at or above the toe of the slopes, the embankment toe and at least
3 feet above the highest anticipated water level should be protected against erosion. The protection
should consist of a filter zone consisting of a geosynthetic or mineral components and a riprap.
Many different systems and materials are available, and the adopted system should consider the
corrosive nature of the water. This office should be contacted for approval of the selected erosion
protection system.
It should be noted that no hydraulic calculations were performed in evaluation of the design water
level within the low area. It is recognized that gross changes in the lake levels could impact the
design water level. Evaluation of this issue is beyond the scope of this geotechnical investigation,
and therefore the provided design is based only on the observed field conditions.

20

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
8.7.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Seismic Design Parameters

The seismic design coefficients provided below in Table 5 are based on the 2012 International
Building Code.
Table 5
Seismic Design Parameters
Site coordinates N41.2209o and W 112.4796o
Parameter

Design Value

Site Class (Table 20.3-1 ASCE 7)

C

Short Period Spectral Acceleration Parameter Ss

1.220**

1-sec. Period Spectral Acceleration Parameter S1

0.448**

Short Period Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter SDS

0.813**

1-sec. Period Design Spectral Acceleration Parameter SD1

0.404**

**

8.8.

Values obtained for from USGS Earthquake Hazards Program website,
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/ based on the ASCE7-10 with July 2013
errata and 2012 International Building Code.
Shallow Foundations

Conventional continuous footing foundations may be utilized for support of the proposed
administrative and maintenance shop buildings. It is expected that the overhead excavator at the
proposed rail spur at Station 44+90 will also be supported on shallow footing foundation. Footing
foundation subgrade should be prepared as recommended in the Site Preparation section of this
report. Recommendations for the design and construction of shallow foundations are presented
below.
8.8.1. Design Parameters
Shallow foundations should be designed using the geotechnical design parameters presented in
Table 6. Footings should be designed and reinforced in accordance with the recommendations of
the structural engineer and should conform to the 2012 International Building Code.
The total allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the friction resistance and passive
resistance. The passive resistance values may be increased by one-third when considering
transient wind or seismic loading.

21

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Table 6
Geotechnical Design Parameters
(Isolated and Continuous Footing Foundations)
Dimensions
Depth of Embedment
Allowable
Bearing Pressure
Estimated Settlement
Allowable
Coefficient of Friction
Allowable
Lateral Passive Resistance

 Continuous footings: at least 20 inches wide
 Exterior footings: at least 30 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for
frost protection
 Interior footings: at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade
 2,500 psf
 The allowable bearing value may be increased by one-third for transient
live loads from wind.
 Approximately 1-inch total settlement.
 Approximately 0.5-inch differential settlement between supports or
over a distance of 30 feet.
 0.30 for mass concrete on soils.
 Incorporates a Factor of Safety of 1.5.
 200 pcf equivalent fluid density.
 The passive resistance derived from the top 12 inches should be
neglected.
 Incorporates a Factor of Safety of 2.

8.8.2. Footing Observations
To evaluate the presence of satisfactory materials at design elevations, footing excavations should
be observed by a representative of Geotechnical Engineer, and be clean of loosened soil and debris
before placing steel or concrete. If soft or loose soils or other unsatisfactory materials are
encountered, such materials should be handled as described in Section 8.3.
8.9.

Concrete Slabs-On-Grade

Based on the soil classification, the on-site soils were anticipated to have a very low expansive
potential. The recommendations provided in the “Site Preparation” section of this report and in
this section are intended to provide a firm bearing subgrade to help reduce the occurrence of cracks
in concrete and associated horizontal separation and vertical offset. However, it should be
understood that the concrete slabs may still crack due to structural design or detailing, curing, or
construction execution even when these recommendations are implemented. If cracking of the
concrete is desired to be minimized, the reinforcement, concrete mix, and curing specifications
should be designed appropriately by the Structural Engineer.
Concrete slabs-on-grade should be constructed on a 4-inch layer of compacted gravel to aid in
drainage and to minimize settlement and cracking of slabs. The gravel should consist of free drain
gravel or road base with a ¾-inch maximum particle size and no more than 10 percent passing the
No. 200 mesh sieve. The gravel layer should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum
dry density as determined by ASTM D1557.

22

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

8.9.1. Floor Slabs
For design of concrete slabs, a modulus of subgrade reaction k 1 on a 1-foot by 1-foot square plate
of 200 pounds per cubic inch may be used. For the on-site sandy soils, the modulus of subgrade
reaction for a concrete element of a dimension can be calculated as
k  k1 (

B 1 2
)
2B

Where B is the governing width of the element in feet, but no more than 14 times the thickness
of the floor slab. Floor slabs should be designed and reinforced in accordance with the Structural
Engineer’s recommendations. The minimum reinforcement to reduce separation and offset of
potential concrete cracks should consist of No. 4 reinforcing bars spaced at 16 inches on-center,
each way, placed in the middle one-third of the section. The slab should be doweled in the
perimeter footings. Reinforcement should be properly placed and supported on blocks or “chairs.”
Welded wire mesh reinforcement is not recommended.
Tetra Tech BAS does not practice in the field of moisture vapor transmission
evaluation/mitigation. However, to assist with the selection of the appropriate slab underlayment
system, Table 7 provides alternatives for control of vapor transmission through concrete floor slab
support placed on a properly prepared subgrade. The provided alternatives are based on local
experience and may be considered appropriate for standard applications. If moisture vapor
transmission is considered a risk to use and operation of the proposed structure, we recommend
that a qualified person/firm be engaged with to evaluate the general and specific moisture vapor
transmission paths and any impact on the proposed construction and to provide recommendations
for mitigation of potential adverse impact of moisture vapor transmission on various components
of the structure as deemed appropriate.

23

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Table 7
Alternatives for Control of Vapor Migration through Concrete Slab
Objective

Recommendation


“Best” protection against
vapor intrusion





“Better” protection against
vapor intrusion



Concrete floor slab-on-grade placed directly on a plastic membrane
10 mils in thickness1 (ACI 302.1R-06).
The membrane should be placed on at least 2 inches of dry silty sand2.
The dry silty sand should be separated from the underlying capillary
break layer by non-woven geotextile, Mirafi 140N or equivalent.
The geotextile should be placed on at least 4 inches of ¾-inch
crushed rock3 or clean gravel4 to act as a capillary break.
Concrete floor slab-on-grade placed directly on a plastic membrane
10 mils in thickness1 (ACI 302.1R-96).
The membrane should be placed on at least 2 inches of silty sand2.
2 inches of dry silty sand2;
placed over plastic membrane 10 mils in thickness.
The membrane should be placed on at least 2 inches of silty sand2.



Standard protection against

vapor intrusion

1
If additional protection is desired, the plastic membrane may be replaced with a 10-mil thick moisture vapor
retarder that meets the requirements of ASTM E 1745 Class C (for example, Stego Wrap or similar).
2
The silty sand should have a gradation between approximately 15 and 35 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and
a plasticity index (PI) of less than 4.
3
The ¾-inch crushed rock should conform to Section 200-1.2 of the latest edition of the Standard Specifications
for Public Works Construction (Greenbook).
4
The gravel should contain less than 10 percent of material passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 3 percent
passing the No. 200 sieve.

All underslab materials should be adequately compacted prior to the placement of concrete. The
materials should be dry or moist and not be wetted or saturated prior to the placement of concrete.
Care should be taken during placement of the concrete to prevent displacement of the underslab
materials. The concrete slab should be allowed to cure properly prior to placing vinyl or other
moisture-sensitive floor covering.
8.9.2. Exterior Slabs
Exterior slabs should be placed on subgrade prepared in accordance with the recommendations
provided in the “Site Preparation” section of this report. As indicated above, a Structural Engineer
should be consulted if cracking of the exterior slabs is to be minimized. As a minimum for exterior
walkways, it is recommended that narrow strip concrete slabs, such as sidewalks, be reinforced
with at least No. 4 reinforcing bars placed longitudinally at 24 inches on center. Wide exterior
slabs should be reinforced with at least No. 4 reinforcing bars placed 24 inches on center, each
way. Reinforcement should extend through the control joints to reduce the potential for differential
movement. Control joints should be constructed in accordance with recommendations from the
Structural Engineer and Architect.
Control joints should be constructed in accordance with recommendations from the structural
engineer and architect. For preliminary design considerations, control joints should be provided
in all concrete slabs-on-grade as recommended by American Concrete Institute (ACI) guidelines
and at a maximum spacing (in feet) of 2 to 3 times the slab thickness (in inches), but generally no
more than 10 feet. All joints should form approximately square patterns to reduce potential for

24

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

randomly oriented shrinkage cracks. The control joints should be tooled at the time of the pour or
sawcut to ¼ of slab depth within 6 to 8 hours of concrete placement. All joints in flatwork should
be sealed to prevent moisture, vermin, or foreign material intrusion. Precautions should be taken
to prevent curling of slabs in this semi-arid region (refer to ACI guidelines). Where adjacent to
buildings the flatwork should be sloped 2 percent or more away from the building.
8.10.

Drainage Control around Buildings

The intent of this section is to provide general information regarding the control of surface water.
The control of surface water is essential to the satisfactory performance of the building
construction and site improvements. Surface water should be controlled so that conditions of
uniform moisture are maintained beneath and adjacent to the structure, even during periods of
heavy rainfall. The following recommendations should be considered as minimal.















Ponding and areas of low flow gradients should be avoided.
Paved surfaces within 10 feet from the building foundation should be provided with a
gradient of at least 2 percent sloping away from improvements.
Bare soil, e.g., planters, within 10 feet of the structure should be sloped away from the
improvement at a gradient of 5 percent.
Positive drainage devices, such as graded swales, paved ditches, and/or catch basins should
be employed to accumulate and convey water to appropriate discharge points.
Concrete walks and flatwork should not obstruct the free flow of surface water.
Brick flatwork should be sealed by mortar or be placed over an impermeable membrane.
Area drains should be recessed below grade to allow free flow of water into the basin.
Enclosed raised planters should be sealed at the bottom and provided with an ample flow
gradient to a drainage device. Recessed planters and landscaped areas should be provided
with area inlet and subsurface drain pipes.
To the extent practicable, planters should not be located adjacent to the structure. If planters
are to be located adjacent to the structure, the planters should be positively sealed, should
incorporate a subdrain, and should be provided with free discharge capacity to a drainage
device.
Planting areas at grade should be provided with positive drainage. Wherever possible, the
grade of exposed soil areas should be established above adjacent paved grades. Drainage
devices and curbing should be provided to prevent runoff from adjacent pavement or walks
into planted areas.
Gutter and downspout systems should be provided to capture discharge from roof areas. The
accumulated roof water should be conveyed to an off-site disposal area by a pipe or concrete
swale system.
Landscape watering should be performed judiciously to preclude either soaking or
desiccation of soils. The watering should be such that it just sustains plant growth without
excessive infiltration. Sprinkler systems should be checked periodically to detect leakage
and irrigation efforts should be reduced or halted during the rainy season.

25

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
8.11.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Retaining Walls

Retaining walls may be supported on conventional footing foundations established on engineered
fill or competent native soils. The subgrade for footing foundations should be prepared as
recommended in the Site Preparation Section of this report.
8.11.1. Footing Foundations
Retaining walls may be supported on conventional continuous footing foundations established on
competent native soils or engineered fill as described in the Site Preparation section of this report.
The conventional footing foundation should be designed using geotechnical design parameters
provided in Table 8 below. Footing foundations should be designed and reinforced in accordance
with the recommendations of the Structural Engineer and should conform to the 2012 IBC.
Table 8
Geotechnical Design Parameters
(Retaining Wall Footing Foundations)
Depth of Embedment
Allowable
Bearing Pressure
Estimated Settlement
Allowable
Coefficient of Friction
Allowable
Lateral Passive Resistance

 At least 30 inches below the lowest adjacent grade
 2,500 psf
 The allowable bearing value may be increased by one-third for
transient live loads from wind.
 Approximately 1-inch total settlement.
 Approximately 0.5-inch differential settlement between supports or
over a distance of 30 feet.
 0.30 for mass concrete on soils.
 Incorporates a Factor of Safety of 1.5.
 200 pcf equivalent fluid density for level backfill condition.
 The passive resistance derived from the top 12 inches should be
neglected.
 Incorporates a Factor of Safety of 2.

The total allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the friction resistance and passive
resistance. The passive resistance values may be increased by one-third when considering
transient wind or seismic loading.
To evaluate the presence of satisfactory materials at design elevations, footing excavations should
be observed by a representative of Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience, and be clean of loosened soil and
debris before placing steel or concrete. If soft or loose soils or other unsatisfactory materials are
encountered, such materials should be removed and replaced with compacted fill prior to pouring
the footing.
8.11.2. Lateral Loading
The lateral pressures acting on retaining walls should be calculated based on the recommendations
presented in Table 9 for active or at-rest conditions. The design values were developed based on
a level backfill condition, and an assumption that a drainage system will be installed behind the
26

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

wall so that external water pressure will not develop. If a drainage system is not be installed,
hydrostatic pressures will need to be incorporated into the design.
Determination of whether the active or at-rest condition is appropriate for the design will depend
on the flexibility of the walls. In granular soils, assumed as the backfill of the subject walls, walls
that are free to rotate at least 0.001 radians (deflection at the top of the wall of at least 0.001 x H)
may be designed for the active condition. Walls that are not capable of this movement should be
assumed non-yielding and designed for the at-rest condition. Walls that are required to minimize
the lateral movements should be designed as non-yielding walls for the at-rest condition.
Based on the Section 1803.5.12 of the 2012 IBC the design of retaining walls higher than 6 feet,
as measured from the top of the footing, requires the inclusion of not only static lateral pressures
but also of additional seismically induced lateral earth pressures. According to the 2012 IBC the
dynamic seismic lateral earth pressures on retaining walls should be determined using the design
earthquake ground motions. Based on the USGS U.S. Seismic Design Maps website application
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php), the PGA from the Design Response
Spectrum at the site is approximately 0.33g (calculated as SDS / 2.5, where SDS is the risk-targeted,
maximum rotated acceleration direction, design response spectrum parameter for short periods.
Table 9
Geotechnical Design Parameters for Retaining Walls
Lateral Earth Pressures for Level Ground behind the Wall
Static Lateral Pressures
Lateral at rest pressure (psf)

58z + 0.47 x Q

Lateral active pressure (psf)

38z + 0.31 x Q

Seismic Lateral Pressures due to Seismic Loading
(for wall heights greater than 6 feet)
– Additional EFD for at rest seismic condition

23.5 pcf

– Additional EFD for active seismic condition

10.3 pcf

Legend:
EFD …Equivalent fluid density
z …Depth measured below the immediate grade behind the wall (ft).
Q …Uniform live surcharge (psf) within a 1(H):1(V) plane drawn upward from the heel of the wall
footing.

8.11.3. Backfill and Subdrainage
The backfill within at least 2 feet immediately behind the retaining wall should have a Sand
Equivalent of about 30, an Expansion Index of less than 20, and fines content (passing #200 sieve)
of less than 15 percent. Where bare ground is present behind the top of the wall, the backfill should
be capped with a concrete swale or with at least 12 inches of relatively impervious clayey material
and sloped to prevent ponding of water.

27

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Retaining walls should be constructed to limit potential for hydrostatic pressure built-up behind
the wall or be designed for it. If irrigation or precipitation infiltration is expected, adequate
drainage is essential to provide a free-drained backfill condition to limit the hydrostatic pressure
buildup behind the wall. If control of efflorescence on the air side of the wall due to moisture
transmission through the wall is desired, the wall should be appropriately waterproofed. Adequate
drainage and waterproofing behind the wall may be provided by a backdrain consisting of a
geosynthetic drainage composite such as TerraDrain, MiraDrain, or approved equivalent, placed
against the entire backside of the wall. The drainage composite should be connected to a
4- inch- diameter perforated ABS or PVC Schedule 40 drain pipe, or an approved equivalent,
placed at the base of the wall. The drain pipe should be sloped at least 2 percent and surrounded
by ¾-inch crushed rock (Standard Specification for Public Works Construction (“Greenbook”) Section 200-1.2) or similar material wrapped in suitable non-woven filter fabric, e.g., Mirafi
140NL or approved equivalent. Perforations in the drain pipe should have a maximum diameter
of 0.25 inches or 3/8 inches for Class 2 Permeable Base or ¾-inch crushed rock drain material,
respectively, spaced 3 inches on center, and be arranged in 2 rows at a radial spacing of
approximately 120 degrees. The axis of the included angle between the perforation rows should
be positioned downward to form a flowline. The drain pipe should discharge through a solid pipe
to appropriate outlets, such as the storm drain system or through the wall. The maximum length
of the drain pipe between discharge outlets should not exceed 100 feet.
8.12.

Concrete Box Culvert

Design concept of the drainage structure at approximate Station 10+50 in the low potentially
inundated area of the proposed rail spur alignment has not been finalized as of this writing. In this
study we have assumed that a concrete box culvert will be provided to convey the water through
the embankment, and the invert of the box culvert would be approximately the same elevation as
the low area. If a different type of drainage structure is adopted, this office should be contacted
for an updated recommendation.
8.12.1. Subgrade Preparation
Since the concrete box culvert is to be constructed within and below the proposed embankment,
the subgrade preparation for the concrete box culvert should be prepared as recommended in
Section 8.6.3 of this report.
8.12.2. Culvert Backfill
Backfill material and placement should follow the recommendations for embankment in Section
8.6.3 of this report.
8.12.3. Design Parameters
Design of the concrete box culvert should be performed in general accordance with Manual for
Railway Engineering (Volumes 2), Chapter 8 prepared by American Railway Engineering and
Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA, 2016).

28

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Vertical Loading
Vertical loads on the top of the concrete box culvert should be assessed by the design chart
presented in Figure 8-16-1 in the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering Volume 2, Chapter 8.
Based on the anticipated density of embankment fills, the dead load curve for the design chart
should be adjusted to reflect a total unit weight of 125 pcf.
Lateral Loading
Lateral earth pressures acting on the culvert should be estimated per Section 8.11.2 of this report.
Bearing Capacity and Settlement
Design of the invert slab of the culvert should be performed based on an allowable bearing capacity
defined by the following equation:
qall = 750D + 400B (psf) (3,000 psf maximum)
qall = allowable bearing pressure
D = footing embedment (feet)
B = footing width (feet)
The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by one-third when considering live loads and
seismic loads. Based on the granular nature of the on-site soils and the recommended subgrade
preparation measures, the post-construction settlement of the culvert is estimated to be less than 1
inch.
8.13.

Asphalt Concrete Pavement Sections

8.13.1. Subgrade Preparation
The subgrade preparation and fill placement in paved areas should be prepared as recommended
in Section 8.3 of this report.
8.13.2. Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design
For preliminary pavement evaluation design, 18-kip equivalent single-axle loads (ESALs) based
on assumed average daily traffic were assumed for the pavement section design. Flexible
pavement sections were evaluated in general accordance with the Utah Pavement Management
and Pavement Design Manual (UDOT, 2008) method for flexible pavement design using a
20- year design life period. Based on the granular nature of the on-site soils, a CBR value of 8
was used for pavement design purposes. The recommended new pavement sections for various
ESALs are presented in Table 10.

29

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Table 10
Flexible Pavement Sections
CBR-Value

Approximate Daily
Truck Traffic

ESALs
(million)

Asphalt Concrete
(inches)

Untreated Road Base
(inches)

7

0.1

3.5

6.0

18

0.25

4.5

7.0

35

0.5

5.0

8.5

69

1.0

5.5

9.5

138

2.0

6.0

11.0

8

Asphalt and untreated road base should be constructed per UDOT 2012 Standard Specifications
for Road and Bridge Construction (UDOT, 2012). Asphalt should be compacted to a minimum
density of 96 percent of the Marshall value and base course should be compacted to at least 95
percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D1557. Additionally, the upper 12 inches of the
subgrade should consist of granular sandy soils that have been reworked and compacted to at least
95 percent of the maximum dry density per ASTM D1557.
8.13.3. Observation
The preparation of the pavement subgrade and the placement of base course and pavement sections
should be observed by Tetra Tech BAS personnel. Careful observation is recommended to
evaluate that the pavement subgrade is uniformly compacted and the recommended pavement and
base course thickness are achieved. Paved areas should be properly sloped, and surface drainage
facilities should be established to reduce water infiltration into the pavement subgrade. Curbing
located adjacent to paved areas should be founded in the soil subgrade in order to provide a cutoff
to reduce water infiltration into the base course.
8.14.

All-Weather Access Road

If the access road to the landfill facility is planned without asphalt pavement surface, all-weather
road may be considered since it generally performs well without rutting, pumping, softening, loss
of traction or similar signs of instability during non-extreme weather and operational conditions.
To provide an all-weather performance with available on-site material, the access road is
recommended to consist of an open-graded base course to act as a drainage layer followed by a
well-graded surface course that will compact well, be durable and largely shed surface water. The
available pavement materials may include crushed rock and soil borrowed from excavations for
the landfill cells.
Prior to the installation of crushed rock base course, the road footprint should be overexcavated at
least 12 inches below the design subgrade level. The exposed base of the over-excavation should
be scarified a minimum of 6 inches and compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry
density (ASTM D1557) at least optimum moisture content. Fill placed in the overexcavation
30

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

should consist of the excavated site soils compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry
density (ASTM D1557) at a moisture content of at least optimum.
A woven stabilization geotextile is recommended to be placed on top of the prepared subgrade
below the crushed rock base course. The geotextile is intended to provide both separation and
reinforcement and is a key element for successful long-term performance of the access road. If
the geotextile is not used, the crushed rock base course may become fouled with subgrade soils
inhibiting its drainage capacity and promoting rutting. The geotextile should consist of woven
TenCate Mirafi HP370 or equivalent and be placed according to the manufacturer’s
recommendations.
The base course of crushed rock is intended to provide for the temporary storage and drainage of
infiltration water. The crushed rock must be large enough to provide adequate pore space for the
water but small enough for easy handling and compaction. The base course should consist of
¾- inch or 1½-inch crushed rock generally meeting the gradations of No. 67 or No. 467 aggregate,
respectively, as defined in ASTM D448, Standard Classification for Sizes of Aggregate for Road
and Bridge Construction. The base course of crushed rock is recommended to be at least 18 inches
thick. Special care should be taken to avoid damage to the underlying geotextile fabric during
placement of the crushed rock.
A surface course at least 8 inches thick consisting of a well-graded mixture of crushed rock, sand,
and fine mineral particles is recommended to be placed on top of the base course. To help shed
water and provide a durable, compact surface, the surface course should generally meet the
gradations of Type I Soil-Aggregate, Gradation C or D, as defined in ASTM D1241, Standard
Specification for Materials for Soil-Aggregate Subbase, Base, and Surface Courses, and satisfy the
following requirements based on the above referenced standard:




At least 8 percent passing the No. 200 sieve;
A maximum Liquid Limit of 35; and
A Plasticity Index ranging from 4 to 9.

The surface course should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM
D1557) at a moisture content of at least optimum. A smooth-drum roller is recommended to
compact the surface course.
8.15.

Soil Corrosion

The corrosion potential of the on-site materials to buried steel and concrete was evaluated based
on laboratory testing. Table 11 below presents the results of the corrosivity testing.
Table 11
Corrosivity Test Results
Location

Sample

Depth

pH

Minimum
Resistivity

Sulfate
Content

Chloride
Content

B-104

SK-1

0 – 7 feet

8.5

2,300 ohm-cm

<0.0005%

0.0036%

31

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Per 2012 IBC, Section 1904.1, concrete subject to exposure to sulfates shall comply with the
requirements set forth in ACI 318, Section 4.3. Based on the measured water soluble sulfate results
the exposure of buried concrete to sulfate attack should be considered “not applicable”, i.e.,
exposure class S0 per ACI 318, Table 4.2.1. Consequently, injurious sulfate attack is not a concern
for concrete with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 2,500 psi.
Per 2012 IBC, Section 1904.1, concrete reinforcement should be protected from corrosion and
exposure to chlorides in accordance with ACI 318, Section 4.3.
The evaluation of potential for corrosion of buried metals was based on the minimum resistivity
and our experience with similar soils. The on-site soils are anticipated to likely have a “moderate”
corrosion potential to buried ferrous metals. As a consequence of these conditions, we recommend
that consideration be given to using plastic piping instead of metal. Alternatively, a corrosion
specialist should be consulted regarding suitable types of piping and necessary protection for
underground metal conduits. The corrosion potential of the on-site soils should be verified during
construction for each encountered soil type. Imported fill materials should be tested to confirm
that their corrosion potential is not more severe than assumed for the project.

32

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development
9.

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

GENERAL SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS

The intent of this section is to provide general information regarding the site grading. Site grading
operations should conform with applicable local building and safety codes and to the rules and
regulations of those governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the subject construction.
The grading contractor is responsible for notifying governmental agencies, as required, and a
representative of Tetra Tech BAS at the start of site cleanup, at the initiation of grading, and any
time that grading operations are resumed after an interruption. Each step of the grading should be
accepted in a specific area by a representative of Tetra Tech BAS, and where required, should be
approved by the applicable governmental agencies prior to proceeding with subsequent work.
The following site grading recommendations should be regarded as minimal. The site grading
recommendations should be incorporated into the project plans and specifications.
1. Prior to grading, existing vegetation, trash, surface structures and debris should be removed
and disposed off-site at a legal dumpsite. Any existing utility lines, or other subsurface
structures which are not to be utilized, should be removed, destroyed, or abandoned in
compliance with current governmental regulations.
2. Subsequent to cleanup operations, and prior to initial grading, a reasonable search should be
made for subsurface obstructions and/or possible loose fill or detrimental soil types. This
search should be conducted by the contractor, with advice from and under the observation of
a representative of Tetra Tech BAS.
3. Prior to the placement of fill or foundations within the building area, the site should be prepared
in accordance with the recommendations presented in the section “Site Preparation” of this
report. All undocumented fill or disturbed soils within the building areas should be removed
and processed as recommended by the representative of Tetra Tech BAS.
4. The exposed subgrade and/or excavation bottom should be observed and approved by a
representative of Tetra Tech BAS for conformance with the intent of the recommendations
presented in this report and prior to any further processing or fill placement. It should be
understood that the actual encountered conditions may warrant excavation and/or subgrade
preparation beyond the extent recommended and/or anticipated in this report.
5. On-site inorganic granular soils that are free of debris or contamination are considered suitable
for placement as compacted fill. Any rock or other soil fragments greater than 6 inches in size
should not be placed within 5 feet of the foundation subgrade.
6. Any selected fill material required for backfill or grading should be tested and approved prior
to delivery to the site.
7. Visual observations and field tests should be performed during grading by a representative of
Tetra Tech BAS. This is necessary to assist the contractor in obtaining the proper moisture
content and required degree of compaction. Wherever, in the opinion of a representative of

33

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Tetra Tech BAS, an unsatisfactory condition is being created in any area, whether by cutting
or filling, the work should not proceed in that area until the condition has been corrected.

34

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

10. DESIGN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
Geotechnical review of plans and specifications is of paramount importance in engineering
practice. The poor performance of many structures has been attributed to inadequate geotechnical
review of construction documents. Additionally, observation and testing of the subgrade will be
important to the performance of the proposed development. The following sections present our
recommendations relative to the review of construction documents and the monitoring of
construction activities.
10.1.

Plans and Specifications

The design plans and specifications should be reviewed and approved by Tetra Tech BAS prior to
bidding and construction, as the geotechnical recommendations may need to be re-evaluated in the
light of the actual design configuration and loads. This review is necessary to evaluate whether
the recommendations contained in this report have been incorporated into the project plans and
specifications as intended.
10.2.

Construction Monitoring

Site preparation, assessment of imported fill materials, fill placement, and other site grading
operations should be observed and tested. The subgrade soils exposed during the construction may
differ from those anticipated in the preparation of this report. Continuous observation by a
representative of Tetra Tech BAS should be implemented during construction to allow for
evaluation of the soil conditions as they are encountered, and to provide the opportunity to
recommend appropriate revisions as needed.

35

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

11. LIMITATIONS
The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are based on Tetra Tech BAS’ review
of background documents and on information obtained from field explorations and associated
laboratory testing. It should be noted that this study did not evaluate the possible presence of
hazardous materials on any portion of the site.
Due to the limited nature of the field explorations, conditions not observed and described in this
report may be present on the site. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced
through additional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation and laboratory
testing can be performed upon request. It should be understood that conditions different from
those anticipated in this report may be encountered during grading operations, for example, the
extent of unsuitable soil and the associated additional effort required to mitigate them.
Site conditions, including groundwater level, can change with time as a result of natural processes
or the activities of man at the subject site or at nearby sites. Changes to the applicable laws,
regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur as a result of government action or the
broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in
part or in whole, by changes over which Tetra Tech BAS has no control. Therefore, this report
should be reviewed and recertified by Tetra Tech BAS if it were to be used for a project design
commencing more than one year after the date of issuance of this report.
Tetra Tech BAS’ recommendations for this site are, to a high degree, dependent upon appropriate
quality control of subgrade preparation, fill placement, and foundation construction. Accordingly,
the recommendations are made contingent upon the opportunity for Tetra Tech BAS to observe
grading operations and foundation excavations for the proposed construction. If parties other than
Tetra Tech BAS are engaged to provide such services, such parties must be notified that they will
be required to assume complete responsibility as the Geotechnical Engineer of Record for the
geotechnical phase of the project by concurring with the recommendations in this report and/or by
providing alternative recommendations.
This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is
designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Tetra Tech BAS
should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the
content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. Reliance by others on the
data presented herein or for purposes other than those stated in the text is authorized only if so
permitted in writing by Tetra Tech BAS. It should be understood that such an authorization may
incur additional expenses and charges.
Tetra Tech BAS has endeavored to perform its evaluation using the degree of care and skill
ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable geotechnical professionals with
experience in this area in similar soil conditions. No other warranty, either expressed or implied,
is made as to the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report.

36

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

12. SELECTED REFERENCES
Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc (AGEC), 2003, “Geotechnical and Geologic
Study, Promontory Landfill, LLC Class I Landfill”, Project No. 1020875, dated July 21,
2003.
AREMA, 2016, “Manual for Railway Engineering, Volumes 1 and 2”.
Black, B.D., and Christenson, G.E., and DuRoss, C.B., and Hecker, S., compilers, 2004a, Fault
number 2369a, East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Promontory section, in Quaternary fault and
fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 2016-09-06.
Black, B.D., and Hecker, S., and Christenson, G.E., compilers, 2004b, Fault number 2369b,
East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Fremont Island section, in Quaternary fault and fold database
of
the
United
States:
U.S.
Geological
Survey
website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 2016-09-06.
Black, B.D., and Hecker, S., and Christenson, G.E., compilers, 2004c, Fault number 2369c,
East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Antelope Island section, in Quaternary fault and fold
database
of
the
United
States:
U.S.
Geological
Survey
website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 2016-09-06.
Black, B.D., DuRoss, C.B., Hylland, M.D., McDonald, G.N., and Hecker, S., compilers, 2004d,
Fault number 2351d, Wasatch fault zone, Brigham City section, in Quaternary fault and fold
database
of
the
United
States:
U.S.
Geological
Survey
website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 2016-09-06.
Black, B.D., DuRoss, C.B., Hylland, M.D., McDonald, G.N., and Hecker, S., compilers, 2004e, Fault
number 2351e, Wasatch fault zone, Weber section, in Quaternary fault and fold database of
the
United
States:
U.S.
Geological
Survey
website,
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, accessed 2016-09-06.
Crittenden, et al., 1988, Bedrock Geologic Map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder County,
Utah”, United States Geological Survey, Open-File Report 88-646, map scale 1:100,000.
Dinter, D.A., and Pechmann, J.C., (2014). "Final Technical Report, Paleoseismology of the
Promontory Segment, East Great Salt Lake Fault" U.S. Geological Survey Award Number
02HQGR0105, 23p.
Cetin, K., Bilge, H., Wu, J., Kammerer, A., and Seed, R. (2009). "Probabilistic Model for the
Assessment of Cyclically Induced Reconsolidation (Volumetric) Settlements." J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2009)135:3(387), 387-398.
Holtz, W.G. and Kovac, W.D., 1981. An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Prentice-Hall,
Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

37

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Lew, M., Sitar, N., Atik, L., Pourzanjani, M., and Hudson, M., Sesimic Earth Pressures on Deep
Building Basements, SEAOC 2010 Convention Proceedings, pgs. 1 to 12.
Mitchell, J.K. and Soga, K, 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, 3rd Edition, Wiley, N.Y.
Pradel, D., 1998a, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils:
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, dated April, pp. 364-368.
Pradel, D., 1998b, Erratum to Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry
Sandy Soils: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, dated
October, p. 1048.
Seed, H.B., and Whitman, R.V. 1970, Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads.”
ASCE Specialty Conference, Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining
Structures. Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., 103-147.
Southern California Earthquake Center, 1999. Recommended Procedures for Implementation of
DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in
California. Dated March.
Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience, 2015, Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map,
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, UT, Project No. BAS 15-99E, report dated
October 6, 2015.
Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of settlement in sand due to earthquake shaking,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 113(8), p. 861-878.
Youd, T.L., and Idriss, I.M. (eds.), 1998, Summary Report in Proceedings of the NCEER Workshop
on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: National Center for Earthquake
Engineering Research Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, pp. 1-40.
Youd, T.L. and Idriss, I.M., 2001, Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary report of NCEER
1996 and 1998 NCEER/SF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils:
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, dated April, pp. 297-313.
United States Geological Survey, 1968, Promontory Point 7.5 Minute Quadrangle (Topographic),
Utah, Scale 1:24000.
USACE, EM 1110-2-2902 “Engineering and Design, Conduits, Culverts and Pipes," March 31,
1998.
Utah Department of Transportation, 2008, Pavement Management and Pavement Design Manual,
updated 2008.
Utah Department of Transportation, 2012, Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Construction, January 1, 2012.

38

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Whitman, R.V., 1991, Seismic Design of Earth Retaining Structures. Proceedings, Second
International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering
and Soil Dynamics, St. Louis, MO., 1767-1778.

39

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Plates

 Project Site

Lucin Cutoff
UPRR Line

Salt Lake City

Map Reference: Google Earth Pro (2016)

Not To Scale

Project Location Map

JOB NO
DATE

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill Development
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate 1

 LEGEND
TP-118

B-105

TP-116

Initial Landfill Cell

B-105

Test Pit
Approximate Location

TP-114

TP-119
TP-117

TP-120
TP-112

TP-110
TP-111

TP-113
SL-02

Overhead Excavator

Hand-Excavated Pit
Approximate Location

TP-108
HP-121

TP-115

B-104

2015 Seismic Refraction
Tomography Line
(Tetra Tech BAS, 2015)

SL-02
TP-107

Proposed Admin
& Shop Bldgs

TP-109

MW-4
B-103

2003 Monitoring Well
Approximate Location
(AGEC, 2003)

MW-4
SL-01

Spur Line Alignment

Geotechnical Test Boring
Approximate Location

TP-120

MW-3

TP-106
MW-2

N

MW-1
B-102
B-101P
B-101
B-100

Proposed Culvert
HP-121

UPRR Alignment

0

300

600

1200 ft

Approximate Scale
Drawing References: 1) Google Earth Pro, 2016

Project Layout and Boring Location Map

JOB NO
DATE

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill Development
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate 2

 B-103:
TD 28’ in Pleistocene Lacustrine
Sediments of Lake Bonneville.

SE

Lucin Cutoff at UPRR Lake Crossing
Historical aerial photos show this portion
of the alignment to be relatively unchanged
with respect to track sub-grade since the
mid-1960’s.

SL-02
Seismic refraction tomography profile
shows “marginally-rippable” threshold
at ~ Elev. 4205-4206’

B-102
Quartzite bedrock at 4208’ (17’ BGS)
Existing Topographic Profile
at Proposed Spur CL

B-101 & 101P, Borings show
bedrock surface at 16.6’ BGS.

?

?
Quartzite Bedrock Surface
(Projected from MW-2,
1500’ from NE)

?

B-104:
“Overhead Excavator”
Boring terminated in cobbles,
refusal to advancement with rig.

Elevation (ft)

Elevation (ft)

HP-121: Hand-dug hole
through 2.5’ of salt, overlying
approximately 12” of poorlygraded SAND, probed hard
at 3.6’ below ponded surface
using the pointed end of
a 16-lb San Angelo bar.
Proposed culvert location.

NW

?

?

?

?

?

?

Topographically low area with shallow ponded water

(Looking SW)

Interpreted Bedrock Profile
at Proposed Spur CL

Proposed Rail Spur Line Alignment Section

JOB NO
DATE

Drawing Reference: Wilson & Company, 2016

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill Development
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate 3

 Preliminary Geologic Map

Property Boundary

cls
zm

Quarry

Qla
zbh

4500

cgc
4000

cls

4500

4000

?

?
3500

54

0

29

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000 feet

?

6

25
16

Qla

zm
Qla

Qla
zbh

cgc

B

zm

24

cgc

zbh

Qla 35

56
67

25

Quarry

79

57

zbh

74

90

72

27
PM 045

Quarry

87

30

67

81

65

49

Qaf
cgc

Qla

cgc
Qla

zm

4000

?

3500

?

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000 feet

86

Qla
cgc

57

cgc

Geertsen Canyon Quartzite (Lower Cambrian): Uppermost 100 m consists of deep reddish-black hematitic quartzite. The main body consists of pale-gray,
pinkish-gray, or light-brown quartzite, commonly with pebble-sized clasts, dominantly of vein quartz. A zone of pebble- to cobble-conglomerate a few tens of
meters thick is recognized about a third of the way up in the formation. The basal 50 to 100 m is commonly coarse grained and contains abundant angular
fragments of salmon-colored microcline. Consequently, the basal zone is relatively non-resistant compared with the remainder of the formation and the
underlying vitreous quartzite of the Browns Hole Formation. Formation is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

zbh

Browns Hole Formation (Late Proterozoic): Pale-gray very-fine-grained vitreous quartzite. Both the grain size and the color allow this unit to form a marked
light-colored band that contrasts with the quartzites of the overlying and underlying units. Exposures at the site exhibit intense ductile folding characteristic of
a shear zone. Unit is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

zm

Mutual Formation (Late Proterozoic): Thick-bedded coarse-grained quartzite intercalated with a few beds of siltstone and shale. Unit is well-exposed in the
large quarry on the westerly side of the property, at the west end of Cross-Section B-B’. Quartzite from this formation was used as rip-rap for the Southern
Pacific causeway across the western arm of the lake. The formation is cut by numerous dark-brown-weathering igneous dikes, some of which were the site of
considerable prospecting activity in the early days. The formation is highly- to intensely-fractured/jointed.

cls

B’

42
77

A

37

10

Lacustrine and Alluvial Deposits, undivided (Quaternary): Mixed alluvial and lacustrine deposits of marl, silt, sand, and gravel. Also includes
pre-Bonneville alluvial deposits.
Limesone and Shale (Middle and Lower Cambrian): Interbedded thin-bedded medium-gray limestone and olive shale. The base of the unit consists of
intensely-folded dense, yellowish gray cherty argillite and medium gray to pinkish limestone. Deformation in this zone is attributed to shearing along the
contact with the underlying quartzite.

cls

Qla

Fill (Historical): Consists of excavated earth material ranging in size from fines to angular boulders, placed between approximately elevation 4550 and 4590 feet
in a localized platform approximately 800 feet west of PT-05.

cls

77

2
PM 040

90

29

zbh

cls

Mapped Geologic Units1

zbh

46

56

4000

cgc

cgc

?

