DSHW-2024-004870

2023 BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CLASS I
PERMIT RENEWAL

Prepared for:
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
(NUERA)

1997 East 3500 North
Layton, Utah 84040
Tel: [phone]

June 30, 2023

ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part Title
Introduction
Includes summary of substantial changes since the last permit renewal
application
I.General Data
Includes State of Utah Solid Waste Permit Application form
II.General Report
Includes general facility information required by
Utah Administrative Rule R315-301 through R315-
310
III.Technical and Engineering Report
Includes operational and technical information
required by Utah Administrative Rule R315-301
through R315-310
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – LOCATION MAP & USGS QUAD
APPENDIX B – UTAH COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPENDIX C – 2022 ANNUAL REPORT
APPENDIX D – SITLA LEASE AGREEMENT / CULTURAL SURVEY
APPENDIX E – BAYVIEW LANDFILL 2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPENDIX F – LANDILL FORMS
APPENDIX G – DISTRICT’S GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN
APPENDIX H – RUNON – RUNOFF CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX I – SWPPP / NOI / MULTI SECTOR GENERAL PERMIT
APPENDIX J – LEACHATE GENERATION CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX K – ENGINEERING DRAWINGS
APPENDIX L – ANNUAL TITLE V COMPLIANCE REPORTS
APPENDIX M – BORING LOGS
APPENDIX N – UTAH HYDROLOGIC DATA REPORT NO. 50
APPENDIX O – UTAH DNR WATER RIGHTS SEARCH
APPENDIX P – LINEAMENT STUDY
APPENDIX Q – SEISMIC ANALYSIS
APPENDIX R – ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
APPENDIX S – FLOW CAPACITY OF THE LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
APPENDIX T – BAYVIEW LANDFILL LFG GAS COLLECTION SYSTEM
APPENDIX U – CELL 1 & 2 CLOSURE
APPENDIX V – CLOSURE CAP EQUIVALENCY
APPENDIX W – FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN
APPENDIX X – PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS / PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
APPENDIX Y – 2009 APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS, HDR ENGINEERING

INTRODUCTION
This document represents a permit application to expand the solid waste disposal facilities at
Bayview Landfill (Bayview), which is owned and operated by Northern Utah Environmental
Resource Agency (NUERA). Bayview is currently operated under permit number 9420R3
issued by the Utah Waste Management and Radiation Control Board.

In the two plus years that have passed since the current Bayview permit was issued, one
major change has taken place at the facility that will impact several design considerations for
the landfill. The major change at the Bayview operation is:

• Additional Leased Property – NUERA has entered into a new lease with the State of
Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) for additional
property that is located to the west of the existing Bayview Landfill. The addition of
the additional land will result in the reconfiguration of the existing stormwater
management structures, landfill cells, support facilities, and final cover. The
additional leased land brings the total leased land to approximately 800 acres. The
anticipated changes to the landfill operations are summarized as follows:

o Drainage Modifications – The existing drainage (Center Wash) that is located
between the northern landfill (Cell 1, Cell 1.5, and all of the Cell 2 Stages) and
the southern portion of the landfill will be removed with future stormwater
being diverted into the North Wash and the South Wash.
o Disposal Cell Configuration – With the removal of the Center Wash, the area
south of the existing landfill will be utilized for waste disposal rather than
being left as a storm water drainage.
o Construction of a Construction and Demolition (C&D) Cell – a dedicated C&D
cell may be constructed within the newly leased SITLA property.
o Relocation of Shop/Office – The existing shop/office will be relocated to aid in
the development of future landfill cells. The future shop location is currently
planned near the landfill entrance.
o Landfill Closure Topography – The final cover topography will be modified to
reflect the increased landfill footprint due to the landfilling of the Center
Wash area of the property.
o Landfill Life – The landfill life will be increased substantially due to the infilling
of the Center Wash area and the associated changes in the landfill final cover
elevations and topography.

The application has been organized to follow the general outline of R315-302 and R315-310.
This organization results in some duplication and repetition of information, but it is intended
to simplify the review and approval of the permit application.

Part I of this document duplicates the standard form outlining general data pertaining to the
site.

Part II is a general report that includes a description of the facility, and Operations Plan.

Part III is the Technical Report and includes the following:

• Geohydrological Assessment.
• Engineering Report.
• Closure Plan
• Post-Closure Care Plan
• Financial Assurance Plan

PERMIT APPLICATION TO EXPAND
BAYVIEW LANDFILL

PART I - GENERAL DATA

PERMIT APPLICATION TO EXPAND
BAYVIEW LANDFILL

Bayview Landfill

PART II - GENERAL REPORT
The permit information has been updated from previous permits to reflect the
change in the land lease for the Bayview Landfill. The State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) lease has been modified to include
additional land located to the west of the existing landfill operations. The
additional leased property will result in reconfiguration of the physical landfill
features but not in the operations of the landfill. Portions of the text and associated
appendices that do not require modifications have been left as originally presented
in previous permit applications. Only the table of contents for the previous 2009
permit renewal application by HDR is included as Appendix Y, with the full
document on file at the landfill for reference.

TABLE OF CONTENTS: PART II – GENERAL REPORT

SECTION 1 – FACILITY DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 1
1.1 LOCATION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................................................................... 1
1.3 AREAS SERVED BY THE FACILITY ................................................................................ 2
1.4 WASTE TYPES ............................................................................................................. 3
1.5 LANDFILL EQUIPMENT ............................................................................................... 4
1.6 LANDFILL PERSONNEL ................................................................................................ 4
SECTION 2 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PROOF OF OWNERSHIP ......................................... 6
2.1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................... 6
SECTION 3 – OPERATIONS PLAN ....................................................................................... 7
3.1 SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................. 7
3.2 WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT - DESCRIPTION OF HANDLING PROCEDURES ........ 7
3.2.1 Waste Acceptance ................................................................................................ 7
3.2.2 Waste Disposal ..................................................................................................... 8
3.2.3 Placement of Cover Soils ...................................................................................... 8
3.2.4 Special Wastes...................................................................................................... 8
3.2.4.1 Used Oil and Batteries ................................................................................. 8
3.2.4.2 Bulky Wastes ............................................................................................... 9
3.2.4.3 Tires ............................................................................................................. 9
3.2.4.4 Dead Animals .............................................................................................. 9
3.2.4.5 Asbestos Waste ........................................................................................... 9
3.2.4.6 Grease Pit and Animal Waste By-Products ................................................. 9
3.3 WASTE INSPECTION ................................................................................................... 9
3.3.1 Landfill Spotting ................................................................................................... 9
3.3.2 Random Waste Screening .................................................................................... 9
3.3.3 Removal of Hazardous or Prohibited Waste ...................................................... 10
3.3.4 Hazardous or Prohibited Waste Discovered After the Fact ............................... 11
3.3.5 Notification Procedures ...................................................................................... 11
3.4 FACILITY MONITORING AND INSPECTION ............................................................... 11
3.4.1 Groundwater ...................................................................................................... 11
3.4.2 Surface Water .................................................................................................... 12
3.4.3 Leachate Collection ............................................................................................ 12

3.4.4 Landfill Gas ......................................................................................................... 13
3.4.5 General Inspections and Quarterly Inspection ................................................... 13
3.5 CONTIGENCY AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS ...................................................... 14
3.5.1 Fire ...................................................................................................................... 14
3.5.2 Loaded Vehicle Fires ........................................................................................... 15
3.5.3 Working Face/Below Cover Fire ......................................................................... 15
3.5.4 Release of Explosive Gases ................................................................................. 16
3.5.5 Explosion ............................................................................................................ 17
3.5.6 Failure of Run-On/Run-Off Containment ........................................................... 17
3.5.7 Groundwater Contamination ............................................................................. 18
3.6 CONTINGENCY PLAN FOR ALTERNATIVE WASTE HANDLING .................................. 18
3.7 MAINTENANCE PLAN ............................................................................................... 19
3.7.1 Groundwater Monitoring Wells and Leachate System ...................................... 19
3.7.2 Gas Monitoring System ...................................................................................... 19
3.8 DISEASE AND VECTOR CONTROL ............................................................................. 19
3.8.1 Insects ................................................................................................................. 19
3.8.2 Rodents ............................................................................................................... 19
3.8.3 Birds .................................................................................................................... 20
3.8.4 Fugitive Dust ....................................................................................................... 20
3.8.5 Litter Control ...................................................................................................... 21
3.9 RECYCLING ................................................................................................................ 21
3.10 TRAINING PROGRAM ............................................................................................... 21
3.11 RECORDKEEPING ...................................................................................................... 22
3.12 SUBMITTAL OF ANNUAL REPORT ............................................................................. 22
3.13 INSPECTIONS ............................................................................................................ 23
3.14 RECORDING WITH COUNTY RECORDER ................................................................... 23
3.15 STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................... 23
3.16 SAFETY ...................................................................................................................... 23
3.17 EMERGENCY PROCEDURES ...................................................................................... 24
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 1

SECTION 1 – FACILITY DESCRIPTION
1.1 LOCATION
Bayview Landfill (Bayview) is located in the Goshen Valley approximately 2 to 3 miles
west of Goshen Bay, the southwestern-most portion of Utah Lake. The Goshen Valley
slopes upward away from the lake toward the East Tintic Mountains some 7 miles
southwest of the lake. The landfill site similarly slopes with an approximate 150-foot rise
from the eastern side of the landfill near State Route 68 (SR-68) to the western
boundaries of the site. The eastern boundary of the landfill site is approximately 120
feet above the water elevation of Utah Lake.

Bayview is located in Sections 17 and 18, T9S, R1W approximately 6 miles north of
Elberta, Utah, and directly west of SR-68. The landfill property includes approximately
640-acres of Section 17 and 160-acres in Section 18. The original 20-acres of leased land
in Section 18 houses a culinary well, a water storage tank, and an upgradient monitoring
well associated with the landfill operations. Appendix A – Location Map & USGS Quad
presents the location of Bayview and surrounding areas as well as location of the landfill
presented on the most recent USGS Quad.
1.2 GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Bayview was located, permitted, designed, and constructed by Provo City Corporation
during 1989. The City received a Conditional Use Permit for the landfill site through the
Utah County Board of Adjustment.

The South Utah Valley Solid Waste District (SUVSWD) was formed in 1989 to own and
operate solid waste facilities for the cities of Provo, Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville,
Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah. SUVSWD assumed the existing and previously permitted
landfill operations from the City of Provo in 1990.

Bayview started operations in Cell 1 in 1990 with Cell 1 being active from 1990 until it was
fully capped in 2005. Cell 2 development started while Cell 1 was operational with Cell 2
beginning to accept waste in February 2005. Cell 2 is operationally broken into four
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 2

individual Stages moving generally from west to east. Cell 2, Stage 1 and Cell 2, Stage 2
provided operational airspace from 2005 through 2020. Cell 1.5 was designed to fill in the
area between Cell 1 and Cell 2 while improving the overall landfill geometry and became
operational in 2020. Cell 1.5 was utilized for waste disposal immediately after the
construction was approved by the State of Utah Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control (DWMRC). Cell 2, Stage 3 was constructed in the fall of 2022 with the
final acceptance of the protective soil layer anticipated in the early summer of 2023. The
landfill area above Cell 1.5, Cell 2, Stage1, and Cell 2, Stage 2 are currently being brought to
final design elevations.

SUVSWD added a compost facility at the Bayview in 2004. The compost facility has
processed a combination of yard waste and biosolids and is jointly permitted through
the DWMRC and the Division of Water Quality. The compost operation is not operated
continually, but on an as needed basis.

In 2016, Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) purchased Bayview from
SUVSWD. NUERA members planning to utilize the Bayview include SUVSWD, North Pointe
Solid Waste Special Service District (NPSWSSD), Trans-Jordan Cities (TJC), and Wasatch
Integrated Waste Management District (WIWMD). In addition to a permit issued by the
DWMRC, Bayview operates under a 2018 Utah County Conditional Use Permit (CUP). A copy
of the most current Utah County CUP documents are included as Appendix B.
1.3 AREAS SERVED BY THE FACILITY
The current service area for the Bayview includes the cities of Provo, Salem, Spanish
Fork, Springville, Mapleton, Goshen, and the communities in southern Utah County.
Most of the municipal solid waste in southern Utah County is transferred to Bayview
Landfill via the SUVSWD’s transfer station. Additionally, since the operations have
changed to NUERA, waste from northern Utah County is being transferred through
NPSWSSD transfer station. Future waste is anticipated from Wasatch Integrated Waste
Management District and Trans-Jordan Cities once construction of their transfer stations
is complete. Waste is not accepted from direct haulers.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 3

1.4 WASTE TYPES
The Bayview accepts wastes transfer stations in Springville (SUVSWD), Lindon
(NPSWSSD), and a city-owned transfer station in Goshen. The individual transfer
stations provide record keeping, screening and processing of incoming wastes, and
shipping of the solid wastes to Bayview. The transfer stations accept residential and
commercial solid wastes, including yard wastes, but generally do not accept
construction debris (C&D) wastes. The transfer stations also do not accept regulated
hazardous wastes. The waste screening operation is outlined in each of the transfer
station's operating plans.

Yard wastes arriving at the transfer stations may either be segregated for composting or
commingled with the residential and commercial wastes for processing and disposal.
Transfer station personnel make these decisions based on whether the compost
operation is active, the quantity and ease of separation of the yard wastes, and the
workload at the specific moment in time.

Bayview will occasionally receive special waste (bulky waste and dead animals) directly
at the landfill under special arrangements with the waste generator. Bulky waste is
crushed and moved to the working face and is buried so that the potential for liner
damage is avoided and so that large materials are not easily uncovered by operations at
a later date. Dead animals are immediately covered with at least two (2) feet of material
to minimize odors and to prevent the attraction from insects, rodents, and other
animals. The wastes accepted at the transfer stations are, loaded into over-the-road
vehicles, and transported to the landfill for disposal. When transfer station staff observe
recyclable materials, and when there is time to easily and safely remove the recyclable
materials, they will segregate these materials into on-site dumpsters for recycling.

Appendix C – 2022 Annual Report includes the most recent operational data for Bayview.
The 2022 Annual Report presents a summary of the types and volumes of wastes processed
at Bayview. During the last operational year, Bayview received 396,698 tons of waste over
256 days for an average of approximately 1,550 tons per operational day.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 4

1.5 LANDFILL EQUIPMENT
All equipment operating at the landfill is owned and operated by Bayview. The following
equipment is available for use at the landfill:

• Caterpillar D8T
• Caterpillar 836 Compactors
• Caterpillar 636 Scrappers
• John Deere Loader
• John Deere Grader
• Kenworth Water Truck
• Off-Road Water Wagon

Any other equipment necessary for the operations of the landfill are rented as necessary.
During periods of major overhaul or extended breakdown, replacement equipment is rented
locally.
1.6 LANDFILL PERSONNEL
Currently, daily operations at Bayview landfill is accomplished with approximately 10 people
(1 manager, 8 operators, and 1 attendant). The following describes the responsibilities for
the on-site personnel at the landfill:

Landfill Manager (Manager) – The Manager is responsible for all day-to-day landfill activities.
Daily responsibilities include road maintenance, general site access and site safety. The
Manager is also responsible for all persons working or visiting the landfill. Additional
responsibilities include the maintenance and oversight of the groundwater monitoring, and
daily, intermediate, and final cover. The Manager is responsible for the landfill meeting all
DWMRC permit requirements. The Manager conducts regular facility inspections and
monitors all landfill activities. The Manager is responsible for all operational documentation
including the preparation of the annual reports to DWMRC.

The Landfill Manager reports to the NUERA Operations and Maintenance (O&M) committee
and ultimately to the NUERA Board of Directors.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 5

Operators Supervisor (Supervisor) – The Supervisor is under the direction of the Landfill
Manager. The Supervisor organizes the operations of Bayview, provides oversight of landfill
personnel, conducts various training associated with modern landfills, and leads the
activities of the crew when the Landfill Manager is not there.

Equipment Operators (Operators) – The Operators are responsible for all day-to-day
activities at the landfill. These responsibilities include; waste acceptance, waste placement,
traffic control, safe operation and maintenance of all equipment, visual inspection of
incoming waste, waste screening operations and general construction as it pertains to
landfill operations.

Landfill Attendants (Attendants) – The Attendants are responsible for the secondary
screening of all incoming waste. The Attendants track all incoming waste and updates
landfill records as required. The Attendants are also responsible for all transactions at the
scale house and assist the Manager in the preparation of the annual landfill reports.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 6

SECTION 2 - LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PROOF OF OWNERSHIP
All properties used for the disposal of waste and supporting functions are owned by the
State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA).
2.1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Bayview operations are conducted on the following parcels of land:

Township 9 South, Range 1 West, SLBM
Section 17: All – 640 Acres
Section 18: E2E2 – 160 Acres
Total 800 Acres More or Less

The use of this land was conveyed by the SITLA to NUERA through a memorandum of lease
that terminates December 31, 2082. Appendix D – SITLA Lease presents lease agreements
along with the Cultural Resources Inventory for the Bayview Landfill Expansion Project.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 7

SECTION 3 – OPERATIONS PLAN

This Operations Plan has been written to address the requirements of UAC R315-302-2 and
briefly describes the operations at Bayview. The purpose of the Plan of Operation is to
provide the Manager, Supervisor, and landfill personnel with standard procedures for day-
to-day operation of the landfill.

The primary function of Bayview is to provide for the responsible disposal of MSW wastes
generated by the citizens of Utah County. Future landfill operations will accommodate MSW
wastes from other NUERA member entities participating in the Bayview project. The landfill
is operated in accordance with the UAC R315-301 through 320.
3.1 SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION
An updated development plan was finalized for Bayview in 2023. The 2023 Development
Plan summarizes the future assumptions regarding landfill operations, summary of recent
projects, and projections of landfill life and associated landfill developments. Appendix E –
Bayview Landfill 2023 Development Plan shows the locations of the landfill cells along with
the development timeline.
3.2 WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT - DESCRIPTION OF HANDLING PROCEDURES
3.2.1 Waste Acceptance
A waste control program designed to detect and deter attempts to dispose of hazardous and
other unacceptable wastes will continue to be implemented at Bayview Landfill in
conjunction with the screening operation of the associated transfer stations. The program is
designed to protect the health and safety of employees, customers, and the general public,
as well as to protect against the contamination of the environment. The landfill is not open
for private hauler or citizen self-hauled wastes.

The following procedures are practiced at Bayview to deter disposal of hazardous and
unacceptable waste. All waste entering are pre-screened for unacceptable materials by
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 8

transfer station personnel prior to transfer of wastes. The operations at the individual
transfer stations are not described in this Operations Plan.
3.2.2 Waste Disposal
Transfer trailers entering the site will be directed by landfill operations personnel to the
working face, where the driver will be instructed to discharge the load. The waste will be
placed in lifts with a loose thickness of 2 - 3 feet. After the waste has been placed in loose
lifts, the operator will run the compactor over all portions of the lift at least two times or
until the waste is thoroughly compacted. Equipment operators will also maintain the
working face so that it is as small as practical to allow for efficient unloading of transfer
trucks, placement and compaction of solid wastes, and minimize the use of cover soils.
3.2.3 Placement of Cover Soils
Cover soils or other approved material will be placed over solid wastes to minimize the
potential for nuisance conditions, fire, or animal contact with solid waste. Nuisance
conditions include odor generation and air discharges; blowing of plastic and paper wastes;
and other conditions that impair the use of adjoining properties.

At the end of each working day, the landfill operators will cover all solid wastes received
during that day with daily cover. The daily cover will consist of a minimum of 6 inches of soil
excavated from other portions of the landfill site.

Whenever a portion of the landfill cell will remain in an inactive condition for an extended
period, landfill operators will place an intermediate cover over the inactive portion. The
intermediate cover will reduce the potential for wind and water-induced erosion of the
cover and reduce the production of leachate and contact stormwater within the landfill cell.
The intermediate cover will consist of an additional 6-inches of site soils.
3.2.4 Special Wastes
3.2.4.1 Used Oil and Batteries
Used oil and batteries are not accepted at Bayview.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 9

3.2.4.2 Bulky Wastes
White goods are not accepted at Bayview. Some white goods may be included in wastes
transferred through the associated transfer stations.
3.2.4.3 Tires
Tires are not accepted at Bayview. Some tires may be included in wastes transferred
through the associated transfer stations.
3.2.4.4 Dead Animals
Dead animals are accepted at Bayview when included in wastes from associated transfer
stations.
3.2.4.5 Asbestos Waste
Asbestos wastes are not accepted at Bayview.
3.2.4.6 Grease Pit and Animal Waste By-Products
Grease pit and animal wastes are not accepted at Bayview.
3.3 WASTE INSPECTION
3.3.1 Landfill Spotting
Landfill spotting is not utilized at Bayview since the waste has been screened at the transfer
stations and Bayview is not a public operation.
3.3.2 Random Waste Screening
In addition to the random screenings performed at the transfer stations, random inspections of
incoming loads are conducted at the landfill according to the schedule established by the
landfill management. If frequent violations are detected, additional random checks are
scheduled at the discretion of the landfill management.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 10

If a suspicious or unknown waste is encountered, the operator proceeds with the waste
screening as follows:

• The driver of the vehicle containing the suspect material is directed to the waste
screening area
• The waste screening form is completed
• Protective gear is worn (leather gloves, steel-toed boots, goggles, coveralls, and hard
hat)
• The suspect material is spread out with the loader or hand tools and visually examined
• Suspicious marking or materials, like the ones listed below, are investigated further:
o Containers labeled hazardous
o Material with unusual amounts of moisture
o Biomedical (red bag) waste
o Unidentified powders, smoke, or vapors
o Liquids, sludges, pastes, or slurries
o Asbestos or asbestos contaminated materials
o Batteries
o Other wastes not accepted by the landfill

The landfill management is called if unstable wastes that cannot be handled safely or
radioactive wastes are discovered or suspected. Specific attention is paid to minimize the
disposal of liquids by screening for liquid containers larger than household size, sludge
containing free liquids, or any waste containing free liquids. The forms utilized by landfill
personnel to record waste screening activities are included in Appendix F – Landfill Forms.
3.3.3 Removal of Hazardous or Prohibited Waste
Should hazardous or prohibited wastes be discovered during random waste screening or during
tipping, the waste is removed from the landfill as follows:

The transfer station where the waste originated will be notified of the prohibited waste and be
asked to perform additional waste screening to minimize the likelihood of a repeat event. The
landfill management will arrange to have the waste transported to the proper disposal site and
then work with the transfer station to determine the responsibility for associated disposal
costs. The landfill management will also contact the State of Utah DWMRC about the incident.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 11

A record of the removal of all hazardous or prohibited wastes is kept in the site operational
records.
3.3.4 Hazardous or Prohibited Waste Discovered After the Fact
If Hazardous or prohibited wastes are discovered in the landfill, the following procedure is used
to remove them:

• Access to the area is restricted
• The landfill management is immediately notified
• The operator will remove the waste from the working face if it is safe to do so
• The waste is isolated in a secure area of the landfill and the area cordoned off
• The Utah County Fire Department is notified
• The Utah County Health Department is also notified

The DWMRC, the transfer station, and the generator (if known) are notified within 24-hours of
the discovery. The generator (if known) is responsible for the proper cleanup, transportation,
and disposal of the waste.
3.3.5 Notification Procedures
The following agencies and people are contacted if any hazardous materials are discovered at
the landfill:

Mark Lamoreaux, Landfill Manager ................................................ [phone]
Utah County Health Department .................................................... [phone]
Director, DWMRC ............................................................................ [phone]
Utah County Fire Department ........................................................ [phone]
3.4 FACILITY MONITORING AND INSPECTION
3.4.1 Groundwater
Bayview has a DWMRC approved groundwater monitoring plan and will continue to follow
the plan. This plan includes sampling and analysis plans for the monitoring of groundwater at
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 12

the landfill. Appendix G includes a copy of the Groundwater Monitoring Plan which details the
groundwater sampling and analysis procedures.
3.4.2 Surface Water
Surface water management structure have been previously designed, installed and are
currently operating as designed. Calculations of the anticipated run-on and run-off volumes
are shown in Appendix H. Run-off from the final cover will be managed by a combination of
berms and ditches. The berms will be placed to divert the water around the active area to
culverts and a settling pond. Landfill staff will inspect the drainage system monthly.
Temporary repairs will be made to any observed deficiencies until permanent repairs can be
scheduled. Bayview staff or a licensed general contractor will repair drainage facilities as
required.

As the landfill operations are reconfigured and Cell 3 is constructed, in approximately 10
years, the surface water management system will be redesigned with updated run-on and
run-off calculations being performed to support the future construction.

Bayview has an approved Multi-Sector General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Industrial Activity, Coverage No. UTR000000. A copy of the most recent
Notice of Intent (NOI) and Multi-Sector General Permit is included in Appendix I. A site
specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan was prepared for Bayview and is included in
Appendix I.
3.4.3 Leachate Collection
Bayview has a leachate collection and management system that has been designed, largely
constructed and is currently in service. The leachate generation calculations are presented in
Appendix J – Leachate Generation Calculations. Appendix K – Engineering Drawings presents
the details of the previously designed and constructed leachate system. Appendix K also
presents additional details of the liner system and general engineering features previously
designed and constructed at the Bayview. Updated engineering drawings will be prepared
as the landfill operations moves into the Cell 3 area in approximately 10 years.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 13

3.4.4 Landfill Gas
Bayview staff began a landfill gas monitoring program by conducting an initial surface
survey for combustible gases, and by purchasing a combustible gas indicator (CGI).
During the initial survey, no measurable combustible gases were detected on the site,
and landfill gas monitoring stations were established for future monitoring events.

Bayview staff will continue to conduct combustible gas monitoring at the established
stations on a quarterly basis. Landfill staff will coordinate the gas monitoring events with
groundwater monitoring events and will arrange for interpretation of the monitoring
results if combustible gases are detected at any station.

If methane releases are detected in excess of 25 percent of the LEL, in the landfill building or
more than 100 percent of LEL at the property boundary, the procedure outlined in the
"Explosive Gases" section is followed.

Bayview has a Title V Operating Permit issued from the Division of Air Quality. A copy of the
most current Annual Title V Compliance Reports is included in Appendix L – Annual Title V
Compliance Reports.
3.4.5 General Inspections and Quarterly Inspection
Routine inspections are necessary to prevent system malfunctions, facility deterioration,
operator errors, and discharges that may cause or lead to release of wastes to the
environment or a threat to human health. Operators are responsible for conducting and
recording routine inspections of the landfill facilities according to the following schedule:

Operators perform pre-operational inspections of all equipment daily. A post-operational
inspection is performed at the end of each shift while equipment is cooling down.

All equipment is on a regular maintenance schedule. A logbook is maintained on each piece
of equipment and any repairs and comments concerning the inspection are contained in the
log. Oil samples are pulled when each machine is serviced, and results are recorded in the
machine log.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 14

Facility inspections are completed on a quarterly basis. Any needed corrective action items
are recorded, and the Operators complete needed repairs. If a problem is of an urgent
nature, the problem is corrected immediately.

Scale maintenance is performed annually at a minimum. If specific problems arise before
scheduled maintenance, scale maintenance is done as required. The scale is certified on an
annual basis.

The quarterly inspection is performed by a team of qualified landfill employees and is
intended to assess the condition of the landfill. This include dust control activities, cover
condition, waste control, perimeter fence, run-off/ run-on system, roads, buildings,
groundwater monitoring wells, compost area, tipping face, and general site conditions. The
forms utilized by landfill personnel to record general and quarterly inspection activities are
included in Appendix F.
3.5 CONTIGENCY AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS
The following sections outline procedures to be followed in case of fire, explosion,
groundwater contamination, release of explosive gases, or failure of the storm water
management system.

The Utah County Fire Department is contacted in all cases where hazardous materials or
materials contaminated with PCB's are suspected to be involved.
3.5.1 Fire
The potential for fire is a concern in all landfills. The likelihood of a fire is lower at the
Bayview since nearly all of the waste is transferred through transfer stations. Bayview staff
follows a waste handling procedure to minimize the potential for a landfill fire. If any load
comes to the landfill on fire, the driver of the vehicle is directed to an area away from the
working face. The burning waste is unloaded, spread out, and immediately covered with
sufficient amounts of soil to smother the fire. Once the burning waste cools and is deemed
safe, the material is then incorporated into the working face. Some loads coming to the
landfill may be on fire but not detected until after being unloaded at the working face. If a
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 15

load of waste that is on fire is unloaded at the working face, the load of waste is immediately
removed from the working face, spread out, and covered with soil.

The Utah County Fire Department is called if it appears that landfill personnel and
equipment cannot contain any fire at the landfill. The Utah County Fire Department is also
called if a fire is burning below the landfill surface or is difficult to reach or isolate.

In case of fire, the Manager, and DWMRC Director are notified immediately. A written report
detailing the event is placed in the operating record within seven days, including any corrective
action taken.
3.5.2 Loaded Vehicle Fires
In the event that a transport vehicle enters the landfill site carrying a burning or smoldering
load of waste, landfill operations personnel will take the following actions:

• Direct the vehicle to a designated section of the landfill away from the working face.
• Direct the driver to deposit his load and to clear the area as quickly as possible.
• Access to the area is restricted
• The landfill management is immediately notified
• Immediately cover the burning waste with sufficient soil to completely smother the
fire. Allow the waste to cool for several days, or longer if necessary.
• If necessary, spray equipment and the transfer vehicle with water to cool the
equipment while working the fire. This will not be necessary if the equipment is
pushing or dumping soil on the burning wastes in front of the advancing
equipment.
• If landfill operations personnel cannot control the fire, the Utah County Fire
Department will be contacted.
• Notify the DWMRC immediately and provide written documentation within 14
days of the fire.
3.5.3 Working Face/Below Cover Fire
In the event of a working face fire or a fire below cover, landfill operations personnel
will take the following actions:
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 16

• Evacuate all non-essential personnel from the area of the fire. Non-
essential personnel would include transfer truck drivers, attendants,
and visitors.
• Isolate the burning material from other wastes to the extent
possible. Use compactor blades and dozers to move the burning
materials away from other wastes; this may not be possible if the
fire is below cover soil.
• Immediately cover the burning waste with sufficient soil to
completely smother the fire. Allow the waste to cool for several days,
or longer if necessary.
• If landfill operations personnel cannot control the fire, the Utah
County Fire Department will be contacted.
• Notify the DWMRC immediately and provide written documentation within 14 days of
the fire.
3.5.4 Release of Explosive Gases
Methane gas generation and concentration is not anticipated to be a problem at Bayview.
However, due to the production of methane in all landfills, landfill gas levels are monitored
quarterly. If a concentration of methane is detected in excess of 25 percent of LEL in a
landfill building, 100 percent LEL at the property boundary, or over 100 parts per million in
an off-site building, the following procedure is followed:

• Landfill operations cease immediately and the Manager is notified. The landfill is
evacuated if personnel or buildings may be threatened
• If gas is detected in a building, the doors and windows are opened to allow the gas to
escape
• If off-site buildings or structures appear to be threatened, the Utah County Fire
Department is called, the property evacuated, and the property owners notified
• The release is monitored, and a temporary corrective action implemented as soon as
possible. Permanent corrective action is completed as soon as practicable

The DWMRC is notified immediately and a written report submitted within 14 days of detecting
the release. The gas levels detected, and a description of the steps taken to protect human
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 17

health are placed in the operating record within seven days of detection. A remediation plan
for the methane gas release will be placed in the operating record within 60 days of detection
and the DWMRC Director is notified that the plan has been implemented.
3.5.5 Explosion
In the event that an explosion should occur at the landfill or in any structure
associated with the landfill, landfill operations personnel will take the
following actions:
• Immediately evacuate the area surrounding the explosion, including any
adjacent buildings. Shut down and abandon any equipment near the
explosion that is hot and may provide an ignition source for additional
explosions.
• Account for all personnel. Contact the Utah County Fire Department
and the emergency dispatcher (911). Contact the Landfill Manager.
• Restrict the explosion area to any entry until emergency response
personnel clear the area.
• Notify the DWMRC immediately and provide written documentation
within 14 days of the explosion.

If the explosion is the result of methane gas, the gas levels detected, and a description of the
steps taken to protect human health is placed in the operating record within seven days of
detection. A remediation plan for the methane gas release will be placed in the operating
record within 60 days of detection and the DWMRC Director is notified that the plan has
been implemented.
3.5.6 Failure of Run-On/Run-Off Containment
The purpose of the run-on/run-off control systems is to manage the stormwater falling in or
near the landfill. Water is diverted away from the landfill using a series of ditches, berms,
and roads. These structures are inspected on a regular basis and repaired as needed. All
stormwaters falling or flowing near the active landfill cell are prevented from flowing into
the active area by diversion berms and ditches.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 18

If the run-on system fails, temporary measures such as temporary berms, ditches, or other
methods will be used to divert water from the active landfill cell.

If a run-off ditch or berm fails, temporary berms or ditches will be constructed until a
permanent run-off structure can be constructed.

Any temporary berms or other structures will be checked at least every 2 hours during
working hours of the landfill. Permanent improvements or repairs will be made as soon as
practicable.

The Manager is notified immediately if a failure of either of the run-on or run-off systems is
discovered. The event will be fully documented in the operating record, including corrective
action within 14 days.
3.5.7 Groundwater Contamination
If groundwater contamination is ever suspected, studies to confirm contamination will be
conducted and the extent of contamination documented. This program may include the
installation of additional groundwater monitoring wells. The groundwater monitoring
program may be updated, and corrective action taken as deemed necessary, with the
approval of the DWMRC Director.
3.6 CONTINGENCY PLAN FOR ALTERNATIVE WASTE HANDLING
Landfill operations have been adapted for wet weather by constructing an all-weather,
asphalt-paved roadway from the site entrance to the active cell. The site soils, including
those used as daily cover, consist primarily of sands and gravels. In the semi-arid climate of
the Bayview site, experience has shown that precipitation has little effect on the operations
of the landfill, especially given the nature of the cover soils. The Bayview management team
does not believe that alternate waste handling plans are necessary for this site with respect
to wet weather operations.

All reasonable caution and prudence will be exercised to not dispose of wastes during any
unreasonable weather conditions. If unforeseen weather conditions occur, the manager, or
his designee, will be informed and will coordinate any changes in operations. The manager
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 19

will consider the system-wide requirements (including transfer station requirements) in
determining what changes, if any, need to be made in operations at the landfill to
accommodate any disruption in waste handling procedures.

In the event of a landfill tipper malfunction, wastes will be diverted to other area landfills
that utilize tippers in their operation until the malfunctioning tipper can be repaired or
replaced.
3.7 MAINTENANCE PLAN
3.7.1 Groundwater Monitoring Wells and Leachate System
The landfill personnel will conduct quarterly inspection which includes the assessment of the
groundwater monitoring wells and the groundwater/leachate collection system.
3.7.2 Gas Monitoring System
Gas monitoring locations will be maintained on a routine basis. Weeds will be removed from
the vicinity of each monitoring location at least every 3 months, approximately 2 weeks prior to
each scheduled sampling event.
3.8 DISEASE AND VECTOR CONTROL
The vectors encountered at Bayview are flies, birds, mosquitoes, rodents, skunks, and snakes.
The program for controlling these vectors is as follows:
3.8.1 Insects
Eliminating breeding areas is essential in the control of insects. Bayview staff minimizes the
breeding areas by covering the waste daily and maintaining surfaces to reduce ponded water.
3.8.2 Rodents
Reducing potential food sources minimizes rodent populations at the landfill. The potential
food sources are minimized by properly applying daily cover.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 20

In the event of a significant increase in the number of rodents at the landfill, a professional
exterminator will be contacted. The exterminator would then establish an appropriate
protocol for pest control in accordance with all county, state and federal regulations. Since
the bulk of the waste delivered to Bayview is through a transfer station the problems with
rodents should be minimal.
3.8.3 Birds
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:
• Minimizing the size of the working face. This is the most effective method of
controlling birds since it reduces the area available for feeding. More frequent cover
and higher degrees of compaction of the wastes may also serve to minimize the
opportunities for feeding.
• Minimizing 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 of noise or other frightening techniques. These techniques offer short-term
reductions in the numbers of birds feeding at a landfill.

If the primary methods do not produce satisfactory results, a destructive method of control
may need to be implemented. Destructive methods may cause harm or death to some birds,
and authorization must be obtained from state and local officials prior to implementing a
destructive program.
3.8.4 Fugitive Dust
The roads leading to the landfill are paved with secondary site access provided via a
maintained gravel access roads. Some construction activities and daily traffic produce a
certain amount of dust. Landfill activities compounded by the occasional high wind present a
periodic fugitive dust problem. If the dust problem elevates above the “minimum avoidable
dust level,” the landfill staff applies water to problem areas.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 21

The landfill has a water tank truck and is used to suppress the dust. Water is applied to the
gravel roads leading to all landfill facilities and to the tipping face. The water is applied as
often as needed to control the dust.
3.8.5 Litter Control
The use of the extensive litter fencing at Bayview minimizes the problem with litter control.
Due to the nature of landfilling operations, litter control is still an ongoing challenge. Landfill
personnel perform routine litter cleanup to keep the landfill and surrounding properties
clear of windblown debris.

Whenever possible, the working face is placed down wind so that blowing litter is worked
into the landfill face. During windy conditions, landfill personnel minimize the spreading of
the waste to reduce the amount of windblown debris.
3.9 RECYCLING
The primary location for recycling will be the transfer stations. These locations are best
suited for separating recyclable materials since separation of recyclables is difficult or
impossible after the wastes have been loaded into over-the-road trucks. The landfill
personnel may segregate tires, large and bulky wooden wastes, and similar materials upon
receipt at the landfill; however, this recycling activity is considered secondary to recycling at
the transfer stations.
3.10 TRAINING PROGRAM
As part of the initial training of new employees, Bayview Landfill Operations Plan is required
reading.

All personnel associated with the operation of the landfill receive training annually. Training
typically includes Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA) courses with
certificates of completion are kept in personnel files. Regular safety and equipment
maintenance training sessions are held to ensure that employees are aware of the latest
technologies and that good safety practices are used at all times. Training will be
documented on the Personnel Training Documentation form.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 22

3.11 RECORDKEEPING
A daily operating record is maintained as part of a permanent record on the following items:

• Number of loads entering the landfill and types of wastes received
• Deviations from the approved Plan of Operation
• Number of waste inspections conducted
• Amount and type of cover material used
• Dust control
• Personnel training and notification procedures
• Landfill gas-monitoring results
3.12 SUBMITTAL OF ANNUAL REPORT
The Bayview Manager will submit a copy of its solid waste facility annual report to the
DWMRC Director by March 1 of each year for the most recent calendar or fiscal year of
facility operation. The annual report will include facility activities during the previous year
and will include, at a minimum, the following:

• Name and address of facility
• Calendar or fiscal year covered by the annual report
• Facility type and status
• Annual quantity, in tons or volume, in cubic yards of solid waste handled for each
disposal facility, including applicable recycling facilities
• Annual update of required financial assurances mechanism pursuant to Utah
Administrative Code R315-309
• Ground water monitoring results
• Explosive gas monitoring results
• And an annual training report

A copy of the latest Annual Report is presented in Appendix C.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 23

3.13 INSPECTIONS
The Manager, or his/her designee, inspects the facility to minimize malfunctions and
deterioration, operator errors, and discharges that may cause or lead to the release of wastes
to the environment or to a threat to human health. These inspections are conducted on a
quarterly basis, at a minimum. An inspection log is kept as part of the operating record. This
log includes at least 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 actions. Inspection records are available to the DWMRC Director or an
authorized representative upon request.
3.14 RECORDING WITH COUNTY RECORDER
Plats and other data, as required by the County Recorder, will be recorded with the Utah
County Recorder as part of the record of title no later than 60 days after certification of closure.
3.15 STATE AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS
Bayview maintains and will continue to maintain compliance with all applicable state and local
requirements including zoning, fire protection, water pollution prevention, air pollution
prevention, and nuisance control.
3.16 SAFETY
Landfill personnel are required to participate in an ongoing safety program. This program
complies with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) regulations as applicable. This program
is designed to make the site and equipment as secure as possible and to educate landfill
personnel about safe work practices.

NUERA trains all of the landfill employees in First Aid, CPR, accident investigation, drug and
alcohol policy, lockout and tagout, confined space entry, blood born pathogen, hazard
communication, defensive driving, spill prevention control and counter measure, hazardous
waste, and commercial driving license requirements.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part II June 30, 2023
Page 24

3.17 EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
In the event of an accident or any other emergency situation, the Operator will notify the
Manager and proceeds as directed. The emergency telephone numbers are:

Mark Lamoreaux, Landfill Manager ................................................. [phone]
Utah County Health Department ..................................................... [phone]
Director, DWMRC ............................................................................. [phone]
Utah County Fire Department .......................................................... [phone]

APPLICATION TO RENEW A PERMIT TO
OPERATE A CLASS I LANDFILL

Bayview Landfill

PART III - TECHNICAL REPORT
The permit information has been updated from previous permits to reflect the
change in the land lease for the Bayview Landfill. The State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) lease has been modified to include
additional land located to the west of the existing landfill operations. The
additional leased property will result in reconfiguration of the physical landfill
features but not in the operations of the landfill. Portions of the text and associated
appendices that do not require modifications have been left as originally presented
in previous permit applications. Only the table of contents for the previous 2009
permit renewal application by HDR is included as Appendix Y, with the full
document on file at the landfill for reference.
TABLE OF CONTENTS: PART III – TECHNICAL REPORT

SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION & MAPS ..................................................................................... 1
SECTION 2 - GEOHYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 2
2.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 3
2.2.1 Stratigraphy ......................................................................................................... 3
2.2.2 Instability and Seismicity ...................................................................................... 4
2.3 HYDROLOGY ............................................................................................................... 4
2.3.1 Surface Water ...................................................................................................... 4
2.3.2 Aquifers ................................................................................................................ 5
2.3.3 Water Rights ........................................................................................................ 6
2.3.4 Groundwater Flow ............................................................................................... 6
2.3.5 Groundwater Chemistry ....................................................................................... 7
SECTION 3 – ENGINEERING REPORT ........................................................................................ 8
3.1 LOCATION STANDARDS .............................................................................................. 8
3.1.1 Land Use Compatibility ........................................................................................ 9
3.1.2 Geologic Hazards ............................................................................................... 10
3.1.2.1 Fault Areas .................................................................................................... 10
3.1.2.2 Seismic Impact Zone .................................................................................... 10
3.1.2.3 Unstable Areas ............................................................................................. 11
3.1.3. Surface Water ........................................................................................................ 12
3.1.4 Wetlands ................................................................................................................ 12
3.1.5 Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 12
3.2 ESTIMATED FACILITY LIFE ......................................................................................... 13
3.3 LANDFILL MODIFICATIONS ....................................................................................... 13
3.4 ENGINEERING DESIGN ............................................................................................. 13
3.4.1 Landfill Cells – Recent Projects, and Near-Term Projects .................................. 13
3.5 MONITORING SYSTEM DESIGN ................................................................................ 14
3.5.1 Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................................... 14
3.5.2 Surface Water Controls ...................................................................................... 14
3.5.3 Leachate Management ...................................................................................... 15
3.5.3.1 Modeling ....................................................................................................... 15
3.5.4 Landfill Gas Collection ........................................................................................ 16
SECTION 4 – CLOSURE PLAN ................................................................................................... 17
4.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. 17
4.2 CELL 1 AREA .............................................................................................................. 17
4.3 CELL 1.5 AREA........................................................................................................... 18
4.4 CELL 2 AREA .............................................................................................................. 18
4.5 CLOSURE PROCEDURES ............................................................................................ 19
4.5.1 Submittal of Plans, Specifications, and QA/QC Plan..................................... 19
4.5.2 Formal Notification ....................................................................................... 19
4.5.3 Additional Closure Activities ......................................................................... 19
4.6 CLOSURE COSTS ....................................................................................................... 20
SECTION 5 – POST-CLOSURE PLAN ......................................................................................... 21
5.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. 21
5.2 POST-CLOSURE PLAN ............................................................................................... 21
5.2.1 Changes to Record of Title ................................................................................. 21
5.2.2 Monitoring and Maintenance Plan .................................................................... 21
5.2.3 Closure and Post-Closure Contact ...................................................................... 23
SECTION 6 – POST-CLOSURE LAND USE ................................................................................. 25
SECTION 7 – FINANCIAL ASSURANCE & CLOSURE/POST CLOSURE COSTS ........................... 26
7.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. 26
7.2 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN .................................................................................. 26
7.3 CLOSURE/POST CLOSURE COSTS ............................................................................. 26
SECTION 8 – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS ......................................................... 27
8.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. 27
8.2 NOTIFICATION LETTERS............................................................................................ 27
8.3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTACT INFORMATION..................................................... 28
SECTION 9 – REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 29

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 1

SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION & MAPS
This Part 3 – Technical and Engineering Report presents information on geology,
hydrology, location restrictions, engineering design, closure, post-closure, and financial
assurance for the Bayview Landfill.

Appendix A – Location Map & USGS Quad contains the location map and the latest USGS
quad information. Appendix E – Bayview Landfill 2023 Development Plan presents the
General Arrangement of the Bayview Landfill, locations of facility structures, and the
locations of the landfill cells.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 2

SECTION 2 - GEOHYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
2.1 GENERAL
Several studies are available in the public and nonpublic arenas that describe the geology
and hydrogeology of the region and the site. The hydrogeology of the Goshen Valley has
been described by Dustin (1978) and Cordova (1970). These studies also describe the
general geology of the area including the Bayview Landfill site. Two hydrogeological
investigations were commissioned by Provo City Corporation during the original permitting
of the site in the 1980s (Chen and Associates, 1980; Rollin, Brown, and Gunnell [RBG],
1983). These investigations provided shallow geological data specific to the landfill site.

During litigation regarding permitting of the site, several parties (Hintze and Fuhriman,
1983; Environmental Science and Engineering, 1986; and Danzberger, 1986) re-evaluated
and re-interpreted the data presented in the Dustin, Cordova, Chen, and RBG studies, and
re-interpreted site-specific geologic and hydrogeologic data. These re-evaluations
presented no new data, and do not contribute to the understanding of the site.

During 1986 and 1987, the Utah County Planning Commission evaluated the Bayview
Landfill site seismicity. This evaluation included on-site trenching to determine whether
lineaments present on the site represented the surface expression of geologic faults. The
Planning Commission's geologist concluded that the lineaments were not related to faults
or seismic activities at the site (Robison, 1987).

During the original construction of Bayview in 1989, the contractor drilled and installed 12
monitoring wells. Six of these wells are deep wells (170 to 310 feet below ground surface)
that provide geological data from regions deeper than earlier Provo studies. Three
additional deep monitoring wells have been installed since Bayview began operating.
These wells serve as compliance monitoring wells and also provide hydrogeological data
specific to the site. Groundwater monitoring has been ongoing at the site with evaluations
submitted annually to the DWMRC. The Groundwater Monitoring Plan is included as
Appendix G. Boring logs for monitoring wells are included as Appendix M.

During 1993, the U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) conducted an evaluation of the aquifers
in Utah and Goshen Valleys. A summary of selected data collected during this evaluation
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 3

has been published as Utah Hydrologic Data Report No. 50, and is attached to this permit
application as Appendix N.
2.2 GEOLOGY
2.2.1 Stratigraphy
Bayview is located in Goshen Valley between the East Tintic Mountains and Utah Lake.
The Goshen Valley is bounded on the north by the Lake Mountains, on the west by the
Mosida Hills and the East Tintic Mountains, on the south by Long Ridge, and on the east
by Utah Lake and West Mountain. The site lies on the eastern slope of the East Tintic
Mountains as the slope approaches Utah Lake. The terrain in the vicinity of the landfill
site slopes toward the lake at approximately 2.5%; the terrain is steeper to the west and
shallower to the east of the site.

The Goshen Valley is underlain by a thick sequence of consolidated and unconsolidated
sediments overlying sedimentary Paleozoic limestone and dolomitic basement rock. The
surficial materials at the site consist of heterogeneous deposits of gravel, sand, silt, and
clay laid down in Lake Bonneville. These deposits were derived from erosion of the East
Tintic Mountains, and were dropped into the lake as beach, bar, and spit deposits along
the fluctuating shoreline. The materials are poorly to moderately well sorted and are
derived from a mixture of Paleozoic sedimentary (limestone and quartzite) and Tertiary
volcanic outcrops. In some places, these lake sediments are overlain by beach and dune
sands representing Lake Bonneville shoreline and Quaternary deposits, respectively. The
western portion of the landfill site exhibits dune and beach sand deposits.

Two other Pleistocene deposits underlie the Lake Bonneville Group sediments: the
Terrace gravel, and the Older Alluvium. The Terrace gravel consists of gravel and sand
benches and contains an aquifer referred to as the Upper Pleistocene aquifer. The Older
Alluvium consists of cemented gravel and sand (fanglomerate) and contains an aquifer
referred to as the Lower Pleistocene aquifer. Miocene latites and conglomerates
reportedly underlie the Pleistocene deposits; the conglomerates reportedly consist of
cobbles and boulders in a sandy matrix. It does not appear that the deep monitoring
wells constructed Bayview penetrate into the Lower Pleistocene aquifer.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 4

2.2.2 Instability and Seismicity
No unstable slopes or subsidence areas have been mapped in the vicinity of Bayview.
However, the Utah County Planning Commission has not prepared landslide, unstable
area, or subsidence maps for this portion of the county. To the best recollection of
Commission personnel, the Planning Commission has received no reports of landslides or
subsidence. The site is relatively flat and is not subject to steep cuts that would create
slope stability problems. There does not appear to be any surface observable evidence
that the site is located in a floe type land stability problem area.

Numerous faults traverse the Goshen Valley. Most of these faults are believed to be
inactive; however, more than 25 earthquake epicenters have been plotted within
approximately 5 miles of the landfill site. These epicenters include one with a reported
intensity of VII on the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, and several with reported
intensities of IV or V (U.S.G.S, 1986). The Utah County Planning Commission has not
prepared seismicity maps for this portion of the county. The International Building Code
(IBC) – 2015 classifies the site as a Seismic Design Category D. This classification places
Bayview in a seismic impact zone as defined under the Utah Solid Waste Management
Rules.
2.3 HYDROLOGY
2.3.1 Surface Water
Three surface water channels cross the landfill site. One of the channels is north of the
existing landfill operations along the northern property boundary, one channel is
located at the southern property boundary, and one channel passes down the center of
the landfill site along the main access road. These surface water channels flow
ephemerally from watersheds west of the landfill site. The northern and central
channels originate about 2 miles west of the site in Section 14. Each of these channels
has a drainage basin of less than 1,000 acres. The southern channel originates less than
1 mile west of the site in Section 18 and has a drainage basin of less than 200 acres.

The northern and central channels have cut gullies approximately 5 feet deep and 30
feet wide through the dune sands on the steep, western portion of the landfill site.
These channels decrease in size to less than 3 feet in depth and less than 10 feet in
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 5

width on the eastern portion of the site. The southern channel is only 1 to 2 feet in
depth.

The drainage channels appear to be completely dry during most years. These channels
carry water only during storm events and during spring run-off from the foothills west
of the site. The sandy nature of the area and of the channel bottoms allows water to
infiltrate into subsoils during storm events with a more frequent return period.

As landfill operations are modified to accommodate the construction of Cell 3 and
associated relocation of the landfill shop/office, the center drainage will be eliminated.
The new SITLA property will allow for the diversion of storm water from the center
drainage to the northern and southern drainage channels.
2.3.2 Aquifers
Previous studies (Cordova, 1980; Dustin, 1978) have defined four aquifers underlying
the Goshen Valley; however, not all of these aquifers appear to be present at Bayview
(Brook, 1994; Carpenter, 1994a). As identified in previous reports, the uppermost
aquifer, the water table aquifer, is contained in the Lake Bonneville group, and is
commonly found at depths of less than 25 feet below ground level (bgl). The second
aquifer, the Upper Pleistocene aquifer, is contained in a sand and gravel deposit, the
Terrace gravel, at depths of 150 to 300 feet bgl in the Goshen Valley. The Upper
Pleistocene aquifer reportedly ranges from 75 to 100 feet in thickness. The Upper and
Lower Pleistocene aquifers are separated by a 50 to 100-feet thick cemented sand and
gravel confining layer. This confining layer is thought to partially separate the two
Pleistocene aquifers. The Lower Pleistocene aquifer is reported to vary in thickness from
25 to 175 feet. The third aquifer, the Tertiary aquifer, is reportedly found at 200 to 500
feet bgl; its thickness is unknown but may exceed 1,500 feet in the Goshen Valley.

Eight shallow soil borings, six shallow monitoring wells, and six deep monitoring wells
indicate that the Lake Bonneville group water table aquifer is not present at the site
(Carpenter, 1994a). The six shallow monitoring wells are constructed with a 20-foot
screen and a 1-foot sump below 49 feet of casing. The wells contain dedicated pumps
mounted at 65 feet bgl. Boring logs are attached to this permit application as Appendix
M. All of the shallow wells have contained small amounts of water during most sampling
events; however, none of the wells have contained sufficient water to allow purging or
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 6

sampling. The water in these wells is believed to be condensation within the well, rather
than perched groundwater (Carpenter, 1994a). The nine deep monitoring wells appear
to be screened in the Upper Pleistocene aquifer (Carpenter, 1994a).

The nine deep monitoring wells do not appear to have penetrated through the Upper
Pleistocene aquifer into the Lower Pleistocene aquifer. Boring logs for these wells are
presented in Appendix M. This aquifer is the uppermost usable aquifer in the immediate
vicinity of the landfill site. The landfill culinary well appears to be screened in the Lower
Pleistocene aquifer (Carpenter, 1994a). The well log indicates that the partially confining
layer between Upper and Lower Pleistocene aquifers is not present at the site. This is
consistent with the interpretation of the U.S. Geological Survey for this portion of the
Goshen Valley (Brook, 1994). The Upper and Lower Pleistocene aquifers appear to
represent a single, water table (unconfined) aquifer in the vicinity of the Bayview
Landfill.
2.3.3 Water Rights
The Utah Department of Natural Resources Water Rights Division lists only one active water
right within 2,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill site boundary. This active water right is the
culinary water well for the landfill. This well is located upgradient of the site and is screened
in the Lower Pleistocene aquifer. The nearest well not associated with the Bayview Landfill is
a well 2,400 feet north of the northeast corner of the landfill. Appendix O presents the
results of the Utah DNR Water Rights search.
2.3.4 Groundwater Flow
The previous studies indicate that groundwater flow enters the Goshen Valley from the
south through Current Creek Gap, and from the northwest through the Mosida Hills.
These groundwater flows converge near the Bayview Landfill site. The groundwater
underlying the site is expected to flow northeast toward Utah Lake. Cordova (1970)
estimated transmissivity of the Pleistocene aquifer to be between 50,000 and 300,000 gallons
per day per foot (gpd/ft). Earthfax (1984) estimated the velocity of groundwater flow north of
Elberta to be 24 feet per year (ft/yr).

In April 1994, Carpenter issued a report on the results of the Bayview Landfill
background monitoring program (Carpenter, 1994b). This report provided an
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 7

assessment of the background water quality and flow direction in the immediate vicinity
of the landfill. This report stated that the groundwater flow at the site moves
northeasterly toward Utah Lake, and estimated the velocity of this flow at 1.8 ft/yr. The
discrepancy between the published values and the apparent velocity of groundwater at
the site is unexplained. However, this does not seem to be important since the upper
aquifer is more than 100 feet below the bottom of the
landfill.
2.3.5 Groundwater Chemistry
The uppermost aquifer (the Upper Pleistocene aquifer) underlying Bayview is classified
as a Class II aquifer. Appendix G – Groundwater Monitoring Plan contains the
groundwater monitoring plan for the landfill. Statistical analyses of groundwater
monitoring data have been completed semi-annually since the completion of
background sampling in 1993. Statistical analysis results are submitted with the Landfill
Annual Reports.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 8

SECTION 3 – ENGINEERING REPORT
3.1 LOCATION STANDARDS
In accordance with the Subtitle D criteria, DWMRC has adopted specific location standards.
The location standards are for new landfills or lateral expansions of existing landfills.
Bayview is adding property to the landfill operation that may be utilized for the disposal of
waste. This additional property is a lateral expansion. The Utah location standards for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLFs), as presented in the Solid Waste Permitting and
Management Rules (R315-302), are outlined below.

1 — Land Use Compatibility
Not to be located within 1000 feet of parks and protected areas
Not to be located in an ecologically and scientifically significant area
Not to be located within ¼ mile of existing dwellings, incompatible or
historical structures, unless allowed by local land use planning or zoning
Not to be located within 5,000 feet of airport runways
Not to be located on archeological sites

2 — Geologic Hazards
Proximity to a Holocene Fault
Considerations for constructing in a seismic impact zone
Consideration given to unstable areas

3 — Surface Water
Will not affect public water system
Will not affect existing lakes, reservoirs and ponds
Cannot be located in a floodplain unless certain criteria are met

4 —Wetlands
Not allowed unless:
Alternative location has been denied previously
Will not violate state water quality standard or Clean Water Act
Will not jeopardize threatened or endangered species
Will not cause or contribute to significant degradation of the wetlands
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 9

5 — Groundwater
Groundwater/landfill cell separation
Sole source aquifer
Groundwater quality
Source protection areas

The following sections present the Utah location standards for landfills and discuss Bayview
compliance with those requirements.
3.1.1 Land Use Compatibility
The Bayview is not known to be out of compliance with any element of the land use
compatibility standard.

No national, state, county, city park, monument, or recreation area is within 1,000 feet of
the landfill. Bayview is not located within 1,000 feet of a designated wilderness, wilderness
study area, wild and scenic river area, stream, lake or reservoir, ecologically significant areas,
or endangered species.

The nearest residence is located more than 1 mile north of the site boundary, and the
nearest town, Elberta, is located approximately 5.5 miles south of the site. The nearest
airport is located approximately 17 miles from the site. No archeological sites are known
to exist near the site. The cultural survey for the Bayview expansion is included in
Appendix D – SITLA Lease.

Bayview is surrounded on the north and west by land zoned mining and grazing (MEG I),
and on the south and east by land zoned agricultural (AI). The landfill is consistent with
these planned land uses. In any case, the site was permitted by the Utah County Board
of Adjustment under a Conditional Use Permit, and therefore, is consistent with the
local zoning and land use planning. Appendix B – Utah County Conditional Use Permit
contains the most recent local permitting documents.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 10

3.1.2 Geologic Hazards
The Utah State Regulations indicate “No new facility or lateral expansion of an existing
facility shall be located in a subsidence area, a dam failure flood area, above an underground
mine, above a salt dome, above a salt bed, or on or adjacent to geologic features which
could compromise the structural integrity of the facility.”

Bayview is not known to be located in a subsidence area, a dam failure flood area, above an
underground mine, above a salt dome, or above a salt bed as mentioned in the Utah State
Regulations.
3.1.2.1 Fault Areas
The Bayview property does not include known Holocene faults, and all solid waste
containment will occur more than 200 feet from the property boundary. A trenching study
was conducted to determine whether apparent lineaments represented the surface
expression of faults. This study concluded that the lineaments were not related to faults.
Appendix P – Lineament Study presents the results of the trenching study.
3.1.2.2 Seismic Impact Zone
Historic seismic records indicate that more than 25 earthquake events have occurred with
epicenters within approximately 5 miles of the Bayview site. These earthquake events have
occurred south, southwest, and southeast of the site.

Bayview has been determined to be in a seismic impact zone. Design for Cell 2 has been
analyzed considering seismic activity and has been found to be stable with an adequate
factor of safety. Appendix Q – Seismic Analysis presents the results of the seismic analysis for
the Bayview structures.

Seismic stability analyses have been conducted to demonstrate that the proposed landfill
components can resist the maximum horizontal acceleration expected at the site. These
analyses were conducted in accordance with the State of Utah Administrative Rules and EPA
guidance presented in RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic Design Guidance for Municipal Solid
Waste Facilities, (EPA, 1995).

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 11

The landfill components considered in these analyses included: linear systems, leachate
collection and delivery systems, the leachate collection and run-on/run-off control systems
and the final cover.

The scope of the analyses included a review of regional and local soils, geology and seismic
selection of the design earthquake and the site-specific earthquake acceleration; static and
pseudo-static stability analyses for each landfill component: and evaluation of stability and
potential deformations for each. landfill component.

The results of these analyses are presented in Appendix Q – Seismic Analysis and indicate
the following:

• Bayview is located in a Seismic Impact Zone. Both deterministic and
probabilistic methods indicate a peak bedrock acceleration of 0.5g. The dense
granular soils offer little amplification or attenuation of the bedrock
acceleration through the overlying soil column.
• The cut and fill slopes and run-on/run-off structures have adequate static
factor of safety and indicate minimal permanent deformations (U < 1 cm) in
response to the design seismic event.
• The closure cap system has an adequate static factor of safety and indicates
acceptable permanent deformation (U < 1 cm) in response to the design
seismic event. No reinforcement is required for the final cover.

These demonstration analyses indicate that the proposed Bayview components are designed
to resist the "maximum horizontal acceleration" at the site.
3.1.2.3 Unstable Areas
The owner or operator of a landfill must consider several factors when determining whether
an area is unstable. In guidance document R315-302, these factors are listed as; 1) soil
conditions that may result in significant differential settling, 2) geologic or geomorphic
features and 3) human-made features or events, both surface and subsurface.

Based on the site location, local geology and subsurface conditions, Bayview is not located
within a known unstable area as defined in the regulations.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 12

3.1.3. Surface Water
The Utah Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules state that no municipal solid waste
landfill shall be located within a public water system watershed, a floodplain, or a wetland
without specific approval of the Director. Bayview is not located within a public water
system watershed or 100-year floodplain. Three surface water drainage features cross the
site from west to east. Calculations for run-on and run-off ditches can be found in Appendix
H. Ultimately, the center drainage will be removed with the surface water near the landfill
being diverted into the northern and southern drainages.
3.1.4 Wetlands
The site drainage features do not contain vegetation that is characteristic of wetlands areas
nor has any other wetland areas have been identified on the site.
3.1.5 Groundwater
The Utah Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules state that no municipal solid
waste landfill shall be located within the following restriction zones:

• Within 5 feet of the historical high groundwater elevation.
• Within 100 feet vertically (50 feet for high total dissolved solids [TDS
between 1,000 and 3,000 mg/I] aquifers) of an aquifer that could be
used for drinking water unless constructed with a composite liner
system.
• Over an aquifer designated as a sole source aquifer or a 1B aquifer.
• In a drinking water source protection area.

Bayview is not located within a sole source or 1B aquifer, or in a drinking water source
protection area. Landfill cells will not be constructed within 5 feet of the historical high
groundwater elevation. The shallowest groundwater at the site, the Upper Pleistocene
aquifer is located more than 100 feet below the bottom of the proposed liner system. A
composite liner system consisting of a geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) and an HDPE
geomembrane is proposed for the bottom of all landfill cells.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 13

3.2 ESTIMATED FACILITY LIFE
The current operational area of Bayview is Cell 2 Stage 2. Details of the landfill life analysis
are contained in Appendix E – Bayview Landfill 2023 Development Plan.
3.3 LANDFILL MODIFICATIONS
This permit application includes provisions for changes in the location of site facilities,
landfill configuration, and changes in the final cover geometry. The future modifications
envisioned for the Bayview Landfill are presented in Appendix E – Bayview Landfill 2023
Development Plan.
3.4 ENGINEERING DESIGN
In 1987, HDR prepared a Landfill Master Plan (HDR, 1987) to guide development of the site
over its active life.

The Master Plan was updated in 2002 (HDR) to show a combined Cell 2 and 3, and to
increase excavation depths in this new Cell 2. A 2008 Cell 2 Master Plan modified Cell 2 -
Stage 2 base grades to drain the western two-thirds down at 2% to the north and east, and
the eastern third down at 2% to the southeast and modified the leachate drainage plan to
accommodate the new grades. Excavation depths remain more than I00 feet above the
uppermost aquifer.

3.4.1 Landfill Cells – Recent Projects, and Near-Term Projects
Appendix E – Bayview Landfill 2023 Development Plan details the Recent Projects (Cell 1.5
and Cell 2, Stage 3) as well as Near-Term Projects (Cell 2, Stage 4).

Generally, excavation side slopes of all Cell 2 Stages will be constructed on a 4:1 (H:V) slope.
The excavation bottom slopes are graded so that leachate drains to the northeast corner of
the lined cell.

The liner system for Cell 2 - Stage 3 and future Stages consists of the following components
(from bottom to top):

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 14

• A reinforced geosynthetic clay liner (GCL).
• A 60-mil textured HDPE flexible membrane liner.
• A Drain-Net on the bottom of the landfill cell only.
• A 2-foot thick protective cover layer. This soil layer will protect the Drain-Net
(bottom of cell), HDPE and GCL during placement of the first lift of solid
waste. It is also intended to provide a pathway for leachate movement above
the HDPE toward the leachate collection and removal system.
3.5 MONITORING SYSTEM DESIGN
3.5.1 Groundwater Monitoring
Bayview has a DWMRC approved groundwater monitoring plan and will continue to follow
the plan. This plan includes sampling and analysis plans for the monitoring of groundwater at
the landfill. Appendix G – Groundwater Monitoring Plan details the groundwater sampling and
analysis procedures.
3.5.2 Surface Water Controls
Bayview and its vicinity generally drain from west to southeast. Stormwater originating west
of the site is routed through three existing surface water channels. See General Arrangement
drawing in Appendix R – Original Development Plan.

Stormwater originating on-site is managed as either non-contact or contact stormwater
depending on its source. Non-contact stormwater is water falling on unimproved portions of
the site, or on improved portions of the site having no contact with solid waste (e.g., the
maintenance building vicinity) or on the final cover of Cell 1. Run-on control structures divert
this water from the active landfill cell and stormwater/leachate pond and route this water
into the existing surface water channels. Contact stormwater is water falling onto the active
landfill cell. Run-off control structures divert water falling on the active landfill cell into the
leachate collection system. Ultimately, contact stormwater is stored and evaporated in the
evaporation pond. Neither leachate nor contact stormwater are discharged from the site.

Analyses have been conducted for run-on and run-off control systems around Cell 2. These
analyses were conducted for a 25-year storm event and the associated time of concentration
that produced peak flow. The analyses, (Appendix H – Run-on / Runoff Calculations), indicate
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 15

that a triangular ditch, nominally 1 foot deep, provides adequate flow capacity. This ditch
geometry was constructed concurrent with the initial Cell 2 construction.
3.5.3 Leachate Management
In its current design, runoff and leachate from Cell 1 and Cell 2 report to the dual lined
leachate pond northeast of Cell 2. Leachate from the compost facility (when utilized) are
contained in the Compost Tea Collection Pond. Sizing calculations for the leachate pond are
found in Appendix J – Leachate Generation Calculations.

The leachate pond liner system consists of the following layers (from bottom to top):

• A 16-ounce non-woven geotextile.
• A 60-mil HDPE geomembrane.
• A geonet, sandwiched between two layers of non-woven geotextile.
• A UV-resistant, 60-mil HDPE geomembrane, textured on side slopes.
• A 6-inch layer of sand (bottom and the 10:1 sideslope only) as a cushion layer
beneath the soil cement to protect the 60-mil HDPE geomembrane.
• An 8-inch layer of soil cement (bottom and the 10:1 sideslope only). The
cement will allow the landfill personnel to enter the pond and remove
accumulated sediment using a front-end loader.

The leachate pond also has a leak detection system between the lower 60-mil HDPE
geomembrane and the sandwiched geonet/geotextile layer. The geonet will convey any fluid
that leaks through the primary liner to a gravel-filled sump with an 8" perforated HDPE pipe.
The pipe extends up a 4:1 sideslope as a solid-wall pipe and terminates at a manhole
structure where a portable water level meter and, if needed, a pump can be lowered down
to check for leaks in the primary evaporation pond liner.
3.5.3.1 Modeling
Since the leachate generation calculations were done for the October 2003 Permit
Application, no modifications have been made to the landfill that affect the amount of
leachate generated or the performance of the leachate collection system. Because of this,
the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model, hydraulic head calculations,
and calculations for the flow capacity of the leachate collection pipe used for the 2003
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 16

Permit Application are still valid and are included in Appendix S – Flow Capacity of the
Leachate Collection Pipe.

Analyses have been conducted to evaluate the sizing and capacity of the proposed leachate
evaporation pond for the combination of contact stormwater run-off from the contributing
cell area and leachate generation from all of Cell I and Cell 2. Only stormwater from the
largest stage in Cell 2 (Stage 3) was considered in the stormwater runoff calculations
because the stages will be developed in sequence, with each stage receiving intermediate
cover when it reaches capacity, thereby reducing contact stormwater runoff. The 25-year,
24-hour storm event was used to compute run-off. The results of the analysis, presented in
Appendix H – Run-on / Runoff Calculations, indicate the leachate evaporation pond is sized
adequately to contain the leachate generated from Cell 1 and Cell 2 and the contaminated
stormwater run-off from the equivalent area of Cell 2- Stage 3. The addition of Cell 1.5 will
have little effect on the amount of leachate generated.
3.5.4 Landfill Gas Collection
Bayview has an active gas collection system with the details of the landfill gas collection
being presented in Appendix T – Bayview Landfill LFG Gas Collection System. The landfill gas
collection system will be modified to accommodate the construction of Cell 1.5. A
construction package detailing the landfill gas collection modifications will be submitted to
the DWMRC for review and approval prior to construction of any gas collection system
modifications.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 17

SECTION 4 – CLOSURE PLAN
4.1 GENERAL
Closure of the existing Bayview cells will proceed from the west to east. Closure started with
Cell 1 and will proceeded over the areas of Cell 1.5 and ultimately through the Cell 2 area. The
drawings in Appendix U – Final Cover Cell 1 & Cell 2 show the final cover closure phases for the
existing landfill.
4.2 CELL 1 AREA
The final cover of Cell 1 area was completed in 2008. An alternate final cover consisting
of 34 inches of on-site, olive-brown silty sand was used to close Cell 1. A seed mix
similar to that shown on the table below was used to establish vegetation during 2009.
The side slopes of the landfill were constructed at a 4:I (H:V) slope, with the top slope
being approximately 5%.

Seed Mix for Bayview Landfill
%Mix Type of Grass

0.50% Sand Drop Seed
1.50% Alkali Sacaton
3.50% Blue Grama
17.50% Blue Bunch Wheat Grass
17.50% Indian Rice Grass
3.00% Sandberg Blue Grass
4.00% Sheep Fescue
16.25% Slender Wheat Grass
16.25% Stream Bank Wheat Grass
20.00% Western Wheat Grass
100.00% Total

The final capping system used for Cell 1 varies from the standard design in the Utah
Administrative Code at R315-303-3(4). However, based on modeling performed for the
2003 permit application, the approved cap is equivalent to the standard design in
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 18

preventing infiltration. A copy of this analysis is included in Appendix V – Closure Cap
Equivalency.
4.3 CELL 1.5 AREA
Cell 1.5 area was constructed between the existing closed Cell 1 (Phase A) and the western
side of the Cell 2 landfill operations. Cell 1.5 area was developed utilizing the same liner and
cover components identified in Cell 2.
4.4 CELL 2 AREA
Landfill Cell 2 is the active landfill area at Bayview. Landfill Cell 2 is not expected to reach
capacity until approximately 2032 or 2033 depending on density and amount of waste
delivered annually to the facility.

The same alternate final capping system as used for Cell 1 area will be used for Cell 2 area
(Phase B through Phase F) when final contours are reached. In general, this capping
system consists of the following layers from the bottom up:

• 6 inches of intermediate cover placed over the daily cover
to provide a 12-inch cushion of soil between the solid waste
and the barrier layer;
• 34-inches of evaporative cap constructed from the olive-
brown silty sand available on-site. The top six inches of this
evaporative cap will be capable of supporting vegetative
growth by amending the soil with compost to aid in initial
seed germination.

Landfill personnel will inspect the completed cap weekly until vegetation is established,
and monthly thereafter to ensure that damage to the capping system is detected and
repaired early. The vegetation on the landfill cap will be maintained to blend into the
surrounding semi-arid landscape.

Landfill personnel will also inspect the completed cap to determine that the final contours
are maintained, and that the flow of stormwater is unimpeded.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 19

A seed mix similar to that utilized in the Cell 1 area (Phase A) final cover will be used to
establish vegetation. The side slopes of the final cover above Cell 2 will be constructed at a
4:1 (H:V) slope, with a top slope of approximately 5%. The southern sides of Cell 1, Cell 1.5
and Cell 2 will have interim cover place on them until Cell 3, Cell 5, Cell 7, and Cell 9 are
developed and filled to final cover contours. Appendix E – Bayview Landfill 2023
Development Plan show the locations of the landfill cells.
4.5 CLOSURE PROCEDURES
Closure activities for each phase of the landfill will take place in accordance with the
following procedures:
4.5.1 Submittal of Plans, Specifications, and QA/QC Plan
Four months before the intended closure of each of the phases of landfilling, a design
package consisting of drawings, construction specifications, and a QA/QC plan will be
submitted to the DWMRC. The DWMRC will have approximately 60 days to review and
comment on the adequacy of the drawings, specifications and quality assurance/quality
control measure envisioned for the construction. Comments from DWMRC will be
incorporated into a final “bid” package for the cover construction.
4.5.2 Formal Notification
The Director of the DWMRC will be notified of the intent to implement the closure plan in
whole or part, 60 days prior to the date projected for construction.
4.5.3 Additional Closure Activities
Additional closure activities to close each of the landfill phases are as follows:
• Regrading of all lower side slopes where current slopes are steeper than 4
horizontal to 1 vertical.
• Regrading the top of the landfill slopes to no less than 5%.
• Finalization (including DWMRC comments) of the final cover design package.
Final Cover design package will include, at a minimum, plans, construction
specifications, and QA/QC protocols to guide the construction of the final
cover.
• Bidding and construction of final cover.
• Construction of run-off control structures as needed.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 20

• Preparation of As-Built Drawings.
• Vegetation of the final cover soils.
• Inspection of final cover construction by Owner, Engineer (engineer of record)
and DWMRC personnel.
• Preparation of Certificate of Closure by a Utah registered Professional
Engineer.
• Submittal of required documents to the State DWMRC and to the Utah
County Recorder’s office.
4.6 CLOSURE COSTS
The most recent closure cost estimates are presented in Appendix C – Annual Report.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 21

SECTION 5 – POST-CLOSURE PLAN
5.1 GENERAL
Post-closure care for Cell 1 at Bayview will consist of long-term maintenance of the
closure cap and ongoing sampling of the groundwater monitoring wells and gas
monitoring stations to ensure that the landfill cell has been closed in accordance with
regulations. The post-closure care period will be 30 years unless unexpected
environmental contamination or continued subsidence occurs, or a shorter period if it
can be proven that it no longer presents a threat to human health or the environment.

The most recent analysis of annual post-closure costs is provided in Appendix C – Annual
Report.
5.2 POST-CLOSURE PLAN
The Post-Closure activities will include the following work:
5.2.1 Changes to Record of Title
A Plat Map and Statement of Fact concerning the location of the landfill shall be recorded
with the Utah County recorder not later than 60 days after certification of final closure. The
recorded document will restrict future land use.
5.2.2 Monitoring and Maintenance Plan
Semi-annual groundwater and quarterly landfill gas monitoring will occur throughout the
post-closure period. This frequency will be increased if data indicate that contamination
may have occurred. The post-closure monitoring frequency will revert to the original
schedule if the more frequent monitoring demonstrates that contamination, if present, is
not attributable to the landfill.

Collection and treatment of leachate generated in Cell 1, Cell 1.5, and all Stages of Cell 2
will be provided by the dual-lined evaporation pond constructed directly north and
upstream of the existing evaporation pond. The original evaporation pond will provide
stormwater and process water runoff containment for the adjacent biosolids compost
facility (when or if composting operations are performed). These leachate collection and
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 22

treatment systems will be inspected as part of the ongoing activities for other landfill cells
during the post-closure period for Cell 1, Cell 1.5, and all Stages of Cell 2. Since Bayview has
no planned surface water discharge, no surface water monitoring will be required during
the post-closure period.

The table below provides a schedule for conducting inspections and maintenance and for
recording these routine activities. Landfill personnel will be responsible for conducting the
inspections, scheduling maintenance, and recording these activities on the forms provided
in Appendix F.

Frequency of Inspection / Maintenance of Facilities During Post-Closure Care

Landfill Facility Inspection or Maintenance Frequency
Landfill Cell Closure cap integrity.
Cell perimeter fence integrity.
Quarterly
Stormwater I Leachate Pond Perimeter fence integrity.
Water depth.
Liner system integrity.
Quarterly
Other Appurtenances Entrance gate integrity.
Perimeter fence integrity.
Monitoring station integrity.
Berm integrity.
Run-on and Run-off Control
Systems.
Quarterly

The above activities will be carried out as part of the ongoing operations during the active
life of the site. They will be expanded to include the entire site at final landfill closure and
will continue throughout the post-closure monitoring period.

A written summary of the activities performed during each inspection will be maintained.
NEURA will retain the right of entry to the closed landfill, maintain all right-of-way’s, and
conduct maintenance and/or remediation activities as needed. The landfill will be
inspected on a quarterly basis for the following conditions:
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 23

• Integrity of the final cover (including erosion, subsidence, seeps and
settlement);
• Loss of vegetative cover or growth of undesirable plant species;
• Visible debris, litter, and waste;
• Condition of access roads, gates, and fences;
• Integrity of on-site structures;
• Integrity of groundwater monitoring system;
• Integrity of methane monitoring system;
• Integrity of drainage features;
• Integrity of the leachate collection system;

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 recovered with suitable soil to establish erosion control and infiltration layers,
as well as positive drainage to maintain the integrity of the final cover. All bare areas in
the final cover will be re-vegetated as necessary.

The need for final cover system repairs due to differential settlement or subsidence will
be determined based on an evaluation of 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 buildup will
be removed from areas where flow is restricted. Temporary stormwater control
structures will be constructed and maintained as needed.

The leachate collection system will be maintained and operated as needed to minimize
leachate head on the liner. NUERA may seek the approval of the DWMRC to cease
leachate extraction and treatment if it can demonstrate that leachate generation has
diminished and no longer poses a threat to human health and environment.
5.2.3 Closure and Post-Closure Contact
The Landfill Manager at Bayview will be the contact person for the Closure period of the landfill.
A caretaker position will be created and serve as the point of contact during the Post-Closure
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 24

care period. The Landfill Manager can be reached at [phone]. The caretaker contact
information will be provided to the DWMRC once that position has been filled.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 25

SECTION 6 – POST-CLOSURE LAND USE
NUERA will design a post-closure land use plan to be implemented at the landfill within 5
years prior to the end of the landfill’s life. NUERA will select an end use for the landfill
consistent with good landfilling practices. The final land use selected for the landfill will be
based upon maintaining a functional landfill cover. Typical end uses range from recycling
operations (which complement existing operations) to recreational activities. Since the
closure of the site will be dozens of years away and with the potential development options
that could occur in this area, it is not currently possible to establish a land use plan that will
be consistent with surrounding land uses and the needs of NUERA.

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 26
SECTION 7 – FINANCIAL ASSURANCE & CLOSURE/POST CLOSURE COSTS
7.1 GENERAL
The most up-to-date financial assurance documents are provided in the latest Annual Report
Submitted to the State of Utah, DWMRC . The Annual Report is included in Appendix C.
7.2 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN
The Financial Assurance Plan for the Bayview Landfill is presented in Appendix W –
Financial Assurance Plan. Financial mechanisms are presented in Appendix C - Annual Report.
7.3 CLOSURE/POST CLOSURE COSTS
The latest Closure / Post Closure Costs are presented in Appendix C – Annual Report.
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 27

SECTION 8 – PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS
8.1 GENERAL
Since this permit application does represent a lateral expansion of the Bayview Landfill,
certain public participation requirements are required. R315-310-3(2) requires that each
property owner within 1,000 feet of the solid waste facility be notified about the permit
application. Additionally, the Director shall be provided with the name and mailing address
of the local government with jurisdiction over the site.
8.2 NOTIFICATION LETTERS
The following entities have property within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill:

A map showing the locations of the parcels with respect to the landfill, property information,
and copies of the notification letters sent to property owners within 1,000 of Bayview Landfill
are included as Appendix X.

Adjacent Property Owners

Utah County
tax id # Mailing Address
Utah State Dept. of Natural
Resources 61-014-0001 SITLA, 675 E 500 S, STE 500, SLC, UT 84102-2813
Steadman Brothers Investments
LLC
61-007-0001
61-006-0003

PO Box 754, Draper, UT 84020-0754
NVR 61-008-0006 50 S Main, Pleasant Grove, UT 84062-2630
Corp of Pres. Bishop Church of
Jesus Christ of LDS
61-009-0001
61-012-0002
61-012-0007
61-016-0004
61-016-0005
61-017-0001
61-012-0003
PO Box 511196, SLC, UT 84151-1196
Utah Dept. of Transportation 61-066-0008
4501 S 2700 W, SLC, UT 84119-5977
Jacob Family Ranch, LLC 61-016-0001
61-015-0002 914 E 300 N, Orem, UT 84097-5098
2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 28

8.3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTACT INFORMATION
The local government with jurisdiction over Bayview is Utah County. Bayview is operating
under an existing Utah County Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The mailing address for Utah
County is as follows:

Utah County
Utah County Historic Courthouse
51 South University Avenue
Provo, Utah 84601

2023 NUERA Bayview Landfill Permit Renewal Part III June 30, 2023
Page 29

SECTION 9 – REFERENCES
HDR Engineering, Inc, 2009, SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill Permit Application.