Qla

18
6

40

49

Qla

25
74

54
PM 047

48

zm

5

88

88

5000

4500

0

76
42

Qla

cls

16

PM 008

Property boundary

4500

3500

34

Quarry

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

B’
SE

zbh

Qaf
20

85

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

5000

Qla
zm

9

B
NW

Qla

Elevation (feet)

83

Cross-Section Section B-B’
N61oW

90

85

Elevation (feet)

zm

90

63

cls

zm

?

W-5 & Sec. A-A’

zm

50
70

54

5000

18

35

63

zbh

3500

cls

zbh

zbh

75

80

Qla

A’
Qla NE

?

zm
20

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

5000

Qla

W-5 & Sec. B-B’

A’

zbh

Elevation (feet)

zm

1000-acre M/L
disposal area
boundary

Cross-Section Section A-A’
N29oE

A
SW

16
1

Geologic unit descriptions of Paleozoic and Late Proterozoic rocks modified after Crittenden, et. al. (1988).

Legend of Symbols
Qla

45

N O RT
N E T IC

2

Filled mine shaft

APPROXIMATE MEAN
DECLINATION, 2014

G

re

at

6

20

UTAH

Sa

lt

Strike & dip of primary foliation
parallel to protolith bedding

Lithologic contact

La

ke

fa

ul

MAP LOCATION

t

Topographic and orthophoto base from USGS (2014).

SCALE 1:12 000

0

1/2
.5

0

1 MILE

1/2
.5

1 KILOMETER

Strike & dip of joints & fractures

37

Fault contact
85

Trend of minor folds. Arrows
on long axes indicate direction
of plunge. Degree of plunge
shown where measured.

Fault contact, dashed where
approximately located, dotted
where concealed or inferred.

Strike & dip of fault
Great Salt Lake fault,
Promontory Section

References:
Advanced Environmental Engineering, Inc. (AEEI), 2008, “Promontory Landfill LLC Class I Landfill Permit Application”, dated August 2008.
Applied Geotechnical Engineering Consultants, Inc (AGEC), 2003, “Geotechnical and Geologic Study, Promontory Landfill, LLC Class I Landfill…”, Project No. 1020875,
dated July 21, 2003.
Black, B.D., et. al., compilers, 2004, Fault number 2369a, East Great Salt Lake fault zone, Promontory section, in Quaternary fault and fold database of the
United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults,
accessed 08/28/2015 12:01 PM.
Crittenden, et. al., 1988, Bedrock Geologic Map of the Promontory Mountains, Box Elder County, Utah”, United States Geological Survey,
Open-File Report 88-646, map scale 1:100,000.
Currey, et. al., 1984, “Major Levels of Great Salt Lake and Lake Bonneville”, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey, Map 73, scale 1:750,000.
Nelson, D.T., and Jewell, P.W., 2015, “Geologic Map of Unconsolidated Deposits in the Hogup Bar Quadrangle, Box Elder County, Utah”, Utah Geological Survey
Miscellaneous Publication 15-2DM, 20 p.
Oviatt, C.G., 2014, “The Gilbert Episode in the Great Salt Lake Basin”, Utah Geological Survey Miscellaneous Publication 14-3, 16 p. and map, scale 1:24,000.
Tetra Tech BAS, 2015, “Preliminary Geologic Map, Cross-Sections and Field Exploration Locations”, scale: 1:12,000.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2014, “Promontory Point, Utah 2014”, 7.5-Minute Series Quadrangle Map, scale 1:24,000, The World Map,
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

Lithologic contact

Strike & dip of bedding

MAG

TRUE NORTH

H

cgc

Tetra Tech BAS, 2015

AGEC Exploration, 2003

12°

Geologic Map and Interpreted Cross-Sections

JOB NO
DATE

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill Development
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate 4

 LEGEND
Wfz - BC

GS

L-

Holocene to Latest
Pleistocene Fault (<15ka)

P

Late Quaternary Fault
(<130ka)

Mid to Late Quaternary
Fault (<750ka)

Project Site

Quaternary Fault (<1.2Ma)

Wfz - W

L-

GS
FI

N
L-

GS

GSL - AI

Great Salt Lake fault
Antelope Island Section

GSL - FI

Great Salt Lake fault
Fremont Island Section

GSL - P

Great Salt Lake fault
Promontory Section

Wfz - BC

Wasatch fault zone
Brigham City Section

Wfz - SLC

Wasatch fault zone
Salt Lake City Section

Wfz - W

Wasatch fault zone
Weber Section

Wfz - SLC

AI
Approximate Scale
1:480000

Drawing References: 1) Google Earth Pro, 2016
2) USGS, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States (visited 2016-09-26)

Regional Fault Map

JOB NO
DATE

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.8017

Promontory Point Landfill Development
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate 5

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Appendix A
Logs of Exploratory Borings and Test Pits

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Appendix A
Logs of Exploratory Borings and Test Pits
Bulk and relatively undisturbed drive samples were obtained in the field during our subsurface
evaluation. The samples were tagged in the field and transported to our laboratory for observation
and testing. The drive samples were obtained using the California Split Barrel Drive and Standard
Penetration Test (SPT) sampler as described below.
California Split Barrel Drive Sampler
The split barrel drive sampler was driven with a 140-pound hammer allowed to drop freely
30 inches. The number of blows per foot recorded during sampling is presented in the logs of
exploratory borings. The sampler has external and internal diameters of approximately 3.0 and
2.4 inches, respectively, and the inside of the sampler is lined with 1-inch-long brass rings. The
relatively undisturbed soil sample within the rings is removed, sealed, and transported to the
laboratory for observation and testing.
Standard Penetration Test Sampler
The standard penetration test sampler is driven with a 140-pound hammer allowed to drop freely
30 inches in general accordance with ASTM D1586. The number of blows (N-value) required to
drive the SPT sampler 12 inches is shown on the borings logs. The sampler has external and
internal diameters of approximately 2.0 and 1.4 inches respectively. The sampling tube consists
of an unlined split-tube barrel. The disturbed soil sample is removed, sealed, and transported to
the laboratory for testing.

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Key to Log of Boring

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Sample Type

Sample Number

Sampling Resistance

USCS Symbol

Graphic Log

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

Depth (feet)

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Water Content, %

Elevation (feet)

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

9

10

11

COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
1 Elevation (feet): Elevation (MSL, feet).
2 Depth (feet): Depth in feet below the ground surface.
3 Sample Type: Type of soil sample collected at the depth interval
shown.
4 Sample Number: Sample identification number.
5 Sampling Resistance: Number of blows to advance driven sampler
one foot (or distance shown) beyond seating interval using the
hammer identified on the boring log.
6 USCS Symbol: USCS symbol of the subsurface material.

7 Graphic Log: Graphic depiction of the subsurface material
encountered.
8 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: Description of material encountered.
May include consistency, moisture, color, and other descriptive
text.
9 Water Content, %: Water content of the soil sample, expressed as
percentage of dry weight of sample.
10 Dry Unit Weight, pcf: Dry weight per unit volume of soil sample
measured in laboratory, in pounds per cubic foot.
11 REMARKS AND OTHER TESTS: Comments and observations
regarding drilling or sampling made by driller or field personnel.

FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST ABBREVIATIONS
MATERIAL GRAPHIC SYMBOLS
Lean CLAY, CLAY w/SAND, SANDY CLAY (CL)

Silty SAND (SM)

Poorly graded GRAVEL (GP)

Poorly graded SAND (SP)

SILT, SILT w/SAND, SANDY SILT (ML)

Poorly graded SAND with Silt (SP-SM)

Quartzite

Well graded SAND (SW)

TYPICAL SAMPLER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

OTHER GRAPHIC SYMBOLS

Auger sampler

CME Sampler

Pitcher Sample

Bulk Sample

Grab Sample

2-inch-OD unlined split
spoon (SPT)

2.5-inch-OD California w/
brass rings

3.0-inch-OD Modified
California w/ brass liners

Shelby Tube (Thin-walled,
fixed head)

Water level (at time of drilling, ATD)
Water level (after waiting)
Minor change in material properties within a
stratum
Inferred/gradational contact between strata
?

Queried contact between strata

GENERAL NOTES
1: AD After drilling
2: ATD At time of drilling

Figure A-1

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-100

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Approximate
4213
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
6.5 feet
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location 41.21440, -112.47424 Sta. -5+15, 260' RT, near the east terminus of the rail spur

4213

0

SP-SM

SK-1

4208

5
SPT-2

6
11
11

Quartzite

4203

10
SPT-3

4198

15

4193

20

4188

25

4183

30

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
FILL:
Poorly graded SAND and Silty SAND, light gray, fine- to
medium-grained, moist, loose to medium dense, with scattered
GRAVEL and accessory CLAY.

5.3

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Water Content, %

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Graphic Log

Total Depth
11.5
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-20
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

G:22 S:68 F:10

...@ 5 feet, dark gray, wet, with slight petroliferous odor

...SPT-02 @ 5',
No sample
recovered

BEDROCK:
QUARTZITE, dark gray, hard, intensely fractured, slightly
FeO-stained, w/ CaCO3-filled veins

...@ 8 ft, hard
drilling,
chattering

27
39
60/5"

Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 11.5 feet BGS.
2) Practical refusal to auger drilling at 10 feet BGS.
3) Wet at 6.5 feet BGS, possible perched GWT.
4) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-101

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Approximate
4221
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location

SP

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

5
SPT-2

4211

10
R-3

4206

15
SPT-4

1.3

5
8
10

GP

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
Sandy GRAVEL, matrix is light brown, fine- to coarse-grained
SAND, dry, dense, reacts strongly to mild HCl; clasts are fine
GRAVEL, well-rounded, primarily quartzite

SM

Silty SAND, light gray, fine- to medium-grained, damp to moist,
dense, w/ scattered GRAVEL and accessory CaCO3 as detrital or
cementitious component.

22
38
42

15
18
16
Quartzite

4201

20

4196

25

4191

30

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

ALLUVIUM (Qal):
SAND, light gray, fine- to medium-grained, dry, medium dense, w/
scattered GRAVEL

SK-1

4216

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

0

41.21687, -112.47892 - Sta. 13+75, 35' RT, north side of the existing low dredged
area

Water Content, %

4221

Graphic Log

Total Depth
17
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-20
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

BEDROCK (QUARTZITE)
Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 17 feet BGS.
2) Refusal to auger drilling at 17 feet BGS.
3) Groundwater not encountered.
4) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.
5) Parallel boring B-101P drilled approx. 20 ft SE to confirm depth to
bedrock.

G:7 S:90 F:3

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-101P

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Approximate
4221
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location

4216

5

4211

10

4206

15

R-5

SP

ALLUVIUM (Qal):
SAND, light gray, fine- to medium-grained, dry, medium dense, w/
scattered GRAVEL

GP

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
Sandy GRAVEL, matrix is light brown, fine- to coarse-grained
SAND, dry, dense, reacts strongly to mild HCl; clasts are fine
GRAVEL, well-rounded, primarily quartzite

SM

Silty SAND, light gray, fine- to medium-grained, damp to moist,
dense, w/ scattered GRAVEL and accessory CaCO3 as detrital or
cementitious component.

15
27
22
Quartzite

4201

20

4196

25

4191

30

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

BEDROCK (QUARTZITE)
Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 16.8 feet BGS.
2) Refusal to auger drilling at 16.8 feet BGS.
3) Groundwater not encountered.
4) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.
5) Boring was drilled as a parallel hole to B-101 to confirm depth to
bedrock.

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

0

41.21686, -112.47887 - Sta. 13+65, 50' RT, north side of the existing low dredged
area

Water Content, %

4221

Graphic Log

Total Depth
16.8
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-20
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

10.1

97.8

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

15.5-16'
DUW=97.8
WC=10.1
16-16.5'
DUW=101.6
WC=7.4
Consol

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-102

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 2

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Approximate
4225
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location

SP

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

R-2

4215

10
SPT-3

4210

15

G:33 S:63 F:4

1.8

SM

5

6
14
20

Silty SAND, light yellowish brown, fine- to medium-grained, damp,
medium dense, w/ scattered fine GRAVEL
4.6

SP

Poorly graded SAND, light brown, fine- to coarse-grained, moist,
dense, w/ scattered quartzite GRAVEL to 2 inch diameter

GP

GRAVEL and COBBLES, matrix is poorly graded SAND, dry to
damp, very dense, w/ CaCO3 cementation; clasts composed of
quartzite, well-rounded

17
17
16

SPT-4 60/6"

Quartzite

4205

20

SPT-05

18
22
60/4.5"

4200

25

SPT-6

48
60/4.5"

4195

30

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
Poorly graded SAND, light brown, fine- to coarse-grained, dry,
medium dense, w/ fine GRAVEL

SK-1

4220

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

0

41.21741, -112.47881 - Sta. 15+94, 8' RT, access road north of the existing low
dredged area

Water Content, %

4225

Graphic Log

Total Depth
31.5
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit/ 3-7/8-in. rock bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling 8" Hollow-Stem Auger / 4"
Method Mud-Rotary

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-20
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

BEDROCK:
QUARTZITE, dark gray, hard, intensely fractured, highly
weathered, w/ CaCO3 and CLAY infilling fractures and FeO-staining

...@ 25 feet, no FeO-staining observed

103.7

Consol

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-102

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 2 of 2

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

4195

30

4190

35

4185

40

4180

45

4175

50

4170

55

4165

60

4160

65

SPT-7

...@ 25 feet, no FeO-staining observed
Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 31.5 feet BGS.
2) Practical refusal to auger drilling at 15 feet BGS.
3) Practical refusal to mud-rotary drilling at 31.5 feet BGS.
4) Groundwater not encountered above 15 feet BGS.
5) Groundwater not measured below 15 feet BGS (mud-rotary
drilling).
6) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Water Content, %

Graphic Log

22
48
60/5"

USCS Symbol

Sampling Resistance

Sample Number

Sample Type

Depth (feet)

Elevation (feet)

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-103

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Approximate
4251
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location 41.22154, -112.48036 - Sta. 33+50, 8' RT, on rail spur alignment

4251

0

SM

SK-1

4246

R-2

5
6
8

SPT-3

10
8
8

5

SPT-4

4241

4236

10

8
9
16

SPT-5

7
30
50/3"

R-6

36
50/4"

SPT-7

10
8
9

R-8

15
24
28

15

20
R-9

4226

25
SPT-10

GP

(COBBLES)

SM

GP

Silty SAND, yellowish brown, fine- to coarse-grained, dry, medium
dense, w/ GRAVEL
Sandy GRAVEL, matrix is silty SAND, yellowish brown, fine- to
coarse-grained, dry to damp, very dense; clasts composed of
quartzite, well-rounded

SP

Poorly graded SAND with GRAVEL

ML

Clayey SILT, light olive gray, damp to moist, very stiff
... @ 17 feet, becomes sandy w/ scattered GRAVEL

19
31
32

18
8
10

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
Silty SAND, yellowish brown, dry, loose, fine-grained, w/ scattered
well-rounded GRAVEL
2.7

GP

4231

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

30

8.6

89.4

14.5

108.4

6.7

131.9

Poorly graded GRAVEL, matrix is Silty SAND, damp to moist,
dense, w/ CLAY

SP

Poorly graded SAND with GRAVEL

CL

Lean CLAY, light gray, moist, stiff.

GP

COBBLES

Notes:
4221

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Water Content, %

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Graphic Log

Total Depth
28
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-21
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-104

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Approximate
4255
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location 41.22441, -112.48277 - Sta. 44+90, 2' LT, overhead excavator location

4255

0

4250

4245

SPT-2
SK-1

8
9
10

SPT-3

8
9
8

R-4

10
14
21

SPT-5

32
50/5"

SPT-6

20
23
18

SPT-7

7
10
10

5

10

ML

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
SILT, yellowish brown, dry, w/ fine GRAVEL and fine- to
coarse-grained SAND

SP

Poorly graded SAND, fine- to coarse-grained, dry, medium dense,
w/ scattered GRAVEL

GP

...COBBLES

SP

... @ 7.5 feet, becomes damp

15

20

4230

25

4225

30

SPT-8

40
50/0.5"

2.7

Poorly graded GRAVEL, matrix is poorly graded SAND, dry, dense
0.9

... @ 15 feet, medium dense

... COBBLES and BOULDERS

4235

1.5

... @ 10 feet, very dense

GP

4240

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

... @ 20 feet, very dense
Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 20.5 feet BGS.
2) Practical refusal to auger drilling at 20 feet BGS in cobbles and
boulders.
3) Groundwater not encountered.
4) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Water Content, %

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Graphic Log

Total Depth
21.5
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-21
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

103.7

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-105

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 2

Total Depth
30.3
of Borehole

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Approximate
4265
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location

SW

SK-1

4260

4255

4250

4245

4240

SPT-2

4
15
8

R-3

6
9
9

SPT-4

8
13
10

SPT-5

4
9
8

5

10

R-6

8
9
11

SPT-7

7
9
9

R-8

11
19
20

15

20

25
SPT-9

4235

30

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Water Content, %

0

41.22988, -112.48702 - Sta. 68+00 Borrow Pit, west of the western terminus of the
rail spur

Graphic Log

4265

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By PS

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-21
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

FILL (Qaf):
Well graded SAND, light brown, fine-grained, dry to damp, medium
dense
1.5

... @ 5 feet, loose

SP

ALLUVIUM (Qal):
Poorly graded SAND, yellowish brown, fine- to coarse-grained,
medium dense, w/ scattered GRAVEL

SW

Well graded SAND, fine-grained, damp, medium dense, w/
scattered GRAVEL

... @ 20 feet, trace of fine GRAVEL

ML

LACUSTRINE DEPOSITS OF LAKE BONNEVILLE (Qla):
Sandy SILT, olive gray, moist to wet, medium dense, with trace FeO
streaks and trace of CLAY

GP

... GRAVEL and SAND

5
7
7

Quartzite

BEDROCK or large BOULDER

11.6

85.9

4.4

79.6

6.3

92.3

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring B-105

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 2 of 2

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

4235

30

4230

35

4225

40

4220

45

4215

50

4210

55

4205

60

4200

65

SPT-10 50/3"

Quartzite

BEDROCK or large BOULDER
Notes:
1) Boring terminated at 30.3 feet BGS.
2) Practical refusal to auger drilling at 30 feet BGS in Quartzite
BEDROCK or large BOULDER.
3) Groundwater not encountered.
4) Boring backfilled w/ cuttings and tamped.

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Water Content, %

Graphic Log

USCS Symbol

Sampling Resistance

Sample Number

Sample Type

Depth (feet)

Elevation (feet)

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 Project: Promontory Point Landfill

Log of Boring For Key

Project Location: Box Elder County, UT

Sheet 1 of 1

Approximate
Surface Elevation

Groundwater Level
Not Encountered
and Date Measured

Sampling
Bulk, SPT, Cal-Mod.
Method(s)

Hammer
140-lb 30-in drop
Data

Borehole
Cuttings/Tamped
Backfill

Location

0

SP
SP-SM
SM
SW
ML

5

CL
GP
Quartzite

10

15

20

25

30

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION

Dry Unit Weight, pcf

Drilling
RB&G Engineering
Contractor

Water Content, %

Drill Rig
CME 55
Type

Graphic Log

Total Depth
8 feet bgs
of Borehole

USCS Symbol

Drill Bit
10-in. cutter bit
Size/Type

Sampling Resistance

Drilling
8" Hollow-Stem Auger
Method

Sample Number

Checked By

Sample Type

Logged By J. Geraci

Depth (feet)

Date(s)
2016-07-21
Drilled

Elevation (feet)

L:\02 - PROJECTS\2015 Projects\BAS 15-99E (2015-0112) Promontory Point LF - Box Elder County, UT\03 Field & Lab\Boring Logs\Boring Logs September 2016 rev.bg4[30-35 with 2 lab Tt LOGO.tpl]

Project Number: 197-2015-0012

REMARKS AND
OTHER TESTS

 0

TP-106

TP-107

TP-108

TP-109

TP-110

TP-111

TP-112

TP-113

TP-114

TP-115

Elev. 4272’

Elev. 4313’

Elev. 4335’

Elev. 4304’

Elev. 4320’

Elev. 4305’

Elev. 4323’

Elev. 4299’

Elev. 4324’

Elev. 4305’

GM

SM1

G P1

SM2

G P1
SM2

SM2

SM1

G P1

Qtzt
COBBLES &
BOULDERS
throughout

G P1

2’D

(tufa)
G-01
Qtzt

Qtzt
SP1

5

GP 2

Qtzt

5’D

Qtzt

5’D

GP 2
Qtzt

GP 2

6’D

DEPTH (ft. b.g.s.)

7’D
8’D

SM1

cemented
7’ - 11’

cemented
7’ - 10’
(marl)

G P1

(marl)

ML

10

10’C

10’E
SK-01

11’C

15
G P1
fine GRAVEL
w/ FeO-Staining

18.5’A
(Refer to Page 2 of 2 for Legend of symbols and units.)

Log of Test Pits TP-106 through TP-115

JOB NO
DATE

Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate A-1

 0

TP-116

TP-117

TP-118

TP-119

TP-120

Elev. 4340’

Elev. 4307’

Elev. 4343’

Elev. 4307’

Elev. 4271’

Legend
Quaternary colluvial, alluvial and lacustrine units:
Topsoil: generally brown sandy SILT or silty SAND, loose, dry, with scattered gravel, scattered
grass roots and small visible pores. Generally < 1’ thick.

SM1
SM2
SM2

G P1

SM2

Silty SAND with GRAVEL: yellowish brown, generally fine to coarse, loose to medium dense,
generally dry, abundant GRAVEL, cobbles or boulders with clasts consisting primarily of quartzite
with trace dolomitic limestone.

ML

Sandy SILT with GRAVEL: yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) with fine SAND, dense, dry, scattered
GRAVEL to 2”, detrital calcium carbonate and partially carbonate-cemented, with secondary CLAY films.

CL-ML

5

SP1
G P1
G P1

DEPTH (ft. b.g.s.)

Silty SAND: brown to yellowish brown, generally fine to coarse, loose to medium dense,
generally dry, often with scattered GRAVEL or cobbles.

GM

cemented
zones
3.5’ - 7.5’

G P1

G-01

ML

cemented
9’ - 10’

G-01

G-01

SP2

Silty GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subrounded to subangular, clasts
are generally fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles or boulders as noted, matrix is SILT, loose to
medium dense, dry, with fine SAND or CLAY.

G P1

GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subangular to subrounded, clasts are generally
fine to coarse gravel, with cobbles or boulders as noted, matrix is poorly graded SAND or silty SAND,
medium dense to dense, dry, common cemented zones or lenses.

GP 2

Poorly-Graded GRAVEL, Cobbles and Boulders: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally subangular,
clasts range from coarse gravel to small boulders, matrix is poorly graded SAND (where present), dry.

GW1

Well-Graded GRAVEL: Clasts are predominantly quartzite, generally angular to subangular, clasts range
from fine to coarse gravel, matrix is poorly graded SAND or silty SAND, dense, dry, cemented within the
upper profile, decreasing in cementation with depth.

SP1

Poorly-graded SAND: generally very pale brown to light gray, generally fine to coarse, loose to
medium dense, generally dry, commonly with with scattered GRAVEL or cobbles.

SP2

Poorly-graded SAND with GRAVEL: generally very pale brown to light gray, generally fine to coarse,
loose to medium dense, dry, with abundant fine to coarse GRAVEL or cobbles, often cemented or
with cemented zones or lenses.

11’B

ML

Precambrian and Paleozoic bedrock units:
Qtzt
G P1

15

BK-01

15’B

CLAY with SILT: dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) with fine SAND, stiff, damp, scattered
GRAVEL to 2”, detrital calcium carbonate and partially carbonate-cemented.

GM

10’C

SP1

GP 2

heavy
caving in
sand

CL-ML

ML

9’C

10

SM1

15’B

QUARTZITE (undivided): Precambrian and Cambrian metasedimentary bedrock of the Mutual,
Browns Hole and Geertsen Canyon Formations. Units are typically hard, highly-weathered and
intensely-fractured. Some fractures are observed to be filled with clay and carbonate minerals.

G-03
Bulk sample: bucket

SK-04
Bulk sample: sack

11.5’A

Grab sample
Test pit termination depth
Subscripts:
A: maximum vertical digging depth
B: impeded by heavy caving
C: refusal in cemented lacustrine gravels
D: refusal in metamorphic rock
E: maximum depth explored

Notes:
1) Test pits excavated on 2016-07-18 and 2016-07-19 with a Kobelco 200 excavator.
2) Maximum digging depth for a Kobelco 200 Excavator is 17.7 to 20.2 ft.
3) All lacustrine units exhibit effervescence when tested with 10% HCl.
4) Groundwater was not encountered during the excavations.
5) Test Pits were backfilled with excavation spoils.

Log of Test Pits TP-116 through TP-120

JOB NO
DATE

Promontory Point Landfill
Box Elder County, Utah

DRAWN BY

BAS 15-99E
September 2016
JPG
Plate A-2

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Appendix B
Results of Laboratory Testing

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Appendix B
Results of Laboratory Testing
Classification
Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System. Soil classifications are indicated on the log of the exploratory boring in Appendix A.
In-Place Moisture and Dry Density Tests
The moisture contents and dry densities of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the
exploratory boreholes were evaluated in general accordance with the latest version of
ASTM D2937. The test results are presented on the log of the exploratory borings in Appendix A.
Particle Size Analysis
An evaluation of the particle size analysis for selected soil samples were performed in general
accordance with ASTM D422. The results of the analysis are presented the borehole logs in
Appendix A and in the back of this Appendix B.
Atterberg Limits Tests
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of selected and representative on-site materials
were performed in general accordance with ASTM D4318. The results of this test are presented
on the borehole logs in Appendix A and in the table below.
Sample
Location

Sample
Depth
(ft)

Soil Type
USCS

Liquid Limit
(%)

Plastic Limit
(%)

Plasticity
Index
(%)

TP-116

7.5-9.5

SC

28

24

4

TP-118

8-10

SC

25

20

5

Direct Shear Tests
The samples were tested under various normal loads. The samples were sheared at a constant rate
of strain selected in general accordance with the consolidation characteristics of the soils (Section
7.3 of ASTM D3080). The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field
conditions. Shearing of the specimens was continued until the shear stress became essentially
constant or until a deformation of approximately 10 percent of the original diameter had been
reached. The results of one-point direct shear tests are presented in the back of this Appendix.
Consolidation Tests
Consolidation tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed soil samples in general
accordance with the latest version of ASTM D2435. The samples were inundated during testing
to represent adverse field conditions. The percent consolidation for each load cycle was recorded
as a ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original height of the sample. Load versus
deformation curves are presented in the back of this Appendix B.

 Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Corrosivity Series
The corrosivity of a selected sample was evaluated in general accordance with National
Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) Protocols. The result of this test
is presented in Table 11 in the report and in the back of this Appendix B.

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-09-09

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-09-10

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

Note:

RE G-01 PM040

quarry wall

Sample Depth:
Brown Silt

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

1

LIQUID LIMIT

2

Number of Blows
Container ID

1

2

3

36

27

16

P8

F1

T38

T21

S5

4

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

32.80

30.40

50.30

54.50

50.90

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

29.80

27.80

46.30

49.60

46.30

Weight of Container

grams

12.40

12.40

25.80

25.50

25.70

* Moisture Weight

grams

3.00

2.60

4.00

4.90

4.60

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

17.40

15.40

20.50

24.10

20.60

* Moisture Content

%

17.2

16.9

19.5

20.3

22.3

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Liquid Limit (%)

Plastic Limit

17

Liquid Limit

21

Plasticity Index

4

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

ML

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-08-26

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-08-31

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

G-01 PM047

Note:

quarry wall

Sample Depth:
Reddish Brown Clayey Silt

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

1

LIQUID LIMIT

2

Number of Blows
Container ID

1

2

3

35

26

15

P8

F1

T38

N21

S5

4

Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

24.00

23.90

53.60

53.50

51.20

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

22.00

21.80

48.20

47.70

45.50

Weight of Container

grams

12.40

12.40

25.80

25.50

25.70

* Moisture Weight

grams

2.00

2.10

5.40

5.80

5.70

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

9.60

9.40

22.40

22.20

19.80

* Moisture Content

%

24.1

26.1

28.8

20.8

22.3

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Liquid Limit (%)

Plastic Limit

22

Liquid Limit

26

Plasticity Index

4

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

ML

 ATTERBERG LIMITS
ASTM D4318
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Date Sampled:

2015-08-26

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

2015-08-31

Tested By:

MG

Sample Identification:

SK-01 PT-06

Sample Depth:

1.3ft to 2.3 ft

Note:
Pale Brown Silty Sand

Sample Description:

PLASTIC LIMIT
Test No.

LIQUID LIMIT

1

2

1

2

3

4

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

Number of Blows
Container ID
Wet Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

Dry Weight of Soil + Cont.

grams

Weight of Container

grams

* Moisture Weight

grams

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

* Weight of Dry Soil

grams

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

* Moisture Content

%

NP

NP

NP

NP

NP

Plasticity Chart
60

CH or OH

Plasticity Index (%)

50
40
30

CL or

MH or OH

OL

20
10
CL or ML

ML or OL

0
0

10

20

30

Plastic Limit

NP

Liquid Limit

NP

Plasticity Index

NP

40

50
60
Liquid Limit (%)

70

80

USCS Classification

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: (909) 860-7777

90

100

SM

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0012:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2 in

100%

1 1/2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PM040

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

2μ

G-01

quarry wall

22

0

ML

1%

20%

79%

26%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0012:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2 in

100%

1 1/2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PM047

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

2μ

G-01

quarry wall

26

5

SM

1%

53%

46%

14%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

1 1/2 in

2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PT-02

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

BK-01

8.5-9.5

-

-

GW

66%

29%

4%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

#200

#80
#100

#50

#40

#30

#16

#8
#10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

1 1/2 in

2 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol

Boring
No.
PT-03

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

BK-01

3.1-4.5

-

-

SM

15%

65%

20%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

 GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ANALYSIS
ASTM C136/C117/D422
Job Name:

Promontory Land Fill

Tested By :

MG

Job Number:

197-2015-0112:200

Date Completed:

August 31, 2015

Address:
Date Sampled: August 26, 2015

100%

# 200

#80
# 100

# 50

#40

# 30

# 16

#8
# 10

#4

3/8 in

1/2 in

3/4 in

1 in

2in

1 1/2 in

3 in

6 in

U.S. Standard Sieve Size

90%
PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
100

10

1

0.1

0.01

0.001

GRAIN SIZE (mm)

Symbol Boring No.
BK-01

Sample #

Deph (feet)

LL

PI

USCS

Gravel

Sand

Fines

PT-05

4ft-5ft

-

-

GW

58%

23%

4%

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel.: (909) 860-7777

2μ

 Table 1

SUMMARY OF TEST DATA
PROJECT
LOCATION

PROJECT NO.
FEATURE

Promontory Point Project
Promontory Point, UT
IN-PLACE

UNCONFINED
OR UU
TRIAXIAL
COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH
(psf)

ATTERBERG LIMITS

HOLE
NO.

DEPTH
BELOW
GROUND
SURFACE
(ft)

B-100

0-5

B-101

0-5

B-101P*

15.5-16

97.8

10.1

B-101P

16-16.5

101.6

7.4

B-102

0-5

B-102

5

B-103

0-5

B-103

2.5

89.4

8.6

B-103

17.5

108.4

14.5

B-103

20

131.9

6.7

B-104

5

B-104

7.5

B-104

12.5

B-105

0-5

B-105

5

85.9

11.6

B-105

12.5

79.6

4.4

B-105

20

92.3

6.3

TP-116

7.5-9.5

24.1

28

24

TP 118

8-10

24.8

25

20

DRY
UNIT
WEIGHT
(pcf)

0-7

LIQUID
LIMIT
(%)

PLASTIC
LIMIT
(%)

MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

PLASTICITY
INDEX
(%)

103.7

5.3

22

68

10

4.6

SP-SM

1.3

7

90

3

0.8

SP

33

63

4

2.9

SP

2

51

47

19.9

SM

19

75

6

2.0

SP-SM

0.9

52

42

6

1.5

GP-GM

1.5

25

67

8

2.8

SP-SM

4

0

14

86

10.9

ML

5

0

23

77

13.0

CL-ML

4.6

1.5

8.5

UNIFIED
SOIL
CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM

PERCENT
SAND

2.7

103.7

PERCENT
FINER THAN
PERCENT
0.005 mm
SILT &
CLAY

PERCENT
GRAVEL

1.8

pH
B-104

MOISTURE
(%)

201601-030
Foundations

2.7

Resistivity Chloride
(ohm-cm) (mg/kg-dry)
2300

36.2

Sulfate
(mg/kg-dry)
<5.04

*Consolidation test originally requested on sample labled B-101 R-03 @ 10', however this sample was clean gravels. Spoke with Jeff who said to test
sample labled B-101P R-05b @ 15.5-16'. We did not have a sample that matched this location. We did however have a sample labled B-102 R5 @
15.5-16', this sample was not shown on the sample log that was provided to us. It was assumed that the sample was mislabled so the consolidation test
was performed on the sample labled B-102 R5 @ 15.5-16'.

NP=Non-Plastic

H:\2016\030_Promontory Point Drilling & Sampling\Lab Testing\Testing Summary

 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHT

1435 West 320 North, Provo. Utah 34601

 

RB 856

 

 

 

 

 

 

801 374-5771 Provo 
ENGINEERING, INC. 801 5216771 SaltLake City PROJECT NO. 201601.030 REPORT NO. NA
SIEVE ANALYSIS (GRADATION)
GRAVEL SAND . SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE I COARSE MEDIUM I FINE
4" 3" 112100

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

80E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60.,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

71
I

 

 

 

40  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 






LEGEND I I 
3-100 AT SILTY SAND SP-SM
I 3-101 AT SAND SP
A 3-102 AT 06', SAND SP
0 3-103 AT 025', SILTY SAND, SM
0 3-104 AT SILTY SAND SP-SM
3-104 AT 125'. GRAVEL SAND, GP-GM I
3-105 AT 025', SAND WISILT GRAVEL, SP-SM 
:01 TP-116 AT SILT ML
0 TP-118 AT SILTY CLAY 

100 1.0

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Project PROMONTORY POINT DRILLING SAMPLING Date 03/03/2016 TO 03/05/2016

Location PROMONTORY POINT, UTAH Technician S. NEIL, D. SCHWICHT I
Sample NoJDepth SEE LEGEND  Procedure  PLAIN WATER 
Material Description SEE LEGEND USCS SEE LEGEND Method u" ASTM c117, C136, 0566, D422

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ear/Horizontal DisplacementNormal Stress. an(psi)
I I I I I Shear Strength
I Test Sam I amp 3 a a Degree MaXImum Straln Parameters
No. . pe - of Normal Shear Rate - -
I slze Dry MOIsture I Stress I FrIctIon .
or . -t I Saturatlon Stress (Inchesi An I 
I (Inches) enSI on en 0 on I I (psi)
ym (I)ch (oh) I r(ps:) mInute) (degrees)
0 2.43 89.0 3.3 -100 3.5 2.7 0.0014
I 2.42 39.2 8.4 ~100 7.3 5.6 0.0014 32.7 0.7
A 2.40 i 90.1 9.0 -100 11.3 7.7 0.0014

MATERIAL: SILT, ML
    HOLE B403
Project: Promontory Point Dilling Sampling

ENGINEERING, INC.

 

Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah

DEPTH: 2.5'

 

4/Horizontal Displacement, an (inNormal Stress, 
I I  Shear Strength
Test samp 9 Data Degree Maximum Strain Parameters
Sample I Normal 
0' Size Dry Moisture 0f. Stress ear ate Friction .
or - Saturatlon Stress (Inchesl 
(Inches) DenSIty Content 0 Ohms? I . Angle Si)
Symbol (pcf) (A) l' (psl) I mInute) (degrees) 
2.43 103.5 2.5 ~100 3.4 3.1 0.0014 i
I 2.41 103.6 2.7 ~100 7.5 5.9 I 0.0014 37.2 I 0.4
A I 2.40 104.0 2.3 -100 11.3 9.1 0.0014
 
I
MATERIAL: SAND, SP
RB  DIRECT SHEAR TEST HOLE B404
Project: Promontory Point Dilling Sampling

ENGINEERING, INC.

 

Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah

DEPTH: 7.5?

Void Ratio (9)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pressure (tons/ftZ)

.75


\w
.70 



.65 
.60
ENGINEERING, INC. 
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 
.55
Project No.  Boring No. 
Surface Elev. Depth Interval 15-5216.
Moisture Content 10?1 Dry Unit Wt. 97-8  bs.ifta
.50
Project: Promontory Point Billing 61 Sampling
Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah
.45
0.01 0.1 1 .0 1 0

NOTE: SAMPLE INUNDATED AT 0.58 

 

Void Ratio 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.ENGINEERING, INC.
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
.45
Project No.  Bon'ng No. A
Sun?ace Elev. Depth Interval 5'
Moisture Content 4-6 Dry Unit Wt. 103-7  bs.it?t3
LL NP PL PI NP 
.40
Project: Promontory Point Billing Sampling
Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah
1
.35
0.01 0. 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.0

Pressure (tons/f?)



10
NOTE: SAMPLE INUNDATED AT 0.58 

 

 

1.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.90 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pressure (tons/f?)