Attachment Y – Application for a Permit to Operate a Class I Landfill (HDR 2009) presents the
last permit renewal application.
APPENDIX A – LOCATION MAP & USGS QUAD

CHECKED BY:
COPYRIGHT:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CAD DWG FILE:
PROJECT NO.:
REFERENCE:
Background Imagery: 2018 Aerial Photograph
NAIP, Utah Geospatial Research Center (UGRC - gis.utah.gov)
MAP
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
[phone] (T)
10804 South State Route 68
Bayview Landfill
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
SITE LOCATION
ISSUE:
-
SHEET TITLE
Elberta, Utah
[phone] (F)
60004000200010000
DATE DESCRIPTIONMARK
10/21/19 DRAFT
SCALE IN FEET
BAYVIEW LANDFILL PERMIT
NOTES:
SITE LOCATION
UTAH
LAKE
05/22/23 DRAFT
CHECKED BY:
COPYRIGHT:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CAD DWG FILE:
PROJECT NO.:
REFERENCE:
ADAPTED FROM MAP
PROVIDED BY CLIENT.
MAP
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
[phone] (T)
10804 South State Route 68
Bayview Landfill
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
USGS
ISSUE:
-
SHEET TITLE
Elberta, Utah
[phone] (F)
60004000200010000
DATE DESCRIPTIONMARK
10/21/19 DRAFT
SCALE IN FEET
BAYVIEW LANDFILL PERMIT
NOTES:
UTAH
LAKE
05/22/23 DRAFT
APPENDIX B – UTAH COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT

APPENDIX C – 2022 ANNUAL REPORT

APPENDIX D – LEASE AGREEMENTS / CULTURAL SURVEY

COVER PAGEMustAccompany All Project ReportsSubmittedtotheUtahSHPO
UDSH Project Number: U-22-EO-0143A Cultural Resources Inventory for the Bay View Landfill Expansion Project, Utah County, UtahReport Date: 03/22/2022 Org. Project Number: EPG/SLC-2022-01
Report Author(s):Heather M. Weymouth County(ies):UtahPrincipal Investigator Heather M. Weymouth
Record Search Date(s): March 3, 2022 Field Supervisor(s):Heather M. Weymouth
Intensive Acres Surveyed (<15m intervals): 15 acres Recon/Intuitive Acres Surveyed (<15m intervals): 0
USGS 7.5’ Series Map Reference(s): Goshen Valley North, Utah (2020)
Sites Reported Count Smithsonian TrinomialsRevisits(no updated site forms)0Updates(updated site forms provided)0Newrecordings(site forms provided)0TotalCountofArchaeologicalSitesinAPE0HistoricStructures(structures forms provided)0TotalNationalRegisterEligibleSites0*Please list all site numbers per category. Number strings are acceptable (e.g. “42TO1 -13; 42TO15”). Cells should expand toaccommodate extensive lists.
Checklist of Required Items for Submittal to SHPO
☒“Born Digital” Report in a PDF/A format
☒SHPO Cover Sheet
☒File Name is the UDSH Project Number with no hyphens or landowner suffixes
☐“Born Digital” Site forms in PDF/A format
☐UASF with embedded maps and photos
☐File name is Smithsonian Trinomial without leading zeros (e.g. 42TO13 not 42TO00013)
☐Photo requirements (including size and quality)
☐Archaeological Site Tabular Data
☐Single spreadsheet for each project
☐Follows UTSHPO template (info here:https://goo.gl/7SLMqj)
☒GIS data
☒Zipped polygon shapefile or geodatabase of survey (if different from APE) or other activityarea with required field names and variable intensity denoted
☐Zipped polygon shapefile or geodatabase of site boundaries with a the required field name
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
1
State Project Number :U-22-EO-0143
Report Title:A Cultural Resources Inventory for the Bay View Landfill Project,Utah County, Utah (EPG/SLC-2022-01)
Report Date:03/22/2022 Report Author(s):Heather Weymouth
Principal Investigator:Heather M. WeymouthEnvironmental Planning Group,A Terracon Company6949 High Tech Drive #100Midvale,Utah 84047
Person-Days for Survey:1 person,1 day
Project Background:In February 2021, Forsgren Associates requested EPG, a Terracon Company complete a Class III cultural resourcesinventory of two Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA)parcels proposed as leased lands fortheBayView Landfill Expansion Project (Project).The land is proposed for lease by the Northern Utah EnvironmentalResource Agecncy (NUERA) from SITLA for the purpose of expanding the current landfill on the adjacen t parcel.Theproposed SITLA-lease parcels are located on the west side of the existing landfill north of Elberta in Utah County, Utah.This inventory was conducted in anticipation of the lease of these parcels as required under state statute.This reportdocuments the results of that inventory. The purpose of this inventory was to identify, record, and determine the extentand significance of all identified cultural resource sites within the project area.
Area of Potential Effects Definition:The Area of Potential Effects (APE) consists of two rectangular parcels totaling 140 acres (56.66 hectares)(Figures 1 and2). The northern parcel, consisting of approximately 55 acres (22.26 hectares), encompasses portions of the NE¼ of NE¼and the N½ of SE¼ of NE¼ of S18, T9S, R1W. The southern parcel, consisting of approximately 85 acres (34.4 hectares),encompasses portions of the E½of SE¼ of S18, T9S, R1W.A total of 125 acres (50.6 hectares)of the Project area havebeen previously surveyed (Miller, Tipps, and Birnie 2003) including the entirety of the southern parcel and all but 15acres(6.07 hectares)of the northern parcel.The survey APE for the present inventory was identified in consultation withSITLAandconsists of the 15 acres (6.07 hectares)within the northern parcel not previously surveyed.
The project area is located directly west of the existing landfill on State Route 68 (Figures 1 and 2)approximately 5.5miles(8.85 kilometers)north of the Elberta,in Utah County, Utah. Topographic map coverage of the project area isprovided by the Goshen Valley North,Utah (2020) 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)quadrangle.
Identification Strategies (archaeological, historical,and ethnographic):An intensive-level (Class III) cultural resources inventory was completed for 15 acres (6.07 hectares) of unsurveyed SITLAlandsinUtahCounty,Utah. The project area was identified using a differentially correctable Trimble GeoXT globalpositioning system (GPS) unit in conjunction with aerial photographs, and project maps as points of reference.
The Class III pedestrian survey was completed by one archaeologist walking parallel transects across the Project area.Ground surface visibility was at or near 85 percent over the entire survey parcel at the time of the inventory.The Projectarea is largely grass covered with Russian thistle and cheatgrass prevalent in disturbed areas along f encelines androadways.There is a large, denuded, Seagull nesting area in the east-central portion of the survey parcel. At the time ofsurvey there were hundreds of Seaguls present, however, nesting was not yet underway.A single small patch ofsagebrush and two isolated juniper trees were present within parcel surveyed. The remainder of the Project area
Acreage:APE:15 acres (6.07hectares)Intensive:15 acres (6.07 hectares)Recon/Intuitive:0
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
2
appears to have burned and since been reseeded with grasses.Cultural disturbance in the area consists of agriculturalfields,the adjacent landfill,and a nearby utility corridor occupied by the Mona to Oquirrh Transmission Line and theKern River Pipeline.The surrounding area consists of planted fields and rolling undeveloped terrain covered in lowgrasses,sagebrush, and juniper trees.
Location(s) and Date(s) of Pre-Field Records Search:1. Utah Division of State History:A file search for previously recorded cultural resources sites and previouslyconducted surveys within 1.0 miles of the current project area was conducted on March 3,2022, by EPGarchaeologistHeather M. Weymouth (Sego ArcGIS Server).2. Federal/State Office:Heather M. Weymouth contacted SITLA archaeologist Kristine Curry with regard to theProject on March 17, 2022 to determine if SITLA records would require additional review beyond what wasavailable in the Sego ArcGIS Server. No additional review of SITLA records was required.3. Historic Records/Maps:As part of the records search, a search of the General Land Office (GLO) survey platsavailable at the Bureau of Land Management’s Internet public access site (www.ut.blm.gov/LandRecords/search_plats.cfm) was conducted on March 3, 2022,to identify potential historic resources (e.g.,features, transportation routes, and telecommunications lines) that could be encountered during the fieldinventory. All available historical GLO maps for the project area were reviewed prior to conducting the fieldinventory (GLO 1856 [T9S R1W).Historic Goshen Valley North, Utah (1950 [1952 ed., 1970 ed.,1978 ed., 1994ed.]) USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle maps for the area were also reviewed prior to conducting the field inventory.4. Other:In addition to those sources mentioned above, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the UtahState Register of Historic Places, the Utah Linear Sites Database, and the historic sites database at the StateHistoricPreservation Office (SHPO)were examined to determine if additional historic resources, historicstructures, or historic sites not in the SHPO archaeological records have been documented in the vicinity of theprojectarea.
Results of Pre-Field Records Search (sites & projects within agency-defined APE buffer and/or site leads from research):The records search conducted prior to field inventory identified six cultural resources projects (Table 1) and six culturalresources sites (Table 2) within 1.0 miles of the current project area.No previously recorded sites are located in theprojectarea.A total of 125 acres (50.6 hectares)of the Project area have been previously surveyed (Miller, Tipps, andBirnie 2003) including the entirety of the southern parcel and all but 15 acres (6.07 hectares) of the northern parcel.Nosites were located during the 2003 inventory, however three isolated chert flakes were noted in the southern parcel ofthe Project.Historic USGS map research indicates the presence of a historic transmission line ca. 1952-1978 crossing thesoutheast portion of the northern project parcel, however, this transmission line is no longer present on the 1994 USGSmapand no evidence of the corridor or the transmission line was noted during review of Google Earth imagery for thearea.
Date(s) of Survey:A Class III cultural resources inventory was conducted by Heather M. Weymouth on March 18, 2022.
Description of Findings:No cultural resources sites or isolates were identified in the project APE during the presentinvestigation.Efforts to relocate evidence of the historic transmission line identified during historic map research wereunsuccessful. No evidence of the transmission line corridor or associated features was identified during the fieldinventory.
Conclusion & Management Recommendations:No cultural resources sites were identified within the portion of theproject cleared during field inventories conducted in 2003 ,and no cultural resources were identified during the presentinventory.Therefore, there will be no historic properties affected by the project.This investigation was conducted usingtechniques considered to be adequate for evaluating cultural resources that are visible for inspection and could beadverselyaffected by the project. If such resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities,ground
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
3
disturbance should be halted and a report should be made immediately to the SITLA Archaeologist in Salt Lake City,Utah.
Required Materials:
☒7.5’ Quadrangle Base map(s) for Project Area
☐7.5’ Quadrangle Base map (s) for Surveyed Area (if different than #1)
TABLE 1PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES PROJECTS WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE PROJECTStateProject No.Report Title Author OrganizationU-89-BC-0481 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Proposed WYCALPipeline through the State of Utah:Proposed WyCalpipeline, Beaver County, Iron County, Juab County,Millard County, Salt Lake County, Sevier County,Washington County, Utah. Brigham Young UniversityMuseum of Peoples and Culturea Technical Series No.90-10.
D. Gredvig, G. Wilson,J. Wilde, R. Talbot, L.Richens, and S Billat(1990).
Brigham Young UniversityOffice of Public Archaeology,Provo, Utah.
U-90-DH-184 Kern River Pipeline Cultural Resources Data RecoveryReport: Utah Geoffrey W. Spaulding(1994)Dames and Moore, Inc., LasVegas, Nevada.U-02-PD-0656 Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of SITLA's DryHollow Flat, Magpie Canyon, Marlow Canyon, OldCanyon, Promontory North, Promontory,PromontorySouth, South Mosida, and West Hills Parcels,BoxElder, Rich, and Utah Counties, Utah. PIII CulturalResources Report 5175 -01-20210
G, Miller, B. Tipps, andR Birnie (2003)PIII Associates, Inc. Salt LakeCity, Utah.
U02A10565;U03A10415;U02ST0566;U03ST1127-
Kern River 2003 Expansion Project: Utah. Volumes I -VII.A. Reed, M. Seddon,H. Stettler (2005)Alpine ArchaeologicalConsultants, Inc. Montrose,Colorado and SWCA, Inc.,Environmental Consultants,Salt Lake City, Utah.U-08-EO-1075 Addendum: A Cultural Resource Inventory of theMona to Oquirrh Geotechnical Investigations SaltLake,Tooele,Utah,and Juab Counties,Utah. EPGCultural Resources Report No. SLC-2009-06.
H. Weymouth and N.George (2009)Environmental PlanningGroup, Salt Lake City, Utah.
U-08-EO-1231 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Mona to OquirrhTransmission Corridor Salt Lake, Tooele, Utah, andJuab Counties, Utah. EPG Cultural Resources ReportNo. SLC-2009-05.
E. Huffman and H.Weymouth (2010)Environmental PlanningGroup, Salt Lake City, Utah.
TABLE 2PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES WITHIN 0.5 MILES OF THE PROJECTSmithsonianNumberSite Type NRHP Recommendation Associated ProjectNumber(s)
42UT404 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIIIsite update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-76-BC-0162U-90-DH-184U-02-PD-065642UT689Lithic Scatter SHPO Determined Eligible U-89-BC-048142UT690Lithic Scatter SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-89-BC-0481
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
4
TABLE 2PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES WITHIN 0.5 MILES OF THE PROJECTSmithsonianNumberSite Type NRHP Recommendation Associated ProjectNumber(s)
42UT720 Lithic Scatter -Destroyed per 2003SWCA site update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-89-BC-0481U-01-A1-250
42UT730 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIII site update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-90-DH-184U-02-PD-0656
42UT793 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIIIsite update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible 91-BC-0031U-02-PD-0656
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
5
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
6
DSHW-2023-209703 195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144880 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880
Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. 711
www.deq.utah.gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah
SPENCER J. COX
Governor
DEIDRE HENDERSON
Lieutenant Governor
Department of
Environmental Quality
Kimberly D. Shelley
Executive Director
DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
AND RADIATION CONTROL
Douglas J. Hansen
Director
November 16, 2023
Jennifer Ortiz, Director
Utah Division of State History
300 South Rio Grande Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
RE: Historic Preservation Survey, Bayview Landfill, Utah County
SW118
Dear Ms. Ortiz:
Under the requirements of Utah Code 9-8a-404, the Division of Waste Management and Radiation
Control (Division) is submitting the attached historic preservation survey (Survey) for your evaluation.
The Survey was conducted on Bayview Landfill (Landfill) property, which is approximately six miles
north of Elberta, Utah on the west side of Utah Lake. The surveyed land will be developed for future
disposal cells within the Landfill property. The Landfill is owned by Northern Utah Environmental
Resource Agency.
The Survey was conducted by Environmental Planning Group, A Terracon Company (Terracon) with its
local office in Midvale, Utah. Based on our evaluation of their Survey, the Division concurs with the
conclusions and recommendations by Terracon.
In accordance with UCA 9-8a-404, please review the attached Survey report and provide your
concurrence or response to the Division in writing regarding the Survey.
If you have any questions, please call Matt Sullivan at 385-454-8012.
Sincerely,
Brian Speer, Solid Waste Program Manager
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
(Over)

BS/MS/wa

Enclosure: Historic Preservation Survey Report (DSHW-2023-209604)

c: Eric Edwards, Health Officer, Utah County Health Department
Tyler Plewe, Deputy Director, Utah County Health Department
Jason Garrett, Environmental Health Director, Utah County Health Department
COVER PAGEMustAccompany All Project ReportsSubmittedtotheUtahSHPO
UDSH Project Number: U-22-EO-0143A Cultural Resources Inventory for the Bay View Landfill Expansion Project, Utah County, UtahReport Date:03/22/2022 Org. Project Number: EPG/SLC-2022-01
Report Author(s):Heather M. Weymouth County(ies):UtahPrincipal Investigator Heather M. Weymouth
Record Search Date(s): March 3, 2022 Field Supervisor(s):Heather M. Weymouth
Intensive Acres Surveyed (<15m intervals): 15 acres Recon/Intuitive Acres Surveyed (<15m intervals): 0
USGS 7.5’ Series Map Reference(s): Goshen Valley North, Utah (2020)
Sites Reported Count Smithsonian TrinomialsRevisits(no updated site forms)0Updates(updated site forms provided)0Newrecordings(site forms provided)0TotalCountofArchaeologicalSitesinAPE0HistoricStructures(structures forms provided)0TotalNationalRegisterEligibleSites0*Please list all site numbers per category. Number strings are acceptable (e.g. “42TO1 -13; 42TO15”). Cells should expand toaccommodate extensive lists.
Checklist of Required Items for Submittal to SHPO
☒“Born Digital” Report in a PDF/A format
☒SHPO Cover Sheet
☒File Name is the UDSH Project Number with no hyphens or landowner suffixes
☐“Born Digital” Site forms in PDF/A format
☐UASF with embedded maps and photos
☐File name is Smithsonian Trinomial without leading zeros (e.g. 42TO13 not 42TO00013)
☐Photo requirements (including size and quality)
☐Archaeological Site Tabular Data
☐Single spreadsheet for each project
☐Follows UTSHPO template (info here:https://goo.gl/7SLMqj)
☒GIS data
☒Zipped polygon shapefile or geodatabase of survey (if different from APE) or other activityarea with required field names and variable intensity denoted
☐Zipped polygon shapefile or geodatabase of site boundaries with a the required field name
DSHW-2023-209604
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
1
State Project Number :U-22-EO-0143
Report Title:A Cultural Resources Inventory for the Bay View Landfill Project,Utah County, Utah (EPG/SLC-2022-01)
Report Date:03/22/2022 Report Author(s):Heather Weymouth
Principal Investigator:Heather M. WeymouthEnvironmental Planning Group,A Terracon Company6949 High Tech Drive #100Midvale,Utah 84047
Person-Days for Survey:1 person,1 day
Project Background:In February 2021, Forsgren Associates requested EPG, a Terracon Company complete a Class III cultural resourcesinventory of two Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA)parcels proposed as leased lands fortheBayView Landfill Expansion Project (Project).The land is proposed for lease by the Northern Utah EnvironmentalResource Agecncy (NUERA) from SITLA for the purpose of expanding the current landfill on the adjacen t parcel.Theproposed SITLA-lease parcels are located on the west side of the existing landfill north of Elberta in Utah County, Utah.This inventory was conducted in anticipation of the lease of these parcels as required under state statute.This reportdocuments the results of that inventory. The purpose of this inventory was to identify, record, and determine the extentand significance of all identified cultural resource sites within the project area.
Area of Potential Effects Definition:The Area of Potential Effects (APE) consists of two rectangular parcels totaling 140 acres (56.66 hectares)(Figures 1 and2). The northern parcel, consisting of approximately 55 acres (22.26 hectares), encompasses portions of the NE¼ of NE¼and the N½ of SE¼ of NE¼ of S18, T9S, R1W. The southern parcel, consisting of approximately 85 acres (34.4 hectares),encompasses portions of the E½of SE¼ of S18, T9S, R1W.A total of 125 acres (50.6 hectares)of the Project area havebeen previously surveyed (Miller, Tipps, and Birnie 2003) including the entirety of the southern parcel and all but 15acres(6.07 hectares)of the northern parcel.The survey APE for the present inventory was identified in consultation withSITLAandconsists of the 15 acres (6.07 hectares)within the northern parcel not previously surveyed.
The project area is located directly west of the existing landfill on State Route 68 (Figures 1 and 2)approximately 5.5miles(8.85 kilometers)north of the Elberta,in Utah County, Utah. Topographic map coverage of the project area isprovided by the Goshen Valley North,Utah (2020) 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)quadrangle.
Identification Strategies (archaeological, historical,and ethnographic):An intensive-level (Class III) cultural resources inventory was completed for 15 acres (6.07 hectares) of unsurveyed SITLAlandsinUtahCounty,Utah. The project area was identified using a differentially correctable Trimble GeoXT globalpositioning system (GPS) unit in conjunction with aerial photographs, and project maps as points of reference.
The Class III pedestrian survey was completed by one archaeologist walking parallel transects across the Project area.Ground surface visibility was at or near 85 percent over the entire survey parcel at the time of the inventory.The Projectarea is largely grass covered with Russian thistle and cheatgrass prevalent in disturbed areas along f encelines androadways.There is a large, denuded, Seagull nesting area in the east-central portion of the survey parcel. At the time ofsurvey there were hundreds of Seaguls present, however, nesting was not yet underway.A single small patch ofsagebrush and two isolated juniper trees were present within parcel surveyed. The remainder of the Project area
Acreage:APE:15 acres (6.07hectares)Intensive:15 acres (6.07 hectares)Recon/Intuitive:0
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
2
appears to have burned and since been reseeded with grasses.Cultural disturbance in the area consists of agriculturalfields,the adjacent landfill,and a nearby utility corridor occupied by the Mona to Oquirrh Transmission Line and theKern River Pipeline.The surrounding area consists of planted fields and rolling undeveloped terrain covered in lowgrasses,sagebrush, and juniper trees.
Location(s) and Date(s) of Pre-Field Records Search:1. Utah Division of State History:A file search for previously recorded cultural resources sites and previouslyconducted surveys within 1.0 miles of the current project area was conducted on March 3,2022, by EPGarchaeologistHeather M. Weymouth (Sego ArcGIS Server).2. Federal/State Office:Heather M. Weymouth contacted SITLA archaeologist Kristine Curry with regard to theProject on March 17, 2022 to determine if SITLA records would require additional review beyond what wasavailable in the Sego ArcGIS Server. No additional review of SITLA records was required.3. Historic Records/Maps:As part of the records search, a search of the General Land Office (GLO) survey platsavailable at the Bureau of Land Management’s Internet public access site (www.ut.blm.gov/LandRecords/search_plats.cfm) was conducted on March 3, 2022,to identify potential historic resources (e.g.,features, transportation routes, and telecommunications lines) that could be encountered during the fieldinventory. All available historical GLO maps for the project area were reviewed prior to conducting the fieldinventory (GLO 1856 [T9S R1W).Historic Goshen Valley North, Utah (1950 [1952 ed., 1970 ed.,1978 ed., 1994ed.]) USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle maps for the area were also reviewed prior to conducting the field inventory.4. Other:In addition to those sources mentioned above, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the UtahState Register of Historic Places, the Utah Linear Sites Database, and the historic sites database at the StateHistoricPreservation Office (SHPO)were examined to determine if additional historic resources, historicstructures, or historic sites not in the SHPO archaeological records have been documented in the vicinity of theprojectarea.
Results of Pre-Field Records Search (sites & projects within agency-defined APE buffer and/or site leads from research):The records search conducted prior to field inventory identified six cultural resources projects (Table 1) and six culturalresources sites (Table 2) within 1.0 miles of the current project area.No previously recorded sites are located in theprojectarea.A total of 125 acres (50.6 hectares)of the Project area have been previously surveyed (Miller, Tipps, andBirnie 2003) including the entirety of the southern parcel and all but 15 acres (6.07 hectares) of the northern parcel.Nosites were located during the 2003 inventory, however three isolated chert flakes were noted in the southern parcel ofthe Project.Historic USGS map research indicates the presence of a historic transmission line ca. 1952-1978 crossing thesoutheast portion of the northern project parcel, however, this transmission line is no longer present on the 1994 USGSmapand no evidence of the corridor or the transmission line was noted during review of Google Earth imagery for thearea.
Date(s) of Survey:A Class III cultural resources inventory was conducted by Heather M. Weymouth on March 18, 2022.
Description of Findings:No cultural resources sites or isolates were identified in the project APE during the presentinvestigation.Efforts to relocate evidence of the historic transmission line identified during historic map research wereunsuccessful. No evidence of the transmission line corridor or associated features was identified during the fieldinventory.
Conclusion & Management Recommendations:No cultural resources sites were identified within the portion of theproject cleared during field inventories conducted in 2003 ,and no cultural resources were identified during the presentinventory.Therefore, there will be no historic properties affected by the project.This investigation was conducted usingtechniques considered to be adequate for evaluating cultural resources that are visible for inspection and could beadverselyaffected by the project. If such resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities,ground
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
3
disturbance should be halted and a report should be made immediately to the SITLA Archaeologist in Salt Lake City,Utah.
Required Materials:
☒7.5’ Quadrangle Base map(s) for Project Area
☐7.5’ Quadrangle Base map (s) for Surveyed Area (if different than #1)
TABLE 1PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES PROJECTS WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE PROJECTStateProject No.Report Title Author OrganizationU-89-BC-0481 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Proposed WYCALPipeline through the State of Utah:Proposed WyCalpipeline, Beaver County, Iron County, Juab County,Millard County, Salt Lake County, Sevier County,Washington County, Utah. Brigham Young UniversityMuseum of Peoples and Culturea Technical Series No.90-10.
D. Gredvig, G. Wilson,J. Wilde, R. Talbot, L.Richens, and S Billat(1990).
Brigham Young UniversityOffice of Public Archaeology,Provo, Utah.
U-90-DH-184 Kern River Pipeline Cultural Resources Data RecoveryReport: Utah Geoffrey W. Spaulding(1994)Dames and Moore, Inc., LasVegas, Nevada.U-02-PD-0656 Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of SITLA's DryHollow Flat, Magpie Canyon, Marlow Canyon, OldCanyon, Promontory North, Promontory,PromontorySouth, South Mosida, and West Hills Parcels,BoxElder, Rich, and Utah Counties, Utah. PIII CulturalResources Report 5175 -01-20210
G, Miller, B. Tipps, andR Birnie (2003)PIII Associates, Inc. Salt LakeCity, Utah.
U02A10565;U03A10415;U02ST0566;U03ST1127-
Kern River 2003 Expansion Project: Utah. Volumes I -VII.A. Reed, M. Seddon,H. Stettler (2005)Alpine ArchaeologicalConsultants, Inc. Montrose,Colorado and SWCA, Inc.,Environmental Consultants,Salt Lake City, Utah.U-08-EO-1075 Addendum: A Cultural Resource Inventory of theMona to Oquirrh Geotechnical Investigations SaltLake,Tooele,Utah,and Juab Counties,Utah. EPGCultural Resources Report No. SLC-2009-06.
H. Weymouth and N.George (2009)Environmental PlanningGroup, Salt Lake City, Utah.
U-08-EO-1231 A Cultural Resource Inventory of the Mona to OquirrhTransmission Corridor Salt Lake, Tooele, Utah, andJuab Counties, Utah. EPG Cultural Resources ReportNo. SLC-2009-05.
E. Huffman and H.Weymouth (2010)Environmental PlanningGroup, Salt Lake City, Utah.
TABLE 2PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES WITHIN 0.5 MILES OF THE PROJECTSmithsonianNumberSite Type NRHP Recommendation Associated ProjectNumber(s)
42UT404 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIIIsite update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-76-BC-0162U-90-DH-184U-02-PD-065642UT689Lithic Scatter SHPO Determined Eligible U-89-BC-048142UT690Lithic Scatter SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-89-BC-0481
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
4
TABLE 2PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES WITHIN 0.5 MILES OF THE PROJECTSmithsonianNumberSite Type NRHP Recommendation Associated ProjectNumber(s)
42UT720 Lithic Scatter -Destroyed per 2003SWCA site update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-89-BC-0481U-01-A1-250
42UT730 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIII site update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible U-90-DH-184U-02-PD-0656
42UT793 Lithic scatter -Destroyed per 2002PIIIsite update SHPO Determined National Register Ineligible 91-BC-0031U-02-PD-0656
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
5
Short Cultural Resources Inventory Report Form
6
3760 South Highland Drive, Salt Lake City, Utah 84106 • history.utah.gov
Spencer J. Cox
Governor
Deidre M. Henderson
Lieutenant Governor
Jill Remington Love
Executive Director
Utah Department of Cultural
and Community Engagement
Christopher Merritt
State Historic Preservation Officer
Utah State Historic Preservation Office
December 1, 2023
Brian Speer
Solid Waste Program Manager
Division of Waste Management & Radiation Control
195 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84116
RE: Historic Preservation Survey, Bayview Landfill, Utah County - SW118
For future correspondence, please reference Case No. 23-2750
Dear Brian Speer,
The Utah State Historic Preservation Office received your request for our comment on the above-
referenced undertaking on November 30, 2023.
Based on the previous work conducted, U22EO0143, we concur with your determination of effect for
this undertaking.
Utah Code 9-8-404(1)(a) denotes that your agency is responsible for all final decisions regarding
cultural resources for this undertaking. Our comments here are provided as specified in U.C.A. 9-8-
404(3)(a)(i). If you have questions, please contact me at [phone] or by email at
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Ryan McGrath
Compliance Archaeologist
DSHW-2023-212490
APPENDIX E – BAYVIEW LANDFILL 2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN

IGES

BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 Development Plan

1 | Page

Contents
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 2
ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 3
RECENT PROJECTS ........................................................................................................................................ 4
2023 PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................................ 5
NEAR-TERM PROJECTS (2024-2031) ............................................................................................................ 6
LONG-TERM PROJECTS (2032 and aBer) ...................................................................................................... 6
LANDFILL CAPACITY ...................................................................................................................................... 7
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 7

APPENDIX A – DRAWINGS
APPENDIX B – DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE

2 | Page

INTRODUCTION
The 660 – acre Bayview Landfill (Bayview) was located, permitted, designed, and constructed
by Provo City Corporation during 1989. The City received a Conditional Use Permit for the
landfill site through the Utah County Board of Adjustment.

The South Utah Valley Solid Waste District (SUVSWD) was formed in 1989 to own and
operate solid waste facilities for the cities of Provo, Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville,
Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah. SUVSWD assumed the existing and previously permitted
landfill operations from the City of Provo in 1990.

In 2016, Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) purchased Bayview from the
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District. NUERA members planning to uYlize Bayview include
SUVSWD, North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District (North Point), Trans-Jordan CiYes, and
Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District.

Bayview was most recently repermi]ed in 2021 with an effecYve permit date of March 26, 2021.
The Bayview permit applicaYon and associated permit can be review at the following links:
h]ps://documents.deq.utah.gov/waste-management-and-radiaYon-control/faciliYes/sw-misc-
faciliYes/DSHW-2019-014268.pdf

h]ps://documents.deq.utah.gov/waste-management-and-radiaYon-control/faciliYes/south-
utah-valley-sw-dist/DSHW-2021-003264.pdf

In late fall of 2021 NUERA entered into an agreement with the State of Utah School and
InsYtuYonal Trust Lands AdministraYon (SITLA) for the lease of approximately 142 addiYonal
acres to enhance Bayview’s exisYng operaYon. The addiYon of the new SITLA land requires an
updated landfill development plan and an updated landfill permit. This document represents the
Bayview Landfill development plan. Drawing 1 in Appendix A shows the General Arrangement of
Bayview and the locaYon of the new SITLA parcels.

3 | Page

ASSUMPTIONS
The current area being served by Bayview include the ciYes of Provo, Salem, Spanish Fork,
Springville, Mapleton, Goshen, and the communiYes in southern Utah County. Most of the
waste in southern Utah County is transferred to Bayview via the South Utah County Solid
Waste District’s transfer staYon. AddiYonally, since the operaYo ns have changed to NUERA,
waste from northern Utah County is being transferred through North Point Solid Waste
transfer staYon. The annual tonnage of waste received at the landfill was 396,698 tons in
2022. Waste volumes delivered to Bayview are assumed to increase at approximately 2%
per year.

Future waste is anYcipated from both Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District
(Wasatch Integrated) and Trans-Jordan CiYes (Trans-Jordan). Since Wasatch Integrated has
already constructed a transfer staYon and is currently transferring waste from their District,
Wasatch Integrated could be able to transfer their waste to Bayview as early as 2025 when
their exisYng contract for waste disposal is up for renewal. The iniYal volume of waste that
could be transferred from Wasatch Integrated would be approximately 125,000 tons per year.
The waste volumes for Wasatch Integrated are assumed to increase at approximately 2% per
year as well.

Trans -Jordan is in the process of designing and ulYmately building a transfer staYon in Sandy
that could be uYlized to transfer waste by 2032. The current annual volume of waste
managed at Trans-Jordan is approximately 407,000 tons that are assumed to increase at
approximately by 2% per year. IniYal waste to be transferred to Bayview would be
approximately 496,000 tons in 2032.

Several assumpYons have been made regarding the management of waste at Bayview Landfill.
Those assumpYons are that soil use will be approximately 15% of the volume of total airspace
and that compacYon of waste will be approximately 1,500 pounds per cubic yard. The current
earthmoving capacity at Bayview is approximately 125,000 cubic yards of soil annually.

4 | Page

RECENT PROJECTS
Several recent construcYon projects have occurred at Bayview that have enhanced the landfill
life. The first project was the construcYon of Cell 1.5 which was a 6.7 – acre lined landfill cell
completed in the spring of 2020. The addiYon of Cell 1.5 enabled the landfill staff to uYlize the
area between Cell 1 and Cell 2 for the disposal of waste. The locaYon of Cell 1.5 is presented on
Drawing 2 in Appendix A.

The second, and larger construcYon project was the construcYon of Cell 2, Stage 3. Cell 2, Stage
3 was an approximately 18 – acre lined landfill cell completed in October of 2022. The compleYon
of Cell 2, Stage 3 added approximately 3,297,000 cubic yards of net airspace. The 3,297,000 cubic
yards is useable space for the disposal of waste since the airspace of the 15% operaYonal soil has
been deducted from the overall airspace volume. Cell 2, Stage 3 will be ready to accept waste
once the documentaYon of protecYve cover soil is submi]ed and accepted by the Division of
Waste Management and RadiaYon Control (DWMRC). The final acceptance of Cell 2, Stage 3 is
anYcipated by early summer of 2023. The locaYon of Cell 2, Stage 3 is presented on Drawing 3 in
Appendix A.

AddiYonally, as previously menYoned, Bayview was able to enter into an agreement with SITLA.
The SITLA land consists of two parcels as indicated on Drawing 1, Appendix A. The northern SITLA
parcel is likely to be uYlized for ConstrucYon and DemoliYon (C&D) waste while the southern
SITLA parcel will be iniYally uYlized for the stockpiling of operaYonal soils and ulYmately be
available for the disposal of waste.

5 | Page

2023 PROJECTS
The current source for operaYonal soil at Bayview are soils generated via the Cell 2, Stage 4
excavaYon. Soil from the Cell 2, Stage 4 excavaYon is being uYlized for daily cover, final cover and
for the protecYve cover in Cell 2, Stage 3. The final configuraYon of Cell 2, Stage 3 has been
analyzed regarding the opYmal depth of cell excavaYon versus the cost of the incremental
airspace gained by the increased depth of excavaYon. The two alternaYves for Cell 2, Stage 4
excavaYon that were considered were alternaYves where the final leachate sump was located
between Cell 2, Stage 3 and Cell 2, Stage 4 and the alternaYve where the sump was located at the
eastern edge of Cell 2, Stage 4. The decision was made to relocate the permanent leachate sump
between Cell 2, Stage 3 and Cell 2, Stage 4. Moving the leachate sump saved approximately
500,000 cubic yards of excavaYon that would have required accelerated excavaYon of Cell 2, Stage
4 as well as significant stockpiling of soil. The locaYon of Cell 2, Stage 4 is presented on Drawing
4 in Appendix A.

The change in Cell 2, Stage 4 configuraYon will allow for the immediate construcYon of the
permanent leachate sump that will aid in the management of leachate. A construcYon package
for the permanent leachate sump is anYcipated to be developed in the summer of 2023 and
constructed during the fall of 2023 or spring of 2024. The DWMRC will be informed of the
relocaYon of the leachate sump as Bayview’s landfill permit is updated to reflect this development
plan.

As the excavaYon of Cell 2, Stage 4 proceeds, soil from the excavaYon can be uYlized in the
construcYon of the final landfill cover. Prior to the construcYon of the final cover at Bayview, a
construcYon quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) plan will need to be developed. A final
cover QA/QC plan will be developed and submi]ed to the DWMRC for approval to assist Bayview
staff during the construcYon of all subsequent final cover projects. The QA/QC Plan will be
submi]ed to the DWMRC for approval in April of 2023.

Another task to be completed at Bayview Landfill during 2023 is the repermimng of the landfill
to reflect the SITLA parcels and the reconfiguraYon of future landfill cells. Both SITLA parcels will
need to be regraded to manage storm water, construct perimeter fences, and to facilitate changes
in the future landfill operaYons. IniYal regrading of the northern SITLA parcel will allow for the
immediate drainage improvements of that parcel and the establishment of a C&D waste cell if
needed.

6 | Page

NEAR-TERM PROJECTS (2024-2031)
The near-term projects envisioned for Bayview include drainage improvements to the southern
SITLA parcel to divert storm water run-on that currently passes through the center of the landfill
operaYons to the southern side of the landfill property. Concurrent with the regrading of the
southern SITLA parcel to accommodate storm water, the new property boundary will be fenced.

The excavaYon of Cell 2, Stage 4 will conYnue for several years providing a source for final cover
construcYon for the northern sides of Cell 1.5 and Cell 2. Final cover construcYon will take place
annually and be performed by Bayview staff in accordance with the DWMRC approved QA/QC
plan. Cell 2, Stage 4 excavaYon will require Bayview staff to excavate approximately 158,000 cubic
yards per year for 5 years.

The near-term projects will culminate with the construcYon of the Cell 2, Stage 4 liner someYme
near 2028 once the excavaYon of the cell is complete. The Cell 2, Stage 4 liner project will be
comprised of approximately 30-acres of liner installaYon providing over 6 million cubic yards of
net capacity for waste. The addiYonal landfill capacity generated by the construcYon of Cell 2,
Stage 4 will provide approximately six years of operaYonal capacity while the excavaYon of Cell 3
is completed.

LONG-TERM PROJECTS (2032 and aAer)
The long-term projects will start in approximately 2032 with the relocaYon of the site uYliYes
associated with the exisYng shop/office facility. Concurrent with the relocaYon of the uYliYes, a
new shop/office will be constructed near the entrance to the landfill. The relocaYon of the
shop/office will allow for the final excavaYon of Cell 3.

Cell 3 will be the first of several landfill cells located directly south of the exisYng landfill
operaYons. The capacity of Cell 3 through Cell 10 are preliminarily esYmated to require some 10
million yards of soil excavaYon providing approximately 67 million yards of net disposal capacity.
The locaYons Cell 3 through Cell 10 are presented on Drawing 5, Appendix A. The locaYons of Cell
4 through Cell 10 are presented on Drawing 5, Appendix A.

The anYcipated Bayview Master Plan is presented on Drawing 6, Appendix A.

7 | Page

LANDFILL CAPACITY
The development of adequate disposal capacity is the primary factor regarding the Bayview
master plan. The scheduled construcYon of the landfill cells reflects the anYcipated waste
disposal needs of the NUERA partners and residents in Utah County. The current volume of waste
delivered to Bayview is approximately 400,000 tons per year. Plans are for approximately 125,000
tons of waste per year from Wasatch Integrated starYng in 2025 and for approximately 500,000
tons of waste per year from Trans-Jordan starYng in 2032. All waste streams are esYmated to
increase at approximately 2% annually.

As previously menYoned, the current soil moving capacity of the staff and equipment at Bayview
is approximately 125,000 cubic yards per year with minimal stockpiling of soil. As currently
planned, the excavaYon of Cell 2, Stage 4 and Cell 3 will require moving approximately 2 million
cubic yards of soil in the next ten years. The earthmoving capacity at Bayview will need to be
enhanced and soil stockpiling increased to meet the required excavaYon schedule.

At the start of 2023, the current net disposal capacity at Bayview is approximately 4.8 million
cubic yards including the airspace generated from the Cell 2, Stage 3 project. This will provide
adequate disposal capacity for five years while Cell 2, Stage 4 is excavated and constructed. The
airspace generated from the construcYon of Cell 2, Stage 4 will be sufficient for an addiYonal six
years unYl Cell 3 is operaYonal in approximately 2034. The details of the generaYon and use of
airspace can be found on the “Bayview Development Timeline” spreadsheet presented in
Appendix B.
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
The development Ymeline for Bayview is visually presented on the “Bayview Development
Timeline” chart presented in Appendix B.

APPENDIX A

CLOSED LANDFILL
(CELL 1)
ACTIVE LANDFILL
(CELL 2 )
WATER
TANK
PUMP
HOUSE
SITLA
(NEW)
SITLA
(NEW)
ADMIN. OFFICE &
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
GATE
12
6
0
0

W
E
S
T

(
S
R
-
6
8

)
ACCESS ROAD
LEACHATE
POND
RETENTION
POND
PERIMETER
FENCE
SCALE
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
ELBERTA, UTAHGENERAL ARRANGEMENT
03/17/23
1-
1
NTS
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW
CELL 1.5
ADMIN. OFFICE &
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
GATE
ACCESS ROAD
SCALE
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 DEVELOPMENT PLANELBERTA, UTAH
CELL 1.5 EXTENTS (2020)
03/17/23
2-
1
1"=800'
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW
2020 - CELL 1.5 EXTENTS
Feet
0 400 800
CELL 2
STAGE 3
ADMIN. OFFICE &
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
GATE
ACCESS ROAD
SCALE
LEACHATE
SUMP
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
GOSHEN, UTAH
CELL 2 STAGE 3 EXTENTS (2022)
03/17/23
3-
1
1"=800'
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW
Feet
0 400 800
2022- CELL 2 STAGE 3 LINER EXTENTS
CELL 2
STAGE 4
(FUTURE)
ADMIN. OFFICE &
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
GATE
ACCESS ROAD
SCALE
LEACHATE
SUMP
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 DEVELOPMENT PLANELBERTA, UTAH
CELL 2 STAGE 4 EXTENTS (2028)
03/17/23
4-
1
1"=800'
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW
Feet
0 400 800
CELL 2 STAGE 4
EXCAVATION: 791,240 CU-YD
NET AIRSPACE: 6,030,367 CU-YD
CELL 3
CELL 4
CELL 5 CELL 7 CELL 9
CELL 6 CELL 8 CELL 10
GATESCALE
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
GOSHEN, UTAH
CELLS 3-10 LOCATIONS
03/17/23
5-
1
1"=800'
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW
Feet
0 400 800
CELLS 3-10
EXCAVATION: 10,114,700 CU-YD
NET AIRSPACE: 62,127,600 CU-YD
CELL 3
CELL 4
CELL 5 CELL 7 CELL 9
CELL 6 CELL 8 CELL 10
CELL 1.5
CELL 2
STAGE 4
(FUTURE)
FUTURE
CONSTRUCTION
&
DEMOLITION
AREA
SOIL STOCKPILE/
FUTURE LANDFILL
CELLS
FUTURE
SHOP/OFFICE
AREACELL 2
STAGE 3
LEACHATE
SUMP
CLOSED LANDFILL
(CELL 1)
ACTIVE LANDFILL
(CELL 2 )
GATESCALE
LEACHATE
SUMP
CONSULTANTS:
REVISIONS REVISIONS
MARK MARKDATEBYCHK DATE BY CHK
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah(801) 270-9400(801) 270-9401 Fax
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
2023 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
GOSHEN, UTAH
MASTER PLAN
03/17/23
6-
1
NTS
1=1
02260-003
1
BM03/17/23
JH03/16/23
-
PLOT DATE:
SHEETDRAWING NO.
DATE:
SCALE
SCALE
APPROVED BY:
PLOT
DWG
REVISION NO:PROJECT:
CHECKED BY:DATE:
DATE:DRAWN BY:
DATE:DESIGNED BY:
COPYRIGHT 2021
N
S
EW

APPENDIX B

BAYVIEW DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE
BAYVIEW WASATCH TRANS JORDAN
Year Yards Available for MSW
(Decrease 15% for soil use)
Projected
Tonnage 2%
increase
Projected
Tonnage 2%
increase
Projected Tonnage 2%
increase
Airspace Consumed at
(1,500 pounds per yard)Additional Airspace
Jun-21
Cap Cells 1 and 1.5 (Total 2,758,700 cy)2020 415,000 553,333
Actual Useable Airspace = 2,344,895 cy (85% of total)2021 2,344,895 427,732 570,309 Total Cell 1, 1.5, & 2
2022 2,059,740 396,698 528,931
Cell 2 Stage 3 (Total Airspace = 3,879,200 cy)2023 4,828,130 404,632 539,509 3,297,320 Cell 2 Stage 3 Airspace
Actual Useable Airspace = 3,297,320 cy (85% of total)2024 4,288,620 412,725 550,299
Wasatch Integrated Annual Tonnage - 320,000 tons per year 2025 3,738,321 420,979 125,000 727,972
Approximately 115,000 tons per year are transferred to Tekoy 2026 3,010,349 429,399 127,500 742,532
Assume 125,000 tons per year being transferred to Bayview starting in 2025 2027 2,267,817 437,987 130,050 757,382
Cell 2 Stage 4 (Total Airspace = 7,094,550 cy)2028 7,540,802 446,746 132,651 772,530 6,030,367 Cell 2 Stage 4 Airspace
Actual Useable Airspace = 6,030,367 (85% of total)2029 6,768,272 455,681 135,304 787,980
2030 5,980,292 464,795 138,010 803,740
Trans Jordan Landfill Annual Tonnage - 407,000 tons in 2022 2031 5,176,552 474,091 140,770 819,815
415,000 tons in 2021 - slight drop in tonnage. Using 2 % for growth.2032 4,356,737 483,573 143,586 496,131 1,497,719
Trans Jordan will begin to transfer waste to Bayview in 2032.2033 2,859,018 493,244 146,457 506,053 1,527,673
Total Net Airspace Avalable before Cell 3 = 11,672,582 Cubic Yards 2034 9,097,295 503,109 149,387 516,174 1,558,227 7,765,950 Cell 3
From June of 2021 2035 7,539,068 513,171 152,374 526,498 1,589,391
2036 5,949,677 523,435 155,422 537,028 1,621,179
2037 4,328,498 533,903 158,530 547,768 1,653,603
2038 2,674,896 544,581 161,701 558,724 1,686,675
2039 8,754,171 555,473 164,935 569,898 1,720,408 7,765,950 Cell 4
2040 7,033,763 566,582 168,234 581,296 1,754,816
2041 5,278,947 577,914 171,598 592,922 1,789,913
2042 3,489,034 589,472 175,030 604,781 1,825,711
2043 1,663,323 601,262 178,531 616,876 1,862,225
2044 7,567,048 613,287 182,101 629,214 1,899,470 7,765,950 Cell 5
2045 5,667,579 625,553 185,743 641,798 1,937,459
2046 3,730,120 638,064 189,458 654,634 1,976,208
2047 1,753,912 650,825 193,247 667,727 2,015,732
2048 7,504,129 663,842 197,112 681,081 2,056,047 7,765,950 Cell 6
2049 5,448,082 677,118 201,055 694,703 2,097,168
2050 3,350,914 690,661 205,076 708,597 2,139,111
2051 1,211,803 704,474 209,177 722,769 2,181,893
2052 6,795,860 718,564 213,361 737,224 2,225,531 7,765,950 Cell 7
2053 4,570,328 732,935 217,628 751,969 2,270,042
2054 2,300,287 747,593 221,981 767,008 2,315,443
2055 (15,156) 762,545 226,420 782,348 2,361,752
2056 5,389,042 777,796 230,949 797,995 2,408,987 7,765,950 Cell 8
2057 2,980,055 793,352 235,568 813,955 2,457,166
2058 522,889 809,219 240,279 830,234 2,506,310
2059 5,782,529 825,404 245,085 846,839 2,556,436 7,765,950 Cell 9
2060 3,226,093 841,912 249,986 863,776 2,607,565
2061 618,529 858,750 254,986 881,051 2,659,716
2062 6,333,813 875,925 260,086 898,672 2,712,910 8,375,000 Cell 10
2063 3,620,902 893,443 265,287 916,646 2,767,168
2064 853,734 911,312 270,593 934,978 2,822,512
75,563,925
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034
Leachate Sump
C&D Cell Prep.
2023 Cover
Installation
Construction of
Cell 2 Stage 3 Liner
2024 Cover
Installation
2031 Cover
Installation
Construction of
Cell 2 Stage 4 Liner
Construction of
Cell 3 Liner
Finish Excavation of
Cell 3
2034 Cover
Installation
Finish Excavation of
Cell 2 Stage 4
BAYVIEW DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE
2025 Cover
Installation
Construct
New Shop/Office
Evaluate Final
Cover Soil Source
New Final Cover
QA/QC Plan
2030 Cover
Installation
Move Site Utilities
2032 Cover
Installation
2033 Cover
Installation
Site Improvements
(Drainage/Fencing)
2026 Cover
Installation
Construction of
Cell 1.5
2021 Landfill Permit
2023 Landfill Permit
SITLA Lease
APPENDIX F – LANDFILL FORMS

Bayview Landfill
Personnel Training Documenta�on

Date: Type of Training: Atendee Name: Training Topic s: Instructor: Atendee
Signature:

MachineMachine
Date 836H 836G 623 New D8R D8T Grader WT Xenwc B Dodge F350 Loader W Dodge Tipoer LGT Plants Banger Welder F150 F350 old Misc Misc
4-Sep
5-Sep
6-5ep
7-Sep
9-5ep
11-Sep
13-Sep
16-Sep
19-Sep
20-Sep
22-5ep
23-5ep
26-Sep
523 Olc{
17-Seo I
18-Seo I
zL-Sepl
* ,4-seof-
2s-sep I
z7-5epl
,&S*I
z9-5epl
305"pT
Machine
Loader W Dodge Tipper LGT Plants Rangen Welder F150 F350 old Misc Misc
Machine
Date 836K DEF 836H 836G 623 old 623 New D8R D8T DEF Grader WW WT Kenworth B Dodge F350 MISC
4-5ep
5-SeP
6-SeP
7;5eP
8-SeP
9-5eP
11
12-SeP
L3-Se!
14-SeP
17-SeP
18-SeP
21-5eP
22-SeP
23-5€P
24-SeP
25-SeP
26-SeP
27-5ep
29-SeP
30-SeP
19-SeP
Sonrtt Utah Yalky Solid Waste District
Bayviem Landfill
Quererly Lerdfill Gas ltf,oniforing Resdts
Quarter _-._
DDte
l]me
Wearter
Sanplc Collcctor'
MonitoringDcviceCalibraed Friorto saffpltog Yes No
Monfuoring Devie Uscd: PhD Plus Muhi Gas Detcctar
MaimenmceShop
OfficeLirach Room lnside
North Boundat-v
Sou& Bounda$'
East Boundar-v
l"eactrarc Pond
I,t e$Bouflday
hrmpllouse
Gas Sarnple Collectoc lfmeasrrcd ToLEL equals or oicecds irtemal action limit, cortact ladfill s$ervisor-
Ladfill Supervisoc lfmeasured o/oLE,L eqtnts or orceeds regutaroq'action lfunir- noti$ ihe Strde Director' in corpliacervifi
40CFR2jE23c-
Conrmerts:
Monitorin*e Location Mea-sured
o/oLE,L
futernai ActionLimit
HalfRegulatory Limh
'/.l,EL
Rcgulator Actior Limit
o/al-EL
12 71
75t7
I0050
i0050
1&l50
10050
.. ':'.
SamplesCollcctcd $-
Weekly Visual Ins ection and Maintenance Re rt
Person
Date (MM/DD/YY)
GOOD HOUSEKEEPING
lnstructions: As necessary, review section 5.3, Gocd [{ousekeeping: Mark "Y" (yes) or"N" (no) as appropriate" For each "N", note question
number and corrective action(s) in the space below
Y N L the maintenance and neat
Y N 2 in the work areas? Are work areas free of clutter?ls there
N 3 material and tools stored
Y N 4 labeled and stored?materials
N 5 the material to date?Y
6YN
Y N 7 ls there evidence of or leaks from on site?or
Y N are outside areas and neat?
N 9
roads, walkways, and other passageways easily accessible, safe, and freer of
protruding objects, materials, or equipment?
N ls blown litter collectedY
Corrective
Preventive Ma i ntena nce
such as maintenance
faci forfeature leaeach ks,signsspills,Asmaintenance,nspect litysectionreviewappropriate,Aslnstructions:preventive5.4,necessary,
for"o"other indicateotherfor(if typevisualthetestofobservation:observation,lndicateetc.tYpeerrosion,operation,proper
thecomments"N"includeeachFor',s or ',N,,satisfactory)ConditionNote as (not(satisfactory)test,ooperation)e.9.,pump
Commentscondition
Type of
Observation
or TestFeature
SNVOLandfill
Face
SNVOConveyance
and
SNVOPond
SNVO
SNVOBerms
SNVOChannels
SNVO
SNVOls
SNVO
Straw Bales,
SNVOCover
SNVOGraded Areas
SNVO
SNVOAreas
SNVO
SNVO
SNVOSpill & Leak
Emission Point:
STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Page r of-
DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATION FORM
Typeoflnspection:Initial()Partiallnitial()StackTest()CEM()Annual()Followup()Surveillance()Complaint()
Source Name:
Street Addnss:
Q!1ylCounty:
Phone:
ATAS IN.
\\ *'0 15 30 45
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Facility:
Equipment:
Control Equipment:
BackFround:
Average Opacily fbr l.Iighest Six-Minutc Period:--
Arnhienl Temn'F RH'q"Comments:
0raw north aragw
ob*ruer
14oo
Affiliation: State of Utah, Deparcmenr of Environnrenral Quality
of Air
I Have Receive a Copy of These Observarions:
SIGNATURE:
Printed Name:
Title:
Height of Discharge Relative in Observer:
I)istmce from Obsen'er:
Condensed Waler Vagxrr Present? Y I N
ertactred f] Detachcd E
Length of Condensed Water Vapor Plume:
Distribution: white-file; canary-EPA; pink-inspector; gold-owner/operator
Observation Date:
Start Tirne: Stop Time:
Sun -fr
Emission Point with Plume (f
Observation Point X
Sirnature:
Sky Conditions: Clear I Partly Cloudy fJ o"ercasr I
Wiod Direction: Wiod Speed: rnPh
APPENDIX G – GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN
6tAl 1lE
Div of Waste Management
and Radiation Control
JUL 2 0 2020
F)1 ZoZ0-0104-1
Groundwater Monitoring
Plan for Bayview
Municipal Solid Waste
Landfill
NUERA Bayview Landfill
July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Groundwater Monitoring System 1
2.1 Landfill Operating Cells 2
2.1.1 Cell 1 2
2.1.2 Cell 1.5 2
2.1.3 Cell 2 2
2.2 Deep Monitoring Wells 2
2.2.1 Upgradient Monitoring Wells 2
2.2.2 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 1 2
2.2.3 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 2 3
2.2.4 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 1.5 3
2.2.5 Additional Monitoring Wells for Leachate Basin 1 3
2.2.6 Property Boundary Wells 3
2.3 Well Construction 3
3 Groundwater Sampling Procedures 3
3.1 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Procedures 4
3.2 Monitoring Well Purging Procedures 4
3.3 Groundwater Collection and Handling Procedures 5
3.3.1 Groundwater Collection Procedures 5
3.3.2 Groundwater Sample Handling Procedures 7
3.4 Groundwater Sampling Frequency 7
3.5 Weather Protocol 7
3.6 Employee Heath and Safety 7
3.7 Decontamination Procedures 8
4 Analytical Testing and Statistical Analysis 8
4.1 Laboratory Analysis 8
4.1.1 Laboratory Procedures 8
4.1.2 Constituents to be Analyzed and Test Methods 9
4.2 Establishment of Background Data 10
4.3 Statistical Methods to Evaluate Analytical Data 11
5 Reporting Requirements 12
5.1 Detection Monitoring 12
5.2 Assessment Monitoring 12
5.3 Corrective Action 12
Appendices
Appendix A. Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Site Map
Appendix B. Field Data Collection Form
Appendix C. Typical Chain Of Custody
July 20, 2020 l
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
This page is intentionally left blank.
ii l July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill vr.:11
to of
1 Introduction
This groundwater monitoring plan (GMP) addresses the groundwater monitoring and
sampling program at the Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency's (NUERA)
Bayview Landfill. The GMP is required by Utah Administrative Code (UAC) Rule R315-
303-3(7)(b) and will meet the requirements under UAC R315-308, Ground Water
Monitoring Requirements.
The Bayview Landfill is located in southwestern Utah County about 6 miles north of
Elberta, Utah and about 3 miles west of Goshen Bay of Utah Lake. The Bayview Landfill
is owned and operated by NUERA, which purchased Bayview in 2016 from the South
Utah Valley Solid Waste District (SUVSWD). NUERA is an organization made up of 6
solid waste entities"' along the Wasatch Front jointed together by an inter-local
agreement.
Groundwater Monitorins Syste
The groundwater flow at the Bayview Landfill can generally be described as flowing
northeast across the site towards Utah Lake2. Compliance monitoring wells are,
therefore, placed east and north of landfill environmental protection features (liner and
leachate collection system sumps and leachate ponds).
The groundwater monitoring system for the Bayview Landfill consists of nine deep
monitoring wells (DMW), DMW-1 through DMW-9. The wells serve to monitor the
groundwater associated with the landfill's three operating units or "cells". The Bayview
cells and monitoring wells are described in more detail below. Appendix Aprovides a map
showing the location of the cells, wells, and other features across the site.
Not all of the deep monitoring wells are sampled because the current operation does not
require that all wells are monitored. The next section of this report describes the current
(2020) operating cells, the wells that are being sampled, and the statistical analysis
approach used to demonstrate compliance with UAC R315-308.
The groundwater monitoring system also includes six shallow groundwater monitoring
wells, SMW-1 through SMW-6. However, none of the six shallow monitoring wells have
contained water sufficient to either purge or sample on any sampling event, and these
wells are not included remainder of this document.
Additional monitoring wells will be added to the system as new cells or leachate basins
are designed and constructed.
1 The NUERA entities are North Pointe Solid Waste Special Service District, South Utah Valley Solid
Waste District, Trans-Jordan Cities, Wasatch Integrated Waste Systems, Weber County, and Logan
City.
2 SUVSWD Bayview Class l Landfill Permit Application, October 2019
July 20, 2020 l 1
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
2.1 Landfill Operating Cells
2.1.1 Cell 1
Cell 1 was the first landfill unit constructed at the site and is now closed. Cell 1 reached
final permitted grades and a final cover was placed in 2005. Cell 1 is in post closure care.
2.1.2 Cell 1.5
Cell 1.5 is located between Cells 1 and 2. It was constructed in 2020 and is
approximately 6 acres in size. The cell bottom liner ties into the liner of both adjacent
cells (Cells 1 and 2). Cell 1.5 is graded so that any leachate generated in this cell would
be collected and conveyed into the leachate collection and removal system constructed
in Cell 2, described below. NUERA will
2.1.3 Cell 2
Cell 2 is an active cell with two stages. Stage 1 is a 20 acres cell located in northwest
portion of the large Cell 2 and was constructed by SUVSWD in late 2004. Stage 2 is a 23
acre cell located south of Stage 1. The liner for Stage 2 Cell 2 was constructed in 2009.
The leachate collection system for Cell 2 Stage 2 conveys leachate to the leachate
collection and removal system in Cell 2 Stage 1.
2.2 Deep Monitoring Wells
2.2.1 Upgradient Monitoring Wells
DMW-1 and DMW-7 are located along the western boundary of the site. These
monitoring wells serve as the upgradient or background wells for the landfill cells which
have been constructed and filled with waste or are scheduled for development over the
next 25 to 50 years. DMW-7 currently serves as the upgradient monitoring well for the
landfill.
2.2.2 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 1
Monitoring wells DMW-3 and DMW-8 were located east and adjacent to Cell 1 and
served as downgradient compliance wells for Cell 1. DMW-3 and DMW-8 were
abandoned for the construction of landfill Cell 1.5 in 2020.3 Monitoring well DMW-9
serves as the groundwater monitoring compliance well for Cell 1, which is in post closure
care. DMW-9 is located 200 feet north of Cell 2 Stage 1.
3 Well abandonment and a groundwater monitoring program variance was approved by the Director of
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control on [date].
2 l July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill 1,,,)
2.2.3 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 2
Monitoring well DMW-9 serves as the downgradient compliance well for Cell 2 Stage 1
and Stage 2. DMW-9 is located within 500 feet of Cell 2 and is hydraulically
downgradient of the leachate sump for Cell 2, where a pump removes leachate from Cell
2 Stages 1 and 2.
Two future compliance monitoring wells will be installed along the northern boundary of
Cell 2 as the landfill development continues to the east within Cell 2. The location of
these two wells will be determined after the limits of future stages of Cell 2 are defined.
2.2.4 Compliance Monitoring Wells for Cell 1.5
Cell 1.5 is located between Cells 1 and 2. Cell 1.5 is graded so that any leachate
generated in this small cell would be collected and conveyed into the leachate collection
and removal system constructed in Cell 2, described above. Therefore, DMW-9 also
serves as the compliance well for Cell 1.5.
2.2.5 Additional Monitoring Wells for Leachate Basin 1
Monitoring well DMW-6 is located along the eastern property boundary and
downgradient of from a former leachate retention basin that collected leachate from Cell
1. A new leachate retention basin was constructed with Cell 2 Stage 1. The new leachate
pond collects and retains any leachate generated from all closed (Cell 1) and active cells
(Cells 1.5 and 2). This leachate pond is double lined with a leak detection system in
place to monitor leaks from the primary (upper) liner. DMW-6 could also serve as a
compliance monitoring point for future stages of Cell 2, depending on the design of these
future cells.
2.2.6 Property Boundary Wells
The remaining wells serve as property boundary wells. Wells DMW-2 and DMW-5 are
located along the northern boundary, downgradient from Cells 1 and 2. DMW-4 is on the
southern site boundary, upgradient of future cells.
2.3 Well Construction
Well construction records, including drilling logs, are presented in Appendix E of the
Bayview Landfill Permit'. Generally, wells have been constructed of 4- or 41/2 -inch
diameter PVC pipe with a 20-foot screened interval and a 1-foot silt sump.
3 Groundwater Sampling Procedures
Groundwater sampling procedures generally consist of first measuring the groundwater
elevation, then purging the monitoring wells of stagnant water, collecting field parameters
(pH, temperature, and conductivity) and then collecting groundwater samples for
laboratory analysis. The following sections will describe each of these procedures in
4 See footnote #2.
July 20, 2020 l 3
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
greater detail. During each monitoring event, monitoring wells will also be inspected for
damage to the upper well casing, protective cover, lock, well cap, and concrete pad. In
addition, the ground surface around the well pads will be inspected for erosion. If any
problems are discovered, they will be repaired or replaced as soon as practicable.
3.1 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Procedures
Prior to each groundwater sampling event, the groundwater level in each monitoring well
and the total well depth will be measured. Groundwater elevation measurements will be
collected using either an electric well sounder marked to determine the depth to the
nearest IA-inch (0.04-foot) increment. For each monitoring event, the total well depth will
be measured to evaluate whether silt has collected in the well casing. Water levels in the
wells will be measured prior to purging or sampling to record the static water level. The
groundwater elevation measurements will be recorded to the nearest 0.04 foot from the
top of the well casing. Water level measurements will always be referenced to the survey
mark on the well casing. When a measurement is collected, the measuring device will be
raised and lowered several times to be sure the correct measurement is recorded.
During each monitoring event, the current water level readings will be compared to the
readinge from the previous monitoring event in order to avoid discrepancies. If an
obvious discrepancy is encountered, the water level will be measured again to ensure
the measurement was recorded correctly.
Prior to collecting water level measurements, the measuring device will be checked for
damage, including bends or kinks in the tape. To maintain consistency and precision,
and to the degree possible, the same measuring device will be used during each
monitoring event and will be decontaminated between each well (see Section 3.7,
Decontamination Procedures). Also once each year, the tape will be checked against a
calibrated tape measure to verify its accuracy.
3.2 Monitoring Well Purging Procedures
Purging refers to the removal stagnant water from the well in order to prevent stagnant
water from entering sample containers. .During the purging activities, disposable latex
gloves will be worn by the sampling team and changed between wells. Temperature,
conductivity, and pH will be continuously measured during purging and recorded in the
field data collection form (see Appendix B for the field data collection form).Once all
these parameters stabilize, indicating stagnant water in the well has been replaced by
formation water, purging will be considered complete. If a well dewaters prior to
achieving the stabile water quality parameters, it will be allowed to recharge before
sampling.
Prior to conducting the well purging activities, the pH and conductivity meters will be
calibrated. Calibration of the instruments will be in accordance with the manufacturer's
procedures for the particular instrument. At a minimum, the pH meter will be calibrated
using standard calibration solutions as recommended by the manufacturer. The
conductivity meter will be calibrated using standard solutions as recommended or
supplied by the manufacturer. The same instrumentation will be used for each monitoring
event.
4 l July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
The method of well purging for this site consists of using a dedicated submersible pump
system for each well where the discharge rate can be regulated for sampling. The pump
intake will be placed within the screened section of the well casing. For wells that sustain
continuous pumping without dewatering, the discharge rate on the pump will be set to
allow minimal drawdown in the well. This procedure will minimize any cascading effects
that may volatilize constituents in the groundwater entering the well casing and will also
minimize agitating sediment collected in the bottom of the well. If the main pump system
fails, temporary portable pumps will be used as backups. If portable pumps are needed,
the intake will be gently lowered into the upper most portion of the water column to
minimize agitating any residual sediment that has collected in the bottom of the well. If a
portable pump is used for more than one well, then proper cleaning of the pump is
necessary to minimize the potential of cross contamination (refer to Section 3.0).
During the purging operations, a record of the climatic conditions, condition of the wells
and surrounding ground surface, field collected water quality, color, odors, water level
will be recorded. The information will be recorded in indelible ink, will be stored either on
site at the landfill office and will become part of the site operating record for the landfill.
3.3 Groundwater Collection and Handling Procedures
3.3.1 Groundwater Collection Procedures
During groundwater collection disposable latex gloves will be worn, and changed
between wells to minimize cross contamination of samples and to reduce the possibility
of coming into contact with groundwater containing contaminants. Prior to collecting a
groundwater sample, the monitoring wells will be purged of groundwater as described in
Section 3.2. The wells will be sampled in the same order they are purged and samples
will be collected within 24-hours following purging. If sufficient recharge does not occur
within 7 days following purging, then the well will be considered dry and a sample will not
be collected. NUERA will follow the laboratory's QA/QC protocols regarding sampling
containers, preservation, and holding times.
Groundwater samples will be collected off the pump discharge. The pump discharge will
be regulated at the time of sampling to maintain as slow discharge rate as possible
(typically 0.1 liter per minute) to minimize cascading and volatilization as the sample
containers are being filled. Once the discharge rate is set for sampling, it will be
maintained at that rate for several minutes so that the sample collected will not be from
the period of time when the pump was operating at a higher discharge rate, and to
ensure that air has been adequately purged from the discharge line. Sample containers
will be held at a slight angle to allow a slow steady stream of water to run down the inner
wall. The sample containers will be held as close to the pump discharge as possible
without touching.lf not already done, preservative should be added immediately after
filling a sample container. Sample containers for VOCs will be completely filled and
sealed carefully to prevent air bubbles. If an air bubble is present, then the sample will be
discarded and the sample will be collected again. All other sample containers will be
filled as completely as possible.
Sample containers will labeled with the well number, date and time collected,
preservatives used, analyses to be run, and the sampler's initials and placed in zip-
July 20, 2020 l 5
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
locked plastic bags. Samples will be preserved within 15 minutes of collection and
immediately placed on ice. The sample containers for each well will include as a
minimum two-40 milliliter VOA glass vials with Teflon® septa screw caps for VOCs, and
other bottles as provided by the laboratory.
Quality Assurance Samples
To provide screening of field procedures, trip blanks, field blanks, and field duplicates will
be analyzed5.
Trip Blank. A trip blank is a vial or bottle filled with laboratory reagent grade water.
These blanks are tested to see if something contaminated the water in the bottles during
transit. The purpose of the trip blank is to determine if any volatile samples have become
contaminated with extraneous substances during storage and transport. Trip blanks are
only necessary when collecting VOC, gasoline range organics (GRO), and petroleum
volatile organic compound (PVOC) samples. Trip blanks will be prepared by the
laboratory and will accompany the empty sample containers and collected samples to
and from the laboratory. At least one trip blank will be prepared for each day of sampling
or for every container transported to the laboratory. Trip blanks will be handled in a
similar fashion as the other samples and will be analyzed for VOC constituents. lf no
VOCs are detected in the groundwater samples the trip blank samples do not need to be
tested.
Field Blank. Field blanks, or decontamination blanks, consist of a sample of the reagent
grade water supplied by the laboratory and used in the final rinse step of the equipment
decontamination procedure. Field blanks evaluate the effectiveness of decontamination
procedures when equipment is not dedicated to a well or disposed of after one use. Field
blanks are not required if dedicated sampling equipment or disposable sampling
equipment is used.
lf decontamination procedures are effective, there should be no contamination in the field
blanks. One field blank should be collected for every 10 or fewer samples collected.
Decontaminate the sampling equipment for the field blank the same way you do when
collecting other samples. After decontaminating the sampling device, fill it with laboratory
reagent grade water, then collect a sample of the reagent grade water - this is your field
blank. Collect the field blank from equipment used in a site's most contaminated well, if
possible.
Field Duplicate. Field duplicate samples will be collected to assess the variability of the
analytical results caused by the sampling equipment and procedures used. Field
duplicates should be collected in wells in which the contaminant concentrations have
been relatively stable over time and wells that are screened in relatively homogeneous
material. This will minimize analytical variability caused by contaminant concentration
gradients that may exist in the ground water system. One field duplicate should be
collected for every 10 or fewer samples and handled in the same manner as the original
sample; however, label them differently so the laboratory cannot tell they are duplicates.
5 Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, Groundwater Monitoring Plan Guidance, 2006
6 l July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill 0-2
3.3.2 Groundwater Sample Handling Procedures
Once the samples have been properly sealed and labeled as described above, they will
be recorded on a chain-of-custody (COC) form and signed and dated by the sampling
technician(s). An example of a typical COC is presented in Appendix C. The COC will
accompany the samples to the laboratory. The samples will be placed in a plastic ice
chest (similar to an Igloo ice chest) with ice or a re-freezable type product to maintain a
temperature as close to 4°C as possible until the analyses are performed. Dry ice is not
permitted due to the potential of freezing the samples and breaking the containers.
Precautions will be taken to secure the samples in the ice chest to prevent them from
breaking during transport. The samples will be delivered to the laboratory within 24-hours
after collection, therefore it will not be necessary to preserve the samples in the field,
except samples collected for dissolved constituent analyses. Any samples, other than the
samples collected for dissolved constituent analyses, requiring preservatives will be
collected in pre-preserved containers supplied by the.laboratory.
3.4 Groundwater Sampling Frequency
The groundwater sampling schedule for detection monitoring consists of collecting
samples from each monitoring well for the detection monitoring constituents on a semi-
annual basis after background data has been established (see Section 4.1.2 for a
discussion on detection monitoring constituents). Any changes to the frequency and/or
number and type of constituents for detection monitoring must be approved by the
Director prior to implementing the change. The schedule for establishing background
data is discussed in Section 5.5.
3.5 Weather Protocol
To the extent possible, sampling of the monitor wells will not be permitted during
inclement weather, thunderstorms, or periods when the temperature drops below
freezing. Caution should be taken when the temperature exceeds 100°F.
3.6 Employee Health and Safety
Landfill personnel are required to participate in an ongoing safety pr0gram6. This
program complies with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and
the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) regulations as
applicable. This program is designed to make the site and equipment as secure as
possible and to educate landfill personnel about safe work practices.
NUERA trains all of the landfill employees in First Aid, CPR, accident investigation, drug
and alcohol policy, lock-out and tag-out procedures, confined space entry, blood born
pathogen, hazard communication, defensive driving, spill prevention control and counter
measure, hazardous waste, and commercial driving license requirements.
While in the field, personnel engaged in the monitoring program shall also adhere to the
following minimum health and safety protocol.
6 2019 Bayview Landfill Class l Permit Renewal Application, October 30, 2019. '
July 20, 2020 l 7
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
• Latex gloves. A new set of gloves shall be used for each monitoring well. Used
gloves will be stored in a plastic bag and disposed in the landfill at the end of
each sample event.
• Eye protection. Safety glasses shall be wore at all times.
If excessive contamination is detected in the groundwater sampling, NUERA will develop
a more detailed health and safety plan for subsequent ground water monitoring activities.
This will include purge water storage, testing, and disposal, protective clothing
requirements, emergency decontamination procedures (eye wash), emergency response
protocols, and medical monitoring.
3.7 Decontamination Procedures
Prior to beginning each sampling event and between monitoring wells, all non-dedicated
equipment, including the water level measuring device, will be decontaminated
thoroughly to minimize the potential for cross contamination. The minimum
decontamination procedures will consist washing the equipment with a non-phosphate
detergent solution (e.g., Alquinox® , Liquinox® ) and then thoroughly rinsing the
equipment with organic-free tap water7. Decontamination of larger items, such as
dedicated pumps removed for repair, will be accomplished by steam cleaning.
Analytical Tesiing and Statistical nalysis
4.1 Laboratory Analysis
The analytical laboratory selected to perform the required analyses will be licensed and
certified by the State of Utah (UAC R315-308-2(5)). At a minimum, the selected
laboratory will apply quality control procedures in accordance with Test Methods for
Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA publication SW-846, Third
Edition, Final Updates I (1993), II (1995), IIA (1994), IlB (1995), Ill (1997), IIIA (1999),
III6 (2005), IV (2008), and V (2015).
4.1.1 Laboratory Procedures
The laboratory will follow appropriate QA/QC protocols developed as part of its licensing
and certification. At a minimum, upon receipt of the samples by the laboratory, the
sample lot will be verified with the information on the COC. If there is a discrepancy with
the samples, the responsible party that collected the samples will be notified and the
problem will be resolved before the analyses are performed. The COC will be signed and
dated by the designated receiving personnel at the laboratory. The COC will remain with
the laboratory until the analyses are completed, then will be attached to the completed
laboratory report. For samples that require overnight transport to the laboratory, the COC
will be signed; including date and time received by the transporter. The COC will be
attached to the sample container(s) and delivered to the laboratory and a copy of COC
will be supplied by the transporter. After the analyses are completed and the laboratory
7 Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, Groundwater Monitoring Plan Guidance, 2006
8 l July 20, 2020
Inorganic Constituents
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
report finalized, the complete COC, or receipt if sent by certified mail, will be attached to
the laboratory report. The laboratory will keep a copy of the COC and laboratory results
for a period of at least three years.
The laboratory will adhere to its QA/QC plan developed as part of its licensing and
certification. If possible, the laboratory will be required to achieve detection limits (DLs)
that are at least one order of magnitude below the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
for a constituent for which an MCL has been promulgated.
4.1.2 Constituents to be Analyzed and Test Methods
As specified in UAC Rule R315-308-4, the groundwater monitoring program at all solid
waste landfills shall consist of detection monitoring that includes specific constituents.
The constituents to be tested for during the detection-monitoring program are listed in
Table 1. Testing methods used for all constituents will incorporate laboratory detection
limits (DLs) that are below the Ground Water Protection Standards identified in UAC
Rule R315-308-4 for each of the constituents. All samples will be analyzed within the
required holding times for the particular analyses. The laboratory will report the CAS
number for each constituent analyzed.
Table 4. Background/Detection Monitoring Constituents
table units
Arnmonia (7664-41-7)
Carbonate/Bicarbonate
Calcium —
Chernical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Chloride
Iron (7439-89-6)
Magnesium
Manganese (7439-96-5)
Nitrate (as N)
pH
Potassium
Sodium
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
Heavy Metals
Antimony (7440-36-0) Lead
Arsenic (7440-38-2) Mercury (7439-97-6)
Barium (7440-39-3) Nickel (7440-02-0)
Beryllium (7440-41-7): Selenium (7782-49-2)
Cadmium (7440-43-9), Silver (7440-22-4)
Chromium Thallium
Cobalt (7440-48-4) Vanadium (7440-62-2)
Copper (7440-50-8) Zinc (7440-66-6)
July 20, 2020 l 9
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Table 4. Background/Detection Monitoring Constituents
table units

VOCs
Acetone (67-64-1)
Acrylonitrile (107-13-1)
Benzene (71-43-2)
Bromochloromethane (74-97-5)
Bromodichloromethane (75-27-4)
Bromoform (75-25-2)
Carbon disulfide (75-15-0)
Carbon tetrachloride (56-23-5)
Chlorobenzene (108-90-7)
Chloroethane (75-00-3)
Chloroform (67-66-3)
Dibromochloromethane (124-48-1)
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (96-12-8)
1,2-Dibromoethane (106-93-4)
1,2-Dichlorobenzene, ortho (95-50-1)
1,4-Dichlorobenzene, para (106-46-7)
trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene (110-57-6)
1,1-Dichloroethane (75-34-3)
1,2-Dichloroethane (107-06-2)
1,1-Dichloroethylene (75-35-4)
cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene (156-59-2)
trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene (156-60-5)
1,2-Dichloropropane (78-87-5)
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene (100061-01-5)
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene (10061-02-6)
Ethylbenzene (100-41-4)
2-Hexanone (591-78-6)
Methyl bromide (74-83-9)
Methyl chloride (74-87-3)
Methylene bromide (74-95-3)
Methylene chloride (75-09-2) Methyl ethyl ketone; MEK
(78-93-3) Methyl iodide (74-88-4)
4-Methyl-2-pentanone (108-10-1)
Styrene (100-42-5)
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane (630-20-6)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (79-34-5)
Tetrachloroethylene (127-18-4)
Toluene (108-88-3)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane (71-55-6)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane (79-00-5)
Trichloroethylene (79-01-6)
Trichlorofluoromethane; CFC-11 (75-69-4)
1,2,3-Trichloropropane (96-18-4)
Vinyl acetate (108-05-4)
Vinyl chloride (75-01-4)
Xylenes (1330-20-7)
Source: UAC R315-308-4
a The CAS Number (if appropriate) is listed in parenthesis.
4.2 Establishment of Background Data
UAC R315-308-2 (5)(a) specifies that background data for the detection monitoring
constituents (see Table 1) should be established during the first year of facility operation
after wells are installed or an alternative schedule as approved by the Director.
Background data consists of a minimum of eight independent samples from the
upgradient and four independent samples from each downgradient well.
The background sampling for the site's original monitoring wells (DMW-1 through DMW-
6) was performed from March 1991 to June 1992, at the beginning of landfill operations.
Upgradient monitoring well DMW-7 was installed in 1999. Background samples were
collected between 2000 to 2003. Prior to DMW-7 installation, DMW-1 served as the
upgradient monitoring well.
Downgradient monitoring well DMW-9 was installed in 2004. Four background samples
were collected in 20058, the first year of operations in Cell 2 Stage 1. Four additional
samples were collected in 2006 and 2007. These samples showed no statistically
8 Includes one sample from late 2004.
10 l July 20, 2020
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill 1;01
significant changes and therefore the data points were added to the background data set
for the statistical analysis of subsequent samples.
The NUERA plans to install new monitoring wells adjacent to each Cell 2 Stage 3 and 4
as the cells are developed, which will be over the next 5 to 10 years. Wells will be
installed one year prior to the estimated time of operations. Background data for
groundwater from the new wells will be collected quarterly adhere to the protocols
outlined in the cited regulations.
4.3 Statistical Methods to Evaluate Analytical Data
After each sampling event the groundwater monitoring data will be evaluated to
determine if statistically significant changes from background values exist for each
constituent listed in Table 1. The statistical analyses will be performed in accordance
with UAC R315-308-2 (8).
The initial inter-well analysis of the groundwater chemistry indicated enough variability
between wells to justify using an intra-well analysis approach. The results of the analysis
were presented in a report submitted to the Utah Division of Waste Management and
Radiation Control (DWMRC) on October 8, 1998. The software package, Sanitas, will be
used to perform the statistical analysis of the groundwater data.
The current statistical analysis approach uses intra-well methods consisting of control
charts and prediction limits. The purpose of these analyses are to determine whether
there are any statistically significant changes (SSCs) in the compliance data relative to
background concentrations. These methods establish limit values based on the
background water quality data collected for each well.
Parametric prediction limits are flexible and straightforward to interpret. The mean and
standard deviation of the background data are used to construct a concentration or
prediction limit (PL) which is then compared to one or more compliance values.
Compliance values are considered acceptable if they are below the PL.
Control charts are applicable in cases where the groundwater has not been
contaminated. The preferred method recommended in the Unified Guidance from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the combined Shewhart-CUSUM control
chart. The Shewhart portion is similar to a PL in that compliance measurements are
compared against background data. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) portion sequentially
analyzes each new measurement with prior compliance data. Baseline limit values are
established with the mean and standard deviation of the background data.
Both parametric prediction limits and the combined Shewhart-CUSUM control charts
require data to be normally distributed or transformed normal. Normality implies that the
values are consistent and follow a normal, bell-shaped curve (Gaussian curve) and that
the majority of the values (95%) are within two standard deviations from the mean of the
concentration values. The Sanitas software tests the data for normality using the
Shapiro-Wilk normality test (for data sets with 50 or fewer samples) or the Shapiro-
Francia test (for data sets with more than 50 samples). The Shapiro-Wilk normality test is
the preferred method based on EPA guidance. The data are not considered normal if
the percentage of non-detects in the background data is greater than 50%.
July 20, 2020 l 11
Groundwater Monitoring Plan for Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
A non-parametric prediction limit is used if the data set fails the normality test, cannot be
transformed normal, or has greater than 50% non-detects. When a non-parametric
approach is applied, the highest background concentration from the data set is used to
set the prediction limit.
e orting equire ents
Upon completion of each detection monitoring sampling event, the laboratory analytical
data and statistical analysis of the data will be summarized in a report. The report will be
submitted with the landfill's annual report unless more immediate notification is required,
which is the case when statistically significant increases are observed.
5.1 Detection Monitoring
When a statistically significant increase over background data has been detected, the
owner or operator must enter the information in the operating record and notify the
Director of this finding in writing within 14 days of the completion of the statistical
analysis of the sample results and within 30 days of the receipt of the sample results
(UAC R315-308-2 (11)(a). The notification must indicate what constituents have shown
statistically significant increases. In addition, the owner or operator must immediately
resample groundwater in all monitoring wells for the constituents listed in Table 1. If a
statistically significant increase is still present after resampling, the owner or operator
must notify the Director in writing within seven days of the completion of the statistical
analysis of the sample results. However, if the statistically significant increase over
background data is believed to be caused by a source other than the landfill, then the
owner or operator can prepare a report that explains the cause of the significant change.
This report must be prepared and certified by a qualified groundwater scientist and
submitted to the Director within 90 days after the sampling event for approval.
5.2 Assessment Monitoring
If the Director approves the report, then the landfill may return to Detection Monitoring. If
the Director believes a satisfactory explanation is not given, the owner or operator must
initiate the assessment monitoring program described in R315-308-2 (12).
5.3 Corrective Action
If after implementation of the assessment monitoring program, a successful
demonstration is not made as described in R315-308-2(13)(e), NUERA will work with the
Director to define the corrective actions to protect human health and the environment.
12 i July 20, 2020
APPENDIX A
Bayview Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Site Map
500 250 1000 1500
MONITORING
. WELL SM5
OOMPOST MONITORING
TEA 'NELL svo
CCL_ECOO POND
MONITORNG
WELL SM2 y‘EIANDONED)
,
FUTURE
OF1 I 2 STADF MONITORING -
WELL DMW-1
FLTURE
CLLL I STADE 2 !I CON,OL ,ANCE
SITE BOUNDARY
MONITORING
WELL DM3
(ABANDONED,
B. LEACHATE CELL 2 STAGE 2
DRAINLINE 3< LEACHATENi..
COLLECTION 1
CELL 2 SUMP
MONITORING STAGE 2
UNPAVED UOMPOSTING
AREA POWER
POLES (TVP)
CELL 2 STAGE 2
LEACHATE PUMP
PAVED
COMPOSTING
AREA
CELL
(CLOSED)
I WELL DM8
(ABANDONED)
CELL 2 IrACHATE CI FANOUT /— MONITORING WELL SM1
UNDERGROUND POWER UNE
253
ONITORING WELL SM3
DIRT ROAD LEACHATE CL EAN
OUT 1TYP)
c STOCK;
PILE!" MONITORING -
WELL OMB NORTH WASH SILTY SAND.
STOCKPILE
MONITORING WELL DIVW-2 14" LEACHATE LINES (DOUR) F WALIFDJ
"
StA;16-171;-'
.! CLEAN OUT
..40.0Watrtr. 1, LEACHA I E LINES mONiTORING WELL (DOUBLE WAL LED
_--
FUTUI,E STAGE 3
LEACHATE
COLLECTION SUMP
„ FUTURE MONI ToRING
WELL (LOCATION APPROX)
I
SEISM'. TRENCH
FUGITIVE WASTE CONTROL FENCE
LEACHATE
DRAINLINE
LLIIILKE STEEL 4 LEACIPLOE
COLLECTION SUMP
`.1 LEACHATE
POND
CELL 2
STAGE 1
FIRE FLYDRANT
WATER TANK
PUMP ,„„ ' 'IA'S'
V. HOUSE // \.k..
t, ) 'GNU, PCI E S
MCNI
FUGITIVE WASTE
CONTROL FENC
GASOLINE PAD
DIRT ROAD
PROPANE PAD
DMINISTRATIO
O‘FICE AND 1,151I,LNANDE
5,11LPINC,
PIRF HYDRANT _44/
ENFERWASH
OWER POLES
(TYR)
SITE BOUNDARY
SCALE 1:100
FEET
SPE, NO
APPENDIX B
Field Data Collection Form
GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAM
BAYVIEW MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL
NORTHERN UTAH ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE AGENCY
DATE:
SAMPLED BY:
RECORDED BY:
WEATHER:
Well Number
Depth of Well
(feet)
Depth to
Water (feet)
Temperature
C F pH Conductivity Comments
DMW-1 300
DMW-2 278
DMW-3 308
DMW-4 195
DMW-5 210
DMW-6 166
DMW-7 295
DMW-8 270
DMW-9 242
APPENDIX C
Typical Chain Of Custody
CHAIN OF CUSTODY CHEMTECH - FORD ANALYTICAL LABORATORY
Expedited turnaround subject to additional charge
CHEMTECH-FORD
9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
801.262.7299 PHONE
866.792.0093 FAX
vvvvvv ord com
Payment Terms are net 30 days OAC. 1.5% interest charge per month (18% per annum). Client ogress to pay collection costs and attorney's
fees.
ITESTS REQUESTED
"M
E
W
=

To
ta
l
C
o
li
fo
rm

+

E
.

c
o
li

(
Pr
e
s
e
n
t/A
bs
e
nt)
•
1
To
ta
l
C
o
li
fo
rm

+

E
.

c
o
h
(
En
u
m
e
ra
te
d)
•
H
P
C
(
Pla
te

C
o
u
n
t)

:.,;
Lab Use Only CLIENT SAMPLE INFORMATION
LOCATION / IDENTIFICATION DATE TIME MATRIX Fieidl Residual
Chlorine
1
2
3
5
6
i
8
9.
10.
Sampled by: [print] Sampled by: [signature] ON ICE NOT ON ICE Temp (Cl:
Special instructions:
Samples received outside the EPA recommended
temperature range of 0-6 C may be rejected.
Relinquished by: [signature] Date/Time Received by: [signature] Date/Time
Relinquished by: [signature] Date/Time Received by: [signature] Date/Time
Relinquished by: [signature] Date/Time Received by: [signature] Date/Time
FAX:
PROJECT:
TURNAROUND REQUIRED:*
COMPANY
ADDRESS:
CITY/STATE/ZIP:
PHONE X:
CONTACT:
EMAIL:
BILLING ADDRESS
BILLING CITY/STATE/ZIP:
PURCHASE ORDER 14:
CHEMTECH-FORD
LABORATORiES
APPENDIX H – RUNON – RUNOFF CALCULATIONS

•
•
•

Runon-Runoff Calculations
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
•