.9

D:



.85 
ENGINEERING, INC. 
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS 
.80 .
Project No.  Bon'ng No. 3-105
Surface Elev. Depth Interval 5'
Moisture Content 11-6 Dry Unit Wt. 85-9 Ist.75
Project: Promontory Point Billing Sampling 4
Promontory Point, Box Elder County, Utah
I
.70 1
0.01 0.1 1 .0 1 0

NOTE: SAMPLE INUNDATED AT 0.58 

 

 

Strata Renewable Resources, LLC
Promontory Point Landfill Development

Project No. BAS 15-99E
September 30, 2016

Appendix C
Slope Stability and Permanent Seismic Deformation Analyses

 Promontory Landfill Development
Rail Spur Line Embankment Stability
Name: Embankment Stability
Method: Spencer
PWP Conditions Source: (none)
Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit
Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No
Horz Seismic Coef.: 0

q=2,750 lbs/ft

1.711

40

2

Depth (feet)

20

1

Embankment
0

-20

-40

Bedrock
-60
0

40

80

120

Name: Embankment
Model: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 125 pcf
Cohesion': 50 psf
Phi': 35 °

160

200

240

Name: Bedrock
Model: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 130 pcf
Cohesion': 300 psf
Phi': 40 °

280

320

360

 Promontory Landfill Development
Rail Spur Line Embankment Stability
Name: Yield Acceleration
Method: Spencer
PWP Conditions Source: (none)
Slip Surface Option: Entry and Exit
Optimize Critical Slip Surface Location: No
Horz Seismic Coef.: 0.267

q=2,750 lbs/ft

1.001

40

2

Depth (feet)

20

1

Embankment
0

-20

-40

Bedrock
-60
0

40

80

120

Name: Embankment
Model: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 125 pcf
Cohesion': 50 psf
Phi': 35 °

160

200

240

Name: Bedrock
Model: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 130 pcf
Cohesion': 300 psf
Phi': 40 °

280

320

360

 Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake Induced Deviatoric Slope Displacements
by Jonathan D. Bray and Thaleia Travasarou
Journal of Geotechnical and Geonvironmental Engineering, ASCE, V. 133(4), pp. 381-392, April 2007
SEE NOTES BELOW FOR GUIDANCE IN THE USE OF SPREADSHEET
Input Parameters
Yield Coefficient (ky)
Initial Fundamental Period (Ts)
Degraded Period (1.5Ts)
Moment Magnitude (Mw)
Spectral Acceleration ( Sa(1.5Ts) )

0.267
0.03 seconds
0.05 seconds
6.5
0.52 g

Additional Input Parameters
Probability of Exceedance #1 (P1)
Probability of Exceedance #2 (P2)
Probability of Exceedance #3 (P3)
Displacement Threshold (d_threshold)
Intermediate Calculated Parameters
Non-Zero Seismic Displacement Est (D)
Standard Deviation of Non-Zero Seismic D

84
50
16
15

Based on pseudostatic analysis
1D: Ts=4H/Vs 2D: Ts=2.6H/Vs

%
%
%
cm

3.46 cm
0.66

Results
Probability of Negligible Displ. (P(D=0))
D1

0.416
<1

D2

1.71

cm

D3
P(D>d_threshold)

5.15
0.008

cm

eq. (5) or (6)

eq. (3)

cm

<1
0.7
2.0

in

calc. using eq. (7)

in

calc. using eq. (7)

in

calc. using eq. (7)
eq. (7)

Notes
1. Values highlighted in blue are input parameters
2. Probability of Exceedance is the desired probability of exceeding a particular displacement value.
3. Displacements D1, D2, and D3 correspond to P1, P2, and P3, respectively.
(e.g., the probability of exceeding displacement D1 is P1)
4. Calculated seismic displacements are due to deviatoric deformation only (add in volumetrically induced movement).
5. ky may range between 0.01 and 0.5, Ts between 0 and 2 s, Sa between 0.002 and 2.7 g, M between 4.5 and 9
6. Rigid slope is assumed for Ts < 0.05 s
7. When a value for D is not calculated, D is < 1cm
8. ky may be estimated using the simplified equations shown below.
9. Examples of how Ts is estimated are shown below.
10. Vs = weighted avg. shear wave velocity for the sliding mass, e.g., for 2 layers, Vs = [(h1)(Vs1) + (h2)(Vs2)]/(h1 + h2)

Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake Induced Deviatoric Slope Displacements
by Jonathan D. Bray and Thaleia Travasarou
Journal of Geotechnical and Geonvironmental Engineering, Vol 133, No. 4, pp. 381-392, April 2007

 APPENDIX 
PHASE 1 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION

Appendix E – Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation
TO:
Stephen Prows

COMPANY:
Promontory Point Resources (PPR)

PROJECT NUMBER:
FROM:
Peter Skopek, Ph.D.
BAS 15-99E
Fernando Cuenca, Ph.D.
RE:
Slope Stability Evaluation
Promontory Point Landfill Phase 1 (Subphases 1A, 1B, and 1C)
Ogden, Utah

DATE:
May 2, 2016
PHONE NUMBER:
909-860-7777

INTRODUCTION
Presented in this Appendix E are the results of the slope stability analyses performed for the design
of Phase 1 (Subphases 1A, 1B, and 1C) of the proposed Promontory Point Landfill, and
preliminary analyses of the conceptual final configuration of the landfill. The analyses were
performed based on site-specific data contained in the following primary sources (other relevant
data sources are listed on the back of this memorandum):




Promontory Landfill LLC, Class I Landfill, Permit Application, by Advanced Environmental
Engineering (AEE), August 2008.
Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map, Promontory Point Landfill, Box
Elder County, Utah, by Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience, October 2015.
Grading and design plans for the slope and base liners provided in Appendix B – “Construction
Plans,” Sheets C-100 to C-106, C-301, C-401, and C-501 to C-504.

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION
Slope stability analyses were performed using SLOPE/W (Geo Slope Office, 2012), using a twodimensional analysis with Spencer’s method, and considering initially a specified non-circular slip
surface, and subsequently allowing for optimization of the slip surface. The analyzed cross-section
is labeled as Cross-Section A on drawing Sheets C-101 through C-106, and it is shown on Sheet
C-301 (see Appendix B – Construction Plans). For the stability analyses this cross-section was
conservatively modified to incorporate a more critical configuration where the excavation to the
landfill bottom was shallower, at about 8 feet below the toe of the landfill, which is characteristic
of the landfill Phase 1 configuration about 290 feet to the east of the Cross-Section A location.
Additionally, analyses were performed on a conceptual landfill final configuration considered by
Tetra Tech, the project landfill designer, to preliminarily assess feasibility of the overall design.

1360 Valley Vista Drive * Diamond Bar, CA 91765 * Tel: 909-860-7777 * Fax: 909-860-5094

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Design Shear Strength and Unit Weight
The following paragraphs provide the summary of design shear strength and unit weight
parameters and the basis for their selection for the different materials and liner components
affecting the stability of the landfill.


Native Alluvium

Strength parameters and unit weight selected for the stability analyses were based on the material
description and penetration blowcounts for the alluvial materials from the Advanced
Environmental Engineering Report (2008) and are presented in Table 1 below.


Municipal Solid Waste

The MSW shear strength parameter values utilized in the analyses are based on the lower end of
the range presented in the references provided in Table 1, although similar results can be frequently
found elsewhere, e.g., Dixon & Jones, 2005. The utilized values are commonly accepted by the
design community for typical waste streams and are considered appropriate and conservative for
this project recognizing that an accurate prediction of the material properties for the presently
unknown anticipated heterogeneous waste stream is not possible at this point.
Table 1
Summary of Design Parameters used in Slope Stability Analyses
BULK MATERIALS
Material

Shear strength

Unit weight

Note

MSW Fill

φ = 30o
c = 200 psf

γ = 90 pcf

Based on Kavazanjian, 1995 and 2001, and
Singh and Murphy, 1990.

Native alluvium

φ = 34o
c = 50 psf

γ = 120 pcf

Based on correlations with blowcounts from
MW-1 (AEE, 2008). Not used in analyses.



Liner Components

The parameters utilized in the analyses for the various landfill liner components and liner
component interfaces, as well as the basis for their selection are summarized in Tables 2, and 3a
through 3e. The material properties of the liner components and liner component interfaces used
in the analyses are based on our collection of previous data and other published data. No laboratory
testing of the liner components was performed for the preparation of this report. The intent of the
parameter selection was to utilize achievable values that will be verified during construction. The
assumed liner component shear strength parameters are therefore considered prescriptive and will
need to be verified as a part of the Construction Quality Control/Assurance (CQC/CQA) program.
Base and slope liner systems for the Promontory Landfill Phase 1 - Subphases 1A through 1C are
proposed to consist of the following components from top to bottom as listed in Table 2.

2

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 2
Base and Slope Liner Components (top to bottom)
Base Liner
Slope Liner
Option 1

Option 2
18-inch Protective Soil Layer
8-oz/sy Separation Geotextile

18-inch Coarse Sand Layer

24-inch Protective Soil Layer

9-inch LCRS Gravel Layer
12-oz/sy Cushion Geotextile

16-oz/sy Cushion Geotextile

60-mil HDPE Geomembrane
textured on both sides

60-mil HDPE Geomembrane
textured on both sides

60-mil HDPE Geomembrane
textured on both sides

Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)

Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)

Geosynthetic Clay Liner (GCL)

Note: LCRS … leachate collection and recovery system
It is common practice that the lowest peak interface shear strength is used for the base liner and
the lowest large displacement interface shear strength for the slope liner (Stark, et. al., 2004; and
Koerner, 2005). Large displacement shear strength is usually defined as shear strength at
25 percent strain, i.e., 3 inches of deformation for a 12-inch square sample. It is recommended
that a static Factor of Safety of at least 1.5 be obtained for this condition. It is also customary to
perform a final check in which the lowest large displacement shear strength parameters for both
the slope liner and the base liner are considered in the slope stability analysis to ensure that the
system has a Factor of Safety greater than unity (Stark, et. al., 2004). This practice was followed
in the selection of the parameters for slope stability analyses.
The considered liner components and liner component interfaces are summarized below in:




Tables 3a and 3b for base liner Option 1 and Option 2, respectively, for peak strength;
Tables 3c and 3d for base liner Option 1 and Option 2, respectively, for large displacement
strength;
Table 3e for slope liner for large displacement strength.

3

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 3a
Summary of Design Parameters used in Slope Stability Analyses
OPTION 1 BASE LINER COMPONENTS PEAK STRENGTH

Material

Interface:
18-inch Coarse Sand Layer & 60-mil HDPE
Geomembrane textured on both sides
Interface:
60-mil HDPE Geomembrane textured on both
sides & GCL

Shear strength utilized
in stability analyses
Peak
shear strength
parameters

Unit
weight
(pcf)

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 34o, c = 0 psf.

Not used in the analyses /
not considered to be
governing interface
strength

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be
φ = 23o, c = 167 psf.

120

φ = 23.5
c = 0 psf

o

Internal : GCL
φ = 16o
c = 794 psf

4

Note

Peak shear strength estimated from in-house database and
Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal
stresses <~ 5,360 psf (less than approximately 60 feet of
MSW) for all slip surfaces along the slope liner.
Peak shear strength estimated from in-house database and
Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal
stresses >~5,360 psf (more than approximately 60 feet of
MSW) for all slip surfaces along the slope liner.

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 3b
OPTION 2 BASE LINER COMPONENTS PEAK STRENGTH

Material

Shear strength utilized
in stability analyses
Peak
shear strength
parameters

Unit
weight
(pcf)

Note

Interface:
Protective/Operations layer & 8-oz nonwoven
Geotextile

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf;
For cohesive soil: φ = 30o, c = 104 psf.

Interface:
8-oz nonwoven Geotextile & 9-inch LCRS
Gravel Layer
Interface:
9-inch LCRS Gravel Layer &12-oz
nonwoven Cushion Geotextile

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf;

Not used in the analyses
/ not considered to be
governing interface
strength

Interface:
12-oz Cushion Geotextile & 60-mil HDPE
Geomembrane textured on both sides

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf;

120

Interface:
60-mil HDPE Geomembrane textured on both
sides & GCL

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be
φ = 25o, c = 167 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, peak shear strength estimated to be
φ = 23o, c = 167 psf.
Peak shear strength estimated from in-house database and
Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses
<~ 5,360 psf (less than approximately 60 feet of MSW) for all
slip surfaces along the slope liner.
Peak shear strength estimated from in-house database and
Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses
>~5,360 psf (more than approx. 60 feet of MSW) for all slip
surfaces along the slope liner.

φ = 23.5o
c = 0 psf
Internal : GCL
φ = 16o
c = 794 psf

5

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 3c
OPTION 1 BASE LINER COMPONENTS LARGE DISPLACEMENT STRENGTH

Material

Interface:
18-inch Coarse Sand Layer & 60-mil HDPE
Geomembrane textured on both sides
Interface:
60-mil HDPE Geomembrane textured on
both sides & GCL

Shear strength utilized
in stability analyses
Large displacement
shear strength
parameters

Unit
weight
(pcf)

Note

120

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 31o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be φ = 13o, c = 0 psf.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses <~
7,055 psf (less than approx. 80 feet of MSW) for all slip surfaces
along the slope liner.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses
>~7,055 psf (more than approx. 80 feet of MSW) for all slip
surfaces along the slope liner.

Not used in the analyses
/ not considered to be
governing interface
strength

φ = 8o
c = 0 psf
Internal : GCL
φ = 6o
c = 250 psf

6

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 3d
OPTION 2 BASE LINER COMPONENTS LARGE DISPLACEMENT STRENGTH

Material

Shear strength utilized
in stability analyses
Large displacement
shear strength
parameters

Unit
weight
(pcf)

Interface:
Protective/Operations layer & 8-oz nonwoven
Geotextile
Interface:
8-oz nonwoven Geotextile & 9-inch LCRS
Gravel Layer
Interface:
9-inch LCRS Gravel Layer &12-oz nonwoven
Cushion Geotextile

Not used in the analyses
/ not considered to be
governing interface
strength

Interface:
12-oz Cushion Geotextile & 60-mil HDPE
Geomembrane textured on both sides
Interface:
60-mil HDPE Geomembrane textured on both
sides & GCL

120

Note

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf;
For cohesive soil: φ = 21o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be φ = 17o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be φ = 13o, c = 0 psf.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses <~
7,055 psf (less than approx. 80 feet of MSW) for all slip surfaces
along the slope liner.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal stresses
>~7,055 psf (more than approx. 80 feet of MSW) for all slip
surfaces along the slope liner.

φ = 8o
c = 0 psf
Internal : GCL
φ = 6o
c = 250 psf

7

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Table 3e
SLOPE LINER COMPONENTS LARGE DISPLACEMENT STRENGTH

Material

Shear strength utilized
in stability analyses
Large displacement
shear strength
parameters

Unit
weight
(pcf)

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be:
For granular soil: φ = 33o, c = 0 psf;
For cohesive soil: φ = 21o, c = 0 psf.
Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be φ = 17o, c = 0 psf.

Interface:
24-inch Protective Soil Cover & 8-oz Geotextile
Interface:
16-oz Geotextile & 60-mil HDPE Geomembrane
textured on both sides

Not used in the analyses
/ not considered to be
governing interface
strength

Interface:
60-mil HDPE Geomembrane textured on both sides
& GCL

Note

120

Not used in the analyses.
Based on Koerner, 2005, large displacement shear strength
estimated to be φ = 13o, c = 0 psf.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal
stresses <~ 7,055 psf (less than approx. 80 feet of MSW) for
all slip surfaces along the slope liner.
Large displacement shear strength estimated from in-house
database and Koerner, 2005.
This is the anticipated governing strength at normal
stresses >~7,055 psf (more than approx. 80 feet of MSW)
for all slip surfaces along the slope liner.

φ=8
c = 0 psf
o

Internal : GCL
φ = 6o
c = 250 psf

8

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

 For the base liner, the governing (weakest) peak interface shear strength for Options 1
and 2 is expected to be within the GCL. Accordingly, the following shear strength
parameters obtained were used in the slope stability analyses (see Tables 3a and 3b):



for normal pressures less than about 5,360 psf (equivalent to about 60 feet of MSW)
an angle of friction of 23.5 degrees with no cohesion intercept;
for normal pressures greater than 5,360 psf, an angle of friction of 16 degrees and a
cohesion intercept of 794 psf.

 Similarly, for the base liner, the governing (weakest) large displacement interface shear
strength for Options 1 and 2 is expected to be within the GCL. Accordingly, the following
shear strength parameters were used in the slope stability analyses (see Tables 3c and 3d):



for normal pressures less than about 7,055 psf (equivalent to about 80 feet of MSW)
an angle of friction of 8 degrees with no cohesion intercept;
for normal pressures greater than 7,055 psf, an angle of friction of 6 degrees and a
cohesion intercept of 250 psf.

 For the slope liner system, the governing (weakest) large displacement shear strength is
expected to be within the GCL. Accordingly, the following shear strength parameters
obtained from our experience and published data (Koerner, 2005) were used in the slope
stability analyses (see Table 3e):



for normal pressures less than about 7,055 psf an angle of friction of 8 degrees with
no cohesion intercept;
for normal pressures greater than 7,055 psf, an angle of friction of 6 degrees and a
cohesion intercept of 250 psf.

The assumed shear strength parameters presented in Tables 3a through 3e are considered
prescriptive and therefore must be verified prior to construction so that the measured values exceed
the considered values herein. It should be noted that, in general, all considered shear strength
parameters, i.e., not just the anticipated governing strength parameters, need to be verified to
confirm that the anticipated governing strength remains the governing one.
Low Permeability Clay Layer Consideration
It is understood that, if feasible, a low permeability clay layer may be installed as a part of the liner
system instead of the GCL component described in Table 2 above. Considering that a typical shear
strength (both internal and at the interface) of the low permeability clay material is likely to be
greater than the critical internal shear strength of the GCL material utilized in the analyses herein,
the presented stability analyses remain applicable also in the case that the low permeability clay is
used. However, if the low permeability clay is used, its shear strength properties must be verified
(both internal and at the interface) and the stability analyses presented herein need to be updated.

9

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Groundwater
Because of the presence of the Leachate Collection and Recovery System (LCRS) system, the
analyses did not consider pore pressure build-up within the MSW materials. Also, no groundwater
conditions were considered in the analyses for the alluvial materials since the groundwater in
observation wells MW-1 and MW-2 during the AEE (2008) exploration at the site was encountered
at elevations 4,205 and 4,210 feet, i.e., about at least 80 feet below the landfill bottom proposed at
elevations between 4,284 and 4,306 feet.
Static Slope Stability
The static stability of Cross-Section A shown on Sheet C-301 in Appendix B was initially
considered. However, this cross-section was slightly modified so that the base liner elevation
would match the shallower depth of excavation on the eastern side of the landfill (about 290 feet
to the east of Cross-Section A) which was considered to be more critical; this modified crosssection is referred herein as the “Design Cross-Section”. The shallower depth of excavation below
the toe of the landfill is deemed more critical, because the favorable ascending inclination of the
failure surface which follows the weakest liner component is shorter. The Design Cross-Section
was first analyzed using large displacement shear strength parameters for the slope liner and peak
shear strength parameters for the base liner. The computed static Factors of Safety for the Design
Cross-Section for the three Subphases 1A through 1C are included in Table 4 and range from 2.04
for Subphase 1A to 1.88 for Subphase 1C (see Attachment 1, Figures B-1 through B-3). These
Factors of Safety are all greater than the target minimum required static Factor of Safety of 1.5.
Subsequently, the static stability for the Design Cross-Section was analyzed using large
displacement shear strength parameters for both the slope and base liner. The computed static
Factors of Safety for the Design Cross-Section for the three Subphases 1A through 1C are included
in Table 4 and range from 1.23 for Subphase 1A to 1.09 for Subphase 1C (see Attachment 1,
Figures B-5 through B-7). These Factors of Safety are all greater than the target minimum required
static Factor of Safety of 1.0.
The future final configuration of the landfill was also preliminarily considered herein based on the
preliminary unpublished configuration plans. Although the precise geometry of this final
configuration is not known at the present time the following anticipated configuration parameters
were considered in the analyses:




The maximum landfill deck will be at elevation of about 5,350 feet (about 1,050 feet higher
than the elevation at the toe of the Cell 1 analyzed herein);
The existing grade is sloping upwards from the Phase 1 - Subphase 1A toe, roughly at a grade
of 6 percent;
The base liner of the landfill cells will be sloped generally at a 3 percent slope but the
excavation below the existing grade will not exceed about 50 feet. Therefore, 10 feet high
steps spaced about 300 to 500 feet will be constructed to limit the depth of the excavation.
For these preliminary analyses the bottom of the landfill was simplified and conservatively
assumed to be sloped at a uniform grade of 4.7 percent.

10

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

The static stability of the assumed final landfill configuration (see Figure B-4) was analyzed using
large displacement shear strength parameters for the slope liner and peak shear strength parameters
for the base liner. The computed static Factor of Safety for this cross-section is 1.52, which is
slightly larger than the minimum required of 1.5, and therefore it is considered acceptable
Table 4
Static Factors of Safety for the Design Cross Section
Factor of
Safety

Attachment 1
Figure Number

2.04

Figure B-1

1.93

Figure B-2

1.88

Figure B-3

Assumed Final
Configuration

1.52

Figure B-4

Subphase 1A

1.23

Figure B-5

1.15

Figure B-6

1.09

Figure B-7

Subphase

Shear strength
Parameters

Subphase 1A
Subphase 1B
Subphase 1C

Subphase 1B

- Slope Liner – large displacement shear strength
- Base Liner – peak shear strength

- Slope Liner – large displacement shear strength
- Base Liner – large displacement shear strength

Subphase 1C

Permanent Seismic Displacement Analyses
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subchapter I, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Title 40 Subpart D (40CFR Subchapter I Part 258 Subpart D) requires that landfills
receiving municipal solid waste be designed for seismic conditions if the facility is located within
a Seismic Impact Zone. A Seismic Impact Zone is defined in Section 2.6.1 of the 40CFR Part 258
as an area having a 10 percent or greater probability in 250 years, i.e., 2,373-year return period,
that the maximum horizontal acceleration will exceed 0.1g. For such a case the landfill should be
designed using the maximum horizontal bedrock acceleration.
From Figure 2.6 in Section 2.6 (40CFR Part 258) the site is located in an area where the peak
horizontal bedrock acceleration at the site is estimated to be about 0.5g and therefore is located
within a Seismic Impact Zone and the seismic risk at the site needs to be addressed.
First, the site seismic demand at the site with coordinates N41.218741, W-112.473848 was
determined using the deaggregation analysis tool from the USGS Seismic Hazard Interactive
Deaggregation website (https://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/). The seismic demand was
determined for a site class B/C (vs= 2,500 ft/sec) for the design seismic event with a mean return
period of 2,475 years, i.e., slightly greater seismic event than the 2,373-year return period event
required by 40CFR Part 258. This ground motion corresponds to a predominant earthquake
magnitude of Mw6.97 located at a distance of approximately 2.6 km. These ground motion
parameters were used to estimate the mean period of the design earthquake Tm of 0.5 seconds, and
the predominant period Tp of 0.32 seconds.

11

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Then the shear wave velocities were estimated for Subphases 1A to 1C taking into consideration
different thicknesses of the landfill waste sliding wedge for each subphase. The shear wave
velocities were estimated using Kavazanjian (1996), and are presented in Table 5. The estimated
natural period Ts of the landfill sliding waste material prism is also included in Table 5.
For the Phase 1 design, The Seismic Design Guidance for RCRA Subtitle D (258) (1995) provides
guidelines and establishes a simplified method to convert the peak horizontal bedrock acceleration
at a site (from Figure 2.6) to a free field peak ground acceleration of 0.5g that accounts for local
site conditions (Figure 4.5). Considering the Tp and Ts determined above, the maximum horizontal
equivalent acceleration (MHEA) of the waste mass can be estimated from Figure 4.8 by
substituting the peak horizontal bedrock acceleration with the free field peak ground acceleration.
It is noted that the free field peak ground acceleration in this case happens to be equal to the peak
bedrock horizontal acceleration. These MHEAs are presented in Table 5 for Subphases 1A
through 1C.
Table 5
Shear Wave Velocity and Natural Period of the Landfill Sliding Waste Mass
Natural Period
Ts
(seconds)

(from Figure 4.8)

(ft)

Average Shear
Wave Velocity
vs
(m/sec)

Subphase 1A

50

195

0.34

0.38g

Subphase 1B

70

200

0.47

0.30g

Subphase 1C

100

212

0.68

0.13g

Assumed Final
Configuration

650

415

4.4

0.03g

Subphase

Approximate
Effective Thickness

MHEA

Given the recent advances in seismology and earthquake engineering and for verification purposes,
the peak horizontal bedrock acceleration was also estimated using the USGS Hazard curve
application (http://geohazards.usgs.gov/hazardtool/application.php) for the same site coordinates
as given above for the same site class B/C (vs= 2,500 ft/sec) as 0.496g matching well the value of
0.5g from Figure 2.6 discussed above. The MHEAs were subsequently computed for Subphases
1A, 1B, and 1C using the methodology by Bray and Rathje (1998) considering the underlying
materials as soft-rock. These MHEAs, presented in Table 6, are lower than those estimated based
on the Seismic Design Guidance for RCRA Subtitle D (258) (1995) presented in Table 5 above,
which is herein deemed overly conservative and not consistent with the current state of practice.
The yield accelerations (horizontal seismic coefficient that would yield a pseudo-static Factor of
Safety of 1.0) for the Design Cross-Section for Subphases 1A through 1C, were computed with
SLOPE/W are summarized in Table 6 and shown in Figures B-8 through B-10. Since the MHEAs
computed using Bray and Rathje (1998) and presented in Table 6 are larger than the yield
acceleration for Subphase 1A, then permanent seismic displacements are anticipated for this
subphase. As the MHEA is almost equal to the yield acceleration for Subphase B and even lower

12

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

than the yield acceleration for Subphase C, the permanent displacements are expected to be
negligible for these two subphases.
The earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacements were computed using the Bray and
Travasarou method (2007) using the spectral acceleration from the UHRS for 2,373 years
(http://geohazards.usgs.gov/hazardtool/application.php) at the degraded period of 1.5Ts for each
subphase of Phase 1 (see Attachment 2). The earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacements
for Subphases 1A, 1B, and 1C are summarized in Table 6. The displacements are less than the
maximum acceptable deformation for landfills of 12 inches, and thus the deformations are
considered acceptable.
Table 6
Earthquake-induced Slope Displacement Data
Subphase

Sliding Waste
Mass MHEA
(Bray and Rathje)

Yield
Acceleration

Attachment 1
Figure Number

Deviatoric Slope
Displacements
(Bray and Travasarou)
(inches)

Subphase 1A

0.334g

0.28g

Figure B-8

2.8

Subphase 1B

0.256g

0.25g

Figure B-9

2.2

Subphase 1C

0.194g

0.24g

Figure B-10

0.4

Assumed Final
Configuration

0.045g

0.13g

Figure B-11

negligible

For the preliminary evaluation of the future conceptual final configuration of the landfill, the
estimated average height of the landfill sliding mass was estimated to be about 650 feet. The
average shear wave velocity vs for such a landfill sliding waste mass was estimated from
Kavazanjian (1996) as 415 m/sec the associated natural period Ts is about 4.4 sec. The MHEA
was computed using the methodology by Bray and Rathje (1998) as 0.045g for the underlying soft
bedrock foundation materials. The yield acceleration for the assumed final landfill configuration
cross-section was computed as 0.135g (see Figure B-10). Since the yield acceleration is much
larger than the MHEA, then the seismic induced deviatoric slope displacements are expected to be
negligible (see Attachment 2).
It is noted that the estimated earthquake-induced deviatoric slope displacements are the largest for
the initial Subphase 1A, then decrease in magnitude for the subsequent Subphases 1B and 1C, and
are negligible for the assumed final landfill configuration. This is due to the fact that as the landfill
height changes the natural period of the potential sliding mass also changes and so does the spectral
acceleration at the degraded period which controls the permanent seismic displacement estimate.
Eventually, for the large thickness of the final landfill configuration, the controlling degraded
period increases in such a way that the associated spectral acceleration is taken from the far and
low end of the acceleration response spectra and therefore the calculated permanent seismic
displacement is negligible.

13

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from the slope stability and deformation analyses:


The static Factors of Safety for the proposed Phase 1-Subphases 1A through 1C landfill
configurations are above the minimum required of 1.5 using the lowest large displacement
shear strength for the slope liner components and the lowest peak shear strength for the base
liner.



The static Factors of Safety for the proposed Phase 1-Subphases 1A through 1C landfill
configurations are above the minimum required of 1.0 using the lowest large displacement
shear strength parameters for both the slope and base liner components.



The static Factor of Safety for the assumed final configuration of the landfill is above the
minimum required of 1.5 using the lowest large displacement shear strength for the slope
liner and the lowest peak shear strength parameters for the base liner.



The maximum design earthquake-induced permanent seismic displacement for the proposed
landfill Phase 1 is estimated to be about 2.8 inches for the Subphase 1A configuration, which
is considered acceptable.



The design earthquake-induced permanent seismic displacement is estimated to be negligible
for the assumed final landfill configuration of the whole landfill.

14

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

CLOSURE
We appreciate the opportunity to provide our professional services on this project. If you have
any questions regarding this report or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to
contact us.

Respectfully submitted,
Tetra Tech

Fernando Cuenca, Ph.D.
Project Engineer

Peter Skopek, Ph.D.
Principal Engineer

Attachments: Attachment 1 – Slope Stability Analyses
Attachment 2 – Seismic Slope Deformation Analyses
Filename: Appendix E Promontory LF- Phase 1 Slope Sability Evaluation 2016-04-26.docx

15

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

SELECTED REFERENCES
Advanced Environmental Engineering (AEE) (2008). Promontory Landfill LLC, Class I Landfill
Permit Application, Layton, Utah. Prepared for Pacific West, L.L.C. August 2008.
American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE/SEI, 2010, Minimum Design for Buildings and
Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10.
ASCE and SCEC, 2002. Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special
Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Landslide Hazards in California.
June, 2002.
Bray, J.D., and Rathje, E.M. (1998). Earthquake-induced Displacements of Solid-Waste Landfills.
J. Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering. ASCE 124(3), 242-253.
Bray, J.D., and Rathje, E.M., Augello, A.J., and Merry, S.M. (1998). Simplified Seismic Design
Procedure for Geosynthetic-Lined, Solid Waste Landfills. Geosynthetics International,
Vol. 5, No. 1-2, pp. 203-235.
Bray, J. D. and Travasarou, T., 2007, Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake-Induced
Deviatoric Slope Displacements: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 133(4), 381-392.
Dixon, N., and Jone, R. (2005). Engineering Properties of Municipal Solid Waste. Geotectiles
and Geomembranes Vol. 23, Issue 3, June 2005, pp. 205-233.
EPA (2016). Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 258. Criteria for Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills. Subpart B – Location Restrictions http://www.ecfr.gov/cgibin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr258_main_02.tpl.
Koerner, G.R., and Narejo, D., (2005). Direct Shear Database of Geosynthetic-to-geosynthetic
and Geosynthetic-to-soil Interfaces. GRI Report # 30. June 14, 2005.
Makdisi, F.I. and Seed, H.B., 1978, Simplified Procedure for Estimating Dam and Embankment
Earthquake-Induced Deformations: Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 104(7), 849-867.
NAVFAC, 1986, Foundations and Earth Structures, Design Manual 7.02, Revalidated by Change
1 September 1986: Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, Virginia.
Rathje, E.M., Abrahamson, N.A., and Bray, J.D. (1998). Simplified Frequency Content Estimates
of Earthquake Ground Motions. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering. ASCE, 124 (2),
150-159.

 Tetra Tech
Appendix E - Phase 1 Slope Stability Evaluation

Project No. BAS 15-99E
May 2, 2016

Richardson, G., Kavazanjian, E., and Matasovi, N. (1995). RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic
Design Guidance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Facilities. EPA Report EPA/600/R95/051. April 1995.
Stark, T.D., and Choi, H. (2004). Peak versus Residual Interface Strengths for Landfill Liner and
Cover Design. Geosynthetics International, 2004 (11), No. 6, pp. 1-8.
Tetra Tech BAS GeoScience (2015). Geotechnical Data Summary and Preliminary Geologic Map,
Promontory Point Landfill, Box Elder County, Utah. October 2015.

 APPENDIX 
FACILITY LIFE DETAILS

Revised: 01-25-17
Calculated By: VHY
Checked By: JMH

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Diminishing Capacity
for Permit Class V

DATA
Tonnage Growth Rate
Assumed MSW Density
Assumed Special Waste Density
Assumed Refuse to Soil Ratio
Total Gross Volume1
Final Cover Volume2
Base Liner Volume3
Slope Liner Volume4
Total Net Capacity5
YEAR6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (TONS)7
84,000
332,000
492,000
501,840
511,877
522,114
532,557
543,208
554,072
565,153
576,456
587,986
599,745
611,740
623,975
636,454
649,184
662,167
675,411
688,919
702,697

SPECIAL WASTE
(TONS)8
255,000
480,000
540,000
550,800
561,816
573,052
584,513
596,204
608,128
620,290
632,696
645,350
658,257
671,422
684,851
698,548
712,519
726,769
741,304
756,130
771,253

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Diminishing Capacity.xlsx

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (CY)
84,000
332,000
492,000
501,840
511,877
522,114
532,557
543,208
554,072
565,153
576,456
587,986
599,745
611,740
623,975
636,454
649,184
662,167
675,411
688,919
702,697

SPECIAL WASTE
(CY)
377,778
711,111
800,000
816,000
832,320
848,966
865,946
883,265
900,930
918,949
937,328
956,074
975,196
994,699
1,014,593
1,034,885
1,055,583
1,076,695
1,098,229
1,120,193
1,142,597

TOTAL VOLUME
(CY)9
527,746
1,192,127
1,476,571
1,506,103
1,536,225
1,566,949
1,598,288
1,630,254
1,662,859
1,696,116
1,730,039
1,764,640
1,799,932
1,835,931
1,872,650
1,910,103
1,948,305
1,987,271
2,027,016
2,067,556
2,108,908

2
2,000
1,350
7.0:1
782,965,000
5,101,000
1,496,000
1,299,000
775,069,000
CUMULATIVE
VOLUME (CY)
527,746
1,719,873
3,196,444
4,702,547
6,238,772
7,805,722
9,404,010
11,034,264
12,697,123
14,393,240
16,123,279
17,887,918
19,687,851
21,523,782
23,396,431
25,306,534
27,254,838
29,242,109
31,269,125
33,336,682
35,445,589

%
LB/CY
LB/CY
CY
CY
CY
CY
CY
REMAINING
CAPACITY (CY)
774,541,254
773,349,127
771,872,556
770,366,453
768,830,228
767,263,278
765,664,990
764,034,736
762,371,877
760,675,760
758,945,721
757,181,082
755,381,149
753,545,218
751,672,569
749,762,466
747,814,162
745,826,891
743,799,875
741,732,318
739,623,411

 Revised: 01-25-17
Calculated By: VHY
Checked By: JMH

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Diminishing Capacity
for Permit Class V

YEAR6
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (TONS)7
716,751
731,086
745,708
760,622
775,834
791,351
807,178
823,322
839,788
856,584
873,716
891,190
909,014
927,194
945,738
964,653
983,946
1,003,625
1,023,697
1,044,171
1,065,054
1,086,356
1,108,083
1,130,244
1,152,849
1,175,906
1,199,424
1,223,413
1,247,881
1,272,839
1,298,295
1,324,261
1,350,747
1,377,761

SPECIAL WASTE
(TONS)8
786,678
802,412
818,460
834,829
851,526
868,556
885,927
903,646
921,719
940,153
958,956
978,135
997,698
1,017,652
1,038,005
1,058,765
1,079,940
1,101,539
1,123,570
1,146,041
1,168,962
1,192,341
1,216,188
1,240,512
1,265,322
1,290,629
1,316,441
1,342,770
1,369,625
1,397,018
1,424,958
1,453,458
1,482,527
1,512,177

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Diminishing Capacity.xlsx

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (CY)
716,751
731,086
745,708
760,622
775,834
791,351
807,178
823,322
839,788
856,584
873,716
891,190
909,014
927,194
945,738
964,653
983,946
1,003,625
1,023,697
1,044,171
1,065,054
1,086,356
1,108,083
1,130,244
1,152,849
1,175,906
1,199,424
1,223,413
1,247,881
1,272,839
1,298,295
1,324,261
1,350,747
1,377,761

SPECIAL WASTE
(CY)
1,165,449
1,188,758
1,212,533
1,236,784
1,261,519
1,286,750
1,312,485
1,338,734
1,365,509
1,392,819
1,420,676
1,449,089
1,478,071
1,507,632
1,537,785
1,568,541
1,599,912
1,631,910
1,664,548
1,697,839
1,731,796
1,766,432
1,801,760
1,837,796
1,874,551
1,912,043
1,950,283
1,989,289
2,029,075
2,069,656
2,111,049
2,153,270
2,196,336
2,240,263

TOTAL VOLUME
(CY)9
2,151,086
2,194,107
2,237,990
2,282,749
2,328,404
2,374,972
2,422,472
2,470,921
2,520,340
2,570,747
2,622,162
2,674,605
2,728,097
2,782,659
2,838,312
2,895,078
2,952,980
3,012,039
3,072,280
3,133,726
3,196,400
3,260,328
3,325,535
3,392,046
3,459,886
3,529,084
3,599,666
3,671,659
3,745,092
3,819,994
3,896,394
3,974,322
4,053,808
4,134,885

CUMULATIVE
VOLUME (CY)
37,596,675
39,790,783
42,028,772
44,311,522
46,639,926
49,014,898
51,437,370
53,908,292
56,428,632
58,999,378
61,621,540
64,296,144
67,024,241
69,806,900
72,645,212
75,540,290
78,493,270
81,505,309
84,577,590
87,711,315
90,907,716
94,168,044
97,493,579
100,885,624
104,345,511
107,874,595
111,474,261
115,145,920
118,891,012
122,711,007
126,607,401
130,581,723
134,635,531
138,770,416

REMAINING
CAPACITY (CY)
737,472,325
735,278,217
733,040,228
730,757,478
728,429,074
726,054,102
723,631,630
721,160,708
718,640,368
716,069,622
713,447,460
710,772,856
708,044,759
705,262,100
702,423,788
699,528,710
696,575,730
693,563,691
690,491,410
687,357,685
684,161,284
680,900,956
677,575,421
674,183,376
670,723,489
667,194,405
663,594,739
659,923,080
656,177,988
652,357,993
648,461,599
644,487,277
640,433,469
636,298,584

 Revised: 01-25-17
Calculated By: VHY
Checked By: JMH

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Diminishing Capacity
for Permit Class V

YEAR6
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (TONS)7
1,405,317
1,433,423
1,462,091
1,491,333
1,521,160
1,551,583
1,582,615
1,614,267
1,646,552
1,679,484
1,713,073
1,747,335
1,782,281
1,817,927
1,854,286
1,891,371
1,929,199
1,967,783
2,007,138
2,047,281
2,088,227
2,129,991
2,172,591
2,216,043
2,260,364
2,305,571
2,351,682
2,398,716
2,446,690
2,495,624
2,545,537
2,596,447
2,648,376
2,701,344