RUN-ON/ RUN-OFF CALCULATIONS
SUVSWD Bayview
Class I Landfill Permit Application
Submitted March 2009 • Prepared By:
HDR ENGINEERING, INC .
•
INTRODUCTION
The run-on/run-off calculations were performed to determine the size of drainage ditches
required to control run-on and run-off flows. The run-on/run-off peak flows were calculated
using the Rational Method:
Q = CiA
where Q = Run-off flow (ft^/sec)
C = Run-off Coefficient
/ = rainfall intensity (in/hr)
A = Area contributing to run-off (acres)
The run-off coefficient, C, was multiplied by the run-off coefficient adjustment factor, Cf, of 1.1
to adjust the rational method for a recurrence interval of 25 years.
Once the run-on/run-off flows were calculated, the capacity of the ditch designed to carry the
run-on/run-off was calculated using Manning's Equation:
Q = h^AR"'S"'
n
where Q = Maximum capacity of ditch (ft^/sec)
rt = Maiming's roughness coefficient
A ~ Cross-sectional area of ditch (ft^)
R = Hydraulic radius (A/wetted perimeter) (ft)
5= slope of ditch (ft/ft)
If the capacity ofthe ditch exceeds the run-on/run-off flow, then the ditch is adequate.
The first set of calculations shown in Appendix M, Attachment 1 is for the run-on from Cell 1
onto Cell 2 and fi-om Cell 2 onto Cell 1. The map on page 4 of Attachment M-1 shows the
portion of Cell 1 that is directed towards Cell 2 and the portion of Cell 2 that will be directed to
Cell 1 after closure with final cover in place. The ditch that will be constructed to go between
Cell 1 and Cell 2 will direct the run-on to the north and south to existing drainage channels. The
final cover on Cell 1 and Cell 2 will be overlaid with short grass prairie, which has a Marming's
roughness coefficient, n, of 0.15, This was considered to be cultivated land on a rural catchment,
so a value of 0.30 was chosen as the basic factor for the run-off coefficient, C.
1 I SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill Pemiit Application March 2009
The second set of calculations shown in Appendix M, Attachment 2 is for the run-off from the
areas of Stage 1 and Stage 2 in Cell 2 prior to installation ofthe final cap. The calculations were
done for the design of drainage ditches which will be constructed aroimd the perimeter of Stages
1 and 2. The run-off was calculated as if Cell 2 were filled to capacity prior to installation ofthe
final cap as a worst-case scenario so that the ditches can be constructed as Cell 2 is filled and
will not need to be redesigned. A Marming's roughness coefficient of 0.027 (earth with weeds)
was used for the channel design and a run-off coefficient (C-value) of 0.30 was used for run-off
calculations (undeveloped land). Because the diversion ditches around Stages 1 and 2 will not
continue around Stages 3 and 4 until these stages are constructed, the ditches will outfall to the
sump in Stage 2,
2 I SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill Permit Application March 2009
APPENDIX M
ATTACHMENT 1:
REQUIRED CAPACITY OF DRAINAGE DITCH FOR RUN-OFF
JobNa No.
HDR Computation TT^R
oiec. |3aiK\/\-eAA^ Lr?jr\(ifili [computed W^^Jr)'^
I Subject I Checked [Date
Task Sheet Of 9±
Q-CJL^
lin^e K)or4^er^ dl(/ec-HoK^,#]^ ^mximati^ orto^ wot
12a^d- ^a 2jd.\ ^Oi rano-f-f cce-fdcmi cJr drainaq^ dur^ ^oc
cxy\\'ua.k(U land /s 0.3G, Thit> \t> maUipfi^d^ba a W^£/iccj
Qadot" o-P /./ -for 0. rec^^'^mci in^e/vaLof 95 &e^s^-.o m^
coeW\c(cr\-(- o^ drainaQQ.,C, i^ 0.^3,
^5-7^^
\o deiejrir\i^^ ram-fad init/isUu^^ \\m^ o-f coir\cm{'faMor\^^:hc^
"^c- Q.oo-?(nL)!' n^ MoLr\f\inQ'^ yoaq^n€5S coe-f(^\Ci^A-l-
Chapter 5 - Hydrology Section 6 - Peak Discharge using the Rational Method
Table 5.6-3: Runoff coefficient adjustment factors for Rational Method
Recurrence Inter/al (years)
IS
50
100
^r
1.1
1.2
1.25
The Rational formula now becomes Equation 5.6-4.
n-CC,IA
360 ,5.6-4
r
5.6.6 Procedure for Rational Method
The general procedure for estimating the peak discharge for a watershed using the Rational
Method is as follows: • . .
(1) Determine the watershed area in hectares.
(2) With consideration for future characteristics ofthe watershed, detennine the time of
concentration as defmed in Section 5.5.
(3) Assure consistency with the assumptions and limitations for application ofthe Rational
Method.
(4) According to the locality in Texas and the design firequency, extract the rainfall IDF
coefficients e, b, and d values firom the list shown in Appendix 5-2.
(5) Using Equation 5.6-2, calculate rainfall intensity.
(6) With consideration for future characteristics ofthe watershed, select or develop
appropriate runoff coefficients for the watershed. Where the watershed comprises more
than one characteristic, C values for each area segment must be estimated individually. A
weighted C value then may be estimated using Equation 5.6-5.
C = -!^
m
.5.6-5
where:
C = weighted runoff coefficient
n = nth subarea
m = number of subareas
C„ = nmoffcoefficient forn"" subarea
V
Job No. No.
HDR Computation
Jiect
Subject
p)aij\i\?AA) land-Cii Computed Date
KR
Checked Date
Task Sheet 3 01 Al
A,^9U.^5 \f^/v^oZlil\ - ^-a\s acres
^af
c^wa
a^^^
r^a^l
A;,.r3-y'^ fa'' I ^oo" i£ '3,W-
' U.-^^H cLcre^
- 336 6Lcr-^s
l.a=
l'Q\o^ ^ \'^A acre<?.
1,5 ? 31.H^ ia-^/jJOlii^l - 9,0? acrc5
\ \n'
Cdl 2
: 9M^ acres
To+al - lb acr^s
< FLCW DXtECtCOKJ
Job No. No.
HDR Computation
^
I Computed
I Subject Checked
Task Sheet b
L- 500'
Date
KR
Date
Of ^1
"ShorV amss prairie.
C\")-'(.04>
^a_r-^ace cLescnifAr^iOfv^ - ^VAO^V (\rass !^ra\riej
Tcr U -- _ T^nV}' ^^,\ •:c , olq
3u:x5v SISOOCH.I^VS^
~t7; ,^ u ^ i^k. - .OO^oSL
3t<)0\i 3WD0^1~^1^)
CWoufxrveiV ^\o^a
S- l?c .". \/--\.U ^Vsec -?rorr\ ^-f. SL
Job No No.
HDR Computation
rojen
I Subject
Task
O
[Computed
Checked
Sheet
OlOJX^ei Fl0(jO (corv-Vir\u£(0
11
1- ^ JOn^-R- :^ .1^
Date
KR
Date
Of -2-
^ I Vvr / Uor ru.t^o^-^orA
CeU \)
•?xxf>e()v G>r\ ^ef.^5 Q-uecur and \oo-ueQjr Vhoux ^Vorm. \s
X^-S^-tl- 3^-Kr \j(x\ae ^forrv prec{p\Va_V\on'-^re^ue/?Ca rnops
XH - ^^'V 3^'Kr \/6Ll\^e ^forri precip(-f(i-lion -i^^aenca maf)5
Xj^i^^ \rvbet loo-ur (^hrpr€6p4dion-?r^(>aOTa m^Xp-IS)
Vs-0-005 ^0.^55-Io.i(o.V\-o3 - . Ma^^ iache^
p^-^/a
TABLE 12.S RATIONAL RUNOFF COEFFICIENT EEF.I
a. Urtan Cuchments
General Description Surface
City
Suburban business
Industrial
Residential multiunics
Housing estates
Bungalows
Paiks, cenaeteries
0.7-0.9
0.5-0.7
0.5-0.9
0.6-0.7
0.4-0.6
0.3-0.5
0.1-0.3
Asplialt paving 0.7-0.9
Roofs 0.7-0.9
Lawn heavy soil
>r slope 0.25-0.35
. 2-r 0.18-0.22
<2* 0.13-0.17
Lawn sandy soil
>7* 0.15-0.2
2-r 0.10-0.15
<2° 0.05-0.10
b. Rural Catchments (las than 10 km^)
Ground Cover
Bare surface
Giassland
Cultivated land
Timber
Basic Factor
0.40
0^5
t. "-gJ
Corrections: Add or Subtract
Slope < 5%: -0.05
Slope > 10%: +0.05
Reojincnce interval < 20 yr —0.05
Recurrence interval > 50 yr +0.05
Mean annual precipitation > 900 mm: +0.03
Table 3-L—Kougimess coefficients (Manning's n) for
sheet flow,.
Surface description N EEF.a
Smcx>th surfaces (concrete, asphalt, gravel, or
bare soil) : O.Oll
Fallow (no residue) \ 0.05
Cultivated soils:
Residue cover $20% 0.06
Residue cover >20% 0.17
Grass:
Short grass prairie 0.15 '
Dense grasses* 0J24
Bermudagiass 0.41
Range (natural) 0.13'
Woods:'
Light underbrush 0.40
Dense underbrush OM
'The n values are a composite of infonnation compiled by Engman
(1986).
^Includes spedes such as weeping lovegrass, bluegrass, buffalo
grass, blue grama grass, and native grass mixtures.
'When selecting n, consider c")ver to a height of about 0.1 ft This
is the only part of the plant cuver that will obstruct sheet flow.
y
r Vi
o
a>
CO
S-
o o
J-
03
VI-^M^
^EF. a-
.50 -
?n ~ . tu
.10 -
~^-
—^
nfi —
04 —
n9 —
• V'-
m
.Ui —
nnt^ — UUD ""
"^"^^
—-
—
/
I
—
^—
'—
r
/
/
r
• "••
—-:::::;i _.. ,5 ^ : -..: /I ^B 4Wi ^^ -^----2__/ ^^ .Z „ 2_.i ^^.rr.[ .//>/__ ^/>^4^ .
/ / JLM-^--.. 3^-:::..... /l / ' LD .I_.i....
L,?^ J....
Z„_ ,
2 4/
lllllllllll/
i:::E;-=-.i:?
/ / ' ^
:::: i : v:.\ _i... .
.. -, ./
^ / :::::z::i::::
. _>_.^
•• b -
f 1--!=-\\ i'-.z"\\ r-
,
,
.. J_
1/1 ill
w tUd:
_-
--
— —
-•—
--
1
20
Average velocnxy, ft/sec
Figure 3-1.—Average velocities for estimating travel time for shallow concentrated flow.
114 113 112 111 110 109
NOAA ATLAS 2, Voliinn VI
PrepHr«d bx U.S. Dipirtfncnt irf Commtre*
NBtlonHlOnanic ind Atmospheric AdtniniBtnitlpil
Natlonil Wsathsr Sirvictv offica of Hydnilocy
Prepared for U.S. Department of Aerlculturo,
Soil Conservation Service, Engineering Division
^-Ji=i%:
-142
•41
-40
-39
-38
UTAH I
10 0 10 20 SD 4(1
MILES
Figure 25
ISOPLUVIflLS OF Z-YR 24-HR PRECIPITATION IN
TENTHS OF AN INCH
-37
114 113 112 111 110 109
^ TO
Xi
1>J
Region of applicability*
Utah south of the Unitas east of
Wasatch, and east and south of
Boulder and Pine Valley l\^oun-
tains'd)
Most of western Utah (2)
Northeast and northwest corners
of Utah (3)
Equation
Corr.
coeff.
No. of
stations
Mean of
computed
stn. values
(inciies}
I irt n
- 0.011 -f 0.942 [(X,)(X,/Xj)] 0.95
0.494 + 0.755 [(Xa)(X,/X,)] .90
86
85
0.72
1.96
Y, = 0.005 + 0.852 [(X,)(Xi/X,)]
Y,oo = 0.322 + 0.789 F(X,)(X,/X,)]
.89
.87
Ya = 0.019 + 0.711[(X,){X,/X,)]
'+ O.OOIZ
Y,„„ = 0.338 + 0.670 [(X,)(X,/X,)]
+ O.OOIZ
.82
.80
65
65
98
79
0.41
1.25
0.40
1.04
* Numbers in parentheses refer to geographic regions shown in figure 18. See text for more complete description.
List of variables
YI =2-yr 1-hr estimated value
Yioo == 100-yr 1-hr estimated value
Xl == 2-yr 6-hr value from precipitation-frequency maps
= 2-yr 24-hr value from precipitation-frequency maps
= 100-yr 6-hr value from precipitation-frequency maps
= 100-yr 24-hr value from precipitation-frequency maps
= point elevation in hundreds of feet
Standard
error of
estimate
(inches)
X,
X,
X«
Z
70 m
0.085
.290
7^
Sa B^ (Si
113 112 ni no
liiiimtii 11117 I
NOAA ATLAS 2, Voiume VI
Pripgftd by U-S. Depertment 9/ Cwrmtrct
NationBlOceanlcandAtmospliericAdminletnition
Netional Weather Service, Office of hfydrolciy
' Prepared for U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Sou Conservation Sirvke, Englnearfng Dlvitlon
-42
-40
UTAH
ID 0 ID 2D 30 40
-39
-38
MILES
Figure 19
ISOPLUVIALS OF Z-YR 6-HR PRECIPITATION IN
TENTHS OF AN INCH
-37
114 113 112 in 110 109
-X) 7^
^ CI
-C) 7^
^?^ ^t;.
114 113 n2 111 110 109
NOAA ATLAS 2, Volume VI
Prepared by U.S. Department of Commerce
National Oceanic end Atmospheric Admimstretion
National Weather Service, Office of Hydroiojr
f r«pared for U.S. Dapartment of AericuJture,
Soil Conservation Ssrvice, EnglneerinE Division
[Job No. No.
HDR Computation TTKR
\/wx) Land^-^ai ico..p.e. k.. ^16'^ jject
Subject ^ I Checked Date
T.sv-Y"^rY>0 oi C(y^CP/lA/rrflQrV,-&)r CP.II ^ Isheet 15 lof Q_
5a/'face^ D^^cnp-Horo - Shorl ar^55 p^airio
r\' 0.16 '^
U300' -X =n^oi(nLT''^=_.Qai(r^j5^-^noO''^^
^hallooj concmho-'ltcL-?louj (t:>ud(xk-(loud)
^a^-(ac^ (:i^5cn/>^o/i.-^hor+ arass prairie
5, - 0.05
V- 3.1? ^"^/s (-kotro ^Ef.S) u5\oa 5-0.05 -?or unfWed ^^0
Tr, V L - __LaO—^ - 0.OOP3
X. - L_ r- IOA' ^—^ - O'OCni
V^-? ^/3^c (-Pvorn EEF. 5^ UiS\n(\ 15^ ^^5 ^or unpa'^ed ^Oi\j
3^V 31^0(3,(^-^^5)
P
Job No. No.
HDR Computation TTT?
•ieet RaaV\Ph) L(lm-(](( |cofT,pu.,d loate 5 / C^
I Subject I Checked |Date
Task Sheet
3^C0V 3^00CMn6%~)
lk io! a.
TcTarfxL ^.^\'S1^+ .0093-^ .O01~i -h.C(^iq-= . 5bL:'Q hr/^Q nnir\
I ( hr .
T^- 33.qb min (-Tor runoH-^^om c^il g_
0^' conce/A^ro^iorv ^o be usedl is ^^J I mm. (-C€)r Q IN
Bd^^ on R.er. 3^-r>aurt b'. PreopHa+ioru dmfh ver-5U5
r^-hiira p^fod^-for ^^\\cA-(hxroMpY^ (5e^ p^a£ IM)
50--n}in shrm^^e. va\uecy^ .l'i mu^^b^, (xppliecL^fo
''M. io a 35-n^dy I-hour
6 ^D\orm \5 0-^.
.'. (kfih ai 0^ p6\tri -Par '^6-moj^ H^-rriin sioi-^rr?--
m^\" - ,z^ II
lfl
1-t
l-»
ro
(N
•"
o
o>
CO
• r^
to
lO
"9-
_
u
^
Io
n D
e
p
t
h
1 2

ic
l
p
l
l
i
0
I • 2l
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
r. •
-
— -
-
-
5
f
10
1
1
25
I
v.^
y-i-
50
-
-_
-
-
• -
-
-
-^
-
-
.
—
.
— -
-
100
Return Period in Yean, Partial-Duration Series
Figure 6. Precipitation depth versus retum period jor
partial-duration series.
T«ble 1.—Five, 10-. 15-
pcrlods
and 30-aliiute ratios for 2- and lOO-year return
Keglon
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Region
Coastal. Korthwest
Interior Northwest
Rocky Mountains-North
Front Face and High
Plains-North
Great Basin
Rocky Mountains-South
Front Face and High
Plains-South
Southwest Deserts
2-Year
5
.30
.35
.38
.39
.34
.35
.33
.34
Retu
10
Ratios to
m Pe
15
alnutea
.45
.53
.57
.58
.51
.54
.51
.51
.56
.64
.68
.69
.61
.65
.62
.62
rlod
30
.73
.81
.84
.85
.81
.83
.83
.82
1 Hour
100-Year Return P
5
.36
.37
.35
.37
.34
.32
.29
.30
10 15
minutes
.53
.56
.55
.56
.52
.50
.46
.46
.64
.67
.67
.69
.63
.62
.59
.59
erlod
30
.82
.85
.84
.87
.84
.81
.81
.80
The final consideration waa conparablllty
to Inforiaatlon for locations adjacent to the study
area. Taking such Information Into account accoi>-
pLlshed two goals. First, It contributed to the
degree of consistency and continuity between this
study and other reports. Second, It provided ad-
ditional Insight Into the variation of the ratios
In this report, providing anchors, so to speak, at
the study area boundaries. For areas east of the
study region, ve compared our results to Frederick
et al. (1977) and for California we related our
results to Frederick and Killer (1979). Xn addi-
tion, we developed frequency estimates for several
stations with ahort-duratloci data in surrounding
states. Fourteen stations were analyzed .for this
purpoae, 10 In the Plains States and 4 In Califor-
nia. Host of these stations were close enough to
be directly comparable to adjacent stations within
the study area, vrhlle a few were chosen at greater
distances from the boundaries to provide some Idea
of Che trend In ratios leading up to the study
area.
It was concluded that the ratios In this
report were consistent with previous studies. The
final ratios are listed In Table 1. A comparison
between these ratios and those from NOAA Atlas 2
and Heather Bureau (1953, 1954) is shown In
Table 2.
6. APFLICAIIOH OF RATIOS
The ratios derived In Che above analyals
are based on stations whose elevations tended to
be In Che lower sections of each region. To .eic-
trapolate these statistics to imich higher eleva-
tions would be a questionable undertaking, because
of the complex effects of slope, funnellng, and
rain shadows that often occur In these areas. As
such, the ratios are noc applicable to all eleva-
tions within each region, but rather to a general
range of elevations. The ranges of applicable
elevation, approximately 3,000 to 3,500 ft in most
areas, are summarized In table 3. In a few cases,
areas are excluded that contain stations Included
In the analysis. The regional ratios were reviewed
In light of this fact, and It was determined that
no adjustments were necessary.
Areas of non-appllcabillty, baaed on ele-
vation and location considerations, are shown In
figure 1 as shaded areas. These areas are based
primarily on smoothed contour maps of Che western
%
Table 2.—Ratios compared to other reports
Dur.
(mln)
5
10
15
30
*.
1
This ^
Report
.34
.52
.64
.82
Ratio to
NOAA
Atlas 2
.29
.45
.57
.79
L Hour
Weather Bur.
(1953, 1954)
.32
.49
.59
.78
^
Averaged over all regions and for all
retum periods
Note: Comparisons are for illustrative
purposes only. Each report covers a
different geographic area, and averaging
Is done without regard to size of region
or specific return periods Involved.
Table 3.—iippllcable eleraCiona within reglona
Region
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0-2500
50-3000
2000-5000
2000-5000
3500-7000
4500-8000
4000-7500
3000-6500
Generally Applicable
elevations (ft)
Columbia Basin to 2500-5500 SE
N to 4000-7000 S
N to 4000-7000 S
N to 3500-7000 S
N to 3500-7000 S
mountains to 100-3500 deserts
states. ' Due Co Che generalized naCure of Che
concours, Chere are Isolaced secclons, primarily
at tbe edge of shaded areas, where the ratios
night be applicable. Conversely, there are
isolaced peaks and high elevations which are noc
shown OS part of any shaded areas, but which may,
In fact, be non-applicable areas.
139
Job No. No.
HDR Computation TTT?
jjeci
I Subject ^ [Cheeked
Task Sheet B \^-2l
Vho-i i^^'^ o^ erf C^i \ X ojnd s. -Mn^_jVraA)^l^ \^
be. fuur\-o-tt- ^^om C^ib i ^md ^ ^oJr -hcuod^ irv
A^A^ ^0u-Maexrx dieJtcWoA d^T^he A"i-fcK^, buv4^a4
^Vou) hoL3 noi- beer\ corApafai. TV\^ -fiou:) compukcL
W -Ui^ Uc)r4'hu)0xdLdir^.c?^(or^ \s a. C(5r\s<2x\/c4\\jt
\iO\\}JL-k)r VAQ. 4\OU^ VAei:(d(r\Q ^OUcVHuoLrd. ^'lAC'e^
4Y^e. -souAVv por4ioA has les? corvVi buL-ViOQ arCoo
U\G^ A^e r\or4V\ por-hbrVTKer-^ u))U b^ \&^ -^-IOLO
\r\ \><\t 't.ovxAh 9orV\^of\. ^o -H^f d>Wa df^icvti^d w
^^fve^ Uou3 m^-^ nor-m par-hbn io\\\ be CLCchpki\o\Q^
A=^ar^^ ,. ,. r(,^
^^ WocLraalic radras (.Tj
n = H(&hniAa roaQiine53 coe-^ici6ri+
Job No. No.
HDR Computation
I Subject
KR
1 Computed loate ^/O^
Checked
Ta$k Sheet g?g)
Date
Of ^
DAo:\uaA^ \>\VcK. OLp(n:\Vu Ccon-Vinu<rO
^-' 0.OO6 . ^ r T
^\^c-e Vi^e ccLp(XcikA o-^4M.C djTcl^^ i^ ar^a^er
^hdn (he OLmoun-r of -f/oco 4^af ooi 11 be, ruAnino
o^-(^ o-f^ odl JL curd ^^i' SLj 4han -Vhis d^A-cK con-C^i^iArcd-ibiv
DroL^naon DlVcK Co^ft<^(rfv^^.^
•^a&l- dJdSjjrx-k) SCdiC'
E-EF.q ?f^/3i
#
TABLE 5.6. Viitiis OF THE EOUGSNESS "CosmciEUT
Type of cViBT>Tiel and description
C. ErCAVATEB OB DREBGEP
a. Earth, str&ight snd uniform
1. (31ea.li, recently completed
2. Qean, after weathering
3. Gravel, uniform section, clean
i. With short grass, few weeds
6. Earth, winding and sluggish
1. No vegetation
2. Grass, some weeds
3. Dense weeds or aquatic plants in
deep channels
4. Earth bottom and rubble sides
S. Stony bottom and weedy banks
6. Cobble bottom and clean sides
c. Dragline-excavated or dredged
1. No vegetation .
2. Light brush on banks
d. Rock wits
1. Smooth and tiniform
2. Jagged and irregular
«. P>ioyinrl« xint. rrioilTt.*;"**!, wo.^^c pn^l
brush uncut
1, Dense weeds, high M flow depth
2. Clean bottom, brush on sides
3. iSfl.me, highest stage of flow
4. Dense brush, high stage
l^inimum
0.016
0.018
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.025
0.030
0.028
0.025
0.030
0.025
0.035
0.025
0.035
0.050
0.040
0.045
0.080
n (cpnHnued)
Normal
0.018
0.022
0.025
0.027
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.030
0.035
0.040
• 0.028
0.050
0.035
0.040
_
o.oso
0.()S0
0.070
0.100
MaxiEQum
/ 0.02)
0.025
0.030
0.033
0.030
0.033
0.040
0.035
0.040
0.050
0.033
0.060
0.040
0.050
0.120
0.080
O.IIO
0.140
y
APPENDIX M
ATTACHMENT 2:
REQUIRED CAPACITY FOR SURFACE WATER DIVERSION DITCH
KRI
Project: Bayview Landfill Conputed: FILR Date: 1/9/2009
ONE COMPANY Subject: Run-olf calculations
Many Solutions *" Task: Deternine Row Rates using Rational Mathod
DA-1: Cell 2 - Diversion Ditch around Stage 1 (Final Contours)
Rational Equatinn Parameters
Drainage Area (A) = 12.61 ac
Time of Concentratinn -l^-sfe)
V = kS°
Eq. 7.11 from UDOT Manual: Roadway Drainage, Hydrology
(See Attached)
Eq. 7.12 from UDOT Manual: Roadway Drainage, Hydrology
(See Attached)
Segment 1:
Therefore,
Segment 2:
Therefore,
where: tc= Time of concentration (min) V= Velocity (ft/s)
L= Length of segment (ft) S= Slope (%)
k= Intercept coefficient from Table 7-10 from UDOT Manual: Roadway
Drainage, Hydrology (See Attached)
L= 395 ft
S= 9.5%
k= 1.61
V= 5.0 ft/s
tc= 1.33 min
1^ 1770 ft
S= 3.3%
k= 1.61
V= 2.9 ft/s
tc= 10.09 min
(Assume shallow, concentrated flow)
(Assume shallow, concentrated flow)
Totaltc= 11.41 min
Rainfall intensity (i> for 25-vear storm
Fortc= 11.41 min
i25= 3.00 in/hr (From IDF curves from NOAA Atlas 14 (See attached))
Rainfall Runoff Cneffirient
C= 0.30 (C value for unimproved area from Table 7-24 from UDOT Manual of Instmction
(See attached))
Frequency Factor fnr Rational Formula
C,= 1.1 (Frequency Factor for 25-year recurrence intemval, from Table 7-21 from UDOT Manual of
Instruction)
Discharge Calculation
Q=C*Cf*l*A
I Q25= 12 cfTH
Projecf. Bayview LandiB RLR Date; 1/9/2009
K)R ONE COMPANY Subject: IRun-off calculations
Many Solutions ^" Tasit: Deterrrine Ftow Rates using Ratpnal Lbthod
DA-2: Cell 2 - Diversion Ditch around Stage 2 (Final Contours)
Rational Eouation Parameters
Drainage Area (A) = 20.96 ac
Time of Concentration t. =l?^'=l;fe)
V = kS"^
Eq. 7.11 from UDOT Manual: Roadway Drainage, Hydrology
(See Attached)
Eq. 7.12 from UDOT Manual: Roadway Drainage, Hydrology
(See Attached)
where: tc= Timeof concentralion (min) V= Velocity (ft/s)
D= Length of segment (ft) S= Slope (%)
k= Intercept coefficient from Table 7-10 from UDOT Manual: Roadway
Drainage, Hydrology (See Attached)
Segment 1:
Therefore,
Segment 2:
Therefore,
L= 400 ft
S= 9.5%
k= 1.61
V= 5.0 ft/s
tc= 1.34 min
L= 2275 fl
S= 2.3%
k= 1.61
V= 2.4 ft/s
tc= 15.53 min
(Assume shallow, concentrated flow)
(Assume shallow, concentrated flow)
Total tc= 16.87 min
Rainfall intensity fi) for 25-vear slorm
For tc= 16.87 min
!«= 2.50 in/hr
Rainfall Runoff Coefficient
C= 0.30
Frequency Factor for Rational Formula
Cf= 1.1
(From IDF curves from NOAA Atlas 14 (See attached))
(C value for unimproved area from Table 7-24 from UDOT Manual of Instruction
(See attached))
(Frequency Factor for 25-year recurrence intemval, from Table 7-21 from UDOT Manual of
Instruction (See attached))
Discharge Calculation
Q=C*C,*1*A
I Q25= 17 cfs
Par-bial duration based Point IDF Curves - Version: 4
40.036799 H 111.968129 14 4688 ft
c
\
C
•F
•rH
E 0; -P C
o
•P
o
i.
0.
10
3
£
1
0.7
0!3
0.2
.1
.07
.05
.03
.02
.01
.001
c
.1-1
1
in
£:
•iH
1
G>
•r-t
H
-l-l
1
ITJ
l-H
c
•rH
1
CSJ
CO
c
•l-l
s
1
m vD
c
•IH
1
CS
ON
e
1
CU
1-1
i.
X
1
CO
s.
X
Tl-
i. i.
X JC
1 1
so CO
Dur^
£.
X
1
CU
..-1
S-
JZ
1
00
^-4
tion
i.
X
1
Tf
w
i.
s: 1
CO
i.
s: 1
00
•^
3
it}
1
CO
m 3
<TJ (Tl
TJ TJ
1 1
•* ID
IP
flj
TJ
r^
:ji
it}
•rs
1
o
»H
3i
tt\
TJ
1
ITJ
l-H
:T>
ftl
T5
1
o cu
D'l
m TJ
1
(S
CO
m
flj
TJ
IO
•*
ZJi
flj
T5
1
<S5
SO
Mon Dec 03 11:39:13 £068
Average Recurrence Interval
<years>
i - y e .3 r
£-year
•j-year
10-year
£5-year
-*-
H-
-B-
-M-
100-year
500-year —f-
1000-gear -B-
UDOT l\4anual of Instruction ~ Roadway Drainage (Customary Units), Hydrology 7-41
In Equation 7.9, i depends on tc and te is not initially known. Therefore, the computation of tc is
an iterative process. An initial estimate of tc is assumed and used to obtain i from the intensity-
duration-frequency curve for the locality. The tc is computed from Equation 7.9 and used to
check the initial value of i. If they are not the same, then the process is repeated until two
successive tc estimates are the same.
7.18.4.2 Velocity Method
The velocity method can be used to estimate travel times for sheet flow, shallow concentrated
flow, pipe flow or channel flow. It is based on the concept that the travel time (TO for a flow
segment is a function of the length of flow (L) and the velocity (V):
^ T. = — (7.10)
^ ' 60V
in which Ti, L and V have units of minutes, meters and meters/second, respectively. The travel
time is computed for the principal flow path. Where the principal fiow path consists of segments
that have different slopes or land covers, the principal flow path should be divided into segments
and Equation 7.10 used for each flow segment. The time of concentration is then the sum of
travel times:
-> tc=2T,:=Z ^ L,
:^1 i = 1 l60Vi,
in which k is the number of segments and the subscript i refers to the flow segment.
(7.11)
The velocity of Equation 7.10 is a function ofthe type of flow (overland, sheet, rill and gully flow,
channel flow, pipe flow), the roughness of the flow path, and the slope of the flow path. Some
methods also include a rainfall index such as the 2-yr, 24-hour rainfall depth. A number of
methods have been developed for estimating the velocity.
After short distances, sheet flow tends to concentrate in rills and then gullies of increasing
proportions. Such flow is usually referred to as shallow concentrated flow. The velocity of such
flow can be estimated using an empirical relationship between the velocity and the slope:
V = kS" (7.12)
in which V is the velocity (ft/s) and S is the slope (%). The value of k is a function of the land
cover, with values for selected land covers given in Table 7-10.
7.18.4.3 Open Channels
Open channels are assumed to begin where surveyed cross section information has been
obtained, where channels are visible on aerial photographs or where blue lines (indicating
streams) appear on USGS quadrangle sheets. Manning's equation or water surface profile
information can be used to estimate average flow velocity. Average fiow velocity is usually
determined for bankfull condition.
7-42 UDOT Manual of Instruction - Roadway Drainage (Customary Units), Hydrology
TABLE 7-10 Intercept Coefficients for Velocity vs. Slope Relationship
of Equation 7.12
-">
K
0.25
0.5
0,7
0.9
1.0
1.5
1.61
2.0
Land Cover/Flow Regime
Forest with heavy ground litter; hay meadow (overland flow)
Trash fallow or minimum tillage cultivation; contour or strip cropped; woodland
(overland flow)
Short grass pasture (overland flow)
Cultivated straight row (overland flow)
Nearly bare and unfilled (overland flow); alluvial fans In western mountain
regions
Grassed waterway (shallow concentrated flow)
Unpaved (shallow concentrated flow)
Paved area (shallow concentrated flow); small upland gullies
Manning's equation is:
V =
where: V = average velocity, ft/s
R = hydraulic radius, ft (equal to /WVP)
A = cross sectional flow area, ft^
WP = wetted perimeter, ft
S = slope ofthe hydraulic grade line, ft/ft
n = Manning's roughness coefficient
After average velocity is computed using Equation 7.13, Tt for the channel segment can be
estimated using Equation 7.10.
7.18.4.4 Reservoir or Lake
Sometimes, it is necessary to compute a Tc for a watershed having a relatively large body of
water in the flow path. In such cases, Tc is computed to the upstream end of the lake or
reservoir and, for the body of water, the travel time is computed using the Equation:
Vw = (gD„r (7.14)
where: Vw = the wave velocity across the water, ft/s
g = 32.2 ft/s^
Dm = mean depth of lake or reservoir, ft
Generally, V^ will be high (8 to 30 ft/s).
One must not overlook the fact that Equation 7.14 only provides for estimating travel time
across the lake and for the inflow hydrograph to the lake's outlet. It does not account for the
(7.13)
7-66 UDOT Manual of Instruction - Roadway Drainage (Customary Units), Hydrology
C = runoff coefficient representing a ratio of runoff to rainfall
I = average rainfall intensity for a duration equal to the time of concentration for a
selected return period, in/h
A = drainage area tributary to the design location, ha
7.23.5 Infrequent Storm
The coefficients given in Tables 7-23 through 7-25 are applicable for storms of 5-yr to 10-yr
frequencies. Less frequent, higher intensity storms will require modification of the coefficient
because infiltration and other losses have a proportionally smaller effect on runoff Reference
(19). The adjustment of the Rational method for use with major storms can be made by
multiplying the right side of the Rational formula by a frequency factor Cf. The Rational formula
now becomes:
Q = CCflA (7.16)
Cf values are listed in Table 7-21.
TABLE 7-21 — Frequency Factors for Rational Formula
Recurrence Interval {•^ears)
> 25
50
100
c,
1.1
1.2
1.25
The product of Cf times C shall not exceed 1.0.
TABLE 7-22 — Hydrologic Soils Groups For
Example for Orange County, North Carolina
Series Name
AltaVista
Appling
Cecil
Chewada
Hydrologic Groups
C
B
B
C
Series Name
Herndon
Hiwassee
Iredell
Lignum
Hydrologic Groups
B
B
D
C
TABLE 7-23 — Recommended Coefficient of Runoff for Pervious Surfaces
(By Selected Hydrologic Soil Groupings and Slope Ranges)
Slope
Flat
(0%-1%)
Average
(2% - 6%)
Steep
(Over 6%)
A
0.04 - 0.09
0.09-0.14
0.13-0.18
B
0.07-0.12
0.12-0.17
0.18-0.24
C
0.11-0.16
0.16-0.21
0.23-0.31
D
0.15-0.20
0.20-0.25
0.28-0.38
Source: (Example from Storm Drainage Design Manual, Erie and Niagara Counties Regional
Planning Board)
UDOT Manual of Instruction - Road'way Drainage (Customary Units), Hydrology 7-67
TABLE 7-24 — Recommended Coefficient of Runoff Values
(For Various Selected Land Uses)
Description of Area
Business: Downtown areas
Neighborhood areas
Residential: Single-family areas
Multi units, detached
Multi units, attached
Suburban
Residential (0.5 ha lots or more)
Apartment dwelling areas
industrial: Light areas
Heavy areas
Parks, cemeteries
Playgrounds
Railroad yard areas
Unimproved areas
Runoff Coefficients
0.70-0.95
0.50-0.70
0.30-0.50
0.40-0.60
0.60-0,75
0.25-0,40
0.30-0.45
0.50-0.70
0.50-0.80
0.60-0.90
0.10-0.25
0.20 - 0.40
0.20-0.40
0.10-0.30
Source: Reference (3).
TABLE 7-25 — Coefficients for Composite Runoff Analysis
Surface
Streets: Asphalt
Concrete
Drives and walks
Roofs
Runoff Coefficients
0.70-0.95
0.80-0.95
0.75-0.85
0.75-0.95
Source: Reference (3).
7.23.6 Procedures
The results of using the Rational formula to estimate peak discharges are very sensitive to the
parameters used, especially time of concentration and runoff coefficient. The designer must use
good engineering judgment in estimating values that are used in the method. Following is a
discussion ofthe different variables used in the Rational method.
7.23.6.1 Time of Concentration
The time of concentration is the time required for w^ater to flow from the hydraulically most
remote point of the drainage area to the point under investigation. Use of the Rational formula
requires the time of concentration (tc) for each design point within the drainage basin. The
duration of rainfall is then set equal to the time of concentration and is used to estimate the
design average rainfall intensity (I). For a specific drainage basin, the time of concentration
consists of an inlet time plus the time of flow in a closed conduit or open channel to the design
point. Inlet time is the time required for runoff to flow over the surface to the nearest inlet and is
primarily a function of the length of overland flow, the slope of the drainage basin and surface
cover. Pipe or open channel flow time can be estimated from the hydraulic properties of the
conduit or channel.
To obtain the total time of concentration, the pipe or open channel flow time must be calculated
and added to the inlet time. After first determining the average flow velocity in the pipe or
channel, the travel time is obtained by dividing velocity into the pipe or channel length.
Worksheet for Diversion Ditcii around Cell 2
Project Description
Friction Method
Solve For
InpMt^Pata; ^•;;.;;:VV:;
Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope
Normal Depth
Left Side Slope
Right Side Slope
;Results^^:c:;";it/;^^
Discharge
Flow Area
Wetted Perimeter
Top Width
Critical Depth
Critical Slope
Velocity
Velocity Head
Specific Energy
Froude Number
Flow Type
GVF Input Data,,
Downstream Depth
Length
Number Of Steps
•i3A/F;0ijfpiS;Data^
Upstream Depth
Profile Description
Profile Headless
Downstream Velocity
Upstream Velocity
Normal Depth
Critical Depth
Channel Slope
Critical Slope
Manning Formula
Discharge
:V. .•...•:.:•..::..........,
Subcritical
0.027
0.00500
1.00
50.00
4.00
66.08
27.00
54.13
54.00
0.82
0.01434
2.45
0.09
1.09
0.61
ft/ft
ft
ft/ft {H:V)
ft/ft {H:V)
cfs
ft'
ft
ft
ft
ft/ft
ft/s
ft
ft
0.00 ft
0.00 ft
0
0.00 ft
0.00 ft
Infinity ft/s
Infinity ft/s
1.00 ft
0.82 ft
0.00500 ft/ft
0.01434 ft/ft
ira/2009 1:11:43 PM
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00]
27 Siemens Company Drive Suito 200 W Walertown.CT 06795 USA [phone] Page lof 1
Cross Section for Diversion Ditch around Cell 2
Project Description : :
Friction Method
Solve For
Input Data ;/•:•;•:;•; ^•••:v:..S\^
Roughness Coefficient
Channel Slope
Normal Depth
Left Side Slope
Right Side Slope
Discharge
Crcws^-^ebtlon ::lmage;::
Manning Formula
Discharge
0.027
0.00500 ft/ft
1.00 ft
50.00 ft/ft (H:V)
4.00 ft/ft (H:V)
66.08 cfs
V:10 1\,
H:1
1/9/2009 1:13:40 PM
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.068.00]
27 Siemens Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown,CT 06795 USA+1-203-755-1666 Page 1 of 1
UDOT Manual of Instruction - Roadway Drainage (Customary Units), Channels 8-13
TABLE 8-2 — Values of Manning's Roughness Coefficient n (Uniform Flow)
Type of Channel and Description
EXCAVATED OR DREDGED
1. Earth, straight and uniforrp
a. Clean, recently completed
b. Clean, after weathering
c. Gravel, uniform section, clean
—^ d. With short grass, few weeds
2. Earth, winding and sluggish
a. No vegetation
b. Grass, some weeds
c. Dense weeds or aquatic plans in deep channels
d. Earth bottom and rubble sides
e. Stony bottom and weedy sides
f. Cobble bottom and clean sides
3. Dragline-excavated or dredged
a. No vegetation
b. Light brush on banks
4. Rock cuts
a. Smooth and uniform
b. Jagged and irregular
5. Channels not maintained, weeds and brush uncut
a. Dense weeds, high as flow depth
b. Clean bottom, brush on sides
c. Same, highest stage of flow
d. Dense brush, high stage
NATURAL STREAMS
1. Minor streams (top width at flood stage < 30 m)
a. Streams on Plain
1) Clean, straight, full stage, no rifts or deep pools
2) Same as above, but more stones/weeds
3) Clean, winding, some pools/shoals
4) Same as above, but some weeds/stones
5) Same as above, lower stages, more ineffective
slopes and sections
6) Same as 4, but more stones
7) Sluggish reaches, weedy, deep pools
8) Very weedy reaches, deep pools, or floodways with
heavy stand of timber and underbrush
b. Mountain streams, no vegetation in channel, banks
usually steep, trees and brush along banks submerged
at high stages
1) Bottom: gravels, cobbles and few boulders
2) Bottom: cobbles with large boulders
Minimum
0.016
0.018
0.022
0.022
0.023
0.025
0.030
0.025
0.025
0.030
0.025
0.035
0.025
0.035
0.050
0.040
0.045
0.080
0.025
0.030
0.033
0.035
0.040
0.045
0.050
0.075
0.030
0.040
Normal
0.018
0.022
0.025
f 0.027J
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.028
0.050
0.035
0.040
0.080
0.050
0.070
0.100
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.045
0.048
0.050
0.070
0.100
0.040
0.050
Maximum
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.033
0,030
0.033
0.040
0.035
0.045
0.050
0.033
0.060
0.040
0.050
0.120
0.080
0.110
0.140
0.033
0.040
0.045
0.050
0.055
0.060
0.080
0.150
0.050
0.070
LEGEND
— DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY
— FLOW PATH
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
CELL 2 FINAL CONTOURS DRAINAGE MAP
N m
0 200 400
SCALE IN FEET
DATE
1
FKHIRE
-9-09
M-1
APPENDIX I – MULTI SECTOR PERMIT / NOTICE OF INTENT / SWPPP

Permit No.: UTR000000
STATE OF UTAH
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-4870
Authorization to Discharge Under the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP) for Storm Water
Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities
GROUP 5
Sector J. Mineral Mining and processing Facilities
Sector K. Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, or Disposal Facilities
Sector L. Landfills and Land Application Sites
Sector N. Scrap Recycling and Waste Recycling Facilities
Sector O. Steam Electric Power Generating Facilities, Including Coal Handling Areas
Sector Q. Transportation Areas and Equipment Cleaning Areas of Water Transportation
Facilities
Sector S. Vehicle Maintenance Areas, Equipment Cleaning, or Deicing Areas Located at Air
Transportation Facilities
Sector V. Textile Mills, Apparel, and Other Fabric Product Manufacturing Facilities
Sector X. Printing and Publishing Facilities
Sector Y. Rubber, Miscellaneous Plastic Products, and Miscellaneous Manufacturing
Industries
Sector Z. Leather Tanning and Finishing Facilities
In compliance with the provisions of the Utah Water Pollution Control Act, Title 19, Chapter 5,
Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended, the Act, the facility identified in the Notice of Intent, is
authorized to discharge industrial storm water from the specified industrial site to waters of the
State, as identified in the Notice of Intent, in accordance with discharge point(s), effluent
limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth herein.
This permit shall become effective on January 5, 2023.
This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, December 31, 2023.
Originally signed March 20, 2018.
Modified and signed this fourth day of January, 2023.
_________________________________
John K. Mackey, P.E.
Director
L.Storm Water Discharges Associated With Industrial Activity From Landfills and Land
Application Sites.
1.Coverage of This Section.
a.Discharges Covered Under This Section. The requirements listed under this section shall
apply to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity from waste disposal at
landfills, land application sites, and open dumps that receive or have received industrial
wastes. Open dumps are solid waste disposal units that are not in compliance with
Sate/Federal criteria established under RCRA Subtitle D. Landfills, land application sites,
and open dumps that have storm water discharges from other types of industrial activities
such as vehicle maintenance, truck washing, and/or recycling may be subject to additional
requirements specified elsewhere in this permit.
b.Limitations on Coverage. Storm water discharges associated with industrial activities from
inactive landfills, land application sites, and open dumps occurring on Federal lands where
an operator cannot be identified are ineligible for coverage under this permit.
c.Co-Located Industrial Activities. When an industrial facility, described by the above
coverage provisions of this section, has industrial activities being conducted onsite that meet
the description(s) of industrial activities in another section(s), that industrial facility shall
comply with any and all applicable monitoring and pollution prevention plan requirements of
the other section(s) in addition to all applicable requirements in this section. The monitoring
and pollution prevention plan terms and conditions of this multi-sector permit are additive for
industrial activities being conducted at the same industrial facility (co-located industrial
activities). The operator of the facility shall determine which other monitoring and pollution
prevention plan section(s) of this permit (if any) are applicable to the facility.
2.Prohibition of Non-storm Water Discharges.
a.In addition to those non-storm water discharges prohibited under Part II.A., this permit does
not authorize the discharge of leachate and vehicle and equipment wash waters to waters of
the State or a municipal separate storm sewer system. Operators with such discharges must
obtain coverage under a separate Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES)
permit.
3.Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements.
a.Contents of Plan. The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:
1)Pollution Prevention Team. Each plan shall identify a specific individual or
individuals within the facility organization as members of a storm water Pollution
Prevention Team that are responsible for developing the storm water pollution
prevention plan and assisting the facility or plant manager in its implementation,
maintenance, and revision. The plan shall clearly identify the responsibilities of each
team member. The activities and responsibilities of the team shall address all aspects
of the facility's storm water pollution prevention plan.
2)Description of Potential Pollutant Sources. Each plan shall provide a description of
potential sources which may reasonably be expected to add significant amounts of
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 2
pollutant to storm water discharges or which may result in the discharge of pollutants
during dry weather from separate storm sewers draining the facility. Each plan shall
identify all activities and significant materials which may potentially be significant
pollutant sources. Each plan shall include, at a minimum:
a) Drainage: A site map indicating the pattern of storm water drainage, existing
structural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff, surface
water bodies, locations where significant materials are exposed to precipitation,
and locations where major spills or leaks identified under paragraph 3.a.2)c)
(Spills and Leaks) of this section have occurred since 3 years prior to the date of
the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under this permit. The
map must also indicate the locations of all industrial activities that are exposed to
precipitation, including, but not limited to: active and closed landfill cells or
trenches, locations of active and closed land application areas, locations where
open dumping is occurring or has occurred, locations of any known leachate
springs or other areas where uncontrolled leachate may commingle with runoff,
locations of any leachate collection and handling systems, and locations of the
following activities where such activities are exposed to precipitation: fueling
stations, vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or cleaning areas, and waste
and other significant material loading/unloading and storage areas. The map must
indicate the outfall locations and the types of discharges contained in the
drainage areas of the outfalls. In addition, the site map must identify monitoring
locations, outfall locations and/or connection to municipal storm sewer, an
outline of the portions of the drainage area of each outfall within the facility
boundaries and a prediction of the direction of flow in each area; and the types of
discharges contained in the drainage areas of the outfalls.
b)Inventory of Exposed Materials. An inventory of the types of materials handled
at the site that potentially may be exposed to precipitation for each storm water
outfall covered under this permit (see paragraph 1.). Such inventory shall
include a narrative description of significant materials that have been handled,
treated, or disposed of in a manner to allow exposure to storm water between the
time of 3 years prior to the date of the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
be covered under this permit and the present; method and location of onsite
storage or disposal; materials management practices employed to minimize
contact of materials with storm water runoff between the time of 3 years prior to
the date of submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under this permit
and the present; the location and a description of existing structural and
nonstructural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff; and a
description of any treatment the storm water receives. The inventory of exposed
materials shall include, but shall not be limited to the significant material
management practices employed.
c)Spills and Leaks. A list of significant spills and significant leaks of toxic or
hazardous pollutants that occurred at areas that are exposed to precipitation or
that otherwise drain to a storm water conveyance at the facility after the date of 3
years prior to the date of the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered
under this permit. Such list shall be updated as appropriate during the term of
the permit.
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 3
d)Sampling Data. A summary of existing discharge sampling data describing
pollutants in storm water discharges from the facility, including a summary of
sampling data collected during the term of this permit. Permittees shall also
provide all available sampling data for leachate generated at the site.
e)Summary of Potential Pollutant Sources. A narrative assessment of the risk
potential that the industrial activities, materials, and physical features of the site,
as identified in 3.a.2)a) (Drainage), pose to storm water quality. The description
shall specifically list any significant potential sources of pollutants at the site and
identify what the pollutant or pollutant parameter (e.g. biochemical oxygen
demand, etc.) of concern is from the following activities: fertilizer, herbicide and
pesticide application; earth/soil moving; waste hauling and loading/unloading;
outdoor storage of significant materials including daily, interim and final cover
material stockpiles as well as temporary waste storage areas; exposure of active
and inactive landfill, land application, or open dumping areas; uncontrolled
leachate flows; failure or leaks from leachate collection and treatment systems;
haul roads; and vehicle tracking of sediments.
3)Measures and Controls. Each facility covered by this permit shall develop a
description of storm water management controls appropriate for the facility, and
implement such controls. The appropriateness and priorities of controls in a plan shall
reflect identified potential sources of pollutants at the facility. The description of storm
water management controls shall address the following minimum components,
including a schedule for implementing such controls:
a)Good Housekeeping. Good housekeeping requires the maintenance of areas
which may contribute pollutants to storm water discharges in a clean, orderly
manner. Permittees shall consider providing protected materials storage areas for
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other significant materials.
b)Preventive Maintenance. A preventive maintenance program shall be
implemented and shall include timely inspection and maintenance of storm water
management devices (e.g., cleaning oil/water separators, catch basins) as well as
inspecting and testing facility equipment and systems to uncover conditions that
could cause breakdowns or failures resulting in discharges of pollutants to
surface waters, and ensuring appropriate maintenance of such equipment and
systems. Where applicable, permittees addressed by this section shall also:
(1)Maintain containers used for outdoor chemical and significant materials
storage to prevent leaking or rupture;
(2)Maintain all elements of leachate collection and treatment systems to prevent
commingling of leachate with storm water; and
(3)Maintain the integrity and effectiveness of any intermediate or final cover,
including making repairs to the cover as necessary to minimize the effects
of settlement, sinking, and erosion.
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 4
c)Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. Areas where potential spills which
can contribute pollutants to storm water discharges can occur, and their
accompanying drainage points shall be identified clearly in the storm water
pollution prevention plan. Where appropriate, specifying material handling
procedures, storage requirements, and use of equipment such as diversion valves
in the plan should be considered. Procedures for cleaning up spills shall be
identified in the plan and made available to the appropriate personnel. The
necessary equipment to implement a clean up should be available to personnel.
d)Inspections. In addition to the comprehensive site evaluation required under
paragraph 3.a.4) of this section, qualified facility personnel shall be identified to
inspect designated equipment and areas of operating landfills, open dumps, and
land application sites at least once every 7 days, or if inactive, at least every
quarter during each of the following periods: January through March; April
through June; July through September; and October through December. A set of
tracking or follow-up procedures shall be used to ensure that appropriate actions
are taken in response to the inspections. Records of inspections shall be
maintained. Based on the results of the inspection, the description of potential
pollutant sources and pollution prevention measures and controls identified in the
plan shall be revised as appropriate within 2 weeks of such inspection and shall
provide for implementation of any changes to the plan in a timely manner, but in
no case more than 12 weeks after the inspection. Inspections shall address, at a
minimum, the following areas where applicable:
(1)Qualified personnel shall inspect areas of landfills and open dumps that
have not yet been finally stabilized, active land application areas, areas
used for storage of materials/wastes that are exposed to precipitation,
stabilization and structural control measures, leachate collection and
treatment systems, and locations where equipment and waste trucks enter
and exit the site. Where landfill areas and open dumps have been finally
stabilized and where land application has been completed, or during
seasonal arid periods in arid areas (areas with an average annual rainfall of
0 to 10 inches) and semiarid areas (areas with an average annual rainfall of
10 to 20 inches), inspections will be conducted at least once every month.
Erosion and sediment control measures shall be observed to ensure they
are operating correctly.
(2)Qualified personnel shall inspect landfill or open dump stabilization and
structural erosion control measures, leachate collection and treatment
systems, and all closed land application areas.
e) Employee Training. Employee training programs shall inform personnel
responsible for implementing activities identified in the storm water pollution
prevention plan or otherwise responsible for storm water management at all
levels of responsibility of the components and goals of the storm water pollution
prevention plan. Training should address topics such as conducting inspections,
spill response, good housekeeping, conducting inspections and material
management practices. At a minimum, this training must be provided annually.
The pollution prevention plan shall identify frequencies and approximate dates
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 5
for such training.
f)Recordkeeping and Internal Reporting Procedures. A description of incidents
(such as spills, or other discharges), along with other information describing the
quality and quantity of storm water discharges shall be included in the storm
water pollution prevention plan. Inspections and maintenance activities shall be
documented and records of such activities shall be incorporated into the plan.
Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for a tracking system for the
types of wastes disposed of in each cell or trench of a landfill or open dump.
Land application site operators shall track the types and quantities of wastes
applied in specific areas.
g) Non-storm Water Discharges.
(1) Certification. The plan shall include a certification that the discharge has
been tested or evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges
including leachate and vehicle wash waters. The certification shall include
the identification of potential significant sources of non-storm water at the
site, a description of the results of any test and/or evaluation for the
presence of non-storm water discharges, the evaluation criteria or testing
method used, the date of any testing and/or evaluation, and the onsite
drainage points that were directly observed during the test. Certifications
shall be signed in accordance with Part VI.G. of this permit. Such
certification may not be feasible if the facility operating the storm water
discharge associated with industrial activity does not have access to an
outfall, manhole, or other point of access to the ultimate conduit which
receives the discharge. In such cases, the source identification section of
the storm water pollution prevention plan shall indicate why the
certification required by this part was not feasible, along with the
identification of potential significant sources of non-storm water at the site.
A discharger that is unable to provide the certification required by this
paragraph must notify the Director in accordance with paragraph
3.a.3)g)(4) (below).
(2)Exceptions. Except for flows from emergency fire fighting activities,
sources of non-storm water listed in Part II.A.2 (Non-Storm Water
Discharges) of this permit that are combined with storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity must be identified in the plan. The plan
shall identify and ensure the implementation of appropriate pollution
prevention measures for the non-storm water component(s) of the
discharge.
(3)Copy of Other Permits. If the facility discharges wastewater, other than
storm water via an existing UPDES permit, a copy of the UPDES permit
authorizing the discharge must be attached to the plan. Similarly, if the
facility submitted an application for a UPDES permit for non-storm water
discharges, but has not yet received that permit, a copy of the permit
application must be attached. Upon issuance or reissuance of a UPDES
permit, the facility must modify its plan to include a copy of that permit.
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 6
(4) Failure to Certify. Any facility that is unable to provide the certification
required (testing for non-storm water discharges), must notify the Director
within 180 days after submitting an NOI to be covered by this permit. If
the failure to certify is caused by the inability to perform adequate tests or
evaluations, such notification shall describe: the procedure of any test
conducted for the presence of non-storm water discharges; the results of
such test or other relevant observations; potential sources of non-storm
water discharges to the storm sewer; and why adequate tests for such storm
sewers were not feasible. Non-storm water discharges to waters of the
State which are not authorized by a UPDES permit are unlawful and must
be terminated.
h)Sediment and Erosion Control The plan shall identify areas which, due to
topography activities, or other factors, have a high potential for significant soil
erosion, and identify structural, vegetative, and/or stabilization measures to be
used to limit erosion.
(1)Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary stabilization
of materials stockpiled for daily, intermediate, and final cover.
Stabilization practices to consider include, but are not limited to,
temporary seeding, mulching, and placing geotextiles on the inactive
portions of the stockpiles.
(2) Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary stabilization
of inactive areas of the landfill or open dump which have an intermediate
cover but no final cover.
(3) Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary stabilization
of any landfill or open dumping areas which have received a final cover
until vegetation has established itself. Land application site operators shall
also stabilize areas where waste application has been completed until
vegetation has been established.
i)Management of Runoff. The plan shall contain a narrative consideration of the
appropriateness of traditional storm water management practices (practices other
than those which control the generation or source(s) of pollutants) used to divert,
infiltrate, reuse, or otherwise manage storm water runoff in a manner that reduces
pollutants in storm water discharges from the site. The plan shall provide that
measures that the permittee determines to be reasonable and appropriate shall be
implemented and maintained. The potential of various sources at the facility to
contribute pollutants to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity
[see paragraph 3.a.2) of this permit (Description of Potential Pollutant Sources)]
shall be considered when determining reasonable and appropriate measures.
Appropriate measures may include: silt fences, earth dikes, gradient terraces,
drainage swales, sediment traps, check dams, pipe slope drains, level spreaders,
storm drain inlet protection, rock outlet protection, reinforced soil retaining
systems, gabions and temporary or permanent sediment basins, or other
equivalent measures. Structural practices should be placed on upland soils as
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 7
practicable.
4)Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation. Qualified personnel shall conduct site
compliance evaluations at appropriate intervals specified in the plan, but in no case less
than once a year. Where compliance evaluation schedules overlap with inspections
required under 3.a.3)d) of this section, the compliance evaluation may be conducted in
place of one such inspection. Such evaluations shall provide:
a) Areas contributing to a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity
at landfill, open dump and land application sites shall be visually inspected for
evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system.
Measures to reduce pollutant loadings shall be evaluated to determine whether
they are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with the terms of the
permit or whether additional control measures are needed. Structural storm water
management measures, sediment and erosion control measures, and other
structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be observed
to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of equipment
needed to implement the plan, such as spill response equipment, shall be made.
b)Based on the results of the evaluation, the description of potential pollutant
sources identified in the plan in accordance with paragraph 3.a.2) (Description of
Potential Pollutant Sources) of this section and pollution prevention measures
and controls identified in the plan in accordance with paragraph 3.a.3) (Measures
and Controls) of this section shall be revised as appropriate within 2 weeks of
such inspection and shall provide for implementation of any changes to the plan
in timely manner, but in no case more than 12 weeks after the inspection.
c)A report summarizing the scope of the evaluation, personnel making the
evaluation, the date(s) of the evaluation, major observations relating to the
implementation of the storm water pollution prevention plan for at least 3 years
from the date of the evaluation. The report shall identify any incidents of
noncompliance. Where a report does not identify any incidents of
noncompliance, the report shall contain a certification that the facility is in
compliance with the storm water pollution prevention plan and this permit. The
report shall be signed in accordance with Part VI.G. (Signatory Requirements) of
this permit.
d)The individual or individuals who will conduct the evaluations must be identified
in the plan and should be members of the pollution prevention team, as identified
in paragraph 3.a.1) (Pollution Prevention Team).
4.Numeric Effluent Limitations. In addition to the numeric effluent limitations described in Part
IV.B., the limitations listed in Table L-1 (below) shall be met by existing and new dischargers.
5.Monitoring and Reporting Requirements
a.Analytical Monitoring Requirements. During the first year (2023) of the permit, permittees
with landfill/land application/open dump sites must monitor their storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity at least quarterly except as provided in paragraphs 5.a.3)
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 8
(Sampling Waiver), 5.a.4) (Representative Discharge), and 5.a.5) (Alternative Certification).
Landfill/land application/open dump sites are required to monitor their storm water
discharges for the pollutants of concern listed in Table L-1 below. Facilities must report in
accordance with 5.b. (Reporting). In addition to the parameters listed in Table L-1 below, the
permittee shall provide: the date and duration (in hours) of the storm event(s) sampled;
rainfall measurements or estimates (in inches) of the storm event that generated the sampled
runoff; the duration between the storm event sampled and the end of the previous measurable
(greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event; and, an estimate of the total volume (in gallons)
of the discharge sampled.
Table L-1.
Landfills and Land Application Sites Industry Monitoring Requirements
Pollutants of Concern Benchmark Monitoring
Concentration1
Numeric Limitations
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)2 100 mg/L
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD5)3
140 mg/L daily max
37 mg/L, monthly average max
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)3 88 mg/L daily max
27 mg/L monthly average max
Ammonia3 10 mg/L daily max
4.9 mg/L monthly average max
Alpha Terpineol3 0.033 mg/L daily max
0.016 mg/L monthly average max
Benzoic Acid3 0.12 mg/L daily max
0.071 mg/L monthly average max
p-Cresol3 0.025 mg/L daily max
0.014 mg/L monthly average max
Phenol3 0.026 mg/L daily max
0.015 mg/L monthly average max
Total Zinc3 0.20 mg/L daily max
0.11mg/L monthly average max
pH3 Within the range of 6-9 standard pH
units (s.u.)
1.Benchmark monitoring required only for discharges not subject to effluent limitations in 40 CFR Park 445 Subpart B.
2.Sampling for TSS is not required for storm water discharges that are infiltrating to groundwater.
3.Monitor annually. As set forth at 40 CFR part 445 Subpart B, these numeric limitations apply to contaminated storm water discharges
from MSWLFs which have not been closed in accordance with 40 CFR 258.60, and contaminated storm water discharges from those
landfills which are subject to the provisions of 40 CFR Part 257 except for discharges from any of facilities described in (a) thru (d)
below:
a) landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill only receives wastes generated by the
industrial or commercial operation directly associated with the landfill;
b)landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill receives wastes generated by the
industrial or commercial operation directly associated with the landfill and also receives other wastes provided the other wastes received
for disposal are generated by a facility that is subject to the same provision in 40 CFR Sub-chapter N as the industrial or commercial
operation or the other wastes received are of similar nature to the wastes generated by the industrial or commercial operation;
c) landfills operated in conjunction with Centralized Waste Treatment (CWT) facilities subject to 40 CFR Part 437 so long as the CWT
facility commingles the landfill wastewater with other non-landfill wastewater for discharge. A landfill directly associated with a CWT
facility is subject to this part if the CWT facility discharges landfill wastewater separately from other CWT wastewater or commingles the
wastewater from its landfill only with wastewater from other landfills; or
d) landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill receives wastes from public service
activities so long as the company owning the landfill does not receive a fee or other remuneration for the disposal service.
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 9
1)Monitoring Periods. Facilities shall monitor samples collected during the sampling
periods of: January through March, April through June, July through September, and
October through December for the years specified in paragraph 5.a. (above).
2)Sample Type. A minimum of one grab sample shall be taken. All such samples shall
be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1
inches in magnitude and that occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable
(greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. The required 72-hour storm event interval
is waived where the preceding measurable storm event did not result in a measurable
discharge from the facility. The required 72-hour storm event interval may also be
waived where the permittee documents that less than a 72-hour interval is
representative for local storm events during the season when sampling is being
conducted. The grab sample shall be taken during the first 30 minutes of the
discharge. If the collection of a grab sample during the first 30 minutes is
impracticable, a grab sample can be taken during the first hour of the discharge, and
the discharger shall submit with the monitoring report a description of why a grab
sample during the first 30 minutes was impracticable. If storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity commingle with process or nonprocess water, then
where practicable, permittees must attempt to sample the storm water discharge before
it mixes with the non-storm water discharge.
3)Sampling Waiver.
a)Adverse Conditions. When a discharger is unable to collect samples within a
specified sampling period due to adverse climatic conditions, the discharger shall
collect a substitute sample from a separate qualifying event in the next period
and submit the data along with data for the routine sample in that period.
Adverse weather conditions that may prohibit the collection of samples include
weather conditions that create dangerous conditions for personnel (such as local
flooding, high winds, hurricane, tornadoes, electrical storms, etc.) or otherwise
make the collection of a sample impracticable (e.g., drought, extended frozen
conditions, etc.).
b)Inactive and Unstaffed Site. When a discharger is unable to conduct quarterly
chemical storm water sampling at an inactive and unstaffed site, the operator of
the facility may exercise a waiver of the monitoring requirements as long as the
facility remains inactive and unstaffed. The facility must state on their NOI that
it is inactive and unstaffed and submit a change NOI if this status changes.
4)Representative Discharge. When a facility has two or more outfalls that, based on a
consideration of industrial activity, significant materials, and management practices
and activities within the area drained by the outfall, the permittee reasonably believes
discharge substantially identical effluents, the permittee may test the effluent of one of
such outfalls and report that the quantitative data also applies to the substantially
identical outfall(s) provided that the permittee includes in the storm water pollution
prevention plan a description of the location of the outfalls and explains in detail why
the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical effluents. In addition, for
each outfall that the permittee believes is representative, an estimate of the size of the
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 10
drainage area (in square feet) and an estimate of the runoff coefficient of the drainage
area [e.g., low (under 40 percent), medium (40 to 65 percent), or high (above 65
percent)] shall be provided in the plan. The permittee shall include the description of
the location of the outfalls, explanation of why outfalls are expected to discharge
substantially identical effluents, and estimate of the size of the drainage area and runoff
coefficient with the Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report (SWDMR).
5)Alternative Certification. A discharger is not subject to the monitoring requirements of
this section provided the discharger makes a certification for a given outfall or on a
pollutant-by-pollutant basis in lieu of monitoring reports required under paragraph b.
below, under penalty of law, signed in accordance with Part VI.G. (Signatory
Requirements), that material handling equipment or activities, raw materials,
intermediate products, final products, waste materials, by-products, industrial
machinery or operations, or significant materials from past industrial activity, that are
located in areas of the facility within the drainage area of the outfall are not presently
exposed to storm water and are not expected to be exposed to storm water for the
certification period. Such certification must be retained in the storm water pollution
prevention plan, and submitted to DWQ in accordance with Part V.B. of the fact sheet
to this permit. In the case of certifying that a pollutant is not present, the permittee
must submit the certification along with the monitoring reports required under
paragraph b below. If the permittee cannot certify for an entire period, they must
submit the date exposure was eliminated and any monitoring required up until that
date. This certification option is not applicable to compliance monitoring requirements
associated with effluent limitations.
b.Reporting. Permittees shall submit monitoring results for each outfall associated with
industrial activity [or a certification in accordance with Sections 3), 4), or 5) above] obtained
during the first year (2023) reporting period, on Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report
(SWDMR) form(s) postmarked no later than the 31st day of March on the following year. For
each outfall, one SWDMR form must be submitted to the Director per storm event sampled.
Signed copies of the SWDMR, or said certifications, shall be submitted to the Director at the
address listed in Part V.B. of this permit.
1)Additional Notification. In addition to filing copies of discharge monitoring reports in
accordance with paragraph b. (above), facilities with at least one storm water discharge
associated with industrial activity through a large or medium municipal separate storm
sewer system (systems serving a population of 100,000 or more) must submit signed
copies of SWDMRs to the operator of the municipal separate storm sewer system in
accordance with the dates provided in paragraph b. (above).
c.Benchmark Level Exceedance Actions. Benchmarks are used to help gauge the overall
effectiveness of control measures at a facility. If there is an exceedance of these levels you
must review the selection, design, installation, and implementation of your control measures
to determine if modifications are necessary. This review must be completed within a month
of receiving sample results. Actions taken as a result of the review must be documented in
the pollution prevention plan and completed in a timely manner, but in no case more than 12
weeks after the evaluation. If no action is taken then you must document the rational for this
decision (e.g. natural background pollutant levels, further pollutant reduction is not
technologically or economically feasible, etc.).
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 11
d.Quarterly Visual Examination of Storm Water Quality. Facilities shall perform and document
a visual examination of a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity from each
outfall, except discharges exempted below. The examination(s) must be made at least once
in each of the following 3-month periods: January through March, April through June, July
through September, and October through December. The examination(s) shall be made
during daylight hours unless there is insufficient rainfall or snow melt to produce a runoff
event.
1)Sample and Data Collection. Examinations shall be made of samples collected within
the first 30 minutes (or as soon thereafter as practical, but not to exceed 1 hour) of
when the runoff or snowmelt begins discharging. The examinations shall document
observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids,
foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution. The
examination must be conducted in a well lit area. No analytical tests are required to be
performed on the samples. All such samples shall be collected from the discharge
resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches in magnitude and that
occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall)
storm event. Where practicable, the same individual should carry out the collection
and examination of discharges for the entire permit term.
2)Visual Storm Water Discharge Examination Report. Visual examination reports must
be maintained onsite in the pollution prevention plan. The report shall include the
examination date and time, examination personnel, the nature of the discharge (i.e.,
runoff or snow melt), visual quality of the storm water discharge (including
observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids,
foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution), and probable
sources of any observed storm water contamination.
3)Representative Discharge. When a facility has two or more outfalls that, based on a
consideration of industrial activity, significant materials, and management practices
and activities within the area drained by the outfall, the permittee reasonably believes
discharge substantially identical effluents, the permittee may collect a sample of
effluent of one of such outfalls and report that the examination data also applies to the
substantially identical outfall(s) provided that the permittee includes in the storm water
pollution prevention plan a description of the location of the outfalls and explains in
detail why the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical effluents. In
addition, for each outfall that the permittee believes is representative, an estimate of the
size of the drainage area (in square feet) and an estimate of the runoff coefficient of the
drainage area [e.g., low (under 40 percent), medium (40 to 65 percent), or high (above
65 percent)] shall be provided in the plan.
4)Adverse Conditions. When a discharger is unable to conduct a visual examination as a
result of adverse climatic conditions, the discharger must document the reason for not
performing the visual examination and retain this documentation onsite with the
records of the visual examination. Adverse weather conditions which may prohibit the
collection of samples include weather conditions that create dangerous conditions for
personnel (such as local flooding, high winds, hurricane, tornadoes, electrical storms,
etc.) or otherwise make the collection of a sample impracticable (drought, extended
APPENDIX I.L
Permit No.: UTR000000
Effective: January 5, 2023
L − 12
frozen conditions, etc.).
5)Inactive and Unstaffed Site. When a discharger is unable to conduct visual storm
water examinations at an inactive and unstaffed site, the operator of the facility may
exercise a waiver of the monitoring requirement as long as the facility remains inactive
and unstaffed. The facility must state on their NOI that it is inactive and unstaffed and
submit a change NOI if this status changes.
6.Definition.
a."Inactive Landfill" For the purposes of this permit, a landfill is considered inactive when, on
a permanent basis, it will no longer receive waste and has completed closure in accordance
with any applicable Federal, State, and/or local requirements.
Page 1 of 3
Fi rst N ame Mid d l e In i tial L ast N ame:Mark Lam oreaux
Permit I nf orm at ion
Eligibilit y I nf orm ation
Owner/Operat or I nf orm at ion
Owner Information
Owner Mailing Address
Owner Point of Contact Information
Operator Information
STATE OF U TAH , DEPARTMENT OF EN VIR ON MENTAL QUAL I TY, D IVISION OF WATER QUAL ITY
195 N o rth 1950 W est, P.O. B ox 144870, Sal t L ake C i ty, U tah 84114-4870 [phone]
No ti ce of In ten t (N OI) fo r C o verag e U nd er th e U PD ES General Mul ti -Secto r
Stor m W ater Per mi t fo r D i sch ar g es Asso ci ated wi th I n dustr i al Activity,
Permi t N o . U TR 000000 NOI
Master Per mi t N umb er: U TR 000000
U PD ES ID:U TRI 00074
State/terr itor y wher e yo u r faci l ity i s d isch arg in g : U T
D oes you r faci li ty d isch arg e to federall y recog n iz ed I n di an Co u n tr y l and s? N o
W h i ch type o f fo r m wo ul d yo u l i ke to su bmi t? Notic e of I nt ent (NOI )
B y i n di cati n g "Yes" b el ow, I co n fi r m th at th e faci li ty o p er ato r i n tend s to be au th o r iz ed b y th e U PD ES Mu l ti -Sector Gener al Per mit (MSGP) for
stor mwater d ischar ges asso ci ated wi th in d u stri al acti vi ty i n th e State o f Utah . I un d er stand th at wh en co ver ag e is g r an ted , all sto rmwater
di sch ar g es mu st co mp l y with th e terms an d co n d i ti o ns o f th e p er mit.
Yes
Own er: Nort hern U t ah Env ironm ent al R es ource Agenc y
Statu s of Own er : Public
Ad d ress Li ne 1:1997 Eas t 3500 N ort h
Ad d ress Li ne 2:Ci ty:LAY TON
ZI P/Postal C od e:84041 State:U T
Ti tle:Landf ill Manager
Ph o n e:801-614-5600 Ext.:
Email :m lamoreaux @nort hernutahera.org
Page 2 of 3
NOI Preparer Information
Fac ilit y Inf ormation
Facility Information
Facility Address
Latitude/Longitude for the facility
Sec t or I dent if ic at ion
Sector-Specific Information
Sit e Act iv ity I nf orm at ion
Receiving Waterbody Information
I s th e Op er ato r I n fo rmati on th e same as th e Own er I n fo rmati o n? Yes
 Thi s N OI i s bein g p rep ar ed by so meo n e o th er than the cer ti fi er.
Faci li ty N ame: Bay v iew Landf ill
Ad d ress Li ne 1:10800 S. U t ah St at e R oute 68
Ad d ress Li ne 2:Ci ty:Elberta
ZI P/Postal C od e:84626 State:U T
C ou n ty o r Si mil ar D ivisio n :U t ah
C oo r di nate System: Dec im al D egrees
Lati tu d e/Lo n g i tu d e:40.033069°N , 111.970004°W
I s you r faci li ty p resen tl y in acti ve an d u n staffed? N o
Pr imary Reg ul ated Secto r: L
Pr imary Activity C od e: LF
Mun icip al Sep ar ate Sto rm Sewer System (MS4) Op er ato r Name: U t ah Count y (U ninc orporat ed Areas)
Li st all o f th e r eceivin g waterb o di es. F or a map o f waterb o d i es go to h ttp://wq .d eq .u tah.g ov (http ://wq .d eq .utah .g o v):
R ecei vi n g W ater :
U tah Lak e
Page 3 of 3
Federal Effluent Limitation Guidelines
C ert if ic at ion I nf orm at ion
I d en ti fy the Efflu ent L imi tatio n Gu id el in e(s) th at app l y to you r sto rmwater di sch ar g es.
40 C F R
Part/Su bp art Eli gi bl e D i sch arg es
Affected
MSGP
Secto r
N ew
So u r ce
D ate App l i cab il i ty
Part 445,
Subpart A & B
R unof f f rom hazardous was t e and
non-hazardous was te landf ills
L 02/28/2000 D o es yo ur facil i ty h ave an y d i sch ar g es su b j ect to
th i s efflu ent l i mitati o n g ui d el i n e?
No
Ar e yo u r eq u esti n g p er mi t co ver age for an y stor mwater d ischar ges sub ject to effl uen t l imi tatio n g u id el in es? N o
I s th e facil i ty r eq u ir ed to d o analyti cal mon i to ri ng ? (See p er mi t co n d i ti o ns Part V. an d Secto r mo ni to ri ng r equ i r emen ts.) Yes
I s th e facil i ty r eq u ir ed to d o vi sual mon i to ri ng ? (See p er mi t co n d i ti o ns n ear the en d o f ap pl icab l e Secto r(s); Ap pen d i x A to AD ) Yes
I s th e facil i ty r eq u ir ed to sub mi t mo n itor in g d ata o r r etai n it o n si te? Submit
I s th ere exi stin g q u an ti tati ve sto rmwater d i sch ar g e d ata? No
D oes th is facil ity si te h ave any o th er U PD ES p er mits? N o
I c ertif y under penalt y of law t hat t his doc ument and all att ac hment s were prepared under m y direc t ion or s uperv is ion in ac c ordanc e wit h a s y s t em
des igned t o ass ure that qualif ied personnel properly gat hered and ev aluat ed t he inf orm at ion s ubm itt ed. Bas ed on m y inquiry of t he pers on or pers ons
who m anage t he s y s t em , or t hos e pers ons direc tly respons ible f or gathering the inf ormation, t he inf orm at ion subm itt ed is , to t he bes t of my k nowledge
and belief , t rue, ac c urate, and com plet e. I hav e no pers onal k nowledge t hat t he inf orm at ion subm itt ed is ot her t han t rue, ac c urat e, and c om plet e. I am
aware that t here are s ignif ic ant penalties f or s ubm it t ing f als e inf orm ation, inc luding t he pos s ibilit y of f ine and impris onment f or k nowing v iolat ions .
Signing an elec t ronic doc ument on behalf of another pers on is s ubjec t t o c rim inal, civ il, adm inis t rativ e, or ot her lawf ul ac t ion.
C er tified B y: J ared M. Lamoreaux
C er tifier Ti tle: General Manager
C er tifier Email : m lamoreaux @nort hernutahera.org
C er tified On : 03/01/2021 1:12 PM ET
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
10800 S. STATE ROAD 68
UTAH COUNTY
UPDES Multi-Sector Group 5 General Permit No.: UTR000000

South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
10800 S. STATE ROAD 68
UTAH COUNTY
UPDES Multi-Sector Group 5 General Permit No.: UTR000000
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 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.”
______________________________ _________________
Terry Ficklin Date
District Manager
SUVSWD
Prepared by:
3949 South 700 East, Suite 500
Salt Lake City, UT 84107
June 2013
SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 Action and Compliance Reporting Requirements ................................................ 4 
2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 
2.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 5 
3.0 FACILITY OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................... 5 
3.1 Facility Description and Location ........................................................................ 5 
3.2 Industrial Activity ................................................................................................ 5 
3.3 Site Physical Characteristics ................................................................................ 6 
3.3.1 Topography and Land Use ............................................................................ 6 
3.3.2 Climatology................................................................................................... 6 
3.3.3 Surface Water Drainage ................................................................................ 6 
3.3.4 Outfall Locations .......................................................................................... 6 
4.0 POLLUTION PREVENTION TEAM ................................................................................ 7 
5.0 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL POLLUTANT SOURCES ........................................... 7 
5.1 Drainage ............................................................................................................... 7 
5.2 Inventory of Exposed Materials ........................................................................... 9 
5.3 Significant Spills or Leaks ................................................................................... 9 
5.4 Sampling Data ...................................................................................................... 9 
5.5 Potential Pollutant Sources ................................................................................. 10 
6.0 MEASURES AND CONTROLS ...................................................................................... 11 
6.1 Storm Water (Runoff) Management .................................................................. 11 
6.2 Erosion and Sediment Control Practices ............................................................ 12 
6.3 Good Housekeeping ........................................................................................... 13 
6.4 Preventive Maintenance ..................................................................................... 14 
6.5 Spill Prevention and Response Procedures ........................................................ 15 
6.6 Inspections .......................................................................................................... 16 
6.7 Employee Training ............................................................................................. 16 
6.8 Record Keeping and Reporting .......................................................................... 17 
6.9 Non-Storm Water Discharges ............................................................................ 17 
7.0 COMPREHENSIVE SITE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION .......................................... 18 
7.1 General Requirements of the CSCE ................................................................... 18 
7.2 Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation Report ......................................... 18 
7.3 SWPPP Revision and Implementation ............................................................... 18 
8.0 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................. 19 
8.1 Quarterly Analytical Monitoring ........................................................................ 19 
8.2 Quarterly Visual Monitoring .............................................................................. 20 

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 2

LIST OF APPENDICES

A UPDES Multi-Sector Group 5 General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Industrial Activities – Appendix II.L
B Site Location and Plan
C Climatic Data – Elberta, UT
D Pollution Prevention Team
E Material Inventory and Description of Significant Exposed Materials
F Reportable Quantities of Hazardous Substances
G BMP Implementation Record
H Spill Documentation Record
I Weekly Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report
J Employee Training Schedule and Employee Training Record
K Certification of Non-Storm Water Discharges
L Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation
M Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report (SWDMR)

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 3
DOCUMENT REVISIONS

BAYVIEW LANDFILL
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN

NUMBER DATE DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE
0 8/30/2005 Initial document
1 7/18/2013 SWPPP revision with permit re-issuance
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 4

1.1 Action and Compliance Reporting Requirements
The following items have been compiled as actions required by SUVSWD to comply
with current UPDES Multi-Sector Group 5 General Permit conditions.

Action Form Frequency Notes

Certification of Non-
Stormwater Discharges
Certification of Non-
Storm Water
Discharges-
Appendix K
Upon permit
renewal
Complete for and file with
Utah Division of Water
Quality (UDWQ) Per Section
5.9
Site inspections Weekly Visual
inspection Report -
Appendix I
Weekly Keep completed forms as part
of this Storm water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
a minimum of 3 years
Visual monitoring of
stormwater Discharge
Stormwater Discharge
Monitoring Report
(SWDMR)-Appendix M
Once Quarterly If no stormwater is discharged,
record findings on SWDMR
and keep in SWPPP document
Analytical monitoring of
discharged stormwater
Stormwater Discharge
Monitoring Report-
Appendix M
Quarterly, in 2nd
and 4th years of
permit.
Collect grab samples as
described in Appendix II.L
Report Findings to UDWQ per
section 7.1
Comprehensive Site
Compliance Evaluation
Comprehensive Site
Evaluation Form-
Appendix L
Yearly Conduct a comprehensive
compliance evaluation per
section6.0, and prepare report
of findings
Track BMP
Implementation
BMP Implementation
Record- Appendix G
As needed Record all newly implemented
Best Management Practices
(BMPs), repairs made, or
removal of BMPs and
responsibilities.
Document all hazardous
Materials spills
Hazardous Material
Spill Record-Appendix
H
As needed Record any spill of hazardous
materials, and subsequent
clean up efforts
Comprehensive
Employee Training
Employee Training
Record-Appendix J
Yearly, newly
hired employees
Training on SWPPP
procedures, record keeping
requirements etc.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 5
2.0 Introduction
2.1 Purpose
In compliance with the Utah Water Pollution Control Act, Title 19, Chapter 5, Utah Code
Annotated 1953, as amended, and the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(UPDES), this Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP or Plan) has been
prepared for Bayview Landfill in accordance with the Multi-Sector General Permit
(MSGP) for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity (Permit No. UTR-
000000). Storm water discharge requirements associated with this permit are included
in Appendix A.

The SWPPP identifies potential sources of pollution that may affect the quality of storm
water that is discharged from the facility. The SWPPP also defines and requires the
implementation of measures and controls that reduce pollutants in storm water
associated with landfill construction and operation. This SWPPP, prepared for the
Bayview Landfill, is to be amended whenever there is a change in landfill design,
construction, operation, or maintenance that may significantly impact the potential for
pollutants to be discharged.
3.0 Facility Overview
3.1 Facility Description and Location
The Bayview Landfill is located in Sections 17 and 18, T9S, R1W approximately 6 miles
north of Elberta, Utah, and directly west of State Highway 68 (see Appendix B, Figure 1).
The landfill property includes all 640 acres of Section 17, and a 20-acre parcel in Section
18. All solid waste disposal activities are planned within the Section 17 parcel; the 20-
acre Section 18 parcel houses a culinary well, a water storage tank, and an upgradient
monitoring well associated with the landfill operations.

The Bayview Landfill consists of the following parcels:

 Parcel “A": SW1/4 NW1/4 Section 17, T9S, R1W,
 Parcel "B": That portion of Section 17, T9S, R1W not described in Parcel "A”, and
 Parcel "C": S1/2 of the SE1/4 of the NE1/4, Section 18, T9S, R1W.

This land was conveyed by the Utah Division of State Lands to the Provo City
Corporation for a term of 51 years under Special Use Lease Agreement No. 498. The
term of this lease agreement extends through the year 2035. The lease agreement
contains a clause for extension of the lease beyond the 51-year period.
3.2 Industrial Activity
The Bayview Landfill was located, permitted, designed, and constructed by Provo City
Corporation during the 1980s and is operated by the South Utah Valley Solid Waste
District (SUVSWD, referred to herein as the District). The landfill accepts compacted or
baled solid waste from the District’s transfer station in Springville and a city-owned
transfer station in Goshen. Permit conditions allow the disposal of waste from within the
District only. The transfer stations accept residential and commercial solid wastes,

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 6
including yard wastes, and generally do not accept construction debris (C&D) wastes.
The transfer stations also do not accept regulated hazardous wastes.

Yard wastes and recyclable materials arriving at the transfer stations may either be
segregated for composting or recycling, or commingled and compacted with the
residential and commercial wastes for disposal.
3.3 Site Physical Characteristics
3.3.1 Topography and Land Use
The Bayview Landfill site is located in the Goshen Valley approximately 2 to 3 miles west
of the southwestern-most bay of Utah Lake. The Goshen Valley slopes upward away
from the lake toward the East Tintic Mountains some 7 miles southwest of the lake. The
landfill site similarly slopes with an approximate 150-foot rise from the eastern to the
western boundaries of Section 17. The eastern boundary of the landfill site is
approximately 120 feet above the current water elevation of Utah Lake.

The land use surrounding the site is generally rural agricultural, with orchard, grain, hay,
and livestock grazing as the predominant land uses in the vicinity of the site. The nearest
residence is located more than 1 mile from the northern property boundary.
3.3.2 Climatology
Climate data from Elberta, Utah, best represent conditions at the Bayview Landfill based
on proximity and similar elevations. Mean annual maximum and minimum temperatures
are 64.9º F and 35.7º F, respectively. Mean annual precipitation is approximately 10.6
inches with April, May, and October typically being the wettest months. The Period of
Record Monthly Climate Summary (1928-1992) and National Climatic Data Center
(NCDC) 1971-2000 Monthly Normals are the most up-to-date records and are included
in Appendix C.

Prevailing winds at the landfill site are from the south-southeast (SSE). However, the
strongest winds, occurring during winter months, are from the west-southwest (WSW).
3.3.3 Surface Water Drainage
Three unnamed surface water channels intermittently drain water across the landfill from
west to east. Each channel drains an area of less than 1,000 acres. Due to the sandy
nature of the channel bottoms and the soils in and around the landfill, storm runoff is
limited and the channels are dry during most years and during most storm events. The
three surface water channels (north, middle, and south) are shown in Appendix B, Figure
1.
3.3.4 Outfall Locations
Landfill operations primarily affect the northernmost of the three surface water channels.
This channel has been relocated around (to the north of) Cell 2 and handles only non-
contact storm water (storm water that has no contact with solid waste). Any storm water
that reaches the eastern property boundary via the north surface water channel is
discharged through a culvert under State Highway 68.

All contact storm water is conveyed in the leachate collection system to the storm
water/leachate pond located to the east of Cell 2 for storage and evaporation. Neither

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 7
leachate nor contact storm water are discharged from the site via surface water
channels.

The middle surface water channel is affected to a lesser degree by current landfill
operations, and the southernmost channel is on an unimproved portion of the property.
Runoff conveyed by the middle and south channels are non-contact storm water. An
excess soil storage berm has been created for aesthetic purposes on the east side of
the property and to the south of the existing windrow (compost) area. This berm blocks
the middle surface water channel such that there is no outfall from the property. Due to
the infrequency of flow in the channel, there is no ponding of water and the berm is of
little consequence in terms of site drainage. Similarly, it is anticipated that a proposed
berm near the southeast corner of the property will cut off the south surface water
channel. When operations move to Cell #3, this channel will be relocated to divert
stormwater run-on away from the active area. For the purposes of reporting and record
keeping, the north, middle, and south outfalls shall be numbered 1, 2, and 3,
respectively.
4.0 Pollution Prevention Team
The Bayview Landfill Pollution Prevention Team (Team) is responsible for the
development and implementation of the SWPPP. Team members include the District
Manager and the Landfill Foreman. Individuals currently holding these positions are
identified in Appendix D. The District Manager is the signatory authority for the SWPPP
and reports identified within the SWPPP. The District Manager shall approve any
document revisions.

Responsibilities of the Landfill Foreman include the following:

 Implementation of SWPPP Measures and Controls (see Section 5.0),
 Identification and implementation of Measures and Controls for new operational
and construction phases,
 Coordination of employee training,
 Outfall monitoring,
 Record keeping,
 Preparation and submittal of reports (see Section 7.1), and
 Updating the SWPPP.
5.0 Description of Potential Pollutant Sources
The following sections describe activities and potential sources that may reasonably be
expected to add pollutants to storm water discharges or that may result in dry weather
storm water discharges.
5.1 Drainage
Features associated with surface water drainage and pollution prevention for the facility
are shown in Figure 2 (Appendix B). These features are briefly described in the
following paragraphs.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 8
Surface Water Channels
In general, storm water flows from west to east across the site as described Section
2.3.3, Surface Water Drainage. On the eastern portion of the landfill, the north surface
water channel has been relocated around Cell 2 and the storm water/leachate pond.
Storm water conveyed by the channel passes through a culvert under State Highway 68
at the eastern edge of the property.
Active and Closed Cells
Cell 1 was closed in 2005. Measures taken during placement of final cover are
discussed in Section 5.0, Measures and Controls. Closure of the cell has been
completed as cover slopes have been vegetated or otherwise stabilized with wood
mulch. Cell 2 is active, and waste is currently placed in an excavated portion of the cell.
Storm water on Cell 2 is therefore contained and handled via the leachate collection
system.
Stockpile Areas
A final cover stockpile is located to the north of Cell 1. A second stockpile area is
located south of Cell 2 and approximately 1,000 feet east of the maintenance building.
Leachate System
Leachate from Cell 1 exits from the northeast corner of the cell into a leachate drain line
that runs generally eastward to the storm water/leachate pond. Leachate from Cell 2,
the active portion of the landfill, collects in the bottom of the cell and is pumped up to the
drain line. The pond receives contact storm water and leachate. The pond has no
surface water discharge; rather, evaporation controls storm water/leachate levels.
Compost operations
The composting operations area includes a storm water pond, which receives runoff
from the existing windrow area/expanded compost pad. The pond is also located to the
east of Cell 2 and does not discharge to a surface water.
Maintenance Building
Maintenance of vehicles and equipment is performed within the maintenance building;
storm water pollution potential is therefore limited. Washing of vehicles and equipment
is completed in the active portion of Cell 2 such that wash waters are directed to the
leachate system.
Above-Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs)
Three ASTs are located near the maintenance building. The fuels stored in the tanks
are unleaded gasoline, propane, and diesel fuel.
Structural Controls
A berm is located between the northern landfill boundary and Cell 2. This berm acts
primarily as a visual barrier; however, it is also a topographic barrier that helps control
the direction of runoff such that precipitation coming in to contact with potential erosion
areas is directed toward the outfall sampling point.

.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 9
Litter control fences have been placed around the north, east, and south sides of Cell 2.
Fence placement was based on the direction of strong, winter winds (from the west-
southwest).

The following features do not exist or have not been identified at the Bayview Landfill
and are therefore not noted in Figure 2:
 Locations where open dumping has occurred,
 Locations of known leachate springs or areas where uncontrolled leachate may
commingle with runoff, and
 Locations of major spills or leaks.
5.2 Inventory of Exposed Materials
The Bayview Landfill receives compacted or baled residential and commercial solid
wastes. These wastes include, but are not limited to, household food wastes, paper,
plastics, and yard wastes. Construction debris (C&D) wastes are generally not
accepted, and hazardous wastes are specifically prohibited.

Yard wastes, which are segregated from other wastes received, are used in composting
operations. Yard wastes and biosolids which are used for composting are included in
the inventory of materials.

Oils associated with the operation and maintenance of landfill equipment are stored in
plastic 55-gallon drums inside the maintenance building. Typically, eight (8) drums are
stored.

Materials used, stored, or produced on site that are or may be exposed to storm water
are included in the Material Inventory in Appendix E. Those deemed to be significant
exposed materials are included in Description of Significant Exposed Materials, also
located in Appendix E.

5.3 Significant Spills or Leaks
There have been no significant spills or leaks within the previous reporting period.
Significant spills or leaks include, but are not limited to, releases of hazardous
substances equal to or in excess of reportable quantities as identified in Appendix F.
5.4 Sampling Data
As discussed previously, two types of storm water are handled at the Bayview Landfill.
Contact storm water is that portion that comes into contact with the solid waste. The
most common exposure potential for solid waste occurs during offloading at the active
working face. Contact storm water and leachate are collected in the leachate collection
system and directed to the evaporation pond; there is no surface water discharge from
the pond. Therefore, no leachate sampling data is performed and no records are
available.