SPECIAL WASTE
(TONS)8
1,542,421
1,573,269
1,604,735
1,636,829
1,669,566
1,702,957
1,737,016
1,771,757
1,807,192
1,843,336
1,880,202
1,917,806
1,956,162
1,995,286
2,035,191
2,075,895
2,117,413
2,159,761
2,202,957
2,247,016
2,291,956
2,337,795
2,384,551
2,432,242
2,480,887
2,530,505
2,581,115
2,632,737
2,685,392
2,739,100
2,793,882
2,849,759
2,906,755
2,964,890

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Diminishing Capacity.xlsx

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (CY)
1,405,317
1,433,423
1,462,091
1,491,333
1,521,160
1,551,583
1,582,615
1,614,267
1,646,552
1,679,484
1,713,073
1,747,335
1,782,281
1,817,927
1,854,286
1,891,371
1,929,199
1,967,783
2,007,138
2,047,281
2,088,227
2,129,991
2,172,591
2,216,043
2,260,364
2,305,571
2,351,682
2,398,716
2,446,690
2,495,624
2,545,537
2,596,447
2,648,376
2,701,344

SPECIAL WASTE
(CY)
2,285,068
2,330,769
2,377,385
2,424,932
2,473,431
2,522,899
2,573,357
2,624,825
2,677,321
2,730,868
2,785,485
2,841,195
2,898,018
2,955,979
3,015,098
3,075,400
3,136,908
3,199,647
3,263,640
3,328,912
3,395,491
3,463,400
3,532,668
3,603,322
3,675,388
3,748,896
3,823,874
3,900,351
3,978,358
4,057,926
4,139,084
4,221,866
4,306,303
4,392,429

TOTAL VOLUME
(CY)9
4,217,582
4,301,934
4,387,973
4,475,732
4,565,247
4,656,552
4,749,683
4,844,676
4,941,570
5,040,401
5,141,209
5,244,033
5,348,914
5,455,892
5,565,010
5,676,310
5,789,837
5,905,633
6,023,746
6,144,221
6,267,105
6,392,448
6,520,296
6,650,702
6,783,716
6,919,391
7,057,779
7,198,934
7,342,913
7,489,771
7,639,567
7,792,358
7,948,205
8,107,169

CUMULATIVE
VOLUME (CY)
142,987,998
147,289,932
151,677,904
156,153,637
160,718,883
165,375,435
170,125,118
174,969,794
179,911,364
184,951,765
190,092,974
195,337,008
200,685,922
206,141,814
211,706,824
217,383,135
223,172,972
229,078,605
235,102,351
241,246,572
247,513,677
253,906,125
260,426,421
267,077,124
273,860,840
280,780,231
287,838,010
295,036,944
302,379,857
309,869,628
317,509,194
325,301,552
333,249,757
341,356,926

REMAINING
CAPACITY (CY)
632,081,002
627,779,068
623,391,096
618,915,363
614,350,117
609,693,565
604,943,882
600,099,206
595,157,636
590,117,235
584,976,026
579,731,992
574,383,078
568,927,186
563,362,176
557,685,865
551,896,028
545,990,395
539,966,649
533,822,428
527,555,323
521,162,875
514,642,579
507,991,876
501,208,160
494,288,769
487,230,990
480,032,056
472,689,143
465,199,372
457,559,806
449,767,448
441,819,243
433,712,074

 Revised: 01-25-17
Calculated By: VHY
Checked By: JMH

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Diminishing Capacity
for Permit Class V

YEAR6
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (TONS)7
2,755,371
2,810,478
2,866,688
2,924,021
2,982,502
3,042,152
3,102,995
3,165,055
3,228,356
3,292,923
3,358,782
3,425,957
3,494,476
3,564,366
3,635,653
3,708,366
3,782,534
3,858,184
3,935,348
4,014,055
4,094,336
4,176,223
4,259,747
4,344,942
4,431,841
4,520,478
4,610,887
4,703,105
4,797,167
4,893,111
4,990,973
5,090,792
5,192,608
5,296,460

SPECIAL WASTE
(TONS)8
3,024,187
3,084,671
3,146,365
3,209,292
3,273,478
3,338,947
3,405,726
3,473,841
3,543,318
3,614,184
3,686,468
3,760,197
3,835,401
3,912,109
3,990,351
4,070,158
4,151,561
4,234,592
4,319,284
4,405,670
4,493,783
4,583,659
4,675,332
4,768,839
4,864,216
4,961,500
5,060,730
5,161,945
5,265,184
5,370,487
5,477,897
5,587,455
5,699,204
5,813,188

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Diminishing Capacity.xlsx

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (CY)
2,755,371
2,810,478
2,866,688
2,924,021
2,982,502
3,042,152
3,102,995
3,165,055
3,228,356
3,292,923
3,358,782
3,425,957
3,494,476
3,564,366
3,635,653
3,708,366
3,782,534
3,858,184
3,935,348
4,014,055
4,094,336
4,176,223
4,259,747
4,344,942
4,431,841
4,520,478
4,610,887
4,703,105
4,797,167
4,893,111
4,990,973
5,090,792
5,192,608
5,296,460

SPECIAL WASTE
(CY)
4,480,278
4,569,883
4,661,281
4,754,507
4,849,597
4,946,589
5,045,520
5,146,431
5,249,359
5,354,347
5,461,433
5,570,662
5,682,075
5,795,717
5,911,631
6,029,864
6,150,461
6,273,470
6,398,940
6,526,919
6,657,457
6,790,606
6,926,418
7,064,947
7,206,245
7,350,370
7,497,378
7,647,325
7,800,272
7,956,277
8,115,403
8,277,711
8,443,265
8,612,130

TOTAL VOLUME
(CY)9
8,269,312
8,434,699
8,603,393
8,775,461
8,950,970
9,129,989
9,312,589
9,498,841
9,688,818
9,882,594
10,080,246
10,281,851
10,487,488
10,697,237
10,911,182
11,129,406
11,351,994
11,579,034
11,810,615
12,046,827
12,287,763
12,533,519
12,784,189
13,039,873
13,300,670
13,566,684
13,838,017
14,114,778
14,397,073
14,685,015
14,978,715
15,278,289
15,583,855
15,895,532

CUMULATIVE
VOLUME (CY)
349,626,239
358,060,937
366,664,330
375,439,791
384,390,760
393,520,750
402,833,339
412,332,179
422,020,997
431,903,591
441,983,837
452,265,687
462,753,175
473,450,412
484,361,595
495,491,001
506,842,995
518,422,028
530,232,643
542,279,470
554,567,233
567,100,752
579,884,941
592,924,814
606,225,484
619,792,167
633,630,185
647,744,962
662,142,036
676,827,050
691,805,765
707,084,055
722,667,910
738,563,442

REMAINING
CAPACITY (CY)
425,442,761
417,008,063
408,404,670
399,629,209
390,678,240
381,548,250
372,235,661
362,736,821
353,048,003
343,165,409
333,085,163
322,803,313
312,315,825
301,618,588
290,707,405
279,577,999
268,226,005
256,646,972
244,836,357
232,789,530
220,501,767
207,968,248
195,184,059
182,144,186
168,843,516
155,276,833
141,438,815
127,324,038
112,926,964
98,241,950
83,263,235
67,984,945
52,401,090
36,505,558

 Revised: 01-25-17
Calculated By: VHY
Checked By: JMH

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
Diminishing Capacity
for Permit Class V

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (TONS)7
5,402,389
5,510,437

YEAR6
124
125

SPECIAL WASTE
(TONS)8
5,929,452
6,048,041

MUNICIPAL SOLID
WASTE (CY)
5,402,389
5,510,437

SPECIAL WASTE
(CY)
8,784,373
8,960,060

TOTAL VOLUME
(CY)9
16,213,443
16,537,712

Notes
1) Total Gross Volume calculated using CADD comparing master base grade to final grade.
2) Final Cover Volume includes a 36" monolithic layer with an average of 3H:1V side slope.
3) Base Liner Volume includes 18" of coarse sand or protective cover soil.
4) Slope Liner Volume includes 24" of protective cover soil with an average of 3H:1V slope.
5) Total Net Capacity = Gross Volume - Final Cover Volume - Base Liner Volume - Slope Liner Volume
6) Year 1 begins 2017.
7) Year 1, 2 ,and 3 MSW tonnage received from Promontory Point, LLC. Assume 2% growth rate after year 3.
8) Year 1, 2, and 3 special waste tonnage received from Promontory Point, LLC. Assume 2% growth rate after year 3.
9) Includes municipal waste, special waste and daily/intermediate cover.

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Class V\Diminishing Capacity.xlsx

CUMULATIVE
VOLUME (CY)
754,776,885
771,314,596

REMAINING
CAPACITY (CY)
20,292,115
3,754,404

 APPENDIX 
HYDROLOGY INFORMATION

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To:

Matt Sullivan, Utah Department of Environment Quality

Cc:

Jon Angin, Brett Snelgrove

From:

Caleb Moore, P.E.

Date:

January 19th, 2016

Subject:

Phase 1 of the Promontory Landfill Facility
Hydrologic Evaluation

1.0 PURPOSE
Promontory Point Landfill Facility (PLF) is located on the west side of the southern tip of the Promontory Point
Peninsula in Box Elder County, Utah. Using standard engineering practices, Tetra Tech, BAS (TTBAS) has analyzed
the site hydrology study for a 25-year, 24-hour precipitation event and 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event. The
intent of this study is to provide the estimated peak flow rates and volumes of run-on that will be required to bypass
the landfill. A system of diversion channels would be located upstream from the landfill site and drain and run-off
away from the landfill and discharge to existing drainage courses before crossing the public road. The proposed
diversion channels are located north of the PLF (see Figure C-801).
Onsite landfill drainage will be directed toward the northern interim detention basin. The onsite flows will be
collected and allowed to settle any sediment prior to pumping. The basin will be reconstructed as the site is
developed throughout phase 1A-1C. (see Figures C-802 – C-804).
The onsite landfill drainage including the diversion channels was designed to carry the 25 year, 24 hour event.
Facilities downstream of the landfill infrastructure was designed to carry to 10-year, 24-hour event such as the
public road drainage crossings and the channels that service the crossings.

METHODOLOGY
Prior to evaluation using hydrology modeling software, several variables were taken into consideration. The tributary
areas were determined using topography from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) as well as previous site
aerial topography. The hydrologic soil types and boundaries were determined from United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) web soil survey data. Rainfall data was found from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) precipitation frequency data server.
To evaluate the offsite flows around the landfill site, hydrologic modeling system (HEC-HMS) software from the US
Army Corps of Engineers was utilized to simulate the complete hydrologic processes of watershed systems. The
soil types were averaged by area to determine an SCS Curve Number. The transform method utilized was the SCS
Unit Hydrograph.
The landfill run-off rainfall volume was determined by utilizing historical data obtained from the NOAA Climate Data
Online promontory rainfall station data from 1981 to 1994. The 90th Percentile storm event depth of 0.55 inches
was calculated per the Utah Department of Water Quality guidance.
Tetra Tech
P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Tech Memo Onsite Hydrology.docx

1

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Tel 909.860.7777 Fax 909.396.9777

 RUN-ON HYDROLOGY
The run-on flows are divided generally into two tributary areas labeled A, B, and C (see Figure C-801). The tributary
area for Area A is approximately 857 acres, Area B is 718 acres, and Area C is 200 acres, with a total tributary area
of 1,775 acres.
The flows from tributary area A are intercepted by the western diversion channel and join with the flows from
tributary area C which are conveyed to the western desilting basin by the lower western channel. The overflow from
the western desilting basin is controlled by a concrete weir which flows towards an earthen channel and directed
under the public road by two cattle guard drains and exiting to native grade via a rip rap energy dissipater.
The flows from tributary area B is intercepted by the eastern diversion channel and directed through a series of
desilting ponds before being conveyed under the main landfill access road by a cattle guard drain. A concrete
trapezoidal channel conveys the flows to another cattle guard drain which crosses the public road before exiting to
native grade via a rip rap energy dissipater.

LANDFILL RUN-OFF HYDROLOGY
Drainage from the northern slope of the landfill as well as areas below the diversion berm will flow into the northern
interim detention basin (see Figures C-208 – C-804). The capacity of the basin was determined as the entirety of
the rainfall depth multiplied by the catchment area. As the landfill is developed the interim basin will be relocated
and the tributary area draining to it will change. The remaining drainage will be directed into the southwestern and
southeastern detention basins as shown on the figures. Below is a summary table of the tributary areas, run-off
volumes, and basin capacities in acre feet (AF).
Table 1 – Hydrology Summary
Area (Acres)

RunRun-off Volume (AF)

Basin Capacity (AF)

Phase 1A

26.8

1.15

1.53

Phase 1B

32.9

1.70

1.86

Phase 1C

27.0

1.67

1.69

2.0 PEAK FLOWS AND HYDRAULICS
HYDRAULICS OF DIVERSION CHANNELS
CHANNELS
PEAK FLOWS
TTBAS has analyzed the site hydrology study based on a 25-year, 24-hour precipitation event to evaluate the peak
flow conditions for tributary areas A, B, and C using the methods discussed in section 2.1. All supporting
documents, assumptions and calculations are in Attachment 1. Below is a summary table of peak flow rates for
each area analyzed in cubic feet per second (CFS).
Tetra Tech
P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Tech Memo Onsite Hydrology.docx

2

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Tel 909.860.7777 Fax 909.396.9777

 Table 2 – 2525-year, 2424-hour Peak Flows
Peak Flow Rate (CFS)
Upper Western Drainage

467

Lower Western Drainage

533

Eastern Drainage

132

The analysis for the 10-year, 24-hour precipitation event was performed using the same methods and tributary
areas as the 25-year, 24-hour precipitation event. All supporting documents, assumptions and calculations are in
Attachment 1. Below is a summary table of peak flow rates for each area analyzed in cubic feet per second (CFS).
Table 3 – 1010-year, 2424-hour Peak Flows
Peak Flow Rate (CFS)
Lower Western Drainage

273

Lower Eastern Drainage

52

HYDRAULICS
The western and eastern diversion channels have been designed to convey the entire flow from the 25-year, 24hour event. Hydraulic analysis was performed using Flowmaster software which utilizes Manning’s equation to
determine the flow capacity. Channels were designed as flat bottom earthen swales with an erosion mat and rip
rap protection at the areas which may be prone to erosion. See Attachment 5 for hydraulic calculations.
Table 4 – Peak Flow Capacity
Peak Flow Capacity (CFS)
Western Diversion Channel

586

Lower Western Earthen Channel

604

Lower Western Rip Rap Channel

601

Western Desilting
Desilting Basin Weir

602

Eastern Diversion Channel

181

Landfill Access Road Crossing

161

The drainage structures located downstream of the landfill drainage conveyance structures have been designed for a
10-year, 24-hour event. Hydraulic analysis was performed using Flowmaster software which utilizes Manning’s

equation to determine the flow capacity. See Attachment 5 for hydraulic calculations.

Tetra Tech
P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Tech Memo Onsite Hydrology.docx

3

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Tel 909.860.7777 Fax 909.396.9777

 Table 5 – Peak Flow Capacity
Peak Flow Capacity (CFS)
Lower Western Earthen Channel

334

Cattle Guard Crossing x2

322

Lower Eastern Concrete Trap Channel

79

Cattle Guard Crossing x1

161

3.0 HYDROLOGIC IMPACTS
Tributary Areas A and B will flow into the diversion channels which are designed to bypass the 25-year, 24-hour
storm event around the landfill. Downstream of the waste prism, the tributary area C joins with area A. The lower
western channels and desilting basin weir are designed to carry the 25-year flows from areas A and C. The eastern
channels, desilting ponds, and access road crossing are designed to convey the 25 flows from Area B. Conveyances
downstream of the landfill infrastructure are designed to convey the 10-year, 24-hour storm event past the public
road and outlets onto native grade through rip-rap energy dissipaters to spread and reduce the erosion potential of
the stormwater.
The downstream conveyances will be designed in such a way as to protect the downstream infrastructure and pass
the drainage under the railroad. The combined 25-year flowrate from both tributary areas A, B, and C is 685 CFS
and 77.0 AF.
The onsite drainage will be directed into basins to treat the run-off prior to being pumped. The peak capacity of the
interim basins is more than adequate to capture the 90th percentile storm event for water quality purposes.

__________________________
Caleb H. Moore, P.E. 8472423-2202

ATTACHMENTS

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Figures
– Hydrology Maps
Attachment 1 – NOAA Rainfall Values, SCS Soil Types, 90th Percentile Rainfall
Attachment 2 – HEC-HMS Model
Attachment 3 – Time of Concentration Calcs
Attachment 4 – Subarea Data
Attachment 5 – Hydraulic Calcs
Attachment 6 – HEC-HMS Results and Hydrograph
Attachment 7 – Unit Hydrograph Data
Tetra Tech

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Tech Memo Onsite Hydrology.docx

4

1360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Tel 909.860.7777 Fax 909.396.9777

 FIGURE 1 -
HYDROLOGY MAPS

TETHA TECH

 

F9363 3 Eu/Om: :uI>mm - do NCZOZV



 



zl?va,


I
11;]
um

I I

I



awnmm."anwa
?493%?
1 
?05: 
t/Af?? 0 . I
lwuwzf oo A 0



0

0

1000






.

2000
2000'

LEGEND

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



a GROUP 

GROUP 
HYDROLOGIC SOIL

GROUP A
HYDROLOGIC SOIL

I DRAINAGE TRIBUTARY AREA
HYDROLOGIC SOIL

FLOWLINE

EXISTING CONTOUR
BREAK

 

 

E10 

m<u sz oo-oo.mo$ 4 4  4  I 

Dm><<z _w<u ?93-03?

oImoxmo 9: 0mm Goo 015. 05303 n> Now
wooboohud _n>X mooboobo 

 

 

 

A_uI>mm 4> - 40 ECZOZV

 

m<u 

 

 

 

FIGURE C-801

 

 

 

 

P:\Pr0m Pt Pt Hydrology Map (PHASE 1A)

 

 

WESTERN DIVERSION BERM

DETENTION
BASIN

 

 

EASTERN DIVERSION BERM

SWALE

1.53 ACRE FOOT CAPACITY
STORM WATER BASIN

      

25.0 ACRES

 
 



Baht-L,?
I 


 





 

 

 

 

 

DETENTION
BASIN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEGEND

0 100 200



200'

 

EXISTING CONTOUR
GRADE BREAK
I DRAINAGE TRIBUTARY AREA

 

 

TYPE 

HYDROLOGIC SOIL

90th PERCENTILE RAINFALL DEPTH - 0.55 INCHES

25.0 0.55 - 1.15 ACRE FEET

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 I 7

1E TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 765

 

 

00?00?2016

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

DATE:

 

AGENCY NAME

VHY JSN

ES


CHM

DESIGNED BY 
CHECKED BY
APPROVED BY 

DRAWN BY 

 

 

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT LLC
HYDROLOGY MAP (PHASE 1A)

 

 

 

FIGURE C-802

 

 

P:\Pr0m Pt Pt Hydrology Map (PHASE 1B)

 

 



   



mu; 

wmmi

 

6mm >omm 30% 9936.3   

w>m_Z 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

w>m_Z

 

 

 

 

 

  

    


w>m_Z

ermZU
mx_m:zo 0023:.?

0 So moo



moo.

I I I I ?m>Um wmmZA


 

mO= 


 

00:. 
ohm .22? I >me 

. ohm 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7

1E TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 765

 

 

00?00?2016

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

DATE:

 

VHY JSN

ES


CHM

DESIGNED BY 
CHECKED BY
APPROVED BY 

DRAWN BY 

 

 

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT LLC
HYDROLOGY MAP (PHASE 1B)

 

 

 

O-mow

 

 

P:\Pr0m Pt Pt Hydrology Map (PHASE 1C)

 

 

WESTERN DIVERSION BERM

DETENTION
BASIN

   

36.5 ACRES

EASTERN DIVERSION BERM

1.69 ACRE FOOT CAPACITY
STORM WATER BASIN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 100 200



200'

 

 

 

36.5 0.55 - 1.67 ACRE FEET

    

DETENTION
BASIN

LEG 
EXISTING CONTOUR
GRADE BREAK
7 DRAINAGE TRIBUTARY AREA
HYDROLOGIC SOIL
 TYPE 
 90th PERCENTILE RAINFALL DEPTH - 0.55 INCHES

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 I 7

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 765

1E TETRA TECH BAS

 

 

00?00?2016

PROJ. NO.: 2015-0112

DATE:

 

VHY JSN

ES


CHM

DESIGNED BY 
CHECKED BY
APPROVED BY 

DRAWN BY 

 

 

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT LLC
HYDROLOGY MAP (PHASE 1C)

 

 

 

FIGURE C-804

 

 

ATTACHMENT 1 
NOAA RAINFALL VALUES
SCS SOIL TYPES
90TH PERCENTILE RAINFALL

TETRA TECH

Precipitation Frequency Data Server

1 of 4

http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=41.2488&l...

NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 1, Version 5
Location name: Corinne, Utah, US*
Latitude: 41.2488°, Longitude: -112.4573°
Elevation: 5215 ft*
* source: Google Maps

POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
Sanja Perica, Sarah Dietz, Sarah Heim, Lillian Hiner, Kazungu Maitaria, Deborah Martin, Sandra Pavlovic,
Ishani Roy, Carl Trypaluk, Dale Unruh, Fenglin Yan, Michael Yekta, Tan Zhao, Geoffrey Bonnin, Daniel
Brewer, Li-Chuan Chen, Tye Parzybok, John Yarchoan
NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland

PF_tabular   PF_graphical   Maps_&_aerials

PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1
Duration
5-min
10-min
15-min
30-min
60-min
2-hr
3-hr
6-hr
12-hr
24-hr
2-day
3-day
4-day
7-day
10-day
20-day
30-day
45-day
60-day

Average recurrence interval (years)
1

2

5

10

25

50

100

200

500

1000

0.121

0.153

0.210

0.263

0.349

0.429

0.524

0.635

0.815

0.979

(0.106‑0.140) (0.135‑0.178) (0.184‑0.244) (0.228‑0.306) (0.296‑0.408) (0.352‑0.506) (0.417‑0.624) (0.487‑0.771) (0.592‑1.01) (0.680‑1.25)

0.185

0.233

0.319

0.401

0.532

0.653

0.797

0.966

1.24

1.49

(0.161‑0.214) (0.205‑0.271) (0.279‑0.371) (0.347‑0.466) (0.450‑0.622) (0.537‑0.771) (0.635‑0.950) (0.741‑1.17) (0.901‑1.54) (1.03‑1.90)

0.229

0.289

0.396

0.497

0.659

0.810

0.988

(0.199‑0.265) (0.254‑0.336) (0.346‑0.460) (0.430‑0.577) (0.557‑0.771) (0.665‑0.955) (0.786‑1.18)

0.308

0.389

0.534

0.669

0.888

(0.268‑0.357) (0.342‑0.452) (0.467‑0.620) (0.580‑0.778) (0.751‑1.04)

0.381

0.481

0.660

0.828

0.481

0.601

0.783

0.955

(0.430‑0.546) (0.535‑0.684) (0.695‑0.890) (0.836‑1.09)

0.555

0.687

0.865

1.03

(0.503‑0.623) (0.621‑0.774) (0.779‑0.974) (0.921‑1.16)

0.724

0.888

1.08

(0.665‑0.795) (0.814‑0.978) (0.993‑1.20)

1.54

1.85

(1.12‑1.92)

(1.28‑2.35)

1.09

1.33

1.61

2.07

2.49

(0.896‑1.29)

(1.06‑1.59)

(1.24‑1.96)

(1.50‑2.58)

(1.73‑3.17)

1.10

(0.331‑0.441) (0.423‑0.559) (0.577‑0.767) (0.717‑0.962) (0.929‑1.28)

1.20
(0.919‑1.46)

1.35

1.65

2.00

2.56

3.08

(1.11‑1.59)

(1.31‑1.96)

(1.53‑2.43)

(1.86‑3.19)

(2.14‑3.92)

1.24

1.49

1.80

2.16

2.74

3.26

(1.06‑1.42)

(1.25‑1.73)

(1.46‑2.11)

(1.69‑2.58)

(2.02‑3.37)

(2.31‑4.12)

1.30

1.54

1.84

2.19

2.76

3.28

(1.14‑1.47)

(1.32‑1.76)

(1.53‑2.14)

(1.77‑2.59)

(2.13‑3.40)

(2.43‑4.16)

1.26

1.53

1.75

2.01

2.31

2.88

3.38

(1.15‑1.40)

(1.37‑1.70)

(1.55‑1.96)

(1.74‑2.28)

(1.95‑2.66)

(2.35‑3.44)

(2.68‑4.20)

0.910

1.11

1.35

1.56

1.86

2.11

2.38

2.67

3.13

3.51

(0.838‑0.993)

(1.03‑1.22)

(1.24‑1.48)

(1.43‑1.71)

(1.68‑2.06)

(1.88‑2.35)

(2.08‑2.68)

(2.29‑3.04)

(2.60‑3.65)

(2.85‑4.23)

1.11

1.37

1.67

1.91

2.25

2.51

2.78

3.04

3.41

3.70

(0.993‑1.24)

(1.23‑1.54)

(1.50‑1.87)

(1.71‑2.15)

(2.00‑2.52)

(2.23‑2.81)

(2.45‑3.12)

(2.67‑3.43)

(2.97‑3.86)

(3.19‑4.27)

1.27

1.57

1.91

2.19

2.58

2.88

3.19

3.51

3.94

4.27

(1.15‑1.42)

(1.42‑1.76)

(1.72‑2.14)

(1.97‑2.45)

(2.30‑2.88)

(2.56‑3.22)

(2.81‑3.58)

(3.07‑3.95)

(3.41‑4.45)

(3.66‑4.86)

1.37

1.70

2.07

2.37

2.79

3.13

3.47

3.83

4.30

4.68

(1.24‑1.53)

(1.53‑1.89)

(1.86‑2.31)

(2.13‑2.65)

(2.49‑3.12)

(2.78‑3.50)

(3.06‑3.89)

(3.34‑4.30)

(3.72‑4.87)

(4.00‑5.33)

1.47

1.82

2.22

2.56

3.01

3.38

3.76

4.14

4.67

5.09

(1.33‑1.64)

(1.64‑2.02)

(2.00‑2.47)

(2.29‑2.85)

(2.69‑3.36)

(3.00‑3.77)

(3.31‑4.21)

(3.62‑4.66)

(4.04‑5.29)

(4.34‑5.80)

1.70

2.10

2.56

2.94

3.46

3.87

4.29

4.71

5.28

5.72

(1.53‑1.89)

(1.90‑2.34)

(2.31‑2.87)

(2.64‑3.29)

(3.09‑3.87)

(3.43‑4.33)

(3.78‑4.81)

(4.13‑5.30)

(4.58‑5.99)

(4.92‑6.52)

1.88

2.33

2.84

3.25

3.79

4.21

4.63

5.05

5.60

6.02

(1.69‑2.11)

(2.10‑2.61)

(2.55‑3.18)

(2.90‑3.64)

(3.37‑4.25)

(3.73‑4.72)

(4.08‑5.20)

(4.42‑5.69)

(4.86‑6.35)

(5.18‑6.86)

2.39

2.96

3.57

4.05

4.66

5.11

5.55

5.97

6.52

6.91

(2.15‑2.64)

(2.67‑3.28)

(3.23‑3.97)

(3.65‑4.50)

(4.19‑5.17)

(4.58‑5.68)

(4.96‑6.18)

(5.31‑6.67)

(5.76‑7.31)

(6.08‑7.79)

2.86

3.54

4.27

4.83

5.56

6.10

6.63

7.14

7.80

8.29

(2.58‑3.18)

(3.19‑3.93)

(3.85‑4.75)

(4.34‑5.38)

(4.98‑6.20)

(5.45‑6.81)

(5.89‑7.42)

(6.32‑8.03)

(6.85‑8.81)

(7.22‑9.40)

3.48

4.30

5.16

5.81

6.63

7.23

7.81

8.36

9.04

9.53

(3.16‑3.85)

(3.91‑4.75)

(4.67‑5.68)

(5.25‑6.40)

(5.98‑7.32)

(6.50‑7.98)

(7.00‑8.64)

(7.46‑9.27)

(8.02‑10.1)

(8.41‑10.7)

4.11

5.07

6.06

6.81

7.76

8.44

9.10

9.73

10.5

11.1

(3.71‑4.53)

(4.59‑5.59)

(5.48‑6.68)

(6.15‑7.51)

(6.97‑8.56)

(7.57‑9.33)

(8.13‑10.1)

(8.64‑10.8)

(9.28‑11.7)

(9.72‑12.4)

1 Precipitation frequency (PF) estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series (PDS).

Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation frequency estimates
(for a given duration and average recurrence interval) will be greater than the upper bound (or less than the lower bound) is 5%. Estimates at upper bounds
are not checked against probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.

Back to Top

PF graphical

3/23/2016 3:14 PM

 Precipitation Frequency Data Server

2 of 4

http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=41.2488&l...

Back to Top

Maps & aerials
Small scale terrain

3/23/2016 3:14 PM

 Precipitation Frequency Data Server

3 of 4

http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=41.2488&l...

Large scale terrain

Large scale map

Large scale aerial

3/23/2016 3:14 PM

 Precipitation Frequency Data Server

4 of 4

http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=41.2488&l...

Back to Top

US Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Weather Service
National Water Center
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Questions?: HDSC.Questions@noaa.gov
Disclaimer

3/23/2016 3:14 PM

 Web Soil Survey

1 of 2

Contact Us

http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

Subscribe

Archived Soil Surveys

Area of Interest (AOI)

Soil Survey Status

Soil Map

Glossary

Soil Data Explorer

Preferences

Link

Logout

Download Soils Data

Help

View Soil Information By Use:
Intro to Soils

Printable Version

Suitabilities and Limitations for Use

Search

A

A

A

Shopping Cart (Free)

Soil Properties and Qualities

Ecological Site Assessment

Add to Shopping Cart

Soil Reports

Map — Hydrologic Soil Group

Properties and Qualities Ratings
Open All

Scale

(not to scale)

Close All

Soil Chemical Properties
Soil Erosion Factors
Soil Physical Properties
Soil Qualities and Features
AASHTO Group Classification (Surface)
Depth to a Selected Soil Restrictive Layer
Depth to Any Soil Restrictive Layer
Drainage Class
Frost Action
Frost-Free Days
Hydrologic Soil Group
View Description

View Rating

View Options
Map
Table
Description of
Rating
Rating Options
Detailed Description
Advanced Options
Aggregation Method
Component Percent
Cutoff
Tie-break Rule

Lower
Higher
View Description

View Rating

Map Unit Name
Parent Material Name
Representative Slope
Unified Soil Classification (Surface)
Water Features

Tables — Hydrologic Soil Group — Summary By Map Unit
Summary by Map Unit — Box Elder County, Utah, Eastern Part (UT602)
Map unit symbol

Map unit name

Rating

Acres in AOI

Percent of AOI

ABE

Abela gravelly loam, 10 to 20 percent slopes

B

511.4

2.8%

AEE

Abela stony loam, 6 to 20 percent slopes

C

198.2

1.1%

BgE

Blue Star gravelly loam, 6 to 20 percent slopes

A

1,479.4

8.0%

Bp

Borrow pits

49.0

0.3%

ETB

Etil loamy sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes

Gp

Gravel pits

HpB

Hupp gravelly silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes

A

1,077.1

5.8%

HpD

Hupp gravelly silt loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes

A

802.9

4.3%

KeB

Kearns silt loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes

B

214.9

1.2%

PAB

Palisade silt loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes

C

101.0

0.5%

PeD

Parleys silt loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes

C

461.1

2.5%

POE

Pass Canyon-Rock outcrop complex, 6 to 30 percent slopes

C

1,548.5

8.4%

RS

Rock land

713.0

3.8%

RT

Rock outcrop

RWG

Rozlee-Rock outcrop complex, 30 to 70 percent slopes

C

SA

Saltair silty clay loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes

C/D

SGG

Sandall-Promo association, steep

C

1,433.4

7.7%

SHE

Sandall-Rock outcrop complex, 3 to 30 percent slopes

C

19.4

0.1%

SJG

Sandall-Rozlee association, steep

C

1,660.4

9.0%

SpF3

Sheeprock gravelly loam, 10 to 40 percent slopes, severely eroded

A

1,009.1

5.4%

SvB

Stingal loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes

B

592.2

3.2%

65.3

0.4%

Sx

Stony alluvial land

ToC

Timpanogos silt loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes

W

Water

WS

Water, saline

YHG

Yeates Hollow cobbly clay loam, 30 to 60 percent slopes

Totals for Area of Interest

A

B

D

39.3

0.2%

699.1

3.8%

97.4

0.5%

66.3

0.4%

32.1

0.2%

50.6

0.3%

66.6

0.4%

4,972.8

26.8%

584.1

3.1%

18,544.6

100.0%

Description — Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by
vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These
soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have
moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine
texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high
water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water
transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are
in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options — Hydrologic Soil Group
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified

3/23/2016 1:31 PM

 Web Soil Survey

2 of 2

http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx

Tie-break Rule: Higher
FOIA   Accessibility Statement   Privacy Policy   Non-Discrimination Statement   Information Quality   USA.gov   White House

3/23/2016 1:31 PM

 DWQ Guidance for
Calculation of 90th Percentile
Storm Event
Permit Requirements
The General Permit for Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer Systems (MS4s), UPDES Permit No.UTR090000 (Permit), was
reissued effective March 1, 2016. Permit Part 4.2.5.3.4, Long-Term Storm
Water Management in New Development and Redevelopment (PostConstruction Storm Water Management) requires new development or
redevelopment projects that disturb greater than or equal to one acre,
including projects less than one acre that are part of a larger common plan of
development or sale to manage rainfall on-site, and prevent the off-site
discharge of the precipitation from all rainfall events less than or equal to the
90th percentile rainfall event. This requirement is to be implemented within
180 days from the effective date of this Permit (i.e., September 1, 2016). This
permit requirement is to be accomplished through the use of Low Impact
Development (LID) and Green Infrastructure (GI) practices that are designed,
constructed, and maintained to infiltrate, evapotranspire and/or harvest and
reuse rainwater.

Utah Division of Water
Quality
April 2016
Contact
Jeanne Riley
Storm Water
(801) 536-4369
Email: jriley@utah.gov

90th Percentile Rainfall Depth
The 90th percentile rainfall depth represents the depth of rainfall which is not
LID in Spanish Fork:
vegetated swale with underground
exceeded in 90 percent of all runoff producing rainfall events within the time
Infiltration gallery
period analyzed. In other words, 90 percent of the rainfall storm events that
produce runoff will be less than or equal to this depth. The majority of Utah
MS4s have a 90th percentile rainfall depth of between 0.6 – 0.7 inches. The
rainfall depth corresponds directly to rainfall volume (not the same as runoff
volume) when applied over an area. For example a 90th percentile rainfall depth of 0.65 inches applied over a 10-acre
site equates to approximately 0.5 acre-feet or 875 cubic yards.
Precipitation Data for Utah
NOAA NCDC weather stations report snowfall events in millimeters (mm) and precipitation events (including melted
snow) in tenths of mm. For days with recorded snowfall, the snow-water equivalency is included in the precipitation
column. First convert the data to inches. Then sort the precipitation data from low to high and eliminate events less
than 0.1 inch, because they do not generally result in any measurable runoff due to absorption, interception and
evaporation. Then eliminate days with recorded snowfall as snowfall does not immediately produce runoff. Once the
data has been truncated, utilize the PERCENTILE function (k= 0.9) to calculate the 90th percentile value of the data.
To develop a frequency curve which depicts the percentile of rainfall events greater than or equal to a given rainfall
depth, either 1.) assign a rank to each of the precipitation values and calculate the exceedance probability percentile
for each value, or 2.) calculate several percentiles utilizing the PERCENTILE function (k = 0.1, 0.2….0.8, 0.85, 0.9,
0.95, etc). Graph precipitation depth (inches) vs. Exceedance Probability Percentile (See Orem Example below).
UTAH DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY – FACT SHEET

1

 Steps for Calculation of 90th Percentile Rainfall Depth
1.
2.
3.
4.

Obtain long-term daily rainfall data.
Sort data low to high.
Edit out snowfall and small events (<0.1 inch).
Use the Excel PERCENTILE function to calculate the 90th percentile
rainfall depth.

Summary
Retaining rainfall events equal to or less than the 90th percentile rainfall event reduces the runoff from smaller
frequently occurring storms, which account for the majority of the annual precipitation volume. Determination of
the 90th percentile rainfall depth allows for calculation of a water quality volume for which designers can choose
LID/GI techniques to infiltrate, evapotranspire and/or harvest and reuse the runoff generated. The 90th percentile
depth is commonly recognized to maximize the cost of controls and water quality benefits, as graphically portrayed
by the upward inflection of the curve. This criteria also incentivizes limitation of impervious areas and promotion of
LID/GI.
References
Urban Stormwater Retrofit Practices Manual No. 3. Center for Watershed Protection. August 2007.
Technical Guidance on Implementing the Stormwater Runoff Requirements for Federal Projects under Section 438
of the Energy Independence and Security Act. USEPA. December, 2009.