Non-contact storm water is conveyed by three surface water channels (designated as
north, middle, and south as noted previously. Due to low precipitation the landfill site
and the high infiltration rates of site soils, the channels are dry during most years and
during most precipitation events. Sampling opportunities are limited, and no sampling

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 10
has taken place to date, nor have any storm water discharges been observed leaving
the site through the north, middle or south channels. Permit requirements related to
sampling are discussed in Section 7.0, Monitoring Requirements.
5.5 Potential Pollutant Sources
Potential pollutant sources associated with activities at the Bayview Landfill have been
identified and are described in the following paragraphs.
Exposure of Active and Inactive Landfill
The most common exposure potential for municipal solid waste is daily disposal at the
active working face, which may be exposed to storm water during rainstorms. Less
common is erosion of the soil cover that may expose the underlying waste to storm
water.
Earth/Soil Moving
Earth moving has the potential to generate dust and particulates, resulting in air and
water quality concerns. Furthermore, earth moving activities often disturb vegetation or
otherwise create exposed slopes and increase erosion potential.
Storage of Daily, Interim, and Final Cover Material
In conjunction with earth/soil moving, storage of daily and interim final cover material is a
potential pollutant source. Unprotected materials are exposed to precipitation, allowing
sediments to be conveyed with storm water.
Waste Hauling, Loading, and Unloading
Along haul roads, vehicle traffic is a source of dust and sediment. Wind-blown debris
from improperly covered vehicles, waste spills due to accident or improper hauling, and
improper unloading methods or locations are also potential sources of pollution.
Leachate System
When leachate cannot percolate vertically, it may escape laterally through the cover
soils on the side slopes of the waste fill operations. Leaks may occur in the leachate
conveyance piping or in the storm water/leachate pond. However, in most locations
where the leachate piping is not on top of a landfill liner, the leachate conveyance pipe is
encapsulated within a containment pipe to capture leaks in the primary conveyance
pipeline. This dual line system helps prevent leaks from being wasted into surface water
or infiltrate the groundwater. In addition, the leachate pond is dual lined with leak
detection.
ASTs and Maintenance Products
Refilling and storage of fuels may result in spills and leaks. Hydraulic fluid, motor oil,
lube grease materials, and other maintenance products stored and used at the
maintenance building may be exposed to storm water, though the potential is minimized
if operations are limited to indoor areas.
Composting Operations
The location of composting operations is marked on Appendix B as Existing Windrow
Area and Expanded Compost Pad. Water is applied to compost materials, and the
operations may therefore be a source of pollution due to potentially high nutrient and
sediment content in discharged water. The windrow area is graded such that all

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 11
discharged waters are directed to the storm water evaporation pond, which does not
discharge to any on site channels.
6.0 Measures and Controls
Best Management Practices (BMPs) are measures used to prevent or reduce pollution
from on-site operations. BMPs may include processes, schedules of activities,
prohibitions on practices, and other management practices to prevent or reduce water
pollution. These practices are generally divided into two categories, structural and non-
structural, and include the following storm water management components:

Structural BMPs include the construction or implementation of:

 Storm water (runoff) management controls, and
 Erosion and sediment control practices.

Non-structural BMPs include the following components:

 Good housekeeping,
 Preventive maintenance,
 Inspections,
 Spill prevention and response,
 Employee training, and
 Record keeping and reporting.

The following sections describe each of these components in greater detail and list
BMPs appropriate for the Bayview Landfill. These BMPs may be part of existing
practices or may be selected for implementation as deemed appropriate by the Team.
Implementation of some BMPs may be ongoing; others may be required on a periodic
basis or during certain stages of landfill operation. The table in Appendix G provides a
tool for BMP implementation tracking should BMPs be required. The BMPs described in
the following sections are general in nature; BMPs selected for implementation should
be accompanied by details such as:

 Description (activities, location, etc.),
 Scheduled completion date,
 Person responsible, and
 Notes (purpose/need, recommendations for follow-up, effectiveness, etc.)

In addition to BMPs, certification of non-storm water discharges from the landfill is
required by the permit as a measure to prevent pollution. This certification process is
addressed in Section 5.9.
6.1 Storm Water (Runoff) Management
All landfills must manage and control storm water runoff in order to properly drain the
site, keep areas free from flooding, and prevent damage to landfill facilities and nearby
infrastructure. The landfill design also considers stormwater run-on and includes
diversions to help prevent stormwater runoff from upgradient areas. Storm water
management can help to prevent pollution of storm water runoff by diverting runoff away

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 12
from potential pollutant sources. Storm water management controls also direct runoff
that contains pollutants to control devices or treatment systems. In general, the facility’s
storm water management approach is summarized as follows:
 Non-contact storm water is conveyed by surface water channels such that
pollution sources are avoided.
 Contact storm water and leachate are directed to a storm water and leachate
ponds. These ponds have no surface water discharge (outfall); evaporation
reduces pond levels. Relatively low annual precipitation and other climatic
conditions of the area make this a viable alternative.

Associated BMPs include:

 Construct and maintain berms, dikes, and/or channels to divert runoff away from
pollutant sources, such as the active landfill working face, disturbed soils, and
stockpile areas.
 Construct and maintain berms, dikes, and/or channels to direct contact storm
water to the leachate collection system or directly to the storm water and
leachate ponds.
 Construct and maintain perimeter drainage channels around closed cells and
stockpile areas (prior to slope stabilization via vegetation or otherwise).
 As a precaution for spills, construct and maintain berms (or other secondary
containment structures) to contain spilled material, preventing contaminated
runoff from entering the storm water management system.
 Design drainage channels to facilitate infiltration of storm water and pollutants
and to avoid erosive velocities.
6.2 Erosion and Sediment Control Practices
Human activities accelerate erosion by removing vegetation, disturbing and compacting
the soil, and changing drainage patterns. When the land surface is developed or
hardened, storm water cannot seep into, or infiltrate, the ground. This results in larger
amounts of water at higher velocities, which will increase the sediment load capacity of
runoff allowing migration of sediment and other pollutants to receiving drainage
channels.

Sediment and erosion control practices that are properly implemented can help prevent
erosion and reduce sediment pollution to receiving streams. Sediment and erosion
control practices include the following actions:

 Divert storm water runoff away from disturbed areas through the use of
contouring, paving, berms, dikes, and/or channels.
 Direct non-contact storm water to stabilized areas such as vegetated fields or
riprap outlets.
 Install silt fence and/or straw bales to protect newly graded slopes until such
slopes can be successfully vegetated or otherwise stabilized.
 Install silt fence and/or straw bales upstream of culverts and outfall locations to
filter storm water.
 Apply compost to exposed slopes to slow runoff and minimize erosion potential.
 Preserve existing vegetation as much as possible.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 13
 Revegetate disturbed areas to stabilize exposed soils, such as areas that have
been excavated or newly graded.
 Revegetate to permanently stabilize completed sideslopes of landfill disposal
cells and to temporarily stabilize intermediate landfill slopes that may not receive
waste for an extended period.
 Minimize the time that disturbed soils are exposed, and promptly revegetate or
otherwise stabilize exposed soils.
6.3 Good Housekeeping
Good housekeeping involves routine – often daily – practices that prevent pollution of
storm water. Good housekeeping employs common sense and promotes cleanliness
and order to minimize pollution potential. Elements of Good Housekeeping and
Preventive Maintenance (Section 5.4) have been incorporated into a Weekly Visual
Inspection and Maintenance Report (Appendix I; see Section 5.6, Inspections). The
following procedures should be considered.
Operations
 Keep active landfill working face at a manageable size with efficient, methodical
operating procedures for dumping, spreading, covering, and compacting waste.
 Deploy litter fences to minimize blown litter, and regularly schedule pick-up of
blown litter and waste materials.
 Store heavy equipment in designated areas, with clear and easy access to
inspection points.
 Maintain dry and clean floors (in the maintenance building) and ground surfaces.
Material Storage Practices
 Clearly label drums, tanks and other containers.
 Store hydraulic fluids, motor oils, clean solvents, etc., in designated areas in
clean, well-marked containers. Display copies of Material Safety Data Sheets
(MSDS) information at designated container storage areas.
 Store equipment, supplies, and other materials away from traffic areas to prevent
accidents.
 Provide adequate space between and around stored materials to facilitate proper
handling and access for inspections.
 Provide secondary containment on all ASTs and elsewhere as appropriate.
 Use drip pans on leaking equipment or vehicles.
 Permittees shall consider providing protected materials storage areas for
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other significant materials as identified in
Appendix E.

Material Inventory Procedure
 Develop and frequently update a material inventory to meet the following
objectives:
o Prevent overstocking,
o Use materials more efficiently,
o Identify which materials and activities pose the greatest environmental
risk and/or may potentially impact storm water, and

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 14
o Identify and implement measures to eliminate or use less hazardous
materials.
 Develop a shelf-life program.
Employee Participation and Training
 Routinely train employees on Plan elements, including BMP implementation (see
Section 5.7, Employee Training).
 Address good housekeeping issues at regular employee meetings and training
sessions.
 Publicize pollution prevention concepts using posters, bulletin boards, tips, and
reminders.
6.4 Preventive Maintenance
Preventive Maintenance involves routine inspections and maintenance of the facility,
facility equipment, and structural controls to correct inadequate conditions prior to failure.
The Preventive Maintenance Program utilizes the following components:

 Weekly inspection of equipment, storm water management controls, drainage
features, and areas of current landfill activity (active face, disturbed areas,
unstabilized areas, storm water/leachate pond, compost area).
 Schedule for periodic maintenance, inspection, or tests of equipment and
systems.
 Prompt adjustment, repair, or replacement of parts or equipment.
 Record keeping of all maintenance activities.

The activities described below are included in the Preventive Maintenance Program and
are reflected in the Weekly Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report (Appendix I). In
general, the integrity of structural features should be verified and the proper working
order of equipment, conveyance systems, and structural BMPs should be checked.
Personnel should look for signs of erosion and other inadequate conditions that are or
might lead to storm water management problems.

 Routinely inspect the active landfill working face for proper dumping, spreading,
covering and compacting procedures. Promptly correct inadequate or ineffective
procedures.
 Routinely inspect leachate conveyance piping and equipment and the storm
water/leachate pond to ensure proper working order. Keep access to pipes and
pumps clear and free from obstructions. Promptly repair any leaks.
 Routinely inspect final and intermediate landfill slopes for leachate seeps, with
prompt repair of eroding seeps.
 Routinely inspect final and intermediate landfill slopes, levees, dikes, berms,
drainage channels, and outfalls for signs of erosion, with prompt repair of rills
and gullies.
 Routinely inspect landfill slopes, facility roadways, channels, and fences for
blown litter and sediment, with regularly scheduled pick-up of blown litter and
removal of sediment from roadways.
 Routinely inspect culverts and remove sediment, debris, or other obstructions.
 Routinely inspect all outfalls for proper storm water routing and remove any
debris or other obstructions.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 15
 Routinely inspect silt fence, straw barriers, or other structural BMPs as
appropriate. Promptly repair fallen or torn fences, replace degraded bales, and
clear accumulated silt.
 Routinely inspect areas of vegetation and revegetate areas of stressed
vegetation.
 Routinely inspect newly graded areas of erosion and settling.
 Routinely inspect facility equipment for proper working order, proper fluid levels,
secure hydraulic hoses, etc. Schedule routine replacement of parts, and
prompt repair of broken or leaky parts and hoses.
 Routinely inspect facility storage areas for good housekeeping practices, leaks,
and spilled materials. Promptly correct inadequate conditions, and clean-up
spilled materials.
 Routinely inspect ASTs for proper working order, structural integrity, and leaks,
with prompt repair of inadequate conditions. Include pumps, valves, pipes,
secondary containment structures, and other appurtenant equipment.
 Routinely inspect secondary containment structures for structural integrity.
 Routinely inspect areas where spills and leaks have occurred in the past.
 Routinely inspect landfill gas (LFG) extraction wells for proper working order.
Monitor well for proper gas levels, and ensure connections to conveyance
piping are sound. (Not yet applicable at the time of this writing, July 2013)

The Weekly Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report form (Appendix I) will be used to
maintain accurate records of the Preventive Maintenance Program. Reports should
include test and/or inspection results and corrective actions implemented. Tests will
include visual observations, tank tightness testing as required, systems equipment
testing and secondary containment systems inspection. When a leak or threatening
condition is found, corrective action must be taken immediately.

When revisions or additions to the SWPPP are recommended as a result of inspections,
a summary description of these proposed changes must be attached to the Weekly
Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report form. The summary must identify any
necessary time frames required to implement the proposed changes. Inspections may
also result in the Implementation of new BMPs.
6.5 Spill Prevention and Response Procedures
The potential for reportable and/or significant spills or leaks is minimized at the Bayview
Landfill by controlling the types of wastes received. BMPs related to spill prevention also
help minimize such incidents, and response procedures heighten preparedness for spills
or leaks. However, there is a low potential for a significant spill of leak from landfill
operations. The focus of the SWPPP, as related to spill prevention and response
procedures, is on materials handling and storm water-related issues.

Existing berms and ditches along the haul roads help contain spills that may originate
from moving equipment on site. For spills in the Maintenance Building, absorbent
materials such as Floor Dry are used for clean-up. Any used absorbent, impacted soil or
used oil is disposed of in Goshen, UT.

The following are BMPs that may be implemented for the spill prevention and response
procedures component:

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 16
 Train employees in proper materials storage and handling (see Section 5.3,
Good Housekeeping and Section 5.7, Employee Training.
 Purchase, inventory, and properly store spill response equipment. Train
employees in the use of spill response equipment.
 Display emergency information (agencies, phone numbers) in appropriate
locations.

Spills shall be documented and retained with the Plan. A template for spill
documentation is included as Appendix H. As noted previously, a list of hazardous
substances and their reportable quantities is located in Appendix F. Any spill of a
hazardous substance equal to or in excess of its reportable quantity must be reported
per the following instructions:

 Notify Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation within 24
hours.
o 24-Hour Emergency Phone Number: [phone]
o Daytime Phone Number: [phone]
 If the release involves health or environmental effects which require immediate
action by local authorities, call 911.
 If the release affects “Waters of the State”, contact the Division of Water Quality.
o Daytime Phone Number: [phone]
o This type of release may also require notification of the National
Response Center (NRC) at [phone].
 Oil spills (including fuels) must be reported to the NRC if harmful quantities are
released. A release is considered harmful if the spill:
o Violates applicable water quality standards; or
o Causes a film or sheen upon or discoloration of the surface of the water
or adjoining shorelines or causes a sludge or emulsion to be deposited
beneath the surface of the water or upon adjoining shorelines. (40 CFR
110.3)
 A written report may be required by one or more of the agencies noted above.
6.6 Inspections
In conjunction with Good Housekeeping (Section 5.3) and Preventative Maintenance
(Section 5.4), weekly visual inspections are to be conducted to ensure that the elements
of the Plan are implemented and functioning effectively. The inspection form, Weekly
Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report, is included in Appendix I and described in
Section 5.4. Completed forms shall be retained with the Plan.

Visual inspections are a critical part of the Plan but are not meant to be a comprehensive
evaluation of the entire storm water pollution prevention program. The inspections
should be routine and scheduled at the same time each week in order to facilitate the
inspections and schedule other operations accordingly. It is important that the
employees conducting the inspection be properly trained, familiar with the SWPPP, and
knowledgeable about proper record keeping and reporting practices.
6.7 Employee Training
Training should educate employees on Plan components, objectives, and
implementation. Each employee should gain an understanding of the importance of

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 17
pollution prevention and his or her roles and responsibilities in the Plan. Training should
address all Plan components including, but not limited to, the following:

 Good housekeeping measures, including operations and material storage
practices.
 Preventative maintenance.
 Specific BMPs for which the trainees are responsible.

An Employee Training Schedule and an Employee Training Record are included in
Appendix J. The former is a planning and scheduling tool for a program of regular
training. Suggested training topics are noted; others may be added by the Team. The
latter (Employee Training Record) should be used to document each training session.
Use of the form will allow the Team to ensure that all employees are trained and
determine when training topics need to be addressed again. At a minimum,
comprehensive Plan training should be conducted annually. As discussed in Good
Housekeeping (Section 5.3), employee training should be an ongoing activity and may
be incorporated into employee meetings.
6.8 Record Keeping and Reporting
Record keeping relating to measures and controls has been discussed in previous
sections. The following records should be kept by the Team:
 BMP Implementation Records (Appendix G),
 Spill Documentation Records (Appendix H),
 Weekly Visual Inspection and Maintenance Reports (Appendix I), and
 Employee Training Records (Appendix J).

Additional record keeping and reporting requirements are discussed in Section 6.2,
Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation Report, and Section 7.0, Monitoring
Requirements.
6.9 Non-Storm Water Discharges
The permit requires certification that the landfill has been evaluated for the presence of
non-storm water discharges including leachate and vehicle wash waters. A certification
form has been provided in Appendix K. Upon completion, the certification should be
sent to the Executive Secretary and a copy should be retained with the plan. The
mailing address follows:

Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Executive Secretary, Water Quality Board
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870

Conditions may exist which prevent testing and certification to be completed. If
applicable, documentation of such is still required.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 18
7.0 Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation
The comprehensive site compliance evaluation (CSCE) is a required site inspection and
an overall assessment of the effectiveness of the current SWPPP. At a minimum the
CSCE shall be completed annually. CSCEs will help the Team identify new controls or
practices for incorporation into the SWPPP. A CSCE form is included in Appendix L.
7.1 General Requirements of the CSCE
The evaluation shall be conducted at least once per year by either one or more qualified
employees or designated representatives who are familiar with the industrial activities
performed at the facility and the elements of the SWPPP. The evaluation will include the
following:
 Visual inspection for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the
drainage system,
 Inspection of structural BMPs, including operation, maintenance and
effectiveness,
 Evaluation of non-structural BMPs and assessment of their effectiveness,
 Determination of additional measures and controls, if necessary, and
 Visual inspection of spill response equipment and other equipment required to
implement the SWPPP.
7.2 Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation Report
The report should include a narrative discussion of the Landfill’s compliance with the
current SWPPP. Items to be included in the report follow:
 Scope of the evaluation,
 Names of personnel conducting the evaluation,
 Date of evaluation,
 Major observations relating to SWPPP implementation for a period of at least
three (3) years prior to the date of evaluation, and
 Any incidents of noncompliance or signed certification of SWPPP and permit
compliance. (A noncompliance incident is any instance where an element of the
SWPPP is not implemented or where specific conditions of the permit are not
met).
7.3 SWPPP Revision and Implementation
The SWPPP should be revised to include and address the findings of the Site
Compliance Evaluation Report. Revisions may include additions, updates and/or
modifications to the following:
 Description of Potential Pollutant Sources (Section 4.0) including inventory of
exposed materials, significant spills and leaks, and potential pollutant sources;
 Measures and Controls (Section 5.0);
 Site Plan (Appendix B); and
 Any element of the SWPPP that requires correction, modification for
effectiveness, or update.

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 19
8.0 Monitoring Requirements
In addition to inspections required as part of the identified Measures and Controls
(Section 5.0) and the annual CSCE, quarterly analytical and visual water quality
monitoring shall be conducted as described in the following sections.
8.1 Quarterly Analytical Monitoring
Quarterly analytical monitoring shall be conducted during years 2 and 4 of the permit
term. Quarterly periods are defined in the permit requirements as January through
March, April through June, July through September, and October through December. A
Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report (SWDMR) form, prepared by the Utah
Division of Water Quality, is included as Appendix M. Required data for the report
includes the following pollutants of concern and their limits:
 Total Suspended Solids (TSS), 100 mg/L; and
 Total Recoverable Iron, 1.0 mg/L.

Storm Event and Sample Type
Instructions regarding storm event and sample type are included on page 2 of the
SWDMR and on page L-9 of Permit Appendix II.L (Plan Appendix A).
Sampling Waiver
A sampling waiver may apply in the following conditions:
 Adverse weather makes sample collection dangerous or impracticable (e.g.,
during drought or extended frozen conditions). See Appendix M (p. 4, Adverse
Weather Waiver) and Appendix A (p. L-9, Adverse Conditions).
 If analytical monitoring during year 2 of the permit shows parameter
concentrations below the cut-off limit, analytical monitoring during year 4 may be
waived. However, the permitee must submit a certification to the Executive
Secretary indicating that there has not been a significant change in either the
industrial activity or the facility measures and controls. Whereas no analytical
monitoring was conducted, because there was no stormwater discharges
observed the Bayview Landfill during permit year 2 or 4, this waiver does not
apply. See Appendix A (p. L-9, Low Concentration Waiver).
 A site is inactive and unstaffed, and certification of such is provided. See
Appendix M (p. L-10, Inactive and Unstaffed Site). This condition does not apply
to Bayview Landfill.
Representative Discharge
If two or more outfalls have substantially identical effluents, quantitative data for one
outfall may be reported as applying to multiple outfalls. The determination of
substantially identical effluents must be made considering industrial activity, significant
materials, and measures, controls, and activities within the drainage areas of the
outfalls. If analytical monitoring is conducted based on a representative discharge,
documentation must be provided as outlined in Appendix M (p. 4, Substantially Identical
Discharges) and Appendix A (p. L-10, Representative Discharge).

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 20
Alternative Certification
If a permitee can certify, by outfall, that equipment, materials, and products associated
with the industrial activity are not presently nor are expected to be exposed to storm
water during the certification period, analytical monitoring may be waived.
Documentation must be completed per Appendix M (p. 4, Exemption to Monitoring
Requirements) and Appendix A (p. L-10, Alternative Certification).
Reporting
Quarterly analytical monitoring results (SWDMR forms for each outfall or other
certification) for each monitoring year must be sent to the Division of Water Quality no
later than the 31st of March of the following year Contact information follows.

The mailing address is:

Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Quality
P.O. Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870

8.2 Quarterly Visual Monitoring
Quarterly visual monitoring shall be conducted for each outfall, with quarterly periods
designated as January through March, April through June, July through September, and
October through December.
Sample and Data Collection
Instructions for sample and qualitative data collection are included in Appendix M (p. 5)
and Appendix A (p. L-11).
Record Keeping
Pages 1, 5, and 6 of the SWDMR (Appendix M) should be used to document quarterly
visual monitoring. In addition to completing fields on the indicated pages, landfill
personnel should note the collection/examination date and time and the nature of the
discharge (i.e., runoff or snow melt).
Representative Discharge
If two or more outfalls have substantially identical effluents, qualitative data for one
outfall may be reported as applying to multiple outfalls. The determination of
substantially identical effluents must be made considering industrial activity, significant
materials, and measures, controls, and activities within the drainage areas of the
outfalls. If visual monitoring is conducted based on a representative discharge,
documentation must be provided as outlined in Appendix A (p. L-12, Representative
Discharge).
Adverse Conditions
If adverse weather makes sample collection dangerous or impracticable (e.g., during
drought or extended frozen conditions), landfill personnel must document the reason for
not performing visual monitoring. See Appendix A (p. L-12, Adverse Conditions).

SUVSWD Bayview Landfill SWPPP July 22, 2013 21
Inactive and Unstaffed Site
If a site is inactive and unstaffed, and certification of such is provided, visual monitoring
is not required. See Appendix M (p. L-12, Inactive and Unstaffed Site). This condition
does not apply to Bayview Landfill.

Appendix A
UPDES Multi-Sector General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Industrial Activities – Appendix II.L
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 1
L. Storm Water Discharges Associated With Industrial Activity From Landfills and Land Application
Sites.

1. Coverage of This Section..

a. Discharges Covered Under This Section. The requirements listed under this section shall
apply to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity from waste disposal at
landfills, land application sites, and open dumps that receive or have received industrial
wastes. Open dumps are solid waste disposal units that are not in compliance with
Sate/Federal criteria established under RCRA Subtitle D. Landfills, land application sites,
and open dumps that have storm water discharges from other types of industrial activities
such as vehicle maintenance, truck washing, and/or recycling may be subject to additional
requirements specified elsewhere in this permit.

b. Limitations. Storm water discharges associated with industrial activities from inactive
landfills, land application sites, and open dumps occurring on Federal lands where an
operator cannot be identified are ineligible for coverage under this permit.

c. Co-Located Industrial Activities. When an industrial facility, described by the above
coverage provisions of this section, has industrial activities being conducted onsite that meet
the description(s) of industrial activities in another section(s), that industrial facility shall
comply with any and all applicable monitoring and pollution prevention plan requirements
of the other section(s) in addition to all applicable requirements in this section. The
monitoring and pollution prevention plan terms and conditions of this multi-sector permit
are additive for industrial activities being conducted at the same industrial facility (co-
located industrial activities). The operator of the facility shall determine which other
monitoring and pollution prevention plan section(s) of this permit (if any) are applicable to
the facility.

2. Special Conditions.

a. Prohibition of Non-storm Water Discharges. In addition to the broad non-storm water
prohibition in Part II.A. of this permit, the discharge of leachate and vehicle and equipment
washwaters to waters of the State or a municipal separate storm sewer system is not
authorized by this permit. Operators with such discharges must obtain coverage under a
separate UPDES permit (other than this permit).

3. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements.

a. Contents of Plan. The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items:

1) Pollution Prevention Team. Each plan shall identify a specific individual or
individuals within the facility organization as members of a storm water Pollution
Prevention Team that are responsible for developing the storm water pollution
prevention plan and assisting the facility or plant manager in its implementation,
maintenance, and revision. The plan shall clearly identify the responsibilities of each
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 2
team member. The activities and responsibilities of the team shall address all aspects
of the facility's storm water pollution prevention plan.

2) Description of Potential Pollutant Sources. Each plan shall provide a description of
potential sources which may reasonably be expected to add significant amounts of
pollutant to storm water discharges or which may result in the discharge of pollutants
during dry weather from separate storm sewers draining the facility. Each plan shall
identify all activities and significant materials which may potentially be significant
pollutant sources. Each plan shall include, at a minimum:

a) Drainage:

(1) A site map indicating an outline of the portions of the drainage area of each
storm water outfall that are within the facility boundaries, each existing
structural control measure to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff,
surface water bodies, locations of active and closed landfill cells or
trenches, locations of active and closed land application areas, locations
where open dumping is occurring or has occurred, locations of any known
leachate springs or other areas where uncontrolled leachate may
commingle with runoff, locations of any leachate collection and handling
systems, locations where major spills or leaks identified under paragraph
3.a(2)(c) (Spills and Leaks) of this permit have occurred, and locations of
the following activities where such activities are exposed to precipitation:
fueling station, vehicle and equipment maintenance and/or cleaning areas,
and waste and other significant material loading/unloading and storage
areas. The map must indicate the outfall locations and the types of
discharges contained in the drainage areas of the outfalls.

(2) For each area of the facility that generates storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity with a reasonable potential for
containing significant amounts of pollutants, a prediction of the direction
of flow, and an identification of the types of pollutants which are likely to
be present in storm water discharges associated with industrial activity.
Factors to consider include the toxicity of chemicals; quantities of
chemicals used, produced or discharged; the likelihood of contact with
storm water; and the history of significant leaks or spills of toxic or
hazardous pollutants. Flows with a significant potential for causing
erosion shall be identified.

b) Exposed Inventory of Materials. An inventory of the types of materials handled
at the site that potentially may be exposed to precipitation. Such inventory shall
include a narrative description of significant materials that have been handled,
treated, or disposed of in a manner to allow exposure to storm water between the
time of 3 years prior to the date of the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
be covered under this permit and the present; method and location of onsite
storage or disposal; materials management practices employed to minimize
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 3
contact of materials with storm water runoff between the time of 3 years prior to
the date of submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered under this
permit and the present; the location and a description of existing structural and
nonstructural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff; and a
description of any treatment the storm water receives. The inventory of exposed
materials shall include, but shall not be limited to the significant material
management practices employed.

c) Spills and Leaks. A list of significant spills and significant leaks of toxic or
hazardous pollutants that occurred at areas that are exposed to precipitation or
that otherwise drain to a storm water conveyance at the facility after the date of
3 years prior to the date of the submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be
covered under this permit. Such list shall be updated as appropriate during the
term of the permit.

d) Sampling Data. A summary of existing discharge sampling data describing
pollutants in storm water of sampling data collected during the term of this
permit. Permittees shall also provide all available sampling data for leachate
generated at the site.

e) Risk Identification and Summary of Potential Pollutant Sources. Include a
narrative description of potential pollutant sources associated with any of the
following, providing they occur at the facility: fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide
application; earth/soil moving; waste hauling and loading/unloading; outdoor
storage of significant materials including daily, interim and final cover material
stockpiles as well as temporary waste storage areas; exposure of active and
inactive landfill, land application, or open dumping areas; uncontrolled leachate
flows; failure or leaks from leachate collection and treatment systems; haul
roads; and vehicle tracking of sediments. The description shall specifically list
any significant potential sources of pollutants at the site and for each potential
source, any pollutant or pollutant parameter (e.g., biochemical oxygen demand,
etc.) of concern shall be identified.

3) Measures and Controls. Each facility covered by this permit shall develop a
description of storm water management controls appropriate for the facility, and
implement such controls. The appropriateness and priorities of controls in a plan shall
reflect identified potential sources of pollutants at the facility. The description of
storm water management controls shall address the following minimum components,
including a schedule for implementing such controls:

a) Good Housekeeping. Good housekeeping requires the maintenance of areas
which may contribute pollutants to storm water discharges in a clean, orderly
manner. Permittees shall consider providing protected materials storage areas
for pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and other significant materials.

b) Preventive Maintenance. A preventive maintenance program shall involve
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 4
timely inspection and maintenance of storm water management devices (e.g.,
cleaning oil/water separators, catch basins) as well as inspecting and testing
facility equipment and systems to uncover conditions that could cause
breakdowns or failures resulting in discharges of pollutants to surface waters,
and ensuring appropriate maintenance of such equipment and systems.

(i) Where applicable, permittees addressed by this section
shall also:

(2) maintain containers used for outdoor chemical and significant materials
storage to prevent leaking or rupture;

(3) maintain all elements of leachate collection and treatment systems to
prevent commingling of leachate with storm water; and

(4) maintain the integrity and effectiveness of any intermediate or final cover,
including making repairs to the cover as necessary to minimize the effects
of settlement, sinking, and erosion.

c) Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. Areas where potential spills which
can contribute pollutants to storm water discharges can occur, and their
accompanying drainage points shall be identified clearly in the storm water
pollution prevention plan. Where appropriate, specifying material handling
procedures, storage requirements, and use of equipment such as diversion valves
in the plan should be considered. Procedures for cleaning up spills shall be
identified in the plan and made available to the appropriate personnel. The
necessary equipment to implement a clean up should be available to personnel.

d) Inspections. Qualified facility personnel shall be identified to inspect
designated equipment and areas of the facility at appropriate intervals specified
in the plan.

(1) For operating landfills, open dumps, and land application sites, inspections
shall be conducted at least once every 7 days. Qualified personnel shall
inspect areas of landfills and open dumps that have not yet been finally
stabilized, active land application areas, areas used for storage of
materials/wastes that are exposed to precipitation, stabilization and
structural control measures, leachate collection and treatment systems, and
locations where equipment and waste trucks enter and exit the site. Where
landfill areas and open dumps have been finally stabilized and where land
application has been completed, or during seasonal arid periods in arid
areas (areas with an average annual rainfall of 0 to 10 inches) and
semiarid areas (areas with an average annual rainfall of 10 to 20 inches),
inspections will be conducted at least once every month. Erosion and
sediment control measures shall be observed to ensure they are operating
correctly.
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 5

(2) For inactive landfills, open dumps, and land application sites, inspections
shall be conducted at least quarterly, and qualified personnel shall inspect:
landfill or open dump stabilization and structural erosion control measures
and leachate collection and treatment systems, and all closed land
application areas.

(3) A set of tracking or follow-up procedures shall be used to ensure that
appropriate actions are taken in response to the inspections. The pollution
prevention plan shall be revised to address any problems found during
inspections. Records of inspections shall be maintained.

e) Employee Training. Employee training programs shall inform personnel
responsible for implementing activities identified in the storm water pollution
prevention plan or otherwise responsible for storm water management at all
levels of responsibility of the components and goals of the storm water pollution
prevention plan. Training should address topics such as conducting inspections,
spill response, good housekeeping, conducting inspections and material
management practices. The pollution prevention plan shall identify periodic
dates for such training.

f) Recordkeeping and Internal Reporting Procedures. A description of incidents
(such as spills, or other discharges), along with other information describing the
quality and quantity of storm water discharges shall be included in the plan
required under this part. Inspections and maintenance activities shall be
documented and records of such activities shall be incorporated into the plan.
Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for a tracking system for the
types of wastes disposed of in each cell or trench of a landfill or open dump.
Land application site operators shall track the types and quantities of wastes
applied in specific areas.

g) Non-storm Water Discharges.

(1) Certification. The plan shall include a certification that the discharge has
been tested or evaluated for the presence of non-storm water discharges
including leachate and vehicle wash waters. The certification shall
include the identification of potential significant sources of non-storm
water at the site, a description of the results of any test and/or evaluation
for the presence of non-storm water discharges, the evaluation criteria or
testing method used, the date of any testing and/or evaluation, and the
onsite drainage points that were directly observed during the test.
Certifications shall be signed in accordance with Part VI.G. of this permit.
Such certification may not be feasible if the facility operating the storm
water discharge associated with industrial activity does not have access to
an outfall, manhole, or other point of access to the ultimate conduit which
receives the discharge. In such cases, the source identification section of
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 6
the storm water pollution prevention plan shall indicate why the
certification required by this part was not feasible, along with the
identification of potential significant sources of non-storm water at the
site. A discharger that is unable to provide the certification required by
this paragraph must notify the Executive Secretary in accordance with
paragraph 3.a.(3)(g)(iii) (below).

(2) Exceptions. Except for flows from fire fighting activities, sources of non-
storm water listed in Part II.A.2 (Prohibition of Non-storm Water
Discharges) of this permit that are combined with storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity must be identified in the plan. The plan
shall identify and ensure the implementation of appropriate pollution
prevention measures for the non-storm water component(s) of the
discharge.

(3) Failure to Certify. Any facility that is unable to provide the certification
required (testing for non-storm water discharges), must notify the
Executive Secretary within 180 days after submitting a notice of intent to
be covered by this permit. If the failure to certify is caused by the
inability to perform adequate tests or evaluations, such notification shall
describe: the procedure of any test conducted for the presence of non-
storm water discharges; the results of such test or other relevant
observations; potential sources of non-storm water discharges to the storm
sewer; and why adequate tests for such storm sewers were not feasible.
Non-storm water discharges to waters of the State which are not
authorized by a UPDES permit are unlawful and must be terminated.

h) Sediment and Erosion Control The plan shall identify areas which, due to
topography activities, or other factors, have a high potential for significant soil
erosion, and identify structural, vegetative, and/or stabilization measures to be
used to limit erosion.

(1) Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary
stabilization of materials stockpiled for daily, intermediate, and final
cover. Stabilization practices to consider include, but are not limited to,
temporary seeding, mulching, and placing geotextiles on the inactive
portions of the stockpiles.

(2) Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary
stabilization of inactive areas of the landfill or open dump which have an
intermediate cover but no final cover.

(3) Landfill and open dump operators shall provide for temporary
stabilization of any landfill or open dumping areas which have received a
final cover until vegetation has established itself. Land application site
operators shall also stabilize areas where waste application has been
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 7
completed until vegetation has been established.

i) Management of Runoff. The plan shall also contain a narrative consideration of
the appropriateness of traditional storm water management practices (practices
other than those which control the generation or source(s) of pollutants) used to
divert, infiltrate, reuse, or otherwise manage storm water runoff in a manner that
reduces pollutants in storm water discharges from the site. The plan shall
provide that measures that the permittee determines to be reasonable and
appropriate shall be implemented and maintained. The potential of various
sources at the facility to contribute pollutants to storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity [see paragraph 3.a.(2) of this section
(Description of Potential Pollutant Sources)] shall be considered when
determining reasonable and appropriate measures. Appropriate measures may
include: silt fences, earth dikes, gradient terraces, drainage swales, sediment
traps, check dams, pipe slope drains, level spreaders, storm drain inlet
protection, rock outlet protection, reinforced soil retaining systems, gabions and
temporary or permanent sediment basins, or other equivalent measures.
Structural practices should be placed on upland soils as practicable.

4) Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation. Qualified personnel shall conduct site
compliance evaluations at appropriate intervals specified in the plan, but in no case
less than once a year. Such evaluations shall provide:

a) Areas contributing to a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity
at landfill, open dump and land application sites shall be visually inspected for
evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system.
Measures to reduce pollutant loadings shall be evaluated to determine whether
they are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with the terms of the
permit or whether additional control measures are needed. Structural storm
water management measures, sediment and erosion control measures, and other
structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be observed
to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of equipment
needed to implement the plan such as spill response equipment, shall be made.

b) Based on the results of the evaluation, the description of potential pollutant
sources identified in the plan in accordance with paragraph 3.a.(2) of this
section (Description of Potential Pollutant Sources) and pollution prevention
measures and controls identified in the plan in accordance with paragraph
3.a.(3) of this section (Measures and Controls) shall be revised as appropriate
within 2 weeks of such evaluation and shall provide for implementation of any
changes to the plan in timely manner, but in no case more than 12 weeks after
the evaluation.

c) A report summarizing the scope of the evaluation, personnel making the
evaluation, the date(s) of the evaluation, major observations relating to the
implementation of the storm water pollution prevention plan for at least 3 years
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 8
from the date of the evaluation. The report shall identify any incidents of
noncompliance. Where a report does not identify any incidents of
noncompliance, the report shall contain a certification that the facility is in
compliance with the storm water pollution prevention plan and this permit. The
report shall be signed in accordance with Part VI.G. (Signatory Requirements)
of this permit.

d) Where compliance evaluation schedules overlap with inspections required under
3.a.(3)(d), the compliance evaluation may be conducted in place of one such
inspection.

4. Numeric Effluent Limitations. There are no additional numeric effluent limitations beyond those
in Part IV.B. of this permit.

5. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

a. Analytical Monitoring Requirements. During the second and fourth year of the permit,
permittees with landfill/land application/open dump sites must monitor their storm water
discharges associated with industrial activity at least quarterly (4 times per year) except as
provided in paragraphs 5.a.(3) (Sampling Waiver), 5.a.(4) (Representative Discharge), and
5.a.(5) (Alternative Certification). Landfill/land application/open dump sites are required to
monitor their storm water discharges for the pollutants of concern listed in Table L-1 below.
Facilities must report in accordance with 5.b. (Reporting). In addition to the parameters
listed in Table L-1 below, the permittee shall provide: the date and duration (in hours) of the
storm event(s) sampled; rainfall measurements or estimates (in inches) of the storm event
that generated the sampled runoff; the duration between the storm event sampled and the
end of the previous measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event; and, an estimate
of the total volume (in gallons) of the discharge sampled.

Table L-1.
Industry Monitoring Requirements
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 9

Pollutants of Concern

Benchmark Cut-Off
Concentration1

Numeric Limitations2

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)i

100 mg/L

Total Recoverable Ironii

1.0 mg/L

BOD5iii

140mg/l daily max// 37mg/l, monthly
average max

TSSiii

88mg/l daily max// 27mg/l monthly
average max

Ammoniaiii

10mg/l daily max// 4.9mg/l monthly
average max

Alpha Terpineoliii

0.033mg/l daily max// 0.016 mg/l
monthly average max

Benzoic Acidiii

0.12 mg/l daily max// 0.071mg/l
monthly average max

p-Cresoliii

0.025mg/l daily max// 0.015mg/l
monthly average max

Phenoliii

0.026mg/l daily max// 0.015mg/l
monthly average max

Zinc (Total)iii

0.20mg/l daily max// 0.11mg/l
monthly average max

pHiii

Within the range of 6-9pH units

iApplicable to all landfill and land application sites.
iiApplicable to all facilities except MSWLF areas closed in accordance with 40 CFR 258.60 requirements.
iiiApplicable to all facilities which are subject to the requirements to 40 CFR Part 445 Subpart B (Industrial Activity Code “LF”)
Benchmark monitoring cutoff concentrations apply to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity other than contaminated storm
water discharges from landfills subject to the nuberic effluent limitatins set forth in above table. Monitor once/quarter for the year 2 and year 4
monitoring years.
As set forth at 40 CFR part 445 Subpart B, these numeric limitations apply to contaminated storm water discharges from MSWLFs which have
not been closed in accordance with 40 CFR 258.60, and contaminated storm water discharges from those landfills which are subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR Part 257 except for discharges from any of facilities described in (a) thru (d) below:
a) landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill only receives wastes generated by the
industrial or commercial operation directly associated with the landfill;
b) landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill receives wastes generated by the
industrial or commercial operation directly associated with the landfill and also receives other wastes provided the other wastes received for
disposal are generated by a facility that is subject to the same provision in 40 CFR Sub-chapter N as the industrial or commercial operation or
the other wastes received are of similar nature to the wastes generated by the industrial or commercial operation;
c) landfills operated in conjunction with Centralized Waste Treatment (CWT) facilities subject to 40 CFR Part 437 so long as the CWT
facility commingles the landfill wastewater with other non-landfill wastewater for discharge. A landfill directly associated with a CWT
facility is subject to this part if the CWT facility discharges landfill wastewater separately from other CWT wastewater or commingles the
wastewater from its landfill only with wastewater from other landfills; or
d) landfills operated in conjunction with other industrial or commercial operations when the landfill receives wastes from public service
activities so long as the company owning the landfill does not receive a fee or other remuneration for the disposal service.

1) Monitoring Periods. Landfill/land application/open dump sites shall monitor samples
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 10
collected during the sampling periods of: January through March, April through June,
July through September, and October through December for the years specified in
paragraph a. (above).

2) Sample Type. A minimum of one grab sample shall be taken. All such samples shall
be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1
inches in magnitude and that occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable
(greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. The required 72-hour storm event interval
is waived where the preceding measurable storm event did not result in a measurable
discharge from the facility. The required 72-hour storm event interval may also be
waived where the permittee documents that less than a 72-hour interval is
representative for local storm events during the season when sampling is being
conducted. The grab sample shall be taken during the first 30 minutes of the
discharge. If the collection of a grab sample during the first 30 minutes is
impracticable, a grab sample can be taken during the first hour of the discharge, and
the discharger shall submit with the monitoring report a description of why a grab
sample during the first 30 minutes was impracticable. If storm water discharges
associated with industrial activity commingle with process or nonprocess water, then
where practicable, permittees must attempt to sample the storm water discharge before
it mixes with the non-storm water discharge.

3) Sampling Waiver.

a) Adverse Conditions. When a discharger is unable to collect samples within a
specified sampling period due to adverse climatic conditions, the discharger
shall collect a substitute sample from a separate qualifying event in the next
period and submit the data along with data for the routine sample in that period.
Adverse weather conditions that may prohibit the collection of samples include
weather conditions that create dangerous conditions for personnel (such as local
flooding, high winds, hurricane, tornadoes, electrical storms, etc.) or otherwise
make the collection of a sample impracticable (e.g., drought, extended frozen
conditions, etc.).

b) Low Concentration Waiver. When the average concentration for a pollutant
calculated from all monitoring data collected from an outfall during the second
year monitoring period, is less than the corresponding value for that pollutant
listed in Table L-1 under the column Monitoring Cut-Off Concentration, a
facility may waive monitoring and reporting requirements in the fourth year
monitoring period. The facility must submit to the Executive Secretary, in lieu
of the monitoring data, a certification that there has not been a significant
change in industrial activity or the pollution prevention measures in area of the
facility which drains to the outfall for which sampling was waived.

c) Inactive and Unstaffed Site. When a discharger is unable to conduct quarterly
chemical storm water sampling at an inactive and unstaffed site, the operator of
the facility may exercise a waiver of the monitoring requirements as long as the
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 11
facility remains inactive and unstaffed. The facility must submit to the
Executive Secretary, in lieu of monitoring data, a certification statement on the
Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report (SWDMR) stating that the site is
inactive and unstaffed so that collecting a sample during a qualifying event is
not possible.

4) Representative Discharge. When a facility has two or more outfalls that, based on a
consideration of industrial activity, significant materials, and management practices
and activities within the area drained by the outfall, the permittee reasonably believes
discharge substantially identical effluents, the permittee may test the effluent of one of
such outfalls and report that the quantitative data also applies to the substantially
identical outfall(s) provided that the permittee includes in the storm water pollution
prevention plan a description of the location of the outfalls and explains in detail why
the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical effluents. In addition, for
each outfall that the permittee believes is representative, an estimate of the size of the
drainage area (in square feet) and an estimate of the runoff coefficient of the drainage
area [e.g., low (under 40 percent), medium (40 to 65 percent), or high (above 65
percent)] shall be provided in the plan. The permittee shall include the description of
the location of the outfalls, explanation of why outfalls are expected to discharge
substantially identical effluents, and estimate of the size of the drainage area and
runoff coefficient with the SWDMR.

5) Alternative Certification. A discharger is not subject to the monitoring requirements
of this section provided the discharger makes a certification for a given outfall or on a
pollutant-by-pollutant basis in lieu of monitoring reports required under paragraph b.
below, under penalty of law, signed in accordance with Part VI.G. (Signatory
Requirements), that material handling equipment or activities, raw materials,
intermediate products, final products, waste materials, by-products, industrial
machinery or operations, or significant materials from past industrial activity, that are
located in areas of the facility within the drainage area of the outfall are not presently
exposed to storm water and are not expected to be exposed to storm water for the
certification period. Such certification must be retained in the storm water pollution
prevention plan, and submitted to DWQ in accordance with Part V.B. of the fact sheet
to this permit. In the case of certifying that a pollutant is not present, the permittee
must submit the certification along with the monitoring reports required under
paragraph b below. If the permittee cannot certify for an entire period, they must
submit the date exposure was eliminated and any monitoring required up until that
date. This certification option is not applicable to compliance monitoring
requirements associated with effluent limitations.

b. Reporting. Permittees with landfill/land application/open dump sites shall submit
monitoring results for each outfall associated with industrial activity [or a certification in
accordance with Sections (3), (4), or (5) above] obtained during the second year reporting
period, on SWDMR form(s) postmarked no later than the 31st day of the following March.
Monitoring results [or a certification in accordance with Sections (3), (4), or (5) above]
obtained during the fourth year reporting period, shall be submitted on SWDMRs
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 12
postmarked no later than the 31st day of the following March. For each outfall, one
SWDMR form must be submitted per storm event sampled. Signed copies of SWDMR, or
alternative certifications, shall be submitted to the Executive Secretary at the address listed
in Part V.B. of this permit.

1) Additional Notification. In addition to filing copies of discharge monitoring reports in
accordance with paragraph 1.b. (above) landfill/land application/open dump sites,
with at least one storm water discharge associated with industrial activity through a
large or medium municipal separate storm sewer system (systems serving a population
of 100,000 or more) must submit signed copies of discharge monitoring reports to the
operator of the municipal separate storm sewer system in accordance with the dates
provided in paragraph 1.b. (above).

c. Quarterly Visual Examination of Storm Water Quality. Facilities shall perform and
document a visual examination of a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity
from each outfall, except discharges exempted below. The examination must be made at
least once in each designated period [described in (1) below] during daylight hours unless
there is insufficient rainfall or snow melt to produce a runoff event.

1) Visual Monitoring Period. Examinations shall be conducted in each of the following
periods for the purposes of visually inspecting storm water quality associated with
storm water runoff or snow melt: January through March; April through June; July
through September; October through December.

2) Sample and Data Collection. Examinations shall be made of samples collected within
the first 30 minutes (or as soon thereafter as practical, but not to exceed 1 hour) of
when the runoff or snowmelt begins discharging. The examinations shall document
observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids,
foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution. The
examination must be conducted in a well lit area. No analytical tests are required to
be performed on the samples. All such samples shall be collected from the discharge
resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches in magnitude and that
occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall)
storm event. Where practicable, the same individual should carry out the collection
and examination of discharges for the entire permit term.

3) Visual Storm Water Discharge Examination Report. Visual examination reports must
be maintained onsite in the pollution prevention plan. The report shall include the
examination date and time, examination personnel, the nature of the discharge (i.e.,
runoff or snow melt), visual quality of the storm water discharge (including
observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids,
foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution), and probable
sources of any observed storm water contamination.

4) Representative Discharge. When a facility has two or more outfalls that, based on a
consideration of industrial activity, significant materials, and management practices
APPENDIX II.L
Permit No.: UTR000000

L − 13
and activities within the area drained by the outfall, the permittee reasonably believes
discharge substantially identical effluents, the permittee may collect a sample of
effluent of one of such outfalls and report that the examination data also applies to the
substantially identical outfall(s) provided that the permittee includes in the storm
water pollution prevention plan a description of the location of the outfalls and
explains in detail why the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical
effluents. In addition, for each outfall that the permittee believes is representative, an
estimate of the size of the drainage area (in square feet) and an estimate of the runoff
coefficient of the drainage area [e.g., low (under 40 percent), medium (40 to 65
percent), or high (above 65 percent)] shall be provided in the plan.

5) Adverse Conditions. When a discharger is unable to conduct a visual examination as
a result of adverse climatic conditions, the discharger must document the reason for
not performing the visual examination and retain this documentation onsite with the
records of the visual examination. Adverse weather conditions which may prohibit
the collection of samples include weather conditions that create dangerous conditions
for personnel (such as local flooding, high winds, hurricane, tornadoes, electrical
storms, etc.) or otherwise make the collection of a sample impracticable (drought,
extended frozen conditions, etc.).

6) Inactive and Unstaffed Site. When a discharger is unable to conduct visual storm
water examinations at an inactive and unstaffed site, the operator of the facility may
exercise a waiver of the monitoring requirement as long as the facility remains
inactive and unstaffed. The facility must maintain a certification with the pollution
prevention plan stating that the site is inactive and unstaffed so that performing visual
examinations during a qualifying event is not feasible.

6. Definition.

a. "Inactive Landfill" For the purposes of this permit, a landfill is considered inactive when, on
a permanent basis, it will no longer receive waste and has completed closure in accordance
with any applicable Federal, State, and/or local requirements.

Appendix B
Site Location and Plan
DATE
FIGURE
August 2005
1

UTAH
JUAB
TOOELE
SUMMIT
WASATCH
SALT LAKE
SANPETE
MILLARD
DAVIS
CARBON
MORGAN
EMERY
Bayview Landfill
2,000 0 2,0001,000
Scale in Feet
Bayview LandfillSite Location
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
North Surface
Water Channel
Middle Surface
Water Channel
South Surface
Water Channel
St
a
t
e

H
i
g
h
w
a
y

6
8
Bayview Landfill Master Plan January 2013 Page 14

Appendix C
Climatic Data – Elberta, UT
ELBERTA, UTAH (422418)
Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary
Period of Record : 1/ 1/1928 to 8/31/1992
Percent of possible observations for period of record.
Max. Temp.: 94.6% Min. Temp.: 96.7% Precipitation: 98.3% Snowfall: 94.2% Snow Depth: 90.6%
Check Station Metadata or Metadata graphics for more detail about data completeness.
Western Regional Climate Center, [e-mail]
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
Average Max.
Temperature (F) 37.1 43.6 53.5 64.1 73.7 84.7 92.6 90.3 81.1 67.4 50.7 39.8 64.9
Average Min.
Temperature (F) 15.5 20.9 27.1 33.8 41.3 49.2 57.5 56.2 46.5 35.9 25.5 18.5 35.7
Average Total
Precipitation (in.) 0.79 0.84 0.99 1.03 1.06 0.73 0.79 0.93 0.73 1.01 0.85 0.83 10.59
Average Total
SnowFall (in.) 7.3 5.0 3.2 1.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.9 5.0 24.8
Average Snow Depth
(in.) 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Page 1 of 1ELBERTA, UTAH Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary
6/13/2005http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliRECtM.pl?utelbe
ELBERTA, UTAH
NCDC 1971-2000 Monthly Normals
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Annual
Monthly
Mean Max.
Temperature (F) 36.5 43.2 53.5 62.3 73.1 85.5 93.0 90.9 80.5 66.5 50.0 38.3 64.4
Highest Mean Max.
Temperature (F) 43.5 52.5 61.3 70.9 79.1 91.0 96.9 94.7 86.4 73.7 60.1 47.5 96.9
Year Highest
Occurred 1994 1995 1972 1992 1992 1994 1988 1994 1979 1988 1999 1977 1988
Lowest Mean Max.
Temperature (F) 26.0 31.6 47.0 53.3 66.5 79.0 88.6 88.4 74.6 57.8 42.0 29.5 26.0
Year Lowest
Occurred 1984 1984 1984 1975 1983 1998 1992 1993 1986 1984 2000 1985 1984
Mean Temperature
(F) 25.9 31.4 40.2 47.6 57.1 67.5 75.4 73.5 63.5 50.6 37.6 27.4 49.8
Highest Mean
Temperature (F) 34.0 38.6 45.7 54.5 62.3 72.2 79.3 77.1 69.3 56.5 44.1 35.4 79.3
Year Highest
Occurred 2000 1995 1986 1992 1992 1994 1988 2000 1990 1988 1999 1977 1988
Lowest Mean
Temperature (F) 17.2 20.0 34.4 40.8 51.8 62.3 70.9 70.4 56.7 44.7 31.0 19.3 17.2
Year Lowest
Occurred 1973 1984 1976 1975 1983 1998 1993 1976 1971 1984 2000 1990 1973
Mean Min.
Temperature (F) 15.2 19.5 26.8 32.9 41.1 49.5 57.8 56.1 46.5 34.6 25.1 16.4 35.1
Highest Mean Min.
Temperature (F) 25.4 26.6 32.0 38.1 45.4 54.0 62.4 60.2 53.0 39.2 28.6 23.3 62.4
Year Highest
Occurred 2000 2000 1978 1992 1992 1988 1990 2000 1990 1988 1998 1977 1990
Lowest Mean Min.
Temperature (F) 4.9 8.3 20.3 28.2 36.3 45.4 52.6 51.2 38.6 30.2 19.8 6.8 4.9
Year Lowest
Occurred 1989 1984 1976 1982 1975 1975 1993 1974 1971 1976 1979 1990 1989
Mean Precipitation
(in.) 0.91 0.82 1.03 1.04 1.17 0.66 0.83 0.86 0.95 1.19 0.88 0.59 10.93
Highest Precipitation
(in.) 2.47 2.09 2.55 2.92 3.01 2.12 3.67 2.11 5.30 2.83 2.69 1.97 5.30
Year Highest
Occurred 1980 1990 1978 1971 1991 1984 1982 1983 1982 1981 1983 1983 1982
Lowest Precipitation
(in.) 0.19 0.07 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.00
Year Lowest
Page 1 of 2ELBERTA, UTAH NCDC 1971-2000 Monthly Normals
6/13/2005http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliNORMNCDC2000.pl?utelbe

Appendix D
Pollution Prevention Team

POLLUTION PREVENTION TEAM MEMBERS

Name: Terry Ficklin
Position: District Manager
Organization: South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Address: P.O. Box 507
Springville, UT 84663-0507
Phone Number: [phone]
Email Address: [e-mail]

Name: Scott Aitken
Position: Landfill Foreman
Organization: South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Address: P.O. Box 507
Springville, UT 84663-0507
Phone Number: [phone]
Cell Phone Number: [phone]

Appendix E
Material Inventory and
Description of Significant Exposed Materials

MATERIAL INVENTORY
Instructions: List all materials used, stored, or produced on site. Assess and evaluate these materials for their potential to contribute pollutants to
storm water runoff. If the material has been exposed to storm water or becomes exposed to storm water, include the material in the Description
of Significant Exposed Materials table.
Material Location
Quantity Exposure to
Storm Water
Nature of Contact
with Storm Water
Past
Significant
Spill or Leak Used Produced Stored
Municipal
Solid Waste
Active daily
working face;
landfill final and
intermediate
sideslopes
122,210 tons
(July 2012-
June 2013))
Yes Contact due to precipitation
during disposal activities, erosion
of sideslopes, and accidents or
spills along facility roadways.
Y N
Yard Waste
and Biosolids
Compost area
(existing
windrow area)
Varies Yes Rain falling directly on pad and
rain not absorbed in the compost
piles becomes runoff; however,
this runoff is directed to the
evaporation pond.
Y N
Leachate Within waste
mass at active
and inactive
disposal cells;
within
conveyance
system
13,300 gal
/ week*
Yes Possible leachate seeps on
landfill slopes; minor leaks and
spills from leachate conveyance
system.

*Note: Quantity produced reflects
a wet year and includes direct
runoff from concrete compost
pad.
Y N
Soil/Sediment Excavations,
disturbed soils,
and newly
graded areas
Varies Yes Contact with precipitation during
earth-moving activities and
before slope stabilization and/or
revegetation.
Y N
Diesel Fuel AST near
maintenance
building
7,500 gal /
6 weeks
Yes Minor spills from fueling vehicles. Y N

MATERIAL INVENTORY
Instructions: List all materials used, stored, or produced on site. Assess and evaluate these materials for their potential to contribute pollutants to
storm water runoff. If the material has been exposed to storm water or becomes exposed to storm water, include the material in the Description
of Significant Exposed Materials table.
Material Location
Quantity Exposure to
Storm Water
Nature of Contact
with Storm Water
Past
Significant
Spill or Leak Used Produced Stored
Unleaded
Fuel
AST near
maintenance
building
500 gal /
2 mos.
Yes Minor spills from fueling vehicles. Y N
Propane AST near
maintenance
building
400 gal /
3 mos.
No (Propane stored as liquid under
pressure vaporizes upon release
from tank.)
Y N

Y N

Y N

Y N

Y N

Y N

Y N

Y N

DESCRIPTION OF SIGNIFICANT EXPOSED MATERIALS
Instructions: Based on the material inventory, describe the significant materials exposed to storm water between the time of three years prior to
the date of submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and the present.
Significant Exposed
Material Period of Exposure Quantity Exposed
(units) Location Method of Storage or
Disposal
Description of
Material Management
Practice
Municipal Solid Waste
(working face)
During rainfall
events
Size of working face Active working face
(varies)
Dumped and spread
in controlled lifts in
approved area
Daily cover
Municipal Solid Waste
(within disposal cells)
Minimal Varies Cell 2 Waste mass placed
within disposal cells
Covered with
intermediate and final
cover soil
Yard Waste and
Biosolids
During rainfall
events
Varies Existing Windrow
Area / Expanded
Compost Pad
Windrow piles Compost area drains
to existing
evaporation pond
Leachate Minimal Varies; limited to
seeps and minor
leaks in conveyance
system
Cell 2 and
conveyance system
Storm water/leachate
pond
Pond controlled by
evaporation; no
discharge to surface
waters
Soil/Sediment During rainfall
events
Varies Excavation areas,
disturbed or newly
graded areas
N/A Temporary or
permanent slope
stabilization,
perimeter ditches
Diesel Fuel Minimal Minimal; limited to
minor spills from
vehicle fueling
operations
Near maintenance
building
AST Secondary
containment
Unleaded Fuel Minimal Minimal; limited to
minor spills from
vehicle fueling
operations
Near maintenance
building
AST Double-walled tank

DESCRIPTION OF SIGNIFICANT EXPOSED MATERIALS
Instructions: Based on the material inventory, describe the significant materials exposed to storm water between the time of three years prior to
the date of submission of a Notice of Intent (NOI) and the present.
Significant Exposed
Material Period of Exposure Quantity Exposed
(units) Location Method of Storage or
Disposal
Description of
Material Management
Practice

Appendix F
Reportable Quantities of Hazardous Substances

Appendix G
BMP Implementation Record

BMP IMPLEMENTATION RECORD
Instructions: The Pollution Prevention Team should identify and implement BMPs to meet site-specific needs. BMPs may be identified at any time; however, the following particularly lend themselves to BMP identification: weekly inspections,
annual Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluations, quarterly monitoring, and changes to landfill operations (cell closure, new grading, etc.). Each identified BMP should be accompanied by a scheduled completion date and a person
responsible for action. Notes might describe the need for the BMP, necessary follow-up, comments on effectiveness, etc.
BMP Component Description of BMP Scheduled Completion Date(s)
for Required Action Person Responsible for Action Notes
Storm Water Management

Erosion and Sediment Control

Good Housekeeping

BMP IMPLEMENTATION RECORD
Instructions: The Pollution Prevention Team should identify and implement BMPs to meet site-specific needs. BMPs may be identified at any time; however, the following particularly lend themselves to BMP identification: weekly inspections,
annual Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluations, quarterly monitoring, and changes to landfill operations (cell closure, new grading, etc.). Each identified BMP should be accompanied by a scheduled completion date and a person
responsible for action. Notes might describe the need for the BMP, necessary follow-up, comments on effectiveness, etc.
BMP Component Description of BMP Scheduled Completion Date(s)
for Required Action Person Responsible for Action Notes

Preventive Maintenance

Inspections

BMP IMPLEMENTATION RECORD
Instructions: The Pollution Prevention Team should identify and implement BMPs to meet site-specific needs. BMPs may be identified at any time; however, the following particularly lend themselves to BMP identification: weekly inspections,
annual Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluations, quarterly monitoring, and changes to landfill operations (cell closure, new grading, etc.). Each identified BMP should be accompanied by a scheduled completion date and a person
responsible for action. Notes might describe the need for the BMP, necessary follow-up, comments on effectiveness, etc.
BMP Component Description of BMP Scheduled Completion Date(s)
for Required Action Person Responsible for Action Notes
Spill Prevention and Response

Employee Training

Record Keeping and Reporting

BMP IMPLEMENTATION RECORD
Instructions: The Pollution Prevention Team should identify and implement BMPs to meet site-specific needs. BMPs may be identified at any time; however, the following particularly lend themselves to BMP identification: weekly inspections,
annual Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluations, quarterly monitoring, and changes to landfill operations (cell closure, new grading, etc.). Each identified BMP should be accompanied by a scheduled completion date and a person
responsible for action. Notes might describe the need for the BMP, necessary follow-up, comments on effectiveness, etc.
BMP Component Description of BMP Scheduled Completion Date(s)
for Required Action Person Responsible for Action Notes

Appendix H
Spill Documentation Record

SPILL DOCUMENTATION RECORD
Instructions: Make a record of all significant spills and significant leaks of hazardous pollutants.
Significant spills include, but are not limited to, any raw materials and releases of oil or hazardous
substances in excess of reportable quantities. Note dates in the following format: MM/DD/YYYY.
Documented by:
Date:
Date of Release: Time of Release:
Spill Reported by:
Regulatory Agencies Notified (Date, Time, Person, Agency, and How Notified):

1. Spill/Leak Type
Release Product
 Diesel
 Gasoline
 Lubricating Oil
 Other: __________________

Release Quantity
 0–10 Gallons
 10-100 Gallons
 100-1,000 Gallons
 1,000-5,000 Gallons
Did release reach
receiving ditch or
channel?
 Yes
 No
2. Source and Description of Spill or Leak:

3. Cause of Release:

4. Receiving Ditch or Channel:
5. Description of Physical Damages:

6. Amount of Product Recovered (gallons):

7. Estimated Cost of Damages:
8. Action Taken to Prevent Recurrence:

Appendix I
Weekly Visual Inspection and Maintenance Report

WEEKLY VISUAL INSPECTION
AND MAINTENANCE REPORT
Person Conducting
Inspection:

Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
GOOD HOUSEKEEPING
Instructions: As necessary, review Section 5.3, Good Housekeeping. Mark “Y” (yes) or “N” (no)
as appropriate. For each “N”, note question number and corrective action(s) in the space below.
 Y  N 1. Is the maintenance building orderly and neat?
 Y  N 2. Is there adequate space in work areas? Are work areas free of clutter?
 Y  N 3. Are equipment, materials, and tools stored properly?
 Y  N 4. Are materials properly labeled and stored?
 Y  N 5. Is the material inventory up to date?
 Y  N 6. Are employees receiving regular training?
 Y  N 7. Is there evidence of drips or leaks from equipment or machinery on site?
 Y  N 8. Are outside areas orderly and neat?
 Y  N 9. Are roads, walkways, and other passageways easily accessible, safe, and free
of protruding objects, materials, or equipment?
 Y  N 10. Is blown litter collected regularly?
No. Corrective Action(s)

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
Instructions: As necessary, review Section 5.4, Preventive Maintenance. As appropriate, inspect
each facility feature for leaks, spills, signs of erosion, proper operation, etc. Indicate the type of
test or observation: “V” for visual observation, “O” for other (if other, indicate type of test, e.g.,
pump operation). Note condition as “S” (satisfactory) or “N” (not satisfactory). For each “N”,
include in comments the corrective action(s) taken, such as maintenance performed.
Facility Feature
Type of
Observation
or Test
Condition Comments
(Corrective action, etc.)
Active Landfill Working
Face
 V  O
___________
 S  N
Leachate Conveyance
Piping and Equipment
 V  O
___________
 S  N
Leachate Pond  V  O
___________
 S  N

Facility Feature
Type of
Observation
or Test
Condition Comments
(Corrective action, etc.)
Landfill Slopes  V  O
___________
 S  N
Berms  V  O
___________
 S  N
Drainage Channels  V  O
___________
 S  N
Culverts  V  O
___________
 S  N
Outfalls  V  O
___________
 S  N
Structural BMPs (Silt
Fence, Straw Bales,
etc.)
 V  O
___________
 S  N
Vegetative Cover  V  O
___________
 S  N
Newly Graded Areas  V  O
___________
 S  N
Heavy Equipment  V  O
___________
 S  N
Storage Areas  V  O
___________
 S  N
ASTs  V  O
___________
 S  N
Secondary Containment
Structures
 V  O
___________
 S  N
Previous Spill & Leak
Areas
 V  O
___________
 S  N
Notes:

Appendix J
Employee Training Schedule and
Employee Training Record

EMPLOYEE TRAINING SCHEDULE
Instructions: Schedule and plan regular employee training as described in Section 5.7, Employee Training. Suggest training topics are noted;
others may be added by the Pollution Prevention Team. The description of the training program or materials might be a reference to a portion of
the SWPPP, the name of another reference document, a training film, etc.
Training Topics Date Required Attendees Brief Description of Training
Program/Materials
Pollution Prevention Team
Responsibilities

Storm Water Management
Erosion and Sediment Control
Good Housekeeping
Inspections
Spill Prevention and Response
Record Keeping and Reporting

EMPLOYEE TRAINING SCHEDULE
Instructions: Schedule and plan regular employee training as described in Section 5.7, Employee Training. Suggest training topics are noted;
others may be added by the Pollution Prevention Team. The description of the training program or materials might be a reference to a portion of
the SWPPP, the name of another reference document, a training film, etc.
Training Topics Date Required Attendees Brief Description of Training
Program/Materials

EMPLOYEE TRAINING RECORD
Instructions: Document training sessions as described in Section 5.7, Employee Training.
Indicate the training topic, the date of the training, and describe the training (as applicable,
include agenda, materials, duration, agenda, and/or certification).
Training Topic:
Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
Description:

Attendees Name Position
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Appendix K
Certification of Non-Storm Water Discharges

CERTIFICATION OF NON-STORM WATER DISCHARGE
Site: Bayview Landfill
Location: 10800 S. State Road 68, Utah County
Evaluator:
Title:
Testing/Evaluation
Date:
Instructions:

Certification: Testing or evaluation of discharge must be completed to determine whether
or not non-storm water discharges, including leachate and vehicle wash waters, are
present. Methods of testing/evaluation include, but are not limited to, a visual inspection
during dry weather conditions, a review of facility drawings and plumbing schematics (to
ensure illicit connections have not been overlooked), and dye testing.

Certification not Feasible: If facility personnel have no access to an outfall, manhole, or
other point of access to the ultimate receiving discharge conduit, they may declare that
certification is not feasible; however, they must provide documentation of why
certification is not feasible and must identify potential significant sources of non-storm
water at the site.

Failure to Certify: If adequate tests cannot be performed, a failure to certify may be
declared. However, documentation of the following is required: testing procedures, test
results and/or observations, potential sources of non-storm water discharges, and why
adequate tests were not feasible.
This record constitutes:
 Certification per Appendix II.L, p. L-5
 A declaration that certification was not feasible
 Failure to certify (see Appendix II.L, p. L-6)
1. Potential Significant Sources of Non-Storm Water

2. Onsite Drainage Points Observed/Tested

3. Evaluation Criteria or Testing Method

4. Observations / Description of Results

5. Additional 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 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.”

________________________________________ ___________________________
Signature Date

Appendix L
Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation

COMPREHENSIVE SITE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION
Site: Bayview Landfill
Location: 10800 S. State Road 68, Utah County
Evaluator:
Title:
Date of Inspection:
Date of Last Inspection:
Instructions: Conduct a comprehensive facility evaluation to ensure compliance with the Multi-
Sector General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities (Permit)
and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (Plan). Any necessary changes to the Description
of Potential Pollutant Sources (Section 4.0 and related appendices) and Measures and Controls
(Section 5.0 and related appendices) must be made within 2 weeks of the evaluation.
Implementation of changes must be completed within 12 weeks of the evaluation.

For the evaluation areas noted below, references to Plan Sections imply also references to
associated appendices. Mark “S” (satisfactory) or “N” (not satisfactory) as appropriate. For
unsatisfactory items, note the evaluation area number and any comments, recommended actions,
etc. below.
EVALUATION AREAS
 S  N 1. Review Plan Section 2.0 to determine adequacy of the facility overview,
including the Site Plan. Does the Site Plan reflect current operations, BMPs,
etc.?
 S  N 2. Verify that Plan Section 3.0 is up to date (Team members, responsibilities,
contact information).
 S  N 3. Review Plan Section 4.0 for accuracy and completeness. Verify proper
record keeping of the Material Inventory and the Description of Significant
Exposed Materials.
 S  N 4. Review Plan Section 5.0, specifically evaluating BMP implementation and
effectiveness. If necessary, identify additional control measures. Visually
inspect spill response equipment.
 S  N 5. Review the last three CSCEs (see Plan Section 6.0), noting major
observations relating to the implementation of the Plan. Determine if
problems or conditions of non-compliance have been remedied.
 S  N 6. Verify that monitoring requirements, including record keeping, have been met
(Plan Section 7.0).
No. Comments/Recommended Action:

COMPLIANCE STATUS
 The facility is in compliance with the Permit and the Plan.
 The facility is not in compliance with the Permit and the Plan.
Describe Areas of Non-Compliance:

“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 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.”

________________________________________ ___________________________
Signature Date

Appendix M
Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Report (SWDMR)

1
STORM WATER DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (SWDMR)
(For additional forms copy this form or contact the DWQ)
IDENTIFICATION & LOCATION
Name Permit No. UTR
Mailing Address:Location (if different )

Monitoring Period:
From: Month Day Year To: Month Day Year
Total Storm Water Discharge Points Number assigned to this Discharge Point
INDUSTRY SECTOR(S)
Industrial Activities or Industry Sector(s) Drained by this Discharge:
~A. Timber Products Facilities
~B. Paper and Allied Products Manufacturing
Facilities.
~C.Chemical and Allied Products
Manufacturing Facilities.
~D.Asphalt Paving, Roofing Materials, and
Lubricant Manufacturing Facilities.
~E.Glass, Clay, Cement, Concrete, and Gypsum
Product Manufacturing Facilities.
~F.Primary Metals Facilities.
~G.Metal Mines (Ore Mining and Dressing).
~H.Coal Mines and Coal Mine-Related
Facilities.
~I.Oil or Gas Extraction Facilities.
~J.Mineral Mining and Processing Facilities.
~K.Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage or
Disposal Facilities.
~L.Landfills and Land Application Sites.
~M.Automobile Salvage Yards.
~N.Scrap Recycling and Waste Recycling
Facilities.
~O.Steam Electric Power Generating Facilities.
~P.Motor Freight Transportation Facilities,
Passenger Transportation Facilities,
Petroleum Bulk Oil Stations and Terminals,
the United States Postal Service, or Railroad
Transportation Facilities.
~Q.Vehicle Maintenance Areas and Equipment
Cleaning Areas of Water Transportation
Facilities.
~R.Ship or Boat Building and Repair Yards.
~S.Vehicle Maintenance Areas, Equipment
Cleaning Areas or Airport Deicing
Operations located at Air Transportation
Facilities.
~T.Wastewater Treatment Works.
~U.Food and Kindred Products Facilities.
~V.Textile Mills, Apparel and other Fabric
Product Manufacturing Facilities.
~W.Furniture and Fixture Manufacturing
Facilities.
~X.Printing and Publishing Facilities.
~Y.Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Product
Manufacturing Facilities.
~Z.Leather Tanning and Finishing Facilities.
~AA.Facilities That Manufacture Metal Products
including Jewelry, Silverware and Plated
Ware.
~AB.Facilities That Manufacture Transportation
Equipment, Industrial or Commercial
Machinery.
~AC.Facilities That Manufacture Electronic and
Electrical Equipment and Components,
Photographic and Optical Goods.
~AD.Non-Classified Facilities.
2
ANALYTICAL MONITORING DATA (For sectors where it is required)
Storm Event: All samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches in magnitude and that occurs
at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. This data must be submitted to the Division
of Water Quality.
Date of Storm Event Month Day Year
Duration of Storm Event Hours
Rain Fall Measurement Inches
Time Elapsed Between Recorded & Previous Storm Event Days
Estimated Total Volume of Discharge (Include units; gal., ft3, etc.)
Please check if there has been no discharge of Storm Water during this reporting period.
(If none please explain in comment section)
~ No Discharge
Sample Type:Data shall be reported for a grab sample taken during the first thirty minutes of the discharge. If the collection of a grab sample during
the first thirty minutes is impracticable, a grab sample can be taken during the first hour of the discharge, and the discharger shall submit
with the monitoring report a description of why a grab sample during the first thirty minutes was impracticable.
Parameter Effluent Limit
(If Applicable)
Concentration
(Concentration quantity, for example -14.2)
Units
(Example - mg/L)
3
SIGNATURE
Name/Title Principle Executive Officer
(Typed or Printed)

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. See 18 U.S.C. 1001 and 33 U.S.C. 1319. (penalties under
these statues may include fines up to $10,000 and or maximum imprisonment of between 6 months and 5 years.)

Signature of Principle Executive Date
Officer or Authorized Agent
Comments:

4
INFORMATION
Adverse Weather Waiver. When a discharger is
unable to collect samples within a specified sampling
period due to adverse climatic conditions, the
discharger shall collect a substitute sample from a
separate qualifying event in the next period and
submit the data along with data for the routine sample
in that period. Adverse weather conditions that may
prohibit the collection of samples include weather
conditions that create dangerous conditions for
personnel (such as local flooding, high winds,
hurricanes, tornadoes, electrical storms, etc.) or
otherwise make the collection of a sample
impracticable (drought, extended frozen conditions,
etc.).
Exemption to Monitoring Requirements. (Does not
apply to sector S or any Visual Monitoring
Requirements.) As an alternative to monitoring an
outfall, an annual certification may be made that
material handling equipment or activities; raw or
waste materials; intermediate, final, or by-products;
industrial machinery or operations; and significant
materials from past industrial activity that are located
in areas of the facility within the drainage area of the
outfall are not presently exposed to storm water and
will not be exposed to storm water for the certification
period. Such certification must be retained in the
storm water pollution prevention plan, and submitted
to the DWQ in accordance with Part V.B of the permit.
In the case of certifying that a pollutant is not present,
the permittee must submit the certification along with
the monitoring reports required under reporting
requirements in the sector. If the permittee cannot
certify for an entire period, they must submit the date
exposure was eliminated and any monitoring required
up until that date. This certification option is not
applicable to compliance monitoring requirements
associated with effluent limitations.
When to Monitor and Report. Samples must be
collected and analyzed at least once during each
three month monitoring period. Monitoring results
must be submitted annually. See Reporting for dates.
More Frequent Monitoring. If sampling is conducted
more frequently than semi-annually, all sampling
results must be submitted. A separate SWDMR is
required for each storm event sampled.
How to Report. A separate SWDMR form is required
for each storm event and for each outfall sampled.
SWDMRs must be signed and mailed to the Division of
Wa ter Quality, and must be postmarked by the date
specified under Monitoring Periods and Reporting
Deadlines. The permittee should retain a copy. The
address and phone number for questions or to mail the
SWDMR is:
Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Quality
Attention Storm Water Coordinator
PO Box 144870
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4870
[phone]
Substantially Identical Discharges. If there is reason
to believe that the discharges from two or more
outfalls are substantially identical, one of the outfalls
may be monitored and that data submitted for all
substantially identical outfalls. A description of the
location of the outfalls, an explanation of why the
outfalls have substantially identical discharges, and
the size of the drainage area and runoff coefficient
must be submitted as an attachment to the SWDMR.

5
VISUAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Sample and Data Collection:Examinations shall be made of samples collected within the first 30 minutes (or as soon thereafter as practical, but not
to exceed one hour) of when the runoff or snowmelt begins discharging. The examinations shall document observations
of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids, foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators
of storm water pollution. The examination must be conducted in a well lit area. No analytical tests are required to
be performed on the samples. All such samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that
is greater than 0.1 inches in magnitude and that occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than
0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. Where practicable the same individual will carry out the collection and examination of
discharges for the life of the permit.
COLOR (Circle the ones that apply):
1. Identification of Color.
Black Dark Grey Medium Grey Light Grey Dark Chocolate Brown Medium Brown
Light Brown Tan Yellow Green Other
2. Intensity of Color. Very intense Prominent Moderately Perceptible Hardly Perceptible
Comments:

CLARITY (Circle the right one):
Totally Opague Slightly Translucent Translucent Nearly Transparent Transparent
ODOR (Circle the ones that apply):
Diesel Gasoline Petroleum Solvent Musty Sewage Chlorine
Rotten Egg Sulfur No Odor Noxious Other
Comments:

6
SOLIDS
Floating Solids: (Description)

Suspended and Settled Solids: (Description)

FOAM, OIL SHEEN, OR OTHER OBVIOUS
INDICATORS OF POLLUTION

UTAH SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL BOARD
SOLID WASTE PERMIT RENEWAL

BAYVIEW
CLASS I LANDFILL

Pursuant to the provisions of the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, Title 19, Chapter 6, Part
1, 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,

South Utah Valley Solid Waste District as owner and operator

is hereby approved to operate the Bayview Class I Landfill located in Sections 17 & 18,
Township 9 South, Range 1 West, Salt Lake Base and Meridian, Utah County, Utah as shown in
the permit renewal application that was determined complete on October 27, 2009.

The operation of the landfill is subject to the conditions that South Utah Valley Solid Waste
District (Permittee) meet 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 shall become effective May 1, 2010 .

This Permit shall expire at midnight April 30, 2020 .

Closure Cost Revision Date: May 1, 2015 .

Signed this 21 day of April , 2010.

Original Document signed by Dennis R. Downs on 4/21/10

Dennis R. Downs, Executive Secretary
Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board

Page 2 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
FACILITY OWNER/OPERATOR INFORMATION

LANDFILL NAME: Bayview Class I Landfill

OWNER NAME: South Utah Valley Solid Waste District

OWNER ADDRESS: P.O. Box 507

OWNER PHONE NO.: [phone]

TYPE OF PERMIT: Class I Landfill

PERMIT NUMBER: 9420R2

LOCATION: Landfill site is located in Township 9 South, Range 1West,
Sections 17 and 18, SLMB; Utah County, Latitude 40º 02' 0",
Longitude 111º 57' 30"

FACILITY ADDRESS: 10800 S. Utah State Route 68, Utah County
(Approximately 6 miles north of Elberta, on the west side of
State Route 68.)

PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

Permit as used in this document is defined in UAC R315-301-2(55).

The renewal application, Draft Application for a Permit to Operate a Class I Landfill, Tracking
Number 2009.01105, as deemed complete on the date shown on the signature page of this
Permit, is hereby incorporated by reference into this Solid Waste Permit and will be referred to
as the permit application throughout this Permit. All representations made in the permit
application are part of this Permit and are enforceable under UAC 315-301-5(2). The permit
application will become part of the operating record of the Landfill. Where differences in
wording exist between this Permit and the permit application, the wording of this Permit
supersedes that of the permit application.

This Permit consists of the signature page, Facility Owner/Operator Information section, sections
I through V, Appendix A, and the permit application as defined above.

The facility as described in this Permit consists of a heavy equipment maintenance building, staff
break room, Cell 1 (closed), and Cell 2 (open and active). The facility has a compost operation
site located east of Cell 2. The facility has two retention ponds both north of the compost

Page 3 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
location. One retention pond is designed to capture precipitation surface runoff from the
compost pad. The other is duel-lined and is designed to capture any leachate from Cell 2.

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

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 123 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
municipal solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste,
construction/demolition waste, and special waste as allowed by UAC R315-315
and authorized in section III-I of this Permit and limited by this section. The
Permittee may accept 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).

C. Prohibited Waste

No hazardous waste as defined by UAC R315-1 and R315-2 or PCB's as defined
by UAC R315-301-2, except as allowed in Section IB (Acceptable Waste) of this
Permit, may be accepted for treatment, storage, or disposal at the landfill. No
regulated asbestos-containing may be accepted for treatment, storage, or disposal.

No 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.

Any prohibited waste received and accepted for disposal at the facility will
constitute a violation of this Permit, of UCA 19-6-101 through 123 and of UAC
R315-301 through 320.

Page 4 of 17
Signed 4/21/10

D. Inspections and Inspection Access

The Permittee shall allow the Executive Secretary of the Utah Solid and
Hazardous Waste Control Board or an authorized representative of the Board, or
representatives from the Utah County Health Department, to enter at reasonable
times and:

1. Inspect the landfill 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;

3. 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 through
320; and

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

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
contamination using barriers or access restrictions, placing of warning signs, or
permanently closing areas of the facility.

The Permittee shall: document the noncompliance or violation in the operating
record on the day the event occurred or the day it was discovered; notify the
Executive Secretary of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board by
telephone within 24 hours or the next business day following documentation of
the event; and give written notice of the noncompliance or violation and measures

Page 5 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
taken to protect public health and the environment within seven days of Executive
Secretary notification.

Within thirty days of the documentation of the event, the Permittee shall submit to
the Executive Secretary 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 Executive
Secretary may order the Permittee to perform appropriate remedial measures
including development of a site remediation plan for approval by the Executive
Secretary.

In 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
action and such action will be subject to all applicable hearing procedures
established under UAC R315-12 and the Utah Administrative Procedures Act.

Revocation of this Permit does not revoke the financial assurance established for
closure and post-closure care of the facility, nor remove any responsibility on the

Page 6 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
part of the Permittee for completion of closure and post-closure care for the
facility required in UAC R315-302-3.

Revocation of this Permit will necessitate that the Executive Secretary exercise
the option to require the funds or other mechanism provided for financial
assurance for completion of closure and post-closure care for the facility required
in UAC R315-302-3 be called.

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.

II. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

A. Design and Construction

The Permittee shall construct any landfill cell, sub-cell, run-on diversion system,
runoff containment system, waste treatment facility, or final cover in accordance
with the alternative design submitted as part of the permit application and in
accordance with the Utah Solid Waste Permitting and Management Rules (UAC
R315-301 thru 320). Prior to construction of any landfill cell, sub-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 Executive Secretary for
approval. Buildings do not require approval. The Permittee shall construct any
landfill cell, sub-cell, cell liner, engineered control system, waste treatment
facility, and the final cover in accordance with the design drawings and
CQC/CQA Plans submitted and approved by the Executive Secretary.

Subsequent to construction the Permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary of
completion of construction of any landfill cell, sub-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-builts are approved by the Executive Secretary.
The Permittee shall submit as-built drawings for each construction event that are
signed and sealed by an engineer registered in the State of Utah.

Page 7 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
The Permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary 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 Executive Secretary prior to construction and must be accompanied by a
CQC/CQA Plan, for each construction season where incremental or final closure
is performed.

A qualified party, independent of the owner shall perform the quality assurance
function on liner components, cover components, and other testing as required by
the approved CQC/CQA Plan. The results must be submitted as part of the as-
built drawings to the Executive Secretary.

All engineering drawings submitted to the Executive Secretary must be stamped
and approved by a professional engineer with a current registration in Utah.

If ground water is encountered during excavation of the landfill, the Executive
Secretary 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 the permit
application and maintained at all times to effectively prevent runoff from the
surrounding area from entering the landfill.

C. Alternative Design

This facility has demonstrated through geologic, hydrogeologic, climatic, waste
stream, and other factors that the landfill will not contaminate ground water and is
approved for the alternative design as outlined in the permit application. Any
contamination of ground water resulting from operation of the landfill may result
in the revocation of this alternative design approval. The basis for approval of the
alternative design is found in the “Alternative Design Statement of Basis” found
in Appendix A of this Permit.

III. LANDFILL OPERATION

A. Operations Plan

Page 8 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
The Operations Plan included in the permit application and the solid waste permit
issued by the Executive Secretary shall be kept onsite at the landfill or at the
location designated in section III-K of this Permit. The landfill shall be operated
in accordance with the operations plan as included in the permit application. If
necessary, the facility owner may modify the Operations Plan, provided that the
modification meets all of the requirements of UAC R315-301 through 320, is as
protective of human health and the environment as that approved in the permit
application, and is approved by the Executive Secretary as a minor modification
under UAC R315-311-2(1)(a)(xiii). Any modification to the Operations Plan
shall be noted in the operating record.

Any modification to the operations plan must be submitted to the Executive
Secretary for approval and is considered a minor permit modification in
compliance with UAC R315-311-2(1)(a)(xiii) unless the Executive Secretary
determines the change should be subject to public comment under UAC R315-
311-2(1)(b).

B. Security

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 one person employed by the Permittee shall be
at the landfill during all hours that the landfill is open. Fencing and any other
access controls as shown in the permit application shall be constructed to prevent
access of persons or livestock by other routes.

C. Training

Permittee shall provide training for on-site personnel in landfill operation,
including waste load inspection, hazardous waste identification, and personal
safety and protection.

D. Burning of Waste

Intentional burning of solid waste is prohibited and is a violation of UAC R315-
303-4(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.

Page 9 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
An alternative daily cover material may be used when the material meets the
requirements of UAC R315-303-4(4)(b) through (d) or when the alternative daily
cover meets the requirement of UAC R315-303-4(4)(e).

An alternative daily cover material is approved and consists of oversized wood
chips sufficient to prevent refuse from being blown away for a 24-hour period
The facility shall also meet the following requirements:

1. Apply daily cover (min. 6 inches of soil) at the end of each week.

2. Apply standard daily cover if weather conditions (e.g., wind, rain, etc.)
prevent the proper use and application of alternate daily cover.

Permission to use alternative daily cover may be rescinded or amended if the
requirements to prevent blowing debris, minimize access to the waste by vectors,
minimize the threat of fires at the open face, minimize odors, or shed precipitation
are not met, or if necessary to prevent nuisance conditions or adverse impacts to
human health and or the environment.

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 the permit
application. If necessary, the facility owner may modify 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 as that approved in the permit application, and is approved by the
Executive Secretary as a minor modification under UAC R315-311-2(1)(a). 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 Executive Secretary 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.

G. Gas Monitoring

The Permittee shall monitor explosive gases at the landfill in accordance with the
Gas Monitoring Plan contained in the permit application and shall otherwise meet
the requirements of UAC R315-303-3(5). If necessary, the Permittee may modify
the Gas Monitoring Plan, provided that the modification meets all of the
requirements of UAC R315-301 through 320 and is as protective of human health

Page 10 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
and the environment as that approved in the permit application, and is approved
by the Executive Secretary as a minor modification under UAC R315-311-2(1).
Any modification to the Gas Monitoring Plan shall be noted in the operating
record.

If the concentrations of explosive 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 notify the Executive Secretary.
Within seven days of detection, place in the operating record the explosive gas
levels detected and a description of the immediate steps taken to protect human
health. Implement a remediation plan that meets the requirements of UAC R315-
303-3(5)(b) and shall submit the plan to, and receive approval from, the Executive
Secretary prior to implementation.

H. Waste Inspections

The Permittee shall visually inspect incoming waste loads to verify 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 1 % of incoming
loads, but no less than one complete inspection per day. Loads to be inspected
are to be chosen on a random basis.

All loads suspected or known to have one or more containers capable of holding
more than five gallons of liquid shall be inspected to assure that each container is
empty.

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

Complete random inspections shall be conducted as follows:

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

2. Loads subjected to complete inspection shall be unloaded at the
designated area;

3. 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

Page 11 of 17
Signed 4/21/10

5. The inspection shall be recorded on the waste inspection form found in the
permit application. The form shall be placed in the operating record at the
end of the operating day.

I. Disposal of Special Wastes

If loads of incinerator ash are 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 use 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 environmental hazard.

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 the acceptance of 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 Inspections

The Permittee shall inspect the facility to prevent malfunctions and deterioration,
operator errors, 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;
run-on/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 a timely manner. The
corrective actions shall be documented in the daily operating record.

K. Recordkeeping

The Permittee shall maintain and keep on file at the heavy equipment
maintenance building, 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. Each record to be kept shall contain the signature of
the appropriate operator or personnel and the date signed.

Page 12 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
1. The daily operating record shall include the following items:

a. The number of loads of waste received each day of operation and
recorded at the end of each operating day. Waste weights will be
recorded at the transfer station;

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. 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.

2. 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 Utah
Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board and/or representatives
of the Utah County 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.

L. Reporting

The Permittee shall prepare and submit, to the Executive Secretary, an Annual
Report as required in UAC R315-302-2(4). 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, a re-application for approval of the
financial assurance mechanism, any leachate analysis results, all ground water
monitoring results, the statistical analysis of ground water monitoring results, the

Page 13 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
results of gas monitoring, the quantity of leachate pumped, and all training
programs completed.

M. Roads

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

IV. CLOSURE REQUIREMENTS

A. Closure

Final cover of the landfill shall be as shown in the permit application. The final
cover shall meet, at a minimum, the standard design for closure as specified in the
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 of the final landfill cover
shall be submitted to, and approval of the plan must be received from the
Executive Secretary 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.

This facility has demonstrated through geologic, hydrogeologic, climatic, waste
stream, cover material properties, infiltration factors, and other factors that the
landfill will not contaminate ground water and is approved for the alternative
cover design as outlined in the permit application. Any contamination of ground
water resulting from the landfill may result in the revocation of this alternative
cover design approval and placement of a cover design meeting the requirements
of UAC R315-303-3(4)(a) or other remedial action as required by the Executive
Secretary. The basis for approval of the alternative cover design is found in the
“Alternative Design Statement of Basis” in Appendix A of this Permit.

B. Title Recording

The Permittee shall meet the requirements of UAC R315-302-2(6) by recording
with the Utah 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

Page 14 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
Post-closure care at the closed landfill shall be done in accordance with the Post-
Closure Care Plan contained in the permit application. Post-closure care shall
continue until all waste disposal sites at the landfill have stabilized and the
finding of UAC R315-302-3(7)(c) is made.

D. Financial Assurance

The Permittee shall keep in effect and active the currently approved financial
assurance mechanism or another mechanism that meets the requirements of UAC
R315-309 to cover the costs of closure and post-closure care at the landfill. 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 landfill
or the permit life, whichever is shorter.

With each annual revision of the closure and post-closure care cost estimate, the
annual payments to be made to the trust fund shall be determined by the following
formula:

NP=[CE-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.

E. Financial Assurance Annual Update

An annual revision of closure and post-closure costs for inflation and financial
assurance funding as, required by R315-309-2(2), shall be submitted to the
Executive Secretary 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 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. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

A. Permit Modification

Page 15 of 17
Signed 4/21/10
Modifications to this Permit may be made upon application by the Permittee or by
the Executive Secretary. The Permittee will be given written notice of any permit
modification initiated by the Executive Secretary.

B. Permit Transfer

This Permit may be transferred to a new permittee or new permittees by meeting
the requirements of the permit transfer provisions of UAC R315-310-11.

C. Expansion

This Permit is for a Class I Landfill. The permitted landfill must operate
according to the design and Operation Plan described and explained in the permit
application. Any expansion of the current footprint designated in the description
contained in the permit application, but within the property boundaries designated
in the permit application, will require submittal of plans and specifications to the
Executive Secretary. The plans and specifications must be approved by the
Executive Secretary prior to construction.

Any expansion of the landfill facility beyond the property boundaries designated
in the description contained in the permit application will require submittal of a
new permit application in accordance with the requirements of UAC R315-310.

Any addition to the acceptable wastes described in Section 1B will require
submittal of all necessary information to the Executive Secretary and the approval
of the Executive Secretary. Acceptance for PCB bulk product waste under UAC
R315-315-7(3)(b) can only be done after submittal of the required information to
the Executive Secretary 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.

File: South Utah Valley Solid Waste District, Bayview Class I Permit #9420R2

Page 16 of 17
Signed 4/21/10

Attachment A
Alternative Design Statement of Basis

Permit TN201000327att.doc
288 North 1460 West • PO Box 144880 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880 • phone [phone] • fax [phone]
T.D.D. [phone] • www.deq.utah.gov
State of Utah

Department of
Environmental Quality

Dianne R. Nielson, Ph.D.
Executive Director

DIVISION OF SOLID AND
HAZARDOUS WASTE
Dennis R. Downs
Director
JON M. HUNTSMAN, JR.
Governor

GARY HERBERT
Lieutenant Governor
October 27, 2005

Richard J. Henry, District Manager
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
P.O. Box 507
Springville, Utah 84663

Subject: Bayview Class I Landfill Construction Approval of Alternative Final Cover of Cell 1

Dear Mr. Henry:

The Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste received the report entitled, Bayview Landfill: Cell 1 Closure
Documents, on September 30, 2005. Based on our review of your revised Permit Application (dated
March 8, 2004) and the September 30, 2005 report that includes your CQA/CQC plan, you are approved
to construct the evaporative cover. This approval is based on construction of the cover design contained
in the current permit #9420R1. Areas of concern during construction and post-construction maintenance
are optimum soil compaction, erosion prevention measures, and other soil evaporative cover-related
issues.

When construction gets underway, please ensure that your Construction Quality Assurance personnel on
site provide daily records of field tests, such as soil compaction, and that they keep our office apprised of
the various phases and construction progress being made. During the construction of the final cover for
Cell 1, periodic inspections may be conducted. Personnel from the Division of Solid and Hazardous
Waste and/or the Utah County Health Department may conduct these inspections to assess compliance
with all conditions of your permit and the Bayview Landfill: Cell 1 Closure Documents.

If you have questions, please contact Matt Sullivan or Ralph Bohn at 801-538-6170.

Sincerely,

Original Document signed by Scott T. Anderson for Dennis R. Downs on 10/27/05

Dennis R. Downs, Executive Secretary
Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board

DRD/MS/kk

c: Joseph K. Miner, M.D., M.S.P.H., Director, Utah County Health Department
Terry Warner, Project Engineer, HDR Engineering, Inc.

File: Bayview Landfill
APPENDIX J – LEACHATE GENERATION CALCULATIONS

•

LEACHATE GENERATION/ HYDAULIC HEAD ON LINER
•
•
JobNa No.
HDR Computation
I Project £a(\\j\ej(0 UndAW
U^Ap.iSiri-^p CnWprJY^^ r\{i,^\em
I Computed UL Date
Checked ^JlAA" •J) Date ^f-Z-l/o-^
laskLearhd-k Cn^Mjfa^onIWw\f^(^\\(- [^^ndon l(|Yjishee. Of '35'
C^ll a Kas tx -ftjitxl arm ^ ^proyinnaklu "S^ocr^es
consider^ iP\ +^e Hudro\oa\c ^vaiua-hot^o4-
Lan(Uv\\ ^a^orrfYXJOCt^iW^lP^ rncdfl. "The-(^i^t>-V^O
(xu^ ot CaU SL uo\\\ hoAje. Co life ov ax)prox\ nrAol-eli,
C\) one acre ijj>U\ on \r\\^a.i r\-^t (>f lO-fee-
l3")on^ oLCf^ uji-Mn \50.f£,e-^ .o^ uoasV^ and
COne ^cr^ 1:5 a^ed as 4he (^e-faalVa/e(k_.-^oran
-Vo obVa\n re^uiH^ 4^oranu ar^ZL-O ^
W u3eH'elV u&uo (51+4+ifi londi-fiU loca+lon.
prec'ipi+^+iorv i5.-f'^ ^or 6a i^ uate Ci.4u, H-VIK +o
bimWocV^ 50 aea/5 erf- r^(n.%l( ^^Lllirfo or\ 4^^
JobNa Na
HDR Computation TTLJ^
BdU,\/]-Pu) La/VJ-flil |cotnp.ted;<OG |Date/^/a3/0 3 I Project
subject \j(ycV\ah> fnlhr-fion "Si^fs-Verrv. Iche^ed V^ JD^e ^A'^/-^
Task • I Sheet g? |of 0Z)
1
(Xfd per ^fa/^6t o-f a ^^S5 (5 0 and. I -, r^sf -' • "^'
^aii Late Ci^ lt> lbinch^$. ^
r
5/a^
Fairfield R£F.i^.
County: Utili Lititude: 40*16' Lanptude: 112*05- Bentioii: 4230 feet Period: 19S0-1992-
Jan F«fa Uae Apr May Jul Jul Am Sap Oct
Hacard high tomp
Raeard low tomp
SS 88 78 65 100
18 4- -20 -23 -38
'}itatiima^^^a:.27ma3^^
BjSjjd'
Naiiiui'inntrfaU 972 8.2 S'.'8
Recwd miY snow 27.0 28.5 13.0
Rteafd dlY mow 12.0 .1.2,0 7.0
^SyTtwa^ratMrri^-a tr.j^fe36i-^
2.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 li *.6 8.8 38.2
20.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 6.0 18.0 32.0 32.0
8.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 4.0 10.0 10.5 •. 12.0
Wr:^S^i!SMS'3^M^^^^o^Ma7m^i*i^o^Si^MBi'
y
*FercaiU{c of period with dao: SSS for tcs^ieatun, 71% far pndpintiaa, I9X fornorw&U.
/
Job No. No.
HDR Computation TT^T?
I project
I Subject
Task Sheet
3.0 ^6\\ cu^cl Lajaer \Ma^
\^^(XM\\ \OJAQX 4upes and 5011 ^-ex•tufe5 in4l)e HELP
frtxiel \jdw useS. 4or 4^c feUouoinq condifions:
Cond\-V\oA. ±
i£)" c^^ daUa coxjejf ("Te.x+arc (^X
vo" o-^ uja^-Ve lT€.y+are te)
CoadiViorv Sl
5^" 0^ \ OL-k.rai di'^i^dcLOLe (.T^K+are i^V
5o\\ \mejr vOQjTt aW a-feam^ +0 be sarVara.ted.at ^
VAQ- V:)eQt\or\\r\(l c^P 4-He t>'\pna\a-V\on -for bo4-h condiWons.
Base,cLo?i Dau^^ Co\x.n\{J.'t>Q\^A.{^)a'^^-Hm^
am BAorqa ^^co\j^a ^peciaL'!>c.rs/\c^ Ui^fHcf.
r^cord^5, W^ ^id lAisie moisture con-een-i -for 4ri/3
JobNa No.
HDR Computation
I Project Eyitix/i^jA^ Ldnd-Ptl I Computed
.bjec. Lpan]rxh. r nI l^cfIOAJ :$u,^Vm
Task
Checked
m.
Sheet ^ 01 ai
bvL vj^\cvr\-V c^ uoa^VO^ \P\\Vva.\ rc\o\^Wv^e. consent ba
e5-V\naaA^^.das -foWouost
© ^ rr\o\^V vjure. conWvV bu \X)\ amc " uO C^^ /pto)
XA = drvL cim^\Va o?- voai4^ ^ ^^^ ^^^^'
©- .\^ ' A\
^ba.u
^Q^' ot La-Vey^l Drainaa^
<L V
JobNa Na
HDR Computation JTT^
.Project B<ra\y]^n\ I nnif^l] ico.p.ed,^D6 \o..U/;^/o.'^
I Subject ^{hn-i-f. CnHec-^ioru ^ipb^m Icnecked TK^Q |,3te (:>/i^h^
[Task I Sheet j^ |ot <$? W
CondAVvGrv. SL
;(^9H" La-^-^/ai Drai naae Uaaer -- T
Ti^p^. «a = \aW(x\ d/ainaq^. loue?
TSI)^ H ^ f m
Go\\e.oUotv -Koob axis no^' cbnsidored as o^
\;Qr+Aca.l d/ainom /dU^ ; resalA^m /A 6u
ccA5ervya.V\ve \rfipin(&rnm> roi^eyP
^^_f^S5arY^ed piahd'O. d<^^i+a'^ 0,15 V\oVcs/acre ;
O-nsfad^dl de^-k-d^^a. v^o\<Jslacr6 ; aoooL
D\(ic-evr\Qjod o^oal'ia
*« G6oVe.y-lU^ used as cufKiorv. ujndernfa>lfi barrio
5o\\ u:^s nor considdTw a^ a \jQ/h(j2u\ dfainacji
YI-1 /a^
TABLE 4. DEFAULT SOIL, WASTE, AND GEOSYNTHEHC CHARACTERISTICS ^-^^t^p. ^
HELP
1
2
3
4
5
6 •
7.
8
9
10
11
12
.13»
14
15
16
17
18*
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
Qassification
USDA
CoS
5
FS
LS
UPS
SL
FSL
L
SiL
SCL
CL
SiCL
SC
Sic
c
USCS
SP
sw-
SW
SM.
SM
SM,
SM
ML
ML
SC
CL
CL
SC
CH
CH
Baniei So3
Bentonite Mai (0.6 cm)
Municipal Waste
(gOOlb/ytPorSnkgAn^)
Municipal Waste
(channeling and dead zones)
Drainage Net (0.5 cm)
Gravel
L'
SiL'
SCL"
CL-
SiCL'
SC"
SiC
C
ML
ML
SC
CL
CL
SC
CH
CH
Coal-Buming Eleclric Plant
, Fly Ash"
Coal-Buming Electric Plant
Bottom Ash*
Municipal Incinenlar
HyAsh"
Fine Copper Slag'
Drainage Net (0.6 cm)
Total
Porosity
vol/vol
0.417
0.437
0.457
0.437
0.457
0.453
0.473
0.463
0.501
0J98
0.464
0.471
0.430
0.479
0.475
0.427
0.750
0.671
0.168
0.850
0J97
0.419
0.461
0365
0.437
0.445
0.400
0.452
0.451
0341
0.578
0.450
0375
0.850
Field
Capacity
voIAol
0.045
0.062
0.083
0.105
0.131
0.190
0i22
0.232
0.284
0J44
0310
0342
0321
0371
0378
0.418
0.747
0.292
0.073
0.010
0.032
0307
0360
0305
0373
0393
0366
0.411
0.419
0.187
0IJ76
0.116
0J355
0.010
WDting
Point
vol/vol
0.018
0.024
0.033
0.047
0.058
0.085
0.104
0.116
0.135
0.136
0.1 S7
0.210
0.221
0251
0.265
0367
0.400
0.077
0.019
0.005
0.013
0.180
0203
0202
0266
0277
0288
0311
0332
0D47
0JQ25
0.049
0.020
0.0CS
Saturated
Hydraulic
Conductjvi^
cm/sec
1.0x10-'
5.8x10*
3.1xia*
1.7x10-'
1.0x10-'
72x10"' i
52x10^
3.7x10*
15x10^
12x10*
6.4x10' 1
42x10'
33x10^
2.5x10'
1.7x10'
1.0x10'
3.0x10*
1.0x10'
1.0x10'
1.0x10^'
3.0x10'
15x10'
9.0x10*
2.7x10*
3.6x10*
15x10*
7.8x10'
12x10*
6.8xlO'
5.0x10'
4.1xlO'
1.0x10'
4.1x10'
33x10"
Moderately Compacted (Continued)
pa., ^/ae"
TABLE 4 (continued). DEFAULT SOIL, WASTE, AND GEOSYNTHETIC
CHARACTERISTICS f E P. a_
Classification
HELP
. 35 •
36
37
38.
39
40
41
42
Geomembrane Material
High Density Polyethylene
(HDPE)
Low Density Polyethylene
(LDPE)
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Butyl Rubber
Chlorinated Polyethylene
(CPE)
Hypalon or Chloroiulfonatcd
Polyethylene (CSPE)
Ethylene-Propylene Diene
Monomer (EPDM)
Neoprene
Total
Porosity
vol/vol
(conclude
Field
Ca.pacity
vol/vol
d)
Wilting
Point
vol/vol
Saturated
Hydraulic
Conductivity
cm/icc
^OxlOr"
4.0x10-"
2.0x10""
1.0x10-"
4.0xlO-«
3.0x10-" 1
2-0x10-" 1
3.0x10-" 1
JobNa No.
HDR Computation TnTy^'
,Hroject ^C\ )JA)\I^ UQ LA A^l S^\ \ |con,pu.ed \<iDCl WlnlQ^jC^^
[subject LPa^hfl4-g. r.n(lP.r4-\QA fSip+f^m [checked -;^/-^g loate ^A^/^3
Task Sheet R lo^ ^6^
330 ^ee.-V a.+ S^?o ^lope. o:nd. \\~io 4^edr ct-f 3 7^
VV^e. (lra\r\^G<2- pa-^hu^oja ^ 4i\e. ma.v:imam d-rainaae
v_^E ^^oo^e^-^ / -I ^
bas^dcru \oop\r\arr\e/t^ r^-k,s-promv a. 9S*?o
For HELP Mcdel ^ \.\1C) -PeeVo.^ '!p?d s\ope uo\l\ b^u^ed,
^roorv ^rhe, VA^LP roo(le^ ^-^^ -toWguJioci,
Cond.\Viof\ i
lcx.cre. o/eo. uj^Vtv \o' c^ uoas-Vc c^sA. ^" o^ daiiu
-^U ->\ope ^ O ''^/(i«u \ paqe IT).
Job No. Noi
HDR Computation IT]R
IPtoiect F)Q 1 l\i\QX k~) LOJnA-^i ( Icornp^ed )^ ly; \o...(^ / Q 3 IQ 3
I Subject pnr^a-}p, OD\\n4i^r\ ^nM-fm [checked 7H^^ lo3.e 6>M^
Task Sheet U lo^ pe^
A acr^ (3/^oL UJ\'VK i3C5' 0^ \jda.%-\^ and IQ; ^-f. ,
inWm^Siafe cover-for CL dLramaaia pa44iu)!mo4
U.O Ola^innana \)q>lK o-C i4ivirda.li'c (4-eact
tpa. noni^^) it) aQprcxinna+eiuL O '""(^^ Her €acK
^u6V^rr>^ approaches 0 -P^^-TKb it:) kss+h(iA , ,
*******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
* * * *
**
* *
**
**
**
* *
HYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF LANDFILL PERFORMANCE
HELP MODEL VERSION 3.07 (1 NOVEMBER 1997)
DEVELOPED BY ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
USAE WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION
FOR USEPA RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
**
* * * *
******************************************************************************
* ************************************************************* *.*.* -k-k-k-k-k-k-k-k-k-k^-k-k
PRECIPITATION DATA FILE:
TEMPERATURE DATA FILE:
SOLAR RADIATION DATA FILE:
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA:
SOIL AND DESIGN DATA FILE:
OUTPUT DATA FILE:
C:\HELP3\SUV\WET5_AV.D4
C:\HELP3\SUV\FAIRFIED.D7
C:\HELP3\SUV\SLCDFLT.D13
C:\HELP3\SUV\SLCDFLT.Dil
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVIEW1YR.Dl0
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVIEW1YR.OUT
TIME: 11:14 DATE: 6/26/2003
******************************************************************************
TITLE: Bayview Cell#2 Year 1
******************************************************************************
'NOTE: INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE LAYERS AND SNOW WATER
WERE SPECIFIED BY THE USER.
LAYER 1
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 6
THICKNESS = 6.00 INCHES
POROSITY = 0.453 0 VOL/VOL
FIELD CAPACITY = 0.1900 VOL/VOL
WILTING POINT = • 0.0850 VOL/VOL
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.1900 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.720000011000E-03 CM/SEC
P- ^d6
LAYER 2
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 18
THICKNESS
POROSITY
FIELD CAPACITY
WILTING POINT
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.
12 0.00 INCHES
0.6710 VOL/VOL
0.2920 VOL/VOL
0.077 0 VOL/VOL
0.1100 VOL/VOL
0.100000005000E-02 CM/SEC
LAYER
TYPE 2 - LATERAL DRAINAGE LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 6
24.00 THICKNESS
POROSITY
FIELD CAPACITY
WILTING POINT
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.
SLOPE
DRAINAGE LENGTH
INCHES
0.4530 VOL/VOL
0.1900 VOL/VOL
0.0850 VOL/VOL
0.1900 VOL/VOL
0.720000011000E-03 CM/SEC
3.00 PERCENT
117 0.0 FEET
LAYER' 4
TYPE 4 - FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 35
0.0 6 INCHES THICKNESS
POROSITY
FIELD CAPACITY
WILTING POINT
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0
FML PINHOLE DENSITY
FML INSTALLATION DEFECTS
FML PLACEMENT QUALITY = 3
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
.199999996000E-12 CM/SEC
0.75 HOLES/ACRE
2.00 HOLES/ACRE
- GOOD
p-\^)a6
LAYER 5
TYPE 3 - BARRIER SOIL LINER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 17
THICKNESS = 0.25 INCHES
POROSITY = 0.7500 VOL/VOL
FIELD CAPACITY = 0.7470 VOL/VOL
WILTING POINT = 0.4000 VOL/VOL
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.7500 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.300000003000E-08 CM/SEC
GENERAL DESIGN AND EVAPORATIVE ZONE DATA
NOTE: SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER WAS USER-SPECIFIED.
SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER
FRACTION OF AREA ALLOWING RUNOFF
AREA PROJECTED ON HORIZONTAL PLANE
EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH
INITIAL WATER IN EVAPORATIVE ZONE
UPPER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGE
LOWER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGE
INITIAL SNOW WATER
INITIAL WATER IN LAYER MATERIALS
TOTAL INITIAL WATER
TOTAL SUBSURFACE INFLOW
77
0
1
16.
2,
9,
1,
2,
19.
21.
0,
.00
.0
.000
.0
.240
.428
.280
.000
.087
.087
,00
PERCENT
ACRES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES/YEAR
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND WEATHER DATA
NOTE: EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM
SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
STATION LATITUDE
MAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEX
START OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)
END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)
EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH
AVERAGE•ANNUAL WIND SPEED
AVERAGE 1ST QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 2ND QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 3RD QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 4TH QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
40.76
0.00
117
289
16.0
8.80
67.00
48.00
39.00
65.00
DEGREES
INCHES
MPH
%
%
%
%
NOTE: PRECIPITATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
?• 1%
JAN/JUL
1.37
2.07
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (INCHES)
FEB/AUG MAR/SEP . APR/OCT MAY/NOV
1.63
1.40
2.06
2.21
1.07
1.30
1.30
1.50
JUN/DEC
1.12
1.20
NOTE: TEMPERATURE DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES FAHRENHEIT)
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
25.20
69.80
30.30
68.50
38.50
59.50
45.70
47.90
54.20
35.30
62.70
26.30
NOTE: SOLAR RADIATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
AND STATION LATITUDE = 40.27 DEGREES
*******************************************************************************
AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
PRECIPITATION
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.45
1.42
0.00
0.00
0.93
2.50
0.00
0.00
1.84
1.91
0.00
0.00
0.47
2.28
0.00
0.00
0.63
1.20
0.00
0.00
0.46
1.21
0.00
0.00
RUNOFF
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
TOTALS
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
.000
.000
,000
.000
.736
0.
0,
0.
0,
0.
.000
.000
,000
.000
.869
0,
0,
0,
0,
2
.000
.000
.000
.000
.260
0,
0,
0.
0,
1,
.000
.000
,000
.000
.548
0,
0.
0,
0.
0,
.000
.000
,000
.000
.488
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
.000
,000
,000
,000
.356
p-I^^S"
0.831 2.814 1.653 2.151 1.039 0.679
STD. DEVIATIONS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER' 3
TOTALS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
STD. DEVIATIONS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 5
TOTALS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
STD. DEVIATIONS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000. 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
AVERAGES OF MONTHLY AVERAGED DAILY HEADS (INCHES)
DAILY AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
AVERAGES 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
STD. DEVIATIONS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
*******************************************************************************
*******************************************************************************
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 1
INCHES CU. FEET PERCENT
PRECIPITATION 15.30 ( 0.000) 55539.0 100.00
RUNOFF 0.000 ( 0.0000) 0.00 0.000
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION 15.423 ( 0.0000) 55986.77 100.806
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED 0.00000 ( 0.00000) 0.000 0.00000
FROM LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH 0.00000 ( 0.00000) 0.000 0.00000
LAYER 5
p'^^/s)6'
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP
OF LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE .,
0.000 { 0.000)
-0.123 ( 0.0000) -447.75 -0.806
*******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 1
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 5
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
MAXIMUM HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
LOCATION OF MAXIMUM HEAD IN LAYER 3
(DISTANCE FROM DRAIN) '
SNOW WATER
(INCHES)
0.89
0.000
0.00000
0.000000
0.000
0.000
0.0 FEET
2.00
(CU. FT.)
3230.700
0.0000
0.00000
0.00000
7260.0000
MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
0.2600
0.0999
'** Maximum heads are computed using McEnroe's equations. ***
Reference: Maximum Saturated Depth over Landfill Liner
by Bruce M. McEnroe, University of Kansas
ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering
Vol. 119, No. 2, March 1993, pp. 262-270.
******************************************************************************
P-'7s^
*****************************************************
FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 1
LAYER
1
2
3
4
5
(INCHES)
1.5758
14.4955
4.5600
0.0000
0.1875
(VOL/VOL)
0.2626
0.1208
0.1900
0.0000
0.7500
SNOW WATER 0.145
******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
•p-'%5
******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
** **
**
**
**
**
* *
**
HYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF LANDFILL PERFORMANCE
HELP MODEL VERSION 3.07 (1 NOVEMBER 1997)
DEVELOPED BY ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY
USAE WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION
FOR USEPA RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
**
**
**
**
**
**
** **
** **
******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
PRECIPITATION DATA FILE:
TEMPERATURE DATA FILE:
SOLAR RADIATION DATA FILE:
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA:
SOIL AND DESIGN DATA FILE:
OUTPUT DATA FILE:
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVPRECP.D4
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVTEMP.D7
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVRAD.D13
C:\HELP3\SUV\BVEVAP.Dil
C:\HELP3\SUV\BAYVIEW3.D10
C:\HELP3\SUV\BAYVIEW3.OUT
TIME: 11:20 DATE: 6/26/2003
******************************************************************************
TITLE: Bayview Cell#2 Year 5
******************************************************************************
NOTE: INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE LAYERS AND SNOW WATER
WERE SPECIFIED BY THE USER.
LAYER 1
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 6
THICKNESS = 12.00 INCHES
POROSITY = 0.4530 VOL/VOL
FIELD CAPACITY = 0.1900 VOL/VOL
WILTING POINT = 0.0850 VOL/VOL
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.1900 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.720000011000E-03 CM/SEC
?-i^/a5
LAYER 2
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 18
THICKNESS = 1560.00 INCHES
POROSITY = 0.6710 VOL/VOL
FIELD CAPACITY = 0.2920 VOL/VOL
WILTING POINT = 0.0770 VOL/VOL
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.1100 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.100000005000E-02 CM/SEC
LAYER 3
TYPE 2 - LATERAL DRAINAGE LAYER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 6
24.00 THICKNESS
POROSITY
FIELD CAPACITY
WILTING POINT
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.
SLOPE
DRAINAGE LENGTH
INCHES
0.4530 VOL/VOL
0.19 0 0 VOL/VOL
0.0850 VOL/VOL
0.1900 VOL/VOL
0.720000011000E-03 CM/SEC
3.00 PERCENT
1170.0 FEET
LAYER 4
TYPE 4 - FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 35
0.06 INCHES THICKNESS
POROSITY
FIELD CAPACITY
WILTING POINT
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0
FML PINHOLE DENSITY
FML INSTALLATION DEFECTS
FML PLACEMENT QUALITY = 3
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
0.0000 VOL/VOL
199999996000E-12 CM/SEC
0.75 HOLES/ACRE
2.00 HOLES/ACRE
- GOOD
p- ^IQ6
LAYER 5
TYPE 3 - BARRIER SOIL LINER
MATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 17
THICKNESS = 0.25 INCHES
POROSITY = 0.7500 VOL/VOL
FIELD CAPACITY = 0.7470 VOL/VOL
WILTING POINT = 0.4000 VOL/VOL
INITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.7500 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.300000003000E-08 CM/SEC
GENERAL DESIGN AND EVAPORATIVE ZONE DATA
NOTE: SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER WAS USER-SPECIFIED.
SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER
FRACTION OF AREA ALLOWING RUNOFF
AREA PROJECTED ON HORIZONTAL PLANE
EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH
INITIAL WATER IN EVAPORATIVE ZONE
UPPER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGE
LOWER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGE
INITIAL SNOW WATER
INITIAL WATER IN LAYER MATERIALS
TOTAL INITIAL WATER
TOTAL SUBSURFACE INFLOW
77,
0,
1,
16,
2,
8,
1,
2,
178.
180.
0,
.00
.0
.000
.0
.720
.120
.328
.000
.628
,628
,00
PERCENT
ACRES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES
INCHES/YEAR
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND WEATHER DATA
NOTE: EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM
SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
STATION LATITUDE
MAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEX
START OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)
END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)
EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTH
AVERAGE ANNUAL WIND SPEED
AVERAGE 1ST QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 2ND QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 3RD QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
AVERAGE 4TH QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
40.76 DEGREES
0.00
117
289
16.0 INCHES
8.80 MPH
67.00 %
48.00 %
39.00 %
65.00 %
NOTE: PRECIPITATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
p-'^'/P^
JAN/JUL
1.35
0.72
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (INCHES)
FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV
1.33
0.92
1.72
0.89
2.21
1.14
1.47
1.22
JUN/DEC
0.97
1.37
NOTE: TEMPERATURE DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES FAHRENHEIT)
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
28.60
77.50
34.10
74.90
40.70
65.00.
49.20
53.00
58.80
39.70
68.30
30.30
NOTE: SOLAR RADIATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR SALT LAKE CITY UTAH
AND STATION LATITUDE = 40.27 DEGREES
*******************************************************************************
AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 30
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
PRECIPITATION
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
RUNOFF
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
TOTALS
1.16
0.69
0.60
0.48
1.20
0.85
0.54
0.80
1.95
0.84
0.77
0.61
2.04
1.05
0.87
0.82
1.30
1.31
0.68
0.73
1.03
1.46
0.74
0.59
0,
0,
0,
0,
,000
.000
.000
,000
0,
0,
0
0,
.000
.000
.000
.000
0.
0,
0,
0,
.000
.000
.000
.000
0.
0,
0,
0,
,000
,000
,000
.000
0,
0,
0,
0,
.000
.000
.000
.000
0,
0,
0,
0,
,000
.000
.000
.000
0.572 0.673 2.225 2.301 1.525 1.048
.^^l96
0.706 0.840 0.789 0.922 0.823 0.763
STD. DEVIATIONS
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 3
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 5
0.258
0.495
0.379
0.809
0.644
0.590
0.918
0.662
0.694
0.363
0.719
0.199
0.
0,
0.
0,
.0000
,0000
.0000
.0000
0,
0.
0,
0.
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
0,
0,
0,
0,
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
0,
0,
0,
0.
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
0.
0.
0.
0,
,0000
,0000
.0000
.0000
0,
0,
0,
0,
.0000
.0000
.0000
.0000
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
AVERAGES OF MONTHLY AVERAGED DAILY HEADS (INCHES)
DAILY AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
AVERAGES
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
O.OOOO
*******************************************************************************
*******************************************************************************
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 30
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED
FROM LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH
LAYER 5
INCHES
14.88 ( 2.435)
0.000 ( 0.0000)
13.186 ( 2.0492)
0.00000 ( 0.00000)
0.00000 ( 0.00000)
CU. FEET
54009.6
0.00
47864.84
0.000
0.000
PERCENT
100.00
0.000
88.623
0.00000
0.00000
p.^^P^'
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP
OF LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
0.000 ( 0.000)
1.693 ( 1.1317) 6144.74 11.377
*******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 30
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 5
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
MAXIMUM HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 4
LOCATION OF MAXIMUM HEAD IN LAYER 3
(DISTANCE FROM DRAIN)
SNOW WATER
(INCHES)
1.66
0.000
0.00000
0.000000
0.000
0.000
0.0 FEET
2.96
(CU. FT.)
6025.800
0.0000
0.00000
0.00000
10733.1621
MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
0.4143
0.0830
*** Maximum heads are computed using McEnroe's equations. *
Reference: Maximum Saturated Depth over Landfill Liner
by Bruce M. McEnroe, University of Kansas
ASCE Journal of Environmental Engineering
Vol. 119, No. 2, March 1993, pp. 2 62-27 0.
******************************************************************************
.9
it*************************-*****************************
FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 30
LAYER
1
2
3
4
5
(INCHES)
2.6547
224.0082
4.5600
0.0000
0.1875
(VOL/VOL)
0.2212
0.1436
0.1900
0.0000
0.7500
SNOW WATER 0.000
******************************************************************************
******************************************************************************
Y-^^l96
APPENDIX K – ENGINEERING DRAWINGS

•
•
•

Engineering Drawing and Specifications
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
•
•
ENGINEERING DRAWINGS
The following conceptual engineering drawings are for reference only and are
not intended for construction.
Final engineering drawings and specifications will be inserted here upon completion .
\:
^
/ A \
—
V
n
'A
s p K
-
C1
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
MARGH 4, 2009
I
DRAWING SCHEDULE
1 COVER SHEET
2 GENERAL NOTES, SYMBOLS &L ABBREVIATIONS
3 EXISTING CONTOURS & SITE PLAN
4 CELL 2 STAGE 2 EXCAVATION PLAN
5 CELL 2 STAGE 2 WASTE PILL CONTOURS
6 PINAL COVER PLAN
7 LINER DETAILS
8 LEACHATE COLLECTION PLAN AND PROFILE
9 LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM DETAILS
10 LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM DETAILS
11 TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
12 TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
13 TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
14 LEACHATE POND GRADING PLAN
15 LEACHATE POND DETAILS
KR
HDR Enginiiring. Inc.
:iB05 S 700 E
Suits 100
Salt Laki aty. UT 04107-2594
ISSUE DATE DESCRIPTION
PROJECT MANAGER
ARCHITECT
CML
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
DESIGNED
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NUMBER
T. WARNER
S. WOMACK
C. MCCARTY
C. MCCARTY
96439
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW U\NDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PL^N
COVER SHEET
0 r 2-HLENAME
SCALE
OOC-Ol.DWG
N/A
SHEET
01 OF 15
GENERAL NOTES STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS
>
1. COORDINATE SYSTEM IS BASED ON LOCAL SURVEY. THE BENCHMARK TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION IS
LOCATED AS SHOWN ON DRAWING NO. C3. EXISTING CONTOURS ARE BASED ON AERIAL SURVEY FLOWN
NOVEMBER U, 2008, BY OLYMPUS AERIALS INC. SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH. CURRENT GROUND ELEVATIONS MAY
VARY FROM THOSE SHOWN DUE TO SITE WORK THAT HAS BEEN PERFORMED SINCE THE AERIAL WAS
FLOWN.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONTOURS PRIOR TO THE START OF EARTHWORK.
3. GROUNDWATER AT THE SITE MAY VARY DEPENDING ON STREAM FLOW, RAINFALL, AND SUBSURFACE
CONDITIONS. THERE SHALL NOT BE ANY ADDITIONAL PAYMENT OR EXTENSION OF CONTRACT TIME
FOR WORKING WITH SATURATED SOILS OR HANDLING GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT THE EXISTING LANDFILL
ROADS, GAS PROBES, AND GROUNDWATER MONITOR WELLS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE
INCURRED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND PROTECT EXISTING LANDFILL
FEATURES.
5. THE LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED BY THE OWNER
OR HIS REPRESENTATIVES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING
UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, AND AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL
DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO EXACTLY LOCATE AND
PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING
PROPER SAFE WORKING DISTANCE FROM ALL UTILITY EASEMENTS.
6. EXCAVATION BY "BLASTING" IS NOT PERMITTED ON THIS PROJECT.
7. FINISHED GROUND ELEVATIONS SHALL MATCH EXISTING GROUND ELEVATIONS EXCEPT AS SHOWN ON THE
PLANS. EXCESS SOIL FROM EXCAVATION AND GRADING SHALL BE PLACED IN DESIGNATED STOCKPILE
LOCATIONS AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER. TRANSPORT OF SOIL TO FILL AREAS SHALL BE CONDUCTED
BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE OWNER.
8. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORTS FOR THE SITE ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THE DISTRICTS
TRANSFER STATION OFFICE OR HDR ENGINEERING. THE CONTRACTOR MAY PERFORM ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATIONS AS HE DEEMS NECESSARY FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. HOWEVER, THERE SHALL BE NO
ADDITIONAL PAYMENT TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS.
9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT, AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, REMOVE TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION ACCESS ROADS. SUCH ROADS SHALL BE LOCATED AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER. DRAINAGE
PATTERNS AT THE SITE SHALL NOT BE ALTERED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY DRAINAGE STRUCTURES, INCLUDING
CULVERTS, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.
10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CREATE SWPPP AND SUBMIT TO ENGINEER AND OWNER FOR APPROVAL.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND CONDUCT WORK CONSISTENT WITH A UPDES PERMIT FOR
LANDFILL CONSTRUCTION. REFER TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS.
11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL, MAINTAIN, AND UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, REMOVE
TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE SWPPP AND PURSUANT
TO REOUIREMENTS. SUCH CONTROLS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE LIMITS OF DISTURBED AREAS AND AT
INTERMEDIATE LOCATIONS WHERE CONCENTRATED FLOW IS LIKELY.
12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP THE LANDFILL HAUL ROAD OPERATIONAL AT ALL TIMES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
SUBMIT A SCHEDULE TO THE O'WNER FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL 72 HOURS PRIOR TO CONDUCTING OPERATIONS
THAT MAY AFFECT OPERATION OF THE LANDFILL ACCESS ROADS. DURING LANDFILL OPERATION, THE CONTRACTOR
SHALL PROVIDE FLAGMEN AND FLASHING WARNING DEVICES AT ALL LOCATIONS WHERE EQUIPMENT WILL BE
CROSSING THE LANDFILL ACCESS ROAD.
13. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION SLOPES SHALL NOT BE GREATER THAN 2H:1V. STEEPER SLOPES WILL ONLY BE
ALLOWED IF THE CONTRACTOR PROVIDES A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT SPECIFYING MAXIMUM SLOPES
AND THE DURATION FOR WHICH SUCH SLOPES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE.
14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL VEGETATION WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS AS REQUIRED TO
CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT. ALL VEGETATION MAY BE DISPOSED OF ON-SITE AS DIRECTED BY THE OWNER.
15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY REPORT TQ THE ENGINEER ANY ERROR OR DISCREPANCY FOUND ONCE THE
CONTRACT DOCUMENT IS CAREFULLY REVIEWED ANO ALL ASPECTS OF FIELD WORK HAVE BEEN VERIFIED. IN THE
EVENT THE CONTRACTOR CONTINUES TO WORK ON AN ITEM WHERE AN ERROR EXISTS, IT SHALL BE DEEMED THAT
THE CONTRACTOR BID AND INTENDED TO EXECUTE THE MORE STRINGENT OR HIGHER QUALITY REOUIREMENT
WITHOUT AN INCREASE IN CONTRACT SUM OR TIME. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE TO CORRECT
ANY FAILURE OF COMPANY PARTS TO COORDINATE OR FIT PROPERLY INTO FINAL POSITION, AS A RESULT OF
CONTRACTOR FAILURE TO RAISE OR RESOLVE A DISCREPANCY.
16. THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS SHOULD AGREE WITH EACH OTHER, AND WORK CALLED FOR BY DRAWINGS
AND NOT MENTIONED IN SPECIFICATIONS, QR VICE VERSA, SHALL BE FURNISHED BY BOTH. WHEN DISCREPANCIES
EXIST BETWEEN SCALE AND DIMENSIONS, THE DIMENSIONED FIGURE SHALL BE USED. IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST
BETWEEN THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT WORK WITHOUT CLARIFICATION
FROM ENGINEER AND RESOLUTION BY OWNER. THE OWNER'S DECISION ON THE RESOLUTION IS FINAL.
17. CONTRACTORS AND EACH SUB CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL GRADES, LINES, LEVELS, AND DIMENSIONS AS
INDICATED ON DRAWINGS, AND HE SHALL REPORT ERRORS TO THE ENGINEER.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH BENCHMARKS IN AT LEAST TWO WIDELY SEPARATED PLACES, AND AS
WORK PROGRESSES THE CONTRACTOR WILL MAINTAIN ADEQUATE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL.
18. REFER TO CQA DOCUMENT FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS.
&
APPROX
ASPH
19
AVG
BOE
BM
BOL
X
BLDG
CL
CMP
CO
CFS
CY
DIA
DET
DWG
ELEV
EXIST
EXC
FL
FML
FT
G
GAL
GND
GCL
GCDL
GDL
GLER
GNDL
GP
HDPE
HORIZ
ID
IN
IE
LCRS
LCS
LCP
LCPR
LF
LEG
LB
LG
MH
MAX
MIL
AND
APPROXIMATELY
ASPHALT
AT
AVERAGE
BOTTOM OE EXCAVATION
BENCHMARK
BOTTOM OF LINER
BY
BUILDING
CENTERLINE
CORRUGATED METAL PIPE
CLEAN OUT
CUBIC FEET PER SECOND
CUBIC YARD
DIAMETER
DETAIL
DRAWING
ELEVATION
EXISTING
EXCAVATION
FLOW LINE
FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINER
FEET
GAS PROBE
GALLON
GROUND
GEOCOMPOSITE LINER
GEOCOMPOSITE DRAINAGE LAYER
GRAVEL DRAINAGE LAYER
GEOMEMBRANE LINER EVALUATION REPORT
GEONET DRAINAGE LAYER
GAS PROBE
HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
HORIZONTAL
INSIDE DIAMETER
INCHES
INVERT ELEVATION
LEACHATE COLLECTION AND REMOVAL SYSTEM
LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM
LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE RISER
LINEAR FEET
LANDFILL GAS
POUND
LONG
MANHOLE
MAXIMUM
.001 INCHES
MIN
MW
MSL
N
NIC
NO
NTS
OC
oz %
PLCP
PERF
PGV
PC
PVI
PT
PZ
Q
QTY
R
ROP
REF
REQ
RD
SCH
SDL
SEC
SHT
S
SDR
SP
SO
STA
SLER
SLQCP
SS
SWPPP
TL
TOC
TQFC
TOL
TOS
TS
TEMP
TYP
VCP
VERT
VLDPE
W
W/
YD
MINIMUM
MONITOR WELL
MEAN SEA LEVEL
NORTH
NOT IN CONTRACT
NUMBER
NOT TO SCALE
ON CENTER
OUNCE
PERCENT
PERFORATED LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
PERFORATED
PASSIVE GAS VENT
POINT OF CURVATURE
POINT OF VERTICAL INTERSECTION
POINT OF TANGENCY
PIEZOMETER
FLOW
QUANTITY
RADIUS
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE
REFERENCE
REQUIRED
ROAD
SCHEDULE
SAND DRAINAGE LAYER
SECTION
SHEET
SOUTH
STANDARD DIMENSION RATIO
STEEL PIPE
SQUARE
STATION
SOIL LINER EVALUATION REPORT
SOIL LINER OUALITY CONTROL PLAN
SIDE SLOPE
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
TANGENT LENGTH
TOP OF COVER
TOP OF FINAL COVER
TOP OF LINER
TOE OF SLOPE
TOP SLOPE
TEMPORARY
TYPICAL
VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE
VERTICAL
VERY LOW DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
WEST
WITH
YARD
SYMBOLS
SECTION DETAIL INDICATORS
DRAWING ON WHICH SECTION IS CUT:
I >—I
SECTION NUMBER
•SHEET NUMBER ON WHICH
SECTION IS DRAWN
DRAWING ON WHICH SECTION APPEARS:
SECTION NUMBER
SECTION
4. SHEET NUMBER ON WHICH
SECTION IS DRAWN
DRAWING ON WHICH DETAll IS INDICATED:
-DETAIL NUMBER
, DETAIL NAME
•SHEET NUMSER ON WHICH
DETAIL IS DRAWN
DRAWING ON WHICH DETAIL APPEARS:
DETAIL NUMBER -
DETAIL
SCALE
-^. SHEET NUMBER ON WHICH
CURVE WITH HORIZONTAL CONTROL:
CURVE RADIUS CALLOUT
\CL BERM PVI
STA 18+50.25
N 14995.00
E 12885.00
ELEV = 650.00
VERTICAL CONTROL DESIGNATION
\
BEGINNING OR ENDING CURVE NODE
CURVE NUMBER CALLOUT
8 %
3
_____iJ.—— '^
N 14995.00
/E 12885.00
V
GRADE
SLOPE DESIGNATION (HORIZONTAL
SLOPE DESIGNATION
COORDINATE
WATER SURFACE (PROFILE)
VERTICAL)
430 SPOT ELEVATION, FEET
KR
HDP EnfinMring, Inc.
3995 S 700 E
Suite 100
Salt Lak« City. UT B4107-2594
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMSER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
GENERAL NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS &c SYMBOLS
N/A
SHEET
C2 OF 15
LEGEND
EXISTING
CONTOURS
CELL FOOTPRINT
BOUNDARY (APPROX.)
PROPOSED LEACHATE
DRAIN UNE
UTTER CONTROL
FENCE LOCATION
NOTES:
, TOPOGRAPHIC DATA IS PROVIDED FROM OLYMPUS
I AERIALS, INC., NOVEMBER U, 2008. EXISTING
CONTOURS IN CEU- 2, STAGE 1 AREA WLL VARY
FROM THOSE SHOWN DUE TO ONGOING
EXCAVATION SINCE THE AERIAL MAPPING WAS
COMPLETED.
BENCHMARKS
BM
J
4
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
N
8492.798
7813.839
9992.856
10095.881
4670.902
4756.794
8118.956
7321.380
7334.971
E
5605.987
7697.793
3357.395
8608.668
8792.512
3567.638
1185.133
1456.147
3456.716
ELEVATION
4711.11
4645.33
4757.29
4623.28
4610.47
4737.42
4806.22
4786.62
4763.08
N
®
150 300
SCALE IN FEET
KR
HDR Ehginaaring, Inc.
3995 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Satt Lah* Qty. UT 84107-2504
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBEF
S. WOMACK
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
EXISTING CONTOURS & SITE PLAN
00C-03.DWG SHEET
C3 OF 15
LEGEND
I
• .)
y
-• V^ : .• ..
.•• r.-^-,.v/>^
• --•, •••><--
- ... • ,...j A •' '.
• A^^^''^ ;>^-^:
/y .A-y
/ / ^-^
/ / .-^ / / / .--1 s '
_'•^ 4 / y
V. /
CELL FOOTPRINT
BOUNDARY (APPROX.)
LEACHATE DRAIN UNE
UTTER CONTROL
FENCE LOCATION
2. TOPOGRAPHIC DATA IS PROVIDED FROM OLYMPUS AERIALS,
INC., NOVEMBER 14, 2008. OWNER WILL PREPARE
SUBGRADE FOR EXPANSION UNER. CONTRACTOR WILL BE
^, RESPONSIBLE TO REMOVE ALL ANGULAR AND ROUNDED
1 STONES TO MEET GEOTECHNICAL SPECIRCATIONS.
SCALE IN FEET
KR
HDR Enginaaring, inc.
3995 S 700 e
Suita 100
SaK Loha CHy, Ul 84107-2594
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
CELL 2 STAGE 2 EXCAVATION PLAN
00C-04.DWG SHEET
04 OF 15
.y
'\~~'
.i
J j
'' •
--. y
. \--- My^' J- ^.^•^
• ,A y yy-yy
. • ^yy'''. yA-y' ^^'•'^
ry-- y "•y' ' . ,-'
/y ,-.y y- .yyy:.y.y
..cy .y,y yy-'-yy^
- //x-:./-^- y
I. A" •••'yy.";y'- r'
\ : / • -y -'•> - \^ r^^ - . .
yyy y
.1. --••
y-y
"•^•o-.
\ ,\.\
^.A: \. ••\.
! • • V . \.
\ ']••)•
yfi
.•• 7.. . r
/ •/,//•
UESEMa
/
\,^y
^ V-'"«
,/.
KR
HOR En»?5^'
39«5^ 700 E
|5'^Ci1,.>«».W7-«»'
ARCHITECT
"^HANICW-
"gXCTRICAL
"iTRU^^L^ „w
—EiSG^E^SiEL
rp-ROJECTNUMSBli^
„0T FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PUN
\
•: i
! i
EXISTING CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS
LEACHATE DRAIN UNE
CELL 2 STAGE 2
WASTE FILL CONTOURS
—j flLENAME OOC-05^ 1SHEET
C5 OF 151
SCALE
nESCRIPTIO" _
N
LEGEND
- 4640 -
- 4S40 -
EXISTING CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS
LEACHATE DRAIN UNE
m
100 200
SCALE IN FEET
PROJECT MANAGER
KR
HDR Enjinnring, Inc.
3995 S 700 E
SuiU 100
Sort Lak« aty. UT 84107-2594
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT NUMBER
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
FINAL COVER PLAN
r 2" 00C-06.DWG SHEET
06 OF 15
2' PROTECTIVE-
SOIL COVER
(SEE NOTE
UPPER GEOTEXTILE
(TYPE 2 ON BOTTOM)
(TYPE 1 ON SIDES)
TEXTURED 60 MIL
HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
2' PROTECTIVE SOIL COVER
UPPER GEOTEXTILE
HIGH STRENGTH WOVEN
(TYPE 1)
TEXTURED
60 MIL HDPE
GEOMEMBRANE
JDPE UNER LIMIT
2' 3' 10'
COMPACTED NATIVE SOIL
8'
GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER
LOWER GEOTEXTILE
(TYPE 2)
-SUBGRADE
TYPICAL LANDFILL LINER DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
LOWER GEOTEXTILE
(TYPE 2)
GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER
INTERMEDIATE COVER
WASTE
'ipiH UPPER GEOTEXTILE
ANCHOR TRENCH
COMPACTED BACKFILL-
(TYPE 2 GEOTEXTILE/
GCL/HDPE)
NOTE:
. AREA BETWEEN TOP OF EXCAVATION
AND BACK OF ANCHOR TRENCH TO BE
GRADED SMOOTH AND EVEN PRIOR TO
PLACING UPPER GEOTEXTILE. REMOVE
ANGULAR STONES.
LINER SYSTEM ANCHOR TRENCH
NOT TO SCALE
TEXTURED 60 MIL
HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
TEXTURED 60 MIL
HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
INTERMEDIATE COVER •
NEW LEACHATE
^^ I COLLECTION TRENCH
UPPER GEOTEXTILE
(TYPE 1)
2' PROTECTIVE-
SOIL COVER
TYPE 1 GEOTEXTILE
5'
%w-^''^'-i'^i'^}0m'm^0'/s
2' MIN. PROTECTIVE
SOIL COVER
TYPE 2 GEOTEXTILE
(OVERLAP TYPE 1
GEOTEXTILE AND
SEW TOGETHER)
-TEXTURED 60 MIL
HDPE GEOMEMBRANE
GEOSYNTHETIC
CLAY LINER
LOWER GEOTEXTILE
(TYPE 2)
STAGE 2 EASTERN LINER TERMINATION
NOT TO SCALE
LINER AT SLOPE TRANSITION
NOT TO SCALE
NOTE: THICKNESS MEASURED
PERPENDICULAR TO
EXCAVATION SURFACE.
LOWER GEOTEXTILE
STAGE 1/STAGE 2 LINER CONNECTION
NOT TO SCALE
NOTES:
1. TEMPORARY STORMWATER INTERCEPTOR
BERM TO BE PLACED IN FRONT OF WORKING
AREA TO DIVERT STORMWATER AWAY FROM
ACTIVE FACE. OWNER WILL RELOCATE AS NEEDED.
2. STAGE 2 GEOMEMBRANE TO BE WELDED TO
STAGE 1. FUTURE GEOSYNTHETIC COMPONENTS
TO BE OVERLAPPED AND SECURED.
3. TYPE I GEOTEXTILE IS REINFORCED AND REQUIRED
ON SIDE SLOPES ONLY, ABOVE HDPE LINER. TYPE" 2
GEOTEXTILE IS NON-REINFORCED (NON-WOVEN) AND
IS TO BE USED ABOVE HDPE LINER ON BOTTOM AND
BETWEEN SUBGRADE AND GCL. A SAND CUSHION MAY
BE USED IN LIEU OF THE LOWER TYPE 2 GEOTEXTILE
WITH PRIOR APPROVAL OF ENGINEER AND OWNER.
4. SEE SPECIFICATION 02240 FOR PROTECTIVE
COVER MATERIAL REOUIREMENTS.
GEOTEXTILE SCHEDULE
LOCATION
ALL
LOWER
GEOTEXTILE
UPPER
GEOTEXTILE
ON
SIDESLOPES
UPPER
GEOTEXTILE
ON BOnOM
(FLOOR)
TYPE
AU-
2
1
2
COMMENTS
REMOVE ALL ANGULAR
STONES GREATER THAN
Q5INCHES
USE 16 OZ/SY NON-
WOVEN IF ROUNDED
STONES GREATER THAN
2 5 INCHES ARE
REMOVED. USE 23OZ/SY
NON-WOVENIFONLY
ROUNDED STONES
GREATER THAN 41NCHES
ARE REMOVED. NO
HORIZONTAL SEAMS ON
SIDESLOPES.
REINFORCED GEOTEXULE.
NO HORIZONTAL SEAMS
ON SIDESLOPES.
USE 12 OZ/SY NON-
WOVEN BENEATH DUNE
SAND (PROTECTIVE SOIL
COVER)
KK
HDR Cnginvaring, Inc.
3995 S 700 E
SuH* 100
Sou Lok« City. UT a+107-2594
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOUD WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
LINER DETAILS
00C-07.DWG
N/A
SHEET
07 OF 15
4740
4730
4720
4710
4690
\
V^
•-•V ^
^
k=
:ONN
ixisT
y
J^
:CT T
+53"
•IG Ih
-—-
o_uja
iaSt
V IN
^S
—^
ft i't*
^HSP
466C
^^^^^^^1%^/^(Vi;^-oXuNE'"""*"".• '' /^ •, :.
-
/
1
8-.
.53
^
>-
^ *T
=^
/
2^
N
u^
LINEF
LEAC
>
y
GRA
lATE
* {
V
\
\
9i
SO.OI
3DH:
^^a
?t
ki
:
)E AT
.INE
^Fir
LE
\
\
/
:?r
53|
i s"
•|9
r
iJNH
INV
INV
4..
AL C
CHAl
>i
\
1')
/
/ft
mp
\,
\
4S
N-4!
)UT=
• -y
VER
UN
1 I
if
" ~^
. ™
=tFNn
57A:
NV (
iTS4
SB.Ot
668.
<r
AT
."IT
/
|/
i•^5a
IIT='
ION
)0
AT Dl
u-
84
690.f
AIN
—M
.0:0
3UAL
2
f^
INE
£T
NV C
pA¥-
•UNE
niFi
.' 11
1IM=.
UT-i
) PIP
N (Hi
*02.:
697.S
695.!
^..^
E
LINE
t
L
T ,
?
\
—
! GR
tr
^
i;
in
-*-
n
^
DE /^
?»
! II
?s
/ /
1
IV
• /
•
/
/
/
\
b\
f"
\
\
f
f
1.
1
\_
%•
\
y
r-FiN
LE/
I
^
M C(
CHAT
gS
?l
V
,-•
VFR
LIN
^^
=FRF
!TA
NV 1
AT
— ^
IRATT
!i«
"
^
- -
JiiEN
2.00
^
-
\ flA
-
~
-
0-1-00 1 -l-OC 2-1-00 4-fOO 5-fOO 6-fOO 7-f-OO S+00 9-1-00 10-1-00 1U00 12•^00 13-1-00 14-fOO
KR
HDR Englnoaring, Inc.
3995 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Salt Lak« Cify. UT 84107-2594
PROJECT MA^4AGER
PROJECT NUMBER
CONSTRUCTION NOTES
INSTALL CLEANOLIT PER DETAIL
INSTALL 14" SDR-17 X 10' SDR-17 DUAL
CONTAINED PIPE PER DETAIL
(D
®
0
(D
(z>
CONNECT 2' RETURN UNE TO 14" SDR-17
X 10" SDR-17 DUAL-CONTAINED PIPE IN
LEACHATE SUMP ACCESS STRUCTURE PER
DETAILS ,
INSTALL PARALLEL 18" DIA SOUD WALL
LEACHATE SUMP COLLECTION RISER PIPE
AND 8" DIA. SOUD CLEANOUT RISER PIPE
PER DETAIL/^
INSTALL 8" DIA. PERFORATED LEACHATE
COLLECTION HPE PER DETAILS
INSTALL CONNECTION FOR OUAL-CONTAINED
PIPE AND PERFORATED PIPE WITTH
PERFORATED END CAP PER DETAIL/
CONNECT PROPOSED PERFORATED LEACHATE
COaECTION PIPE TO EXISTING STAGE 1
LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE.
NOTE:
NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF
THIS SUBMITTAL
N
®
SCALE IN FEET
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM
PLAN AND PROFILE
ooc-oe.DWG
H: r'=120' V: r=12'
SHEET
C8 OF 15
8 0Z.CEOTEXT1LE
(1' MIN, SEWN OVERLAP)
DRAINAGE
AGGREGATE
(1x10-2 CM/SEC)
2' PROTECTIVE SOIL COVER
(SEE GENERAL NOTE 3)
SMOOTH 60 MIL HDPE
GEOMEMBRANE
8" DIA. PERFORATED
LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE (^
NOT TO SCALE
LEACHATE COLLECTION TTJENCH nr\
1--6-
PERMISSIBLE
CONSTRUCTION
JOINT
FINISH
GRADE
NOT TO SCALE
- #4 O 10" e.w.
LEACHATE SUMP ACCESS ^_^
STRUCTURE- SECTION A^
TYPICAL CORNER
lEINFORCINC rT\
NOT TO SCALE
2" DIA. ELECTRICAL-
CONDUIT ACCESS
PREFABRICATED L_i_N
HDPE END CAP do
18" DIA. LEACHA
SUMP COLLECTION
RISER PIPE (HDPE)
3
NOTCH FOR
SUMP PUMP
DISCHARGE
LINE
NOTCH DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
-A
l'-6"^
MIN."
T -Ii
-T 1 r '
18 DIA. SUMP RISER PIPE
NOT TO SCALE
ALL LAP SPLICES FOR #4 BAR
TYPICAL CORNER REINFORCING
NOT TO SCALE
nONCRFTF NOTTS:
1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL HAVE 4000PSI COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH O 28 DAYS.
NORMAL WIGHT.
2. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE "BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENT
FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE" ACI-3ie LATEST EDITION.
3. REINFORCING BARS SHALL CONFORM TO SPECIFICATIONS FOR "DEFORMED
BiaET-STEEL FOR CONCRETE REINFORCEMENr WITH 60Ka YIELD STRENGTH:
ASTM A615 GRADE 60.
4. REINFORCING BARS TO BE WELDED SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT
OF ASTM A706 GRADE 60.
5. CC^R ON ALL REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS, UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED:
i CONCRETE PLACED AGAINST GROUND 3 IN
II EXPOSED FORMED SURFACES
A. (J AND SMALLER 1.5 IN
B. #6 AND LARGER 2 IN
6. ALL EXPOSED CORNERS SHAa HA\t 1 IN CHAMFER. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED,
7. SAWED GROOVES SHOULD BE MADE MTHIN APPROXIMATELY 4 TO 12 HOURS OF
SLAB OR PAVEMENT RNISHING. IF THIS IS NOT PRACTICABLE. USE PREMOLDED
STRIPS.
8. AS AN ALTERNATIVE, A PRECAST CONCRETE BOX MAY BE USED.
THE PRECAST BOX SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE
STRENGTH OF 5000 PSI O 28 DAYS.
GENERAL NOTES:
1. LEACHATE RETURN UNE IS TO AaOW
ANY SPILLAGE OR RAINWATER ACCUMULATION
IN SUMP ACCESS STRUCTURE TO RETURN TO
LANDFILL SUMP FOR REMOVAL GROUT BOTTOM
OF STRUCTURE TO VALVE AFTER INSTALLATION.
IF NECESSARY,
2. GROUT BOTTOM TO DRAIN TO RETURN UNE.
3. SEE SPECIFICATION SECTION 02240 FOR PROTECTIVE
SOIL COVER REQUIREMENTS.
LEACHATE SUMP ACCESS _^
STT^UCTURE- PLAN /8\
NOT TO SCALE
6" DIA. NOMINAL EXTRA
STRONG STEEL (YIELD
Fy-36 KSI) PIPE BOLLARD
W/CONCRETE HLL, PLACE
3-0" DEEP IN r-6" DIA,
CONCRETE BASE,
8" DIA, LEACHATE
COLLECTION PIPE
CLEANOUT RISER
(HDPE) PREFABRICATED
HDPE END CAP
|4 O 10" E,W,
PUMP WIRING J-BOX
H O 10" |l'-6"
LEACHATE SUMP
ACCESS STRUCTURE
WAU.-OR RPE SADDLE
TYPICAL BOLLARD
NOT TO SCALE
8" DIAMETER CLEANOUT RISER PIPE END CAP
NOT TO SCALE
NOT TO SCALE
KR
HDR Engin«arin9, Inc,
3995 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Solt Laki Crty, UT 84107-2594
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PVAH
LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM DETAILS
N/A
SHEET
C9 OF 15
SUMP COLLECTION PIPE PROPOSED 10" LEACHATE
DRAIN UNE
KR
HDR Engintaritig, Inc,
3995 S 700 E
Su-da 100
Salt Lllkt City. UT 84107-259*
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOUD WASTE DISTRICT
BAWIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM DETAILS
OOC-10,DWG
N/A CIO OF 15
/
/
/
/
1
-.-.J
J
1
L
-A \
4
• V ^ y
/
\
\
\
1 1
\
/
..... .lr
1
\
\
1
I
\
\
\
^
\
1
1^
i
....
^
H^
y'
/
"~~—
J'L -J
EX
A;
v
\
\
—
STING SROUND
OF ll|-14-08
\ i
-y-""
INILKIM COVER FOR CELL
STAGES 1 AND 2•
i
]_____
—
SURFAC '--I'
, -
1
i
" ~A
1
•-
;
1
EXIST'
FOR
NG UNE
;EU. 2
1\
! \
""1 1
1
R GRAD
STAGE •
'-—
\
i
^A ^_;^;_^
i
T-
~^ ---
,-\- -----
S
•X
T
"
\
i
1
V,
.
_ ^
--
1
•-*
•^
1
1
1
-^
"
-.
\
1
"^---^
•
"^
\
\
\
I
1
1 '!
! J
PROPqSEli UNER GRADE
FOR Sul 2 STAGE 2 -
____ J,B7%„ r^
A
!
i
1
i
^
\
\
/
6
y
/
—
"^ N
H
r
^,
_/ 'l
/
/
• V
V
\
y
/
i
'\
i
i
•\
';
!
8-^00 9-fOO 10-FOO 11+00 12-fOO 13+00 14+00 15+00
CROSS SECTION A
KR
HDR EnginMnng. inc.
3905 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Salt Lokt aty. UT 84107-2594
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW UNDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
NOTES
1, REFER TO SHEET C4 FOR UNER GRADING
PLAN,
2, REFER TO SHEET C5 FOR INTERIM FINAL
COVER GRADING PLAN,
3, REFER TO SHEET C6 FOR HNAL COVER
GRADING PLAN,
4, INTERIM COVER IS FOR STAGES 1 AND 2,
ADOmONAL COVER WILL BE PLACED DURING
CELL 2 FUTURE EXPANSION. AFTER BERM IS
REMOVED,
CELL 2 STAGE 2
TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
H: r=80' V: r=8'
SHEET
Cll OF 15
' 1
4780
4770
4760
4750
4740
4730
4720
4710
4700
4680
4670
4660
4650
0+
2
1
r
^
\
i
1
!
[
:
'
y
1
00 1 +00
KR
HOR CngiriMring, Inc.
3985 S 700 E
SuH* 100
SaK. Loka aty, \JT M107-25e4
_J ISSUE
1
4
r V
/
/
/
A-s
V
\
...\
/
1
^w
V
\
\
\..
I.L
-
3
1
h- 1
/
/
/
\
V
V \
1 H \
2+00 3+
DATE
.-•
-. —'
i
V 1
•^
•••""""•\Nr
\
\
^
00
\ V
1
.C.ELL...2
1
\
^
—
-^
...QNAL. COVER -
--
INTEfllM COV
„. .„.-. STAS.ES.J. Ai
\
--^
EXISTIN
FOR CE;
5 UNER
tLJ2. ST
,
GRADE
^GE 1 -
iv
^-
ER FOR
l*[)_2.._
4
••••
^
1
__1
CELL 2
;
y
;
XISTINGI GROUN
\S OF i;i-14-{
i
i
^
IV-^
^ ^
8
URFA
1
. —-
1
i
j
!
i
-^
\
\
CEJ
\
\
\
\
\.
"\
^ -
^
!
V
^
i
\
\
—
/
/
/
H
r V
~^-^
5
>^
1 ^
^
"~~"
-"^
1
^
i 1
i
i
t
1
~
-^
i
^4
1
'•>
PROPOSED LINER GRACE
FOR CELL 2 SfAGE 2 —j
--:^
t
1
^
1
1
\
\
\
\
6
\
••"•\4'-f " "
\ If V
\
•" T
i /
/
r^
r
--
/ /
^ /
1
1
I
\
\
1 j
1
j
J i —XT
\
j i
4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00 9+00 10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00
CROSS SECTION Al
DESCRIPTION
PROJECT MANAGER
ARCHITECT
CIVIL
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
DESIGNED
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NUMBER
T. WARNER
S. WOMACK
C. MCCARTY
C. MCCARTY
96439
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
_
i
j
j
i
15+00
4780
4770
4760
4750
4740
4730
4720
4710
4700
4680
4670
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT .
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% DRAniNC PI AN
7 1 8
NOTES
1. REFER TO SHEET C4 FOR UNER GRADING
PLAN.
2. REFER TO SHEET C5 FOR INTERIM FINAL
COVER GRADING PLAN,
3, REFER TO SHEET C6 FOR FINAL COVER
GRADING PLAN,
4, INTERIM COVER IS FOR STAGES 1 AND 2,
ADDITIONAL COVER WILL BE PLACED DURING
CELL 2 FimjRE EXPANSION. AFTER BERM IS
REMOVED.
CELL 2 STAGE 2
TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
0 1" 2" RLENAWE
SCALE
00C-13,DWG
H: 1"=80' V: r=8'
SHEET
C120F 15
1
^^
\
1
...
\
0+00 1 +
I
00
•-
2+
r
/
y
\
2
1
.J\
7
\
^
\.
\ "li
j
i
1
!
1
1
1 1
i
1
00 3+
1
^
\
H \
^
1
00
KR
3935 S 700 E
Suit* too
Salt Lok» City. UT S+107-2594
—
4+
\\
\
00
ISSUE
1
i
\
....\„-
v;:
1
h""" • "
3
1
1
•~~.^.-..
^
1
1 E)ilSTlNG
i A$ OF 11
;
i 1
i \ " '
i ! j i
5+00 6+
DATE
00 7+
CR
IROUND
-14-08
./"
PROF
FOR
00
OS
A
j
~^ CELL 2 FINAL COV :R -T. i
\1 •^ -^ \1
X
SURFAC
.^
OSED L
CELL 2
8+
s
\
\
"•
\,
\
\ 10'
V,
H
\ !
\
r V
\
\
INTERIM CfjVER F()R CELL
STAGES 11 AND 2 1
E
"A
^ ^
NER GRiAOE
STAGE 2 —y^
00
SE
DESCRIPTION
— -f
-^^^.^i
1
i
i
i
\ \
9+00
CTION
PROJECT MANAGER
ARCHITECT
CML
MECHANICAL
ELECTRICAL
STRUCTURAL
DESIGNED
DRAWN BY
PROJECT NUMBER
10H
B
-^
\
2
1
^^'--^
-00
••-,
\
\
^
J
T, WARNER
S, WOMACK
C. MCCARTY
C. MCCARTY
96439
H
...
1
\
\
\
-••
—
^^i
" A _i __
\
V
4'
\ u
hOO
\
•-^
5
i 1
1 ;
S- i
v:
\
r
\
'^
~«^ 1 I ~"
V
^
\
\
\ V^
\
1 \
i 1
i
12+00
5s
1
—,
1
1
i
1
1
BEFM BETW
ANO STAGE
REMOVED B
-^
;EN STAGES 1-
3-4 TO BE
EFORE WASTE IS
PIA;ED IN"STAGES"
1
j
4- ^
\,
\
\
1
/
y
yAJilD
i I ,A /
j
FUTURE
~' -4- -..,
i
i
13+00 14-i-OO
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
/
6 1
i
1
i
*-
'.
*•;• N
/
/••"
/
/ i
\- M •
' H
J
h •• - 4760 p
2
3
G
4750
4
A
C
j
•~^
^-••^-
i
i
CELL 2' UNER-
r
15+00
~'~
\.. „...
\
16+00
\
^1
4650
17+00
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
3n% GRADINf; PI AN
7 1 8
NOTES
REFER TO SHEET C4 FOR LINER GRADING
LAN,
, REFER TO SHEET C5 FOR INTERIM HNAL
OVER GRADING PLAN,
, REFER TO SHEET C6 FOR FINAL COVER
RADING PLAN,
, INTERIM COVER IS FOR STAGES 1 AND 2,
DomONAi. COVER WILL BE PLACED DURING
ELL 2 FUTURE EXPANSION. AFTER BERM IS
EMOVED,
CELL 2 STAGE 2
TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
0 1" 2" RLENAME
SCALE
00C-t4.DWG
H: r=B0' V: r=8'
SHEET
313 OF 15
4652
fgSO—-
V \
\ \
HJR
HW EnglnMfing, Inc,
3995 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Salt LotM City, UT S4107-2S04
\
\
EXISTING LEACHATE POND-,
LEGEND
EXISTING
CONTOURS
PROPOSED CONTOURS
CELL FOOTPRINT
BOUNDARY (APPROX,)
LEACHATE DRAIN UNE
CONSTRUCnON NOTES
0 INSTALL 10" PVC BEND WITH 10" PVC
CLEANOUT PER DETAIL /'^^N
(2) 1NSTN.L LEACHATE POND PER DETAIL
(?) PIPE PENETRATION PER DETAIL m
NOTE:
DETAIL / > \ NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF
I THIS SUBMnTAL
N
®
30 60
SCALE IN FEET
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW UNDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
LEACHATE POND GRADING PU\N
SHEET
C140F 15
FOUNDATION
SEE SPECIFICATIONS
FOR REQUIREMENTS
UNPAVED AREA
PIPE SPRINGLINE
NOTES:
1. Bc-OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF PIPE,
2, NOT APPUCABLE TO TRENCH SECTIONS WITH NORMAL
GROUNDWATER LEVELS ABOVE THE PIPE CROWN,
3, SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR MATERIAL AND COMPACTION
REOUIREMENTS,
PIPE TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION
NOT TO SCALE
KR
HOR EnginMring. Inc.
3995 S 700 E
Suit* 100
Salt Ink. City, UT 84107-2594
8" HDPE PIPE FOR
LEAK DETECTION
60 MIL HDPE UNER
SIDESLOPES)
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
OR ENGINEERED FILL-
(95X STD. PROCTOR) ^8" PERFORATED
HDPE PIPE
_16 OZ/SY NON-WOVEN
GEOTEXTILE
PROPOSED LEACHATE POND TYPICAL SECTION f 2
NOT TO SCALE Cl
PROJECT MANAGER
PROJECT NUMBER
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW UNDFILL
CELL 2 STAGE 2
30% GRADING PLAN
LEACHATE POND DETAILS
00C-11,DWG
N/A C15 OF 15
APPENDIX L – ANNUAL TITLE V COMPLIANCE REPORTS

NORTHERN UTAH
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE AGENCY
1997 East 3500 North | Layton, Utah 84040

April 12, 2023

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region VIII
Office of Enforcement, Compliance, and
Environmental Justice
(Mail Code 8ENF)
1595 Wynkoop Street
Denver, CO 80202-1129

Dear Sir or Madam:

Please find attached the annual compliance certification for Bayview Landfill, Title
V Operating Permit No. 4900230004. This report covers the period of
April 1, 2022, through March 31, 2023. This certification is being submitted as
required by Section I.L of our Title V Operating Permit and is also being submitted
in duplicate to the Utah Division of Air Quality.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this report.

Sincerely,

NORTHERN UTAH ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE AGENCY

Mark Lamoreaux
General Manager, Bayview Landfill

cc. Kleinfelder

Bayview Landfill
Location:
6800 Utah Hwy 68
Elberta, Utah 84626
Mailing:
1997 East 3500 North
Layton, Utah, 84040
[phone]

North Pointe
Solid Waste
Special Service District
2000 West 200 South
Lindon, Utah 84042
[phone]
utahcountygarbage.org

South Utah Valley
Solid Waste District
P.O. Box 507
Springville, Utah 84663
[phone]
suvswd.org

Trans-Jordan Cities
P.O. Box 95610
South Jordan, Utah 84095
[phone]
transjordan.org

Wasatch Integrated
Waste Management
District
1997 East 3500 North
Layton, Utah 84040
[phone]
wasatchintegrated.org

20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 1 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
1997 East 3500 North
Layton, Utah 84040

TO: Office of Enforcement, Compliance, and Environmental Justice, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
Director, Utah Division of Air Quality

FROM: Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency – Bayview Landfill

RE: Annual Compliance Certification, Title V Operating Permit #4900230004

DATE: April 11, 2023

In accordance with Operating Permit provision I.L and
Utah Administrative Code (UAC) R307-415-6c(5), the following compliance certification is submitted.

This certification covers operations from: 04/01/2022 to 03/31/2023.

Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
I.B
Was the source operated in
compliance with the operating
permit?
The landfill was operated in
compliance with the operating
permit.
Continuous X
I.C.3
Did the permittee furnish
information requested by the
Director?
Yes, reports, notifications, and
other required submissions
were submitted to the Director
of UDAQ.
Continuous X

20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 2 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
I.D.2
Did the permittee submit
application for renewal of this
permit on or before the date
shown under "Enforceable
Dates and Timelines" at the
front of the permit
(March 17, 2025)?
The last permit renewal
application was submitted to
UDAQ on March 17, 2020
resulting in an updated permit
issued on September 17,
2020. The next permit renewal
application will be submitted
before the due date.
Continuous X

I.G.1 Did the permittee pay the
annual emission fee?
Yes, the annual emission fee
was paid. Continuous X
Emissions Inventory Fees
of $6,586.14 were paid to
the UDAQ in November
2022.
I.G.2
Was the fee paid by the
deadline specified in the
permit condition?
Yes, the annual emission fee
was paid on time. Continuous X

I.K
Were all application forms,
reports and certifications
submitted pursuant to the
permit properly certified by a
responsible official?
Yes, the application forms,
reports, and certifications have
been signed by a responsible
official of NUERA.
Continuous X

I.L.1
Did the permittee submit this
compliance certification
complete & on time?
Yes, the annual compliance
certification will be mailed to
EPA Region VIII and UDAQ
prior to April 15, 2023.
Continuous X

I.L.2
Did the permittee also send all
compliance certifications to
EPA?
Yes, the previous annual
compliance certification was
sent to EPA Region VIII before
April 15, 2022.
Continuous X

I.S.1.a
Did the permittee properly
retain all records required by
the permit?
Yes, the records required by
the permit are retained at
Bayview Landfill.
Continuous X

20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 3 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
I.S.1.b
Did the permittee include all
applicable information in
records of monitoring required
by the permit?
Yes, Bayview Landfill included
all applicable information in
monitoring records required by
the permit.
Continuous X

I.S.2.a
Did the permittee submit
monitoring reports every six
months, or more frequently if
specified in Section II, and
were all instances of deviation
from permit requirements
clearly identified in the
monitoring reports?
Submittal of semi-annual
monitoring report Continuous X
A semiannual monitoring
report was submitted to
UDAQ on October 28,
2022 for the monitoring
period of 4/1/2022 through
9/30/2022. A second
semiannual report for the
monitoring period of
10/1/2022 through
3/31/2023 will be
submitted to UDAQ by
April 30, 2023.
I.S.2.b
Were all reports submitted
pursuant to Provision I.S.2.a
properly certified by a
responsible official?
Yes, the reports have been
signed by a responsible official
of NUERA.
Continuous X

I.S.2.c
Did the permittee promptly
notify the Director of all
deviations from permit
requirements?
No deviations occurred during
this reporting period. Continuous X

I.U
Did the permittee submit the
inventory required by R307-
150 in accordance with the
requirements of that rule?
An emissions inventory for
reporting year 2020 was
submitted to UDAQ in April
2021.
Continuous X
Emissions inventories are
required every three
years.

20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 4 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
II.B.1.a
Visible emissions caused by
fugitive dust shall not exceed
10% at the property
boundary, and 20% onsite
and control measures in the
most recently approved
fugitive dust control plan are
being taken. [Authority
granted under R307-309-3(1);
condition originated in R307-
309-5]
All monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements
have been completed in
accordance with II.B.1.a.1,
II.B.1.a.2, and II.B.1.a.3.
Continuous X
Bayview Landfill adheres
to the most recently
approved fugitive dust
control plan and records
are maintained as
described in Provision
I.S.1 of the permit.
II.B.1.b
Visible emissions shall be no
greater than 20 percent
opacity. [Authority granted
under R307-201-3(2);
condition originated in
R307-201]
Visual opacity surveys of each
affected emission unit are
performed on a quarterly basis
by an individual trained on the
observation procedures of 40
CFR 60, Appendix A, Method
9, and in accordance with 58
FR 61640 Method 203C for
fugitive emission sources. All
records are maintained as
described in Provision I.S.1 of
the permit.

The monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements
have been completed in
accordance with II.B.1.b.1,
II.B.1.b.2, and II.B.1.b.3.
Continuous X
Opacity observation forms
are kept on-file at the
source location, as
specified by the Operating
Permit.

20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 5 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is
compliance
continuous
or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and
all deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
II.B.1.c
Records shall be
maintained of the material
(salt, crushed slag, or
sand) applied to the roads
by the permitted source.
[Authority granted under
R307-307; condition
originated in R307-307]
The monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements have been
completed in accordance with
II.B.1.c.1, II.B.1.c.2, and II.B.1.c.3.
Continuous X
The following records are
maintained by Bayview
Landfill:
For Salt - the quantity
applied, the percent by
weight of insoluble solids
in the salt, and the
percentage of the material
that is sodium chloride
(NaCl).
For Sand or Crushed Slag
- the quantity applied and
the percent by weight of
fine material which
passes the number 200
sieve in a standard
gradation analysis.
(Origin: R307-307)
II.B.2.a
(a) The permittee shall
calculate a non-methane
organic compounds
(NMOC) emission rate for
the landfill using the
procedures specified in
monitoring. The NMOC
emission rate shall be
recalculated annually,
except as provided in
paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
reporting.
The monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements have been
completed in accordance with
II.B.2.a.1, II.B.2.a.2, and II.B.2.a.3.
The landfill successfully completed
Tier 2 monitoring on November 16 -
18, 2020 under II.B.2.a.1.(c).
Continuous X
NUERA (on April 20,
2021) submitted an
annual NMOC emissions
estimate (greater than 50
megagrams/ year) for
calendar year 2020.

20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 6 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is
compliance
continuous
or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
II.B.2.b
The permittee shall meet
one of the following
requirements for all
asbestos disposal
operations at the landfill:
(a) there shall be no visible
emissions to the outside air
from any active waste
disposal site where
asbestos-containing waste
material has been
deposited,
(b) at the end of each
operating day, or at least
once every 24-hour period
while the site is in
continuous operation, the
asbestos-containing waste
material that has been
deposited at the site during
the operating day or
previous 24-hour period
shall
(1) be covered with at least
15 centimeters (6 inches)
of compacted non-
asbestos-containing
material, or

The operations, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements have been completed
in accordance with II.B.2.b, including
II.B.2.b.1, II.B.2.b.2, and II.B.2.b.3.
Continuous X
Although permitted to
receive asbestos-
containing materials
(ACM), Bayview Landfill
has not received ACM
waste for disposal.
20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 7 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is
compliance
continuous
or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this
permit provision. In Out
II.B.2.b
(2) be covered with a
resinous or petroleum-
based dust suppression
agent that effectively binds
dust and controls wind
erosion. Such an agent
shall be used in the
manner and frequency
recommended for the
particular dust by the dust
suppression agent
manufacturer to achieve
and maintain dust control.
Other equally effective dust
suppression agents may be
used upon prior approval
by the Director. For
purposes of this paragraph,
any used, spent, or other
waste oil is not considered
a dust suppression agent.
(c) use an alternative
emissions control method
that has received prior
written approval by the
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
(USEPA) according to the
procedures described in 40
CFR 61.149(c)(2).
[Authority granted under 40
CFR 61.154; condition
originated in 40 CFR
61.154]
(cont’d) (cont’d)

20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 8 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is
compliance
continuous
or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this permit
provision. In Out
II.B.2.c
Unless a natural barrier
adequately deters access by
the general public, the
permittee shall comply with
one of the following:
(a) the fencing and warning
sign requirements of 40
CFR 61.154 (b), or
(b) at the end of each
operating day, or at least
once every 24-hour period
while the site is in
continuous operation, the
asbestos-containing waste
material that has been
deposited at the site during
the operating day or
previous 24-hour period
shall be covered with at
least 15 centimeters (6
inches) of compacted non-
asbestos-containing
material. [Authority granted
under 40 CFR 61.154;
condition originated in 40
CFR 61.154]
The operations, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements have been completed
in accordance with II.B.2.c,
including II.B.2.c.1, II.B.2.c.2, and
II.B.2.c.3.
Continuous X

Bayview Landfill has not
received ACM for disposal.

20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 9 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this permit
provision. In Out
II.B.2.d
The permittee shall maintain
waste shipment records of
all asbestos-containing
waste material received. In
addition to routine shipment-
tracking information, the
waste shipment records
shall document instances of
improperly enclosed or
uncovered waste, or any
asbestos-containing waste
material not sealed in leak-
tight containers. [Authority
granted under 40 CFR
61.154 (e); condition
originated in 40 CFR
61.154]
Operations, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements have been
completed in accordance with
II.B.2.d, including II.B.2.d.1,
II.B.2.d.2, and II.B.2.d.3.
Continuous X

Records are maintained by
Bayview Landfill, as
described in Provision I.S.1
of the permit. (Origin 40
CFR 61.154(e)). Bayview
Landfill has not received
ACM for disposal.
II.B.2.e
The permittee shall
maintain, until closure,
records of the location,
depth and area, and quantity
in cubic meters (cubic yards)
of asbestos-containing
waste material within the
disposal site on a map or
diagram of the disposal
area. [Authority granted
under 40 CFR 61.154 (f);
condition originated in 40
CFR 61.154]
Operations, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements have been
completed in accordance with
II.B.2.e, including II.B.2.e.1,
II.B.2.e.2, and II.B.2.e.3.
Continuous X

Records are maintained by
Bayview Landfill, as
described in Provision I.S.1
of the permit. Bayview
Landfill has not received
ACM for disposal.

20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 10 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this permit
provision. In Out
II.B.2.f
Upon closure of an
asbestos-containing waste
disposal site, the permittee
shall submit a copy of
records of asbestos waste
disposal locations and
quantities and shall comply
with the following:
(b) Unless a natural barrier
adequately deters access by
the general public, install
and maintain warning signs
and fencing as follows, or
comply with paragraph
(a)(2) or (a)(3) of this
condition:
(1) Display warning signs at
all entrances and at intervals
of 100 m (328 ft) or less
along the property line of the
site or along the perimeter of
the sections of the site
where asbestos-containing
waste material was
deposited. The warning
signs must:
Operations, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements have been
completed in accordance with
II.B.2.f, including II.B.2.f.1,
II.B.2.f.2, and II.B.2.f.3.
Continuous X
Records are maintained by
Bayview Landfill, as
described in Provision I.S.1
of the permit. Bayview
Landfill has not received
ACM for disposal.

20235204.001A/SLC23R152360 Page 11 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Term Description of permit
provision
Method used to determine
compliance status
Is compliance
continuous or
intermittent?
Compliance
status
Other facts relevant to
compliance
determination, including
references to any and all
deviations for this permit
provision. In Out
II.B.2.f
(i) Be posted in such a
manner and location that a
person can easily read the
legend; and
(ii) Conform to the
requirements for 51 cm×36
cm (20"×14") upright format
signs specified in 29 CFR
1910.145(d)(4) and this
paragraph; and
(iii) Display the following
legend in the lower panel
with letter sizes and styles of
a visibility at least equal to
those specified in this
paragraph.
(2) Fence the perimeter of
the site in a manner
adequate to deter access by
the general public.
(3) When requesting a
determination on whether a
natural barrier adequately
deters public access, supply
information enabling the
Administrator to determine
whether a fence or a natural
barrier adequately deters
access by the general
public.
(cont’d)

(cont’d)
CAA Title
IV (Acid
Rain)
Provisions
Bayview Landfill is not
subject to Title IV. NA NA NA NA NA
20235204.001A/ SLC23R152360 Page 12 of 12 April 12, 2023
© 2023 Kleinfelder www.kleinfelder.com
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
1997 East 3500 North
Layton, Utah 84040

In accordance with Operating Permit provision I.K and UAC R307 -415-5d, and based on information and belief formed after reasonable
inquiry, I certify that the statements and information in this document are true, accurate, and complete.