UTAH DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY – FACT SHEET

2

 STATION
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

STATION_NAME
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

DATE
PRCP (IN) 90th PERCENTILE (IN)
19811005
0.32
0.55
19811008
0.28
19811011
0.82
19811012
0.6
19811014
0.76
19811015
0.15
19811016
0.32
19811029
0.2
19811030
0.16
19811118
0.15
19811219
0.2
19811220
0.15
19811227
0.3
19811229
0.12
19811230
0.14
19820120
0.11
19820203
0.28
19820216
0.22
19820223
0.22
19820311
0.32
19820314
0.47
19820318
0.27
19820329
0.11
19820401
0.15
19820509
0.27
19820510
0.15
19820511
0.46
19820518
0.15
19820528
0.25
19820614
0.17
19820707
0.13
19820708
0.48
19820725
0.15
19820728
0.55
19820829
0.54
19820909
0.79
19820914
0.15
19820915
0.44
19820918
0.14
19820925
0.25
19820926
2.4
19820927
0.21
19820929
0.47
19820930
0.12
19821002
0.39
19821026
0.23

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19821027
19821031
19821119
19821130
19821201
19821213
19830128
19830129
19830207
19830213
19830227
19830307
19830313
19830317
19830322
19830323
19830324
19830327
19830331
19830410
19830420
19830421
19830425
19830430
19830501
19830502
19830506
19830511
19830515
19830601
19830602
19830604
19830702
19830705
19830708
19830816
19830817
19830818
19830819
19830820
19830821
19830902
19830903
19830927
19830929
19831001
19831002

0.57
0.11
0.24
0.88
0.11
0.17
1.29
0.12
0.11
0.4
0.11
0.28
0.22
0.48
0.34
0.26
0.12
0.22
0.2
0.2
0.28
0.15
0.12
0.35
0.15
0.2
0.23
0.14
0.32
0.13
0.15
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.3
0.11
0.76
0.16
0.64
0.25
0.39
0.15
0.42
0.67
0.35
0.2
0.22

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19831014
19831101
19831107
19831119
19831120
19831125
19831130
19831201
19831203
19831204
19831214
19831219
19831223
19831224
19831225
19831226
19831227
19840211
19840216
19840222
19840315
19840317
19840331
19840408
19840415
19840422
19840429
19840501
19840531
19840605
19840607
19840608
19840721
19840722
19840819
19840907
19840923
19840924
19841001
19841012
19841017
19841107
19841108
19841110
19841124
19841216
19850107

0.18
0.13
0.3
0.2
0.55
0.25
0.22
0.35
0.2
0.14
0.6
0.32
0.14
0.3
0.4
0.29
0.18
0.25
0.16
0.13
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.42
0.27
0.96
0.19
0.18
0.5
0.38
0.26
0.1
0.25
0.21
0.13
0.27
0.15
0.19
0.2
0.95
0.4
0.14
0.26
0.13
0.3
0.19
0.12

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19850108
19850219
19850302
19850311
19850421
19850509
19850510
19850624
19850722
19850730
19850903
19850911
19850918
19851007
19851021
19851109
19851111
19851112
19851117
19851123
19851129
19851202
19851207
19860108
19860120
19860130
19860201
19860213
19860216
19860217
19860219
19860308
19860309
19860310
19860316
19860401
19860402
19860408
19860410
19860412
19860423
19860425
19860426
19860427
19860428
19860429
19860511

0.16
0.48
0.2
0.27
0.59
0.26
0.2
0.22
0.18
0.27
0.42
0.32
0.17
0.18
0.22
0.35
0.19
0.14
0.42
0.25
0.25
0.26
0.67
0.2
0.45
0.34
0.17
0.55
0.5
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.22
0.17
0.38
0.38
0.36
0.4
0.13
0.45
0.15
0.55
0.2
0.12
0.32
0.21
0.75

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19860721
19860728
19860820
19860908
19860917
19860918
19860919
19860925
19860930
19870101
19870104
19870105
19870119
19870203
19870213
19870223
19870309
19870316
19870501
19870516
19870517
19870518
19870519
19870520
19870521
19870525
19870528
19870609
19870720
19870721
19870814
19870824
19871012
19871013
19871101
19871105
19871106
19871113
19871125
19871222
19880105
19880106
19880229
19880301
19880418
19880419
19880421

0.26
0.63
0.34
0.3
0.15
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.26
0.12
0.15
0.2
0.12
0.2
0.31
0.27
0.12
0.17
0.24
0.15
1.45
0.88
0.19
0.88
0.53
0.15
0.8
0.2
0.12
0.4
0.25
0.2
0.25
0.84
0.27
0.18
0.17
0.72
0.15
0.18
0.2
0.15
0.17
0.19
0.28
0.12
0.12

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19880424
19880430
19880505
19880529
19880530
19880626
19880913
19880920
19881103
19881112
19881113
19881114
19881123
19881221
19881225
19890104
19890201
19890213
19890219
19890301
19890307
19890320
19890326
19890402
19890511
19890512
19890513
19890514
19890515
19890516
19890824
19890917
19890920
19891025
19891026
19891124
19891125
19891126
19900101
19900115
19900302
19900304
19900408
19900416
19900423
19900428
19900528

0.11
0.2
0.13
0.56
0.22
1.35
0.41
0.18
0.53
0.47
0.04
0.25
0.25
0.18
0.12
0.11
0.14
0.11
0.13
0.17
0.12
0.46
0.13
0.15
0.3
1.16
0.2
0.01
0.15
0.17
0.55
0.12
0.28
0.4
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.15
0.14
0.18
0.22
0.13
0.52
0.3
0.17
0.13
0.12

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19900530
19900611
19900709
19900817
19901018
19901105
19901120
19901213
19901219
19910101
19910107
19910113
19910114
19910115
19910216
19910228
19910301
19910302
19910425
19910503
19910509
19910530
19910531
19910601
19910602
19910719
19910827
19910907
19910908
19910909
19910910
19911022
19911023
19911028
19911109
19911117
19920106
19920107
19920211
19920216
19920220
19920222
19920615
19920701
19920711
19920712
19921028

0.15
0.5
0.17
0.84
0.27
0.28
0.11
0.15
0.2
0.15
0.22
0.18
0.15
0.14
0.57
0.22
0.5
0.12
0.45
0.44
0.12
0.47
0.04
0.28
0.39
0.15
0.15
0.29
0.4
0.22
0.26
0.25
0.33
0.84
0.4
0.22
0.2
0.25
0.17
0.35
0.19
0.34
1.39
0.7
0.14
0.11
0.45

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19921029
19921030
19921119
19921120
19921122
19921228
19921230
19930107
19930108
19930109
19930110
19930111
19930118
19930119
19930209
19930314
19930317
19930328
19930416
19930504
19930505
19930506
19930602
19930605
19930606
19930607
19930723
19930916
19930917
19930918
19931007
19931009
19931011
19931012
19931015
19931016
19931122
19931212
19940105
19940311
19940319
19940321
19940407
19940410
19940425
19940426
19940428

1.46
0.32
0.13
0.13
0.18
0.22
0.14
0.15
0.27
0.19
0.06
0.11
0.12
0.11
0.29
0.22
0.3
0.12
0.19
0.29
0.18
0.27
0.52
0.18
0.34
0.16
0.37
0.28
0.36
0.1
1.29
0.28
0.14
0.01
0.37
0.2
0.25
0.13
0.15
0.14
0.28
0.5
0.21
0.82
0.18
0.22
0.75

 GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052
GHCND:USC00427052

PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US
PROMONTORY UT US

19941105
19941112
19941116
19941127
19941203
19941213

0.23
1.15
0.15
0.14
0.2
0.25

 ATTACHMENT 2 
HEC-HMS MODEL

TETHA TECH

 

 

{a Basin Mudel [Basin 1] IEurrent Run [Run 1]



 

 

ii:-

'31

C2

HEA-

ii:-

C3

'34

AA.



IiRAE
RCA-Upper
HA9

EACH

RCA-aner

A1

HA1

HA2

HA3

 

REE

REIT

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENT 3 
TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCS

TETHA TECH

Promontory Point Landfill Hydrology Calculations
Kirpich + Mannings Time of Concentration Calculations
Existing Condition

tc

V

V

A1

= 0.0078

= 16.1345

=

0.385

LxL
S

Sheet Flow

(s)

R

1.49

Shallow
Concentrated
Flow

0.5

0.66

S
n

L
S
R
n
V

=
=
=
=
=

Longest Flow Path (ft)
Slope (ft/ft)
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
Mannings Roughness Coefficient
Velocity (ft/sec)

K
M

= Kirpich Method
= Mannings Method

0.50

Channelized Flow

A (Acres)

Method

L

S

10.00

K

100'

6400-6390
=
100

0.1000

M

115'

6390-6380
=
115

0.0870

M

933'

6380-5950
=
933

Velocity (ft/s)

tc (min.)

tc (hr.)

0.66 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0110 hr.

4.76

0.40 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0067 hr.

0.4609

2.97

5.24 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0873 hr.

A2

18.88

M

293'

5950-5850
=
293

0.3413

2.93

1.54 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0256 hr.

A3

27.56

M

811'

5850-5650
=
811

0.2466

3.66

3.69 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0616 hr.

A4

45.08

M

605'

5650-5550
=
605

0.1653

2.83

3.56 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0594 hr.

A5

89.47

M

1,639'

5550-5370
=
1639

0.1098

3.20

8.54 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1423 hr.

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\25yr Time of Concentration.xlsx

1/18/2017

 Promontory Point Landfill Hydrology Calculations
Kirpich + Mannings Time of Concentration Calculations
Existing Condition

S

Velocity (ft/s)

tc (min.)

5370-5086
=
1877

0.1513

4.16

7.52 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1253 hr.

1,419'

5086-4950
=
1419

0.0958

4.20

5.63 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0939 hr.

M

5,681'

4950-4550
=
5681

0.0704

12.26

7.72 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1287 hr.

M

1,862'

4550-4378
=
1862

0.0924

14.17

2.19 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0365 hr.

M

1,496'

4378-4246
=
1496

0.0882

14.57

1.71 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0285 hr.

K

100'

5692-5646
=
100

0.4600

0.36 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0061 hr.

M

100'

5646-5550
=
100

0.1600

6.45

0.26 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0043 hr.

M

1,225'

5550-5074
=
1225

0.3886

3.35

6.09 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1016 hr.

A (Acres)

Method

L

A6

172.46

M

1,877'

A7

209.36

M

A8

242.50

A9

78.67

B1

9.80

tc (hr.)

B2

19.33

M

1,083'

5074-4910
=
1083

0.1514

2.77

6.52 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1086 hr.

B3

38.76

M

393'

4910-4876
=
393

0.0865

1.97

3.32 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0554 hr.

B4

76.65

M

1,285'

4876-4770
=
1285

0.0825

2.27

9.43 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1572 hr.

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\25yr Time of Concentration.xlsx

1/18/2017

 Promontory Point Landfill Hydrology Calculations
Kirpich + Mannings Time of Concentration Calculations
Existing Condition

B5

164.43

M

2,259'

4770-4580
=
2259

0.0841

1.90

19.82 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.3303 hr.

B6

259.76

M

2,775'

4580-4402
=
2775

0.0641

2.35

19.68 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.3280 hr.

B7

162.57

M

448'

4402-4374
=
448

0.0625

8.08

0.92 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0154 hr.

M

3,180'

4374-4240
=
3180

0.0421

9.38

5.65 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0942 hr.

5.47

5.41 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0901 hr.

0.65 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0108 hr.

B8

94.48

M

1,775'

4384-4280
=
1775

0.0586

C1

9.50

K

100'

4828-4818
=
100

0.1000

M

863'

4818-4750
=
863

0.0788

2.07

6.95 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1158 hr.

C2

19.04

M

788'

4750-4640
=
788

0.1396

3.65

3.60 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0600 hr.

C3

35.94

M

986'

4640-4542
=
986

0.0994

4.56

3.60 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0600 hr.

C4

60.83

M

2,497'

4542-4294
=
3616

0.0686

7.20

5.78 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0963 hr.

M

1,857'

4294-4250
=
740

0.0595

9.78

3.16 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0527 hr.

K

100'

4564-4554
=
100

0.1000

0.65 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0108 hr.

C5

47.03

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\25yr Time of Concentration.xlsx

1/18/2017

 Promontory Point Landfill Hydrology Calculations
Kirpich + Mannings Time of Concentration Calculations
Existing Condition

C6

31.64

M

125'

4554-4540
=
125

0.1120

5.40

0.39 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0065 hr.

M

2,185'

4564-4262
=
2185

0.1382

3.86

9.43 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.1572 hr.

K

100'

4294-4284
=
100

0.1000

0.65 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.0108 hr.

M

2,550'

4284-4246
=
2550

0.0149

38.99 min

x

1 hr
60 min

= 0.6498 hr.

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\25yr Time of Concentration.xlsx

1.09

1/18/2017

 25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
RA1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.46090

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width
Discharge

ft/ft

ft

9.80

ft³/s

0.03

ft

Results
Normal Depth
Flow Area

3.30

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

101.31

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.03

ft

Top Width

101.31

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04424

ft/ft

Velocity

2.97

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.14

ft

Specific Energy

0.17

ft

Froude Number

2.91

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.03

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.46090

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:23:19 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04424

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:23:19 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.34130

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

24.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.04

Flow Area

8.26

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

201.65

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.04

ft

Top Width

201.64

ft

Critical Depth

0.08

ft

Critical Slope

0.04211

ft/ft

Velocity

2.93

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.13

ft

Specific Energy

0.17

ft

Froude Number

2.55

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.04

Critical Depth

0.08

Channel Slope

0.34130

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:23:53 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04211

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:23:53 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.24660

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

53.90

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.07

Flow Area

ft

14.73

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

202.93

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.07

ft

Top Width

202.92

ft

Critical Depth

0.13

ft

Critical Slope

0.03533

ft/ft

Velocity

3.66

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.21

ft

Specific Energy

0.28

ft

Froude Number

2.40

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.07

Critical Depth

0.13

Channel Slope

0.24660

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:07 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03533

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:07 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA4
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.16530

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

94.40

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.07

Flow Area

ft

33.40

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

502.67

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.07

ft

Top Width

502.66

ft

Critical Depth

0.10

ft

Critical Slope

0.03809

ft/ft

Velocity

2.83

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.12

ft

Specific Energy

0.19

ft

Froude Number

1.93

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.07

Critical Depth

0.10

Channel Slope

0.16530

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:19 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA4
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03809

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:19 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA5
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.10980

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

175.40

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.11

Flow Area

ft

54.78

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

504.37

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.11

ft

Top Width

504.36

ft

Critical Depth

0.16

ft

Critical Slope

0.03322

ft/ft

Velocity

3.20

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.16

ft

Specific Energy

0.27

ft

Froude Number

1.71

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.11

Critical Depth

0.16

Channel Slope

0.10980

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:30 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA5
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03322

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:30 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA6
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.15130

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

265.60

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.13

Flow Area

ft

63.80

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

505.08

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.13

ft

Top Width

505.08

ft

Critical Depth

0.21

ft

Critical Slope

0.03032

ft/ft

Velocity

4.16

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.27

ft

Specific Energy

0.40

ft

Froude Number

2.06

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.13

Critical Depth

0.21

Channel Slope

0.15130

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:43 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA6
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03032

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:24:43 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA7
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09580

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

383.80

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.18

Flow Area

ft

91.48

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

507.27

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.18

ft

Top Width

507.27

ft

Critical Depth

0.26

ft

Critical Slope

0.02797

ft/ft

Velocity

4.20

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.27

ft

Specific Energy

0.46

ft

Froude Number

1.74

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.18

Critical Depth

0.26

Channel Slope

0.09580

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:25:12 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA7
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02797

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:25:12 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA8
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.07040

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

25.00

Bottom Width

463.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

1.31

ft

Flow Area

37.78

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

33.26

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.14

ft

Top Width

32.84

ft

Critical Depth

2.02

ft

Critical Slope

0.01534

ft/ft

12.26

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

2.34

ft

Specific Energy

3.64

ft

Froude Number

2.01

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.31

Critical Depth

2.02

Channel Slope

0.07040

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:27:18 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA8
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01534

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:27:18 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA9-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09240

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

20.00

Bottom Width

467.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

1.37

ft

Flow Area

32.96

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

28.65

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.15

ft

Top Width

28.21

ft

Critical Depth

2.28

ft

Critical Slope

0.01506

ft/ft

14.17

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

3.12

ft

Specific Energy

4.49

ft

Froude Number

2.31

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.37

Critical Depth

2.28

Channel Slope

0.09240

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:15 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA9-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01506

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:15 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA9-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08820

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

467.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

1.55

ft

Flow Area

32.05

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

25.81

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.24

ft

Top Width

25.31

ft

Critical Depth

2.53

ft

Critical Slope

0.01489

ft/ft

14.57

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

3.30

ft

Specific Energy

4.85

ft

Froude Number

2.28

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.55

Critical Depth

2.53

Channel Slope

0.08820

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:29 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA9-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01489

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:29 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.38860

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

15.30

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.05

Flow Area

4.56

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

101.81

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.04

ft

Top Width

101.81

ft

Critical Depth

0.09

ft

Critical Slope

0.04015

ft/ft

Velocity

3.35

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.17

ft

Specific Energy

0.22

ft

Froude Number

2.79

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.05

Critical Depth

0.09

Channel Slope

0.38860

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:41 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04015

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:41 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.15140

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

19.60

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.07

Flow Area

7.08

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

102.80

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.07

ft

Top Width

102.79

ft

Critical Depth

0.11

ft

Critical Slope

0.03806

ft/ft

Velocity

2.77

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.12

ft

Specific Energy

0.19

ft

Froude Number

1.86

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.07

Critical Depth

0.11

Channel Slope

0.15140

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:55 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03806

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:28:55 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08650

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

25.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.06

Flow Area

ft

12.76

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

202.54

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.06

ft

Top Width

202.54

ft

Critical Depth

0.08

ft

Critical Slope

0.04174

ft/ft

Velocity

1.97

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.06

ft

Specific Energy

0.12

ft

Froude Number

1.39

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.06

Critical Depth

0.08

Channel Slope

0.08650

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:29:06 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04174

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:29:06 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB4
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08250

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

36.70

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.08

Flow Area

ft

16.19

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

203.22

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.08

ft

Top Width

203.21

ft

Critical Depth

0.10

ft

Critical Slope

0.03843

ft/ft

Velocity

2.27

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.08

ft

Specific Energy

0.16

ft

Froude Number

1.42

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.08

Critical Depth

0.10

Channel Slope

0.08250

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:29:19 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB4
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03843

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:29:19 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB5
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08410

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

57.80

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.06

Flow Area

ft

30.46

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

502.43

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.06

ft

Top Width

502.43

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04250

ft/ft

Velocity

1.90

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.06

ft

Specific Energy

0.12

ft

Froude Number

1.36

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.06

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.08410

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:18 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB5
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04250

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:18 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB6
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.06410

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

121.30

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.10

Flow Area

ft

51.66

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

504.12

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.10

ft

Top Width

504.12

ft

Critical Depth

0.12

ft

Critical Slope

0.03605

ft/ft

Velocity

2.35

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.09

ft

Specific Energy

0.19

ft

Froude Number

1.29

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.10

Critical Depth

0.12

Channel Slope

0.06410

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:38 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB6
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03605

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:38 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB7-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.06250

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

20.00

Bottom Width

132.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.74

ft

Flow Area

16.36

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

24.66

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.66

ft

Top Width

24.42

ft

Critical Depth

1.05

ft

Critical Slope

0.01865

ft/ft

Velocity

8.08

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.01

ft

Specific Energy

1.75

ft

Froude Number

1.74

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.74

Critical Depth

1.05

Channel Slope

0.06250

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:52 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB7-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01865

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:30:52 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB7-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.025

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.04210

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

132.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.77

ft

Flow Area

14.08

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

20.87

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.67

ft

Top Width

20.62

ft

Critical Depth

1.19

ft

Critical Slope

0.00930

ft/ft

Velocity

9.38

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.37

ft

Specific Energy

2.14

ft

Froude Number

2.00

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.77

Critical Depth

1.19

Channel Slope

0.04210

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:31:05 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB7-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.00930

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:31:05 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 B8
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.05860

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Bottom Width

8.00

ft

23.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.45

Flow Area

ft

4.21

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

10.85

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.39

ft

Top Width

10.70

ft

Critical Depth

0.59

ft

Critical Slope

0.02301

ft/ft

Velocity

5.47

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.46

ft

Specific Energy

0.91

ft

Froude Number

1.54

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.45

Critical Depth

0.59

Channel Slope

0.05860

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:31:18 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 B8
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02301

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 10:31:18 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.07880

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

15.50

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.07

Flow Area

7.48

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

102.95

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.07

ft

Top Width

102.95

ft

Critical Depth

0.09

ft

Critical Slope

0.04004

ft/ft

Velocity

2.07

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.07

ft

Specific Energy

0.14

ft

Froude Number

1.35

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.07

Critical Depth

0.09

Channel Slope

0.07880

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:17:21 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04004

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:17:21 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.13960

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

42.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.11

Flow Area

ft

11.55

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

104.52

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.11

ft

Top Width

104.52

ft

Critical Depth

0.17

ft

Critical Slope

0.03228

ft/ft

Velocity

3.65

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.21

ft

Specific Energy

0.32

ft

Froude Number

1.94

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.11

Critical Depth

0.17

Channel Slope

0.13960

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:00 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03228

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:00 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09940

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

98.40

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.21

Flow Area

ft

21.56

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

108.29

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.20

ft

Top Width

108.28

ft

Critical Depth

0.30

ft

Critical Slope

0.02703

ft/ft

Velocity

4.56

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.32

ft

Specific Energy

0.53

ft

Froude Number

1.80

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.21

Critical Depth

0.30

Channel Slope

0.09940

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:18 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02703

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:18 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC4-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09930

Left Side Slope

10.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

10.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Bottom Width

50.00

ft

166.40

Discharge

ft/ft

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.43

ft

Flow Area

23.11

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

58.56

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.39

ft

Top Width

58.52

ft

Critical Depth

0.67

ft

Critical Slope

0.02121

ft/ft

Velocity

7.20

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.81

ft

Specific Energy

1.23

ft

Froude Number

2.02

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.43

Critical Depth

0.67

Channel Slope

0.09930

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:35 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC4-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02121

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:35 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC4-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.02370

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

15.00

Bottom Width

553.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

2.51

ft

Flow Area

56.52

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

30.87

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.83

ft

Top Width

30.05

ft

Critical Depth

2.86

ft

Critical Slope

0.01449

ft/ft

Velocity

9.78

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.49

ft

Specific Energy

4.00

ft

Froude Number

1.26

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

2.51

Critical Depth

2.86

Channel Slope

0.02370

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:54 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC4-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01449

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:24:54 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC5
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.12720

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

52.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.13

Flow Area

ft

13.53

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

105.28

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.13

ft

Top Width

105.27

ft

Critical Depth

0.20

ft

Critical Slope

0.03086

ft/ft

Velocity

3.86

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.23

ft

Specific Energy

0.36

ft

Froude Number

1.90

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.13

Critical Depth

0.20

Channel Slope

0.12720

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:25:13 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC5
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03086

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:25:13 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC6
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.01490

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

10.90

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.10

Flow Area

ft

10.02

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

103.94

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.10

ft

Top Width

103.93

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04321

ft/ft

Velocity

1.09

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.02

ft

Specific Energy

0.12

ft

Froude Number

0.62

Flow Type

Subcritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.10

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.01490

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:28:46 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC6
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04321

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 8:28:46 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 10-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
RA1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.46090

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width
Discharge

ft/ft

ft

5.20

ft³/s

0.02

ft

Results
Normal Depth
Flow Area

2.26

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

100.90

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.02

ft

Top Width

100.90

ft

Critical Depth

0.04

ft

Critical Slope

0.05077

ft/ft

Velocity

2.30

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.08

ft

Specific Energy

0.10

ft

Froude Number

2.71

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.02

Critical Depth

0.04

Channel Slope

0.46090

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:20 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.05077

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:20 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.34130

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

13.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.03

Flow Area

5.69

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

201.14

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.03

ft

Top Width

201.14

ft

Critical Depth

0.05

ft

Critical Slope

0.04829

ft/ft

Velocity

2.30

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.08

ft

Specific Energy

0.11

ft

Froude Number

2.41

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.03

Critical Depth

0.05

Channel Slope

0.34130

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:41 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04829

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:41 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.24660

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

30.60

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.05

Flow Area

ft

10.46

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

202.08

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.05

ft

Top Width

202.08

ft

Critical Depth

0.09

ft

Critical Slope

0.04000

ft/ft

Velocity

2.92

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.13

ft

Specific Energy

0.18

ft

Froude Number

2.27

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.05

Critical Depth

0.09

Channel Slope

0.24660

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:51 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04000

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:11:51 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA4
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.16530

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

51.50

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.05

Flow Area

ft

23.15

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

501.85

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.05

ft

Top Width

501.85

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04348

ft/ft

Velocity

2.22

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.08

ft

Specific Energy

0.12

ft

Froude Number

1.83

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.05

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.16530

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:06 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA4
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04348

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:06 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA5
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.10980

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

98.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.08

Flow Area

ft

38.63

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

503.08

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.08

ft

Top Width

503.08

ft

Critical Depth

0.11

ft

Critical Slope

0.03777

ft/ft

Velocity

2.54

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.10

ft

Specific Energy

0.18

ft

Froude Number

1.61

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.08

Critical Depth

0.11

Channel Slope

0.10980

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:22 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA5
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03777

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:22 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA6
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.15130

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

145.80

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.09

Flow Area

ft

44.46

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

503.55

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.09

ft

Top Width

503.54

ft

Critical Depth

0.14

ft

Critical Slope

0.03461

ft/ft

Velocity

3.28

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.17

ft

Specific Energy

0.26

ft

Froude Number

1.95

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.09

Critical Depth

0.14

Channel Slope

0.15130

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:46 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA6
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03461

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:12:46 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA7
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09580

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

500.00

ft

Discharge

197.60

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.12

Flow Area

ft

61.33

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

504.89

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.12

ft

Top Width

504.88

ft

Critical Depth

0.17

ft

Critical Slope

0.03236

ft/ft

Velocity

3.22

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.16

ft

Specific Energy

0.28

ft

Froude Number

1.63

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.12

Critical Depth

0.17

Channel Slope

0.09580

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:00 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA7
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03236

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:00 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA8
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.07040

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

25.00

Bottom Width

223.30

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.85

ft

Flow Area

23.52

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

30.40

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.77

ft

Top Width

30.12

ft

Critical Depth

1.28

ft

Critical Slope

0.01742

ft/ft

Velocity

9.49

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.40

ft

Specific Energy

2.25

ft

Froude Number

1.89

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.85

Critical Depth

1.28

Channel Slope

0.07040

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:16 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA8
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01742

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:16 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA9-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09240

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

20.00

Bottom Width

229.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.91

ft

Flow Area

20.59

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

25.73

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.80

ft

Top Width

25.44

ft

Critical Depth

1.48

ft

Critical Slope

0.01694

ft/ft

11.13

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

1.92

ft

Specific Energy

2.83

ft

Froude Number

2.18

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.91

Critical Depth

1.48

Channel Slope

0.09240

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:53 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA9-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01694

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:13:53 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RA9-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08820

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

229.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

1.04

ft

Flow Area

19.81

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

22.56

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.88

ft

Top Width

22.22

ft

Critical Depth

1.66

ft

Critical Slope

0.01663

ft/ft

11.56

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

2.08

ft

Specific Energy

3.11

ft

Froude Number

2.16

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.04

Critical Depth

1.66

Channel Slope

0.08820

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:14:58 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RA9-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01663

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:14:58 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.38860

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width
Discharge

ft/ft

ft

9.50

ft³/s

0.03

ft

Results
Normal Depth
Flow Area

3.43

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

101.37

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.03

ft

Top Width

101.36

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04454

ft/ft

Velocity

2.77

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.12

ft

Specific Energy

0.15

ft

Froude Number

2.65

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.03

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.38860

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:16:05 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04454

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:16:05 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.15140

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

10.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.05

Flow Area

4.73

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

101.88

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.05

ft

Top Width

101.87

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04385

ft/ft

Velocity

2.14

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.07

ft

Specific Energy

0.12

ft

Froude Number

1.75

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.05

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.15140

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:16:43 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04385

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:16:43 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08650

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

12.10

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.04

Flow Area

8.22

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

201.64

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.04

ft

Top Width

201.64

ft

Critical Depth

0.05

ft

Critical Slope

0.04912

ft/ft

Velocity

1.47

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.03

ft

Specific Energy

0.07

ft

Froude Number

1.28

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.04

Critical Depth

0.05

Channel Slope

0.08650

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:03 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04912

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:03 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB4
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08250

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

200.00

Bottom Width

15.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.05

Flow Area

9.45

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

201.88

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.05

ft

Top Width

201.88

ft

Critical Depth

0.06

ft

Critical Slope

0.04680

ft/ft

Velocity

1.59

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.04

ft

Specific Energy

0.09

ft

Froude Number

1.29

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.05

Critical Depth

0.06

Channel Slope

0.08250

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:22 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB4
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04680

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:22 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB5
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.08410

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

19.80

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.03

Flow Area

ft

16.10

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

501.29

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.03

ft

Top Width

501.29

ft

Critical Depth

0.04

ft

Critical Slope

0.05379

ft/ft

Velocity

1.23

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.02

ft

Specific Energy

0.06

ft

Froude Number

1.21

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.03

Critical Depth

0.04

Channel Slope

0.08410

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:34 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB5
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.05379

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:34 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB6
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.06410

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

500.00

Bottom Width

45.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.06

Flow Area

ft

28.50

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

502.28

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.06

ft

Top Width

502.27

ft

Critical Depth

0.06

ft

Critical Slope

0.04482

ft/ft

Velocity

1.59

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.04

ft

Specific Energy

0.10

ft

Froude Number

1.17

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.06

Critical Depth

0.06

Channel Slope

0.06410

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:57 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB6
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04482

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:17:57 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB7-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.06250

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

20.00

ft

Discharge

51.80

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.42

Flow Area

ft

9.02

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

22.68

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.40

ft

Top Width

22.55

ft

Critical Depth

0.58

ft

Critical Slope

0.02225

ft/ft

Velocity

5.74

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.51

ft

Specific Energy

0.94

ft

Froude Number

1.60

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.42

Critical Depth

0.58

Channel Slope

0.06250

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:18:33 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB7-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02225

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:18:33 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RB7-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.025

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.04210

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

ft/ft

Bottom Width

16.00

ft

Discharge

51.80

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.44

Flow Area

ft

7.70

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

18.81

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.41

ft

Top Width

18.67

ft

Critical Depth

0.66

ft

Critical Slope

0.01099

ft/ft

Velocity

6.73

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.70

ft

Specific Energy

1.15

ft

Froude Number

1.85

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.44

Critical Depth

0.66

Channel Slope

0.04210

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:19:12 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RB7-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01099

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:19:12 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC1
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.07880

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

11.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.06

Flow Area

6.14

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

102.43

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.06

ft

Top Width

102.43

ft

Critical Depth

0.07

ft

Critical Slope

0.04302

ft/ft

Velocity

1.82

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.05

ft

Specific Energy

0.11

ft

Froude Number

1.31

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.06

Critical Depth

0.07

Channel Slope

0.07880

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:19:33 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC1
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.04302

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:19:33 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC2
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.13960

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

27.50

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.09

Flow Area

8.89

ft
ft²

Wetted Perimeter

103.50

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.09

ft

Top Width

103.49

ft

Critical Depth

0.13

ft

Critical Slope

0.03538

ft/ft

Velocity

3.09

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.15

ft

Specific Energy

0.24

ft

Froude Number

1.86

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.09

Critical Depth

0.13

Channel Slope

0.13960

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:01 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC2
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.03538

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:01 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC3
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09940

Left Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

20.00

ft/ft (H:V)

100.00

Bottom Width

64.00

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.16

Flow Area

ft

16.54

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

106.42

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.16

ft

Top Width

106.41

ft

Critical Depth

0.23

ft

Critical Slope

0.02956

ft/ft

Velocity

3.87

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.23

ft

Specific Energy

0.39

ft

Froude Number

1.73

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.16

Critical Depth

0.23

Channel Slope

0.09940

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:13 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC3
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02956

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:13 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC4-Upper
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.09930

Left Side Slope

10.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

10.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Bottom Width

50.00

ft

101.90

Discharge

ft/ft

ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

0.32

ft

Flow Area

16.97

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

56.41

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.30

ft

Top Width

56.38

ft

Critical Depth

0.49

ft

Critical Slope

0.02334

ft/ft

Velocity

6.01

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.56

ft

Specific Energy

0.88

ft

Froude Number

1.93

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

0.32

Critical Depth

0.49

Channel Slope

0.09930

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:40 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC4-Upper
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02334

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:20:40 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 RC4-Lower
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Normal Depth

Input Data
0.035

Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope

0.02370

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

15.00

Bottom Width

273.20

Discharge

ft/ft

ft
ft³/s

Results
Normal Depth

1.71

ft

Flow Area

34.47

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

25.83

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.33

ft

Top Width

25.27

ft

Critical Depth

1.90

ft

Critical Slope

0.01611

ft/ft

Velocity

7.92

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.98

ft

Specific Energy

2.69

ft

Froude Number

1.20

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.71

Critical Depth

1.90

Channel Slope

0.02370

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:21:30 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 RC4-Lower
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01611

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/9/2017 10:21:30 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 ATTACHMENT 4 
SUBAREA DATA

TETHA TECH

Calculated By: JSN
Checked By: VHY
Date: 1-4-2017

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
SUBAREA A DATA

SUBAREA

AREA

A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8

sf
435680
822314
1200390
1963753
3897164
7512219
9146069
10563331

ac
10.00
18.88
27.56
45.08
89.47
172.46
209.96
242.50

A9

3426729

78.67

Total
SOIL TYPE

A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6

C
C
C
C
C
C
A
C
D
A
C
D
A
C

A8
A9

RA1
RA2
RA3
RA4
RA5
RA6
RA7
RA8
RA9 Upper
RA9 Lower

LENGTH
lf
933
293
811
605
1639
1877
1419
5681
1862
1496

TOP EL
6380.00
5950.00
5850.00
5650.00
5550.00
5370.00
5086.00
4950.00
4550.00
4378.00

SLOPE
BOT EL
5950.00
5850.00
5650.00
5550.00
5370.00
5086.00
4950.00
4550.00
4378.00
4246.00

RCN1

RCN

79
79
81
81
81
81

79
79
81
81
81
81
55
81
88
63
81
88
63
85

ft/ft
0.4609
0.3413
0.2466
0.1653
0.1098
0.1513
0.0958
0.0704
0.0924
0.0882

BOTTOM WIDTH
ft
100
200
200
500
500
500
500
25
20
16

2

3

Time of Concentration
hr
0.1050
0.0256
0.0616
0.0594
0.1423
0.1253
0.0939
0.1287
0.0650

894.57

SUBAREA

A7

REACH

AREA
SF
435680
822314
1200390
1963753
3897164
7512219
142437
8951002
52630
5469917
2151192
2942222
2057015
1369714

AC
10.00
18.88
27.56
45.08
89.47
172.46
3.27
205.49
1.21
125.57
49.38
67.54
47.22
31.44

Sq Mi
0.01563
0.02950
0.04306
0.07044
0.13979
0.26946
0.32807

80.6

0.37891

73.6

0.12292

71.8

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Subarea Data.xlsx

1

Computed in WinTR-55 for Arid Rangeland,
desert shrub, used aerial to determine
condition
2
Choose representative cross section through
Reach
3
Computed in using Kirpich and Mannings
equations

 Calculated By: JSN
Checked By: VHY
Date: 1-4-2017

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
SUBAREA B DATA

SUBAREA

AREA

B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6

sf
426835
842084
1688223
3338731
7162632
11315358

ac
9.80
19.33
38.76
76.65
164.43
259.76

B7

7081607

162.57

B8
Total

4115457

94.48
825.78

SUBAREA

SOIL TYPE

SF
69598
357237
409417
244082
188585
838644
752395
97184
2577234
438496
323001
5683671
1478961
7496627
249013
3569718
4534890
2546717
3223263
892194

B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8

C
D
A
C
D
A
C
D
A
C
D
A
D
A
C
D
A
D
A
D

REACH
RB1
RB2
RB3
RB4
RB5
RB6
RB7-Upper
RB7-Lower
RB7

LENGTH
lf
1225
1083
393
1285
2259
2775
448
3180
1775

TOP EL
5550.00
5074.00
4910.00
4876.00
4770.00
4580.00
4402.00
4374.00
4384.00

SLOPE
BOT EL
5074.00
4910.00
4876.00
4770.00
4580.00
4402.00
4374.00
4240.00
4280.00

Sq Mi

RCN1

RCN

0.01531

85.2

0.03021

69.5

AREA
AC
1.60
8.20
9.40
5.60
4.33
19.25
17.27
2.23
59.17
10.07
7.42
130.48
33.95
172.10
5.72
81.95
104.11
58.46
74.00
20.48

0.06056

68.4

0.11976

67.8

0.25692

68.2

0.40588

71.4

0.25402

72.0

0.14762

68.4

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Subarea Data.xlsx

81
86
55
81
86
55
81
86
63
81
88
63
88
63
85
88
63
88
63
88

ft/ft
0.3886
0.1514
0.0865
0.0825
0.0841
0.0641
0.0625
0.0421
0.0586

BOTTOM WIDTH
ft
100
100
200
200
500
500
20
16
8

2

3

Time of Concentration
hr
0.1120
0.1086
0.0554
0.1572
0.3303
0.3280
0.1096
0.0901

1

Computed in WinTR-55 for Arid Rangeland,
desert shrub, used aerial to determine
condition

2

Choose representative cross section through
Reach

3

Computed in using Kirpich and Mannings
equations

 Calculated By: JSN
Checked By: VHY
Date: 1-18-2017

PROMONTORY POINT LANDFILL
SUBAREA C DATA

SUBAREA

AREA

C1
C2
C3

sf
413791
829504
1565598

ac
9.50
19.04
35.94

C4

2613808

60.00

C5
C6
Total

1896676
1378178

43.54
31.64
199.67

SUBAREA

SOIL TYPE

C1

D
C
D
C
D
A
C
D
C
D
A
D

C2
C3
C4
C5
C6

REACH
RC1
RC2
RC3
RC4 Upper
RC4 Lower
RC5
RC5

LENGTH
lf
863
788
986
2497
1857
2185
2550

TOP EL
4818.00
4750.00
4640.00
4542.00
4294.00
4540.00
4284.00

SLOPE
BOT EL
4750.00
4640.00
4542.00
4294.00
4250.00
4262.00
4246.00

RCN1

RCN

0.01484

88

0.02975

86.9

0.05616

87.9

0.09376

83.8

0.07334

85.9

0.04944

80.0

88
88
85
88
85
63
85
88
85
88
63
85

AREA
SF

AC

413791

9.50

515742
313762
1532744
32854
213970
1906891
492947
1403729
640791
311163
1067015

11.84
7.20
35.19
0.75
4.91
43.78
11.32
32.23
14.71
7.14
24.50

P:\Prom Pt LLC\Prom Pt LF\Cell 1\Docs\Calcs\Hydro\Runon Tributary\Subarea Data.xlsx

ft/ft
0.0788
0.1396
0.0994
0.0993
0.0237
0.1272
0.0149

1

2

BOTTOM WIDTH
ft
100
100
100
50
15
100
100

2

3

Time of Concentration
hr
0.1866
0.0600
0.0600
0.1490
0.1745
0.6606

Computed in WinTR-55 for Arid Rangeland,
desert shrub, used aerial to determine
condition

Choose representative cross section through
Reach
3
Computed in using Kirpich and Mannings
equations

 ATTACHMENT 5 
HYDRAULIC CALCS

TETHA TECH

Western Earthen Trapezoidal Channel D=3', B=16', Z=3 @1.6%
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.040