_________________________________ _____________________________
Mark Lamoreaux Date
General Manager, Bayview Landfill

APPENDIX M – BORING LOGS

•
•
•

Boring Logs
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
•

CULINARY WELL
•
Hmk w m aw
I B-C _...
/.,^.4:4il. •?/
REPORT OF WELL DRILLER ^^^^fej^.'r."?^
STATE OF UTAH cua N..
4./^/
GENERAL STATEMENT: Raport of wdl driUtr U honby madt and flM with th« 8UU EndnMr, In aecortUnct with th* Uwi ef UUh.
(Thil report ihill bt fU«d with th« Stat* EafiBtor within tO dayi aft«r th* eonplttioB or abandoniatnt of th* w*IL Failan to fU* aach
report* eonstitntn a mltdcmoanor.)
Lt TESTS: ^^^«, Draw^nm b IW <lbUaM la
•tatk l«*«l.
••aDi
af S«rtlon ff
Bot «rord« not n*cd«l)
(3) NATURE OF WORK (Cheek): N«.wdi BI
RapUniMiit Wdl Q DMpmInt O Rapalr O Akaadoa D
M abaadoammk daairlka Batarial twt »neadar<:
(4) NATURE OF USE (cheek):
Donartla D
IrriMtlaa D
ladaatria) O
Walu O
MaaMval Qi^ Btaaknlar
Otkir a VM w«a
(5) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (cheek):
BateiT ay »" D '"o^ D
CabI* Vr Dri»a» O »aia< O
Waa a ttiR^BiniradaT TM C^'Ha a If aa, W wkoat,
YlaM I / S3 (aL/nln. arltk —^..^. fart 4nw4*n
- .Jipy - ._*i.H.
- ..a..e.JL. .. - _2L2
Ballar laat wUmin, wttk.. lial drav«an aflar.
Artaflaa flaw , *<fr.M, Data.
Ttiwparataf af wataf. €.S„.^Ci.— Waa a rtwalaal aaajyafa Madaf Na a
(13) WELLJ.OG: DUaaff^r^ €.^..
f««t. BaaA af aea>lata4 wall—:
li^
S.c,
S.I
'•hi
3. '
r- / so f
ft
; Plaaa«a "X~ la tha a»aaa ar aamMaalloB af ipaaM Baa4a4 ta 4Mlnata <ka aiatoilal ar camblaatlua af mauriali aaeoaatarad la aacb dapth InUmU. Uadar aBIIAaM aaba anr dnirabia a«(M aa ta accurrania ef watar aad DM aelar, alaa, aatan, ata^ atf taalvlal aiH taunlarad la aach dapU latarval. Vlaa addlUaaal ibaH U ' '
(6) CASING SCHEDULE: nr-dad o waiMtf'"
/f DIAA. frMi_ MC-i^ aa.^£id_
,, /wU..' Dlaai. lnm...jO faat UtSOmSJiml GvSSS—
" Diam. Iraa fail ta faat Gam
wa« p^ »«i«rt g vmt a
(7) PERFORATIONS
Trpa nf parfaralor atad —y^
aha of parforaUaai ...,S»J4E.
laraladt T ra-a^ Ma D
(8) SCREENS: Wall Ktaai. laaulladt TM O M* •
If anufactnrar'a Nana ..^^.^^—.^^—*.
irp. Kadil Na
Diam. Slat alta..
Diam. ..Slot alM.. ..Bat fiata
(9) CONSTRUCTION:
Wai wall caral paakadT Yai Q Na ST •<» af traaall—
Cra>al placaa fia« faat^
Waa a lurfaca aaal pmMad? Yaa B^ Na Q
To -bat daptkl /^.<>_.;---^,.-faal ^^_
Malarial a«od la Mali .. .j/GOnSi^t T
Did anr atrau coauln unuaabla waui
Trpa ef waur;
Method al Mallnf itrau cfli
Yaa D Ke
.... Daptk tt atnta—
V
Wai anrfaca cailas luadT
Wai It tamentad In Plata!
Yta (T
T« 9^
Me O
Ke a
(10) WATER I^EVELS: ^^"^-^
SUlIc lav.l "7 ^ ]r../.T(H balew Ited ivfi
Artaalan praviura
Dala_1
, faat ebera land iBrfaaa Data.-
9AAJi.
LOG RECEIVED1 (11) FLOWING WELL:
Contielled kr (ikaak) Talae D
Cap O riec D Ne CeoWel D
Doei well leak >ieea4 aaalwt Taa •
Me a
(14) PUMP:
HanafaetBrar'i Mese
Trpe! ZMr.i.4.aJt.-
Deptk to peaip ar kewlea,_ .bt.<>.Q...
•. r~
Wall Drillar'* Statcmtnt:
Thii well wa* drilled und*r my (uptrriilon, and thi* raport ii tma t«
th* beat of 07 knowltdg* and btUef. . ^^
Name _X^i4iyi^jSfe_.i^4j!-iaL:
jFataea, flr^fr aerpetatleM ^m 4f , <**»• "5 g<f')
USB OTRZB iDC FOB ABOmONAL BBMABBB
frnm m-M-n4t
I •.€ .T. •-REPORT OF WELL DRILLER
STATE OF UTAB Ctalta KK.
CepM
GENERAL STATEMENT: R*port of w*n drlU*r ia h*r*b* mad* and filed with th* SUU Enfln**r, In aeeerdane* with th* lawi *f UUh.
(Thia report ihall b* filed with th* Stata I!acla**r within SO daya aft«r th* eomplotion or abandonnant of th* w*IL Failnra to file soeh
report* conititutei a ntiademaaner.)
(1) fX o
(2) LOCATION OF WELL:
Nottk
amik
of Sartiofl
eet worda net
.., T..
. Cmiad Water Bait*
M _. , «.. •
BILBM
(3) NATURE OF WORK (check): Mawwau D
Raplacament Well D Daepenlni Q Bapalr Q Abaadae D
If abandonaMiiL datariba taalaflal aid preaednat.
(4) NATURE OF USE (cheek):
Denaalla O ledeelilal Q MaaMpal Q
hfleatle* D MIelee Q Otkar D 1^ WaU
(5) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (check):
•etarr O »•* • **>^
Cable D Dfjaae Q
(() CASING SCHEDULE: Tknada* a
" Dies, fn
•• DIaai. fnta «ai« ta fart aa*«-
.•* Diam. fteei fert to Itrt Oeca-
H«w D Belert O !»»•*
(7) PERFORATIONS: r.rfa..tadt Ta. a M.
tiv* ^f p«rformt0r aaad..
8I>« ot pvrforaUenf latha W-
pOTferatInt fraa . faA tK-
.„..^p«rferaUoiiB ftMB_
p«rfor«tIoM fvMi tt
._„ »OTfof«UMB inm fMt to-.
p«rfarmUww tna. ^ tm^ ta-
(8) SCREENS: w.n Mrwi. m.uiMr tm Q M.
Han uf ut«r«r*a Kss« ..
DUm. Slot all* Bat *•*— ** to..
DUm Slot ilta Iai fw ••••, —Ite to-
(9) CONSTRUCTION:
Wai wall rraral patkadT YM O Na Q Ilea at araTalL-
Cra«<l placed from fart ta .
Waa a aurface aaal provldad? YM Q Me D
To what daptk I fart
Material aMd la aMt:
Did anr atraU centala uoaaable walarT YM Q
Tn>* of water: — Daptk ad i
Hrthod of aaallnc atrata offt..
2) WELL TESTS: Drewdewa la Ike dlitane li fert tke wptar leael ie lew.
ared balew atatla leaal.
penp iMt laadal YM D Me O If H, VP wkeal.
Yleldi ....nL/Mlii. Witt fl
. (al./Bia.«Mh . lart dnwdaWB eflav_
-a.».m. Beta.
(13) WELL LOG:
Deptk drWed
Me a -Te. D
f.^
NOTB: Plaaa an "Tr" In Ike apew or I ^ ,„
or comUnatloB ef MatoriaU enaoeatarad la Mck deptt (ntarvaL lledw f?HAWTB Make ear
dMirebIa «el« aa ta occurrence of weler eed tke eeler. alee, aatpiv, ete- ef toetertal ee-
eeuntarad la eaak daptk lntar<ral, VM addltlesal .koM It poeded. - — — —n~
nMp.llee af W.M. PMdid ta dalneto tk* atatafW
k inum ••
Wai lurfaM aailn* eiadl
Waa It cvmantad IN placi T
YM
TM
a
a
Me
Me
(10) WATER LEVELS:
static Inal ., ttrt below lead nifM* Data.
Artaaian pimure fiat .b«ra lead ••!<». Beta..
LOG RECEIVEDi (11) FLOWING WELL:
ContnlM kr (eketk) Tain O
Cap 0 riiw a HeOesMl D
DoM well leak anaU oaiwt Ta D
M* •
(14) PUMP:
Maaetaataiwi'a Naa
Tr»a; •• r~
Deptk to peetp «r kewfae.. fa
Well DrtlWr'a 8tBt«n*Bt:
Thla wdl waa drlUad undkr mjr •Bp*tTialon, and thla nport ia tn* to
th* beat of my knowl*dce and^lin. ^n-y
Hame-^
Addr***.
ireteaa. flita, ar lerpeiatlae) ftrw er yrml •
(Sign*d).
LleanMNo. ^2i<jr_
(Wall Pilllirl
.OaU--.»-
mc OnOB IIDB FOB «ODTnONAt. BHIABM
APPENDIX E-2
MONITORING WELLS
• /• - >
Herm Hughes & Sons, Inci represents that we have
determined and verified alT field dimensions and
measurements, field construction criteria,
materials, and similar data, and that ne have
coordinated this eupmlttal with the
_ of/jhjr Work an^/tpe Contract
Documents.
/-2^%l
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake CHy, Utah 84115
[phone] Date In- ll-g-t^
RIG NO. .RIGTYPE f^- P- 160Z> WELL NO. S Wl U ) - i TYPE yrln^.'A gr.
JOB OWNER p>-.»wj r.^4y
LOCATION _gxii
TIME
Start
yfoo
m
IP
stop
Olc^
.yu.Vui L
DEPTH
From
O
S^'
10
i<,
10
2.B
2<f-
:3,o
H^
uo
'
To
.^
^"
/£?
/5
ZC?
2.5
29-
3P
t/i
i.0
>^
..S.JiC^\.\^
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft.
5"
Log or Remarks
O^r.yt e.^d^ ^ O.lP. tf- c^.r^.'H«j.
»Vir,t.><» Sef MO OW^VWVO-t fli..'LL4-l0r.'o*
/I" f^? 1^'
c^.J-f .<.'//
£on at.i»m«ih.*K"f' 19 p.fci/rfi - 5'a.*c(. «i tf »vfrii ^c J
Ok.;LL 6 15«K Uolt to ^.^
Vu<4*.Li -7 1' i^'tz p\jr. C^JL «».«,drL
P^r]i Xf ' „-P W.,l*.
\An\)e. ^•.'/:v <Dii«-o*\ «u.v,ci <:*Tup<5rt
en-
Type
A./^
Size
/t
No.
/
1
1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
g^xifcj^ KJLJU
HOURLY WORK HRS. ii
Signature of Owner or Representative
CASING USED: Size 12
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
Ft. Used 30
Ft. Used
Anrwunt
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
# ^ ^W
Driller M Helper »»f.'^e - spi^^MlL Helper
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
pnojcoT NO. t)r?iLie/l: IMAier^ f>B.TJ=^jtin/it . BORING, NO. M:Si!l!£:LL-
PRo.iPriT MAMP ftyi</vi5yj \^AnrjPlLL •___ LOGGED BY I2i2i^££i^£i/^
DRILLING. METHOD nPH L/r^^vP AilL f^PTflP,^ \l"CA<.lril(, DATE DRILLED ''^ '^^ao
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION hlOSTA-ifA 'JJATJ^-e. -^.r/tr"
LOCATION: T R SECT TRACT PAGE_J_OF
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPMJ a. CD
UJ
< H
(0
cm
<>-
o
5 3 o o r
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
IO.
^O
2d.
^eAvELi"/ C/VJC: R^chiLw-Ee..^'J)rl •?,7>i;gt:.g
fjl^'AltlrJC r,'^!,:-.!-'^ •:.:^f)L. jc>% ~./?A't!^.L .
^fiiC): i^-Bc£iJS,!-^-/^£.o'/jr) M^/.r//> kfa.inc
VJBLI lofiYci)
^i^\/EUk^ SMC '.^^CC/ai-c^p^jor). n<g^;i/hi
^O/tv-rn fg% A,^Jy^L.
^/ft^/^uV 6hm- kU-CiCi^-BfiO'jjrj lu.e^/iii'M
tiPfi-fho "zcp^in gfioygA
/^PAy/^ll"/ <A/i)D: FiNB-6fiAj/jsO qePOKH ^fL-^^r)
l^grn^yy ^.Of>.rrD fO-';n<^fi^^L
s/m^ P^Bt."^ 4g4v£^:/gffgg.'f.-^-/9e^w/i>>. '•g£y
fiMP'.^ ^VPy-^C A^%PB.f<eLP<
REMARKS pj£6r Z-3 fi^T 6r^is.</^ [AjmHffitO
Sitfs^ltU. kL^t)titie. of GCt-f^>,OV^ IC e.9J>bl£M Exploratory&MonHor
6E:?UJW S;iW0<.iK6^veL*.. WellDrilimg
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME .
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^ nP.-^_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
ii is Ul
7^ UJ
< H
CO
lu"-oz
|1J;J
Q. ca 22 < >
coco
z
2
ol
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
ISL
HO
i<L
S<L
(i?0
^Mvguy </i/;Z) r kk.ov.->miw-R.'Sr-{j^ fcofi^i^ciersc
pe^FKLH ^iLiy <.hNr>'. k5/)n\tlM- Rt^lOf* .vt^^
P^Ofl^ C£>f=Tyf,._^Or^!= Cun-f&A^lZ-
cgrygrJT^/j SA.TV 5/>r;<Q; [X>^ir£ tp/i^cpi6/i
BRJ?^t^ Vj-g.'^ "=•• r)~-•'-cfi •;!?/:- .^.--^/C/J-^/C'
CfiMfm."^ 'jr^riC f fi.e-CPiiLU-P.fz.^D'^/J, fp:>r->.h'
\ee.:nfC '. Sg>kiF e^fj-.^f-trxAriiyO sg cArJC
•
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
anoiMrs un RM-SVW) UJ -)
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE § OP^^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
Ul
;H Ul n
CO
tui
ILii
Ul"-
oz
0. 00 22 <> coco
o
z 2
og s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
7(2-
.. r.D. 751
£M\rS-Ui -ShUd'. P.'^CDC'A- F'i(iJ)'*}0 .Pi^^'P.^i'
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date/r^-/^-^^?^
RIG NO. /<^' RIG TYPE.
JOB OWNER Prrn^^l /<.'ty
Bu± hL ^
.WELLNO. <mU^- \ TYPE ,nicniTrru7(j,
LOCATION _^
TIME
Start
ife w
stop
Cl V i^: c:tv^
DEPTH
From
7i'
To
0
1 DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft.
7V'
Log or Remarks
Tr^-^fyJ] I'r.'f klrm\^^^''^t^^. , P.O'
y.'f^^'U^ry.^H ^/>7^/4^^/ '^-f hlojik
^-^"^irr-. 7?^ yn'
rt^j-j^Tr,/! ^i-hc-O' 'f>yehC^ ^rot7n 7^'-
^^'
7/7.-5"^/Z y.r^r//-^ir^ he./ilc^h,^ rrr-z-r) ^4^'-
-^.o'
•i:^<1^ill /7^ir,T^<f»7e^T^,^c/r\ 2^^ '-
<'^/7^y ^y>/?^/-^^. fJ-(^/77 ^'~C>
^n<7?,// <fjr'/'a^e^ yy^njfo/f. f}(rui
BIT
Type Size No.
1
4 1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
.R.Used.
Ft. Used.
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel _OII.
MISC.
^^"v£/^ra t. Helper Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date }/'>'l'i'%-<^
•
RIG NO. .RIG TYPE (L~P-"70oQ .WELLNO. $^>m?- -2 TYPE \vi^^.'i-cy.
JOB OWN
LOCATIOr
ER P }/-o\JO
i G^i. o>
TIME
Start
7 ioo
A
V
Stop
ip]0^
^.«-+ v
ejc 1V»N.cX,
DEPTH
From
0
io
7o
^o
lie
60
ho
To
m
tp
Ko
^to
SO
ifO
IS
UHJL C.»LL
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft. Log or Remarks
Uv/[r».CA Cc.&^>*\eif. f Dw.^Li p>^p^
VKc^L»e <AT</ ti^m. p •"
h\-a.^-{ 4o /i^.Nl A.A»>ue 17"
S^irU s.U4y •• IZ/yie ^U 6-9 r-Lcy
£\t-t^uei V «i„..J • f^lokltS
a V-•. o « L r-f^r-u'i'.-rl f-nhhLtV
^11 f <
a.fr^%jeL £,t: Htrt, rrcl ^ckkltS.
<i.l.c<i/rL <,o.t*eX f'^Ukl-mS
«. p-^M.-L <.^^^f rr^Ublf^
Kfi,i;« Pl'<^, •*<? <-)*»<•« l/l p«c\
BIT
Type
Rix^Ak
'
Size
//
No.
/
A i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.. ;/
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
iz. FLUsed.
FLUsed.
75
_AnK>unt
.Water G.P.M.
_Water Static.
Fuel _Oil.
MISC. m
Driller
IA/I ..rh, PJT^^^ I^^'P^VVI;/;. cn.\.Jl.LL l^^-P^'
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
pnojECT MO. f^^iiLirP'. Hi;f/er/ pB.Tiie.s.c/O BORING. NO. £iZi^i±J£i:^
PROJECT NAMP g/)yVieW UAr/rr^itl- LOGGED BY T. eSL/'^UA]^
nQiiiiMP, MPTunn DAlLL/nfi.Wt^ Al/L P.^A£.^ >g':/i;,V/>n ATP DRILLED /g*// ^lfi>^
DESCRIPTIVE inPATinM f.A'h,T lOP- CBLL i±. 1
_0F^
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T. R .SECT. TRACT. PAGE
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM]
gi
a. CO
Ul
^ Ul a. 0.
2 >•
< I-co
£01
o.ff'
Ul"-
oz
3o
CLO 22 < > coco
o
o
X
b
2 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
i
\o^
15-
ZO
z^L.
J2.
g/^r/Ci^ --S/Ar; 6/eg'Ai/;; /n%^/iTfr i//vey i//F/.z,
:./7^>7E^?. l^/Z/g ^y^///^Z)
^/^rjflY -s/i-r r bPO'nfK Z-Pm <.fir)C vj^iiioigif.
PiN^ <LPA\n^/^
^Mv^Lui ^MfC • eP.PMr). WgLL <:,-9/?rg/:
/Z^>^,>•^ A/K'i'./A r-rr-T^^J^^
^/>A;OV ^g/^ygj. • 6i?p:>.^rj, yy^cufy^. zsP/cr^£
/.?-^»t<A Whm'Afi ^ •'.'if-/irih,vi'^K.'i'>%-n'iC
SAtJC^ 6f^^i~- 6fei?<oA', A«g/ijftA <j.yi-r:=C
(H-IP,^^ f£>%SA>JC, C(pht^-L^ &/J*v^l.
ffifiei'f 6Mvgu'y s^^r-zQ ; 6eDMfJ.^pfic>&m s.fiArrD
^gee/sg^ 77 agt^*'^ /v'/i>pedBiii ^P%6PnMS'..
REMARKS ft£ir /^' fnn^'6ti.^jn^ 'S,iuT^PAe>ei^6i.Y wmoQiittu/i/.
&lf>l-..ANiP fir &p£fiHe>t-B. IC S^f^O-t-o/aAv^L wrh-t Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
#
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
. DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
..DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^ "P 9
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
2i
So
U)
7' Ul
!§:
< H
CO
xfi;
Ul"* OZ
-lO
(LCD 22 < >
COCO
z 2
B o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
REMARKS
^>C
4(2.
vr"
s-c?
5-5:
^g"
^:f\m^ ^M'/^L • hf^/i>i\i). iJ-€>ofi: V --cf^.-^r.
<v9i>-«.g f^^eiS-fi; -'''^".-^'•jir/O,
fiMve LL v^ •</^ r;f: •• /Qfi.5>u/ »o KC £/ /1; v^ c g^er'.g/^
2g^;,4/c^.v<L
fil^)fSll^ SArW aA£>Mf^J, PiP>Pfi.LW •^•/^.g.'rsrc
PgegZ-Y 'SAWfry C')(2AV^U'.\(-P.'^ POO/JL'i ^iC/PrBL
1/)'!^ Or.RPA^ ^otr^.>^NCi
^£^VElLy </^AAD'. fig.pu;r;. >^ff.c/t;hv tpi^^rs^n
Uo'^o 6MVEL /2>6>'>>»vj
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
•
• PROJECT NO. __
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY B9RING
BORING. Kin ^V-.SMW-<g.
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE -^ OP ^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
<o EO
^ CQ
UI
< H
CO
£U1 STUl
Ul""
OS
sd CLOD
22 0
coco
= ^ s
Q
^
_i
z i
0
0
Ul 5
or
Ul
^
*
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
<AtlL'-l .^P:A'JBL : U.o-^^r) PPOiyj SOBT^C
^O^n ^.htlD
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617W. Wells Parte Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date /^-/4^-^^/
RIG NO. /O
JOB OWNER Prnvo C;Ty
.RIG TYPE Fyt;l;nc( ^wEa NO. f5/?9A_/-2- TYPE /^cn.T^n ^
LOCATION /^.-tj/ iKe lU
TIME
Start
^^^
•
Stop
1 r ^
DEPTH
From
w
To
0
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
79'
Log or Remarks
Xrl<.P^ /I / v./ ^/'./. ){^4^ ''vD^^r- . ;^r. '
rs-f^^''<,^ry^^ ^//,^y ^C^V.f"V^-^^'
m-c-To yo'
'Xr7:<I7i}l <//y^y <^/.^r/ 7<^-^/?i 7^/'-
<^4^'
Z/7<y&// /^r-^^/O' ^e/^7^y^,~7?. -fiy.-^/}! ^^-
2.0'
Tn^Tall /?co tz-.e^eyi "t -Ai/r? "7^^ ' - ^ '
^W i^.c,ncre7€. -frr^/n 6^—0
"fyj ^f?i // <( >r .•/« ^z* ^^ y^7 aJr.TJ?^ /.
BIT
Type
•
Size No.
*
1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS._
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
• 1
Driller,;;^/ U—yyJ^^ ^ I Helper I Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
SaH Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date /^-i"~Sy
RIG NO. 2.. RIG TYPE C-P~ 7(^00 WELLNQ.fiO-SlilUJ-3 TYPE
JOB OWNER _££flJUfi__i-i-hy-MohtUir
LOCATION Sa
TIME
Start
y\0o
•
Stop
'
(?1PO
y y»'« y.) V
DEPTH
From
0
' 0
5
10
2o
3o
HO
60
Oo
To
Ki
<
)0
70
30
MO
SO
ipo
10
Hiftni -^f^UL '.
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
10
Log or Remarks
/»f/50€ ^foy^ ^S to Otrcoi^. rt^^i^ «.U.
0-^. ^ r-o.'^^^^ri. Hfoutt «.*^cl Stfup
©kv *^3 lO^.^LL4lO..Vt a*' tuSe.'K^-
^ v^cKve Uy ^tri
PfiBPL J/ <J...c.Gt/.
d>»-cucL ~^ ^wucly-C.,*tT
^u^»^L • <*V-/v-Sc.uci
/:.„ o^L - ^.riy-s.^Cf
^.crfy tlvc^ueL
<Ciu«o*,L yLcyc/ s.'Lf
<ivc.t<.L So.v,.ci V s.'Lf
BIT
Type
ftu^
Size
//
No.
i
^
<
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size / 2-
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used yV
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
m f
Driller,
/T/TL/. f<pJ/ , X /•^<f-'^
Helper YH.'iir. Sp>.i^a Helper go()«.-f B
i LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
rnojcoT NO. D^ILLEPJ MA^TJ PBr/r^iei^o/J RnBiMn Mn j;v-S»«tA/-5
PROJECT NAME R/lVVll~yAJ UH*JDt=-)l,L 1 nr.r.en av TOK^ £.B£.£./MK.
DRILLING. METHQO DP-1UL/f)fi-)\IB A-l^ tpTAlt^ n"cJCHV6> QATE DRILLED 101^/39
DESCRIPTIVE LOrATlOM Mg/gf)/-'!^ gg&^i^ S.
PAftP / np $
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T .SECT. TRACT.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM3
Q^ U
20 Ul -^
Ul
-1 Ul
g. 0. If CO
^
ui"-
CO
ur
2
CO
Ss a. m
coco
AP
H
I
C
MN
& 3 0 0
E u 5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
£"
IG.
/r
2^2-
2i3
f<ig/iygiiV ^M/ij/): /^iegy,mgf;/u^. '^i^iir^c
rBMLV •6MV^L • 6j(>Ey, )AA^I1)U)^ €-OA:.7^/?
^g/yg z:.^^/^;-?^ 70 5?S" yvirv.
/5ieAV£LW </\A)f;'^ ^,';.r; /^A-MJV', ^•\<g^i^ v/fyrrx
--/^-^ :^ ^w;-:? ao^g^jyg
^Mve.Li.Y 5,'i.Ty <A/tfr'; p.PnuirJ. (€on^ ^j>/-r/'
PEfiRi^ f.eAvt^u.'i ^AffC: iRa^iiAi-^ies/ pg>?£t/
</?£7ED. g'^wtf f-gfifil.E5 Tg> t^O Ai^/A
^r,R^:ry
tovEiLJ <A/^}r): fiP.g'^j/J. ^^APl.i^»^ ^.:ffti-£C
REMARKS
7?t/ii d^fi^H-^l^E e^J60yl^neeEO ^Vi?fi£- Exploratory & Monitor
a(-:A;SL r^rhtJ nt -ll^<r V^O. P^N^r^r^TlOri WellDrllling
g*.7tx^«6 6&Tr&)e.r>fE ai^ni-vti ^"''^. ^5,,^- OAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
CD
Z
CC
o
CQ
>-
CC
O
< oc o
-J
Q.
X
UJ
u.
o
a
o
-I
09
>4
V)
1
>
o
i
>-
ta
^
^
C\
o
II
^ _J
H D -J
^ UJ ;;
a: S °
O O UJ
OJ J 1-
<
a
1
Ci.
US
•*J
S
-J
•a
u
>
>-
UJ
1
II)
'-J
o
r UJ I
. 2 h-
<
1
1
1.
I
(
(
<i
» < u
: 2 2
• H c
> O 2
1 IU -
» -} -) o =
: oc a
\. a. c
k
s
r",
'•s.
.;
r\
• L
{••
z
o
<
O
o
-1
tu
>
1-
a.
cc
O
(0
UJ
Q
>•
) z
3
O
' o
UJ
1 H
: (-
) V
«1
O
Oi
UJ
<
1-
O
<
OC
1-
O
Ul
CO
cc
»-'
z
o
»-
<
o
o
» -J
2
o
1—
Q.
OC
O
CO
QJ
O
o
o
o
-I
o
X
~l
13A31 IJ3XVM
Nwmoo
OIHdVHOOIlin
nonwAs
3ndwvs
S31dWVS
i33d NI
liidsa
3dAi
aidwvs
iNnoo Moia
NOIiVUi3N3d
QJ" CD 9
J- (0 3 >-'
IK
5
CQ
•3.
IJJ
•*4
h
...
*..r
VJ
UJ
s.t.
i-
i
VI
UJ
..4
flf)
••"1
^
•>
^
?
0
4S
IM
~i
. .i<0
Ul
-4
UJ
Vll Vi
•?-
—J
U!
CL
1"
li
^
—*
c-,
- *
v>
V
2
"«=l 1
V-'
si
•v)
^
QJ
Ui
>
-5.
3
<
UJ
<J^
i
i
0.
tr
-^
<c
u
QL
V
1
?>'
Cl
'JL5
^
\
:.i
v>
h
V
>\i
^
l,J
vn -J-
-v
kJ
u
I)
1 :«
•>-
'•I
1*
•5
a '.U
SJJ
"4
-:>•
••.;1
-J
UV
u.
t
5
o
f*
<,
»-.-
<.i
• y,
ll
to =r •J' Vo V/) ^
1 1 1 1—J~ (
' * ,
o
o
2
•a
^-o =
Ui 5
CO
:»:
or
<
UJ
(C
...
>•
z s s o o
o
-J
CO
UJ
§
Q
i LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
•P wo JEST NQ. n/^/UBIt: IrviiPTJ PBtBfi-<o/i BORING. NO, /-'..f-:yy/j-~
PROJECT NAME P;lV\;"=tAJ lA-fJCnUl LOGGED Rv Tt>V\n BSlOUAil
DRILLING. METHOD rPlUL-^C-fJ^ A-i. g-V-/>V J?-'l.'/-r///6 DATE DRILLED JOSABSUL
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
_DESCRIPTIVE LQCATinM r)-fVi <U, £ •'<*^ L
.SECT,_____ TRACT PAOF -3 QPs?
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
2t=
2^
ffO
2§ aaa
UJ
-1 UJ
a. a. 2 > < H co
r-Ml
Uj"-
cz
CO
UJ
-1
<
0}
UJ-J
_iO
a. m 2 2 <>-
COCO
o
i 2
S 2 S 3 a i ss
ZJ
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
65"
7t?
linjiL
^f\fJ{^^ .•.rfif.r-^ --^f^-A^I-L' 'viPo;uKH ^PfiT^D
Pi^^e.V.^'^ ro RfTwirn.
QfJ^r^^ ^ILV^ £r.!}C : ^i^>:o/.; ^
rT^ -^X Zi^^r7 6/a4VE^ 5g%Ot>r.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLIIsiG COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] ^Ae/O'C/.^C/
RIGNO.y^ RIGTi9^ fy/.J/hCl ^WELLNO. ^ni f., •'- ^ TYPE hny,,.-7^.;-n^
JOBOVtfNER /^l^r. <^/'/7/ \
LOCATION £
TIME
Start
_
#
Stop
!)^(////y^^
DEPTH
From
75'
To
(J
•
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
7S'
•
Log or Remarks
r^.^t;./! rr.~fhL.)/^^"niy^.,yy^'
rrrf-cytyyn y^y^y^/ ^(^/'^i^//--^""afyr^.
-T^^-yn:
Tt^<.'1y/ fl <,I.Y,c/ '^O'jhy/ -/^r-yu^ TVT '—
^^:
T^/y.'STyi// yr>r>^<f ^^yi7ny\/7?- •7Vr»/i-7
^^'-pry
irn<;'f//} n/f^'t't ytf^r)ig•/^'t~-p/r'n^Z,0''~
fi ' £/nr./ /^yinmyfr -7r<^yi^ ^' ~C) .
"Tyi^I^jJ <fii'/^ii^^ /^.,--./^/0/y.7^ytH ,
'
•
BIT
Type Size No.
«
^_ 1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
FLUsed.
R. Used
AiTx>unt.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel Oil
MISC.
#
i/.r/t^ Driller
^^^^-^
Helper Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
/ Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date JO' ll-^<:f
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOt
7 RIG TYPE C' 9'looo WELL NO. S mtO - ^j TYPE M
ER Ov^nOO c!^^
4 Rt-.Y {)i^\*i Icj-kyd
TIME
Start
TieiO
•
Stop
(ff)3£>
STAND BY TIME 1
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From To
19
s
IO
/s
•xo
2S
30
26
^10
LIS
UO
f/(.U
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
S
IO
l^
10
1^
30
3i
HO
^i'
l^o
13
•IRS.
r or Representat
CASING USED: Size /
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ize
ive
1
ype
l.og or Remarks
Ic?c*cl IT^'^cc^f.^M ^^A fiu.^LL pJp-K.
set u»Q.+*i» i'Wi^rl^.
S-fr" up Aw^cl <ile.*.'f +« dv-.^LL i'jKV.t
12.'^
S. c't^y 01 KJ. .^CLKIV/
1 J
c:^ lre-0« t-^^c^uJ
/rL.lfCi\)<. U 1- £c»,c/
/•>»»£>«.«<• L ^r « vwvT*\.4f cl
^,.
' ^
t «. X ^
t c I «^
, '^ ^ "
V L \. \
P^ALL OV;LL p.'pe W»c7uc c>^? ^\^•e
l^nLe..
VOn^k fJVA +Wi» feUjilJfl. p£.£k.'vM^.
' 0
on'VQ^
BIT
Type
l^^f^h
HOURLY WORK HRS. 11 IT.
R.Used 7S
R. Used
Water G.P.I
Water Stati(
M.
Amount Fuel
Size
)/
No.
1
1 ^
Oil
MISC.
• i
Driller ./> "^ *'"»-
W rxjfVn . K^
(1
luL^ O^i^ "'^'m;r<.Sf,'J.a"* '^plner 1
1
4 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
pnojcoT MO. .n/)ui i-e: v\Ari/n^ Ps.iti><n/D RORiNPi Mn fN-^r-^'iAJ-H
PROJECT NAME f\M\Jl^\A) L/l/JPFlLL LOGGED BY "^'^' ^^- -'^>v^
DRILLING. M F T H O n Cfi.lU L./tfi-.1= A £ O.C^'/ie'/ tJ' V,M</^/^ DATE DRILLED '^Z--; ^-^
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION tllTT TO DL^.^UAE/l
LOCATION: T R SECT TRACT PAfiP / OF $ _
HEAD
SPACE
USirjG
(FPM3
Is UJ
< H
CO oz
yo 0. m 22 <>-wco
5 z 2
3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
~3
it
r'
/^
a^
241-
J^
^e^Ayt^LL / -^ ;/T : ^^o\/jrJ. fioon^.<:afi7w.
(7Wmv) PifU'Ji^-AlL lO%A/e.4VEi
^A/JQ^ ^fAVBL'i' BtouirJ. r/zc.\\jrA-::otrrs-C
^£4v&i2.^/ <:',^T : 5£guJ?J. ^cj/iiy ~jr~iC
ZMO'i QMMBL: 8(io\jmOi f^^Divr^. ^pfiTB/:)
ff?^7 f^fJC' I
<l^f-iC'^ fe/PAvgj..- epo\j)t), >V!g/-jL'm .^g^/'-r^^
IF REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD _
STATE COUNTY.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE Z^ofB.
m
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CrPM]
ZH
<o
a. CD
UJ
< H
(0
CUJ
oz
|»H _iO
OL m
22
< > coco
— E < cc o o
3
z 2 3
o o
UJ
> UJ
DC
^
^
S
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
5£1
4^
.- H-
SP
m.
SMflV /^<eAV£Z.: hf.'7j)r) pcVB.i'^ <pf.rEC
AMVBli^ ^./l(JC-t P^i^DKH fi.f...T'.u/-J NsnUM ^.^/^/)
/^iMVEuy ^Arin- PSUlCH d/iiM^rJ t^^LVJf •^cfHiEC
>£^^'^ A/^'^ITL -?AP'LF <,A;if.
/5MVm'/ <m'' P.£.Cf)li^ P^UW^ A>.^n\JI^ Z:>fi7SC
\S^r, ffiMFL ^Z?A/>gg .C^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRlLLirslG COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
HnpiNP, NO fiM-SynW-^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
..DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE v'^ OFv-^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
<o So
a. 03
UJ
a. a.
2 >
< t-
co az
UJ ^ .J O Q. m
22 o
co-co
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
(^CZ
P&ftBLV GMM^Ui CfwD ' e^DwtJ, f'^rivn^ CfiCTSC
\o% p^fiP.Lgs. -tp*.„ f^tAmfc^ntc^ ^-ANn^ ^-yj,)ca)
S/\l}D^ AMyg) : £^l£^ ep.O^Vt) h-fLivA^ -aPT=J.
II REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088 .
[phone] Date/^?V;^>5r^^
RIG N0./<^ RIG TYPE
JOB OWNER /^ryM^r> ^.^Ty
Trerhh^ .WELLN0..£^24Zl_^i^: TYPE /r?r^^.7^r;hp^
LOCATION /^^t i/f/.V U /
TIME
Start
^ 9
stop
1 y • i:^
DEPTH
From
7<'
To
C
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
7S'
Ljog or Remarks
t.<tJ/ /'r,-fhLJ^^^"^i.^r.. 7^.C>'
r.f^^^ "^rry.^^ ryr,e-/ ^/(P'UlLnk
^^"^i^r- -T;: yn'
Ty}<iy- // <//.Y f^f^rr^nr/ -A-mtn y^ —
4^^/'
T/I<.VJ/ yy-ri,^-<y.Loyi-ii^n/t<r' -frr-n-^ ^<^/-'-
-z^y
Tn-yTdi/l ^cCtTy^fWcnT-fi-c^t^l 7.n'-^^'
y//7/'/ y.yrnerre'ty.'hnr,,',-, A^—C^
T'yi<i1yc/I ^f^f-fy,/^ y.^isnl yDM^'ni^
BIT
Type
,
Size No.
<
'^ 1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
"^/JLT^ft^z £
HOURLY WORK HRS..
Helper Helper
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe
MISC.
R. Used
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
J
^ ^
.y
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
^^ Salt Lake city. Utah 84115 .
^P [phone]
RIG NO. 1. RIG TYPE C-P-looO WELL NO.
JOBOWNER Pj-ouo ^v"f y
Date /6?-V-?rC| (
5 S M 10 TYPE Mapirhy
LOCATION (?i/>vy Ui'^eO Le-iAcl ^.'LL
TIME
Start
yioo
iH W
Stop
(M
DEPTH
From
0
To
7/
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft.
yf
.
Log or Remarics
v/lou^ fK^'^ fi^con il^d^lO.P.
c.cfup o rv *^ i a^:LL 4 O^i'v A
12" (li.^r.^yicL.
0
n-S' s.'Lt 4.S....C?
A;.IC' S.'L t4 Q^^J
W-\^ Sc^J^ S .a-f fo ycu^^'L
i6^20 /5J/,.A0tf i - ^CSMC/ S.A /
2c7 '^S A-^.KUtiL - s.^Lf-
1^-So «>^,,^/ -fiu«c\
30-3^ i^. v-6..j.^ - s:if
l>6^ ^/o \.^^,„^L
HD'^^ .A. O.L
HS>'So ^\^,^ z ;^ ^z.^.
«^^"«^^ A ft^.jyL -^ cUy
££.-ltO J^.M.tL-4- "
(cO'b^ /• - ''
y^' 70 /' ' ' '
-/o~73 / ' - M
BIT
Type
&.//«
Size
//
No.
/
i
\
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. //
CASING USED: Size 2-
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used
R. Used
Amount
T<' Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
m
^^
°*>y.7^j, fcte^ Helper /V.'^r .<^p:.rLU. Helper
i' LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PROJECT NO. tXLlll^^: |/\A«E.Ty PBTtaSON annmr. Mn ."^A^W £"
PROJECT NAME fi/\)/V}BVj LA/JDF)U I o n r. F f. av TbvY\ 9ELCUAIC
PRIM IMP,. MFTunr^ Oaill/peWg A]t eiTTAief \l"0K)})& DATE DRILLED (^/M/^
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
_DESCRIPTIVE I QfJATinM ^AJiT iWB ^ '1^-^^-r^ .U rilre. F^)v
.SECT TRACT PAGE_i_OFi^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
ii UI
-I UJ
IS:
< H
CO
CUJ
oz
a ca 22 < >
coco
z
2 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
10
2^"
•^S-,
.12:
Cl^ygy 5^l.r: 6eByiCl4 B/^W/^J^ F)r/E i^HniN^
'ju^u <n(LTP.f) )n% r^iA\i
PEEBIY S^CJD' SS-IUCV) e.e-C^v}f^J.r^^DWrr.
^emBX>. /vign;um .-yiP.-r-t-Jfl.^-or^^ p-^.-g-
SMPy ^fNEL : ^££y. vEfi.Y- rPcn^ c.c^r.D,
r^VF PEr.eLZC •% 'Zs^rf-tf,
^feAvEL; ^e£y, n^^m-hi cc^TirJ6
(3>-6pmrf\)
pEeeiY se^iVEL- ^gg/ F£g?u/;y. p^^/g/»- ^^^r^
•£'^/X£ P£:g£;£.^ 7ir V.:">;;-V'
S/^/Vf)y 6P/^Vgl; >$g£y &^O^r^.MU- fcc^^V
gcergQ . //?% auryr.T^^ PPPBL^H i, r>.Ofnr^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COK'iPANY
i LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME Jif\-i\J\BVJ
BORING. MO •^>viu; <r
LOGGED BV lOr^ &S.L^'-^A'^
DRILLING. METHOD •C./M:i_ >c-..5 /^-/g. ^^CTW^l/ )?"^^^W6 DATE DRILLED /^^/^^
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
LOCATION: T R SECT TRACT PAGE_E=_OF^_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
II UJ
-I UJ
0. Q. 2 >-
< H
(O
•=UJ
Uj"" CZ
a. 03 22 < >
coco
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
T'OO
--2-.11
^•^ITiT
m('
^r
^A
35*
4:?
vr
>rc>
^rr
^'
^yi-b t^r.\ FEfhPiLeA -t^ /Oif^r^
"^AM^ r',/^\IBL'. 6^^"/ rviBOlv/Y) ^c^fifEO i.e>n,^
SILTV G/LA^/BL: P,fi.O\fJN.POOi^-^i' C.'Tfi'-O
^/ir 16 o^ff-BC/'/K fiESSLfjTa 2/^>„.
^MVEL ; ^£g/. '//^€VJ>r,'' C^^^-^o<o/uE
fl-^^^ eeteu^'L -th IO tf<m
SI^Ti 61^/iVtL • B^D^^r^i '/'•^-'; FOff^---'' <C>I^T^D
vEfgy ccHttf^'B -rw/yt/^Aa Zii^/^ ^./..•;- -^^
^A//?!/ ryMJEL: REOWfJ. n/\B/)IUm <Cfi-T^C.
<or,BPF.BBL^ -fe IDr^y^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well DrIllInQ
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
i LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BQRIMfS MO. .Ol^W -S"
B/\1^)^^^J LOGGED SY "^t^ BBl^UA'^
rROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING, METHOD TP'',-L/DAV\JF M?^ kp-^AfJ^ il!'C^ill^^ D^TE DRILLED \Ol^'S^
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION '.
LOCATION: T R SECT TRACT PA fig 3 QP3
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ ao
UJ
-I UJ
< H
CO
jrui
uj"-
o
^^
0. m
2? <>• coco
=
5 tr a o
3
z 2
3
d o o
UJ
^
cr y <
S
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
^d
7^_
T'4_2<^
6^M^lli ^flHO' 6^D^.N. rMEClUfll CiTr^TS^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Welis Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date/^;-7-?^^/^
RIG NO.^
JOB OWN
LOCATIO
//> RIG TYPE z^.;//';?^/ WELL NO. f^/7? ^c/''-^ TYPE ^y^.T^/nn
ER /^. "//X'l ^//T/
M /^y .y/Vrc. /•
TIME
Start
^fSHi V
Stop
STAND BY TIM El-
Signature of Owne
' DEPTH
From
7('r'
To
0
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
7/'
Log or Remarics
r..<-^// I'n-fhLy,!^ ^^'^i^y .2^-'
^rf^'^ ^'^y.ryeA nnri ^<^/ Wh%^k
/>'^ ^'/nty^ 7^ y^ '
•pji-^T^.-ll <./,Yr^ <y/y}y/ -fi-y-ni 7^''—
^^\
T.,^-i7y<ll yr,r,t<^. Jr)eni^n;t>. -hry/n A^-
yy^'
7ry,^% // /leaT y.evrte^'f'rymP.O- ^'
ayiyf /^(^nynyf^. T^/r? ^ '-C>
'ti'-,<'7yt/f ^rrTyiyi- y•C'/r)/P/yf?y>f^
_
BIT
Type Size
HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS.
r or Representat
CASING USED: Si
CASING USED: Si
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
26 FLUsed Water G.P.M.
ze Ft. Used Water Static
ype Amount Fuel Oil
No.
«
A
\
MISC.
# 1 ^^ 1
y
/ . /• °*'///.r/^::z:r^ **" Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone]
<s: 1^5^
Date ioH ~ 9H '^^
RIG NO. 7 RIGTYPE^- P- 7^C?C7
JOBOWNER Pmoo r.^4y
LOCATION r^ «.v O : * to ' L ^ V. c\ C .^ LL u,*.^"f
WELLNO. 5 mto- 4
«-^ VJi^-^S. U.Rr.
TYPEv NWI O M i^itf t* \>
TIME
Start
7;dO
•
Stop
^l\-)
DEPTH
From
0
To
7J
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
Vrt/loVJC. V^.^du awci Stt"^ U|D <?K 6
n^. M 1 4-oi..»u<. IT" rr.5*.vci..-
<J
6'-/^' S/tt^Sc.cA
/^'-3o' snt^f Sc.».c\
30*-V^' d^^^or.L-V 5c..cA
"•l^'LO fj^....^L >ir S^o(
{ffO - 16' OL k-u^ J < L + 5e^ *v cf
VMrt« c i^o*.* Pv rt .''cL. 4rt -** ^
BIT
Type
thJioH
Size
//
'
No.
I
4
STAND BY TIME HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. ie&
Signature of Owner or Representative
CASING USED: Size IZ
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe
MISC.
R. Used ^7^
R. Used
Amount
Stt OvP btN.'\ rit5 PcA
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
M
• 1
YY)riAlj^^ P-eXQ/>ioJ>y^ I K » b r »"f Ff.
Driller He^er V-/<'-- •=:
4 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
r.lOjCG-T H-Q. 0ftlLLEj2> //o/?-"/ f^BT&TZ^rJ anamn MnfiV-^JV^W-^r?
PROJECT NAME RAVvigyv/ LA/VJPP/LL LOGGED BY T. iSgLCUAt?
DRILLING. METHOD &glLl.yg£WP A>g g/7TAl?V n'VjKJM DATE DRILLED ^nf'&jfii:}
.DESCRIPTIVE L Q n A TI n N gA-aT /J^F UtA^.^: fh^ r-Ci'lC .
PAGE / 0F3_
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T. .SECT, TRACT.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM3 C 03
UJ
< H
co
CZ
3^
Q. 03 22
•^ >
to eo
g I cc
o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
i^
/^.
5-^
(c>
zo
zs
so
6/e/it/gi.LV'
(S;e/^v/ELLV
SI'-TY
tLEAvgi : <gfe£^, MP/^iUtv s.-^j^T^ro. A/i/^i;;.Mig
i3jc£v^ *=9 t'jeAHi.T.Afi..
fiEEBiy 4£Av£Li ^^^y.^l^EQ^UK i:^ft.Tgi)
IlL/^iiiiO.
gfcAveuV $iL.TV 5A/\)f}' fteovAjrJ i^/go/y/w.
Sgfe,7gi3,S)ur IS ^^^fggWE
5;LTV <gfeftv£L \a^vt tBovJt), PPQEL^ ZCCT^
REMARKS
Exploratory & MoriUor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4 PROJECT NO.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PROJECT NAMP R/>V\/lg\AJ \.f^tJCFlUL I nr.r.pr. av T. BEl^l^UAlC
DRILLING. METHOD fifi)LL/(;P\^lr A-\/L ^JftntJ.^ I^''CJI^J/JA DATE DRILLED /gA/gf
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^ OF -5
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM)
li
S3
a. iD
Ul
< H
CUJ
Uj'"
oz
0. o
< >
O
S 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
35-
HO
HS
SO
SSL
(oO
^EfieiY ^MVEL: g/esY efe^?w^). >i^gfl)m
(S-igtvvrvs^ .SSCTfgg
g/2)\V£I. ; gEPPl^H 6£EV ftfipv^n;, wgii £^gT»
fe hAm^ gpi;iVPglO
^NOV 6^AVEL^> fiEnr-)i^H fteouylV. VEgV
{iJjnjttiX WgLL g,gE-ngO. ANAULAe
S/t>T/ 6e/^vgL ; e£ou;^^?^ fiogai,/ g^ATgn
Af;6t;io^g.^:S£?K^y PPA6LFS.
SAMD^ CDWEV $/kTi fiegujr\;j fi>i>kL^ <^T^0
3o% ^AftV tQ}rP\rr
sm^ivf ami aur*, ee-o'^-^f). t-i^^p-i^'j cr*=7^r>
Wn^Ll^V
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
•
DAVE'S DRILLING COfvlPANY
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. N%^'.Si5lWr?^
_ I nr,r.Pn RV iDm BEuU^Ht
nail I iMfi MCTHOn />ie/j&/9-r?aX)C/ ^/j^/A /^/?Wg^ l?lrt///)/Ln A TC DRILLED l0M<^
PROJECT NAME
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE -s3_OFi2_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
UJ
Q. Q. z >
< H UJ"^
OS
CJ
ttr-J
JCJ
a. m 22
< > w.«
=z
£
^ rr*
C5
o p
D
7" i
n o
UJ
> UJ
cr u <
5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
«•
6^5'"
7^
5|uT^ ^I^AVSL : fi>^gbU/\;, PgoiQ^y gge-TJ^
/g7f:^'-Ay
^ig-AvELiy <:A^'r>; /g^gUUiVj f-gg)eL'^£^p;e^jQ
SoMg S/LT-^dLAy
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRlLLII^iG COfvlPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date A-^'-^-^r^ •
RIG NO..^
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
4^U") RIG TYPE Fyn'l's^r, WEU NO. S)7)U'^^ TYPE /Tfrm.'^r^J^c^ .
ER /^(-A^f? ^/t, ' ^
4 /?Al/f,>r..
TIME
Start
,^
#
Stop
STAND BY TIME ^
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
7^'
To
O
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
73'
Log or Remarics
r^^fl r^ hLnl<'^^"/)rr . Ttc-y
n-f^^^'^rry^y^ y,j.J ^^r'y-f hUl^
^^•'ni^yTh yi^y.
'X^/?^ fe // -^rJ.yr^ <y/y)yy/ -/yrnri ~7 "^ '—
4^4^:
T/nfOI/l yt^y/j'<>('. hp/it^n.fe. l9n/T) 4^4^^
7.n'.
:Z^ <lf ll //f^tiiy f/n^'/iTSi-i^-i 7.^'- '^ '
C/ny( yAnyyi'TZ •ryr^nr^ ^'—^
•:t:M<i?ill ^t-vr/ye^^er. /^<^^y}nC>/^Zhy\
en-
Type
.
•
Size No.
<
#
4RS. HOURLY WORK HRS.
r or Representat
CASING USED: S
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
ze Ft. Used Water G.P.M.
ze FLUsed Water Static
voe Amount Fuel Oil
MISC.
• •
Helper Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date Id-l^-'k^
RIG NO. Z RIG TYPE C-'P-lOoO
JOB OWNER Pyoo/o r.'^y
.WELLNO. D WiU^ - \ TYPE \Mo^.'{n\r^
LOCATION _R£a
TIME
Start
7l(?0
^
Stop
5/30
>y Ul .,.. /^uJr.'LL
DEPTH
From
(,$
^n
10
l<^^
?25
l^/S
/6.S
/«tS
To
^^
^/)
\oS
U-^
ws
165
JVS
2^i
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
0*..'LC.^UH ^ iH.-.'^U* //^*' rcSir.'Ko
^kcuO>-i 1~ SO.MCV r •.- WU » wTt./'vf
CLL uwlr'' t>-«*^'<^ ^^^i- ^p J^W'^
C-cMti/i-f^A iko<z\L
Ca^f^v,^ ^\^px.A. pc^l (_ O.P. pixf
6»/^ S+ocl>L*J^«v l-i>^^. be.t )L .^1/^ -W^
l,«=.U. ^4^u.-f \r<» c^K^LL.
C«h/ir«-/«cl lloc;!^ .
C«K,*K-fn:cl V^ocK.
H4udisTo*\r- uji'+W Sc*wA
ll I*. I ».
' ^ '^ ^KC(. VcUy
VHua s4<?vi<. Ui .'i1^ 5,uhJI V cLc^y
•
BIT
Type Size
'P^V
No.
/
1
^
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. \oh
1""^..-^^ fdrr.:
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type _
if" R. Used
Ft. Used
Amount
^0 Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
# ' -^^ '
OrSb^
Helper r?^ /?^ gy^
Helper t
S J-eva
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 .
[phone] Dale lO'll'^^
RIG NO.. X RIG TYPE C-P- loop WELL NO. Q m tA> - I TYPE yn.^»i'/^k-
JOB OWNER ^./.^K^rf r.^'^y
TIME
Start
^',oo
^^^ w
stop
(nAX)
DEPTH
From
2oS
12c
X40
HLO
7 S-O
2>60
3^c»
^H6
3U(?
SS-c?
^ICO
i^lO
^Ho
HU>
i/s^
^00
To
27 c?
7WO
lite*
i?-o
3^0
310
3H^
2(.^
B^O
L\OD
»-|20
^^C>
4I<.D
HS-o
^00
£xo
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft. Log or Remarics
riuM L,V.i ^W yy p<-irt
Vv^uA cAnvi^ 4 cL.s/ -^ <;r.v.cT
c. tA.iv>-r P olr tviej.^rt w Wr. rliouel-t
\ "
V /
^
lL'£^4c^^ cVif^ild £X"V 3i-<:3*
^^^
UL? t«.7 e V- r. V -ecis. t\T 7 3 0
/
V
ujcc-^r V r V*^. 1^ c^-\- SOO
Pul.f JOK^.L O.^P*. .
OcA-t virUi S"ftvv"T-rV S> r\ O.^t-fZ-uD
BIT
Type
^if^*
,
Size
^^Y
No.
/
-«" 1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. it-f^^s.
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe
R.Used
R. Used
Anrwunt
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
w %
°''"W„7f:. P^lTw- \"^n.Uf R l"°^'tH. fe^
-jOTHi- O^^^ S2.C?'
•I LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
-p^v&d^^M-Ntr. ni^iu^/P: nA/ifQ-n/ f^TtecoPJ BORING, NO.MnfiMIzi.
PROJECT NAME P.fl'I^I^VO U/JfJDPJi-l- LOGGED BY'J22}l-£.£k^ujidj<
DRILLING. METHOD rPiLL/nPiVH Al& P-^A/Z</ )o'c^S)NC> DATE DRILLED lolf^JC^Q
DESCRIPTIVE I nnATioM fllO^TTf ^ WHT^IL :-T.. .i60 W/ZK
OFJS.
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R .SECT. TRACT. PAGE
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM] a. (n
UJ
It
CO
uj"-oz
lag
OL m
< >
coco
0
o o
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
• io_
is_
ZQ—
zs
BO'
•<yLTy ^BAMti.l'J PBBFiL0<.: Aee^ '-)M hOOEi'J CfitT.^
fiFPPi^C znVn*^'^ oo'':„'.m-\^L "y-^in-
^^tf-yi i':(--f.'-)r-vu'^ SAi)t>: &BJ£^i^POOPL'f <:!?cret£
pisBBv^ -fe ^jgtt-,-,, i-y - I •:f>-;.£r
PSget-y ^f^tu:-: Racc.:.H fiko-j}f-) t^^.^ci'Ji^. £e?E.T^C
-,<. Pr:FPl.'~ TO r^'-i : •• . Kiisf-/-^ -'f.'/T qf'. r^fi-.-
Plgp>?igl % l.rt^^ 7e>% 6/?-<vgt.
PEfiRl^ A^^}f.LL'^ €AW • l?«JDHH i^P<?L.jr) focei.^ tot-tPC
?CP:n fiMv^^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4 PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
anBiM« MO fiV-g>VV;-/
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED llOltHlOy^
STATE. .COUNTY,
LOCATION: T.
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE 2. QF ^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
H
0. o
Ul
CO
Ul""
oz
-lO Q. a
<>
(OCO
ii LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
^^
JD"
ssi
PgfifiLV /^MV£LIV f^AWC: Re:DPI6!4 ^fjS'J) N .
Pi^BVf 6fi»vgM.V 5AyO-. ABCD}6I4 BtP'^f}, POt^eLi/
P£6ft/W APjonif^LLH <.AMi^•• Prcxcr^ fnojjr). -^'•;•:•-•
^.<ryr 7^^^ .6Mt/s,t..
Pl^gRiS ••^^Ain- PPr^j^AJ 'A.twi. i,ntxe,D.Piiif <A/tf)
/<?&^V£i.i.y 6MD:R/ir)'ji)rl <JJP.LI <.oerr-^,P)n!^ sAtJD
(Z-lfivi.,^
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION; T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. MlCniWj.
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED lOUl-yj ^^
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAQE 3 np &
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
ii
a. 03
UJ
< t-co
!ruj o.ft"
oz
0. QQ
ZZ < > coco O O
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•
10^
0O
Bs'
9<?_
B^
SMT): r)P,CDi6^i fjBovu/^. UUELL {LO^THIC.
cr;/;ir - Vyr-LV-JYA --ffrtr .
sAm '. R.^f)D16>ti ke^QjOn. \k)£j.L Sf/^TifC. !i^irJB.-iff
y^AiKnrurA <nriC.
AJIAI^H^ <./lnr\'. PsrjO\tii PP•:>•))r). r-'onm ^oc-nsr
CPi^P^E ^.MD ^i>'/^ Afi£-^S. I.
/fiAVguV s^^)/) •. fisnnKf/ (KP.nM^r\. '^it&^ Poo^vj
f^-l*^^ ^etiv^O c^Hc^^,^ ^arin HQlnhM^L.
i '/>/iVguy SAfff) r /i^fi)ni6i4- fi^oMJNi f>pP£i^ ipe-TT^
^ZJlxs^ ^IWP-y lAAP^Dl^yi^^DMO.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION: T
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
POBmn Mn fiM-OMW'}
LOGGED BY ,
DATE DRILLED IOll''il^Q
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE *•/ OF ^
#
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
ii
Si
Ul
15:
< H
£uj
UJ""
OZ
3^
Q. OD ZZ o coco
o
S 3 18
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
IQ2_
/<P2_
//£f
//£.
\2d
J2^
<>M0: P.ircr,y,>^ R^u)r}. PootJ-'yO/f,-rr^c
CO/IP-e CAAil'JF/) ^.^rjc.
ST-r' i {i^coi<H PiLovpr) -r/u-miv/i/E.
(g/Q»Vt5.i.i./ ^)uT: ^"B^Jiifi kP-P^JiJtl. tPlf\KeNmj
tU^'f^^VDK,H Beo\it)ti. ^//yg £^}fJEP.
/!/.ftt/: kl^Z'DI'ilr' B^MJ^i , i-,riE i^f^lfl^
J_JL
REMARKS /.rTHfi?/,^?^./ CHAf/ftfi b^fCti^i^i-fiUii
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
• PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. .Ey::Oi22Wd.
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED lO/U^I^^
LOCATION: T.
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE .^OF^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
18
a. o
UI
< H
(0
o^UJ
OZ
Q. m
ZZ
< >
coco
o
z z
5 LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•
]30
\ZS
IHQ_
/•/<
152_
)5f
/?/?;i\/gi-Xy -^ILT: P/^..r.i<}il^.D-MN .~W5-
(2-"^,.^^ rfi/^'/Jff/>
6g»vEu.v ^iL-r: ^AT,=:
/-.Pfiyl^.UL^ Ciur-"^ Sfifr^
6ig/V5t.2«/ 6/^T '^.^^^F ? -^^^ i.rK-V-
^J/ni.i.u^ r.---T --^Ah^^ l.?*^^3/"'^^5 ~
CfJA-^^i-Vj <:/t--^77?Wg.- -J^^g tr^/^'/5:
•REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION: T
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
RnPiMft Mn fiV'QMlA/")
LOGGED BY
'. DATE DRILLED l/?/l^lfi>^
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^ QF i^
•
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
ii H
zQ
^ IS
UI
CO
xte
Cll
uj"-oz
-J o
CL OD ZZ <>-coco
O
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
li'aZ
/^^
I'^QZ
;75_
/^
jj^ a
sii^r^iDniB; ftsmif^H s/^owN.
£;ii.r<'^n^ : >^/fe/-7C/i^ A£..?y^v^ ^P
<:i..T^-rp/i/r ; ^/ii^yg
'^iirr^.io/VE ><^>A'.
/iCT^Tf^ •' €'/l/V.g
^ikT^m^iv^'- ^^fif^i^
REMARKS
ilLT50f/^J<> VtA'/ Ht?m6^Bfi\f6 Exploratory* Monitor
//v TV.- A'/^hT /A/ii' diE. 6^pc'j^, DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
• PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
RnpiNP, Mn ^V'CHlW-/
LOGGED BY
" DATE DRILLED )oh/^lf^>
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE V OF.^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM]
Zfe
So
C IS
UI
7* UJ i§: < I-co
Uj""
oz
Q. O
< >
COCO
Z
. 3
Q O X o
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
RQZ
/^^
-LtPO
zo^
CLUHwrJE : <Ar/B
Clrii^^.m/E : •lA^y.^
C\^i^H6'wm : ^/i/^ g
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4 PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY,
LOCATION; T
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
: «n«.M« Mn f^V'DMW"}
LOGGED BY
•
DATE DRILLED /^//^/^^
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^0?^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM]
ii p
zQ
a, IS
Ul
-J UJ
1^
< H
CO
xte UJ
UjC
OZ'
o. m ZZ < >
coco
s
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
2£}^'S20
II
C^i-tH^fOt^E'' ^^DPi6H p,/&owrJ, \jtp.i/T^irJB
r^Pl/DNlEn, IfJl.Vtli'mD, l^y^06>l£N^D\)<,
REMARKS ,_--€2-0 Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drillino
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date./^^-7^-6:7
RIG NO. /^
JOB OWNER /^I'O ^-7/
.RIG TYPE/g?0-/-/?C f _WEa NO. OnOtJ- l§ TYPE /JfynrTcrruy^
LOCATION /^n\/L'/tr.iKj
TIME
Start
•
Stop
.£...,—rr-
DEPTH
From
^0'
To
o
DRILLING INFORMATION
FL
^2d
Log or Remarics
^/}.<,'fcc}l /rdW/-."?^ Aeyiir^nrt?. /y^ ^./-/^... '^;^^' - n
•
BIT
Type Size
•
No.
*
^ 9
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
R.Used.
FLUsed.
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
__Fuel _OH.
MISC. ao^^H-PL^ k&mj)oim/) m^-t^ ua^^wifiT^a,
r^rtllar yrr yjt He^r He^r
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date 10' /S- S-q
aiG NO. 2. .RIG TYPE C-P-lGfOO WELL NO. Om U*) - I '^ TYPE ynovs'^oir
JOB OWN
LOCATIO^
ER Py.ii\}n r .^fv/
J 1P.C.V .,^eu> UuJ^^.^lL
TIME
Start
7/00
A
^
Stop
s;3D
DEPTH
From
0
0
<5
/^
/^
2^
ij?
To
•IP
5
)0
IS
20
IS
^O
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
mftouft i(?.v- -Tr^wi !DvH,w-l -fo VOT-C^H
tllfOLi^'f.) u hrf^ i T,
hfnu^ 'fc:> nwiiLj-H2 s,-V i^p <i,^A \o
A^>\V \ nv.H,.^ J»^'' rc.c*,*v.d .
hl^A ii,.-M^Lrt rtr-f^/^urt tov^,'Mf) «!,/ov4rrJ
.Cf>.V.L.t ,.f.^h c9 'P,>ci vor.f^c;
1 . - u
^ . L
cl ,
1 1
CJ. lAo »J ,1. L
S c. ^^ ol
c\yc*ueL f- Mcf^sFdrtf. cv'fC C,d
n
BIT
Type
^Ms,
.
Size
W
No.
/
i
%
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. i£iL
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
Qii^ING MUD: Type
'^•" R. Used "^ O
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
* 1
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake CHy, Utah 84115
[phone] Date i^- /Cf-%o{
RiGNO. ~L n\(^nPEy~Q-10oo WELLNO. V) WLID-1-^ TYPE y}^
JOB OWN
LOCATIO
ER pvr..'/-) r .^ Iv
Om.'h 7J^
M ft.w ,>.'^u, '/...r!^d/
TIME
Start
y.no
^^
#
Stop
^> .N:
STAND BY TIME 1-
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
.Jt?
"^0
^5S
-^^
V.S
5^
SS
Lf-^5g
To
3.:^
^0
y^
6o
ss
yo
n
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
)Aj&\r{l n V, C.'eLf^-tLn i iry.^rl ^<D a,^f
,'i <k4^A^ci. J\J^ IcrM.
C^LA \D J^.'L/. TJ- J...*(^«L JD'Vo.W.'n^.
Q.-r.A kv, 1.J <j'fo M «.
/(. t t
r t t ^
it It
/I 1 ».
till
HRS. HOURLY WORK HR
r or Representat
CASING USED: Si
CASING USED: Si
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
BIT
Type
«c,//,^
Size
7^^
No.
/
i
(
i"
s. ,Diz.
ze IC' FLUsed dO Water G.P.M.
ze Ft. Used Water Static
vpe Amount Fuel Oil
MISC. .
g|||Cc<UcrJ( pvoL'f^ r.^-fv/ yc<irL r.r.Lv^r- rtu-V c< w cO L,.«k^J rA ••U«. Cu.ih^.j'<i. i
^W •T>t-<.'cA kMov)^ VifAt?. Wv^^l.-.p. 4-t3 t^«- VA.-I^"+U.
nrillAr .- ' V ?,ALi.i> ^ H^-fJjuJi-C/ lA/^/-TTM. Ky^^^
UalnAr 1
wi,o.,-f ci/^.. e
€
pnojcoT NO. //Mff X^g;<:vg^^3</
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T_ R
..DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE .OF.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ 0, 03
Ul
-I IU
\l
CO
ft:
wLif
0. m S2 <>
(OCO
o z s
3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
^nynPv^^ u/B^^ D&a^\i^
id>v HOAD P.Qj\n-F-i^ PUDP
-p u iTHnLnf^i/:. Lnp^A/zHt^
lAin unr^ t\VJ(li/^jffBLf^ F=OIZ.
rm^^ B^^^]4ou^.
DR)LkJ~J? i^^POPCr uJJi-\ f^W^-
A,>l.-)Kni)B.£) H&D- iM\JJ)6^JlJ^
-n-t/jfyU^y-cuT j-^^m^.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monftor
Weii Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
•
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W.Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date //;>.? ^ -^7
RIG NO.//> RIG TYPE
JOB OWNER Ar^l^C ^'A/
frinma .WELLNO. OWtJ'lA TYPE r)iyn/l^r,ntj
TIME
Start
.A.
W
Stop
DEPTH
From
^{r
To
o
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
^r-''
Log or Renf)artc8
Il^/i<l7cll (^-oar^^- Jr>ey)lr>nn<^- -Prnn-i
^^n'—n Aumo/p) \b/?u^
BIT
Type
*
Size No.
4
^^ 1
*
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
R.Used.
FLUsed.
.Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel _Oil.
MISC.
#
Driller ///' /^/*^7'*^"~^ I Helper '• I Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115
[phone] Date/i^-2 ^-%^ •
.RIG TYPE y.-9'lOOD WELL NO. H yyl tO-/~-g> TYPE Vnn.,.'A RIG NO.. gy-
JOB OWNER. •P i>n U O ^ ,* f
LOCATION ft-.^.j.^^o^ l,c.v^C^ p.'UL
TIME
Start
I'lOO
stop
-/.VD
•*
DEPTH
From
D
6
ID
2C
26
ZO
•\^
LIO
V^
65
h^
-^6
ns
To
£
io
lo
7S
lo
^S
'/o
^IS
SS
us
75.
qi
ioS
DRiaiNG INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
K/(/jf>w. u.^« Cwivi hw»UJ"/-ff -/•<-»
/-rt.
Sff,..p <f..,+ ft? J t.'(./_ J- ft..'Of
/l?''^.M.*.'v,.. .
f^».c.o^V ^ §..,A ' <..' I /•
<l,i , » r '
' '
It 1 1 » ^
,1 1 I ' '
h\iAtV<-reit f.
jvi„ciJ<ri,<» >/:)•'I'r..^...'hH <k/tf^f^U-f vy'
n^.'LL ,^-p^vK V^L«L
iV U J «i 4(? M -t
BIT
Type
BcH/H
Size
^^v
No.
/
M i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
w.,-t, f.
HOURLY WORK HRS. ^
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type _
10' 1 I
W
5 3
1

if i
f
Vi Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
w •
Driller "^^.1^. so.U,U Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
m
RIG NO. 2.
JOBOVWERJDi<£.'L'
LOCATION BrW
n
w.
RIG TYPE
d .A.J
7
<r
i
ocii I ucuve wiij, uiaii o^i la
[phone]
-P-7d?oO
r^u
WELL NO. Dm oO-/-^
Date /^ "
TYPE
2V-
>VlDr.
-^<^ 1
^Aoh
TIME
Start
7/^D
Jk w
stop
3;i{D
DEPTH
From
](?^
i?^"^
N6
llfi
i^S
loi
22S
2VJ
ISS
2L-i>
;?7S
7^.s
:>'?s
iciJ
To
i2S
H^
\U^
\'kS>
le3
126
^HS
Iii*
i63
2 75
295
^'f,^
.3c^S
3i?^
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
D: .*I_L .'i,.. lb'' /*!p*^ VinC te.
VldKrt <itcJt. T-
/'
(1
\ I
I '
\ ^
I V
1 I
){^\ c\ L.'HLr h.'f ^f cir..iscL S^.-.^'5
YVl ud<,{e^f U: • "f k ,-,..,., v L <,-e^-. i*t's
II . " ' t
, ( ' «^ ' * / V
(1 * ' II 1 1
JYluJcTtfrvC less e\,/^vi'L
BIT
Type
P^M,
Size
^/^v
^'
No.
/
i
1
STAND BY TiME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. i£L
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvpe
MISC.
^i-
FLUsed '
R. Used
Amount
-LUo'
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
^W
Driller
MJZL^—J&dl ^^^[A}IL <.p'J.LL Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake CHy, Utah 84115
[phone] Date //)-2<-^q
RIG NO.
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
2. RIG TYPE
ER prcvio r-..^V
c-P-7cC?£> WELLNO. Dwui -l-(^ TYPE IT.. :„,'l-cr
J
J ft.vY .!.'*. a« Vc.v.clCi"'LL
TIME
Start
7!3to
^
Stop
S'30
STAND BY TIME 1
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From To
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
trsi (^o»^ Uif-^irv. ftvxiA n..M L p.'p«-
? 1^ ^O 1 /* < TL. ^ M A u V V -e i:^ .»\r,- U;c. <•
rtl<.u>.,^u.l i....4.,v. •Ar.vu^ ^O ta--^Htf »A .^-^St
CiA\. \V^ n»..ML p'p" ^"'^ >k%7/tr^'
V/^ if»>U. 1? pt-r. HO' L/'h ^c.eeK.
t<kov.fA pi.r \(. Cvt;irv\ "^aCroZfS' t\TVt',.'A.4r
.ir-^.L f.Ort. TLl^'- ^M' J^/.L-r >^.'q
FMI^*. /f "f^O Oec^yyy. rL..H .'/ Kntx'e
f/o OwvCO-'-/ -«?^f up
BIT
Type Size No.
i 1
HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. l£>
r or Represental ive
CASING USED: Size H'IZ AL^«|/ P.
CASING USED:Size H 'U" 9\}C ^CY.
DRILLING MUD: Tvpe
MISC.
_^ 2- H'l^'^ P.uc. ...p^s
[J.C, FLUsed •? "feO WaterG.P.M.
ftn FLUsed Vn Water Static 2.^5"
Amount Fuel Oil
^/ ft\, A..4 --^ S'-^^ 10-OC^
- M;+ u..^-^ 7V.5' i
^nf.±i . «.v,( ^'^^W.'Uc <.p.^u.LLL Helper
•I LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
ftfHajecT wo. cf^iLBJ^- i^^f-rV f^^TT-^O/l) BORING, NO.£i£iCMd6__
PROJECT NAME f^/iyVIFUJ UH/!//?nUL LOGGED BY -^/l^ SS/^i/Al^
DRILLING. METHOD f^'-^'P-JTrfSpyi QPII^l CfiPJ^ !0'' DATE DRILLED J^kHMZZ
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE OFN
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ 0. CD
UJ
< I-az
-I o
Q. m
< >•
COM
o
2 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
m
s_
IO
IS_
zo
l-S
la.
6IIT/ 6fiAveu: 1-16^7 SfiOiU/J f^O)/?/.'^
^peiv/;
PEBBL'^ ^lUTi UlhUT hP-CUJ!'). \)^(i'J f^OD^i
'^X-P-TPX^ Lf\9/hE rr£SLB^ TO roh^n^.
'z'lurY 6/MVE/-: e>£'^\DiO . f'ppi^y c^ier^C
^/))VOV ^AMBli hp.^^
<MD^ camL: fiyfi^f^ Pcnfiy-^ c-c-^f
-^y^i ^-P)r^m ryOln^Ml
/•^ygAV^UV 6/TVO; ^Pgy ^nnfiy4 yokftfi
rrv^rv^ fc^.^-rtV&<.,, l^oOf^ C^fAVtL
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
BORING. NO.
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT ^. PAGE ^ QP
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
^5 5d
UJ >
29
a.cD
%
< K
CO
truj
iiiH 'Jo ag
<>•
<0.(0
f
<| 3
§
5
^
2
-r o n
>
tu
cc
S <
3
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
55^
W<9
^5-
SQ_
SS-IO:' OMn^^ir^rJE '. ^ew)6U BdoivA). \j^A>f fan
/^pmsf^.f)^ rni^f-yr-j^ i/fiacu -l\/:rfr)Ui
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD -
STATE COUNTY.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. fiMiil]£lda.
lOlT-SlP^Cf'"
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
LOCATION; T_
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^1.0R^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM] 0, OS
UJ
< H
(0 oz
0. ffl
<>-
(OCO
z p.
o o
5 LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
.. IOS'3^
OM'i^-fZ^m', (JF-CC'I^U 9l?.CW/\). \}^A^
F//v£'i^p./i//y&f3, r,ci^^,i\if ijifj^H cvrn^ihCi.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
San Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date/o-?(r^-^^r
RIG NO. /O RIG TYPE Py(,l,nCy ^WEU NO. OmW- IB- TYPE ^lrm,'TcrCnCj
JOBOWNER /^/t-^-> C'/'ty
LOCATION L
TIME
Start
•
Stop
r
DEPTH
From
'^9'
To
0
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
^"^i'
Log or Remarics
:^<,/:^// r o^lnl^nk^^i''nl^y,
44^ ' ^Z 4^^ ^'^^r..^.^ y,^^/ -7. ^h '
yf h/nnk" i^^ " y^>yy. Tn ^r>\'
r^y;<if2:// <rJ.yy^ <y^r7yy -frnAn 30'7'-
-y.^A'
T^ji^T?, ll ^cw/'«r^ Ayyi^n/ft!. -fn-xI-n
y,<.s^-zo'
"^n f^To li /)r'^t iy^/7j^/71 :/yy->/7i7 0 ^
cr//W yrinehyl^ -^i^^j-n 'A '—lO
J^y^Tciil <(>r-fctr:y. y^^ht^n/y.f/nn
BIT
Type Size
^
No.
*
#
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used
R.Used
AnK>unt
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
• 1
"^/yf.'myTzyrp i "^ i ""^
'• ijFi ij'iyn oJjjFiii 01
- 02
••••} r. jvct: fV.VM: j-'.jnii. IJGH f:u:;;b2r: i)mtO- Ig 03
•• ^ , . - . 04
.? r.nv.ct :: Ur: Date: //- 12-^^ 05
^3 •" "~ - 06
u7 l.'ell inside diameter: HYZ IN 07
G3 08
09 Oopth of botto:n: 3o2 FT 09
10 . -77 10
11 LGi.uih of orcvel prck: HS FT 11
52 12
13 DiL:-..;L3r of cravel pack: h-2o IN n
14
15 i:-?si!rcd Ly: M,. P&T^6£>/\) 17 Recorded by: "dM^JM^
l\ " * ' r%
- c.
•'•3
• Jl
-rt •'5
•'. Q
'^7
•••3
-'.3
£0
Cl
;^.2
•3
Color
::!.;r
'.::;:::EI;TS
»i. 4. —1> f.
i .
15
If^
1/
; ."• ' Air tGiTiperature: S^ DegF 1'
0 • .1
<\ "jrtnGr condition: fjc^^y '^.1
^ 22
'3 VI; JiDRAVfAL OF WELL VOLUMES 23
24
1 l.'cn Volume J.'ell Volume Well Volume 25
----- 26 •/ •'•.-( 1...I ; .rci-a yi.^x n
^.i "..'rUr Uv2l f.rior _ij^^ : ' 28
^.9 Tir.-i l^^gin flur.hing ^jli.3.C>. cL «L 29
30 Tir..2 c-nd flii^.Iiing U^iiD. 30
.il Tir„.3 v.ctc-i- 1:VG1 after 'L7..*3^" _______„__ 31
32 Estir.jted volu.,3 flushed {^^M.) '^l'-aSyD^j_jy^£v^_...lm^im.imM^SMZ. 32
33 t K- /n- ZI^S-'I^VSL 33
34 FIELD ,'.:;ALYSIS 34
35 - 35
36 l.'?.t6r tc-.,p2r:tUf-e (DcgC) („o -f 36
37 S£r,:ple pH -7 37
23 Sarr.ple conductivity (f.iiios/cm) j/^g 38
39 Buffer before — 39
•:0 ruffer after — • 40
a Cdor tLi.*. 41
JtsaL<sZt*/5 ^ 2
43 OKsvcAcPAienn' l^ttO ujn6 rVir vvsvr otFF-icvur fO 45
CUH/llfi l^lA/e6> f=fiff>n r?n£ \^fif^ • • 45
sUa-/ c .V__.^ff.j.*:! _wg.?u f^v.lL.1,^ 58
(4a.,.'1/1. yt^'gr/ y? ^tK.5'i..<7 g'f'f ci-V. 49
;gr:phs of "..-ctc-r sair.ples in labeled jars. 51
52
EI:D OF SECTION 53
Tayvicw Landfill Construction 5-21-89
DAVE'S DRILLE^G
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake CRy. Utah 84088
[phone] Dale /0-31-S^
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
7 RIG TYPE tr-P-)^^C> WEILNO. p^ to-2 TYPE>>^^>,;/
ER Vifi^iiO cAy
4 P.,.^»/.Vw i^^r\-^^LL
TIME
Start
I'CO
^•^
•
Stop
V/so
STAND BY TIME i
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
0
€
IS
1&
To
S
IS
3o
HS
DRILLING INFORMATION
fl Log or Remarks
W\rt\;e. n>.x ,. ..rl <..A ^1 p .«- rt
D Wi to -1
^v..'Lt4 t)..\ie. //i>''r^?r.^,.
<..A t^;'{+ '
I's t.«o«/. «^ Schd
* 1
HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. ^ /Z_
r or Represental
CASING USED: S
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
^t
BIT
Type
^-Mfi
•
Size
•v^r
ie Id R.Used ^/S Waler G.P.M.
ize FLUsed Water Static
voe Amount Fuel Oil
No.
/
1
«
^
MISC.
^ 1
Driller >l/jtT, gt:!..:..^ r^'^T?ii^ ff/,.S.'=S Helper Sycrtri ^g/? T^^.^.- I
•
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake CHy, Utah 84088
[phone] Date. 11- /- ^<^
RIG NO.
JOB OWN
LOCATIO
Z RIG TYPE
ER pvovf. <L>
C - P 7<CteO WELL NO. Om U-> - 2 TYPE )*«.,' A, *-
fv
^J IX^,/ .y.^..^ ;LcwJ CA)
TIME
Start
lico
ii V
stop
i.r,oO
STAND BY TIME h
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
V5
{.0
To
^0
7<
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
•
Log or Remarics
Ot.^f L -in^.^l/t- )6'' Ci.Sr.^h J
<::i ••cu-r-L «r ^.5^*.c4
rj kt^iiel J Scii <:(
t.^ v^. p 1 -^-l « ^ n W !.> - ^/ • -r» e Wl l<4 S-'^
,
BIT
Type
Rr#^
1 Size
9¥r
No.
1
«
-••
g f
4RS. HOURLY WORK HRS. ^
r or Representat ive
CASING USED: Size j^
CASING USED: Si
DRILLING MUD: T
MISC.
ze
R. Used 3 O Water G.P.M.
Ft. Used Water Static
voe Amount Fuel Oil
1
^
\'^nf/..tru PT. Helper w-\
U/L e. rt«5<i "^Sirl, K/i I l^T^. ^ M **
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Dale /A 1 -5^c^
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
"Z RIG TYPE
ER ^Ve\70 cHy
C-^ -IhoG WELLNO. Hwi />%-*? TYPE hi V/h'Tcv-
4 t?ikYn:'*w iL.eH C'il
TIME
Start
l>ry
^
•
Stop
^AVY)
STAND BY TIME f
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
"7^
"IQ
\(}f?
no
;^<;
160
To
^0
I0.<i
no
as
iSO
ii>6
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
•
HRS.
r or Representat
CASING USED: S
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
^e 10
ze
ype
MISC.
Log or Remarics
r>v.^Ll 4- pw.^oe. ]lf c:<^sr.»»,d
c\ur..y,^ L 4/-/^UIf\\- <;
CA \,zx «.• L A COIDVNU'S
\t ' «
/< < ^
r^ . (
IC If
13Lc«u -Tl/^rl L/tK^ AK CArf/ tfeh,/?.
loT^nT ro 0»ua.'s c^iiKtJ. cs A /WtLu out.
BIT
Type
M<^
Size
<?K
•
No.
/
f
^ i
*
HOURLY WORK HRS. ^ '/? _
R.Used <^D Waler Q.P.M.
R. Used Water Static
Amount Fuel Oil
- OK <^ V P- Ic&n M
^^ r ... ,._. _
Driller m^ itj P"^"La:^ , "-^-t;^ /?..^ Helper S/ey e:. hicni*^cf,.f I.
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W.Wells Park Road
t^m saitLaKeuny, uian&woe
^ [phone]
RIGNO. ^ RIG TYPE <l-P-7c5»oO WELL NO. OVYIUJ-
JOBOWNER Pr^oo C.'-^/
Date y/- .?- S C( ^
Z TYPE Vve.^.':^o^
LOCATION Ur>.Vv..Vu> Icl^rA P.^LL
TIME
Start
7.'co
^
Stop
.s;co
DEPTH
From
(i.S
/^o
/^^
210
13^
To
i^C)
i^J
no
lis
i^ib
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Renuuks
n.:U i D..'1/t. /^'V..r*/Kc;
ayc^uA ^ coit^Vle'.^
H 1
« i( tl
U 'I
»r •/
•
BIT
Type
l^.fh
'
Size
^^Y
No.
/
1
i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. I/O
CASING USED:Size fO FLUsed 15
CASING USED: Size R. Used
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe Amount
MISC. ^
^ Th^^cX tc c\^:Li /5peM V.,Lt c.f ICj^ ^^.^LLrri
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
f^ lio' k^A l/)^^9 \
UpL ^K iUf trfoLr. /'/^.i/^t'/ ^. ^rJ CM. ,,+(,,-.. P'r** "
C"i.» <; e.'u/| f^-lc,^..fl ic qn UcurVt-w /-^T l4»S y.^vM^uitrr fj ^.t/i^<;
g f /
°>.7t^ Rt. '-^-g>-^
Helper 'f\ f)
If IVi Kc^S.
Helper C,ic Ot= yyr aa ' ^* 'S '- **
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake CHy, Utah 84088
[phone] Date l/> L~^Ci
RIG NO. 2>
JOB OWNER "Pvf^iin r.Uj
.RIGTYPE P-P-ltPaa WELL NO. Dhl.U, 1 TYPE /yf^^.-l^i-
LOCATIOf 4 \tu
TIME
Start
7:on
0
Stop
r . ,'
.-f M: ru-) J
prr: •—• —=
DEPTH
From
2^b
zrs
To
2^5
?7o
n*MrtiJi V.LL lO«ST a-K tulcL 1,. K^ S».. TA End
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
n.M I .^H/i lO' <»p*« K^lft
CevM.nT^-Jly «V »-c^uc L lO.^rL Pv^rfui^e^-
^ * h.rL7c!cl C4 f^.i^L
\x5.4tv -2^.^'
P«u w^*» ifc>'«:...... ISO <41^ -SU^ll
/'lu.^uifL p.^^ U 4/0 2^/S Ci.o,*i Z70*
{^./•ffow, of M** .•..^r.*K«i /S C.4 :2il0
/
BIT
Type
f^McH
Size
4^^
No.
7
<
tf
H
STAND BY TIME HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. la. Signature of Owner or Representative -
. 1
CASING USED: Size fi" S c ^ <.«; n.
CASING USED: Size "/ "'- <' ' ^
DRILLING MUD: Type
MISC.
R. Used U.^
FL Used 11 O
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel
IS
2 3V'
Oil
^ 1 ^ --- ^
Driller WiiJh^. pSfeg^ Helper-f, i^\,\\ WC':.^,
\AA' U » Cn.'M^r LL
Helper
i.^C'^l ^'UC'.^f>l -•!'. Li-SL.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PRn.itrnT Nn y^OlLLF^,' A^/lPTV prrrPPCO/V RnpiMr. Mn P,\!'nmW-Z.
PROJECT NAME LOGGED BY TD/f.^ f\FiyM/4iC
. DATE DRILLED DRILLING. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATJON; T R
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE / OFJ^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
•
2t
O. 03
< I-
a. II
Q. CQ
< >
U-O)
o
z
. 3
Q O
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
S''
IQL
za^
2^^
M:
Cz/l-ygy ^ytT; y&LiovjiiH- tPr-'j-jtK '.i^r.uCry.T^-^
^ikT: 6<eg^ fieff^/^i wv-Li- ^•:?/>T^f: ^ upu
P//t/f ^x/Ft-i- r^/erf^n
V (^iO 1/ PINFAPfi Wi=/:- , ^ ^1-// '^ n)&
</ifrY^tssuc'-{^P^-^ .•^^£}fiiv i:^yT^x)
fi/>jB-r-,fixinEC
pgeei^V 6feA\jgLi ^/^>=i/ pg/7£W -jg,e7gz;
ff^r/
P^fiftiV SAA>0: gggujrJ, »ogt?>eiy <.pe.rS^C,
r^^tn^Mv^ 5Hrm
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
#
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. BV-DVAW-Z
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T. R,
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
PAGE _Z^0F_2.
Ul
< I-
co OS
13o
(LO 22 <> coco
z
2 , 3 o o
s
tu >
IU
I -I
cc
IU H <
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Bd
4^2_
.. '^^J
:^C?
SS
hCT~
^UMfAL"^ p£^p>p<:.'r^/^&'/ /^^/:?g;.>^ ccfirr/:
\)fr&l/ (7 ni^P-^ ft P^rfLr'<.--~s i-'P.^'A'.
SOMBll^ CgfefiZ*/ fi^/JiQ: ^•^?/i. •/•-/: ^ P^/^^.^
r^/r-Tr./:. ^<^-luyK<.^r>A^ ^.>,-^>/r.f-.<;;=j V^^gfti-
^gjiv;^nV gp/jpip^.-. Mf»g.v ^^^wa*/ r-/x,:^^^ T" COm-if- T-TiP.P-.ir^t -tf-i C-J^/z-yVv. P-.cirfftlS^L
£M£lJ_
^fcVEUvg£&f. kVl^^/l;>^^ £gf^T€/?, d/gylig^.f
fw-g>.>>'^fi^ff.'irn r;p F)/}g-S -rov^' r-f tfejiFi'fe-sg>v>v
m&LJ^Mi^Ui 6/\i1P: CiBB'^. Pi)o/^i -^^^J^P
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
POBiKir. K.n BS-tht^VJ-Z
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT T R A C T PAGE ^0F_2_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
ii is
0, m
REMARKS
lU
< H
«0
xS
QZ
0. OD 22 < >
(OCO
5
z
2 3 o
O
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
hi
no^
75_
^0
et
31L
:geeiV h^^^w- ^fc!/ hKgr;iy/H tmrjrz-^O)
PB&Bd nPh'l-~-L: c,(!!.^-J. f,B.r.i'J/-- - :-•'•-'L
$£?"/<, Pfi-^eh-c, -i^^-r^,..^ Al^KfZl ?-^A,^
f^jqez.^ feeftN&.L.- ^iP.gi/ M/ie^r/i.7/v rr-^r.^-SD.
/<?y/7 pg^fiAFd fe 3g>rw. iifi/^lr-L Z-'aW^.
10% P'.h&^jy -& r^'^h^i.
<^i>ti^'^\P^. (^^Bl^6Ai-'C ? e^.'-frBP-Ovfi /,-r/;'/ t:>->-r:r^
Ir-Vr^fimrL SC^'y f~6e;J'^n^-~.r:-.r..
j^fiBLH ^RTic^ 6i:,fi1~-L- "T'T'-'-f:- cp'<;rJ, i-:r6e>-r-s
T-o^r, -g ^p;*-i'^ .c/wc to'^i,
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
• BORING. NO. .£i=£liUJ4iz2-
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGEJLOF.^.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
is
& CD
IU
!§:
< t-
(0
lU""
az
<5^
eta 22
< >
COCO
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
^d
ICO
)0{
IIQ^
lit
\20
f£.66kS ^Ptii^ixi 6ArJc^ kP.Pnn FCOPI-'^ yi>ni^V
^ftBi^ y^PAVgyi-y ^iinc.-&^.ovjt)j Poofi.\Ji yi?e>rT£>,
\lP^nf^r-fT-9ir-s ia •'"Qf^f JiP^i^j^fiM^'J- >frr,.-.' ',vti
Kreei^ «A7i-/giw c„>iL: kttvix)ti (-7opyi cc^r^c
tcrla fiF6euki' iS ^C'^'^ .7^fn^f:iU. -'UB- -A//r.,
\0hPfbm-t ir ^^.'A, SpfffijifVSu.., w >:r./m i htiP
0£y^^;-^ f.PK'^li^ LU^ ^.ArlC :P.BO'/y() r<9f.'y'C-^i^^.
lo'fr>Pff.6(-f^ 'h=i^O^>^,2C^nl-cA-lt;. r,=,/'>r Cti''(.
PBEBL'^ ^pft\--/-iV '.n/lt • fJi^.P-^jr} >.':':••- :-r:rz '-f.'JC
''' 'i^-f-fjurri -j-^^A^'/g- / 'v- y-'' 'J*-^ -'..-iffP •
^^i-
m REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
. anom» Kin P.M^rYAMhl
LOGGED BY
DRILLING. METHOD DATE DRILLED
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^0F.$.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
^S
53
fli
z? 0. O
IU n
(0
Uj"-
az
Q. CD 22 <> coco
o
5 3 is
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
115-
I^O-
i%£^
tHQ__
I'i^
)So
pK&ftLV 6/anvguy ^niv •• ^r^V-'i pop^y^ <^OF:ISX
/g^^p&Afi^.K zp^'^^enm /)rrjy.-u'C.
P^BPiH ^SKryu-'^. tATic: P?-DDfAff t^pQvfJ 'J-ZU £rn-r-/>
»^^grf/l;)^^.• ci^HD lt>%("^BHiS:^ ion 4>'</-:
/^M^n^ <sfJD'. ^H^^i/tll- t.PDmJ J^^s-riOHi tiyTV£
\ifc\f a.onr-ir' •< Afir , lo^..-. -C/>fVfe//j -^ -^
p^if^u^ 6f>^y^^y </\f')rr. ,-rzT'--.> .^.•r.v.-' ,,rC:'J>^
CClirr) h.':r->ri^- ^.fii')r. •'^7;--t^/.-'^"> V-'-. "•c%iJ>nf,
PEBBLi hfJA^^lVi 6firtD: l^eW)6f4 B.P.OV)rJ. t/gU- <,LfPj^/}
P^/NE -L/ViL. ^< PBAfii-E^.-iS ^J.M , /otAJiJI/i^L
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO. _
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
_«__ BORING. .NO.-Sli^HH^L
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE 1 rit: y
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
Ul
< t-
co
tUJ
Ckli
Ui"-
oz
CO
a. CD 22 o coco
5 z
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
led
i9e_
.. /^
7«t?
ZoS
z-\o
<yiy\^rz.
frf^T.
y
5KIHP
CPM^VLM 6Arin '• >;>so/ijf6;A ftfep'^r; ,'.g/?/i//h iii;^^
P-lN^-^ i^S?.frJ>^ CSf/C.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BOBmG.uo. Mzimt^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED .
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE _^0F_2_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
zt=
H
a. ffl
Ul
15: < •-
CO
lU"-
oz
CO !ijd
0.0
22 <> coco
1
3 Q T*
5
z
3 Q rj
or
{"
t
5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
2.1^
I^'KT'
ri^
-ViO
'o<r
7*10
f,tt^^^-yi ^Ktlt'tirr!'i> B^V)/}. •.o7-:' '.crf^-'
A£<l^/g•^^^-V ^.fitiP; Pz-npyA'' ^P.r^ufi yi-i.rr')h^
c. n^.^1 g-•/!*•-- ^fi'n^ ~.?^o ->JA:r-.
<mt
Pifp.(^L^ <j\rH\r^ttPi^n pKte^fi, pi::o(^i-'J Cirf>--m.-
hfn\J^ -'.fitit r^.^^C A?/a6A^-'-^ -/P*/^ .
^/iwt'i Pr^fifik^i: fiiroGieil BPPfjjr-i cacnH 6iPC7^ij
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION: T,
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. JSVIOMTL
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE 3-of$.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
zfc
<o
(L ffl
Ul n
CO
Ett UJ '^2
0. ffl 22 < > coco |8|5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
Z4f
750
TSS"
Z(sO
lUS
^^H
REMARKS
(.flttJ^uH Uiit\'-kErt.)^.u B^POij)fJ j.-i^A!U/v\
'J2£ML •mr,' -zi^.v ". o^T ••-,•//••••-;•
V
^Y^n E
^Rywe
I
<AM!
'^,/5/«.!-
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
Salt Lake City. Utah 84088
[phone] Date •^'•- //-^'Sr'^i
RIG WO.fl'fO RIG TYPE.
JOB OWNER Pj-r^y'r /*.'ty
/^^,'J/n^l WELLl\Q.O/]'1(.J-^.-Z- TYPE /^v^/t/i^/-.v..
TIME
start
yco
Jjr^n m
7.'CO
Stop
9fCX
^rc
^/rn
"NC-'-V/ lr,f It /
DEPTH
From
.
To
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft. Log or Remarics
//-^
'f;nr<A /^..ryirsA t^^^ y>,. Ay^Jy D^l-^-U-
•Pr.,^'^A'-n .^<17Al <:v.r¥r^^y
Cci-np/ift^t..,
a^^ D/r)(J'7, .:Xl.<^t.il I'r^^f-
h/yiZ-tl/i^i ' r-S^rt^A^ . an^l 7J-P S? 'y-.Jr-
^^"y)Ur -Tn ?.^Q*. '•rnK'l7.f{^,.nrf
ffr^^^ Z7/'''- -? uy\'.
'
//- 7
Set cymp, h,-q rrr?^ I Jni'.K^ ySii /yj^
r)MLf-a. i^.r,J^lty ...-^//-TC^ -Zi^y^
An:
//-^ -/7M;</ y^y^y}/-r}^,^ yii A^/,^ f^~?
fmyi A^ '-/I ."fnUa ll -Sot-fa^^^ -Tc*/-*,^.
\llcti- 1 Av<.-j^rj 7^y-A:ih,V/ '
/2-i'eJyy>e Ay/y <7r)C?-C^
BIT
Type
/O^
/c
/r^A
Size
i
f^^
' ^
No.
«
^ 4
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
^r^^Zm^
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
*
FLUsed ^
RUsed
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
41k tf • . f
yi / .
f
/
Helper
li/in /\yi^^ "^ <t^'y y^..,.<t,...
•••Jl
•2
('3
C'l
05
05
07
03
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
33
29
•0
',1
<2
43
-'.4
45
f.5
47
43
49
50
51
52
53
Vn.iJirVflOfinFMX
rroject: BAYVIFUJ^A^nnL.!. .. i.'cll f:i:.-,hcr: _Pm.VP:L2^
Project Kur.-,ber: "__ ' Date: //- Z 2,- ^<^
l.'ell inside diameter: HL IH
Depth of bottom: 211 FT
Length of gravel pick: HS FT
Dian-.atcr of gravel pack: l(;'Xo_ IN
Ksasuicd ty: _JVi, ^XS^P^cH} •
Recorded by: '-:^l/pt/j/, ^^.
Air temperature: ?T) DegF
Weather condition: /^cc^-e/^ colA
WITHDRAWAL OF WELL VOLUMES
FLUSHING ' Well Volume Well Volcn-.e Well Volume
jL^\t.
X^k. J . XLlo.
V.'ater level bsfore
Water level after
T1.?.e begin flushing
lice end flushing o^\ zo
Time v.'ater level after J£il3£2—_
Estimated volume flushed (GAL) ^'-^^L p<,- >H.'I,>.
FIELD ANALYSIS
SSL Water temperature (DegC)
Sample pH (.
Sample conductivity (mhos/cm) t^ho
Buffer before -
Buffer aftar —
Odor
Color
Other
JLLc-£.
co:'::;ErjTS
-7?^ w^/.i fi.tx^\ii^fiW M^M Wi^p^ ftpe^e.
(^e.^Bu)P/\ii£nrr AND PPDnoLcn e^oop
Attach photographs of water samples in labeled jars.
END OF SECTIOM
01
02
03
04
05
05
07
03
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
lij
17
18
19
?-:o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30 n
32
33
34
CO
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
•
Bayview Landfill Construction 6-21-89
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Paiic Road
Salt Lake City, Utafi 84088
[phone] DaleJhMzlS-
RIG NO. 2-.RIGTYPE C-P-yoocD WELL NO. dv^Ui'X .VfPEJoLiJulhj^
JOB OWNER p^^ood a.H ]f
LOCATION £L
TIME
Start
7!oo
#
Stop
5;co
.
*
:^/ v.' e Wl
DEPTH
From
O
^
iO
f.f?
?o
25
30
y^
iO
7^
To
,5*
iO
IS
20
25
.20
'•l^
^0
7^
^r:>
..uci^i.^LL
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
SCjf up rt*l OrKW-? cir. ur/ tL ^..V
'fi.'iicrS f5*^ Vii'rt. i- ^.*,iM.p.
>/c..-( /ft'' ^d.«;r.>ud.
m<xKe Cl vcoft.!?!^ sl,t>«. tb/ut.
0^;^/. f n^.N.,- /O" ct.w/..ri
fi^.r-fTML
ificrJ^ f.^LL
a.hs.oc^L clc.V J- Sct^J)f fi.'l't
OLV-c**'gL &c^v>ol CCJIDWLCC
c^t-aticL S"»AcA Ccjtblc^
ai.«.t>e.t <;»t.vid C^lo^pir^
«. i.r.i;,-L ^«xl«cV <-ot)(^ltS
4 .(. '^ ^ ^
<J I «. • \ V V \
BIT
Type Size
/?^^r1 ?^V
No.
/
«
1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. in.
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type _
/2>'' R. Used
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
rite M % 4
°^,M.7ti, pSFzL^ r^^//. ....J.iL 1"'^
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake CKy, Utaft 84115
[phone] Date U '1^-^^
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIO^
)_ RIG TYPE <
ER P^-rtfio rJ^f
J. R^^v' i;-**- «^
TIME
Start
7.'oo
%
Stop
=^'!'>0
DEPTH
From
'\o
166
\20
{S6
ISO
lui
To
los
Ho
Yl.6
]iD
IU5
)&c
. Ic^*'
C-?-200(D WELLNO. 0*«6')- 5 TYPE iffc>ur'^otr
JIOAL
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft. Log or Remarics
OK'a 4 n..'i;« (O'^ ccSr'.'s.cL.
CAVuiJ-cl 5c^^cX C.-oV) V>ltrS
e4 Vt.^<j^l. Af^wvpl foolLciS
cv V-^ W «fL 5u weX ctj\oloL<:S
0\:,..,-rL S.^-<( /-CJU klei
M l,c~u<-L .SowcA CcstoLe.^
('5pcl. Vf^L/-. Ui,,.,_-iL Ccf*,r-KcCX i/^,-h li/tfj;
BIT
Type
TSMTA
Size
W'4
No.
/
g
%
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
CASING USED: Size.
CASING USED: Size
ML
HOURLY WORK HRS.
\'-*-r,^7rf.^.^.
FLUsed.
FLUsed.
7.S .Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
DRILLING MUD: Type Amount Fuel Oil
MISC.
4 1 ^ ^ •
"^i^H/Hc sp.'JUL Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
SaK Lake City, Utati 84088
[phone] o^t_liA±3Jl
RIG NO. ZL
JOB OWNER Pr-t'Uo r^Ay
.RIG TYPE r.^OACcDd WELL NO. D W\ (AJ - S TYPE Mt,^.'[o\
LOCATION Rf^y v5
TIME
Start
?/cO
_
•
Stop
SlbO
•*,^<o
DEPTH
From
1^
To
m
y^'f-y-A Q.AL
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarks
P.'ti<'up ^rrv.t pluK-/- >'i, PLk^A^
ir,n(( A ici .^Lop.
u^^A fo tK*. eico sfcD*-^ <^^A
ISo'^'l^'PU^ ^ ^
iAt/-c^\J^L^ T* eir^ HCI «p«jm^
LcMt/./,/-C <?<•!.*/» Ur're ttc'l-etr
BIT
Type
Bulk
Size
^/^
No.
/
1
4 1
'
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.. m.
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe
MISC.
R. Usad
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel OU
i w
^^%^^^^r^ {'"'^'u.^iU SPU.LL r^'P^'Av f^oss
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
SaK Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date lhl6 -^c\
RIGNO. IL RIGTYPE A~P^ 7ood) WELL NO. 0 Hi LU-^ TYPE m^-/'
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
ER pVii^Jc) ^/l ^v
4 ft c.y' D.'cto U.wiA ^.'UL
TIME
Start
l!co
H\2>0
^
Stop
<^t30
sioO
STAND BY TIME ^
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
I^S
w
To
^\0
7?^
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
.
Log or Remarics
Di^.' LL.'IA fl. /9p<LI^ II/JL*
,!••< kvi -. ... \-*rX /^r««i/ -f.! .C
\i\^A ^^ ft/ijtx\A -4n Set OUMO.
4RS. HOURLY WORK HRS. lO'
r or Representat Ive
^o^
BIT
Type
R.*fni«
Size
Cf^f^
No.
i
<
g
1
*
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED:Size.
DRILLING MUD: Type.
FLUsed.
FLUsed
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
^Fuel -Oil.
MISC.
"""^'[^^..rfri- pTn: A/rpr»
Helper k'/Zi. ci^.'^i.^ r^'P'r/V /?^S
•^ '/*//.^ l'i '/tn "^ /^^ .. i-y 11.^\
H
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
Salt Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date /I'/A-S'H
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOI
7 RIG TYPE ^r-P~ 7C?C3<D WELL NO. /)M 05 - 3. TYPE »ifex //C^.
ER pvnMtO Ci^4 f
M fic.v.,.v^u) Lc^^A P/LL
TIME
Start
2!oo
^
W
Stop
s;m
STAND BY TIME ^
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
.2 2^
2^o
266
270
is-i-
'
To
2^0
2SS
Z>D
2gS
ZdD
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
•
Log or Remarics
Ou.'Ll 'uH AjpHiH l»«jlc_
yfluA sLuf. U\AU cUf rf- gt'r.li^l
VhtLcl <rautr i-o.'Hv cCt^y 4 at-^ucL
mud s4o^« uj.'fU «j.kcceL Li'HLc u..ico
\^^i.A .«;T«!»k.- lu.'fU r. u,...<.L i.c.ye/s
t^ <t . « < I it
r.AAi l.^r! Hh P.UC 2o'^^
ScVceV\ tifcvrl <^(,«.,^( pc..*' 1/ to 2^^'
'
HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. M
r or Representat ive
BIT
Type
Ri-^/«
?yo'
Size
^^
•
/
No.
/
t
^ i
'
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
y// ^i..-^
H'h.^ Sc\t/ic^
FLUsed.
FLUsed.
2?0
10_
.Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
Water Static ^i^'o'
Fuel ^011
MISC.
Driller, 'v\^r.X^ ertn^ J""^^;.. i Coi^
He^r mnl.
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road.
SaK Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date //- /7> ^q
RIG NO.. RIG TYPE gg^nPL^•f:o^. g>«. WEU. NO. 0 m VU "v^ TYPE tytoK.' ht
JOB OWN
LOCATIOI
ER p irou/5 rA y
4 Ps'^ y i/.^r .*.» LawJC.^LL
TIME
Start
V.OO
^
#
Stop
^.'l€
DEPTH
From To
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
Wioort fl-PAOOO fo LcfAouJin. CKircur
<A I.p ^^^pUi'o^ ^r<j. -4-iarl^k
Rw.^v^rj Xk.Aiy^Ae. fJLh, IL^i'AyS'.
AcA \r> p^LI lo" ^a.«:...W af )L>.<
.<:lUL pA-{.'i.r. >^ A.J/>»,Ats.
iD^lV^A r^?s^.*hr, CVc,K. »U&*-i/^
BIT
Type
Lue^(( •K hWr- Lc^yJouah £i.»^««. L£>«^cS't4
trf/./L{lk.
Size No.
«
i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.. ^
Driller W.r7t,, P^>.,v.... rrv,;(^.. .So;J,a \"^T,-rn~l
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Tvoe
MISC.
R:Used
R.Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Stalk:
Fuel
—
OU
• 1
inSS. H
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
PBOJSCT-NO. (sPtiiP-d: I'V^/lfi'T^ Jif^Tl^^nnf HnpiMft Mn C\l'f)yY\VJ^^
PROJECT NAME ft/lV\Jlg\A) ltir^\miL-P^Oy>0 CiV/ LOGGED BY -f, Rf^iyU^JC
DRILLING. METHOD t,b)\^/nHWIV AlCLP/TTtAU ln"CM,m^ DATE DRILLED \\h(^\(>C^
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
LOCATJON: T R
1
.SECT. TRACT. PAGE I OP in
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM]
Zi-
So
0. m
< H QZ <>
coco
r.
z^..
- /51
z^
^^L-
3i2.
REM ARKS rc'-^c?' hliolePj
ii
o o
T
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
g/lA/g^/ 6//^^7y S^'l^l. • OHVB. aeiPUjNi \id^
fi£/IV^y
i^ve^t;,!/ ^yi-'T' 01'II\JB BW^JO/^y VBP.'^ rirJ^
/-../> AJf)£^ lO%i>fifil=rL
Pc^cf.Pi tC^-lnD.^ ie^/n<:fit-lD z.-:^;/}<ji^
^^rv t'^BuH 6/piivg^ •• t^.gy BJPPfJOfO. rooi^yj '-cem.
l'?''j'7 6iur' 3iP% (i^B£L£y-^ .;?g^h.
r"
5A>/e
:£ I \7—
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY,
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
RnaiM» MO AV^/)>nV./-'3
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED ')}iC>/AO
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
,SECT._____ TRACT PAGE •> nrlO
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM3
pi
-I
a. CD
UI
& 0. S > < I-co
as
0. m Z2 <>
CO. CO
o
z
5"
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
5-^-
v5-5L-
^^
\o'lBpm%V-^i.'ili> ion-,. ZO^/i&iVlS/..
•
^MA
PFftfti-V AP,/\V;r7lV -^MiCr. hPPUJf^ /^^/g/gg/g
2p''lofijf!K^SiJ^syoeu-SOfi:i^D H^fPJni tZAflO
pi£>&i>i 6/gA\/guy ^/i/'J/Q a^iPCiCJi Bflou)/!)
2P% P^BkSC. l^/n ^itVfeL eC/^ i^gfllVm S^/V/?.
m REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
• BORING, tto. £±:11M1^3-
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT T R A C T PAGE A o FJO
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
UJ
< ^-
V)
tit!
OZ
3d
a. CO SS <>
coco
o
z s 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
REMARKS
l^X
Id
74.
eo
et
30.
PfiSeiV ^nCj- R^.€D)6H AAA^^, /o%p^iEC
tUF,».L ^oc-n<C n^rvJr^ --Aril-
5/1/ve
L
U-
iM-L.
Cuivg-
fg^Hf <J^tiL •' <rB£^t^. iO^PVBBii^ -g ^O/^.i-^
i
PPO^Vj '^P^.Tt-D T^<e^\'Oi^y^<P>A^~^'t.t^fi£>
^y
</^mg>
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4' PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. Mh£USlMLz2-
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE V CipJV
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
m
It is
"J?
^^ a, tn
REMARKS
UI
sJ UJ
CO Q5
Sd
Q. ffi sz <>
COCO gs
3
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
^^Ll
ipp
la
no
\i'
n m.
^^/se/y ^/?iivgAJ.y ^s^sm-- r^f^^ BSIPMO /.^wasfr^
^/P/WgUy g^rJC/ ni^O^Klr 7^^r.'^>//-J~L
\Air.r,ivr-' y-cPTBr. t/^.-Pf"jK' fii^p-jji) trnvP
5ht^M OBBPlV P^lUiS^L-.APP'^-BPOvir). M(-i>0
r.J>ilP<B lC^;n^>At\r-, ^CPi^ hrr-f*.li^y^ i^Ok/^
2<P0!o^Pt^:5U
PSfAI-ry-tr yr^n,^- >£>'lnAPjt7PC.
(
7
J^ML^L.
Exploratory & Monitor .
WeU DrilHng
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. .^izMMLZ^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION; T R
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE NS" OPJO
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
•
a. ffi
UJ _j UJ
!§:
< H
CO
REMARKS
/3^
fcuj
Ui""
OS
3d
0.01
sz
< > coco
"^—f I 5 O X t
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
}^s_
IBQ^
m
iH^L^
I I ISiP
I
^
'g/^ivi..£
^
snmg
^//>t//?V /ni^mtp- /'y.P-ffii f^PD^fl, 10 <'in<Mf)
W iSV.. L A /7,P 71?/^ jT^jg >i1 '/^<:
X
T^
^/fh'F
/S'/^ygn-y -^/^i^Q- f^ecni^fi- PPo'jjf}. Icf'o-'^n^tz.i.
•M^'^ •i'/i^.r^-jH - g=.W:E /<:'r?i^ f»t</<C.
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME .
DRILLINQ. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE /^ nf IO
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
H
UJ d 0. ffi
<
CO
OS
UJ;^ -lO a.ffi ZZ < > coco
z z
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
REMARKS
ISL
i(fiO
- /^C-
no
nL-
1^
/g-^uig/;./ AtirJf):ij^/roify^j BfjO'j)f} is>%Afiff^/t^c
\i/g:^-^/p^-yr >vr-.oiM^ ^r^ ^./ir/i.
PPAciL'j P,P^y|r•u^ ^AUC- ^^.Ak<ft Pfij?'j}r/
t^ePoPl.^y/^PT^ts, rvxmj^A <ArJC-
v^
-J/IVVi?
^/lyyg
-5/1 ;Mg.
MJ^-t^ cei^WS/) •afi£-ig^tt?CI\)r>^. f.^)'€fir/D
ExplCKatory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. iiL:^]MLL^
: LOGGED BY .
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE 1 Of /py
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
ZK
pi
So
a. ffi
UJ
< t-
n UJ Q.ii_
UJ_
az
0. ffi zz <> coco
z s
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
A
1^
/'?^2_
l<=i
2£^
2^^
^•\o
pgfi.Pl'i /•y.Pt^n^-Lli 4^Afi/C • h.'C-CC-^'^ G.P^U.'/^)
-2,(^^10 f^T^y£'---Z, i^('/nP>£mi.^ ^ff/EiJiffC.
st^nn
^
5A/v\5-
ir
C/^yri~.
I
5mg=_
V
'S/(»fti€'
•
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
4 PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY B0RIN(3
• BORING. NO. M:±2llWLl^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE _S-OFZ^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
ii
UJ=^
Q. ffi
Ul
3J UJ
^>
< H
co
tuj
Uj'*'
OS
o
•II .-j jO
zs
<>•
coco
^
a^
9
§
5
^
2
3
0
S
y
f LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
t20
Zl
n^-.
230
Z^^
^'fO
l/P^jn cr^Qi.^^ T o^.-^frr-:.. ^r)f fi-c t/ir/9
Jy
ft^JOLSi.
Jll.
:kL!2L^
n|.iW^-7P/i;£;pi=jjj i.;-fife^r^^ ^gya/iv-cj. //z't:
i/v cun\Nh<
4^
<.ytmg
REMARKS ixr 2.55* fkt^tismpri ^UiiriS
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
• BORING. NO. M^MUill^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^ ciP /n
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
UJ
7* UJ
< t-co
ruj
U"Ll_
az
_iO a ffi ZZ < >
coco
z z
ol s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
IH'.
ZSO
ZSiL.
ZhCL-
K^S
JS^
yiti^<ivi]j^ r Pr^^r f-/7g,gf/i-?;^ -;/•./- v^vvi-r
f
5 A HI ft:
•S'/lK^g
^/iMiL
</^Mtg-
—r—
ifiyvMT
REMARKS )2jf^ ^AflV^T^^ ^UT7?A'6'6^/i^ 1^^^
J , ._.,«, Exploratory & Monitor
Anji/lO nypteei^l^i-^^^''^*^- WellDrilimg
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECiT NO. __
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BOR\NG.HO.Mj:QltMZ^
_^ LOGGED BY
'. DATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE IP^ neJO
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
li P
zQ uJ =j 0, ffl
UJ
;;' uj 1^
(0
rti;
OZ
0. ffi zs o coco
o
s
z z
3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
27.
Z^2-
.. 2-0£l.
Z^o
Zl
'^OO
S/iii\j\s:i.%y 6/in/ri''.f)BCCh.w AP.O/)/J ^-^"^^afmA.
VtSjp^ p-Mjr, ^finmsr-P n^/ CArtP
•^dtt -'^
. I
i t.f,\
61^X11.
aft)v^
'^AY-i
REMARKS ^.^ ^^jj^ b^t.^lb ^^'"'^
A^nn^^-ir &;. \pfPl^^^l^U cy •r?A-.^^''«'-'^'^^wSSnT'*''"''"
. term's, -.vr^i. «..,,!J: i:.i/r^—s,';.rvT:?wF f*Jlj'>^T
/s. ^ ^.£,£ K..r?e /-/^/j^^^/.a DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Uke City, Utati 84088
[phone] Date-.V" 2r>-g-c<
RIG NO. _RIG TYPE HeLr y^r^A^tr WELL NO. p M (,> -.3 TYPE JQ^^ tulf^fc.
JOB OWN
LOCATIOI
ER P v/n)y> r : fv
M Ray i>.' >/•u^ Lecv,
TIME
Start
l\f')0
•
Stop
^'30
DEPTH
From To
A P.' Ll.
DRILUNG INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarits
f.'LJ liw.+ rv Uc^cfc^
QiA ^^J/,^AA /M t^^A pr.ll.
It)' /-cSc.'iiclAo IP) /AVoiIJ 0.\^ck
/K<-fe^(.L ^'' ^ufCc^c p:pC.. ftKci kHul/c
<r« W» eA CcA .
KV/70C eU^y-ffi.'un.- itP ic^V AnlAi^ /•.^.rr.
/y t"t VTCM^ -lo 3-c^ LOrtL^
0<crt*v d:-P-7ooo
BIT
Type Size No.
«
i 1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.. ^
'/:
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
aUsed.
R.Used.
.Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
__Fuel _OII
MISC.
•I Driller ^^ ^^7— rr^t—^ l^^^f^AA \t) C_«. ^.{1. I "«•»»'
jUBU aCMpl^&wDI UOG. DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City, Utafi 84115
[phone] D3ie__LL i/ioje? #
RIG TYPE ^U. l^..c^(c^r WELL NO. M QJ ' 3 TYPE 'm/^v,.'io\r
JOB OWNER 9fC\/<D C A \J
RIG NO.
LOCAl lor "* nr
TIME
Start
^ w
Stop
.V ^ •t^u
DEPTH
From To
1
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
Q.... .v, -yon' ^I'L PX\C euc.i^
Pr>' V'/i Si-.v-ci^i^
dft^otL p:.c il CrtjUA 7r>o' io Zis'
flt=..f<9 h."/c Sfd C.-^*^ 1/,^'- 2n'
Oi¥-nA •Ti-rti'v* 2o -^
<c..l(..A f.ou. T-' (^'
//>- 2^ - ^^^A
n..^i( 4- n..\,^ i^'' O' \US*
op^v. U.lr^ it^'-3oo'
///i^ ^,a-/e^ c-f z?^'
BIT
Type
•
Size No.
0
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of (Dwner or Representative.
^M^^^^
HOURLY WORK HRS.
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used
R. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel
5r
Oil
MISC.
• 1
Helper Helper
•
•
01 IMI. nrv^ii'Fi'.iMi 01
02 C2
03 Project.: .FVAMf.WJ.ANDfJ.ll '..'ell IJuTiibcr: _ P/^U^ X. 03
^4 • ...-.• - --. - ^^
05 Project riurobcr: • Date: ^A&ft/_^J /yS^ 05
06 • • • 06
07 Wen Insicie dUniBter: 4C.9"IN 07
08 08
09 Depth of bottom: •• ^^Jy FT 09
10 . . . _ 10
11 Length of grave] pack: *. x^ FT \\
12 12
13 DIaiTieter of gravel pack: /^ IN 13
15 rieasured by: _^^^ 15
16 . 16
17 Recorded by: 17
18 . , 18
19 Air ten-iperature: .- J^j^ DegF 19
20 . • . 20
'i.\ Heather condition: • ?1
ll 22
23 WITHDRAl.'AL OF V.TLL VOLUMES 23
24 ... 24
^:5 FLUSHING l/ell Volu.Tie Well Volume Well Volu.nie ;5
'5 ?6
27 '..'ater level before /i4/S'.^ • 11
28 Water level after ___I • '""" ZS
29 TIfTie begin flushing yJf.'^fO '_ _,! 29
30 Time end flushing _Z.^1!£H. ____I ._ Z '^^
31 Time water level after ,—_I ^1
32 EstifTiated voiuma flushed (GAL) ^/^gg^ ~ I -2
33 33
24 FIELD ANALYSIS 34
35 • 35
36 1,'ater temperature (DegC) ^O /^ 36
37 Sample pH y,yj 37
38 Sample ccnductivity (mhos/cm) ^Jdi^ 3-3
39 Buffer before • 39
^0 Buffer after '-.^
41 Odor Ai>^>^ \ 41
42 Color 6A.*/r- .'_ H2
43 Other ' "" " 43
/, 4 4 4
45 COMMENTS 45
45 46
47 47
50 SO
51 Attach photographs of v.'ater samples in labeled jars. 51
52 52
53 END OF SECTION 53
Bayview Landfill Construction 6-21-89
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
SaK Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] DaieV^-^^g'j^ •
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
"2- RIG"
ER Prtfvi<5 /•,' i
TYPE_j
<
C^ Q-lOO^ WELLNO. OvWtO- *•/ TYPEi^on.'/d
4 t^c,v llJ«^^ 'l^wi-C'LL
TIME
Start
7130
^ w
Stop
v;.?o
STAND BY TIME \
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
0
6
iO
\^
-?,«?
3S
V^
^^
i'S
. To
S
Ib
tS
^s
2S
"IS
iS
LS
IS
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
HRS.
r or Represental Ive
CASING USED: Size //;''
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ize
voe
MISC.
Log or Remarics
HCKA^ r-f.S-^.'Krtl
<4^yi fo CXV.'LL i n^.Ve ffi"c^A^.'M.i
^uuM-ucL "^ cohUXJs .s<.«.c(
i/v ' ' ^ *
.V
IV
, V
I I V X- V *•
1 I IV V V
J 1 ^ I t I
BIT
Type
fi-/^/,
Size
^^^
HOURLY WORK HRS. <=^
R.Used IS Water 6.P.
FLUsed Water Statk
M.
Amount Fuel Oil
°""^'^..t. i^t::... n?/^. -<..vj.a
-|Q^—
No.
/
1
^
M 1
"'•p^'fO.v.f^-n
1
1
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City. Utah 84115
[phone] Date /0-27'SC|
RIG NO. 2- RIG TYPE €r-P- lOOO ^WELL NO. D rlO fO - ^( TYPE yWt?M.7o^
JOB OWNER pypyjo r .^ 4 y
LOCATION i/^CA
TIME
Start
IAD
%
Stop
SiCk.;
-y u:,.v^ L
DEPTH
From
ys
^s
V
loi-
ns'
izs
135
HS
To
<5r-5
^5
)6^
M^
I2J
/35-
ms
uo
;..A e.vcL
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
r^.:Ll4 nv..^U<. /O" yc^s^.^.f.
<:ij *.«.y cL - <;t..ucA-W<?Lj.t: v5 •
Cjt<u.v;eL St^wA SiyiAvirS
P iC « V I ^
I ^ « V. 1 \
\C \ V. « 1
\\. V \ « \
VV • \ <• < >•
IV 11 i \
BIT
Type
Mir.
Size
Q^^
No.
1
i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS ;. Ci^/Z,
CASING USED: Size lO^^
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R. Used
R. Used
Amount
-5C Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
^"-^ i
#
Driller^ ^ -4—
fjfniMA/-Helper-;., o ^ "^'^"n.^./^/:^
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 South
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115
[phone] Date Uo ' 3S->8c^
RIG NO. 1. RIG TYPE ^T - P- lOOV WELL NO. 0 vvt IO - ^1 TYPE VMr* v..' ^.
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
ER p»-/^t)C ^M
sir
V
J tt^f\-/ <^ .'r .!•» Ke*wfiiCv*Ll.
TIME
Start
llio
^
w
stop
2{3C
STAND BY TIME f
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
ISO
To
KfS
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
hratatU.VM U.'^^LJI sU^t I'^i.i-
C^P->CO.
<^.^;Lrv/ r^A tU.'i^tl.'s c;4c.^-(rJ
)n..,^IL.fi in''
awc^otL - 5C.KA~ "dc?Lclfev'.s
•
HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. "7
r or Represental
CASING USED: S
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
BIT
Type
'
Size No.
^ 4
ie (0'^ R.Used 1^ Water G.P.M.
ze Ft. Used Water Statte
voe Amount Fuel Oil
Ml§g.
m
^^ %
°*V)^i7tr~^7iiiir "•»'"77«. /?.ss Helper
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
^OJCOT f<0. CPlllBie.- yyfA/aV ^^-P-^OA/ BOR\NG.NO.&Z^ilEzd^^
PROJECT NAMg if/r^/g'-V '.^AfjrP/!-!. LOGGED BY r^-'^' h'^J^i^Akj
DRILLING. METHOD OAI^'^/D/S.ive: A'l A. A^fT^-zAJ DATE DRILLED —
1
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE J-OF:Z_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM3
ZH
UJ u
a. (Q
15:
< H
ft
OS
a. 03
SS
o
cow
1
zi o o
IU
2; .J
or
UJ
s
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
/O
/r
2^
<;i<i;<!?^ /.Pf[-'rF-l- £-PE'-l- h-'Bi:-)r,-
pBeei^ ^]kr i efij>vjN,pi/:£-&f'A]/J^£:
-rr. :• :>rr:^
-Skfi'rL 2-H ry//,
P^&^iH. 6i\i>c'J fif-'^'j^L • .[i^r'yf^f"-:'.•';v io^CAt.r
rct.t-t^ y '^ 1^ -* ^ •» . •vViii/i'ni c.r/••.'•/.
pzSdyJ Ci'h^i-L • r..(^H .'I -r-/•( /
p.p/\p.<.e /IJ^OIAPL
f^eei^,'C.MCi&eA'/e=u'. Q^n-^.r^.'^iim-^ coxyf-^y
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
• BORING. NO.S±mJiL±
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED
LOCATION; T.
..DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE 2^OF7_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
So
a. o
Ul
< t-
(O
Uj""
oz
0. m SS
<>
v).m
S
at s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•3^J
^c?
*vr
r^
^5>"
/;p-;i\/euy g/iryiC : ^APt?^. >;>t=/,.^y/^ -'•,- -r^
j^Fj?!--:'^ --^r.r: ::.•'. CMf.--tWi/:\(), .^c7inhn/J:'.
/CP,^V-.:>.v ->;-'.:.- • ,.>-^-,„; ^finy->A^vU
^iBBki ap.i\%I • &>P^^. v;f 1.1- i::^/:r5x sve-
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drillino
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
. BOR\NG.NO.M±!:i:±±L
LOGGED BY
DRILLINQ. METHOD DATE DRILLED
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE S_OP2.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM3
2tr Bi <o
0. CD
UJ _j UJ
< H
(0
^UJ
az
So
Q. O SS <>-
».(0
ii
o o 5 o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
(^
7^
?^
SO
^cf
5MC^ ^P^SFL •• PP^'/, t-'TCJi-- -• •:r-rrL
(iPfm-vpJ 6MP'- i^e^'jQP /i/gu cof-i^c. P')f- '
(^:]fy.'.--(\p "> :'-•uii.f^c -r:' •^.-'/'.(••'•P' --fqi
<A/Vfyf r^OKIv^l •- BPOr-f) •J •..'•r-rX
eg'v^ SArir
^BBi^ f,p.KiBk- tcp^n. i-ookis £>ATr^
fi<!;6'JU?t<^, M^''^ "•-71---f •• 'gfcl-g^ t^b^^'f-'-'^/-
Q^%v\ Sflr/CV /^/jfli^v- 9UP:\t)\- feegvj/l. ^;P?;?H
^r/.-x; .,j,^)Ai;i;tr/. Li^t&e f-f^ fhir
REMARKS (.^i^O'^yr Hl-'J''''''^ Wl-C^^ '^'i: rJ":^
I-;?
Exploratory & Monitor
WeU Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
. BORING. NO. iM^EJ^ldL
, LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
_DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE JLOFJI.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
^^ 5o
So
^5 S^
^"^ n
to
tUJ
SJU.
OS
0. 01 SS <>
<0(0
s _ 3 o o ? o
s LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
"^sZL
too
.. /^d
.. /'e
//r
no
PPhl'ci-.u^ CMC : pbUKy'A- P.-^y>))ri PPOH^^P,'--
pgBfiiV &Uii?i)H {"HOC, ••f-.-rr.icy frfp-nn ^^r.iyy^.
T.op-rrr ^P?'/M."-../A!.:: rr^(:ir-:. t. '^::»y.
CPhir-ll'^ <(Sf<C .kftDiO^ fpj)\xit\ PPPfiif ^}PTSL
^o% 6£y1VFL /.''ClVy^ ~> ' PS: '/C/iL .
^f{N0- H^hPKU PLO'xy f). Ai-r.JL r.'•'/ -r?/- .
v-'.'-'i- Ch'-'i.
CPh^^D-l^SMiry. P'^-n/)l6H BPm). Vv.x:nn)r. tSO^C
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING, METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
• BORING. NO. BM'C'/^/^M-^
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT^: PAGE ^^ OF_Z-
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
oz
^9 E"
5=9
CL CD
UJ
If
CO
UjU-
OZ
ad
CL CD SS < >
coco
o
s B o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•
1^^
t^^Z
i%r
IHO
HS
ML
SgAVgu^ 5A>Jr ; i?f=[>Di<LP, styjiP \tJB'^u <9yr^0
PEfifiiy /^PA/rUV tt^iiO : ll^Wl6}r P.P.O'JJP. PPc?py^
<PP-^-C 7.£^lyP,lA1-CA. m?rwr.^ ^.AyC-
%hmH
PidfCJU^ ' ^BDDiSH B^P'J^^, WELL Cf/^.l^
j -^ kV Ky P/IPVPL^. 7.^% ^A/!/P ,
ip% ^fi 1^1 >v rr^iw^ •r./i/^c.
^P/\)/^U : HEPOIill Bt£?\jorJ. MBDI\)^ COPT^ID
^^fi^'fiO^JUD^D, A-JTA^W
sm}^ ^P.f\vB}.' /^=nf)i^H ^f:C?'ji)P t-opp'yj t9P-r^0
IP%6MI[ .
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORXNG. NO. i}LM^£dL
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE -^OFJZ_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
4
2!r
I"
z9
0, CD
REMARKS
UJ
7^ UJ 1^
CO
!ruj
uj"-
OZ
m -i
JO
0. CD SS o
CO. CO
T
s
z s 3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
jbP^
\^s
\no
lis
I /sH
f^P>BlS ^mvEl' K^boi6ri tJ'j^vofJ f p^ni^i ipeias
A06IJL/1&. PE^hktt y. ^Oi^.
^mf)'' PBDDK^H M^P'^li >/gOJi;yh <.PPTSC
v\^^Owm-tg g.<?i1feiHs ''\nCi,
Pg6BW 6^Vg-l-•• l^BDPHil BP.9[JUr). PQopl.^
rg'ifeTgO Pg68l.B^-fe 2g**"^
^/IfJOV. \^^%evl ^PM^L- fi^0Dl6li BP0v3t). \/HU/
fCiPH'^ scpr^t ic>%^,nT)f) P^UU^t-iJ ^i^x.
^OAVEUV <.f\r)t\: P^::c'6i>bf-.y•/.)({ Pff/?e^ -^P-^^/
•7O^lo PfLh^^L C'B^^.
fjm't.vA ^f;hiP'fegpoi5i^ aepi^r?. t^>.F.on;>v. £g>grE£)
xn'^lp-, fePAWEL
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
•
• PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORiMft un B/''CyA''0''h
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED •_
STATE. .COUNTY,
LOCATION: T.
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE SL-OPSL.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
li
H
^9
(L OD
Ul
& (^ S >-
< H
CO 05
a, CQ SS <>
COCO
s
z s
3
O o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
.. '^€_
l^i
\o,0
/iPtiVEii^ <.i\i^JO •• P^wi^i-f MiOitiP !.v^.iL ry--/?rj?
Ig'^.r-/:;^;:-! J=./;= -rA/^;^
REMARKS
Exploratory & MonitCK
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake CKy, Utah 84088.
[phone] Date /y-S-V^ •
RIG NO. /<S'
JOBOWNER //r.!-//'>
.RIGTYPE.
^HJ^
/?1f'Ah -y .WELL NO. DprfiJ-^^. Z- TYPE x^7.-/„ t^ ,V,^
LOCATION r<ry.y/(^.\
TIME
Start
7.W
•
7:0^
^
•
stop
^:Y.
rf'PC
•„ l'J'
' DEPTH
From
^
To
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
•
Log or Remarics
H /AZ_
//v<L'/ y^y;.'/^ c. Ty. rJi.- iL ,"rp ••
cApi/i^r.-f P"''^ / ^ 1'^ Pin '
r/I/^ A/^i..^ 7<;'-/<^-X '
T^L^r ./trv / /,7o <• /-• fY^ yCf^y>
fj.- 11-^
/ni7~n^ty ftfJ /r'hP yfy ^. Aii/n
r/J-r.1 /<-^.a. /^< '-y.^AyW A/nr,j
/p^^'pia^y,^^77: /-/.//Ar/,
%.
BIT
Type
9i
/OJ'
,
Size
•
{( S
Cy- ^
.
No.
f
_.
•
'
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R.Used
RUsed
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel OU
MISC.
^ . w
, ^ •—
Driller Helper Helper
•'
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake Ctty, Utah 84088
[phone] Date.
^0'^^,,-,-^
RIG WQ.^/P)
JOB OWNER ftr-l't^ T^.'fy
.RIGTYPE F>lil^r^ ^ .WELL NO. nmU-JCy^^.l TYPE /r>a/,:'t. .'k, .
s LOCATION /5A,/K/><L/
TIME DEPTH DRiaiNG INFORMATION BIT
Start Stop From To Ft. Log or Remarics Type Size Ite.
VI :2ZL m/O'-y)
1?</^fipf. ^It -fr^rl^l^^r/Thr.
!T7-eplPk /7y>yJ/^>/-n/y- //V/ yjyi Ay^/y. -^
•-> .^.^ . , .^)y y / •/— y/ / y /1y '
63d
n/?7cJ--Bl/:/'yy^.Z.-f7 -"AyAe /'^y^'^6
(^ y//^/j7:,'s77/l ^r^-r-f^/P^. y<!'/-/-7/)/c'f7y^lK, Al. ll^
yc^c r/^- ^/
Ay,'t'Ty,/'i^^ /^/7^-y^y7//g. A/^ ^V. /ji^ r;7/<«?- r^g
^nmi./'^. '^'-TypW) /^ Ay A. ^
DJDlJ-y. ^^y/yl,ll/Z..... Af' p^<.^
#
^L^ 2^ /a^
r> Ay/rr/^P/U& 7.W ^ C^7/r I
^/^-h 79A -^./^(T . V-,^.> Ay:, y.^.y7
P^pr>.pAi:> Ay/y /<^7^. AC/S '- "hO
A/^PtrA/^y/'y^.'/.n yif-y^ Aiyyyyi -/yf^r// y//jyJ^
/A/^/CA f.>;fk yJ..A)pype ^jmi ^
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD: Type.
FLUsed.
FLUsed.
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel _OII.
MISC.
m-
Driller
i^ 1 ±
Helper y:-../L^< \'^ <ii7yy M.PI:
• 1 \TiL ni-vriorr.hNi oi
••'^ , 02
03 Frcj.ct: • .VLQU'^L'-OL l.'ell f.'urr.bsr: p wUiij^ 03
C4 . • . ' ." " 04
05 r.-cj<:ct i:ur„L::r: • Date: // - /2. > S c^ 05
^5 „ • " 06
07 Well inslcJe diameter: Hli. IN 07
08 08
09 . Depth of bottom: •• /CLS FT 09
10 -10
11 Length of gravti pcck: ZS FT 11
12 12
33 Dicu;ater of sravel pack: //ijjz. IM 13
14 . , 14
15 i:=c-suvEd by: M. Pg-fgafcy/L/ 15
17 Record-:d by: ^-jjlMO,/^. OdlL 17
13 . 18
19 Air te.T.peraturG: ijZ DegF 19
':G 20
:':1 Heather condition: r^^.v j» g^ M^ i/ 4- /^Li-t. t^ 21
^2 ' 22
?3 VflTHDRAVfAL OF WFLL VOLUMES 23
" ^ OK.
/5 F!iirHIi:G Well Volume Well Volume Well Volume 25
:./ •• Ur l£V£l Lifcre llS'-W' 27
J-.a ;.'ctrjr leva! after / is' ; "JB
29 Tirra bsgin flushing fj'js 29
30 Tirr.a eiid flushing ~\i',jc, 20
31 Tima v.'ater level after //wr '_ . 31
32 Estirr.ated voluT.a flushed (GAL) y C^L P^7~^,v. . 32
33 * • ," ~" 33
34 FIELD AfiALYSIS 34
35 - 35
36 :.'iter te.Tiperature (DeaC) LO -36
37 ^iTple pH ' _JZ 37
?3 Si:.pie conductivity (mhos/cm) ttrrS' 38
?.9 n;jffDr before — 39
•.0 :jffar after — 40
.1 C'Jor /L>o»ig. 41
42 Color cLtc.\r ^2
'•3 Othzr ~ ~ 43
/4 44
'•5 cj::;iENTS 45
45 46
47 -iktS W^U. PfWOOC^ VI^*/£»ooJ> WimB. 47
'•3 48
•'9 ~~ 49
50 50
51 .attach f-hotogrsphs of \;cL£r san-.ples in labeled jars. 51
52 52
:3 Ei;0 CF SECTION • 53
B:.yvit./ Lc.drill Construction 6-21-89
DAVE'S DRILLmG
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City. Utati 84088
[phone] Datej/lViJlSL
RIG NO. 1. .RIG TYPE C-P- 2/>ryc^ WELL NO. O VH IU - ^ TYPE >^^.».'-fot^
JOB OWN
LOCATIOI
ER 9 VOVO c>
^ G ft V 1 ? t^ c VJ
TIME
Start
roo
^^^
•
Stop
s\oo
DEPTH
From
0
S
16,
3o
Hi
U>o
IS
'io
lo^
To
5
16
:JO
^s.
(pO
IS
%o
(OS
UO
^i i^^A ^AL
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft. Log or Remarics
Ov^/LL 'i' D^.'ut \0"' re.5*.'*.^^
S..*.JL -i- C,.^ L 1-
c\iri-<oe.L T Sc-t^cA
CA »-e<.oe L "* kr St>^^c-(
* f - '^ ^1
OK Vd-VcU St*M C^
• i.t' • /
^ f*^ 4/<- i. ^ '^ Sc wM
<}
BIT
Type
'
Size
^^
,.
No.
/
«
1
^
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative,
HOURLY WORK HRS.. i^
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLINQ MUD: Type.
Jn. a R. Used.
FLUsed.
fZo
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel _OII
MISC. 3
rrr Ualnar !>/ Hetoar
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road .
sail LBKe uny, uiane4UDo
[phone]
RIG NO. '2 RIG TYPE ^ - P - lOOO WELL NO. 0 WI ai -^
JOBOWNER P-^ni,a c.'4y
Date //- ^-S-q ^
TYPE IMALI.'L^
LOCATION ftc^V O.^^ul lo.^A C.'LL
TIME
Start
7.Vd
•
Stop
S\(yO
DEPTH
From
120
136
lio
106
RS
\9tO
l^sS
"\S
To
\3S
\so
]ys
iys
tiO
/^^
hs
2«?
DRILLING INFORMATION
Fl. Log or Remarics
Ot-.'/.L'*.^*. 4 O^.S>*.'ta,i 10' <!:^c...«H5|
<Ul-iAOe.t r Se. ^J^ '
/yk t*.tJt.L ^ JSe....tA
«^ »• OL i>«. L «r Sc...^£A
m/i.'sT «:,.«J-faL.-.n^i. ^oi>ble!s
lOo.1e.V- /a.»/.£.0<5/. <n^«.cA. A- Cvc^r.TtvV tS
UJcTtl »- <:L»,.:^II«L St^iAtA a- (^ Vcr 4 »-v«A
Ji\r>.h•!•».. .'jt.c.,.L ac.*,cl 9 «^6^«-ht* v^ts
OI^.^LI A f..-W. I<*<'- 2/0 ©ftrwv H^iLr.
paLL D..»AL p/p>- CH h^l tvi&tj«. I^A-A.
fo Olrvi UJ-J^ .
BIT
Type
iSi.rfevi
'
Size
c^'/z
No.
/
f
M 1
•
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS.. ML
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
Ft. Used
Ft. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel OU
^ 1 1
1 nrillar .11 » JL 1 Uatnar 1 Ll<.l..<.. . . 1
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
f^nojccT-No. r\P)iLsP.! mSfi-PV PST^fi^y/ll BORING, NO.^iinMiiil
PROJECT NAME ^/lyy' gv*/ Ufimr-•.•:. -PPn^V ''-^iT^ LOGGED BY / ' &.,^i-CyiP-^k
nRii I iMft MPTHOn Aie. P-O-PAPU /^/>.'j.>//X'lv/g^ lD''/ZAP)r/i n t.y v DRILLED lolPilPA?
STATE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
LOCATION: T R SECT TRACT PAftF i C\P 7
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
Zt
ui
< I-
rt;
LJ"" oz
Q. CQ
<>
CO-CO
s
o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
s'H
10
iS_
ZO_
zs
?o
OLT •• OUlVE, \f^Bi.L e<pP:.TrC. F/ns^ S^MJ/J^^
top.TPh 10% P^'p-Auf'^ -^ 5P/* /'•. iP^h -vrr.
^nAI LP.P17" u^k'^ J 9^'^'^.7^J^^
J^
C>l>viF
jp^ftfiiy ^l^ftyguV 5A/j/^5 n^\t\M-ro^-e-^ i/^yfttc^y
.</^fi77-o //?%APgfii-fe, A-fe^Ji^w^-^/^A/'^g ^/>-/yg.
ygfiR)^ ^^^rjw ^/envg;-: ft&nai?^; -^o^ P^SBUILS
-n, ^f)^v,. .^o'ln-^P^ti
REMARKS QaiUC-D lojd ^^ i'D/'y^^
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
«
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METH
ST/
LO(
VTP
:ATION
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LQtinet} BV
on nATP nan 1 en in/Pil^^
COUNTY nPSCRIPTIVF 1 nc.ATinn
: T R .qpr.T. THArT PAGP 2OP "^
1
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
Zh-
Ul
IS
CO
to tu -J
CO
0.01
LI
T
H
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
CO
L
U
M
N
1 LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
1
ml
%
«
r
so"'
ssZi
ho—
-
y
(
)
\y
.<rA)we>
»
;•
^
V-
^nmri
1
(
^
<flmi?.
OfiSBii/ ^PAVFUV <:/L-rr ctiue PPupuDrJ A»>/V//>OT;
le^nPBP.ei.t^.^ii?nr^ 7a°:^C.fiKi-&u. .i-^^-'iv/r '-'AT,
PBf^p^\M </iTV A/e/iy5i.' pPoujiO. pi»M^iJtene}
/ ^'5'rj Plf. ftei S<. TS * /? ^, W 3o^/.-;M.-r
Y
K
y
fAr*.^
^^
} REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. M:£M::£
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE OFJZ_
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
ii
p.
a. (D
UJ
^^
< H
CO
rt]
tat
OS
^t ii <> coco
s
^
s
Q
f 3
z
3
Q
0
ai
or
i^ !5
3
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•
es:-
no_
tP—
^i
M.
T/LTV PPMt^u U ^g^/?^< ; ^g^-y pr/^Pii^C. r-^jrmfr^V
J-
\y
snu^
PBfjBk^ ^IUTV hP/ii'S.i-- k^cc/tft- B-evut/v, pfip/jH
SC¥'J^. <^/nPIPMI^jt^ iP'A.^ .^O^^/n^lLTi
• • • > • • • ^,m I • , , • ^p » • h^ — I ^aj i^Ml f I I W Mar, r .^M 1 ••ni 1 a ,
<^/\Prfr
J-_
€/JIM^
f^g6fl/ty ^PAveuv p,PHD-:PEtni6t^ Pfio/tr/ fiooPU
^nO-r^S^. I0%P9BPA^.?/P^^fi-,<^L t^.r, ,^r^lU/'y
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
RnRiMft Kin fiV-fi/YM/Z-S"
LOGGED BY .
DATE DRILLED ///^/A^
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE ^4 np 1
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ (L, CD
i$:
< I-
co
til
lu"-
0.(0 sz
<>•
coco o o 1°
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
/^2Z
lO'i
uo_
\v.
JiQl
peBBL^ P,M\if^iy<^ .Pmo!P.-^tf^-'" f^p/yjjrJ.
^nPV^'./)PV^(i if>^inff'&^t-V.'.7D^Lf..pA't'Si. fJ^iP£tJfATF
P.Pfe^r cr.f y/ic^r
L
sT
^h-
XT
^f^ A 'g--
iT
-' ^ rf
^^Aj
^
37rrr «r REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
OATE DRILLED iZsm
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE QFSL.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
UJ
!§:
< H
CO
£UJ
OS
So
Q. CD ZZ <> coco
z z
3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
130
/?5_
}<iO
IH L'JT
\5D
^tf~\*li\f_ /'(ifliW ^fir:/h1 ^,^r)nn --••:'-/:)
^f?7<7 .i,p.pv7J. •.-./'•->,•< -^ ',-^.x. "p -"^^
W
'fi't-fy
^iTl/^,'
V
JLJH
JL
^^£±J£_
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
BORING. NO. LL:£If2liS^
LOGGED BY'
DATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE _iz_OF_^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM) a. CD
UJ
< H
CO
n UJ
Ul"-
0.0 zz o coco
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
isd
1^0
\^s__
no
Hi
J3a.
^
iT/IKufc
PEBBl^ ^/g/n/gtW ^APP '. ^s^t^r.i^P f,PLW-fJ.
S%fif.f^lfi. Ip'^'n -^fi/)-/s!.\-r..i-WtY '-rf.VC F-.H-h (."-r. r-'f.yl
9e=f^P.i\f f.r^f,'ir.,i'J ^ Af/r - /:pn>iV). y^..^y-f^:-
?^-i^- o -U. A •{'• - A"^r • J ^* -Tr; :,n,tr:'
^/fW^
?
J^
fiM^
Jc
^iM£_
-#
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor .
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
d PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLINQ. METHOD
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
RnaiMri un -AM-PW^.^S
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY
LOCATION: T R
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE _:ioF^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM)
UI
s^ UJ
< I-
co
truj
uj"-oz
0. CD ZZ <> coco
^ z
§< s
3
x8
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
/»
190'
.. i^sZ
Zoo
loS
2m.
6f\n.-
•^/1'.V»
V
i^tl)S<(
!£
^«Kf.
Pgafilt/ /:)=.v';:.u,t/ /fi/^/- : f?r.•./,>/•:. ^^ •.-;i/;
vT^n Pf^^Ui /0%iCPfiV^.L UJgi-t. "g-gr/^^ ^P(: PU: C/^^C-
,f\r-9
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Park Road
Salt Lake City, Utafi 84088
[phone] Date /J'yO-'7^
RIG HO.sA'/A) RIG TYPE TflA/hO
JOB OWNER fjyyc d/Ty
LOCATION 7^PiVL'/<^<^
.WELL NO. PT/^O'IIS, ^ TYPE />yyi TlS.^:,,^
TIME DEPTH DRILLING INFORMATION BIT
Start Stop From To Ft. Log or Remarics Type Size No.
2222.
A?7y/^'.r>(^y:Jlhrrf A^ff AyA n/?7i-J-<
5m. Ad7Ay<.
7'no /HO'Sp'Cf ^^ 70/7)^- ^
<^ t~pf^ y^ Ar -^^/A)
^'y-^rX// ^yyr^_y>Ay.7%y. ^ynfr^-Z/n 2/^ cy^ifyf// yyyTfy>/y.r.yyy.. „'^fT
^UKl A^ ±2L A^
^
Ap7Ay-^
STAND BY TIME HRS..
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS..
CASING USED: Size.
CASING USED: Size.
DRILLING MUD: Type.
.R.Used.
.aUsed.
.Anwunt.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel _OU.
MISC.
• • ' " • i • I • !• - I • • ^. — ^^^*mm
'^'^Tfci "°^ 5^^^^^/i^. Driller Helper
<^s-s
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
Salt Lake City, Utali 84088
[phone] Date//-/^-^^
RIG NO.^/^ RIG TYPE /^/lifO
JOB OWNER M>u/t1 ^,;7y
_WEaHQ.f)nl/yJ- A TYPE moM.-iy,r:
^
LOCATION '^ y lA'yuJ
TIME
Start
y.rr)
%
stop
91-^?
DEPTH
From To
DRILUNG INFORMATION
FL Log or Remarks
F.n.'<l, A^^/^/VftTrM^ yiA A/lA^ jy^cJ-^
•froyn KA) '- /O. Ty, <.7^ll ^ur^y^yyf
P^.^A/1 yf7^/Hay .^
P^yy 7^ /^)£//v anz-l ^.'J/ , ,p 7A'
/0/jOf y>^yl TZlAe, ky/rJA-T^-^ h.jif/Ai'U
'
BIT
Type Size No.
«
1
1
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. 9' ^Ay<^
I Driller ^/V^;=^rV I Helper THeipeT
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
R.Used
R.Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel ON
MISC. - ..
#
•01
02
03
04
05
OS
07
03
09
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
23
29
30
31
32
33
24
35
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
''!4
45
45'
47
43
•19
50
51
52
53
iTIL JiiXIFLpiiMhirt
.'j--)jcct: fsYyiUiJ-AL-nniL l.'ell Ni:n-.bcr: Q ynio -^C
Project IJuruber: '• • Date: l(- 2. I' S-^
V.'ell inside diameter:
Depth of bottom:
H/2. IN
21/ FT
Length of gravel pack: '7.S FT
Diamster of gravel pack: to-2.fi IN
"iiiwxi
Ksasured by: M'-P^IJ^1S:SG/JI.
Recorded by: JJumui..^.. ^
FLUSHING
Air tGrripcrature: SS DegF
Weather condition: /g.V hA \\<K'>A/
WITHDRAWAL OF WFLL VOLUMES
" • "'• Well Volume Well Volu'me l.'ell Volume
l.'^ter level Lafora JSZJtL'Al
I'ater level after ±J3Xl__ __
Time begin flushing \S^HS
Tima end flushing JteLiS L
Time v/ater level after /^ws* _"
Estimated volume flushed (GAL) ?& pe>- KK.'t^.
S5L
FIELD ANALYSIS
V/ater temperature (DegC)
Sample pH
Sample conductivity (mhos/cm) t^fjO
Buffer before —
Buffer after —
Odor
Color
Other
Pcih-c
co:;;'.EHTS
a>ttB6£ 6Alvm. HUD PIUiOVLEn ^ i/My h/XiD
Attach photographs of water samples in labeled jars.
END OF SECTION
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
n
14
i&
17
19
cO
21
22
23
24
25
25
2/
28
29
30
31
52
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41"
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
EO
51
52
53
Bayview Landfill Construction 6-21-89
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 341 OSoutfl
Salt Lake CHy, Utafi 84115
[phone] Date /g">'?qf
RIG NO. 7 RIG TYPE dT- 9-IOGD V^ELL NO. OmiQ- io TYPE MoiL.'fc^r
JOB OWNER I-0I7 0 cl
LOCATION Q>«ini
i
S_SAi. kci^Jt-FMl
TIME
Start
7;^o
M^ 9
Stop
3)1D
DEPTH
From
0
IQ
7^
30
io
50
SS
Uo
To
c
2C?
3c?
vo
^0 ^r
to
75
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
' lm pu-t «>^ C/l,4ei^ .^u
^.J «ji«..-+ +« iy^.^LL ^
Ct?Wi(P.
P^.^o*.^ A»"
^'-^i-.y rl S/Lt
Cf*^CKU^L ^ <iz..v^A
6>t^cvr.L C,c^A i-S/Cf
/"awr. r>vL Sc^vO\
Pat-cUcL <icL.cJ.
n»^CA. |Oc«K •• ^ V- M O t i-
C^vo.v-eU T 5cKt>\ "
f^ lr-e>. U -e. L V S*-McJ(
BIT
Type
fr(^7R.i^
•
Size
/O
No.
i
M i
STAND BY TIME HRS. HOURLY WORK HRS. i^
Signature of Owner or Recresentative
CASING USED: Size I O
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
FLUsed IS
FL Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel Oil
MISC.
1
A ^ V
Driller )/ificj1rr>i, T^tUZ^ \^^^'ii\i,^ii^ S^^ZLZ Helper
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 Soutti
Salt Lake City, Utah 84115
[phone] DAeJlz^JliS.
RIG N0._
JOB OWN
LOCATIOf
7 RIGTYPE
ER Pro VJ o r A>J
4 Y?s«^VO»'etO A*v*.
TIME
Start
lioo
#
Stop
(?loo
STAND BY TIME!
Signature of Owne
DEPTH
From
7i'
«=fo
To
^0
loS
C'P''?oaD wEaNO. DM LU'^ TYPE wi
p^ff^
TH I "ha
A ^^tC
DRILLING INFORMATION
R.
/s
/S
HRS.
r or Represental
CASING USED: S
CASING USED: S
DRILLING MUD: T
ive
ize /O
ize
ype
Log or Remarics
//>c.Jl nw..'LL p.'mt iV C^s...»u«f-
U^^L L ^o:A^K io "tW^ v>/tj_
<^.'l.U Uju4^l- A-i-uc K. \JUOt^K oh
^ly <u.V tc^mjP. /"t-y "i? £iA M^hyt.
<^»>^.
tlii IVVie KT«CI etfcOif.L ^ Se.*^eA
<!. tJ ^Vl ». U. + edl <LLl.e^K.«_L «^S^l.^C>\
^
BIT
Type
Biijtn
'
Size
/O
HOURLY WORK HRS. //
FLUsed SO Water G.P.M.
R. Used Water Static
Amount Fuel Oil
No.
/
1
• i 1
1 Driller ,AJ <#— rr rr-^^^ ' 1 Heioer . t/ l . . 1 Hplnar n t / .^ 1/ 4 ^
DAVE'S DRILLING
577 West 3410 Soutli
Salt Lake City, Utafi 84115
[phone] Date m-^n-^^
RIG NO. 1. .RIGTYPE <C~P- lOOV .WELLNO. nwH?- L TYPE Wtei/..'•//?r
JOB OWN
LOCATIOI
ER F i^o t'c?
^ RrsV i;.
TIME
Start
7:00
9
Stop
^;«)
cP ^y
vu> i'.uJr.^LL
DEPTH
From
IbS
\20
m
no
150
To
/ZO
/^^
/^t?
/^c?
\\^s
DRILLING INFORMATION
R. Log or Remarics
VutL up ^Au/piMi-K T
Ov.;i.r .'uw J- r)..s...'M,, /<5"
^e WiTKTtrX /-J \.r>.tJ e L d" Sc^v^cA
hftviri c-/tfMt .L 5^^Ji -^»-cx^«; L
/^t-Vvxi'k.4ecl OL*'<^«J<<— «f ^c, cX .
UJci'ieK CwwAc «i'<'tA CekVirntfJ c<,>>c*.,|.l "^.MJ
t:c i^MT v^TecA o< v>.;»cicr L i Uio<.-t< ^
rUftw Kole, /-xi^cl ^ULLL O^.^LL V'^y*.
VMndc- A.v*ci ^o Otcovt. Lad 0. A cv^cl,
)0' <:t*5c*UclL OIVTO VOo.f-«V "Vv-w-clC Ti».(C <-
M -^0 0«COV\r UVtlfiO..!. MJcA fo
*^ S-L la^A ll*^ /-c.sr.«*.el..
Vyioue V-M* \rt S Vh.UJ -'*^/
BIT
Type
R.IBM.
Size
^^
No.
/
4 i
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
HOURLY WORK HRS. Ji
CASING USED: Size _
CASING USED: Size _
DRILLING MUD:Type.
ML FLUsed.
Ft. Used
4S-
Amount.
.Water G.P.M.
.Water Static.
Fuel Oil
MISC.
J./LL^J f^owc i^O io ILS' oPciL hAe.
"'^')^//;rnj, (^h^Ay,^^ \^0m rcrUniA
Driller: Helper
^
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Pl^e-JC-^T NO. IP'I.IIP • i-^/a-Z'-^ pr-fpCAJ . ana IN n MO f^j-OirVJ-jP
PROJECT NAME E/^'J'/.^VJ UfsfJP.^lU. L0GGED BY LlhLjii;i=ilJl£;=^
DRM I iNr, MFTHon r.PJiUcP\^!^P= Jrip__ t nT^P'/ .•y"^/i;.W4nATP DRILLED AgV-;;; v?-^
DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION f^^T P>r^ Ef^YA 3
PAGE _Z_0FL2_
STATE. _C0UNTY
LOCATION: T 0 .SECT, TRACT.
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPMJ
03
IS
a. ca
y,,,
15:
< 1-
(0
=f^ £li!
oz
Ui
<
03
-i O
a. ffi
<>-
coco
¥
5 ?
§3
LI
T
I
I
O
CO
-I
UJ >
or
<
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
lo
'•'n
6ILT: RUnwN. WELL 5Pin^lO, Vf^y oPHca/B.
p\t}^'hf>mi^.p
6l\T< PBm</ 6M-/EL'- P:PSM)P)_\}h,i<J pcc£v/roc:nr/
'PEPBueS ID PtO^x/K.
P£fip)\' PiPAlz.-py. -••^•^•P:kow^).ppoP-i^:.OfT^D
PFftftLFf^. a^-2.0^^ uur I'^^jtn^ x'7.y£c;VE
PFfieiV SllT'i 6MVEL •• BkO\JJt}. POPP-LV £^£7g;
PCftfiiy gM\/g2: &Pe*/- tfiowrj. M^CIVM cai.-rw
U£?>^»>s CS'St^*) fi/0 RriE6.MEUU/K^f^SP!
6t\mi ^IPT: Seouofi}. weu ^ce-T^O PINE.
&,fi.Nf)^Di ggif-gcmE vum-t) \/Jsr.
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING CO^'!PANY
i PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD _
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION: T
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
3 0R\NG. NO. Ell^J^^lJlzIZ.
LOGGED BY
: DATE DRILLED
..DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT T R A C T PAGE •- Q F .V?
HEAD
SPACE
USING
:PPMJ
21-
20
111 u
0. CD
UJ
-i UJ
a. Q.
2 >
< t-
r:UJ
az
UJ o
D. CD 25 < > wco
c < cc o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
•4; fO.
'f:r
So
.-,-s
ftFftftiV ^/LtV 6M\JEL : SPOWrJ, fiOOPi.'-' -Z^/CTSP^
\lf-p.-J XO:-r.-,\i'!» C/'-"^ r^?/-' /":
JtMB-uLi gftVEV ig/iT r P^\).)fO yftP.^ ppofy-/ -:cf:rsD
M^i/ g'/;g: 'Cp.f::nsP.
PfeeiV 6MVE1,: ^g.gy- eg^wA) )a.E/)ji;>w ax^-r^n
^5-g K^K^ gpaf^rgO PN>r!\CU^<
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monltof
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING. METHOD .
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION; T
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
LOGGED BY
: DATE DRILLED
^DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT. PAGE .0F_^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
^PPMJ
^5
zP
UJ -*
UI
< 1-
(O
Uj""
oz
to
UI
1
CO
!3d
0. o
22 <> CO-CO
¥
QR
A
P
t
LU
M
N
2 o r
UJ
oc
UJ
!;
s
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
__
(^£1
^7,0
3(2^
ed
3011
Msh
•^ILTY fgeeH ^eAVEL: figpuj/i^^ vfegv P/>QPk^< ^/^^TEZ?,
PBfiSiy ^APC'J j-//-;:- ^•''=:^ •:/--''v^/'/ /g.^z./
-^/?A^T^f;,^OkV'e •FIMg.g
.5/^;i;0*/ PBfiSLE<>'. PIPE^, PPPP,L.V COO^O 'Jtf-'-^
CoAe.i.^
p£he,\.H PPA^tllM <AfJ£ i ^EDO^U ki-£>\sjt) iMEClvyi
"P^fe.
P^6t.V f;/1)'yj?V ///'/^l/£L-• P =cc;^>r 6/:>-'.'3/'j. A^oy;v
;^.•^c^ 'S^^e/^A;6t>i•;l^ H}r. on-invrnf)
v^ftfl/CV ^MVEL • h^iid^H R(-yjJf}i t^DORvJ ^orr^
m
m REMARKS
f\Frt£.^C' klT>+Pi.O&y C^H/itU^^ fi'?^*M*77^^i.i/ Exploratory & Monitor
y/i; O^?*.«?;£ '4'1'^ 7^jm/*i£. AE/:;b/'-/>' i&P.CWM:I/1«'^y WellOrllling
u.fit}fi.)Ai ^uTh y.ms p^ ^>o PP'J^' DAVTS Dn!LU?]G OOl^.WSl
• PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
. BORING. NO.BizMMjd2.
DRILLING. METHOD
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAGE T CiP^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
(PPM:
Zt-
So
^^
z Q
a. CD
UJ
15:
< H
CO
uj"-
oz
a. m 22 < >
WW
5
3 o o
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
9C
l<00_
\o^
lle_
//^
j[Z£
/WiVBUl^ 6Af)0: P.BC£t6H t?/?oujM ittgrinyv ;.PA7?^
PS66:.'^ <^;1»y/}y ^/^/Vgl : RecflKW f^&n^jj/J
PBSeii W.')~iiH CniJC-P£crii<.ri PP,O^JJ 0. r-con^
6fiflD '' PBCC)6-y P.Po^J}fJ ;vrt-i. -CoflT/:
•AflP'. RUDICIT hPO'^JiJ r.'t-LVJ-)^ •:.-•'<• rr/:
P^^PLM ^MVgL ; APB^l6H BPOw/i) POoPlS -iJeTSg
fE^Sftt-E-S TT? Pff mK.
«>
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
3]
rn
H
>
3J
?!
** So
CO ^
o
30
z
Q
O
O
>
-<
K3
^
i
Cb
iiiir^iiiiPiiiirimPi
m
1
re.
I
I
I I
^3^
|c^
li
vV
Ife?
30
n
sV
g
fe
I
•b
c w -r
2 O ^
PENETRATION
BLOW. COUNT
SAMPLE
TYPE
DEPTH
IN FEEV
SAMPLES
SAMPLE
SYMBOL
LITHOGRAPHIC
COLUMN
WATEF1 LEVEL
o
r-
O
o
o
o
tn
o
O
z
o
o
>
(O
-1
>
m
o
O
c
z
o
30
z
o
TJ -D
3J 3
O O
c c
tn m
O o
s z z
m > O
X m
O
o
m
O
3)
>
o
o
m
CO
o
3
<
m
r-
O
O
>
0
z
> o
m
h
o
•n
O
>
-I
m
o
3)
O
o
o
m
a
m
O
3
z
o
m a» ^
o -< O
r
O
Ci
o
m
X
TJ
r-
O
30
>
H
o
-<
03
O
Z
E
55
J
4 PROJECT NO.
PROJECT NAME
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
. ROR.Kir, un ^y-CPylW-ih
DRILLING. METHOD
LOGGED BY
DATE DRILLED
STATE. .COUNTY.
LOCATION: T.
.DESCRIPTIVE LOCATION
.SECT TRACT PAQE -^OF^
HEAD
SPACE
USING
CPPM3
^S
G5 2° UJ si a. CD
UJ
< H
co
r-UJ
uj"-oz
CO
UJ
_J
0.
2
CO
a ffi 22
< > coco
¥
GR
A
P
LU
M
N
0 0
-J
-J
UI S
or i^ ^
5
LITHOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
l^s
\u>
\ys
\no
A^pm^LlH 6MP : tPo-yrj!Ci^ Pr^P ^Ai^y-i.
Pi/^-Av^il-i SAf/n : RPOwmcH PSP, po'jmEC,
wzjAVY^ •s.ytr^c. • y ''.^ ^ r.^ vr >
PiiLAvELi^ -fAW'. tPpyurji-LH PEC /fo-yrCfjQ
•rTll.lf/^ •tce-:T:C lOf... /r-f^';?: L
PmSL^.SMO^ PPAMtL : EPQ^xitm^ fe^z?. foozV
<,pie.'(EO Ll\P-(?e. PBPPIE.^ ~kj ifD<^Ay,y
REMARKS
Exploratory & Monitor
Well Drilling
DAVE'S DRILLING COMPANY
DAVE'S DRILLING
5617 W. Wells Parte Road
SaH Lake City, Utah 84088
[phone] Date AAP'7 2 - 9^^{
RIG ^o.Ji£L RIG TYPE .Fhii/ppi^ .WELL NO. DmtJ - A? TYPE njc^/irTii^.n^ .
LOCATION ,/?^i///.V^; .....
TIME
Start
^
#
Stop
. ;' —
DEPTH
From
/PP'
To
^
o
DRILLING INFORMATION
Ft.
/^'
Log or Reniarfw
r^ <^ // / ' ^»/ hJyJ< ^-^ " yi t^/^ >
yp^' yA^^''<y.f>'.^.y y^.W7PA<i y.'A
h/y.^ik-^-^" oi^p. rh A^A;'
TTyKT^j/ '^/A^.yy y<>y/yjy/ -^ynn^
'70A^'^ /^A^'
'P'y<7y/ /) yr\rfr<f ky.^iTy^y/lk •+ryyn
/A^' -2.A7'
T^AIQ il M/^QL Ty^y7e'^i7~Ar(?yy\ TA) -
A'y/ny/ ^y,y)yyyAy, M/^ A ^-A> .
77yi<'f7i' Jl <ftr-Ayc:f yyynpAy.TFy/^
BIT
Type
^
.
Size No.
«
^^ m
STAND BY TIME HRS.
Signature of Owner or Representative.
rpA^.
HOURLY WORK HRS.
CASING USED: Size
CASING USED: Size
DRILLING MUD: Type
Ft. Used
Ft. Used
Amount
Water G.P.M.
Water Static
Fuel
,
Oil
MISC.
A 1 •
Driller
.^:1.
He^er Helper
•
'11 i:''ii.j:i'V!«';:iif.f;i UI
t'3 r.oj&ct: .r.V)VlRMAN'^rnj. .. I'ell K'.':..bcr: DmW' ^ 03
O'l , 04
05 Project Nu::,Lar: Date: //-?/ -^^t 05
CS ^, • 06
07 l.'ell Inside diameter: Q'/z. IN 07
03 C8
09 Depth of bottoni: •• IL/f.^^n 09
10 . 10
11 Length of gravel peck: IS FT 11
12 12
13 Dicr.,;ter of grjivel pacl:: lOr'kP IN 13
14 "^s*^ Id
15 :;-:asu».:d by: AMjt....P.^&JZ£>C>/^ - 15
17 "c-corded by: ':2^«JL^i&W' 17
18 . - ^ . .. _ ^^
19 Air temperature: ^4?_ Dc-gF 19
20 " •• eo
21 V.'eather condition: Sun\n>/^ ci-'^ <^ ^•/^'^e /4>- 21
22 ^^ '''' 22
23 UITHDRAVfAL OF WELL VOLUI'.ES 23
24 24
25 FLUSHING l.'ell Volume l.'ell Volu:;ie l.'ell Volume 25
'^J 26
27 l.'ctar iGvsl bsfore /34' 27
23 '..'ater level after /a 4 13
23 Ti.73 begin flushing \1)D').. ^__ ' 29
20 Tirr.e end fli'shing jL5l5ii . " ^_ -"^
51 Tina water level after /ifiZo" A. "L 31
32 F.stinated volu-.e flushed (GAL) ^~ C^ [per M.'M 32
33 33
34 FIELD ANALYSIS 31
35 - 35
36 '..'ater ter.perature (DegC) Lo -f 36
37 Scir.pl e pH _2 37
38 Sample conductivity (mhos/cm) ^*^\ 33
39 Buffer before _:^ 39
<0 Buffer after — " -;0
41 Odor fJow-^ '_ Al ''^1
52 Color ciccic A -^2
43 Other 43
^ ^ ^^ ^
45 CGIWENTS 45
45 46
^7 -V/t^. W^I4. fiJ£iC^V££B£l vu£>Plf P.»P/Diy 47
^5 jLF/ae oi^jmym^/i/T..jp2tiuLw-V.fVf&e.. '^s
ll ,MJs-i-\>4ifiiu^^.j^AJtm^. fi.p^9^P3:i ^3
50 EG
51 Attach photographs of v/ater saj.ples in labeled jais. 51
52 ll
53 END OF SECTION F.3
Bayview Landfill Construction 6-21-89
)b K*lf 5 X S IU inc. <..c.ii ••(•)•-« kx
9 X 24 CM
Kcurr^L 6 cssrn co.
field Copy^fNJWcU Tesl", ApplicoHon No
Hint IH u. 1. k. \B 2^y^^ or^
Test Conducted by Rhodes Bros.; FiJImore, Utoh — 743-6277
"^L.
•v
4I.1II 90 SHtdS 5 iOUAIt
A I 42.]lf 100 iHEIti 9 SOUAIE
26(3
306
37a
M 3 'IO
Ml
N
3iO-
3So-
'100
F^ovo LA//prni sjT^e C/EII.
Se/'T. 0~% /IBP
2.9S jr-Jp^.
K
5^
:^
J 27
3S-7 •^^
7"= 2,BS v^ jiaao- S^vaaffJjfy
I*
1^
/So TLCo :t5o 3oo 3So 'to 6
P/sc//j9/ec£ ^ cyr^
367 SOUTH COMMERCE LOOP
•
OREM. UTAH 84057
[phone]
CHEMTECH
CHEMICAL AND BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSES
2875 MAIN
SUITE #101
SALT UVKE CITY. UTAH 84115^
[phone]
CEHT1F1CATE OF ANALYSES
SAMPL£ IDENTIFICATION
CLiENT: Prove City V/ster Dept.
Provo, ur 84601
LAS NO. UOl4823
DATE SAMPLED:
TIME SAMPLED:
MPLED BY:
9-9-8S
0940
C-IC
CATION: I^nd Fill Sita, fell Discharge
Pics (dis = 350 gpn)
COMMENTS;
PAflAMETEa LEVEL
Alkalinity aa CaCOj, mg/I 308
Ammonia aa NHj-N, mg/I 11 •'•
Ansenic as Aa. mg/I ^'01 ^
Barium aa Sa, mg/I 0.022
Bicartionate as HCO,. mg/I ^'^
Boron aa S, mg/I
Cadmium aa Cd, mg/I ^•^'
ilcium aa Ca. mg/I '^
Caroonate aa CO3. mg/I ^
PARAMETER LEVEL
Chloride as CL mg/I 57.6 -^
Chromium aa Cr (Hex.), mg/I <.01 ^
Chromium as Cr (Total), mg/I <.01 -^
Ccnductivity, u.Tihoa/cm 676
Copper as Cu, mg/I 0.085 -
Fluoride as F, mg/I 0.72 •-'
Hardness as CaCOa, mg/I 136
Hydroxide as OH. mg/I ^
Iron as Fe (Dissolved), mg/I 0.082 -
Iron as Fe (Total), mg/I 0.!^^^
LsadaaPb. mg/I 0.045 -
Magneaium aa Mg, mg/I 13.3
Manganeae aa Mn. mg/I < .01 "
Mercury as Hg, mg/I C.0C1S •
Nickel asNI, mg/I <-C'i
Nitrate as NOj-N, mg/I 1.60 •'
Nitrite as NOrN, mg/I <.005^
Phosphate as PO*-P. mg/I 0.01 S
Potaaaium aa K, mg/I 15.2
Selenium aa Se, mg/1 <. 002 -
SilicaaaSiO, (Diaaolved), mg/I 70.2
Silver as Ag, mg/I < -01 '
Sodium as Na, mg/I 62.4
Sulfate as SO4. mg/l 60.3 -^
Total Diasolved Solids, mg/I 614 •-
Turtsidity, NTU °'^b"
Zinc as Zn. mg/I C. oRT-
pH Units S-OS ""
•
frnm IU tu am
*torlmlt ». C. REPORT OF WELL DRILLER
STATE OF UTAH
->^jCct^p2iUy
Ctola Ma.
GENERAL STATEMENT! Report e( woll drillor U hcnbr mado Md fil«d with th* SUU EntlnMr, In iceonUnn with th* law* e{ tlUh.
(This report ahall be filed with th* Slat* EiifiB*«r within SO day* af t«r the completion or abandonnwat of th* W*1L Pailur* ta fil* lach
report* eonstitutes a mlidcmeanor.)
(2) LOCATION OF WELL:
County „.......
Nonh
.._ U 5ocitli
•f S«rtlon . ,. ,
BUI ward, not hocdod)
. Ground Wilar Baola^
Eoll
(taan kkak)
N BtLMf
(Mrikt
(3) NATURE OF WORK (check): Mow Wdl
lt.pbMm«il W<ll O tttniiltit O Ravolr O .AkonjM
(4) NATURE OF USE (ehtck):
Donatio D MnMrirU • MuWvd D
bTliotbmD MblM D Otk« O
•tookwalar
TMWoU
(S) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (cheek):
Botorr a Du a
CoMo D I''''" D
Jotta<
»onl
a
o
=
D
D
a
_D
(6) CASING SCHEDULE
" DUai. Il«i. 'o«
" DJoH. from foot to.
" Olam. froai . <••* to.
H»w D »o<o«t g
(7) PERFORATIONS:
Trp« ef perierfttar Baed._«——
fliu ef p«rlerktlotii . .->-—
r*rfaf«tWr Tai G Mo O
pvrferatkie* frea^
p«rfer«Ueni fi«M_
..... p«r/er«Uo»e trom..
. p«rferatlo«i froH...
_.p«rferaU0Di fr««L-
(8) SCREENS: w«]i .crMn iniuiiwr Xm D N« a
Hanafaetnrer'e Ne«« ...._^,—, ,. - - . - - •«
Tn« -...-
Diam. .. . Slot vlia..
DUm Slot tU*. .
HadW V^
.8«t frem
(9) CONSTRUCTION:
Wii will (ro..l paekodt YM Q No O Slio ot «r»oli—
Grir*} pUcod from foot lo
Wo, • nrfooo oral pcoriiloj? Tm O Mo O
To «b>t 4«plkT ton
Holorlol aw4 !• Mol: _
DM anr otratk conUIn unusoblo watorT
Typa of water: .— . . • —
Hothod «( aomlino .Irate oft:
Y* D Mo
Doplk o< omio
Wai anrfaoo eaatne uwdT
Wai ll comontod In plaeoT
Too
Ta
Ho
Me
a
a
(10) WATER LEVELS:
suile lav.1
Arttalan pmiurt
. tiot Ulow lw4 alrtuo DoU..
.. toot oboro land aortooo I>ato_
LOG RECEIVED: (II) FLOWING WELL:
ContnlM ky (ofcoiki •olio Q
Cap D rii* O Me Coaml Q
Dora waU lonk emW ooolict Tea D
Ne a
I) WELL TESTS: Drawdoara la tba diauaoo la tool IW wolar IOTCI la low otW bolow MoUo lofoi.
npomp trat madaf Tra • No Q It oo, by wbomT
Tlaldl •oL/Mln. wltk foot dniw4owm otlor-
Ballor loot
ArlafUo tlow .
taL/tein. wHIi..
Ttfflpwatiira •/ water.
(13) WELL LOG:
DopUi drUlod _ toot. Snrtk ot ooaplalod woB
Mo O TM D
faal.
NOTXi Flora an "X" In tha ipan or eoinblnaUoR of apoora Modod to daolnuto tko HototW or combination of mattHali oncounund In neb doptb fnlorooL Undor MSMABKS Moko oep daalrabla BOIM aa to aecurronra of woter ood tha eolor. alta, paloro. ote.. et autorlo] «». Muaurad In each daptk tatorrol. Ura oddlUonol skaat If nudad.
'PaTtfti~7'(c^(t('tA*ML
V'^r^-PlHf-
Work aurtod.. , !• Coaaplotad..
(14) PUMP:
Uanotaonioi'a Noao..
Tipei , H. r.
Doptk to pamp er kewtai.. ..foot
Well Driller'* StaUment:
Thil well wa* drilled under mj luperrlilon, and tbii Mport li tm* to
the best ofjpT knowledt* and I
Nam*
st ofjnj ImowledE* and bejlii.j y^
^fS//VA///i.cS:.JMhAJiLj. IPonen, firm, er wrparallon) (Trpo or pflet)
Addrasi.
(Signed).
Lle*ni*No. -g^^-
(Woll Drillar)
. DaU.. -.»-
vac invni MBB roi ADOITIOMAI. axKAtu
foaa IU-M-II.«
Bowdadi a. C.
Inapiitlin Bhaot
Caplad
REPORT OF WELL DRILLER
STATE OF UTAB
GENERAL BTATEHENTi Report ef wall driller It herebr made and filed with th* SUU Entineer, In ataerdant* with th* laws ef tJlah.
(This report shall be filed with the SUU Enfin**? wltUa SO day* af Ur the completion or abandonment ef tb* walL Failni* to ftl* neh
reporU eonitituUa a mlidemeanor.)
(1) :^^73
(2) LOCATION OF WELL:
Cwinty ... Gfownd Wolov Boola.
Iloooo klaaki
North
Soolk
foot. .
Boat
of Swtlon
out *-ordi not naadad)
Wrat
T
w mn
laeriko
SLL TESTS: Dfowdown la Iko
oiod bolow alMla I dtaueoo bi fool lbo welor lotol lo low.
•ip IMt madat TM • M* Q It oob
soL/nl*. wltk foat dmwdowB ftflor—
BolUr loot
Actorloa flew ..
TomporotilM of wntor..
. loL/Bta. wHk.. . fal dnwdewa atlai_
. Woo aokoMlool aatlyik siiat Me Q Too D
(13) WELL LOG: eiOMOtOt ot woll ..
(3) NATURE OF WORK (cheek): HMTWOU Q
Raplacamonl Wall D Doapanln* • Bapalr Q Aboadaa Q
If abandoninoni, doacrlbo aatorlol and pt—odaiai
(4) NATURE OF USE (cheek):
Doanaatk O
Irrleallaaa
ladnolrfat O
MM** D
MaaWaal Q
OIkar a
(5) TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION (cheek):
RataiT • Oe* O 1*-* •
Coblo O Drloea D Botod D
(6) CASING SCHEDULE: nrraM a waUod D
„." Siaoi. froM taot to fMt Oae*
" DIaai. tram foot to fMt Oo«a
.- OUm. troo. foal to (ael Oaea
Now D BoJoel D Pood Q
(7) PERFORATIONS:
Typo or potforatar aood _—
•Uo of porforatJeno
rattontadt TM O Ma O
-laikM ky-
.„ portoratloaa troM.
poffoiatloiio fkoM.
.. portofattoaa tioM. -taab
parfontloaa traM_—
porfoTotlona ftoaa.. -taal !•_
(8) SCREENS: Woll raroan IniutladT TM O Ma O
Mannfactoiof'a MaMa .^—.^^.._«.^.-^._.»
Typo Madal No.
Diam Slot alH _ Bot tram tU to
Diam .Slot alio Bol '—— " *-
(9) CONSTRUCTION:
Wat wall sraoal padadT YM O Na O BIM at sraoall^
Graval plocad from foal to
Waa a iortaca oral piooMod? Tra
TO wkal daptk t..
Material aaad la aral:
ht
Did aay olraU caatola unawkla watert TM Q M*
T>pa of watatl...- Do** at itnU
Hathod of aaollas alrato ott I.....
Waa iurtoM aailne uaadt
Wu It eomonlad In plant
TM
TM
a
a
Ma
Me
a
a
(10) WATER LEVELS:
Suiii lavtl
Annlon pioiautw
...loot kalow I
.. foot abooo I
I oarfaM Dele.
I taifoM Bato-
LOG RECEIVED: (11) FLOWING WELL:
Contiollod kr (akoak) Talaa O
Cap O rtm a Ma Coatoal O
DoM woO laak atoaad oMlaaT TM Q
Me a
Doptk drillod. ,
or oomblnnllun at piatorlaia oneovatortd la Mtk doptk (ntorral. UndM BZMABKS Moke aar
dMirabIa BOIM aa to aeaarronao of walor a«d Iho oolor. aba. aauta, ata, ef toalattol m.
DB^II
1
^rt
f$?
,£M.
,«5
e
%
700
5aS
?/tf
MATSaiAL
Isl
X .
^ ' ^
'J ^ A i
Hill
^_ .n
I
_
BBtABKB
ll
<^^'Ur^i^^3^,
yf&htOu /it«-*vfcA
>• ^ »
Wark atortad... , It CoMplotod..
(14) PUMP:
Manataotaiat'a MaMa_...
T»e: B. r~
Doptk to paM* ar bawiM _.. ...... tool
Wall OrtlUr'B StaUment:
This well was drilt*d under mr SBperrislon, and this raport if tm* to
the best •< ay lDowl*d(* andyMlidf. y^
Nam. ^ZPlP//JA&^.-£li^lSrA:=^±z
troiaoB. fitto. OT oorporallea) (Type OT pflat)
AddrasB ,
(Sipied) .
No. AAS.
(Wall DiUtar)
. DaU--.«-
DSC OTBCB SM n* ADDtnONAL UMAkU
APPENDIX N – UTAH HYDROLOGIC DATA REPORT NO. 50