Roughness Coefficient

0.01600

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

3.00

ft

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

ft

Results
Discharge

586.05

Flow Area

75.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

34.97

ft

Hydraulic Radius

2.14

ft

Top Width

ft³/s

34.00

ft

Critical Depth

2.88

ft

Critical Slope

0.01880

ft/ft

Velocity

7.81

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.95

ft

Specific Energy

3.95

ft

Froude Number

0.93

Flow Type

Subcritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

3.00

Critical Depth

2.88

Channel Slope

0.01600

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 12:56:20 PM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Western Earthen Trapezoidal Channel D=3', B=16', Z=3 @1.6%
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01880

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/6/2017 12:56:20 PM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 Lower Western Trap Channel D=3', B=16', Z=3 @1.7%
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.040

Roughness Coefficient

0.01700

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

3.00

ft

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

ft

Results
Discharge

604.09

Flow Area

75.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

34.97

ft

Hydraulic Radius

2.14

ft

Top Width

ft³/s

34.00

ft

Critical Depth

2.92

ft

Critical Slope

0.01872

ft/ft

Velocity

8.05

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.01

ft

Specific Energy

4.01

ft

Froude Number

0.96

Flow Type

Subcritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

3.00

Critical Depth

2.92

Channel Slope

0.01700

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:59:18 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Lower Western Trap Channel D=3', B=16', Z=3 @1.7%
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01872

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:59:18 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 Western Rip Rap Channel
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.069

Roughness Coefficient

0.05000

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

3.00

ft

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

ft

Results
Discharge

600.58

Flow Area

75.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

34.97

ft

Hydraulic Radius

2.14

ft

Top Width

ft³/s

34.00

ft

Critical Depth

2.92

ft

Critical Slope

0.05575

ft/ft

Velocity

8.01

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.00

ft

Specific Energy

4.00

ft

Froude Number

0.95

Flow Type

Subcritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

3.00

Critical Depth

2.92

Channel Slope

0.05000

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 2:45:40 PM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Western Rip Rap Channel
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.05575

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 2:45:40 PM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 70' Wide Concrete Weir
Project Description
Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
4242.00

Headwater Elevation

ft

Crest Elevation

4240.00

ft

Tailwater Elevation

4241.50

ft

Crest Breadth

22.00

ft

Crest Length

70.00

ft

Paved

Crest Surface Type

Results
Discharge

601.89

ft³/s

Headwater Height Above Crest

2.00

ft

Tailwater Height Above Crest

1.50

ft

Weir Coefficient

3.04

US

Submergence Factor

1.00

Adjusted Weir Coefficient
Flow Area
Velocity

3.04
140.00
4.30

US
ft²
ft/s

Wetted Perimeter

74.00

ft

Top Width

70.00

ft

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/18/2017 2:45:10 PM

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

1

 Lower Western Earthen Channel 10 Yr
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.034

Roughness Coefficient

0.03000

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

2.00

ft

Left Side Slope

4.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

4.00

ft/ft (H:V)

10.00

Bottom Width

ft

Results
Discharge

334.32

Flow Area

36.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

26.49

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.36

ft

Top Width

ft³/s

26.00

ft

Critical Depth

2.38

ft

Critical Slope

0.01479

ft/ft

Velocity

9.29

ft/s

Velocity Head

1.34

ft

Specific Energy

3.34

ft

Froude Number

1.39

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

2.00

Critical Depth

2.38

Channel Slope

0.03000

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:58:09 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Lower Western Earthen Channel 10 Yr
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.01479

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:58:09 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 Grated Rectagular Culvert
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.014

Roughness Coefficient

0.02000

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

2.00

ft

Bottom Width

5.00

ft

Results
Discharge

161.02

Flow Area

ft³/s

10.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

9.00

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.11

ft

Top Width

5.00

ft

Critical Depth

3.18

ft

Critical Slope

0.00580

ft/ft

16.10

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

4.03

ft

Specific Energy

6.03

ft

Froude Number

2.01

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

2.00

ft

Critical Depth

3.18

ft

Channel Slope

0.02000

ft/ft

Critical Slope

0.00580

ft/ft

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:55:41 AM

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

1

 Eastern Earthen Trapezoidal Channel D=1.33', B=16', Z=3 @ 3%
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.040

Roughness Coefficient

0.03000

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

1.33

ft

Left Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

3.00

ft/ft (H:V)

16.00

Bottom Width

ft

Results
Discharge

181.08

Flow Area

26.59

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

24.41

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.09

ft

Top Width

ft³/s

23.98

ft

Critical Depth

1.44

ft

Critical Slope

0.02257

ft/ft

Velocity

6.81

ft/s

Velocity Head

0.72

ft

Specific Energy

2.05

ft

Froude Number

1.14

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.33

ft

Critical Depth

1.44

ft

Channel Slope

0.03000

Bentley Systems, Inc.
11/15/2016 3:02:29 PM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Eastern Earthen Trapezoidal Channel D=1.33', B=16', Z=3 @ 3%
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.02257

Bentley Systems, Inc.
11/15/2016 3:02:29 PM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 Lower Eastern 10 Yr Concrete Trap Channel
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.014

Roughness Coefficient

0.02500

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

1.50

ft

Left Side Slope

1.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Right Side Slope

1.00

ft/ft (H:V)

Bottom Width

2.00

ft

Results
Discharge

78.50

Flow Area

5.25

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

6.24

ft

Hydraulic Radius

0.84

ft

Top Width

5.00

ft

Critical Depth

2.46

ft

Critical Slope

0.00345

ft/ft

14.95

ft/s

Velocity

ft³/s

Velocity Head

3.47

ft

Specific Energy

4.97

ft

Froude Number

2.57

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

1.50

Critical Depth

2.46

Channel Slope

0.02500

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:46:56 AM

ft
ft
ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

2

 Lower Eastern 10 Yr Concrete Trap Channel
GVF Output Data
Critical Slope

0.00345

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:46:56 AM

ft/ft

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

2 of

2

 Grated Rectagular Culvert
Project Description
Friction Method

Manning Formula

Solve For

Discharge

Input Data
0.014

Roughness Coefficient

0.02000

Channel Slope

ft/ft

Normal Depth

2.00

ft

Bottom Width

5.00

ft

Results
Discharge

161.02

Flow Area

ft³/s

10.00

ft²

Wetted Perimeter

9.00

ft

Hydraulic Radius

1.11

ft

Top Width

5.00

ft

Critical Depth

3.18

ft

Critical Slope

0.00580

ft/ft

16.10

ft/s

Velocity
Velocity Head

4.03

ft

Specific Energy

6.03

ft

Froude Number

2.01

Flow Type

Supercritical

GVF Input Data
Downstream Depth

0.00

ft

Length

0.00

ft

0

Number Of Steps

GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth

0.00

ft

0.00

ft

Profile Description
Profile Headloss
Downstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Upstream Velocity

Infinity

ft/s

Normal Depth

2.00

ft

Critical Depth

3.18

ft

Channel Slope

0.02000

ft/ft

Critical Slope

0.00580

ft/ft

Bentley Systems, Inc.
1/19/2017 10:55:41 AM

Bentley FlowMaster V8i (SELECTseries 1) [08.11.01.03]

27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

Page

1 of

1

 ATTACHMENT 6 
HEC-HMS RESULTS AND HYDROGRAPH

TETHA TECH

25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
Project:

Promontory_Runon_New Simulation Run: Run 1

Start of Run:
01Jan2000, 00:00
End of Run:
02Jan2000, 00:00
Compute Time: 17Jan2017, 17:04:05

Basin Model:
Basin 1
Meteorologic Model: Met 1
Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic
Element

Drainage Area Peak DischargeTime of Peak
(MI2)
(CFS)

Volume
(AC-FT)

A1

0.01563

11.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.5

A2

0.02950

21.1

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.0

A3

0.04306

36.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.7

A4

0.07044

59.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

2.8

A5

0.13979

117.6

01Jan2000, 12:05

5.6

A6

0.26946

226.8

01Jan2000, 12:05

10.8

A7

0.32807

267.7

01Jan2000, 12:05

12.8

A8

0.37891

158.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

9.0

A9

0.12292

40.5

01Jan2000, 12:05

2.5

B1

0.01531

17.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.8

B2

0.03021

6.8

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.5

B3

0.06056

10.9

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.9

B4

0.11976

18.8

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.7

B5

0.25692

44.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

3.8

B6

0.40588

126.0

01Jan2000, 12:05

8.0

B7

0.25402

86.1

01Jan2000, 12:05

5.3

B8

0.14762

22.9

01Jan2000, 12:10

2.2

C1

0.01484

20.0

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.9

C2

0.02975

37.5

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.7

C3

0.05616

75.1

01Jan2000, 12:05

3.4

C4

0.09376

96.6

01Jan2000, 12:05

4.5

C5

0.07334

52.2

01Jan2000, 12:15

3.9

C6

0.04944

10.9

01Jan2000, 12:45

1.8

JA/C

1.59229

558.6

01Jan2000, 12:20

56.8

RA1

0.01563

9.8

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.5

RA2

0.04513

24.2

01Jan2000, 12:10

1.6

Page 1

 Hydrologic
Element

Drainage Area Peak DischargeTime of Peak
(MI2)
(CFS)

Volume
(AC-FT)

RA3

0.08819

53.9

01Jan2000, 12:10

3.3

RA4

0.15863

94.4

01Jan2000, 12:10

6.1

RA5

0.29842

175.4

01Jan2000, 12:15

11.6

RA6

0.56788

265.6

01Jan2000, 12:15

22.3

RA7

0.89595

383.8

01Jan2000, 12:15

35.0

RA8

1.27486

463.2

01Jan2000, 12:20

43.9

RA9

1.39778

467.0

01Jan2000, 12:25

46.3

RB1

0.01531

15.3

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.8

RB2

0.04552

19.6

01Jan2000, 12:15

1.3

RB3

0.10608

25.2

01Jan2000, 12:20

2.2

RB4

0.22584

36.7

01Jan2000, 12:25

3.9

RB5

0.48276

57.8

01Jan2000, 12:35

7.6

RB6

0.88864

121.3

01Jan2000, 12:25

15.5

RB7

1.14266

132.1

01Jan2000, 12:30

20.7

RC1

0.01484

15.5

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.9

RC2

0.04459

42.2

01Jan2000, 12:10

2.6

RC3

0.10075

98.4

01Jan2000, 12:10

6.0

RC4-Lower

1.59229

553.0

01Jan2000, 12:25

56.7

RC4-Upper

0.19451

166.4

01Jan2000, 12:10

10.5

Page 2

 10-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
Project:

Promontory Onsite 10 Yr Simulation Run: Run 1

Start of Run:
01Jan2000, 00:00
End of Run:
02Jan2000, 00:00
Compute Time: 09Jan2017, 10:10:02

Basin Model:
Basin 1
Meteorologic Model: Met 1
Control Specifications: Control 1

Hydrologic
Element

Drainage Area Peak DischargeTime of Peak
(MI2)
(CFS)

Volume
(AC-FT)

A1

0.01563

6.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.4

A2

0.02950

11.9

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.7

A3

0.04306

21.4

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.2

A4

0.07044

35.1

01Jan2000, 12:05

2.0

A5

0.13979

69.6

01Jan2000, 12:05

3.9

A6

0.26947

134.1

01Jan2000, 12:05

7.5

A7

0.32807

156.9

01Jan2000, 12:05

8.8

A8

0.37891

70.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

5.6

A9

0.12292

15.3

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.5

B1

0.01531

11.0

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.6

B2

0.03021

2.2

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.3

B3

0.06056

3.3

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.5

B4

0.11976

5.4

01Jan2000, 12:10

0.9

B5

0.25692

13.0

01Jan2000, 12:10

2.1

B6

0.40588

45.4

01Jan2000, 12:05

4.8

B7

0.25402

33.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

3.2

C1

0.01484

13.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

0.7

C2

0.02975

24.4

01Jan2000, 12:05

1.3

C3

0.05616

49.6

01Jan2000, 12:05

2.6

C4

0.09376

60.2

01Jan2000, 12:05

3.2

JA/C

1.59230

273.8

01Jan2000, 12:25

38.9

RA1

0.01563

5.2

01Jan2000, 12:15

0.4

RA2

0.04513

13.1

01Jan2000, 12:10

1.1

RA3

0.08819

30.6

01Jan2000, 12:10

2.3

RA4

0.15863

51.5

01Jan2000, 12:15

4.2

RA5

0.29842

98.0

01Jan2000, 12:20

8.1

Page 1

 Hydrologic
Element

Drainage Area Peak DischargeTime of Peak
(MI2)
(CFS)

Volume
(AC-FT)

RA6

0.56789

145.8

01Jan2000, 12:25

15.5

RA7

0.89596

197.6

01Jan2000, 12:20

24.2

RA8

1.27487

223.3

01Jan2000, 12:25

29.7

RA9

1.39779

229.1

01Jan2000, 12:30

31.2

RB1

0.01531

8.7

01Jan2000, 12:15

0.6

RB2

0.04552

10.5

01Jan2000, 12:20

0.9

RB3

0.10608

12.4

01Jan2000, 12:25

1.4

RB4

0.22584

15.1

01Jan2000, 12:35

2.3

RB5

0.48276

20.4

01Jan2000, 13:00

4.3

RB6

0.88864

45.2

01Jan2000, 12:35

9.0

RB7

1.14266

51.8

01Jan2000, 12:45

12.1

RC1

0.01484

11.2

01Jan2000, 12:15

0.7

RC2

0.04459

27.5

01Jan2000, 12:10

1.9

RC3

0.10075

64.0

01Jan2000, 12:10

4.5

RC4-Lower

1.59230

273.2

01Jan2000, 12:30

38.8

RC4-Upper

0.19451

101.9

01Jan2000, 12:15

7.7

Page 2

 Reach "RA9" Results for Run "Run 1"
500

450

400

350

Flow (cfs)

300

250

200

150

100

50

00:00

03:00

06:00

Run:Run 1 Element:RA9 Result:Outflow

09:00

12:00
01Jan2000

15:00

18:00

Run:RUN 1 Element:RA9 Result:Combined Inflow

21:00

00:00

 Reach "RB7" Results for Run "Run 1"
160

140

120

Flow (cfs)

100

80

60

40

20

0
00:00

03:00

06:00

Run:Run 1 Element:RB7 Result:Outflow

09:00

12:00
01Jan2000

15:00

18:00

Run:RUN 1 Element:RB7 Result:Combined Inflow

21:00

00:00

 Reach "RC4-Lower" Results for Run "Run 1"
600

500

Flow (cfs)

400

300

200

100

0
00:00

03:00

06:00

Run:Run 1 Element:RC4-LOWER Result:Outflow

09:00

12:00
01Jan2000

15:00

18:00

21:00

Run:RUN 1 Element:RC4-LOWER Result:Combined Inflow

00:00

 ATTACHMENT 7 
UNIT HYDROGRAPH

TETHA TECH

25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
Project: Promontory Runon
Simulation Run: Run 1 Reach: RA9
Start of Run:
01Jan2000, 00:00
Basin Model:
Basin 1
End of Run:
02Jan2000, 00:00
Meteorologic Model: Met 1
Compute Time: 06Jan2017, 09:16:22 Control Specifications: Control 1

Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

00:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:00

0.0

0.0

Page 1

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

02:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:35

0.0

0.0

Page 2

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

04:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:10

0.0

0.0

Page 3

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

07:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:45

0.0

0.0

Page 4

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

09:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:50

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

10:55

0.2

0.1

01Jan2000

11:00

0.3

0.3

01Jan2000

11:05

0.5

0.4

01Jan2000

11:10

0.7

0.6

01Jan2000

11:15

1.0

0.8

01Jan2000

11:20

1.5

1.2

01Jan2000

11:25

2.1

1.7

01Jan2000

11:30

2.9

2.4

01Jan2000

11:35

3.8

3.3

01Jan2000

11:40

5.0

4.3

01Jan2000

11:45

8.2

6.3

01Jan2000

11:50

13.5

10.3

01Jan2000

11:55

21.6

16.7

01Jan2000

12:00

44.8

30.9

01Jan2000

12:05

119.6

74.7

01Jan2000

12:10

251.3

172.3

01Jan2000

12:15

421.6

319.4

01Jan2000

12:20

478.0

444.1

Page 5

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

12:25

450.4

467.0

01Jan2000

12:30

406.6

432.9

01Jan2000

12:35

353.9

385.6

01Jan2000

12:40

287.3

327.3

01Jan2000

12:45

213.5

257.7

01Jan2000

12:50

156.2

190.6

01Jan2000

12:55

118.6

141.2

01Jan2000

13:00

94.1

108.8

01Jan2000

13:05

76.6

87.1

01Jan2000

13:10

63.7

71.4

01Jan2000

13:15

53.2

59.5

01Jan2000

13:20

45.5

50.1

01Jan2000

13:25

39.8

43.2

01Jan2000

13:30

35.4

38.1

01Jan2000

13:35

32.9

34.4

01Jan2000

13:40

32.6

32.8

01Jan2000

13:45

35.1

33.6

01Jan2000

13:50

37.6

36.1

01Jan2000

13:55

39.2

38.3

01Jan2000

14:00

40.2

39.6

01Jan2000

14:05

40.8

40.4

01Jan2000

14:10

40.7

40.7

01Jan2000

14:15

40.0

40.4

01Jan2000

14:20

39.1

39.7

01Jan2000

14:25

38.1

38.7

01Jan2000

14:30

37.0

37.6

01Jan2000

14:35

36.1

36.7

01Jan2000

14:40

35.2

35.7

01Jan2000

14:45

34.3

34.8

01Jan2000

14:50

33.5

34.0

01Jan2000

14:55

32.8

33.2

Page 6

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

15:00

32.1

32.5

01Jan2000

15:05

31.7

31.9

01Jan2000

15:10

31.6

31.7

01Jan2000

15:15

32.2

31.8

01Jan2000

15:20

32.6

32.4

01Jan2000

15:25

32.8

32.7

01Jan2000

15:30

32.9

32.9

01Jan2000

15:35

32.8

32.9

01Jan2000

15:40

32.6

32.8

01Jan2000

15:45

32.3

32.5

01Jan2000

15:50

31.9

32.1

01Jan2000

15:55

31.4

31.7

01Jan2000

16:00

31.0

31.2

01Jan2000

16:05

30.5

30.8

01Jan2000

16:10

30.1

30.4

01Jan2000

16:15

29.7

30.0

01Jan2000

16:20

29.3

29.6

01Jan2000

16:25

29.0

29.2

01Jan2000

16:30

28.6

28.8

01Jan2000

16:35

28.2

28.5

01Jan2000

16:40

27.9

28.1

01Jan2000

16:45

27.6

27.8

01Jan2000

16:50

27.3

27.4

01Jan2000

16:55

26.9

27.1

01Jan2000

17:00

26.6

26.8

01Jan2000

17:05

26.4

26.5

01Jan2000

17:10

26.1

26.2

01Jan2000

17:15

25.8

26.0

01Jan2000

17:20

25.5

25.7

01Jan2000

17:25

25.3

25.4

01Jan2000

17:30

25.0

25.2

Page 7

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

17:35

24.8

24.9

01Jan2000

17:40

24.5

24.7

01Jan2000

17:45

24.3

24.4

01Jan2000

17:50

24.1

24.2

01Jan2000

17:55

23.8

24.0

01Jan2000

18:00

23.6

23.8

01Jan2000

18:05

23.4

23.5

01Jan2000

18:10

23.1

23.3

01Jan2000

18:15

22.7

22.9

01Jan2000

18:20

22.4

22.6

01Jan2000

18:25

22.1

22.3

01Jan2000

18:30

21.8

22.0

01Jan2000

18:35

21.6

21.7

01Jan2000

18:40

21.3

21.5

01Jan2000

18:45

21.1

21.3

01Jan2000

18:50

21.0

21.1

01Jan2000

18:55

20.8

20.9

01Jan2000

19:00

20.6

20.7

01Jan2000

19:05

20.5

20.6

01Jan2000

19:10

20.3

20.4

01Jan2000

19:15

20.1

20.2

01Jan2000

19:20

20.0

20.1

01Jan2000

19:25

19.8

19.9

01Jan2000

19:30

19.7

19.8

01Jan2000

19:35

19.6

19.6

01Jan2000

19:40

19.4

19.5

01Jan2000

19:45

19.3

19.4

01Jan2000

19:50

19.1

19.2

01Jan2000

19:55

19.0

19.1

01Jan2000

20:00

18.9

19.0

01Jan2000

20:05

18.8

18.8

Page 8

 25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
Project: Promontory Runon
Simulation Run: Run 1 Reach: RB7
Start of Run:
01Jan2000, 00:00
Basin Model:
Basin 1
End of Run:
02Jan2000, 00:00
Meteorologic Model: Met 1
Compute Time: 06Jan2017, 09:16:22 Control Specifications: Control 1

Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

00:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:00

0.0

0.0

Page 1

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

02:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:35

0.0

0.0

Page 2

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

04:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:10

0.0

0.0

Page 3

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

07:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:45

0.0

0.0

Page 4

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

09:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

09:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

10:50

0.1

0.0

01Jan2000

10:55

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:00

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:05

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:10

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:15

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:20

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:25

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:30

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:35

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:40

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:45

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:50

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

11:55

1.1

0.1

01Jan2000

12:00

17.0

0.9

01Jan2000

12:05

86.2

13.8

01Jan2000

12:10

67.7

72.4

01Jan2000

12:15

49.1

71.4

01Jan2000

12:20

74.0

52.8

Page 5

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

12:25

146.7

69.0

01Jan2000

12:30

116.8

132.1

01Jan2000

12:35

79.2

122.8

01Jan2000

12:40

73.8

86.7

01Jan2000

12:45

93.8

74.9

01Jan2000

12:50

91.6

89.8

01Jan2000

12:55

84.9

92.0

01Jan2000

13:00

79.1

86.2

01Jan2000

13:05

71.5

80.3

01Jan2000

13:10

62.0

73.1

01Jan2000

13:15

49.0

63.9

01Jan2000

13:20

39.3

51.6

01Jan2000

13:25

30.4

41.2

01Jan2000

13:30

25.7

32.2

01Jan2000

13:35

24.8

26.7

01Jan2000

13:40

22.9

25.0

01Jan2000

13:45

20.6

23.3

01Jan2000

13:50

19.6

21.0

01Jan2000

13:55

20.9

19.8

01Jan2000

14:00

20.4

20.6

01Jan2000

14:05

19.7

20.5

01Jan2000

14:10

19.4

19.8

01Jan2000

14:15

20.0

19.5

01Jan2000

14:20

20.1

19.9

01Jan2000

14:25

20.3

20.1

01Jan2000

14:30

20.1

20.2

01Jan2000

14:35

19.9

20.2

01Jan2000

14:40

19.5

19.9

01Jan2000

14:45

19.1

19.6

01Jan2000

14:50

18.7

19.2

01Jan2000

14:55

18.3

18.8

Page 6

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

15:00

17.9

18.4

01Jan2000

15:05

18.1

18.0

01Jan2000

15:10

17.9

18.0

01Jan2000

15:15

17.6

17.9

01Jan2000

15:20

17.4

17.6

01Jan2000

15:25

17.8

17.4

01Jan2000

15:30

17.7

17.7

01Jan2000

15:35

17.5

17.7

01Jan2000

15:40

17.4

17.5

01Jan2000

15:45

17.4

17.4

01Jan2000

15:50

17.4

17.4

01Jan2000

15:55

17.3

17.4

01Jan2000

16:00

17.2

17.3

01Jan2000

16:05

17.1

17.2

01Jan2000

16:10

16.9

17.1

01Jan2000

16:15

16.7

16.9

01Jan2000

16:20

16.5

16.7

01Jan2000

16:25

16.3

16.5

01Jan2000

16:30

16.1

16.3

01Jan2000

16:35

15.9

16.1

01Jan2000

16:40

15.7

15.9

01Jan2000

16:45

15.6

15.8

01Jan2000

16:50

15.4

15.6

01Jan2000

16:55

15.2

15.4

01Jan2000

17:00

15.1

15.3

01Jan2000

17:05

14.9

15.1

01Jan2000

17:10

14.8

14.9

01Jan2000

17:15

14.6

14.8

01Jan2000

17:20

14.5

14.6

01Jan2000

17:25

14.3

14.5

01Jan2000

17:30

14.2

14.4

Page 7

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

17:35

14.1

14.2

01Jan2000

17:40

14.0

14.1

01Jan2000

17:45

13.8

14.0

01Jan2000

17:50

13.7

13.9

01Jan2000

17:55

13.6

13.7

01Jan2000

18:00

13.5

13.6

01Jan2000

18:05

13.3

13.5

01Jan2000

18:10

13.2

13.3

01Jan2000

18:15

13.0

13.2

01Jan2000

18:20

12.9

13.1

01Jan2000

18:25

12.7

12.9

01Jan2000

18:30

12.6

12.7

01Jan2000

18:35

12.5

12.6

01Jan2000

18:40

12.4

12.5

01Jan2000

18:45

12.2

12.4

01Jan2000

18:50

12.1

12.2

01Jan2000

18:55

12.0

12.1

01Jan2000

19:00

11.9

12.0

01Jan2000

19:05

11.8

11.9

01Jan2000

19:10

11.7

11.8

01Jan2000

19:15

11.6

11.7

01Jan2000

19:20

11.5

11.6

01Jan2000

19:25

11.4

11.5

01Jan2000

19:30

11.4

11.5

01Jan2000

19:35

11.3

11.4

01Jan2000

19:40

11.2

11.3

01Jan2000

19:45

11.1

11.2

01Jan2000

19:50

11.1

11.1

01Jan2000

19:55

11.0

11.1

01Jan2000

20:00

10.9

11.0

01Jan2000

20:05

10.8

10.9

Page 8

 25-year, 24-hour Precipitation Event
Project: Promontory_Runon_New
Simulation Run: Run 1 Reach: RC4-Lower
Start of Run:
01Jan2000, 00:00
Basin Model:
Basin 1
End of Run:
02Jan2000, 00:00
Meteorologic Model: Met 1
Compute Time: 17Jan2017, 17:04:05 Control Specifications: Control 1

Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

00:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

00:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

01:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:00

0.0

0.0

Page 1

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

02:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

02:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

03:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:35

0.0

0.0

Page 2

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

04:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

04:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

05:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:10

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

06:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:05

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:10

0.0

0.0

Page 3

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

07:15

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:20

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:25

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:30

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:35

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:40

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:45

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:50

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

07:55

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:00

0.0

0.0

01Jan2000

08:05

0.1

0.0

01Jan2000

08:10

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

08:15

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

08:20

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

08:25

0.1

0.1

01Jan2000

08:30

0.2

0.2

01Jan2000

08:35

0.2

0.2

01Jan2000

08:40

0.2

0.2

01Jan2000

08:45

0.3

0.2

01Jan2000

08:50

0.3

0.3

01Jan2000

08:55

0.3

0.3

01Jan2000

09:00

0.4

0.4

01Jan2000

09:05

0.4

0.4

01Jan2000

09:10

0.4

0.4

01Jan2000

09:15

0.4

0.4

01Jan2000

09:20

0.5

0.5

01Jan2000

09:25

0.5

0.5

01Jan2000

09:30

0.5

0.5

01Jan2000

09:35

0.6

0.6

01Jan2000

09:40

0.7

0.6

01Jan2000

09:45

0.7

0.7

Page 4

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

09:50

0.8

0.8

01Jan2000

09:55

0.9

0.8

01Jan2000

10:00

1.0

0.9

01Jan2000

10:05

1.1

1.0

01Jan2000

10:10

1.2

1.1

01Jan2000

10:15

1.3

1.2

01Jan2000

10:20

1.4

1.3

01Jan2000

10:25

1.5

1.4

01Jan2000

10:30

1.7

1.6

01Jan2000

10:35

1.8

1.7

01Jan2000

10:40

1.6

1.7

01Jan2000

10:45

1.4

1.5

01Jan2000

10:50

1.4

1.4

01Jan2000

10:55

1.5

1.4

01Jan2000

11:00

1.7

1.6

01Jan2000

11:05

2.0

1.8

01Jan2000

11:10

2.7

2.3

01Jan2000

11:15

3.5

3.0

01Jan2000

11:20

4.4

3.8

01Jan2000

11:25

5.4

4.8

01Jan2000

11:30

6.6

5.9

01Jan2000

11:35

8.2

7.2

01Jan2000

11:40

12.4

9.9

01Jan2000

11:45

18.3

14.8

01Jan2000

11:50

26.4

21.6

01Jan2000

11:55

39.8

31.7

01Jan2000

12:00

64.7

49.7

01Jan2000

12:05

145.9

97.2

01Jan2000

12:10

338.6

223.0

01Jan2000

12:15

480.1

395.2

01Jan2000

12:20

558.6

511.5

Page 5

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

12:25

544.7

553.0

01Jan2000

12:30

488.5

522.2

01Jan2000

12:35

428.4

464.5

01Jan2000

12:40

356.8

399.8

01Jan2000

12:45

278.7

325.5

01Jan2000

12:50

207.1

250.0

01Jan2000

12:55

155.2

186.3

01Jan2000

13:00

121.3

141.6

01Jan2000

13:05

98.5

112.2

01Jan2000

13:10

80.7

91.4

01Jan2000

13:15

67.1

75.2

01Jan2000

13:20

56.8

63.0

01Jan2000

13:25

49.3

53.8

01Jan2000

13:30

43.7

47.0

01Jan2000

13:35

39.8

42.1

01Jan2000

13:40

39.7

39.7

01Jan2000

13:45

41.6

40.5

01Jan2000

13:50

44.4

42.7

01Jan2000

13:55

46.5

45.3

01Jan2000

14:00

47.7

47.0

01Jan2000

14:05

48.3

48.0

01Jan2000

14:10

48.4

48.3

01Jan2000

14:15

47.8

48.1

01Jan2000

14:20

46.8

47.4

01Jan2000

14:25

45.7

46.4

01Jan2000

14:30

44.5

45.2

01Jan2000

14:35

43.3

44.0

01Jan2000

14:40

42.2

42.9

01Jan2000

14:45

41.2

41.8

01Jan2000

14:50

40.2

40.8

01Jan2000

14:55

39.3

39.8

Page 6

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

15:00

38.4

38.9

01Jan2000

15:05

37.7

38.1

01Jan2000

15:10

37.8

37.7

01Jan2000

15:15

38.2

37.9

01Jan2000

15:20

38.7

38.4

01Jan2000

15:25

39.1

38.9

01Jan2000

15:30

39.1

39.1

01Jan2000

15:35

39.0

39.1

01Jan2000

15:40

38.8

39.0

01Jan2000

15:45

38.5

38.7

01Jan2000

15:50

38.0

38.3

01Jan2000

15:55

37.5

37.8

01Jan2000

16:00

36.9

37.2

01Jan2000

16:05

36.4

36.7

01Jan2000

16:10

35.9

36.2

01Jan2000

16:15

35.4

35.7

01Jan2000

16:20

35.0

35.2

01Jan2000

16:25

34.5

34.8

01Jan2000

16:30

34.1

34.3

01Jan2000

16:35

33.6

33.9

01Jan2000

16:40

33.2

33.5

01Jan2000

16:45

32.8

33.1

01Jan2000

16:50

32.5

32.7

01Jan2000

16:55

32.1

32.3

01Jan2000

17:00

31.7

31.9

01Jan2000

17:05

31.4

31.6

01Jan2000

17:10

31.0

31.2

01Jan2000

17:15

30.7

30.9

01Jan2000

17:20

30.4

30.6

01Jan2000

17:25

30.1

30.2

01Jan2000

17:30

29.7

29.9

Page 7

 Date

Time

Inflow
(CFS)

Outflow
(CFS)

01Jan2000

17:35

29.4

29.6

01Jan2000

17:40

29.2

29.3

01Jan2000

17:45

28.9

29.0

01Jan2000

17:50

28.6

28.8

01Jan2000

17:55

28.3

28.5

01Jan2000

18:00

28.1

28.2

01Jan2000

18:05

27.8

28.0

01Jan2000

18:10

27.4

27.6

01Jan2000

18:15

27.0

27.3

01Jan2000

18:20

26.6

26.9

01Jan2000

18:25

26.2

26.5

01Jan2000

18:30

25.9

26.1

01Jan2000

18:35

25.6

25.8

01Jan2000

18:40

25.3

25.5

01Jan2000

18:45

25.1

25.2

01Jan2000

18:50

24.9

25.0

01Jan2000

18:55

24.7

24.8

01Jan2000

19:00

24.5

24.6

01Jan2000

19:05

24.3

24.4

01Jan2000

19:10

24.1

24.2

01Jan2000

19:15

23.9

24.0

01Jan2000

19:20

23.7

23.8

01Jan2000

19:25

23.5

23.6

01Jan2000

19:30

23.4

23.5

01Jan2000

19:35

23.2

23.3

01Jan2000

19:40

23.0

23.1

01Jan2000

19:45

22.9

23.0

01Jan2000

19:50

22.7

22.8

01Jan2000

19:55

22.5

22.6

01Jan2000

20:00

22.4

22.5

01Jan2000

20:05

22.2

22.3

Page 8

 APPENDIX 
CLOSURE COSTS

TABLE A
PROMONTORY LANDFILL LLC
PRELIMINARY CLOSURE COST ESTIMATE
PHASE 1A
Item
No.
1 FINAL COVER1.0

Description

Mobilization/Demobilization 1.1
Preliminary Grading/Subgrade Preparation 1.2
GCL (Deck)
40 MIL VFPE Liner (Deck)
Geocomposite (Deck)
Final Grading/Vegetative Cover 18" Thick (Deck)

3

4

$77,000
$0.10
$0.75
$0.80
$0.65
$0.30
$2.50
$500
$15,000
Item 1 Subtotal

$77,000
$69,500
$162,051
$172,854
$140,444
$64,820
$126,164
$1,500
$15,000
$829,333

16

ac

$7,500
Item 2 Subtotal

$120,000
$120,000

5.0
11.0

ac
ac

$2,000
$2,000
Item 3 Subtotal

$10,000
$22,000
$32,000

16
5

ea
ea

$1,200
$750
Item 4 Subtotal

$0
$19,200
$3,720
$22,920

16

ac

$10,000
Item 5 Subtotal

$160,000
$160,000

Demolition-Scale House/Salvage Scales 6.0
Decommissioning of Environmental Control System 6.1

1
-

ls
-

$50,000
Item 6 Subtotal

$50,000
$0
$50,000

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Construction Management 7.0

16

ac

$10,000
Item 7 Subtotal

$160,000
$160,000

FINAL COVER CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE 2.0
Monitoring, Inspecting, Testing and Reporting
EROSION CONTROL (REVEGETATION) 3.0
Drill Seeding
Hydroseeding
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL

DRAINAGE CONTROL SYSTEM
Drainage Control System (incl. berms, downdrains, inlets, etc.) 5.0

6

7

Total

ls
sf
sf
sf
sf
sf
cy
ea
ls

Monitoring and Control Systems 4.0
Raise LFG Well Heads 4.1
Synthetic Boots (Deck)
5

2016 Unit Price

1
695,000
216,068
216,068
216,068
216,068
50,466
3
1

Evapotranspirative Cover (Slopes)1.3
Settlement Monument Installation
Construction Survey
2

Estimated Quantity

STRUCTURE REMOVAL/ABANDONMENT

TOTAL PRELIMINARY CLOSURE COST

$1,374,253

Footnotes*:
1.0 Assumes all soil necessary for closure is stockpiled on site.
1.1 Includes necessary permits, health & safety plan, SWPPP, bid bond, office equipment, trailer, utilities, office support, general labor, and
miscellaneous charges to be incurred by the contractor. Based on approximately 7% of total construction cost including final cover, gas
system modification, drainage improvements and demo.
1.2 Includes: scarifying and recompacting the interim cover and subgrade preparation, assumes 1' of material is in place.
1.3 Evapotranspirative cover is based on a 4-foot thick cover section, volume of earthwork assumes 1-foot of cover is in place.
2.0 Based on the Final Cover CQA procedures included with the permit revision.
3.0 Assumes the usage of native plant species that exhibits low long-term maintenance needs, thus eliminating the need for an irrigation
system.
4.0 No cost is included in this category because the gas monitoring system, groundwater monitoring system and leachate collection system
will be in-place at closure.
4.1 Assumes one LFG extraction well per acer will need to be extended through the final cover, wells in the liner area will also require a
synthetic boot.
5.0 Costs for constructing downdrains, inlets, bench channels and top deck berm. Does not include perimeter drainage and basins, that will
be in place prior to closure.
6.0 Cost assumes the removal of scales and the scale house, any required backfill, and disconnecting electrical components.
6.1 Assumes that no environmental control systems will be decommissioned/abandoned at closure.
7.0 Cost (including final report) for construction management services includes third party construction management throughout the duration
of construction.

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Closure Cost Estimate\Prom_ClosCostEst 1A.xlsx

TETRA TECH BAS

 TABLE B
PROMONTORY LANDFILL LLC
PRELIMINARY ANNUAL POST-CLOSURE MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATE
PHASE 1A
Item
Description
No.
1 EROSION CONTROL/VEGETATIVE LAYER MAINTENANCE
Hydroseeding
Vegetative Layer/Final Grading Maintenance
1.1
Quarterly Inspections
2

3

ac
ac
hr

$2,000
$68,000
$60
Item 1 Subtotal

$1,000
$17,000
$1,440
$19,440

64

hr

$60
Item 2 Subtotal

$3,840
$3,840

2
32

ea
hr

$1,300
$60
Item 3 Subtotal

$2,600
$1,920
$4,520

8
8
40
40
1

ea
ea
hr
hr
ls

$200
$1,280
$60
$60
$10,000
Item 4 Subtotal

$1,600
$10,240
$2,400
$2,400
$2,000
$18,640

0.5

ac

$10,000
Item 5 Subtotal

$5,000
$5,000

80

hrs

$60
Item 6 Subtotal

$4,800
$4,800

-

-

Item 7 Subtotal
SUBTOTAL PRELIMINARY ANNUAL POST-CLOSURE MAINTENANCE COST

$0
$0
$56,240

2.0

3.0

GROUNDWATER MONITORING SYSTEM AND SURFACE WATER MONITORING
Groundwater Sampling/Analysis/Inspections
Semi-Annual Sampling4.0
Lab Analysis4.0
Monitoring and Statistical Analysis
Surface Water Sampling/Analysis/Inspections 4.1
Repair and Maintenance (assume replacement of a well every 5 years)

5

DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE/IMPROVEMENTS
Drainage Maintenance/Improvements

6

REPORTING
Annual Summary Report 6.0

7

Total Annual Cost

LEACHATE REMEDIATION/CONTROL
Leachate Collection/Removal System Sampling
3.1
Quarterly Inspections

4

2016 Unit Price

0.5
0.25
24

1.0

GAS COLLECTION/CONTROL/MONITORING SYSTEM
Quarterly Inspections

Estimated Quantity

CORRECTIVE ACTION
Corrective Action

TOTAL 30 YEAR PRELIMINARY POST-CLOSURE MAINTENANCE COST

$1,687,200

Footnotes*:
1.0 Cover stabilization, settlement repair and erosion control. Cost based on closure cost estimate, converted to a cost per acre, includes mob, survey, all
cover components, CQA and CM.
1.1 Includes cost for quarterly inspections for cover erosion, settlement, fencing and vegetation.
2.0 All monitoring frequencies are in accordance with the Utah Administrative Code Rule R315-303.
3.0 Assumes that leachate generation will be a negligible following closure.
3.1 Cost includes quarterly inspections of the sumps and clean out pipes.
4.0 Assumes groundwater system consists of 4 wells each sampled semi-annually for a total of 8 samples per year. Cost includes semi-annual sampling
and lab analysis of the groundwater monitoring system. Refer to Appendix M of the Permit Application for the groundwater monitoring plan and list of
constituents.
4.1 Cost includes sampling, analysis and quarterly inspections of the surface water monitoring system.
5.0 Based on closure cost estimate, assumes 0.5 acres of drainage will be repaired each year.
6.0 Cost includes annual reports for gas collection/control system, leachate collection system and groundwater/surface water monitoring system.
7.0 The site is not currently constructed, therefore there are no known releases of contaminants.

J:\Promontory Point\Permit Revision\Closure Cost Estimate\Prom_PosCloCostEst Phase 1A (002).xlsx

TETRA TECH BAS

 APPENDIX 
FINANCIAL ASSURANCE

[Draft specimen document for SOLID WASTE program use only.This standby trust agreement and associated pages
(Schedule A, Schedule B, Exhibit A, and Certificate of Acknowledgement) must be worded as follows, except that
instructions in BRACKETS are to be replaced with the relevant information or deleted and the brackets deleted.
Version – 1 July 2015

STANDBY TRUST AGREEMENT
Trust Agreement, the "AGREEMENT," entered into as of [date] by and between Promontory
Point Resources, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the "GRANTOR," and UMB Bank,
N.A., a national banking association organized and existing under the laws of the United States of
America, the "TRUSTEE."
Whereas, the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board of the State of Utah has
promulgated certain regulations applicable to the GRANTOR, requiring that an owner or
operator of certain solid waste management facilities shall provide assurance that funds will be
available when needed for closure, post-closure care, or corrective action for a facility within the
State of Utah in accordance with Title 19, Chapter 6, The Solid and Hazardous Waste Act (the
“ACT”) and Utah Administrative Code R315-301 to R315-320 (the “RULES”).
Whereas, the GRANTOR has elected to establish a STANDBY TRUST into which the proceeds
for a [letter of credit or surety bond] may be deposited to assure all or part of such financial
responsibility for the facilities identified therein.
Whereas, the GRANTOR, acting through its duly authorized officers, has selected the TRUSTEE
to be the trustee under this AGREEMENT, and the TRUSTEE is willing to act as trustee.
Now, Therefore, the GRANTOR and the TRUSTEE agree as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this AGREEMENT:
(a) The term "GRANTOR" means the owner or operator who enters into this AGREEMENT
and any successors or assigns of the GRANTOR.
(b) The term "TRUSTEE" means the TRUSTEE who enters into this AGREEMENT and any
successor TRUSTEE.
(c) The term "DIRECTOR" means the DIRECTOR, Utah Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control of the State of Utah.
(d) The term “beneficiary” means the DIRECTOR Utah Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control of the State of Utah
Section 2. Identification of Facilities and Cost Estimates. This AGREEMENT pertains to the
facilities and cost estimates that will be identified on attached Schedule A.
Section 3. Establishment of Fund. The GRANTOR and the TRUSTEE hereby establish a
STANDBY TRUST fund, the "FUND," for the benefit of the DIRECTOR. The GRANTOR and
the TRUSTEE intend that no third party have access to the FUND except as herein provided. The
FUND is established initially as consisting of the property, , as will then be described in Schedule
B and attached hereto. Such property and any of the property subsequently transferred to the
Version 3 July 2015

 TRUSTEE is referred to as the FUND, together with all earnings and profits thereon, less any
payments or distributions made by the TRUSTEE pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The FUND
shall be held by the TRUSTEE, IN TRUST, as hereinafter provided. The TRUSTEE shall not be
responsible nor shall it undertake any responsibility for the amount or adequacy of, nor any duty
to collect from the GRANTOR, any payments necessary to discharge any liabilities of the
GRANTOR established by the DIRECTOR.
Section 4. Payment for Closure. The TRUSTEE shall make payments from the FUND as the
DIRECTOR shall direct, in writing, to provide for the payment of the costs of closure and/or
post-closure care of the facilities covered by this AGREEMENT. The TRUSTEE shall reimburse
the GRANTOR or other persons as specified by the DIRECTOR solely from the FUND for
closure and cleanup expenditures in such amounts as the DIRECTOR shall direct in writing. In
addition, the TRUSTEE shall refund to the GRANTOR solely from the FUND such amounts as
the DIRECTOR specifies in writing. Upon refund, such funds shall no longer constitute part of
the FUND as defined herein.
Section 5. Payments Comprising the Fund. Payments made to the TRUSTEE for the FUND shall
consist of cash or securities acceptable to the TRUSTEE.
Section 6. Trustee Management. The TRUSTEE shall invest and reinvest the principal and
income of the FUND as directed in writing by the GRANTOR and keep the FUND invested as a
single fund, without distinction between principal and income, in accordance with general
investment policies and guidelines which the GRANTOR may communicate in writing to the
TRUSTEE from time to time, subject, however, to the provisions of this section. In investing,
reinvesting, exchanging, selling, and managing the FUND, the TRUSTEE shall discharge his
duties with respect to the TRUST solely in the interest of the beneficiary and with the care, skill,
prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing which persons of prudence,
acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters, would use in the conduct of an enterprise
of a like character and with like aims; except that:
(i) Securities or other obligations of the GRANTOR, or any other owner or operator of the
facilities, or any of their affiliates as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as
amended, 15 U.S.C. 80a-2.(a), shall not be acquired or held, unless they are securities or other
obligations of the Federal or a State government;
(ii) The TRUSTEE is authorized to invest the FUND in time or demand deposits of the
TRUSTEE, to the extent insured by an agency of the Federal or State government; and
(iii) The TRUSTEE is authorized to hold cash awaiting investment or distribution uninvested
for a reasonable time and without liability for the payment of interest thereon;
(iv) If the GRANTOR does not provide the TRUSTEE with written instructions directing the
investment or reinvestment of any of the FUNDS, the Trustee may invest such funds in money
market funds including _________________or such similar money market funds until the
TRUSTEE has received appropriate written instructions from the GRANTOR.
(V) The TRUSTEE shall be entitled to sell or redeem any such investment as necessary to make any
distributions required under this Agreement and shall not be liable or responsible for any loss
resulting from any such sale or redemption.
Version 3 July 2015

 (VI) Income, if any, resulting from the investment of the FUNDS shall be retained by the
TRUSTEE and shall be considered, for all purposes of this Agreement, to be part of the FUNDS.
Section 7. Commingling and Investment. The TRUSTEE is expressly authorized in its discretion:
(a) To transfer from time to time any or all of the assets of the FUND to any common,
commingled, or collective trust fund created by the TRUSTEE in which the FUND is eligible to
participate, subject to all of the provisions thereof, to be commingled with the assets of other
trusts participating therein; and
(b) To purchase shares in any investment company registered under the Investment Company
Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., including one which may be created, managed,
underwritten, or to which investment advice is rendered or the shares of which are sold by the
TRUSTEE. The TRUSTEE may vote such shares in its discretion.
Section 8. Express Powers of Trustee. Without in any way limiting the powers and discretions
conferred upon the TRUSTEE by the other provisions of this AGREEMENT or by law, the
TRUSTEE is expressly authorized and empowered:
(a) To sell, exchange, convey, transfer, or otherwise dispose of any property held by it, by
public or private sale . No person dealing with the TRUSTEE shall be bound to see to the
application of the purchase money or to inquire into the validity or expediency of any such sale
or other disposition;
(b) To make, execute, acknowledge, and deliver any and all documents of transfer and
conveyance and any and all other instruments that may be necessary or appropriate to carry out
the powers herein granted;
(c) To register any securities held in the FUND in its own name or in the name of a nominee
and to hold any security in bearer form or in book entry, or to combine certificates representing
such securities with certificates of the same issue held by the TRUSTEE in other fiduciary
capacities, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of such securities in a qualified central
depositary even though, when so deposited, such securities may be merged and held in bulk in
the name of the nominee of such depositary with other securities deposited therein by another
person, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of any securities issued by the United States
Government, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, with a Federal Reserve bank, but the
books and records of the TRUSTEE shall at all times show that all such securities are part of the
FUND;
(d) To deposit any cash in the FUND in interest-bearing accounts maintained or savings
certificates issued by the TRUSTEE, in its separate corporate capacity, or in any other banking
institution affiliated with the TRUSTEE, to the extent insured by an agency of the Federal or
State government; and
(e) To compromise or otherwise adjust all claims in favor of or against the FUND.
Section 9. Taxes and Expenses. All taxes of any kind that may be assessed or levied against or in
respect of the FUND and all brokerage commissions incurred by the FUND shall be paid from
the FUND. All other expenses incurred by the TRUSTEE in connection with the administration
of this Trust, including fees for legal services rendered to the TRUSTEE, the compensation of the
TRUSTEE to the extent not paid directly by the GRANTOR, and all other proper charges and
Version 3 July 2015

 disbursements of the TRUSTEE shall be paid from the FUND.
Section 10. Annual Valuation. The TRUSTEE shall annually, at least 30 days prior to the
anniversary date of establishment of the FUND, furnish to the GRANTOR and to the
DIRECTOR a statement confirming the value of the Trust. Any securities in the FUND shall be
valued at market value as of no more than 60 days prior to the anniversary date of establishment
of the FUND. The failure of the GRANTOR to object in writing to the TRUSTEE within 90 days
after the statement has been furnished to the GRANTOR and the DIRECTOR shall constitute a
conclusively binding assent by the GRANTOR, barring the GRANTOR from asserting any claim
or liability against the TRUSTEE with respect to matters disclosed in the statement.
Section 11. Advice of Counsel. The TRUSTEE may from time to time consult with counsel, who
may be counsel to the GRANTOR, at the cost of the FUND or the GRANTOR with respect to
any question arising as to the construction of this AGREEMENT or any action to be taken
hereunder. The TRUSTEE shall be fully protected, to the extent permitted by law, in acting upon
the advice of counsel.
Section 12. TRUSTEE Compensation. The TRUSTEE shall be entitled to reasonable
compensation for its services as agreed upon in writing from time to time with the GRANTOR.
Section 13. Successor Trustee. The TRUSTEE may resign or the GRANTOR may replace the
TRUSTEE, but such resignation or replacement shall not be effective until the GRANTOR has
appointed a successor Trustee and this successor accepts the appointment. The successor Trustee
shall have the same powers and duties as those conferred upon the TRUSTEE hereunder. Upon
the successor Trustee's acceptance of the appointment, the TRUSTEE shall assign, transfer, and
pay over to the successor Trustee the funds and properties then constituting the FUND. If for any
reason the GRANTOR cannot or does not act in the event of the resignation of the TRUSTEE,
the TRUSTEE may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor
Trustee or for instructions. The successor Trustee shall specify the date on which it assumes
administration of the TRUST in a writing sent to the GRANTOR, the DIRECTOR, and the
present TRUSTEE by certified mail 10 days before such change becomes effective. Any
expenses incurred by the TRUSTEE as a result of any of the acts contemplated by this Section
shall be paid as provided in Section 9.
Section 14. Instructions to the TRUSTEE. All orders, requests, and instructions by the
GRANTOR to the TRUSTEE shall be in writing, signed by such persons as are designated in the
attached Exhibit A or such other designees as the GRANTOR may designate by amendment to
Exhibit A. The TRUSTEE shall be fully protected in acting without inquiry in accordance with
the GRANTOR's orders, requests, and instructions. All orders, requests, and instructions by the
DIRECTOR to the TRUSTEE shall be in writing, signed by the DIRECTOR and the TRUSTEE
shall act and shall be fully protected in acting in accordance with such orders, requests, and
instructions. The TRUSTEE shall have the right to assume, in the absence of written notice to the
contrary, that no event constituting a change or a termination of the authority of any person to act
on behalf of the GRANTOR or the DIRECTOR hereunder has occurred. The TRUSTEE shall
Version 3 July 2015

 have no duty to act in the absence of such orders, requests, and instructions from the GRANTOR
and/or the DIRECTOR, except as provided for herein.
Section 15. Amendment of AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT may be amended by an
instrument in writing executed by the GRANTOR, the TRUSTEE, and the DIRECTOR, or by
the TRUSTEE and the DIRECTOR if the GRANTOR ceases to exist.
Section 16. Irrevocability and Termination. Subject to the right of the parties to amend this
AGREEMENT as provided in Section 15, this TRUST shall be IRREVOCABLE and shall
continue until terminated at the written agreement of the GRANTOR, the TRUSTEE, and the
DIRECTOR, or by the TRUSTEE and the DIRECTOR, if the GRANTOR ceases to exist. Upon
termination of the Trust, all remaining trust property, less final trust administration expenses,
shall be delivered to the GRANTOR.
Section 17. Immunity and Indemnification. The TRUSTEE shall not incur personal liability of
any nature in connection with any act or omission, made in good faith, in the administration of
this Trust, or in carrying out any directions by the GRANTOR or the DIRECTOR issued in
accordance with this AGREEMENT. The TRUSTEE shall be indemnified and saved harmless by
the GRANTOR or from the Trust FUND, or both, from and against any personal liability to
which the TRUSTEE may be subjected by reason of any act or conduct in its official capacity,
including all expenses reasonably incurred in its defense in the event the GRANTOR fails to
provide such defense.
Section 18. Choice of Law. This AGREEMENT shall be administered, construed, and enforced
according to the laws of the State of Utah.
Section 19. Interpretation. As used in this AGREEMENT, words in the singular include the
plural and words in the plural include the singular. The descriptive headings for each Section of
this AGREEMENT shall not affect the interpretation or the legal efficacy of this AGREEMENT.
In Witness Whereof the parties have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed by their
respective officers duly authorized and their corporate seals to be hereunto affixed.

By______________________
Jonathan Angin, CEO
Attest:
[Title]
[Seal]
[Signature of Trustee]
Attest:
[Title]
Version 3 July 2015

 [Seal]

Version 3 July 2015

SCHEDULE A

FACILITY NAME: Promontory Landfill Facility

FACILITY ADDRESS:

18900 W East Promontory Road, Promontory, UT 84307

AMOUNT OF COVERAGE:

$3,061,453.00

SIGNATORY FOR GRANTOR: Jonathan Angin, CEO

Version 3 July 2015

 SCHEDULE B

The funding of this standby agreement consists of cash from Surety Bond No. SU04763 and
Surety Bond No. SU04764.

Version 3 July 2015

 EXHIBIT A

Designated signatory for GRANTOR:

Jonathan Angin, CEO

Designated Signatory for Beneficiary:

Scott Anderson
Director,
Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation
Control
State of Utah
postal service:
Director,
Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation
Control
State of Utah
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880
courier address:
Director,
Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation
Control
State of Utah
195 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84116

Version 3 July 2015

 Certificate of Acknowledgment

State of [____________________]
County of [___________________]
On this [____] day of month, 20[__], before me personally came [signatory for GRANTOR] to
me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he is [title], of [company], the
corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the seal of said
corporation; that the seal affixed to such instrument is such corporate seal that it was so affixed
by order of the Board of directors of said corporation, and that he signed his name thereto by like
order.

Notary Public
My commission Expires:[ ]

Version 3 July 2015

 APPENDIX 
PHASE 1 PLANS

 PT PT COVER SHEETDWG 1/12/2017 2:19 PM

r>Z_u_n_rr



_uI>m_m A
_uI>m_mm for 40
ENG-E04-

-  $2 c>m< N3 

 

  
    

0mm? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 
E25  . a _20mx 0m mImmam
50562  a 
- IL  0-2: 00<mm 01mm
6  m.   0-30 0.4m - a 
. II 0.3; _uI>mm mx0><>jOZ   
a  0-3m _uI>mm :y - mom a II
0-30 vz>mm :w mx0><>jOZ a 
i 0.3% :w mx0><>jOZ   
0-30 vz>mm :w - mom 
 0-30 _uI>mm A0 mX0><>jOz ?30232 3 a. a 
0.3? _uI>_-m>0I>am >mm> $5.20 in; I $12
 0-80 0m>_z>0m 0.4m _zomx gnaw 
0-03 Emmammz 0m>_z>0m 
0.8? Emmammz 0m>_z>0m  
0-80 m>mammz om>_z>0m     
0-02 m>mammz 0m>_z>0m a
0-08 mzam>z0m m0>0 03m 052 _zumx    
0-02 mzam>z0m mo>o    
\7 0-08 mzam>z0m m0>0 8,55  
0L2 040925 052  8.5 
0&2 Umd?-m   
0.8? 032.0 umogmg 03m  a  
 0-80 0325 a  
- 0&2 omEFm .- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0-mom 
0-mom 
0-mow >20 
0-mom 
0-moo 
0-3 0 


0-3 0m0mm-mm0-_-_OZ

 

 



    
    



00<m_~ mImmd

Umm_02m_u w< 0-03 00<mq 0:00.320
w< >m 

0Im0_Am_u w< 0mm 
0-2:

. Oczmd?cnjOZ

 

 

 

 

 

 

        
 

 

 

         
 

Goo <58 0.03050 OP 0 Nam
oombookdu _u>X oomboobo 

   

I 
$0   .
 0>rmw 
 Imzm< 
I

 

 

          
 

     

 

 

 

 

 

         

 

mm<_m_oz 

 PT PT SITE MAP.DWG 1/12/2017 1:19 PM



APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE

I
I



CONCEPTUAL


DESILTING BASIN





OUTFALL
SYSTEM 

MAINTENANCE
SHOP

FUELING
FACILITY

NOTE:

FUELING FACILITY, MAINTENANCE SHOP,

ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND PARKING
LOT, ENTRANCE ROAD WITH BYPASS LANE,
SCALES, AND STORM WATER POND TO BE
CONSTRUCTED UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.

    
 





STOCKPILE PER SHEET C-401
APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PERMIT LIMIT
CONCEPTUAL

lg" UNTARPING

AREA
SCALES ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING AND
 PARKING LOT
RESTROOM FACILITY
DRIVERS
BREAK AREA

  

THE GREAT SALT LAKE

DESILTING BASINS

I

I

ENTRANCE 
I

I
I

 

 

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION

OF

PERMIT
LIMIT

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
I PROPERTY LINE



ROAD WITH
BYPASS LANE

EXISTING
ACCESS ROAD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

400 800 1600

GRAPHIC 800'

LEGEND

 

PROPERTY LINE
?10? EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
- - EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
- - - - - - - SUBTITLE-D LIMIT OF WASTE
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
LCRS MAINLINE

FLOWLINE
- - TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

 

 

 

 

 

I RIP-RAP

 

AC PAVING

 

SECTION NAME
REFERENCE SHEET

CONCEPTUAL
DESILTING BASIN

WESTERN DIVERSION I 

CHANNEL PER SHEET C-200 II .

LEACHATE
OUTFALL
SYSTEM

MAINTENANCE SHOP

 

ABBREVIATIONS
BW BOTTOM OF WALL
CF CUBIC FOOT
CU. YD. CUBIC YARDS
DIA DIAMETER
EG EXISTING GRADE
FL FLOWLINE
FS FINISHED SURFACE
FT FOOT
GB GRADE BREAK
GCL CLAY LINER
HDPE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT
LCRS LEACHATE COLLECTION AND
REMOVAL SYSTEM
OZ OUNCE
00. ON CENTER
TC TOP OF CURB
TG TOP OF GRATE
TW TOP OF WALL
TYP TYPICAL
SDR STANDARD DIMENSION RATIO
SD STORM DRAIN
SY SQUARE YARD

TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valle)I Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7

 

 

  
 

    

 
  
 

 

EASTERN DIVERSION
CHANNEL PER SHEET C-200

0 200 400 800

GRAPHIC 400'

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF
PERMIT LIMIT

. CONCEPTUAL
DESILTING BASINS
FUELING 
FACILITY UNTARPING 
AREA y.


I
I: 
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
AND PARKIN 
RESTROOM FACILITY
CALES 
DRIVERS BREAK AREA 


FEE





CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 

GOO 

EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES



4

CONSTRUCT BASE LINER PER
CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER PER

 

C-504
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER 

an
CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS MAINLINE PER






3 

7 

CONSTRUCT BASE LINER TERMINATION PER
CONSTRUCT LINER TERMINATION PER

 

CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL PER
CONSTRUCT 18" SOLID LCRS RISER PER

CONSTRUCT 6" LCRS MAINLINE AT TOP
OF SLOPE PER

CONSTRUCT TOE LINER TRANSITION PER

 

CONSTRUCT LCRS PIPE CONNECTION PER

 

CONSTRUCT LCRS TOE DRAIN PER
CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BENCH PER

 

CONSTRUCT BOLLARD PER

 

PLACE TEMPORARY CAP ON LCRS PIPING

  
    

ENTRANCE ROAD WITH







6D




BYPASS LANE

CONSTRUCT TOP OF SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER


CONSTRUCT LINER JOIN PER 



C-501 C-501


 

CONSTRUCT BASE LINER JOIN PER

 

CONSTRUCT LCRS SUMP PER

 

CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER
JOIN 6" LCRS MAINLINE
JOIN 6" PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL



INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PER
CONSTRUCT 6" SOLID HDPE PIPE
JOIN 6" PERFORATED LCRS TOE DRAIN


C-505 C-505
rm

6
C-505 C-505 

TEMPORARY LINER TERMINATION PER
BASE LINER JOIN PER

 

CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER
INSTALL STORMWATER PUMP
INSTALL RIP RAP





CONSTRUCT V-DITCH PER

 

CONSTRUCT TOP DECK INLET PER
CONSTRUCT SANDGAB CHEVRON PER

 

INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT 20'
O.C. UNDERNEATH STOCKPILE MATERIAL

   

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

584724232202":

    

SITE MAP

 

CALEB
HENRY

       

DESIGNED BY 

DLL FILE Site Map.dwg

 

     

DRAWN BY 

    

   

PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

   

 

   

CHECKED BY 

 

     

   

 

 

   

APPROVED BY 

 

     

CHM DATE 01?2017

 

GES DATE 01?2017
C-100

   

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT PHASE 1A EXCAVATION.DWG 1/12/2017 1:19 PM

SEE SHEET C-200 FOR
DIVERSION CHANNELS BEYOND





 






 

0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 

 

EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES


CONSTRUCT BASE LINER PER 4 



C-504
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER 

an
CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS MAINLINE PER


CONSTRUCT 6 PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL PER 

 

 

ELEV. 4302

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER PER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT LINER TERMINATION PER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT 18" SOLID LCRS RISER PER 

CONSTRUCT 6" LCRS MAINLINE AT TOP 4

OF SLOPE PER 
3 4

 

CONSTRUCT TOE LINER TRANSITION PER Wm

CONSTRUCT LCRS PIPE CONNECTION PER

C-502
WV
CONSTRUCT LCRS TOE DRAIN PER
C-504 

C-501
PLACE TEMPORARY CAP ON LCRS PIPING 

CONSTRUCT TOP OF SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER


CONSTRUCT LCRS SUMP PER 9

CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BENCH PER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT 6" SOLID HDPE PIPE

 

 

 

CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY LINER TERMINATION PER 

C-505 C-505

 

 

INSTALL STORMWATER PUMP

6690 63696969696)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEGEN 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

 

 

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
LCRS MAINLINE

FLOWLINE
TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



SEE SHEET C-401
FOR STOCKPILE
PLAN BEYOND

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEACHATE OUTFALL SYSTEM
(SEE SHEETS C-108, C-506, C-507)

    
 

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

PHASE 1A EXCAVATION

 

 

 

TETRA TECH BAS

 

 

 

CALEB

HENRY DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Phase 1A Excavation.dwg

DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN
CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
APPROVED BY CHM DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

   

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 PT PT PHASE 1A FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY.DWG 1/12/2017 1:20 PM

0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEGEN 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
- - TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
    

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

PHASE 1A FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY

DESIGNED BY: DLL FILE Phase 1A Fi   - FOR REFERENCE 
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-102

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

TETRA TECH BAS

 

 

 

        
 

CALEB
HENRY

 

 

          
    

      

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

   

 

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

   

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 PT PT PHASE 1B EXCAVATION.DWG 1/12/2017 3:26 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4330

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 



4330 

MATCHLINE -

SEE SHEET C-104

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SEE SHEET
C-401 FOR
STOCKPILE
PLAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

4
\6

TETRA TECH BAS

CALEB

HENRY
I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

FOR PERMIT PURPO

   

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN

CONSTRUCT BASE LINER PER 

th
CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER PER 
CONSTRUCT BASE LINER TERMINATION PER @963;
wm
CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS MAINLINE PER

WW
CONSTRUCT 6 PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL PER MW

C-505 C-505
CONSTRUCT LCRS PIPE CONNECTION PER 

0-502
WV
CONSTRUCT LCRS TOE DRAIN
C-501  

C-501
PLACE TEMPORARY CAP ON LCRS PIPING 

CONSTRUCT LINER JOIN PER 

C-504 C-504 
CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER 

 

 

CONSTRUCT LINER TERMINATION PER

 

 

CONSTRUCT TOE LINER TRANSITION PER

 

CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BENCH PER

 

 

JOIN 6" LCRS MAINLINE
JOIN 6" PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL
JOIN 6" PERFORATED LCRS TOE DRAIN

 


CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY LINER TERMINATION PEMW

 



5
CONSTRUCT BASE LINER JOIN PER 
INSTALL STORMWATER PUMP

 

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
LCRS MAINLINE


 

 

 

 

FLOWLINE
- TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

    
    
   

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

PHASE 1B EXCAVATION

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Phase 18 Excavation.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-103

SES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

        
 

 

    

      
    

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

   

   






 

 

\PHASE 1B EXCAVATION.DWG 1/12/2017 3:26 PM

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4350 E5
GRAPHIC 50'
4340
4330
4320
4350 4310
1 (wt
4300
4340
ELEV. 4302 
4330 

8 
_4320 MATCHLINE -
SEE SHEET C-103


V. 
2:2 I
I I
I Ill >770
5299 (3?3 90 
g3) 13  
b?rb??LEGEND CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR STORMWATER PUMP
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
LCRS MAINLINE

FLOWLINE
TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

 

 

EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN

 

 

 

 

    
    

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

PHASE 1B EXCAVATION

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Phase 1B Excavation.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-1 04

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

 


TETRA TECH BAS 

 

 

        
 

CALEB
HENRY

 

 

          
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

   

 

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

   

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 PT PT PHASE 1B FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY.DWG 1/12/2017 3:27 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4370

 

 

4370

 

 

4360

 

4360

 

 

 

4350

 

 

 

 

4340

 

 

 

4330

 

 

4320

 

 

 

 

4310

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

LEG 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

 

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
- - TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC


TETRA TECH BAS   PHASE 1B FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY

 

 

HENRY

CAI-EB  DESIGNED BY: DLL FILE 0?105 Phase 18 Fill FOR REFERENCE 
I360 Drive? Diam?nd Bar, CA 9 I 765   DRAWN BY: PV ANP DATE: 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7 CHECKED BY GES DATE 01-2017

APPROVED BY: CHM DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

 PT PT PHASE 1C EXCAVATION.DWG 1/12/2017 3:28 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

436? 0 25 50 100
52:2:

4350 GRAPHIC 50'

4340
I I
32 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
  

 

 

 

ELEV. 4316 A 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 












[>551 14 TYPE A 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



SEE SHEET C-401 
FOR STOCKPILE
PLAN BEYOND

 

LEGEND CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 

 

 

 

 

MAJOR CONTOUR EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN

EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR CONSTRUCT BASE LINER PER 
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR 4















CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER PER

C-501
CONSTRUCT BASE LINER TERMINATION PER 

CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER

CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS MAINLINE PER


 

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
LCRS MAINLINE


 

 

 

 

FLOWLINE

TOP I TOE I GRADEBREAK CONSTRUCT 6" PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL PER 
CONSTRUCT 6" LCRS MAINLINE AT TOP OF
SLOPE PER 

 

C-504 
CONSTRUCT TOE LINER TRANSITION PER 

CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE BENCH PER 

CONSTRUCT TOP OF SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER


CONSTRUCT BASE LINER JOIN PER

 

PLACE TEMPORARY CAP ON LCRS PIPING

 

 

6
C-504 C-504
CONSTRUCT SLOPE LINER TERMINATION PER 
JOIN 6" LCRS MAINLINE
JOIN 6" PERFORATED LCRS LATERAL

CONSTRUCT 6" SOLID HDPE PIPE

TEMPORARY LINER TERMINATION PER

C-505 C-505

INSTALL STORMWATER PUMP

  

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

PHASE 1C EXCAVATION

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE 0?106 Phase 10 Excavation.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-106

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

  
 

 

 

 

 

   


TETRA TECH BAS 3;;724232253-2 

 

 

   

CALEB
HENRY

      
 

 

 

        
   

  

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7

   

 

 

          

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

       

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 PT PT PHASE 1C FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY.DWG 1/12/2017 3:30 PM

 



 

4340

 

 

4330

 

 

4320

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



4350
4350
4340 


4330 4330

4330 25 50 100
$5
I 4340 GRAPHIC 50'
I 

4350 g; 
I 
I 
I 4360 4330
I I 
4370 I
I .b
03


03
.P

 
4390 

00
93
4400 
.b
00
?1

53 4410
00


g; 4420 

I 
c> 
c> . 


ES
A310
4420 I3

(Y).
4410
4400
4390
4380
4370
4350
LEG 
4350 10 EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR

10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
4340 9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
43m) 
PROMONTORY POINT, LLC
TETRA TECH 3A5 PHASE 1C FILL - FOR REFERENCE ONLY
'39th DESIGNED BY: DLL FILE C-107 Phase 10 Fill - FOR REFERENCE 
I360 Valley #5359326 DRAWN BY: Pv ANP DATE: 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN
CHECKED BY: GES DATE: 01?2017 107
N0. REVISION DESCRIPTION BY: APPROVED BY CHM DATE 01-2017 -

 

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT LEACHATE OUTFALL AREA GRADING.DWG 1/12/2017 1:28 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 
 
    
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
I 




MATCHLINE -

SEE SHEET C-101

ENTRANCE ROAD 
SEE SHEET C-300
4298.98 FG
4298.90 FG 




4292.91 FL 
//4298 60FG 
I 0
1 .1-0 I 71/ 1.0% 4298.68FG 

4292.57 FL 4295 0 WV 4292.57 FL
4295.0 TW FUTURE TANK 
4292.22 FG 42925 F3 4292.5 FS 4292.~33 4292.00 FG I 
I 
4292.00 TC 4295.0 TW  4295.0 TW 7 
4291.99 FG 42924292.5 FS 
4 
I 1.72% 3 4292.00 TC 
- 4291.99 FG 


0\ 6? 0 
4292.35 FG SI SI 
4291.85 FG





LEACHATE OUTFALL SYSTEM 0 5 1O 20
(SEE SHEET 0-506) SE
GRAPHIC 10'
BW BOTTOM OF WALL
PROPERTY CF CUBIC FOOT EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES AND CONTOURS SHOWN
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR CU YD CUBIC YARDS 
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR DIA DIAMETER CONSTRUCT BOLLARD PER 
PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR EG EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR FL FLOWLINE
LCRS MAINLINE  SURFACE
- LCRS LATERAL GB GRADE BREAK
ANCHOR TRENCH GCL CLAY LINER
FLOWLINE HDPE HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
TOP TOE GRADEBREAK HP HIGH POINT
INV INVERT
SECTION NAME LCRS LEACHATE COLLECTION AND
REMOVAL SYSTEM
REFERENCE SHEET OZ OUNCE
GO ON CENTER
TC TOP OF CURB
TG TOP OF GRATE
TW TOP OF WALL
TYP TYPICAL
SDR STANDARD DIMENSION RATIO
SD STORM DRAIN
SY SQUARE YARD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

 

    

  

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

LEACHATE OUTFALL AREA
GRADING

FILE C-108 Leachate Outfall Area Grading.dwg
DATE 01-2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

DATE: 01?2017 C-1 

 

   

{047242322023

 

   

CALEB

HENRY DESIGNED BY: DLL

DRAWN BY PV ANP
CHECKED BY GES
APPROVED BY CHM

      
 

 

        
   

        

 

        
   

   

 

DATE 01?2017

 

     

   

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT DRAINAGE SITE PLAN INDEX MAP.DWG 1/12/2017 2:22 PM



 

 

 

 

 

 

    
   

 

CELL1C

CELL1B

 



  
 

 

CELL1A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0 100 200 400

GRAPHIC 200'

 

 

 

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 

 

 





EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER

 

C-502

C-502

9
C9

 

INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PER
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER

 



INSTALL 

EGEND

 

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR

 

10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

 

 

 

9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER

LINER LIMIT

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

 

 

TETRA TECH BAS



DRAINAGE SITE PLAN INDEX MAP

 

 

CALEB

HENRY DESIGNED BY: DLL

FILE Drainage Site Plan Index Map.dwg

 

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765 DRAWN BY 

PV ANP

DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

 

CHECKED BY: GES

DATE 01?2017

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION APPROVED BY CHM

 

 

DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT WESTERN DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG 1/12/2017 2:22 PM

 

 

 

 

MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C-202

 

I

SEE SHEET C-101 FOR
PHASE 1A EXCAVATION BEYOND

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

WESTERN DIVERSION CHANNEL

 

0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 



EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER

 

C-502

3
C9

 

INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PER 

10

CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER 0502

 



INSTALL RIP-RAP

 

 

 

LEGEN 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER

LINER LIMIT

 

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

TETRA TECH BAS

WESTERN DRAINAGE PLAN

 

CALEB .
HENRY DESIGNED BY.

DLL

FILE Western Drainage Plan.dwg

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765   DRAWN BY 



ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

CHECKED BY 

GES

DATE 01?2017

 

APPROVED BY 

 

 

CHM DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT WESTERN DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG 1/12/2017 2:23 PM

 

MATCHLINE - SEE. SHEET C-201

WESTERN
DIVERSION

CHANNEL

  






4350

 

 

\fv

 

5?

 



4340





 

6%



 

 

   
  

 

  

RETENTION BASIN
4232.00 FLOOR ELEVATION

 

 

 

EL. 4242

EL. 4240

INLET STRUCTURE

EL. 4242

APPROXIMATE
LOCATION OF

PROPERTY LINE 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 


TRANSITION 
9 STRUCTURE 



- ASPHALT

ROAD CROSSING PER 


.

RIP-RAP

OUTLET STRUCTURES
ASPHALT

LEGEND

Amt/I/

0 25 50 100

SE

GRAPHIC 50'

 

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR

 

PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

 

PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER

LINER LIMIT

 

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

TETRA TECH BAS



WESTERN DRAINAGE PLAN

 

CALEB I
HENRY .3 DESIGNED BY. DLL

FILE 0?202 Western Drainage Plan.dwg

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765   DRAWN BY . PV ANP

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

CHECKED BY: GES

DATE 01?2017

 

APPROVED BY CHM

 

 

DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT EASTERN DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG 1/12/2017 2:24 PM

 
 
  






 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

PROPOSED CELL 1C GRADING LIMITS
SEE SHEET C-106

0 25 50 100

5:52:51

GRAPHIC 50'

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

 





EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN
CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER

 

0-502

3
C9

 

INSTALL EROSION CONTROL BLANKET PER 

10

CONSTRUCT DIVERSION CHANNEL PER 0502

 



INSTALL RIP-RAP

EGEND

 

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR

 

10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

 

9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER

LINER LIMIT

 

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

TETRA TECH BAS



EASTERN DRAINAGE PLAN

 

CALEB .
HENRY DESIGNED BY.

DLL

FILE Eastern Drainage Plan.dwg

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765   DRAWN BY 



ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

CHECKED BY 

GES

DATE 01?2017

 

 

APPROVED BY 

 

CHM DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT EASTERN DRAINAGE PLAN.DWG 1/12/2017 2:53 PM

 

 

 
 

 

 

  

0

EXISTING 
POWER POLE
EXISTING 
ELECTRIC LINES

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

  

 

 

  
 
 
 
  
 

  

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

25

50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

   
 

2% MIN
ASPHALT

43?

I
II I 



TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valle)I Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 4302-40 EL. 4298.80 :0
LIJ EL 4325 00 431150 430400 LIJ
Lu 4328'20?\ EL. 4314.EL. 4302.00 a I EL. 4298.80 Lu
2 
CONCRETE :l
I RIP RAP EL. 4315-33 CUT OFF ALL RIP RAP RIP RAP CONCRETE I
NCRETE EL. 4305.33
0 EL. 4329.53 CO CUT OFF WALL 
I- CUT OFF WALL CONCRETE I-
EL. 4239.30 CUT OFF ALL EL. 4300.13 
I
I
APPROXIMATE I
LOCATION OF
PROPERTY LINE
I 25 50 100
55::
I GRAPHIC 50'
(D I


5 SEE SHEET C-300 I
FOR ENTRANCE
ROAD PLANS I
I
Lu EL. 4286.00 TRANSITION
Lu 60' STRUCTURE 4:8; EL. 4284.ROAD CROSSING PER
RIP-RAP I
I EL. 4288.87 EL. 4283.89 
CUT OFF WALL I
I2 EL. 4298.80 EL 4287 33 ASPHALT
. . 
TRANSITION 0/ OUTLET
CONCRETE
 CUT OFF WALL
I RIP-RAP

5384724232202":

CALEB
HENRY

 

 

 

 

LEGEN 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT
TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

 

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

EASTERN DRAINAGE PLAN

 

DESIGNED BY 

DLL FILE Eastern Drainage Plan.dwg

 

DRAWN BY 

PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

CHECKED BY 

GES DATE 01?2017

 

APPROVED BY 

CHM DATE 01?2017

 

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT ENTRANCE ROAD SITE PLAN INDEX MAP.DWG 1/12/2017 3:01 PM

  
  
 
  
   
 
  
  
   
   
 
  

WESTERN DRAINAGE

PER SHEET C-200 0 100 200 400


GRAPHIC 200'


EASTERN DRAINAGE 
PER SHEET C-200 



CELL 1C

CELL 1B

  
      
   
 
 
   
  
    
     
  

STOCKPILE 
PER SHEET 
0-401

 

CELL 1A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

SEE SHEET C-301 






 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
10 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR

 

 

9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

ENTRANCE ROAD SITE PLAN INDEX MAP

DLL
PV ANP
GES
CHM

 

 

 

 


TETRA TECH BAS 

 

 

        
 

CALEB

HENRY DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY 
CHECKED BY 
APPROVED BY 

FILE Entrance Road Site Plan Index Map.dwg
DATE 01-2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

DATE: 01?2017 

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

          
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

   

 

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

 

 

   

   

REVISION DESCRIPTION

   

CELL 1A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





0? o\
ACCESS ROAD I ACCESS ROAD $1




\4290 7?
400 NP ?7 E) CCESS AMP
588%] (g 
?7

 

 

 
  
  

LEACHATE COLLECTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REMOVAL SYSTEM FUELING FACILITY
COLLECTION SYSTEM PER I
SHEET C-108 I

I 
963,
I
I
EQUIPMENT
MAINTENANCE SH

 

 

?34?
MATCHLINE - SEE BELOW LEFT

0 25 50 100

55::

GRAPHIC 50'

 

 

MATCHLINE - SEE ABOVE RIGHT

PT PT ENTRANCE ROAD.DWG 1/12/2017 3:25 PM

   
     

EXISTING POWER POLE 

25 50 100

SE

GRAPHIC 50'

EXISTING OVERHEAD

ELECTRIC LINES AC PAVING

A A a
I a 
I,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LEGEN 
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
1O PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
9 PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR

LIMIT OF EXISTING LINER
LINER LIMIT

TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
RIP-RAP

 

 

 

AC PAVING

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

 

 

 


TETRA TECH BAS   ENTRANCE ROAD

 

 

If??th  DESIGNED BY: DLL FILE Entrance Road.dwg

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765   DRAWN BY: Pv ANP DATE: 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

 

 

 

TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7 CHECKED BY GES DATE 01-2017

APPROVED BY: CHM DATE 01?2017

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

   

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C-301

 

 
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


\rm; 5 om><m3mcoxn>m520>mm>
mImm._. Oboe VI 
gnaw
m?m 030mm A xmmamooz .85 

PEPE nLu om>_uz_o mo?32/  
I. I w! I 
_.>zmm I: \?liENTRANCE ROADDWG 1/12/2017 3:01 PM

  

 

Qm><mr 

 

 

 

 

_umO 2 _u


3 OOZHOCZ


9H mx_mjzo _._zmm
I I I 22% 
3n 3m om>omwmm>x
. 

I

  

 

>0 

 

 

 






mx_mjzo om><mr 
mo>o 

 

0 mm mo 30

WNWIIHH

mo.



 

 

 

 


m>m   a mzaz>zom no.3

 

 

Imzm<
:8 <93 <me 01,5. 99302. 9 5   om><<z 9: 2 >zu ohm 2-8: may/rmu 5 $922
4? oopmao?d _n>x ?8&88 almoxmo 9: 0mm ohm 2-8:

w<n 

_uO? . _uO?u Oczmd?cnjOZ

9&6sz my? 0&8 maasom momaa?

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

mm<_m_oz 

 PT PT STOCKPILE PLAN.DWG 1/12/2017 2:28 PM

  
  
 
  
  
  
  

0 25 50 100

5:52:51

GRAPHIC 50'

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXCAVATE OR FILL TO GRADES SHOWN

 

INSTALL RIP-RAP
CONSTRUCT V-DITCH PER

 

0-505
CONSTRUCT TOP DECK INLET PER A
CONSTRUCT SANDGAB CHEVRON PER

$9 (3

 

 

INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT
20' DC. UNDERNEATH STOCKPILE MATERIAL



 

 

 

 

 


09817

 

07917

 

LEGEND

09817

 

 

PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR
EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR
PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
- - - - - - - SUBTITLE-D LIMIT OF WASTE
- TOP TOE GRADEBREAK
FLOWLINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

STOCKPILE PLAN

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Stockpile Plan.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-401

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

  
 

 

 

 

 

   

 

   


TETRA TECH BAS 

CALEB
HENRY

 

      
 

 

       

  

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 I 7

      

 

    

 

       

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

       

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 3:39 PM

 

SLOPE
LINER PER

6" PERFORATED
HDPE PIPE PER a

BASE
LINER PER

 

 

  
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60 MIL HDPE
GEOMEMBRANE
(TEXTURED BOTH SIDES)

60 MIL HDPE
GEOMEMBRANE
(TEXTURED BOTH SIDES)

8 
FILTER FABRIC

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
  
 
 
  

  

    
 

 

     
  
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
   

 
   
     
 
 
  
 
 

   

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROTECTIVE COVERSOIL
I 0%00/  Omen/Mg
5893008930089) 008 00 I     4? a; 20(2) 
LAP AND SEW 930259004 I0m?05208&8m? 095  

 
12 CUSHION
a. CLAY (GCL) LINER SUBGRADE GEOTEXTILE
EXTRUSION WELD CLAY LINER (GCL) LINER SUBGRADE
36" 36 
A 72" 
LCRS HEADER SWALE 
1 LCRS TOE DRAIN AND TRENCH 2 BASE LINER 3 BASE LINER
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106, C-502, C-504 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106, C-502, C-504
PROPOSED SURFACE
PROPOSED
SURFACE DRAINAGE BENCH 40/. 
I 
00 00 TO
2/ 00%00806500800 0
029%0029890
PROPOSED SURFACE 
GEOTEXTILE-BACKED GCL DRAINAGE BENCH I OQa?g?Qa?g?Qa
PROPOSED SURFACE LINER PER 
LINER SUBGRADE 
VARIES 
4 SLOPE LINER 5 DRAINAGE BENCH 6 LCRS SUMP
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106, C-502, C-504 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101
18" HDPE PIPE
22 5? EINSEITR PER
450 
HDPE PIPE 
PER PLAN I.     I   .          
GEOTEXTILE ..   9.  jj-Et   .  
I  :5300%)0000 0000 
EDI LAP AND SEW 0080 Q0 I LAP AND SEW
GEOTEXTILES - - - - - - - - - GEOTEXTILES

A VARIES 
Ray 0 
PERFORATIONS, 4 PER ROW,
ALTERNATE ROWS BY 45?
WILL SELECT SLOTTED OR PERFORATED
ROWS BY 225? PIPE BASED ON SUBMITTAL FOR GRANULAR DRAINAGE SECTION A
MATERIAL. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE PRICING FOR
EITHER OPTION. NTS
7 LCRS SUMP PERFORATED PIPE 8 PERFORATED HDPE PIPE 9 LCRS SUMP
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-501, C-502 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-501, C-504 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

  

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

DETAILS

FILE DetaiIS.dwg
DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

DATE: 01?2017 

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

  
 

 

   

TETRA TECH BAS

 

   

CALEB

 HENRY  DESIGNEDBY:

DRAWN BY 
CHECKED BY 
APPROVED BY 

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY -

DLL
PV ANP
GES
CHM

      
 

 

          
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

   

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

   

   

SEE SHEET C-507
FOR LEACHATE
CONTROL DETAILS

 

 

LIMIT OF LINER


PIPE SUPPORT


   

 

 

 

.SECTION A

 

 

   
 

 

 

 

 

 



,r'r


 

 

 

 

 



 

 
    

HDPE PIPE

 

4' PLYWOOD

LINER PER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PERFORATED HDPE mi? PER A
PIPE WRAPPED IN 
GEOTEXTILE 

-

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

- .- .1 I, 
 
36" 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 18" HDPE LCRS a A . .
I RISER PIPE LINER PER A. 
I PROTECTIVE
COVER SOIL SLOPE LINER 24" I
SECTION 

BASE LINER TERMINATION

4 LCRS LATERAL AND MAINLINE

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

?d 18" OVERLAP PERFORATED HDPE PER :0-507
 I
4
COVER SOI

 

 

 



 

 

 

.
BOLLARDPER a .00. 
 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-1 03, C-106 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103, C-1 06
A BASE
LINER PER LINER PER
2 

4' PLYWOOD 1  
6.. PERFORATED PROTECTIVE COVER SOIL
HDPE PIPE
ORR

. P: 96:LCRS RISER

BASE LINER TERMINATION

5

LCRS LATERAL AND MAINLINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   
    

   
 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 
 

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103, C-106
I  I ROUND CAP
36" 36" ..
m? 4 STEEL BOLLARD LANDLOK 450T EROSION
I . I CONTROL BLANKET LANDLOK 450T EROSION APPROVED EQUAL PER
I CONTROL BLANKET OR WIDTH PER PLAN
6" PERFORATE a - - PCC FILLED COMPACTED 3' APPROVED EQUAL PER I: 
HDPE PIPE PER I BACKFILL I

PAINT SAFETYYELLOW TROWEL TO MATCH I I 0000 00000 00000 
00 00 00 0
I EXISTING SURFACE 'PERFORATED OCQO OCQQVUCQO OCQO 
I i HDPE PIPE (HDPE WYE I SOLID RISERCONTRACTOR SHALL '4 SE 1' 12 oz NON WOVEN
I DETERMINE IN THE FIELD THE 53 .4 A. A 2.1: 1 GEOTEXTILE
I I REQUIRED PIPE FITTINGS . I, I :0 TYPE A TYPE 
I TOP OF LCRS SECURE AT 12" INTERVALS,
I  I BACKFILL AND COMPACT SOIL.
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-502 C-108 REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-104
16, A 16' PER 
ANCHOR TRENCH LANDLOK 450T EROSION PLAN I: 16 PER RIPRAP
I . CONTROL BLANKET OR A LANDLOK 450T EROSION PLAN APPROVED EQUAL PER CONTROL BLANKET APPROVED EQUAL PER 
Eu Ir Mm 9I
IQ VO ?m?m?m?m?i?wy IEMEMEMEMEI mamaANCHOR 12 OZ NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
TRENCH TYPE A PER ANCHOR
TYPE A PER TRENCH
TYPE '3 PER LANDLOK 450T EROSION
FILI- SECTION LANDLOK 450T EROSION FILL SECTION CONTROL BLANKET OR
   a     8.    
I ANCHOR TRENCH ?42I?l IriANCHOR ANCHOR
TRENCH a
TYPE A PER TYPE A PER
CUT SECTION TYPE A PER CUT SECTION

 

 

 

 

WEST DIVERSION CHANNEL

10

EAST DIVERSION CHANNEL

 

PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 3:09 PM

NTS

 

REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-104

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

NTS

 

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

 

REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-104

TETRA TECH BAS

84724232202";

CALEB
HENRY

 

   

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

 

    

DETAILS

 

    

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE C-502 Details.dwg

 

 

    

        
    

DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01-2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY: GES DATE 01-2017
C-502

APPROVED BY: CHM DATE 01-2017

   

 

       
    

   

 

 

   

   

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 PT PT 1/12/2017 2:29 PM

O>_u


:25qu cm - Ewe:
@Nm .umm 


%w

 

..

 

 

 



 

PER PLAN

_u<0 
Am_Nm 

 

 
   

30 
m_uOX< >UImw_<m IU 
w: 3 

   
 
 

 

 

 

wr>w

 

 

 

 

20.2mm.

.. mm 

M. OOZUCZ. mc_u_uO_N._.m >20 wm
w; wOr._.m. 


 

  
 
  



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOrm AIEOCOI




Am_Nm _u_m_N 



29m: 


UNONA
UNOAO

Am_Nm _u_m_N _u__umv

 

 

 

 



 

 

08 
04mm. mvox< :0
201020. 

AN _u_u>0mmv

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.
.A. ..
.. 000m0_2>4m 503.02 .. m. ..
6 c2535 BEN 00 .504 w>09.2500 mammr .A.  .
.. I>m0<<>mm. ..  
4. 20m m0c93.0 Iorm 2.50:0: 

ADV
.. g4

A UN VIA\0020mmjm 

20.2mm.
.. mm 
N. OOZUCE. mI>_u_u mm

 

 

?Km wOr._.m. 

<<>m1mmw. 

 

A mC_u_uO_N._.

mC_u_uO_N._.

 

mImm? O-mom

 



 

 

MImm? O-mom

 

 

20.2mm.

.. mmOCmm AMEHEHEHEHEHEH:
HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHQ: FHIIEHEHEHEHEHE
EHEHEHEHEHEHEHII HEHEHEHEHEHEHEI
I I 
I I 

 

20.2mm.
.. mmocmm .N w>0x_u__u_u mO= 

 



 

01m02 054
mo. 2.8213



Wm.



Um<_0mm


 

    

     
 
 

W. 

m. .WEWEHI

   

20.2mm.
.. w>O_A_n__u_u 

20ex: c2535 .380 :10//
c2535 .380 >20_.m wm>0xm4
BEc2533 Bow.
A o_ Rona
m. _u._um 
0_ um.? .2an
12.019 0020mm4m  5. - $0 08 09.2560 mammr
82 041mg. 0 _o mvox< :0 20:020.
0 _o .23. Q. mzwmozmza 
0oom0.2>4m 505.02

20.2mm.

mm 

N. OOZUCZ. mC_u_uO_N._.m m1>_u_u mm
H30 wOZ.m.


w. 

A. 
>mm Om

 

UNOVN m0 
w>mm m. W5 


. 20.? m0c93.0 Io_.m 413:0:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7/8 .
TYP

 

 

 

 

 

 

>_u_umo<m0 
_u__um 
mImm? 0-80
2% 204m I. 204mc005



.u_.um am

?n
in 0:0 0:0 jzuwxwx.m
Mn_ 00cw_.m 25min.


$204.20
0m0c20
0cmm>050:5.? 4. . .. . 
0020mm4m  .. .
.4 . .
4 mo 202mm_um_ 0020mmam mm cmmo mom 30:20.
. .. . mo w. 0023.63.? 3 .u__um 505.02 3
I $0203.02.
. a .Eq 
.2 .



 

 

 





 

 

wimm? O-moN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm<_m_oz Omon?udoz

  

Goo <58 0.0303 OP 0 Nam

 

 

mImm? O-mom

w>m


Imzm<

oopmooNdN _u>X oombaobo 

?aw?u 1:310

   

    
   
          
 





. O-mow 
m0>_umu >m 

 

. Oczmd?cnjOZ

 

 

Emma.DE.

0mm


 

    

        
    

   

 

       
    

   

 

 

   

   

 PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 2:30 PM

LIMIT OF LINER
LIMIT OF LINER
LIMIT OF LINER

BASE
a EXISTING BASE

LINER PER
LINER PER


 

 

 

  
   

 

 

     

 

  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3
I: SLOPE LAP GEOTEXTILE EXISTING SLOPE
LINER PER a AND SEW LINER PER A

4 PLYWOOD . . 2. 1.
1 
2 v:  34 
I-AP 
my 0000 0000 3000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 300 \xx
0000 0 000 000 000 a ?d IOLOOAOQO C. 220T -
I I ?329ng REMOVE CUT EXISTING REMOVE OVERLAP AND SEW
CUT EXISTING
I PLYWOOD GEOTEXTILE AT PLYWOOD GEOTEXTILE AT GEOTEXTILE
EDGE OF EDGE OF
ANCHOR TRENCH EXTRUSION WELD ANCHOR TRENCH EXTRUSION WELD
HDPE LINER HDPE LINER
2 2
EXISTING ANCHOR
TRENCH
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103 C-106


LL UJ

3
I: LI.
3 EXISTING BASE
4 a
3 LINER PER
3 LINER PER
I: 3 
EXISTING SLOPE a
LINER PER
PERPLAN   .EXTRUSION WELD
. -  .  REMOVE HDPE LINER
I \5 REMOVE CUT EXISTING PLYWOOD
PLYWOOD GEOTEXTILE AT
SLOPE A EDGE OF EXISTING ANCHOR
LINER PER ANCHOR TRENCH EXTRUSION WELD TRENCH
2 2 HDPE LINER

 

 

 

 

 

4 6" LCRS MAINLINE AT TOP OF SLOPE 5 LINER JOIN 6 BASE LINER JOIN

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-103 C-106

 

 

 

 

 

LIMIT OF LINER
LIMIT OF LINER

SLOPE
LINER PER


6" PERFORATED 
HDPE PIPE PER
A 
7 7" PER 2 SLOPE

. I LINER PER

LAP 

  
 

PROTECTIVE COVER SLOPE LINER PER
SOIL (SLOPE)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<?36 
 '7/?7/?7/27/77Z7/?f?36" 36" EXTRUSION WELD 2' 
A 72" 

 

 

 

 

LCRS HEADER SWALE

7 LCRS TOE DRAIN AND TRENCH 8 LINER TERMINATION 9 SLOPE LINER TERMINATION

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-101, C-103, C-106

- REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
    

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

DETAILS

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Details.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-504

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

 


TETRA TECH BAS 

 

 

        
 

CALEB
HENRY

 

 

          
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

   

 

 

       
    

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

   

 PT PT 1/12/2017 2:30 PM



 

 

 



LIMIT OF LINER

Hw-

 



mammw umTWII

. . 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 




2 



LIMIT OF LINER

w>mm 9
w. :me _u_m_N

 

 









 

 





mecm_oz I . I . I
:0_um _._2mm mecmSZ <<mr0
I0_um_._2mm
:me :me 
mImm? 0L0: ow om mImm? 0L0_._2mm 0mm w>mm _._2mm 0mm 
_._2mm 0mm 023mg
I w. 
o<mm >20 mmoamv?rm 
2 mmOme?m 2 .
0>mm I >20 _.m_mAmm mm_<_o<m m>mE I 2 I
_._2mm 0mm umoam02<m  000E02<m oo<mm I RA
>20 53 
oo<mm 0204m02.m_>20 .1  .. ..  0900 Powm om><mr00900 0000060. 
  IQ 69$; 
  
I. 
. >20 >20 
mx_mjzm >zo_._om
Emzoz
mx_mjzm mx_mjzm >20_._om
m>mEm2 0:0: Emzoz
:me 0. :me w>mm :me 
mImm? mImm? mImm? OLow

<>m_mmI I I 

m>mm 

_._2mm mm.? "4
I 
26am? LI 0. I 
I w. 
mm_<_o<m ..  ..  v.2. I 2.92 $59.0 23 mm momOm0 >20c20 Em m>z0w>om
>20 m>00302 cm Em
.  4 4 sq 05m_0m m>20 3 0m 1.01mm>z0 m>o >4 Em mro? 
.H. 4 .. 0 
mecm_oz I o?omw?.
g. :0_um _._zmm  .I I 0W
A  38.02 0.. o> 
mx_mjzo >zo_._om
mam.sz Emzoz

 







 

 

 

w>mm :me 





 



 

mImm? OI: ow

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm<_m_oz 

 

 

 

 



 

mImm? 0L3

 

_w>m

Goo <58 01?? 0.9303 OP 0 Nam
oombookdu _u>X oomboobo 

 

 

mImm? OILS

   



 



    



 

O>_I_m_w
Imzm<

Emma.sz 

 



      

_u__Im OImom 

 

  

w< 

  



   

    

   

3&0: mO>:mu >m 

 

 

   

OI w< 

0mm

     

    

 

w< 

   



     

  



 

3&0: 

 

. Oczmd?cnjOz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14v 7n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




0_n


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4w

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

556A.

 

 

 

 

 

. 
 ..V DVD: 
I a. I a. I
8.3. I
mm0._._02>
g.
I 8.I..jau?\ I .7:
8 .  
?gal ZO._.mm

_Ianm 8:21 <<Im2


<m24. 0m
m0c>_!

_u>00mm 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. M: 0>C0m
_20_.C0_m 
ANV

mm_2_u0_N0m0 enEuV _u>00mm.

 

 

 

 

m02_0 _Im<_m_I 


 

 

0_n_n 
mmOCmm0 _2m_0m 

mmEmm 

 

 

 

 

ANV

 

 

 

 

 

 

c-<mza A8

 

ZO._.mm
mImmd 02r<v

_u0_I< 
mNoo m>_n_m 00C_w_u_m 


M: _u<0 >20 mo

 

 



Wm: _u<0 m0: mo. _u_I>20_m. 
_u<0 WOI mo. 

0mc20_n0m Nome; mrmOd?O 
ANV Pm: >20 N: 0m >_u_u_N0<m0


m: 0020mm._.m _n0C20>j02
_u>0 mammZOAI 0_u Aboo _umc. 3mm mmw>m
3.. 0.0. m>0I 

\mj
_umm 0-8m

 

N: _u<0 0m>Nb: _Nm0C0mm
Mm: _u<0 

0_n_H 
_wm_I_I0<<m mx_u>2m_02 

Pm_u<0 
Na: mo

0.. N: _u<0 mmUCOmm
Na: _u<0 
w: _u<0 >20 #0
N: _u<0 

_umm 

99

a

_u=u_m _umm
Em?

2 9m: _quoo 
AOZ 

c2535 _umwmm >zo_.m mm>oxm1300
6m >_u_umo<m_u mock.

c2535 _ummow >zo_.m 
6m mock;

_u__um 
1H 
_u>0

wm0020>m< 
_umm mm0._._02 0 9

$99 @6 @9 C9 @0696)

AL 02 mImm._. 0-mom >20 _umm

3.. 0020mm._._m 
00. 
m, 00.3.93. mm <mm=n=m0 


_u<0 moo02\0_u_n 

N: I0_u_m 
_u<0 

N: I0_um 
.I0_u_m .  . . . . . . ..
0>m_20 m4 I .. m.

Eds m..xwo.. w>m_2
>20 0m _umm



a ww

 

 

 



NV

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.18:


 

 

 

Amowao 
_nm 

 

 

II 31%" 
15%

 

 

 

 

 

 

MACS:

 

. - I .L

 

 

II

mm0._._02 _w

 

20.2mm?

A.

_wm 
<<Im2 0_um2 >20 _umm 
>20 

. >20 

_n_j._20m >20 
0mm_02.

>20 
>20 
>20 

mXUmeU _u<0 _u__u_20 _wm 
_umm 

MHZCOACNZI >20
>20 0020mm._.m wr>wm 
>20 




wc_u_u0_M._. _wm 0>m002
mammr.

>20I0mm mm 30 >20
wm >2 >_u_u_N0<_m0 
0022m0._._02m _20_.C0_m _wm_I_I0<<m

wm >20
_umm 

_uom _wm 0mm_02m0 

>20 
>20 mI0_u
m_02m0 >20 w< E0m2mm0 0m
m20_2_m_m_N m>0I
9H w\ .. 
m.m. m_<__wm00_m0 Am: 2:2. 
wm _um0<_0m0. >20I0m 00:6 >20I0m>0m
_wm m00m. mx_u>2m_02
>2010mm _wm cmm0 

m0>_u_mu 2.. A.


5&3 Nu. 

 

15'

 

 

 

muoo 
_m 3%
0:>20 mC_u_u0_N._.

 

m0>_u_mu inn?.

 

MImm? 0-mom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m:
AN: dd
0.0. 
 
oozmquOjoz N.
29212:: .. "o
n. . 3


I..I
we

 



L0_2._.m 
Ste: m_u>0_20. L0_24.m 4.0 mm
mm>_um0 w>02mm 7.38.0 40 
32.: I l. l. .l

 

>20 _u>0







_w>m_2

 

 

m0>_umu ium.

PT PT LEACHATE OUTFALL SYSTEM 1/12/2017 3:08 PM

mImm? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm<_m_oz 

 

 

_w>m

_woo <58 01?? 0.9303 n> Nam
oombookdu _u>X oomboobo 

 

 

 

m0>_umu mImm? 0-mom

 

m0>_umu ink.

 

wimm? 0-mom


   

  

 

   







 

       

o>rmw .
Imzm<

0mm_02m0 w<u 

0.95 _.mmojm?m 053: 96.83 

 

    

0m><<2 



    

    

   

m0>_umu >m 

 

   

OI m02m0 

0mm

     

    

 

   





     

  



 

 

 

_uO? . _uO?u Oczmd?cnjOz

 .I.ON 

 3 SEIE)

NAAOHS SV 
109-0 2 am TICI



OTI 
3J.EIEIHS 

    

    

   

3 WHO 3 A8 
3 A8 CIEIMOEIHO
3 A8 NMVEICI

3 A8 CIEINOISEICI

    
 

 

    

       
    

 

08098606 
S91 I6 VI) 3'98 O9EI

     

      

 

    
   
    

AHNEIH


 

 

3V8 H381 

 

   

LO 

SJ.N

LO 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SJ.N 

SJ.N

 

X08 JHOMVEIEI8 dW?cI 9 X08 JHOMVEIEI8 

 

 

9

HEIOHCISNVEIJ. CINEI 

CINEI c 0.L

 

 

8

 


OJ.


O.L

(vssv ao INNVEICIAV)

NIVEICI :3


X08 JIIOMVEIEI8

(vssv 80 


(03W A8 

aanaans) HEISIEI 


 

ao
aasm 
enema-H

 

X08 JIIOMVEIEI8

 

 

 

 

 

0\

NOIJVNIWEIEIJ. 880i 

JNVOOISEICI 

O.L X08 EIZIS

 

Eldld EIEISIEI

EICICIH 


Eldld HEISIEI

 



 

ONIEI anOV8



 

 

 

(17) anozl

 

 



 

 

A

I ..L


 

 

 

 

 

 


CIEICIVEIEIHJCIVEFI





 



GNEI CIEICIVEIEIHJ
Eldld 08 HOS ..L

 

Om

 

 



Eldld 

..8L 

 

(XOEI 
wow) aaonaswm
SNIEIIM

 

IV A

 

(Y

 

 

 

SJ.N

 

LO 

SJ.N

 



 

EIEISIEI c 0J.

 



 




 

88d X08 HOVEI WOJ.J.O8 NI NIVEICI
?g OJ. X08

dW?d VWEIN
EIEIJ. ..Z

HEISIEI 88V8 EISOH
CINV 



NOIJISNVEIJ O.L
..Z

..Z

9@

SCIVEIEIHJ. CINV

TIIEICI - EIZIS - dlae 080C) X17 VINEIN 

EOVEIOJS O.L
..Z "17
8W0 

Eldld HEISIEI OJ. 
HIV

.

8W0 EIEIJSVWOW
MOEIHO ..Z


9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EIO 80.6999
8W0 EIEIJSVINOW ..Z

@?88d 88m HEIOHCISNVEIJ CINEI 

CINV 
OEIN CINV 
OJ. 



KN


 

88d X08 HOVEI WOJ..LO8 NI NIVEICI
?g Di X08

JIIOMVEIEI8 HEIOHCISNVEIJ VWEIN


OJ. X08 .LFIOMVEIEI8 O.L SJJIO
EIO ON 

lend 

O.L NOIJISNVEIJ O.L HEISIEI EICIISNI dW?d
EICIISNI O.L X08 
WOEH 38800 

93M 8W0 EIEIJSVWOW EIEIJEIW 

'A'n 80:l 
SS EISOH EIEIHSSEIEICI HOIH ..Z

HODOEIHJ. 8HJ.S Eldld Eldld ?17 EINO)


069690 GD 0

 

SELLON 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     
 

 

 

 

83d HEISIEI 
?7 am 

EIEISIEI

 

 

 



WOEH EIOJOIN
:9 WOElzl 
HEIOHCISNVEIJ. 


ONIEIIM 



 



 

 

 

8L

 

 

 

 

 

I

 

 



 

 

 



 

 



VHJON


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88d EIEISIEI 
?m



EIAO8V 
NOIJIIVO) 

?8/9 I OJ. X08 

 

0833 J.d J.d 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

NOTE:
0" ALL LAPS ARE PER DETAIL 3 ON THIS SHEET AND DETAIL I 
CONT- CONST- JOINT TYP. 11 ON SHEET S0502, OR 24" MIN., WHICHEVER IS 3 
SHEAR . GREATER. . REINFORCING LAP SPLICE SCHEDULE
KEY (CONC. WALLS g: c; 53 ,1 I
ONLY) 3 II f? 2500 f? 3000 f? 4000 f? 5000
'(Inches) (Inches) (Inches) (Inches)
REINF QOF - CONSTRUCTIONCORNER INTERSECTION ALT. CORNER D=8d FOR #9 AND LARGER 7 69 63 54 49
d=6d FOR SMALLER BARS
SINGLE LAYER OF REINFORCEMENT TYP..L..
'7 7
CLEARANCE AS (EXCEPT FOR 6 1. LAPS SHOWN IN THIS TABLE ARE CLASS B, CATEGORY 3 TYPE SPLICES. LAP LENGTH IS BASED
NOTED UPON SMALLER OF TWO BARS BEING SPLICED WHEN NOT THE SAME SIZE.
STRUCT. NOTES I II
IL IL 2. INCREASE LAP BY A FACTOR OF 1.3 FOR HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMENT SO PLACED
THAT MORE THAN 12 INCHES OF CONCRETE IS CAST IN THE MEMBER BELOW THIS
LAP AND OFFSET STIRRUP OR TIE 
DOUBLE LAYER OF REINFORCEMENT 
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-506 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-506 NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-506
A 9.5' 
7. CONSTRUCTION NOTES
(THIS DETAIL 0N LY) FINISHED 1 5/8" GALVANIZED
SPLICE PER I I If I UNISTRUT P1000H
II 
Sg??gfw 1/8u WIDE 1-1/2" DEEP com I Q) 1 5/8" GALVANIZED P1000 UNISTRUT CHANNEL 
EACH SIDE OF SAWCUT - SAW CUT JOINTS AS SOON I CHANNEL (OR APPROVED EQUAL)
SAIEBAESIEOUGH 1 TYP C2) UNISTRUT P2265 ANGLE BRACKET 
FILL SAWCUT JOINT WITH - GALVANIZED OR APPROVED EQUAL 1 2" DIA 1 TAINLE
SIKADUR 51 SL SEALANT OR INITIATE TRIAL CUTS WITHIN GALVANIZED 
APPROVED EQUAL HOURS OF CONCRETE PLACEMENT. PVC PIPE I I P1065 HD ANCHOR WITH 4 1/2"
TYP CONNECTOR (TYP-I ANCHORAGE DETAIL
I I I I I II EMBEDMENT.
-
to co 1 5/8" GALVANIZED UNISTRUT
oo' - - I P1000H CHANNEL (TYP.).

I TYP 3 PROVIDE ANCHORAGE AT 12"
TYP O.C. AS SHOWN IN DETAIL
. . I a, . ABOVE.
INTERRUPT TOP BARS MIN AX ADDITIONAL TOP BARS AT 1 II
AT CONTROL JOINT I BENEATH TOP REINFORCING I NOTES:
MAT. MATCH SIZE AND 1 6" SCH 80 1. ALL STRUT CHANNEL MATERIAL SHALL BE GALVANIZED.
SPACING To TOP MAT PVC PIPE 2. ALL CONDUIT SUPPORTS AND ANCHORS SHALL BE
REINFORCING I a? ASSEMBLED WITH 316 STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS,
AI. I WASHERS, LOCK WASHERS, NUTS AND SPRING NUTS.
I 4 3. 3 FRAME ASSEMBLIES TOTAL
NOTE. PROVIDE CONTROL ALL UNISTRUT CONNECTION SHALL USE HEX-HEAD BOLT
JOINTS AT EVERY 20CONNECTS THAT ARE THREADED INTO SPRING NUT OR
MAXIMUM, EACH WAY SECTION A APPROVED EQUAL.
TYP 6" U-BOLT 1/2" SCALE. 1.. 4.

NEOPRENE STRAP

 

4 CONTROL JOINT 5 FILL STAND

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-506 SCALE: REFERENCE SHEET: C-506

 

 

 

 



 

 

2:1 3:1 EARTHEN BERM

 

EARTHEN BERM WITH
CONCRETE SLOPE
PROTECTION (SEE B-B BELOWSURFACE
.

     
   
  

 

3' 6"

 

EARTH EN BERM (TYP-N-3414-1N-341413T41.

 


NTS

SECTION B-B
NTS

2:1

 

 

10'

 

 

 

PLAN

 

6 TOP DECK INLET

 

PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 2:31 PM

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: C-401

 

 

    
   
          
 

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

DETAILS

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Details.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-508

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

TETRA TECH BAS

 

584724232202":

 

 

CALEB
HENRY

 

 

    

        
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 909.860.80 7

   

 

 

       
    

   

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

     

 

 

 

   

   

 

QCZNU _u_m_N

A _22222222222222_


A $204.20 0m0c20
01>zzm_. 


mammr m>=um 35 3 0.0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

     
    
  
  
 

039320 
Goo Em. m>0I


 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mImm._.?

mmOjOZ  NO.
28 Em. 

.2 55x3 mIm>m xm< jinx 0020mmjm
MexU 2m:

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

mm0._._OZ
?woo Ewm.

 

 

 

 

 

2 
0  0:3. 2 
01>zzm_. 


3 ON 202-<<0<mz A. 0mm_u oozom?m
mmoam?rm mm0._._OZ w-_w 0503H um?


Nmo\o m._.OZm mx_m._._zo OZOCZU
/lv . MN. m.
. 
3:2. ,_0_24 4.NNOO Ewm.

 

 

mmOjOZ
mboo Ewm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 QCZNU mm0._._OZ

 

mImm? mImm?

 

 

 



       
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>2010m
a<_um> in 
o: A 0.8? mx_m._._ZO ONOCZU mmOm_OZ
53: AA 5.. mmOm_02 jaum 2% 00230.. 
00230.. wr>zxma 
wr>zxma um.? - 
>zozom ammzox meb?camo
22 mx_m:20 $920 1L1ON. zoz-<<0<mm0._._OZ 

 

PT PT 1/12/2017 2:31 PM

 

 

 

 

 

mImm? MImm? mImm?

w>m

    
 





Ummazmo w< DE. O-mom 0005:0056
w< m0>rmu >m 

0mm 
0-23

. Oczmd?cnjOZ

 

 

 

 

   

 

   

 

      
 

 

 

        
    

  

Goo <58 0.03050 OP 0 Nam
000000.33 _u>X oombaobo 

      

 

 

          

 

 

   

 

 

 

       

mm<_m_oz 

 PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 2:31 PM

6" THICK CONCRETE WEIR
WITH #4 18" O.C.E.W.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4' DEEP CONCRETE
CUTOFF WALL PER

6" THICK CONCRETE WEIR

 

  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4' DEEP
CONCRETE
CUTOFF

WALL PER




 

   

6" THICK CONCRETE WEIR
WITH #4 18" O.C.E.W.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 3 I 
1r_ EROSION
- . A CONTROL A 
A <1 3 . (I. BLANKET PER . BOTTOMOF I II  - Er
BOTTOM OF .. .V BASIN 
BASIN
160? _4 11' 

7 
4' DEEP CONCRETE a CHANNEL 
CUTOFF WALL PER OUTLET PER 
NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET:
FINISHED

ANCHOR I a 3 <1 
TRENCH EROSION q: 71",   I 
TYPE A CONTROL a 
EXISTING GROUND BLANKET PER  CATTLE GUARD . 
DRAINAGE . ?51. --
'4 CROSSING PER 'Ad14.4  
 I
16.5' 
I 1? II
SECTION

LINED EARTHEN CHANNEL

CUTOFF WALL

 

NTS

 

REFERENCE SHEET:

 

 

NTS

REFERENCE SHEET:

 

 

8" THICK
CONCRETE WITH
#4 12" O.C.E.W.

   

. VARIES

VARIES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

f? VARIES


A.


 

4' DEEP

CUTOFF 47' . ..
43?4" LIA . ..

 

 

 

 

 

A.



TRANSITION WING
WALLS FROM 5' WIDE
CHANNEL TO 165'

 

 

 

 

 

CLASS 1
RIP-RAP




 

CATTLE GUARD
DRAINAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I4 10' 12" A 5' 
CROSSING PER TRANSITION WING
WALLS FROM 3' TO 6"
<1 
CLASS 1
. .   RIP-RAP
/4221 
APPLY BUTYL MASTIC TAPE 
OR EQUAL BETWEEN JOINT 
12 OZ.
NON-WOVEN

8" THICK CONCRETE
WITH #4 12" O.C.E.W.

ELEVATION

 


4' DEEP

GEOTEXTILE

CUTOFF a
WALL PER

 

TRANSITION STRUCTURE

7 FLARED OUTLET AND ENERGY DISSIPATER

 

NTS

 

REFERENCE SHEET:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

 

 

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET:

TETRA TECH BAS

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9 I 765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

 

 

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

   

 

DETAILS

    

 

DESIGNED BY: DLL

 

FILE Details.dwg

      

 

  

DRAWN BY 

  

PV ANP

   

DATE 

 

01?2017

    

   

SCALE: AS SHOWN

 

   

CHECKED BY: GES

   

DATE 

 

   

01?2017

 

APPROVED BY CHM

   

  

 

DATE 

 

 

01?2017

  

C-510

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

8" THICK CONCRETE
WITH #4 12" O.C.E.W.

 
 
     

VARIES

EXISTING GROUND 

EXISTING GROUND
6" THICK CONCRETE
WITH #4 12" O.C.E.W.
VARIES

I

 

 

 

EXISTING GROUND
8" THICK CONCRETE
WITH #4 12" O.C.E.W.
VARIES

. 
.V .1441? . . I
VARIES VARIES
Tl

  

 

 

 

 

J2

 

 

 

 

 

1 CONCRETE TRAPEZOIDAL CHANNEL 2 TRANSITION STRUCTURE 3 TRANSITION STRUCTURE

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET:

 

 

 

 

 

4 DETAIL 5 DETAIL 6 DETAIL

 

 

 

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET:

 

 

7 DETAIL 8 DETAIL 9 DETAIL

 

PT PT DETAILS.DWG 1/12/2017 2:31 PM

 

 

 

 

 

NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET: NTS REFERENCE SHEET:

TETRA TECH BAS

    
    

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

DETAILS

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Details.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-51 1

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

        
 

 

 

        
    

  

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7

   

 

 

          

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

   

 

 

 

  

     

 PT PT CROSS-SECTIONDWG 1/12/2017 2:32 PM

4500

4450

4400

4350

4300

4250

4200

4150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REVISION DESCRIPTION

 

EXISTING GROUND

HASE 1A EX VATION

1A FILL

PHAS 1C FILL

 


USCALE: 50' 50'

 

 

4500
4450
4400

4350

PHASE1C
EXCAVATION 4300

PHAS IB PHASE1 BASIN
PHASE 18 IN

4250
4200

4150

PROMONTORY POINT, LLC

CROSS-SECTION

DESIGNED BY DLL FILE Cross-Section.dwg
DRAWN BY PV ANP DATE 01?2017 SCALE: AS SHOWN

CHECKED BY GES DATE 01?2017
C-512

FOR PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

   
 

 

   


TETRA TECH BAS 

CALEB
HENRY

 

        
 

 

          
    

I360 Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9  765
TEL 909.860.7777 FAX 90986080 7