•
•
•

Utah Hydrologic Data Report No. 50
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary
•
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Dallas L. Peck, Director
t
For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from:
District Chief
U.S. Geological Survey, WRD
Room 1016 Administration Building
1745 West 1700 South
Salt Lake City, Utah 84104
U.S. Geological Survey
Books and Open-File Reports Section
Federal Center
Box2542S
Denver, Colorado 80225
»
•
CONTENTS
Introduction 1
References cited.... 3
ILLUSTRATIONS
(Plate is in pocket)
Plate 1. Map showing selected hydrologic-data sites, southern Utah and Goshen
Valleys, Utah, 1890-1992.
Figure 1. Diagram showing numbering system used in Utah for hydrologic-data
sites 2
TABLES
Table 1. Records of selected wells 4
2. Drillers' logs of selected wells 33
3. Water levels in selected wells 39
4. Discharge of selected wells 61
5. Chemical analyses of water from selected wells 68
6. Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance
of water from selected springs 94
7. Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance
of water from selected springs, drains, and sloughs during seepage
studies 95
8. Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance
of water from selected streams and canals 98
111
CONVERSION FACTORS, VERTICAL DATUM, AND ABBREVL4TED
WATER-QUALITY UNITS
Multiply By jo obtain
acre
foot
cubic foot per second
gallon per minute
inch
mile
square mile
Water temperature is given in degrees Celsius (°C), which can be converted to degrees
Fahrenheit (°F) by the following equation:
°F = 1.8 (°C) + 32.
Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of
1929—a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the
United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.
Specific conductance and water temperature are given in metric units. Specific conduc-
tance is given in microsiemens per centimeter (^S/cm) at 25 degrees Celsius. Chemical concen-
tration is given in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (ng/L). Milligrams per liter
is a unit expressing the solute per unit volume (liter) of water. For concentrations less than 7000
milligrams per liter, the numerical value is about the same as concentration in parts per million.
One thousand micrograms per liter is equivalent to 1 milligram per liter.
0.4047
4,047
0.3048
0.02832
0.06308
25.4
0.0254
1.609
2.59
hectare
square meter
meter
cubic meter per second
liter per second
millimeter
meter
kilometer
square kilometer
IV
SELECTED HYDROLOGIC DATA FOR SOUTHERN
UTAH AND GOSHEN VALLEYS, UTAH, 1890-1992
By Bernard J. Stolp, Marilyn Drumiler, and Lynette E. Brooks
INTRODUCTION
This report contains hydrologic data collected in southern Utah and Goshen Valleys fron,
1890 to 1992. Southern Utah and Goshen Valleys are south of Salt Lake City in Utah County,
north-central Utah. The area is bounded on the east and south by the Wasatch Range, on the south
by Long Ridge, on the west by the East Tintic Mountains and the Mosida Hills, and on the north
by a line through about the middle of T. 7 S. Southern Utah Valley and Goshen Valley are divided
by the northern tip of Long Ridge, West Mountain, and Utah Lake (Cordova, 1970). The area is in
the Basin and Range physiographic province described by Fenneman (1931), and includes about
390 square miles.
Most of the data in this report were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey in coopera-
tion with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights. Some of the ear-
lier data were published previously by Cordova (1969 and 1970).
The purpose of this report is to provide hydrologic data for use by the general public and
by officials managing the area's water resources, and to document data collected during a 4-year
study of the ground-water resources in southern Utah and Goshen Valleys. Tables 1 to 8 contain
selected ground- and surface-water data. Select data, including well depth and water level, is
given for over 400 wells, and chemical analyses are given of samples from about 90 wells. The
numbering system used in Utah for hydrologic-data sites is illustrated in figure 1. Hydrologic-data
sites are shown on plate 1.
These data could not have been collected without the cooperation of local residents and
officials of irrigation companies and municipalities, who permitted access to their wells and prop-
erty.
The system of numbering wells and springs in Utah is based on the cadastral land-suivey system of the U.S. Govemment.
The number, in addidon to designating the well or spring, describes its position in the land net. The land-survey system divides
the State into four quadrants separated by Uie SaU Lake Base Line and the Salt Lake Meridian. These quadrants are designated by
the uppercase letters A, B, C, and D, indicating the northeastem, northwestern, southwestem, and southeastern quadrants,
respectively. Numbers designating the township and range, in that order, follow the quadrant letter, and all three are enclosed in
parentheses. The number after the parentheses indicates the secUon, and is followed by three letters indicating the quarter section,
the quarter-quarter section, and the quarter-quarter-quarter section—^generally 10 acres*. The lowercase letters, a, b, c, and d
indicate, respectively, the northeastem, northwestern, southwestem, and southeastern quarters of each subdivision. The number
after the letters is the serial number of the well or spring within the 10-acre tract. When the serial number is not preceded by a
letter, the number designates a well. When the serial number is preceded by an "S," the number designates a spring. Thus,
(C-10-1)24ddc-l designates the first well constructed or visited in the southwest 1/4, southeast 1/4, southeast 1/4, section 24,
T. 10 S., R. 1 W. A location number with no serial number designates a surface-water data-collection site.
Sections within a township
R. 1 W.
Tracts within a section
Sec. 24
b
c
a
b i «
•
nometers
(C-10-1)24ddc-1
T. 10S.. R. 1 W.
' Although the basic land unit, the section, is theoretically 1 square mile, many sections are irregular. Such sections are subdivided
into 10-acre tracts, generally beginning at the southeastern comer, and the shortage is taken up along the northern and westem
sides of the section.
Figure 1. Numbering system used in Utah for hydrologic-data sites.
2
REFERENCES CITED
Cordova, R.M., 1969, Selected hydrologic data, southern Utah and Goshen Valleys, Utah: U.S.
Geological Survey open-file report (duplicated as Utah Basic Data Release No. 16), 35 p.
—1970, Ground-water conditions in southern Utah Valley and Goshen Valley, Utah: Utah
Department of Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 28,79 p.
Fenneman, N.M., 1931, Physiography of the western United States: New York, McGraw-Hill,
534 p.
Table h—Records of
[—,no
Well number: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data sites.
Owner: Last known or reported owner.
Use of water: C, commercial; H, domestic or household; 1, irrigation; K, mining; N, industrial: O,
Casing: Diameter: Diameter of the production string of casing; Reported from the driller's log or measured
reported, only top of perforated interval is known; R, wire wound; S, screened: X, open hole.
Elevation of land surface is given in feet above sea level. Elevations are reported to the nearest 0.01 foot
Water level is given in feet and decimal fractions. Measured except where noted R, reported.
Other data available: L, driller's log (table 2); W, water-level measurements (table 3); D, discharge
Well number
(C-7-1)26cdd-1
(C-8-1)20cdb-2
(C-8-1)20cdb-3
(C-8-1)20cdb-4
(C-8-1)29dda-1
(C-8-1)34bcc-1
(C-8-1)35dcb-1
{C-8-2)25dac-1
(C-9-1)3ddb-1
(C-9-1)4ccc-1
(C-9-1)4ddc-1
(C-9-1)5ddc-1
(C-9-1)17abb-1
(0-9-1)17abb-2
(0-9-1)17ada-1
(0-9-1 )17bba-1
(0-9-1 )17bbc-1
(0-9-1 )17bbd-1
(0-9-1 )17bbd-2
(0-9-1 )17cdd-1
(0-9-1 )18add-1
^ (0-9-1 )20cdd-1
(0-9-1 )20ddd-1
(0-9-1 )26bda-3
Owner
Smith, Doyle
Bateman
Harold Hewlett & Sons
Unknown
Bateman
LDS Church
Dixson, S.
Steadman, Bill
LDS Ohurch
LDS Ohurch
LDS Ohurch (No. 9)
Steadman, Bill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
LDS Ohurch
LDS Ohurch (No.7)
Burraston, B.
Year
drilled
1979
1967
1972
. —
1973
1970
1945
1972
1964
1970
—
1970
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
1986
1964
1963
1915
Use
Of
water
S
S
1
1
1
H
S
S
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
1
1
S
Well
depth
(feet)
116
345
400
225
625
412
212
600
575
756
690
776
70
210
166
269
301
70
300
195
502
532
788
56
selected wells
data available]
observation; P, public supply; Q, aquaculture; S, stock; U, unused; Z, other,
in the field. Finish: O, open end; P, perforated, where single depth is
Upper or lower limits of perforations or screen are given in feet below land surface,
when the well has been surveyed.
(table 4); O, chemical analysis (table 5).
Casing
Diameter
(inches) .
8
16
—
12
6
4
8
18
16
18
16
4.5
4,5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
12
20
18
1.5
0
X
0
P
P
P
0
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
s
s
s
s
s
R
R
R
P
P
P
P
P
0
Finish
(feet)
227-345
100-235
307-595
402
300-390
190-205
225-338
365-565
240-405
565-750
200-683
280-390
545-740
49-70
189-210
145-166
228-269
260-301
49-70
280-300
175-195
350-445
450-500
275-521
300-490
490-775
Clav/otinn
of land
surface
(feet)
4,495
4.620
4,620
4,620
4,595
4,535
4.489
4.770
4,510.36
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
22 R
120.2 R
128 R
—
89.34
43.94
-3.0 R
276 R
17.08
Date
03-05-79
04-04-67
10-10-72
—
03-02-87
03-04-91
06-15-64
05-24-72
03-04-91
Other
data
available
0
0
0
0
0
L.W.C
4,620 128.76 03-14-91 W.C
4,570
4,640
4,670
4,665
4,635
4,730
4.745
4,740
4,740
4,670
4,775
4,701.40
4,640
4,496
81.01
163 R
69.18
175.19
136
232.72
241.19
69.35
243
171.7
264 R
200.34
137.98
-7.0
03-04-91
03-30-70
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
09-09-86
03-04-91
03-05-91
05-09-90
L.W.C
0
L
L.W.C
L.W.C
W.C
Table I,—Records of
Well number
(C-9-1)26dcd-1
(0-9-1 )28ccb-1
(0-9-1 )29acc-1
Owner
Woodard. J.E.
LDS Church
LDS Church
Year
drilled
1956
1962
1963
Use
of
water
S
1
1
Well
depth
(feet)
37
802
700
(0-9-1 )29bcc-1 LDS Church 1963 H 800
(0-9-1 )29cdc-1
(0-9-1 )29cdc-2
(0-9-1 )34ccc-1
2 (0-9-1 )34acd-1
(C-9-1)34ddc-1
(C-10-1)2bcd-1
(C-10-1)3ddb-1
(C-10-1)4bbb-1
(C-10-1)4cbb-1
Town of Elberta
Town of Elberta
LDS Church
Miller, H.
Miller, A.
Green, Duane
White, G.T
LDS Church (No. 2)
LDS Church
1977
1989
1951
1961
1964
1981
—
1962
1962
P
P
1
S
H
S
H
1
1
400
387
650
265
256
100
495
882
870
(C-10-1)9ccc-1 Wright, Bill 1961 474
(O-10-1)10ddc-3
(0-10-1)11ccd-1
(0-10-1)15cca-1
(C-10-1)17aaa-1
(C-10-1)17bba-1
(C-10-1)17bba-2
(0-10-1)18ccc-1
(0-10-1)24ddc-1
Green, Duane
Burraston, Carma
Morgan, H.
Town Of Elberta
Sunshine Mining Company
Sunshine Mining Company
Levering, Dean and Betty
Lunceford, Scott
1979
1980
1951
1955
—
1986
—
1965
H
—
U
U
u
u
u
u
162
160
168
376
860
320
450
533
(0-10-1 )25abd-1 Lunceford, Scott 1951 645
•
selected wells—Continued
Casing
•
Diameter
(inches)
2
20
18
18
8
10
8
1.25
2
6
6
18
12
16
6
6
12.5
6
4
6
8
20
12
0
—
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
0
0
0
—
P
S
S
S
S
p
p
p
0
p
—
0
S
p
0
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
Finish
(feet)
280-380
380-405
426-700
300-350
350-675
700-775
315-385
270-340
70-580
587-650
525-880
406-550
640-680
700-740
750-850
255-346
360-420
427-474
150-157
750-860
300-320
366-391
422-428
462-482
372-450
461-492
507-550
568-575
585-600
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,505
4.643
4,719
4,792
4,760
4,760
4,551
4.508
4,517
4,515
4,555
4,672
4,664
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
-1.33
127.65
214.28
300.10
288
256.55
17.85
-6.90
-5.50
9.18
18.86
147.04
135.86
Date
03-07-91
03-04-91
03-04-91
04-02-90
05-23-88
06-29-89
12-13-74
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-07-91
04-24-67
03-05-91
03-04-91
Other
data
available
L.W.C
L.W,0
L,W,C
0
0
L.C
0
L.W.C
L.W,C
4,681
4,555
4,550
4,600
4.711
4.810
4,810.4
4,918
4,750
131.68
6 R
4.37
28.29
170.37
266.71
266.56
353.46
212.54
03-08-77
03-07-91
03-05-91
03-07-91
12-30-71
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-05-91
03-05-91
0
0
W.C
0
W
W
W
W
4.778 245.15 03-05-91 W.C
T^ble h—Records of
Well number
(C-10-1)28ada-2
(C-10-1)29cdd-1
Owner
LDS Ohurch
LDS Ohurch
Year
drilled
1979
1961
Use
of
water
H
1
Well
depth
(feet)
775
842
(C-10-1)29dcd-1
(C-10-1)29ddd-1
LDS Church
LDS Ohurch
1954
1962
H
I
460
700
(C-10-1)30baa-1
(C-10-1)3lcdd-1
(0-10-1 )32ccc-1
Unknown
LDS Church
LDS Ohurch
1963
1961
S —
I 603
I 507
•
(C-10-1)33cbb-1
(C-10-1)34bbb-1
(C-10-2)13bcc-1
(0-11-1)6abc-1
LDS Church
Oritchfield, Ross
Bronson, Jonathan
LDS Church
1961
1949
1963
U
H
567
342
300
679
(C-11-1)6bdd-1 LDS Church 1964 762
(C-11-1)6cab-1
(D-7-2)32dad-1
5 (D-7-2)33dcc-1
(D-7-2)34dcd-1
(D-7-2)35ccd-1
LDS Church
Batty. Roy
Banks. A.
Christofferson. B.
Hales, G.
1981
1978
^_
1959
1900
1
H
S
S
1
825
550
400
194
300 4
selected wells—Continued
Pa< \^el«
Diameter
(inches)
8
16
6
16
—
20
16
16
—
6
18
18
20
8
2.5
2
2
sing
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
0
P
P
P
P
P
—
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
0
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
0
0
Finish
(feet)
746-760
185-189
205-275
280-574
595-685
696-762
770-815
162-195
228-246
408-411
420-428
532-695
290-603
210-220
263-324
352-356
367-398
420-505
155-567
180-220
315-322
330-335
390-488
495-532
545-675
425-500
533-541
556-577
584-659
672-745
474-807
350-353
450-453
370-400
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4.670
4,680
4.670
4,660
4,778
4,760
4.743
4,680
4,660
5.140
4,770
4,780.9
4,795
4.493
4,495
4,505
4,507.1
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
135 R
151.3
129.06
100.50
228.67
210.69
204.1
115.54
89.39
172.24
229.99
234.39
262 R
-22.7
—
-6.60
-7.4
Date
04-06-79
03-29-66
03-07-91
03-04-80
06-05-90
03-14-91
03-29-66
03-07-91
03-07-91
03-05-91
12-11-75
04-06-90
09-18-81
03-04-91
—
03-05-91
03-23-61
Other
data
available
C
0
W
L,0
0
W
W
L.0
L.W.C
L.W,D
D
W.O
D
Table 1.—Records of
Well number Owner
Year
drilled
Use
of
water
Well
depth
(feet)
D-7-
D-7-
D-7-
D-7-
D-7-
P-7-
D-7-
D-7-
0-7-
D-7-
D-7-
P-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
D-7
2)35ccd-2
>2)36bbb-1
2)36ccb-1
2)36dad-1
2)36dcc-2
3)18dcc-1
3)19aac-1
3)20adb-1
3)20bcd-1
•3)20bcd-3
•3)28bdb-1
•3)28cab-1
•3)28dbb-1
•3)29bdb-1
•3)29dcc-1
•3)29ddd-1
•3)30aaa-1
•3)30aac-3
•3)31cac-2
-3)32bcc-1
•3)32bcc-2
-3)32bcd-1
-3)33baa-6
•3)33ccc-5
•3)33ccc-6
•3)34bcb-1
•3)34cdb-1
p-8-1)2ccd-1
D-8-1)3dda-1
D-8-1)10bcb-1
D-8-1)10bcb-2
D-8-1)11bac-1
D-8-1)13aaa-1
D-8-1)13bdd-1
D-8-1)13daa-3
D-8-1)14dad-1
D-8-1)20abb-1
Hales, A. 1961
Money, W. 1943
Money, W. 1961
Huntingdon, B. —
Crandall, Condie —
LDS Church 1962
John Kuhni and Sons Animal By-Product Plant 1938
Brigham Young University 1970
Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe 1926
Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe 1927
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources 1963
Park Ro-She Corp. (H.J. Robbins. Pres.) 1961
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources 1988
Fibertek 1986
Sumsion, Howard 0. 1953
SpringviUe City 1986
Perry, Robert 1977
Condie. A. 1953
Childs, Neil 1964
Wood Springs Irrigation Company 1934
Metcalf, Harold 1972
Jensen, Clarence L. 1977
Champeriain 1900
Vane,J.E. —
Matson Springs irrigation Company 1966
SpringviUe City 1961
SpringviUe City 1960
Hirst, Harold —
Unknown 1967
South Shore Fruit Farms —
South Shore Fruit Farms —
Utah County 1981
Schaffer, S. B. 1906
Atwood, G. 1950
Mecham, Darrell F. 1949
0. B. Turkey, Inc. 1966
Hi-Country Fruit Farms (Phil Belnap) —
H
S
I
S
U
H
N
U
N
N
U
U
U
N
I
U
I
S
S
I
H
S
H
U
I
P
P
H
U
U
U
P
H
S
I
I
H
420
147
504
100
186
322
268
353
306
635
338
285
37
148
136
413
277
125
135
414
164
151
138
140
533
485
445
55
72
240
135
300
358
119
345
350
205
•
•
10
^elected wells—Continued
Pai Oa:
Diameter
(inches)
4
3
3
—
2
4
3
16
4
4
16
2
2
8
2
16
6
2
4
—
6
6
2
2
16
16
16
8
—
6
—
8
4
2
8
6
6
5ing
0
0
P
—
0
P
0
p
0
0
p
p
0
0
0
s
0
0
p
—
p
0
0
0
p
p
p
p
p
o
—
0
—
p
0
0
p
0
0
Finish
(feet)
496-504
115-121
115-350
270-330
280-285
349-413
130-135
152-159
230-533
410-475
158-230
284-395
402-442
200-251
285-328
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4.507
4.490
4,500
4,500
4.503.1
4,495
4,493
4.520
4.495
4.494
4.520
4,527
4.550
4.502
4,515
4,525
4.495
4,496
4,503
4,511
4.511
4.518
4.560
4.567
4,565
4,580
4.650
4.495
4,520
4,520
4,520
4,495
4,499
4,496
4,499
4,492
4.505
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
-17
• —
-35 R
-5.9
-11.40
-18.9
-26.1
-1 R
-25.0
-42.5
-22.4
-14.8
8.43
—
-25 R
-28 R
-40.9
-15.4
-14.3
-5.4
-14.5
-13.2
-4.7
-5.2
-14.3
2.0
45.9
6.87
32.32
17.01
43.34
-7.7
-11.3
-1.5
-13.9
—
15.68
Date
05-12-64
— "
10-01-61
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-05-91
04-28-47
03-11-70
10-15-64
10-15-64
09-11-87
03-04-91
04-18-89
—
03-11-53
01-15-87
03-09-82
03-04-91
09-13-89
03-04-91
03-26-81
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-08-91
04-22-64
07-01-65
03-05-91
02-15-91
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-05-91
06-25-65
—
03-05-91
Other
data
available
D
D
D
W,D
L,W
. 0
L.W
D
0
. W.D
L
W
W,D,C
W.D
W
L,C
W
0
W,C
W
C
W,D
W
D
D
W
11
u
Table 1.—Records of
Well number
(D-8-1)23bdd-1
(D-8-1)25aad-1
(D-8-1)25aba-1
(D-8-1)25cbb-1
(D-8-1)26bdd-1
(D-8-1)35cac-1
(D-8-1)35cac-2
(D-8-1)36bcc-1
(D-8-2)1baa-1
(D-8-2)2aac-1
(D-8-2)2caa-1
(D-8-2)2cda-1
(D-8-2)2daa-1
(D-8-2)3aad-1
(D-8-2)3ccd-1
(D-8-2)4abb-1
(D-8-2)4abb-2
(D-8-2)4abc-1
(D-8-2)4bab-1
(D-8-2)4cba-2
(D-8-2)4cbb-1
(D-8-2)4cdc-1
(D-8-2)4cdc-4
(D-8-2)4dad-1
(D-8-2)7cab-1
(D-8-2)7cbd-1
(D-8-2)7dda-1
(D-8-2)7ddd-1
(D-8-2)9aad-1
(D-8-2)10adb-1
(D-8-2)10bdd-1
(D-8-2)12ddc-1
(D-8-2)12ddc-2
(D-8-2)13abc-1
(D-8-2)13bdd-1
(D-8-2)14cad-1
(D-8-2)14dcc-1
(D-8-2)16caa-1
Owner
Binning. Lester and Agnes
Hansen, J.
Ludlow. W.
Kelsey, C.
Vannosdol, George
Hanson, Charles K.
Hanson, Charles K.
Ercanbrack, L.
Finch, J.
Banks, L
Thomas, G.
Roach. T.
Williams. R.D.
Monk, B.
Banks, L.
Banks, LM.
Sorensen, James Jr.
Sorenson, W.
Banks, L
Sharp, Jeff
Lakeside Irrigation Company
Olsen, Chet
Olsen, Chet
Sorensen, W.
Brooks, H. L.
Nelson, Justin R.
Hall, M.
Hall, M.
Banks, A.
Ottesen, H.
Sorenson, F.
Diamond, Harold
Diamond, Harold
Johns, K.
Pace, R.
Elson. G.
Johns. W.
Lewis, R.C.
Year
drilled
^^»
1953
1944
1964
1977
1975
1962
1963
1963
1961
1951
1900
1948
1963
1961
1900
1895
1950
1963
1909
1934
1908
1945
1963
1947
1962
1956
1913
1964
1966
1955
—
1961
1961
1962
1953
1939
1895
Use
of
water
S
S
1
S
8
H
1
S
S
1
S
H
S
1
S
8
H
8
H
1
1
H
H
1
1
H
S
H
H
H
H
S
8
1
H
8
H
H
Well
depth
(feet)
120
104
173
300
126
440
351
231
182
336
338
140
346
417
420
150
—
230
324
330
500
80
143
607
263
355
276
520
385
588
411
172
372
378
378
376
377
570
•
12
selected wells—Continued
~
c.» wd.
Diameter
(inches)
2
2
2
1.5
6
6
8
4
6
2
2
2
2.5
2.5
2.5
1.25
—
2
3
2
8
2
2
3
2
4
3
1.25
3
3
2.5
2
3
3
3
2.5
2
3
sing
0
0
X
X
0
0
p
—
p
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
0
0
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
p
p
0
0
0
Finish
(feet)
163-173
205-300
100-345
167-182
412-417
316-324
593-607
364-372
368-378
368-378
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,500
4,497
4.498
4,504
4.620
4,575
4,578
4,518
4,505
4,511
4,518
4,524.4
4,514.9
4,512
4,512
4,494.1
4,498.2
4,496
4,495
4.501
4,499
4,500
4,500
4,502
4.493
4,492
4,498
4,498
4,511
4,520
4,518
4,540
4,541
4,548
4,555
4,547
4,553
4,525
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
-8.0
-9.9
-6.5
-11.8
77.86
52.96
60.7
-10.9
-10.3
-22.8 R
-11.6
-4.7
-25.7
-15.8
-8 R
-14.1
-6.0
-11.3
-4.4
-17.6
-6.1
-12.2
-13.0
-13.4
-7.5
—
-4.9
-9.3
-8.7
-19.7
-4.0
-2.6
-48.6
-18.4
-28 R
-3.5
-14.2
-27.2
Date
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-04-91
03-06-91
03-05-91
06-29-65
03-07-91
08-08-89
08-06-64
09-21-89
03-04-91
04-02-90
09-15-89
11-01-61
03-05-91
09-12-89
09-12-89
09-12-89
03-01-91
09-15-89
03-04-91
03-04-91
09-28-89
08-20-64
—
03-04-91
03-01-91
03-05-91
03-01-91
09-28-89
08-13-76
09-10-84
09-28-89
04-02-64
03-05-91
07-09-65
09-05-90
Other
data
available
W.D
D
W
W
0
W
W,D
D
W,D
W.D
W.D.C
W.D
D
W.D
D
W.D
W.D
W.D.C
W,D
W
W.D
D
D
W
W
D
W,D
D
D,C
D,0
W,D,C
D
W
D
W,D,C
13
Table 1.—Records of
Well number Owner
Year
drilled
Use
of
water
Well
depth
(feet)
(D-8-2)16dbb-2
(D-8-2)17ada-1
(D-8-2)17add-5
(D-8-2)17add-6
(D-8-2)17ccc-2
(D-8-2)17dab-2
(D-8-2)17dad-1
(D-8-2)17ddd-1
(D-8-2)19add-1
(D-8-2)20cad-2
(D-8-2)21aaa-1
(D-8-2)21bbb-2
(D-8-2)21ddd-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-2
(D-8-2)23dbd-1
(D-8-2)23dbd-2
(D-8-2)23dbd-3
(D-8-2)23dca-2
(D-8-2)24bdc-2
(D-8-2)25bca-1
(D-8-2)25dac-3
Huff, J.
Hansen, B.
Huff,E.
Huff
Clayson, Mrs. Allen
Beckstrom, J. L
Evans, James 8.
Simmons, Steve
Beckstrom, A.
Hawkins, 0.
Anderson. Mrs. John
Lee, Eddie
Anderson. Bernell
Salt Lake By-Products
Salt Lake By-Products
Ferto Corporation
Ferto Corporation
Ferto Corporation
Ferto Corporation
Thomas, R.
Valley Asphalt, Inc.
Spanish Fork City
1962
1964
1962
1950
1959
1959
1975
1944
1916
1900
1956
1936
1935
1957
1920
1916
1940
1963
1978
1961
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
N
N
N
N
H
I
H
N
U
168
466
105
80
363
100
110
94
480
420
498
110
347
620
385
390
390
569
352
246
620
m
(D-8-2)26aad-3
(D-8-2)26aad-4
(D-8-2)26abb-3
(D-8-2)26adc-1
(D-8-2)27acd-1
(D-8-2)28cbd-3
(D-8-2)28cca-2
(D-8-2)28daa-1
(D-8-2)29aaa-7
(D-8-2)29aab-5
(D-8-2)29add-1
(D-8-2)29bcb-1
(D-8-2)29bcd-2
(D-8-2)29cab-1
Creer. R.
Leland Milling Oompany
Ludlow, A.
Unknown
Thomas, I.
Hone, Melva
Thorton, S.
Larson, D.
Hickman. Rex L.
Steele, Alice
Reynolds, Reed
Argyle, Bert
Zieman, Jacob
Hansen, Arthur
1961
1987
1946
1971
1948
1944
1951
1939
1957
1956
1935
1966
1952
1947
H
N
H
S
S
H
8
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
223
360
371
—
180
92
200
120
390
176
222
165
166
168
i m
14
F"^
•
selected wells—Continued
•
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
4
3
4
2
8
3
8
16
4
6
2.5
6
2
2
3
2
2.5
2.5
3.5
4
2.5
2.5
X
P
0
0
0
0
X
—
—
0
0
0
0
—
p
p
—
p
p
0
p
p
p
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Finish
(feet)
452-466
84-105
83-94
380-390
380-390
475-500
327-352
505-508
512-545
547-564
600-605
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,522
4,514
4,517
4,515
4,509
4.514
4,518
4.522
4.514
4.522
4.536
4,522
4.541
4.545
4.545
4.565.1
4,561
4,560
4,562
4,570
4,610
4,622
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
-4.2
-5.4
7.74
8 R
-8.5
9.11
9.16
8 R
-12.6
-2.7
-6.85
10 R
-12.5
-15.4
-10.9
-19.6
-15.6
-1.1
-18.2
-1.5
27 R
38.42
Date
03-04-91
03-01-91
03-17-70
06-07-50
08-17-89
09-03-64
03-04-91
07-13-44
03-01-91
03-01-91
08-28-89
06-26-56
10-02-89
03-04-91
03-04-91
12-17-47
06-23-65
09-15-64
10-05-73
08-17-89
12-30-78
03-05-91
Other
data
available
W
W,L
D
D
W.D
D
D
W
W
W
D
W,D
W,D
W,D
D
0
W.D
W
4.595
4.595
4.579
4.550
4,546
4,525
4,525
4,535
4.530
4.525
4.526
4,508
4,512
4,513
35.45
8
-3.9
-4.5
-5.2
-6.6
-4.1 ,
-2.6
-6.9
-4.6
-3.8
-10.5
-19.6
-26.4
03-06-91
09-25-87
03-04-91
02-16-71
03-05-91
07-31-89
03-01-91
09-25-64
03-05-91
03-01-91
08-10-77
08-17-89
08-17-89
03-04-91
W
W
W
W.D.C
W
D
W
C
D
W.D
W.D
15
TEible 1.—Records of
Well number
(D-8-2)30bad-1
(D-8-2)31bcd-1
(D-8-2)31cbb-1
(D-8-2)31cda-1
(D-8-2)31cdb-1
(D-8-2)31cdb-2
(D-8-2)32aad-1
(D-8-2)32daa-1
(D-8-2)33bcc-1
(D-8-2)34acd-1
(D-8-2)34dda-1
(D-8-2)36dbd-2
(D-8-2)36dbd-3
(D-8-3)2dcd-1
(D-8-3)2dcd-2
(D-8-3)3bca-1
(D-8-3)3cca-1
(D-8-3)3dcb-1
(D-8-3)3dcd-1
(D-8-3)4caa-2
(D-8-3)4caa-3
(D-8-3)4caa-4
(D-8-3)4cad-1
(D-8-3)4daa-1
(D-8-3)5bca-1
(D-8-3)6ddd-1
(D-8-3)6ddd-2
(D-8-3)6ddd-3
(D-8-3)6ddd-4
(D-8-3)6ddd-5
(D-8-3)7aad-1
(D-8-3)7abc-1
(D-8-3)7aca-2
(D-8-3)8abd-1
(D-8-3)10cba-1
(D-8-3)10dac-1
Owner
Stewart. 1.
Tanner. Art
Schaerrer. Grant
Schearrer, Grant
Schearrer, Grant
Schearrer, Grant
Young. K.
Benjamin Cemetery
Mackey, Boley
Ludlow, N.
Bearnson, Gill
Gardner. L.
Cloward. B.
Mapleton City
Dawn. Richard
SpringviUe City
Snyder. Robert
Fullmer, Richard
Seal. Z.
Eddington Canning Company
Eddington Canning Company
Spanish Fork City
Eddington Canning Company
SpringviUe City
Phillips. J.L.
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
SpringviUe Irrigation Company
Schwartz. Glade
Leftwich. Jack
Williams. Keith
Miner, R Lee
Hjorth Brothers
Johnson. Kelly
Year
drilled
1944
1890
1945
—
1920
1963
1934
1949
—
1946
1946
1952
1961
1954
1977
1990
1975
1978
1961
1945
1952
1965
1935
1961
1890
—
—
1934
1934
1934
1946
1972
1948
1959
1961
1977
Use
of
water
1
8
8
1
8
1
H
1
I
S
8
H
H
P
H
P
H
H
1
H
1
U
—
P
H
U
1
i
I
1
S
c
1
u
1
H
Well
depth
(feet)
32
60
96
450
90
435
117
247
—
80
130
260
38
533
200
428
232
305
387
117
153
—
231
371
150
—
357
149
284
160
148
156
147
300
520
62
•
• :
16
selected wells—Continued
9
#
^«i
oa!
Diameter
(inches)
2
2
3
12
22
12
2.5
5
—
2
2
4
6
10
6
16
6
6
16
4
8
8
4
16
2
—
3
3
3
3
3
8
2.5
4
8
6
sing
0
0
0
P
0
P
P
0
0
—
0
0
0
—
p
p
0
p
p
p
p
0
p
0
0
p
p
0
—
—
0
—
—
0
p
0
0
p
0
Finish
(feet)
150-450
210-325
375-430
238-243
246-533
280-420
200-232
285-305
215-385
112
145-255
280-370
132-156
395-520
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4.500
4,503.2
4,504
4.510
4.510
4.510
4,520
4,545
4,525
4.531
4.528
4.640
4.640
4,805
4,800
4.640
4,702
4,725
4,736
4.560
4,560
4,560
4,580
4.629
4,522.2
4,520
4,620
4,518
4,518
4.518
4.525
4.519
4.525
4.560
4.714
4.725
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
-7.3
—
-14.8
—
-15.0
-30.2
-2.5
11
—
-7.4
-11.0
51.12
9.13
221.70
171.12
70.23
114.17
148.69
164
-20
—
-25
-18.1
46.2
-9.7
—
—
-2.7
—
—
-25.1
-23.5
-25
6.14
127.6
34.44
R
R
R
R
R
R
Oate
09-28-64
—
08-28-89
—
03-07-91
03-07-91
09-28-64
11-10-49
—
03-05-91
03-09-90
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-19-65
03-08-91
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-05-91
04-22-64
06-08-45
—
07-19-65
07-02-65
07-01-65
03-04-91
—
—
11-04-64
—
—
03-31-64
03-04-91
07-14-48
03-04-91
06-30-65
03-05-91
Other
data
available
D
D
W.D.C
D.C
W.D.C
W.D.C
C
W.D.C
W.C
W.C
L
L
D
D
D
D
L
WD
D
D
D
W.D
D
L.W
L
L
17
"Kible 1,—'Records of
Well number Owner
Year
drilled
1977
1986
1983
1961
1977
1963
1989
1972
1965
1973
1977
1950
1960
1960
1960
1963
1968
Use
of
water
H
i
1
P
H
U
U
1
1
S
H
8
1
1
H
H
1
1
P
Well
depth
(feet)
203
242
215
500
70
675
376
363
395
70
275
65
127
295
171
350
1,000
#
(D-8-3)10ddb-2
(D-8-3)11abb-1
(D-8-3)11caa-1
(D-8-3)11ccc-1
(D-8-3)11ccc-2
(D-8-3)14acc-1
(D-8-3)14bab-1
(D-8-3)14dab-1
(D-8-3)14dca-1
(D-8-3)16aaa-1
(D-8-3)16aaa-2
(D-8-3)17ada-1
(D-8-3)17bad-1
(D-8-3)17cdc-1
(D-8-3)17cdc-2
(D-8-3)18aaa-3
(D-8-3)18bdc-1
(D-8-3)19bbb-1
Porter, Rich D. & Lois G.
Edmonds, Paul K.
Perry, Fay L
Mapleton City
Johnson, Frank
Orton, G.B.
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Shurtleff. F.L.
Broadbent, J.
Kimber and Johnson
Rostron, Melvin
Garner, R.
Orton, G.B.
Pierce, L.
Smith, R
Hanson, R.
Spanish Fork City
Spanish Fork City
•i
(D-8-3)19ccb-1
(D-8-3)19ccd-1
(D-8-3)19cda-1
(D-8-3)19dca-1
(D-8-3)21bbd-1
(D-8-3)21cac-1
(D-8-3)22bab-1
lO(D-8-3)22cbd-3
(D-8-3)23baa-1
(D-8-3)23ccd-1
(D-8-3)23cdd-1
Spanish Fork City
Christiansen, H.
Spanish Fork City
Spanish Fork City
Snyder, Paul
Storrs, Jan
Crandall, Condie
Mapleton City
Dr. Orton
Biesinger, N.
Whiting. R.W.
1969
1890
1975
1970
1977
1976
1972
1961
1961
1973
1
H
P
P
H
H
H
P
1
1
1
H
275
25
393
603
358
275
26
541
265
381
18
selected wells—Continued
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
6
8
8
12
6
8
4
8
12.5
6
6
4
4
4
4
6
16
12
1.5
12
16
6
6
4
16
8
6
0
P
O
P
P
P
P
P
P
R
P
P
P
P
P
0
0
0
0
0
p
p
p
p
p
p
0
p
p
p
X
p
p
p
0
p
Finish
(feet)
210-215
383-405
409-494
65-67
189-200
372-395
507-675
351-371
200-363
210-215
233-252
315-378
55-65
330-350
780-811
820-833
890-920
948-955
170-250
160-179
303-332
461-50
330-358
265-275
15
485-535
360
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,722
4,790
4,770
4,730
4.735
4.775
4,729.1
4,800
4,800
4,710
4,705
4,700
4,600
4,705
4.710
4.550
4.554
4.675
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
141.47
200 R
185.60
140
46.16
177.05
144.85
210 R
195 R
14.68
123.43
24.53
—
9.79
142.22
-2.1
-23.9
—
Date
03-05-91
04-01-86
03-05-91
03-06-91
03-07-91
03-05-91
12-22-89
02-25-72
07-20-65
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-07-91
—
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-07-91
06-22-65
—
Other
data
available
0
W
w
w
w
w
L
L
w
w
w
4.585
4,590
4,660
4,690
4.719
4,735
4,720
4,760
4,770
4,960
4,980
10.7 R
-6.4
88
—
135.24
133.12
11.32
179.88
—
220 R
182.96
10-19-69
03-04-91
11-05-75
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
—
09-29-61
03-07-91
W
L,W
L
19
Table 1.—Records of
Well number
(D-8-3)26bcd-1
(D-8-3)26cbd-1
(D-8-3)26cbd-2
(D-8-3)26cca-2
(D-8-3)26ccb-1
(D-8-3)27adc-1
(D-8-3)27adc-2
(D-8-3)27bad-1
(D-8-3)27bad-2
(D-8-3)27cdc-1
Owner
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Corporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Trojan Powder Corporation
Spanish Fork City
Year
drilled
1989
1989
1989
1989
1940
1989
1989
1989
1989
1963
Use
Of
water
U
U
U
U
N
U
U
U
U
P
Well
depth
(feet)
236
302
43
35
399
188
395
276
468
630
•
\
i
I
[
*
1
i
(
(D-8-3)28abc-1 Jensen, J. 1961 470
(D-8-3)28bcd-1
(D-8-3)28bdc-1
(D-8-3)29aaa-1
(D-8-3)30dba-1
(D-8-3)31ccd-1
(D-8-3)32add-1
(D-8-3)32baa-1
(D-8-3)33aca-1
(D-8-3)33acb-1
(D-8-3)33cac-1
(D-8-3)33cac-2
(D-8-3)34aca-1
(D-8-3)34bab-1
(D-8-3)34bbb-1
(D-9-1)1bac-1
(D-9-1)1bcb-2
(D-9-1)2ada-2
(D-9-1)2cab-1
(D-9-1)2ccd-1
(D-9-1)2ddd-1
(D-9-1)11acc-1
(D-9-1)11acc-2
(D-9-1)11baa-1
Spanish Fork City
Anderson. G.
Famsworth, Richard 0.
Haderlie, R
Hendacka. H.
Southeast Irrigation Company
Vincent, W.
Spanish Fork City
Stravk^berry Water Users' Association
Hunter, W.
Shepherd, Lee
Trojan Powder Oorporation
Spanish Fork City
Hurst. Harold
Powell, Lynn, and Young, Dallas
Powell. LM.
Farr, L.
Hi-Country Fruit Farm
Oritchfield, Gale
Stewart. M.
Uddle, G.
Uddle, Parley
Bezzant. Clifford
20
1961
1961
1974
1970
1970
1960
1971
1910
1958
1973
1940
—
1973
1976
1973
1948
1973
1980
1945
1974
1981
1971
P
1
H ,
U
H
1
1
H
H
H
H
H
N
U
8
I
H
H
H
—
H
H
8
1
410
395
289
285
246
276
328
50
100
693
261
470
151
600
416
610
210
280
60
253
85
168 4
r
SCi lected wc/fe—Continued
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
4.5
Finish
(feet)
8 216-236
8
4
4.5
4
5
12
12
12.5
12
8
6
4
5
6
—
4
6
10
16
8
6
6
3
8
8
2
6
8
8
P
R
S
R
R
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
—
P
0
P
0
0
P
0
0
p
p
—
p
—
X
0
0
0
—
p
0
p
365-399
163-183
375-395
256-276
443-463
220-254
377-432
515-520
541-546
583-589
264-284
425-465
240-285
265-285
320
353-693
240-261
135-146
316-416
175
118-165
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,965.6
5,012.6
4,991.1
4,983.9
5.000
4,820.5
4,820.6
4,778.5
4.772.4
4.780
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
189.04
231.16
36.13
21.86
266.1
96.57
165.40
149.39
185.36
168.9
Date
03-08-91
03-08-91
03-08-91
03-08-91
03-23-65
03-08-91
03-08-91
03-08-91
03-08-91
06-30-65
Other
data
available
W
W
W
W
LW
W
W
LW
L
4,745
4.749
4.746
4.735
4.711
4,655
4.660
4.720
4,678
4,664
4.760
4,800
4.844
4.797
4.720
4,520
4.530
4.532
4,720
4,730
4,555
4,610
4,615
4.598
154.1
178.50
160 R
113.73
67.12
—
164 R
-40.6
—
62.41
-13.5
101.16
142.75
70.87
-26.5
-6.4
-3.1
182.51
205 R
5.49
73 R
77.79
62.10
06-30-65
04-22-64
10-01-75
03-06-91
03-04-91
—
03-03-65
03-04-91
—
03-07-91
03-08-91
03-24-67
03-06-91
03-06-91
08-09-89
03-05-91
03-05-91
06-26-89
06-22-80
03-06-91
07-01-74
03-06-91
03-06-91
L
L
L
L
LW
L
0
W
W
W
D
W
W
21
Table 1.—Records of
j
1
1
•
Well number
(D-9-1)11bad-1
(D-9-1)11ddc-1
(D-9-1)12bbc-1
(D-9-1)13bdb-1
(D-9-1)13bdb-2
(D-9-1)14aad-1
(D-9-1)14aad-2
(D-9-1)14ada-1
(D-9-1)14ada-2
(D-9-1)14ddd-1
(D-9-1)23acc-2
(D-9-1)23ada-1
^^(D-9-1)23adb-1
(D-9-1)23daa-1
(D-9-1)23dcb-1
^2(D-9-1)24acb-1
(D-9-1)25aac-1
(D-9-1)25aad-1
(D-9-1)25aad-2
(D-9-1)25aca-1
(D-9-1)25ada-1
(D-9-1)25ada-2
(D-9-1)25ada-3
(D-9-1)25ada-4
(D-9-1)25ada-5
(D-9-1)26aaa-1
(D-9-1)26aab-1
(D-9-1)26add-1
^3(D-9-1)26dda-1
(D-9-1)27aca-1
(D-9-1)27aca-2
(D-9-1)32bbd-1
^*(D-9-1)35abb-1
(D-9-1)35bcd-1
(D-9-1)35bcd-2
Owner
Bird, Terry
Simpson. Leonard
Bishop. A.
McBetii, Clyde
McBetii, Clyde
Wayman, Raid L
Wayman, Craig
Stewart, D.
LDS Church
Nay. 0.
Payson Fruit Growers
Hi-Country Fruit Farm
Rowley Brothers
Meredity, V.
Rowley Brothers
Daveport. L.
Spring Creek Irrigation Company
Holladay Field
Spring Creek Irrigation Company
Unknown
Spring Creek Irrigation Oompany
Unknown
Holladay Field
Unknown
Unknown
McMullin. Dave
Rowley Brothers
McMullin, Dave
McMullin, Dave
Keigley Quarry
Keigley Quarry
Oberg, Martin
Strawberry Highline Canal Company
Rowley
Thompson, R
Year
drilled
1971
1971
1947
1912
1920
1961
1971
1945
1961
1950
1977
1959
1959
1963
1970
1962
1934
1934
1934
1934
1934
—
—
—
—
1973
1959
1984
1961
—
1949
—
1963
1957
1963
Use
of
water
H
H
H
1
1
1
1
H
!
H
N
1
H
H
H
H
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
—
1
1
U
1
1
K
N
U
1
8
1
Well
depth
(feet)
160
135
70
340
340
360
300
55
363
125
363
323
290
86
201 \
100
34
79
75
160
124
—
90
—
—
380
340
200
307
310
365
80
435
190
278
22
1
selected wells—Continued
f^a< \ja.l
Diameter
(inches)
8
8
4
6
12
12
8
4
12
4
10
12
12
6
8
6
4
4
4
3
4
—
—
—
—
10
12
10
14
8.25
8.5
3
16
6
6
sing
P
0
0
0
0
P
P
P
0
P
0
P
P
P
—
—
P
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
—
—
—
p
p
p
p
0
p
—
p
0
p
p
Finish
(feet)
126-160
90-360
97-100
190-300
110-360
120-170
220-355
44-308
126-198
100-380
70-340
100-200
90-300
220-365
145-430
160-210
218-275
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,615
4,608
4,562
4.605.8
4,605.8
4,619
4,605
4,620
4,620
4,649
4,770
4,667
4.695
4.687
4.760
4,659
4,695
4,682
4,680
4.705
4.680
4.680
4,680
4,680
4,680
4.705
4,715
4.735
4.741
4,765
4,760
4,530
4,800
4.822
4.822
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
80 R
64.81
3.63
—
-7 R
57.57
28.70
15 R
42.10
30.60
243 R
23.04
50.09
39.71
114 R
3.41
-1.6 R
-3.1 R
-5.0
-2.6
-7.6
-12.5
-12.8
-9.4
—
53 R
61.92
45 R
51.4
226.96
224 R
15.95
103 R
151.23
160
Date
07-20-71
03-07-91
03-06-91
—
11-04-64
03-06-91
01-23-91
01-27-45
03-25-67
03-06-91
05-15-77
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
10-22-70
03-08-91
10-14-64
05-28-64
03-07-91
08-30-89
03-07-91
07-20-89
07-20-89
07-20-89
—
06-26-73
03-06-91
07-31-84
06-29-65
10-25-89
01-01-50
03-05-91
03-29-67
03-06-91
10-14-64
Other
data
available
D
LW
LW.C
0
0
W
w,c
W
W
• D
D
D
D
W,D
D
W,D
D
D
0
W.O
0
W
W
0
0
23
Table 1.—Records of
Well number Owner
Year
drilled
1975
1961
1962
1955
1966
1936
1967
1956
1964
1943
—
._
1953
1956
1967
1970
1915
1915
Use
of
water
1
1
H
1
1
H
1
1
8
H
1
1
1
H
H
1
H
1
1
1
Well
depth
(feet)
415
386
185
325
733
188
196
227
138
310
165
r ,
133
142
146
156
60
162
m
(D-9-1)36acb-1
(D-9-1)36bbc-1
(D-9-1)36cdb-1
(D-9-1)36cdd-1
(D-9-2)1bcb-1
(D-9-2)2add-1
(D-9-2)2dad-1
(D-9-2)2dad-2
(D-9-2)3aba-4
(D-9-2)4cdc-1
(D-9-2)5acc-1
(D-9-2)5acc-2
(D-9-2)5acc-3
(D-9-2)5bcc-1
(D-9-2)5bcc-2
(D-9-2)5bcd-1
(D-9-2)5bcd-2
(D-9-2)5bdd-1
(D-9-2)5bdd-2
(D-9-2)5bdd-3
(D-9-2)5bdd-4
Ferguson, Bill
Strawberry Highline Canal Company
Miller. M.
Shaw. W.E.
LDS Ohurch
Davis. Frank
Culmer. E.
Culmer, E.
Taylor. R.
Island Ranch Company
Jones, H. Max
Jones, H. Max
Jones, H. Max
Depew, Max
Depew. Max
Depew. Max
Maurin, Charles
Jones. H. Max
Jones, H.
Depew. Max
Jones. H.M.
4
363
(D-9-2)5cbb-3
(D-9-2)5ccc-1
(D-9-2)5ccd-2
(D-9-2)5dcd-3
(D-9-2)5ddb-1
(D-9-2)5ddc-2
(D-9-2)5ddd-1
(D-9-2)6add-4
(D-9-2)6add-5
(D-9-2)6ddb-1
15 (D-9-2)6ddb-2
Stickney. Donna
Wilson, Sherol
Unknown
Payson City
Browm. Wayne L.
Payson City
Unknown
Christiansen, G.
Walker. James
Wilson, Shirley
Wilson, 0.
1961
1900
1990
1934
1974
1934
1990
1961
1962
1970
1
1
U
—
H
U
U
H
H
1
121
160
32.5
166
40
170
32.5
112
310
158
1964 302
24
t
selected wells—Continued
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
10
16
4
12
16
2.5
4
2
4
8.4
2
4
4
6
4
2
2
6
4
2
1
3
—
3
1
6
8
8
8
P
P
P
0
P
P
P
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
p
p
0
0
p
p
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
p
p
p
p
0
Finish
(feet)
200-265
365-415
80-370
192-325
540-618
645-730
136-146
147-156
67-75
170-180
192-355
177
85-90
100-105
121-126
146-152
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,820
4,807
4,862
4,890
4,580
4,570
4,570
4,570
4,528
4,582
4,536
4.542
4,542
4,537
4,537
4,537
4,537
4.541.6
4.542
4.540
4.541
4,541
4,560.8
4,562
4.576.8
4.565
4.576.99
4,576
4,534
4,535
4,546
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
102.41
102.2
167.64
187.52
-7.2
-1.6
-.6
-9.6
-15.4
13
-32.3
—
—
-20 R
-14.2
-8.1
—
-13.1 R
-27.9 R
—
-40.0
-21.1
-8.3
3.44
-12.4
-5.3
-15.2
5.96
-23.3
-31.2
-18.0
Date
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-08-91
03-06-91
03-05-91
08-17-89
03-05-91
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
—
—
04-26-53
08-09-89
08-09-89
—
09-23-64
09-23-64
—
01-02-69
03-06-91
12-04-64
07-02-90
10-10 66
06-22-89
03-11-74
03-06-91
07-19-89
07-19-89
03-07-91
Other
data
available
W,C
W,C
W
W.C
W.D
W.D
W
W.D
W
W
W.D
D
W.D
W.D
D
D
D
W.D
D
W
D.C
D
W
W.D
W.D
W.D.C
4.552 -17.9 03-07-91 W
25
Table 1.—Records of J
•
Well number
(D-9-2)7bdd-1
i6(D-9-2)7cda-2
(D-9-2)7dcc-1
(D-9-2)8ccb-1
(D-9-2)9bac-1
Owner
Peart. M.
Cornaby. B.
Spencer, S.
Unknown
LDS Ohurch
Year
drilled
1963
1962
1956
1990
1961
Use
of
water
8
8
H
U
I
Well
depth
(feet)
66
16
310
46.5
445
(D-9-2)10cad-2
(D-9-2)10cad-4
(D-9-2)10dac-1
(D-9-2)11aaa-1
(D-9-2)11aca-3
(D-9-2)11adc-1
(D-9-2)13dbc-1
(D-9-2)13dca-1
(D-9-2)14baa-1
(D-9-2)14bdd-1
(D-9-2)15adb-1
(D-9-2)15bbb-1
(D-9-2)15bcc-1
(D-9-2)15cda-1
(D-9-2)16cbb-1
17(0-9-2)17aaa-1
(D-9-2)17ada-1
(D-9-2)17bbb-1
(D-9-2)17cbc-1
Woodhouse, Ralph
Woodhouse. Mike
Christensen. Don H.
Wilson
Cole, Don
Salem City
Johnson, Hal 0.
Unknown
Turpin. W.T.
Vachea, Dan
Gasser, P.
Payson City
Raynaud, A.L.
Allred, Rey
Payson City
Payson City
Brimhall, Reed
Unknown
Payson City
1936
1966
1933
1958
1932
1976
1971
1970
1960
1961
1971
1970
1970
1961
1990
H
H
H
H
P
I
H
H
H
H
P
H
I
P
P
U
U
P
400
49
360
320
285
150
445
186
133
130
195
100
218
500
195
165
31.5
600
(D-9-2)17daa-1
(D-9-2)18aab-1
(D-9-2)18aca-1
(D-9-2)18dad-1
(D-9-2)19aca-1
Payson City
Unknown
Unknown
Haitt, W.
Emerald Turf Farm
1954
1990
1934
1949
1977
P
U
H
H
I
225
31.5
278
92
343
26
r selected wells-—Continued
•
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
6
—
6
1
16
6
3
4
3
6
4
6
4
16
6
8
12
16
6
16
12
1
3
4
16
0
P
0
0
p
p
p
p
0
0
p
p
0
0
p
0
0
0
—
0
p
p
p
o
0
p
p
p
p
0
0
0
p
p
Finish
(feet)
13-16
50-169
202-252
288-337
377-427
175-185
310-320
347-445
25-180
250-500
100-195
235-300
380-415
450-518
160-220
160-300
323-343
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4,594
4,600
4,603
4,606
4,608
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
20.16
8.02
7.94
5.5
37.47
Date
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
07-02-90
03-06-91
Other
data
available
W
W
W
W,C
4,585
4,585
4,598
4,584.63
4,595
4,596.9
4,960
5,020
4,690
4.750
4.695
4,611
4.665
4.750
4.760
4,682
4,720
4,623
4.650
4.764
4.613
4,620
4.645
4,650
-16.1
3.63
-20.9
-28.8
-22.3
-8.4 R
346 R
404.96
72.20
128.25
77.48
21.41
64.84
104 R .
156 R
74.9
117.42
14.2
40 R
158.50
6.16
17.15
37.01
40.46
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-04-91 -
03-04-91
03-04-91
12-04-64
07-17-76
10-25-89
03-06-91
03-06-91
03-06-91
,03-06-91
03-06-91
05-11-70
04-04-71
06-28-65
03-06-91
07-02-90
04-24-89
01-18-67
07-02-90
03-06-91
03-07-91
03-05-91
W.D
W.O
W.D
0
W
W
0
27
Table h—Records of
Well number
(D-9-2)19acb-1
(D-9-2)20baa-1
(D-9-2)20bbc-2
(D-9-2)20bdc-1
(D-9-2)20cca-1
(D-9-2)20ccc-1
(D-9-2)22add-1
(D-9-2)22bad-1
(D-9-2)22cad-1
(D-9-2)22dac-1
(D-9-2)23abb-1
Owner
Emerald Turf Farm
Hardman, H.T.
Mount Loafer Irrigation Company
Revel, James M.
Peay. G.
Spring Lake Water Works Company
Haskel, RE.
Allred. Rey
Brunson, Reed A.
Goosenest Water Oompany
Elk Ridge Corporation
Year
drilled
1976
1971
1961
1974
1946
1962
1972
1957
1976
1970
1979
Use
of
water
1
1
1
1
H
P
H
Z
1
P
P
Well
depth
(feet)
311
175
275
445
60
145
272
855
220
500
957
(D-9-2)24aca-1
(D-9-2)24bda-1
(D-9-2)25bbb-1
(D-9-2)25bbc-1
(D-9-2)26add-1
(D-9-2)26baa-1
(D-9-2)29acd-1
(D-9-2)29acd-2
(D-9-2)29acd-3
(D-9-2)29acd-4
(D-9-2)29bba-1
(D-9-2)29cda-1
(D-9-2)29dbd-2
(D-9-2)30bcb-2
(D-9-2)30cbb-2
(D-9-2)31cda-2
(D-9-2)32bac-1
(D-9-2)32bbb-1
(D-9-2)36acd-1
Hanks. Ted
Hanks. Ted
Elk Ridge Oorporation
Elk Ridge Oorporation
Elk Ridge Oorporation
Elk Ridge Corporation
Judd. Steve
Judd. Steve
Judd. Steve
Judd. Steve
Mountain View Dairy
Spring Lake Water Works Oompany
Spring Lake Water Works Oompany
Unknown
Helm. Andrew
Thorvaldson, A.
Ashton, 0.
Jarvis. Marvin
Loafer Water Users' Association
1971
—
1970
1969
..
1971
1950
.—
—
1972
1961
1989
_
1957
1962
1953
1970
1960
1
u
p
p
p
p
Q
Q
Q
Q
S
P
P
1
H
H
1
1
S
450
300
340
132
500
530
70
^^
._
^^
250
116
183
95
167
367
505
340
•
28
selected wells—Continued
Casing
Diameter
(inches)
12
16
8
4
12
8
6
8
12
8
#
8
4
6
8
10
10
4
8
10
8
4
6
10
10
8
Finish
(feet)
P
X
P
P
o
p
p
p
p
p
p
S
s
s
s
s
s
s
p
o
p
p
p
p
p
o
157-309
175
85-265
190-440
95-110
120-135
262-272
235
160-200
185-415
250-330
380-400
425-465
530-605
690-730
810-840
845-955
305
150-340
70-87
100-130
295-495
335-530
X 155-250
O
P 105-120
P 140-150
O
O
P 255-307
P 127-500
X 130-340
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4.645
4.740
4.670
4.740
4,725
4.716
4.960
4.840
5,020
5,035
4.900
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
35.61
136.81
55.90
120 R
4.99
20.40
248 R
185 R
140.26
190.60
255 R
Date
03-05-91
03-05-91
03-29-67
09-27-74
03-06-91
03-05-91
09-01-72
04-19-58
03-06-91
04-28-89
09-27-79
Other
data
available
0
LW
W
5.140
5.100
5.290
5,340
5,470
5,190
4,780
4,780
4.780
4.780
4.730
4.780
4.850
4,680
4,705
4.832
5,200
4.800
6,120
266
286.90
158
80.03
265
335
-12.6
-11.8
-11.1
—
67
36.43
63.0
-8.6
7.74
140.1
252.9
87
119
R
R
R
R
R
R
11-01-71
03-04-91
04-20-70
03-06-91
10-23-70
07-31-71
08-09-89
08-09-89
08-09-89
—
10-01-72
03-07-91
03-07-91
08-03-89
08-03-89
06-28-65
06-28-65
12-01-70
05-11-89
L
W
W
L
W.D
L
L
D
W,D
0
29
Table 1.—Records of
Well number
(D-9-3)5bbb-2
(D-9-3)5bbd-1
(D-9-3)5cdc-1
(D-9-3)6abb-1
(D-9-3)6cbc-1
(D-9-3)7aab-1
(D-9-3)18bbb-1
(D-9-3)19bba-1
(D-9-3)19bba-2
(D-10-1)1acd-2
(D-IO-l)lcbb-l
(D-10-I)2adb-1
(D-10-1)2bba-1
(D-10-I)2ddd-1
(D-10-I)4ddc-1
(D-lO-l)IOaab-l
(D-lO-l)llbbd-l
(D-10-1)17cca-1
(D-10-I)19bad-1
(D-10-1)19bdc-1
(P-10-I)30bac-1
Owner
Brigham Young University
Brigham Young University
Koyle, J.
Cloward. R.
Guss, P.
Tanner, Paul
Salem City
Woodland Hills
Woodland Hills
East Santaquin Irrigation Company
Santaquin City
Summit Creek Irrigation Company
Genola
Summit Creek Irrigation Company
Ekins, Shirt
Beardall. Norman
Rowley, Claude
D.S. Powelson & Sons
Unknown
Ekins. Shirt
Lunceford. Scott
Year
drilled
1959
1962
1946
1904
1965
1973
1971
—
—
1965
1956
1961
1960
1969 .
1976
1974
1964
1955
• —
1970
1983
Use
of
water
H
1
H
8
8
H
P
P
—
1
P
1
P
1
H
H
H
U
—
1
1
Well
depth
(feet)
276
601
105
14
280
190
584
—
—
650
456
580
527
694
400
333
475
102
—
455
600
•
Previously reported as (C-9-1)20dcc-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (C-9-1)34dba-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (C-10-1)15cdd-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (C-10-1)25aab-l (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (D-8-2)4aab-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (D-7-3)2gdcb-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (0-8-2)2abd-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (D-8-2)4baa-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
Previously reported as (D-S-2)4bcb-1 (Cordova, 1969, table 1).
30
selected wells—Continued
"—
r.a« was
Diameter
(inches)
8
12
6
20
6
6
16
—
—
16
16
12
12
12
8
8
6
12
—
16
12
sing
P
P
O
X
—
p
p
—
—
p
p
p
p
p
p
X
p
p
p
—
—
p
X
p
p
p
p
Rnish
(feet)
300-340
515-586
1-20
175
406-566
190-643
280-454
259-548
189-520
212-496
506-694
120-400
233-245
273-300
335-470
200-420
431-455
300-400
482-501
520-538
556-572
Elevation
of land
surface
(feet)
4.675
4.684
4.820
4.661
4.675
4.705
4,870
5.160
5.160
4.920
4.973
4.938
4.880
5.015
5.040
4,960
5,020
4,563
4,580
4,650
4,840
Water level
Above (-)
or below
land surface
94.9 R
91.10
40.74
9.60
86.23
91.50
256.66
—
—
229.85
270.14
234.90
144.70
313 R
—
186 R
311
31.22
—
125 R
257.30
Date
09-01-64
03-08-73
03-04-91
03-04-91
03-05-91
03-04-91
02-15-91
—
—
• 08-09-65
03-07-91
02-15-67
03-14-73
02-14-70
—
03-22-74
11-04-64
03-05-91
—
08-31-70
03-19-90
Other
data
available
LC
W
W
W
W
0
W
0
C
W
0
0
0
^° Previously
" Previously
^^ Previously
" Previously
^* Previously
^* Previously
" Previously
" Previously
reported as
reported as
reported as
reported as
reported as
reported as
reported as
reported as
(D-8-3)22cac-1
(D-9-1)23aac-1
(D-9-1)24acc-1
(D-9-1)26daa-1
(D-9-1)35aba-1
(D-9-2)6ddc-1
(D-9-2)7dbc-1
(0-9-2)16bbb-1
(Cordova, 1969, table 1).
(Cordova, 1969, table 1).
(Cordova, 1969, table 1),
(Cordova, 1969, table 1),
(Cordova, 1969, table 1).
(Cordova, 1969, tablet).
(Cordova, 1969, table 1).
(Cordova, 1969, table 1).
31
Table 2.—Drillers' logs of selected wells
^eli number: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data sites.
Thickness: In feet.
Depth: Depth to bottom of interval, in feet below land surface. Total depth may be deeper than well depth
reported in table 1.
Material Thickness
(C-9-1)3ddb-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Clay, sand, and gravel 98
Clay, yellow 17
Clay and gravel 30
Clay and sand 35
Clay, yellow 10
Sand and gravel 15
Clay, yellow 10
Sand and gravel 55
Clay and gravel 60
Clay, yellow 10
Clay, sand, and gravel 213
Clay, yellow 22
(C-9-1)4ddc-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Clay and sand 80
Sand and gravel (water) 32
Clay and sand 78
Clay and gravel 170
Clay and gravel 120
Clay, sand, and gravel 128
Sand and gravel 82
(C-9-1)17cdd-1
Log by Dave's Drilling Company
Sand, gravel, and cobbles 75
Sand, gravel, and boulders 75
Sand and gravel 45
i(C-9-1)20cdd-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Silt and sand 14
Clay and gravel 124
Clay and sand 20
Clay and gravel (water) 52
Clay and sand 35
Sand and gravel 11
Clay, tan 4
Sand and gravel 30
Conglomerate 30
Clay, sand, and gravel 230
Clay, red 25
(C-9-1)20ddd-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Gravel and boulders 23
Clay, sand, and gravel 127
Depth Material Thickness Depth
98
115
145
180
190
205
215
270
330
340
553
575
80
112
190
360
480
608
690
75
150
195
14
138
158
210
245
256
260
290
320
550
575
23
150
(C-9-1)20ddd-1—Continued
Gravel (water) 8 158
Clay and gravel 32 190
Gravel 59 249
Clay and gravel 229 478
Conglomerate 24 502
Clay and gravel 225 727
Conglomerate 2 729
Clay and gravel (red) 69 798
(C-9-1)28ccb-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Clay and sand 16 16
Gravel and boulders 2 18
Clay, sand, and gravel 57 75
Boulders 4 79
Clay and gravel 46 125
Sand and gravel (water) 47 172
Clay, sand, and gravel 65 237
Sand and gravel 26 263
Clay, gravel, and boulders 35 298
Sand and gravel 80 378
Conglomerate 6 384
Clay and gravel 204 588
Sand and gravel 32 620
Clay and gravel 92 712
Conglomerate 18 730
Clay and gravel 72 802
(C-9-1)29acc-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Silt 2 2
Clay and boulders 13 15
Clay, sand, and gravel 39 54
Clay, gravel, and boulders 31 85
Sand and gravel 30 115
Sand, gravel, and boulders 68 183
Clay and gravel 27 210
Sand and gravel (water) 22 232
Sand, gravel, and boulders 20 252
Sand and gravel 102 354
Clay and gravel (yellow) 62 416
Sand 8 424
Clay and gravel 208 632
Clay and sand 68 700
33
Table 2.—Drillers' logs of selected wells—Continued
Material Thickness Depth Material Thickness Depth
(C-9-1)29bcc-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Silt 1 1
Clay, sand, and boulders 39 40
Clay, gravel, and boulders 127 167
Sand 20 187
Clay, sand, and gravel 100 287
Gravel and cobbles 43 330
Clay, sand, and gravel 36 366
Clay and silt 8 374
Sand 13 387
Clay 59 446
Gravel 2 448
Clay. sand, and gravel 314 762
Sand and gravel 25 787
Clay and sand 13 800
(C-9-1)34ddc-1
Log by Angus Hales
Clay and silt 100 100
Gravel 1 101
Sill and sand 56 157
Gravel 1 158
Silt and sand 38 196
Clay 12 208
Silt and sand 57 265
(C-10-1)4bbb-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Clay and sand 45 45
Clay, sand, and gravel 330 375
Conglomerate 20 395
Clay, gravel, and boulders 5 400
Conglomerate 23 423
Clay, sand, and gravel 50 473
Conglomerate 5 478
Clay, sand, and gravel 46 524
Clay and gravel 238 762
Clay, sand, and gravel 118 880
Unknown 2 882
(C-10-1)4cbb-1
Log by Layne-Texas Company
Clay, sand, and gravel 90 90
SarKJ and gravel 54 144
Gravel and boulders 22 166
Sand and gravel 88 254
Clay and gravel 40 294
Gravel and shale 8 302
Shale 8 310
Gravel 30 340
Sand and gravel 69 409
Gravel 120 529
(C-10-1)4cbb-1—Continued
Shale and rybite 50 579
Clay, sand, and gravel 608 1,187
Gravel and hard rock 13 1,200
Shale 18 1,218
(C-10-1)31 cdd-1
Log by Robinson Drilling Company
Clay and silt 10 10
Sand and gravel 20 30
Clay, sand, and gravel 180 210
Clay and volcanic ash
(water) 45 255
Sand and gravel 38 293
Clay, brown 19 312
Volcanic cinders 6 318
Clay, sand, and gravel 132 450
Conglomerate 55 505
Clay and sand 5 510
Sand and gravel 18 528
Volcanic ash 8 536
Clay, conglomerate, and
volcanic ash 9 546
Clay and volcanic cinders 3 548
Clay, sand, and gravel 55 603
(C-11-1)6abc-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Clay, sand, and gravel 21 21
Clay and cobbles 109 130
Gravel and boulders 8 138
Clay, sand, and gravel
(water) 248 386
Sand, gravel, and cobbles
(water) 74 460
Clay, sand, and gravel 36 496
Sand and gravel (water) 36 532
Clay, sand, and gravel 103 635
Sand and gravel (water) 42 677
Clay and gravel 11 688
(C-11-1)6bdd-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Clay, sand, and gravel 23 23
Gravel and boulders 19 42
Clay, tan 6 48
Clay, gravel, and txjulders 17 65
Clay. sand, and gravel 213 278
Sand, gravel, and cobbles
(water) 26 304
Clay. sand, and gravel 20 324
Sand, gravel, and cobbles 60 384 •
34
Table 2.—Drillers' logs of selected wells—Continued
Material Thickness Depth
(C-11 -1 )6bdd-1—Continued
Clay, sand, and gravel
(water) 288 672
Sand, gravel, and boulders
(water) 68 740
Clay, sand, and gravel 35 775
(D-7-2)32dad-1
Log by Jensen Construction and Drilling Company
Clay and sand 190 190
Clay 160 350
Sand (water) > 10 360
Clay, sand, and gravel
(water) 190 550
(0-7-3)18dcc-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Sand 26 26
Clay, blue 89 115
Gravel 6 121
Clay, tan 37 158
Sand 70 228
Clay 50 278
Gravel 4 282
Clay 7 289
Sand 33 322
(D-7-3)28cab-1
Log by Technical Services Inc.
Silt, sand, and gravel 20 20
Clay (gray) 17 37
Sand (water) 4 41
Clay 33 74
Silt, sand, and gravel 93 167
Clay and gravel 16 183
Hardpan 4 187
Silt, sand, and gravel 21 208
Boulders 1 209
Sand and gravel 41 250
Gravel and hardpan 35 285
Boulders 5 290
(D-7-3)32bcc-2
Log by Jensen Construction and Drilling Company
Clay 25 25
Silt and sand 8 33
Clay 72 105
Sand 3 108
Clay 36 144
Sand, gravel, and cobbles (water) 18 162
Clay 2 164
Material Thickness Depth
(D-7-3)34cdb-1
Log by J.S. Lee and Sons
Gravel and boulders 9 9
Sand 14 23
Clay and gravel (water) 29 52
Sand and gravel 28 80
Clay and sand 60 140
Sand and gravel 115 255
Clay and gravel 190 445
(D-8-2)17ada-1
Log by Christopherson and Simmons
Soil 10 10
Sand 26 36
Clay 41 77
Ciay (red) and sand 132 209
Clay, blue 6 215
Clay (red) and sand 23 238
Clay, blue 38 276
Clay (white) and sand 93 369
Clay, blue 9 378
Clay (red) and sand 23 401
Clay (white) and sand 33 434
Clay (blue) and sand 32 466
(D-8-3)3bca-1
Log by Lee Drilling Inc.
Fill 3 3
Gravel, cobbles, and
boulders 15 18
Clay, sand, and gravel 5 23
Sand 45 68
Clay, gray 70 138
Gravel (water) 75 213
Sand and gravel 32 245
Clay 28 273
Sand and gravel (water) 12 285
Conglomerate 18 3(»
Gravel (water) 125 428
(D-8-3)3cca-1
Log by Jensen Construction and Drilling Company
Topsoil 5 5
Sand and boulders 5 10
Hardpan 3 13
Clay and sand 186 199
Gravel (water) 33 232
(D-8-3)4daa-1
Log by J.S. Lee and Sons
Clay, sand, and boulders 40 40
Clay and sand 103 143
35
Table 2,—Drillers' logs of selected wells—Continued
Material Thickness Depth Material Thickness . Depth
(D-8-3)4daa-1-Contlnued
Gravel 112 255
Clay, blue 19 274
Gravel 94 368
Clay and sand 3 371
p.8-3)8abd-1
Log by Woodhouse Drilling
Top soil 2 2
Clay and gravel 58 . 60
Sand (water) 20 80
Clay, blue 40 120
Sand and gravel 93 213
Sand (water) 57 270
Clay, red 15 285
Sand and gravel 10 295
Sand 5 300
P-8-3)10cba-1
Log by J.S. Lee and Sons
Sand and gravel 17 17
Sand 118 135
Clay and sand 45 180
Clay, blue 52 232
Gravel 78 310
Clay, brown 2 312
Unknown '. 208 520
(D-8-3)10dac-1
Log by Basin and Range Drilling Company
Sitt and sand 4 4
Sand 7 11
Gravel and cobbles 17 28
Sand and gravel 18 46
Graveland cobbles (water) 16 62
(D-8-3)16aaa-1
Log by Jensen Construction and Drilling Company
Topsoil 6 6
Gravel 9 15
Clay and silt 35 50
Gravel (water) 20 70
(D-8-3)16aaa-2
Log by Basin and Range Drilling Company
Silt 2 2
Gravel ; 6 8
Sand (water) 24 32
Clay, brown 17 49
Sand and gravel 13 62
Silt, sand, and gravei 22 84
Silt and sand 53 137
Clay and sand 107 244
(D-8-3)16aaa-2-Contlnued
Sand 27 271
Gravel (water) 4 275
^(D-8-3)22cbd-3
Log by Eldon Comer
Clay 250 250
Clay and sand 40 290
Sand, gravel, and cobbles 21 311
Clay 134 445
Clay and sand 37 482
Gravel and cobbles 59 541
(D-8-3)23ccd-1
Log by Woodhouse Drilling
Top soil 3 3
Clay, brown 17 20
Clay and sand 110 130
Ciay and gravei 30 160
Sand 101 261
Gravel (water) 4 265
(D-8-3)27adc-1
Log by Dave's Drilling
Sand and silt 40 40
Sand and gravel 15 55
Sand and sitt 20 75
Sand 15 90
Sand and sitt 10 100
Sand (water) 20 120
Sand and gravel (water) 15 135
Sitt and sand 12 147
Shale 8 155
Sand and gravel 30 185
Sand and silt 15 200
Sand 22 222
(D-8-3)27bad-2
Log by Engineering Science, inc.
Sand 10 10
Clay and sand 15 25
Gravel 5 30
Sand 20 50
Clay and sand 15 65
Silt and sand 5 70
Clay and sand 35 105
Silt and sand 30 135
Clay. silt, and sand (water) 115 250
Silt, sand, and gravel 15 265
Gravel 20 285
Sand and gravel 10 295
Clay, silt, and sand 139 434
36
Table 2.—^Drillers' logs of selected wells—Continued
j^jierial Thickness Depth
/D-8-3)27bad-2 —Continued
Sand and gravel 16 450
Gravel 10 460
Sand and gravel 5 465
Gravel 10 475
(D-8-3)27cdc-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Gravel and cobbles 18 18
Clay and sand 151 169
Sand 25 194
Clay, sand, and gravel 17 211
Sand, gravel, and cobbles
(water) 35 246
Clay, sand, and gravel 127 373
Sand, gravel, and cobbles
(water) 62 435
Clay, gravel, and boulders 16 451
Clay 14 465
Clay, gravel, and cobbles 7 472
Clay 42 514
Sand and gravel 6 520
Clay 20 540
Sand and gravel (water) 6 546
Clay and sand 36 582
Sand, gravel, and cobbles 2 584
Clay and sand 56 640
(D-8-3)28abc-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Gravel 19 19
Clay 183 202
Sand and gravel (water) 82 284
Clay and sand 137 421
Sand and gravel (water) 49 470
(D-8-3)28bcd-1
Log by Woodhouse Drilling
Gravel and boulders 30 30
Clay, blue 139 169
Sand (water) 85 254
Gravel (water) 37 291
Sand and clay 49 340
Conglomerate 40 380
Sand (water) 30 410
(D-8-3)28bdc-1
Log by Woodhouse Drilling
Gravel 25 25
Clay 175 200
Sand 35 235
Gravel 50 285
Material Thickness Depth
(D-8-3)28bdc-1-Contlnued
Clay 93 378
Gravel 4 382
Sand and gravel (water) 13 395
(D-8-3)29aaa-1
Log by Burt Drilling Company
Clay, silt, and sand 22 22
Sand and gravel 45 67
Clay 203 270
Gravel (water) 19 289
(D-8-3)30dba-1
Log by Jensen Drilling Company
Clay, brown 7 7
Gravel and boulders 5 12
Clay and gravel 15 27
Clay and sand (water) 91 118
Clay, blue 11 129
Clay and sand 4 133
Clay, blue 24 157
Clay and sand 58 215
Clay, sand, and hardpan 6 221
Clay and sand 42 263
Gravel (water) 22 285
(D-8-3)31ccd-1
Log by Basin and Range Drilling
Sand and gravel (water) 35 35
Sitt and sand (water) 30 65
Clay, gray 22 87
Silt and sand 18 105
Clay and sand (water) 60 165
Sand and hardpan 7 172
Clay and sand (water) 46 218
Sand and gravel (water) 5 223
Clay, silt, and sand 22 245
IHardpan 5 250
Sand, gravel, and cobbles
(water) 25 275
Silt, sand, and gravel 12 287
Ciay, silt, and gravel 28 315
Sitt and sand (water) 2 317
(D-8-3)32baa-1
Log by Reda Pump Co.
Clay 10 10
Gravel 10 20
Sand 22 42
Clay 98 140
Silt (water) 20 160
Sand 55 215
37
Table 2.—Drillers' logs of selected wells—Continued
Material Thickness Depth
(D-8-3)32ba8-1 —Continued
Clay 25 240
Silt 20 260
Hardpan 11 271
Sand and gravel (water) 5 276
(D-9-1)14aad-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Clay 60 60
Clay and gravel (water) 25 85
Clay 40 125
Clay and gravel 235 360
(D-9-1)14aad-2
Log by Binning Drilling Company
Top soil 6 6
Clay and gravel 91 97
Gravel (water) 3 100
Clay, sand, and gravel 47 147
Clay and gravel (water) 173 320
(D-9-2)20ccc-1
Log by Reda Pump Company
Gravel and cobbles 55 55
Clay and sand „. 35 90
Gravel (water) 20 110
Ciay and gravel 12 122
Gravel (water) 3 125
Clay and gravel 20 145
(D-9-2)24aca-1
Log by Binning Drilling Company
Topsoil 8 8
Clay, gravel, and cobbles 32 40
Clay, gravel, and t>oulders 40 80
Clay, gravel, and cobbles 69 149
Solid rock 5 154
Clay, gravel, and cobbles 13 167
Solid rock 10 177
Ciay and gravel 63 240
Clay, gravel, and boulders 20 260
Clay and gravel 13 273
Solid rock 4 277
Clay, gravel, and cobbles 23 300
Clay and boulders 5 305
Gravel (water) 10 315
Clay and gravel 34 349
Solid rock 7 356
Clay, gravel, and boulders 44 400
Clay and cobbles 37 437
Clay and gravel 5 442
Solid rock 8 450
Clay, brown 2 452
Material Thickness Diepth
38
(D-9-2)26add-1
Log by Binning Drilling Company
Clay 10 10
Clay and gravel 90 100
Clay, gravel, and boulders 35 135
Conglomerate 13 148
Clay, gravel, and boulders 22 170
Conglomerate (water) 10 180
Clay, gravel, and boulders 50 230
Conglomerate (water) 8 238
Clay, cobbles, and boulders 27 265
Clay 20 285
Conglomerate 8 293
Clay and gravel 172 465
Conglomerate 58 523
(D-9-2)29cda-1
Log by Woodhouse Drilling
Boulders 20 20
Clay and gravel 20 40
Sand and gravel 38 78
Gravel (water) 38 116
(D-9-2)29dbd-2
Log by Binning Drilling Company
Silt and gravel 5 5
Hardpan 15 20
Clay, brown 20 40
Clay and boulders 40 80
Clay, brown 25 105
Gravel (water). 15 120
Sand 10 130
Gravel (water) 20 150
Clay 15 165
Boulders (water) 35 2(X)
(D-9-3)5bbd-1
Log by Eldon Comer
Topsoil 3 3
Gravel and cobbles 12 15
Sand and gravel 18 33
Clay and sand 227 260
Clay, gravel, and hardpan 30 290
Sand, gravel, and cobbles (water) 50 340
Clay, tan 8 348
Clay and gravel 4 352
Clay 81 433
Clay and sand 64 497
Clay and gravel 3 500
Sand, gravel, and cobbles 89 589
Clay,tan.... 31 620
'Actual localion is different from historic records. See fool-
note, table 1.
•
4
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells
Well number: See figure 1 for explanation of the numt>ering system tor hydrologic-data sites.
Water level: In feet above (-) or below land surface.
Well
number
(C-9-1)3ddb-1
(C-9-1)4ccc-1
(0-9-1 )4ddc-1
Date
07-01-1964
10-01-1964
11-02-1964
12-07-1964
11-02-1965
12-02-1965
11-05-1966
12-19-1966
12-08-1967
12-21-1968
12-19-1969
12-09-1970
10-11-1971
12-15-1971
10-03-1972
10-14-1973
10-13-1974
03-04-1991
03-03-1974
03-11-1976
03-09-1976
03-10-1977
03-10-1978
03-12-1979
03-03-1980
03-04-1981
09-17-1981
03-01-1982
09-20-1982
03-02-1983
09-21-1983
03-10-1984
09-11-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
09-08-1986
03-02-1987
09-15-1987
03-01-1988
09-14-1988
03-01-1989
09-15-1989
03-08-1990
03-14-1991
09-10-1991
03-11-1992
04-15-1964
05-12-1964
Water Well Date
level number
19.0 (C-9-1 )4ddc-1 09-08-1964
16.94 Continued 10-02-1964
18.90
18.65
19.91
18.19
18.53
20.20
19.28
19.92
21.09
22.00
22.87
20.59
21.13
21.10
21.39
17.08
135.00
136.52
137.39
136.67
136.74
138.79
138.61
138.62
148.26
138.13
139.90
136.04
13574
133.17
133.24
131.29
131.30
135.05
132.67
133.84
130.43
135.80
131.09
131.72
129.86
128.76
138.60
130.68
78.96
78.04
11-05-1964
12-07-1964
02-03-1965
03-02-1965
03-25-1966
04-05-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
04-05-1967
03-21-1968
03-19-1969
03-20-1970
03-15-1971
03-03-1972
03-14-1973
03-13-1974
03-11-1975
03-09-1976
03-10-1977
03-10-1978
03-12-1979
03-03-1980
03-04-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-10-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
12-15-1988
01-23-1989
02-27-1989
03-09-1989
06-22-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-17-1989
12-20-1989
02-15-1990
03-08-1990
04-02-1990
05-09-1990
07-05-1990
08-03-1990
09-07-1990
water.
level
82.20
82.80
81.10
80.81
83.94
80.37
81.94
81.76
84.04
83.00
82.82
83.71
83.87
84.00
84.20
85.42
89.32
85.69
86.29
87.34
86.65
86.32
86.1
86.55
86.93
87.03
85.24
82.60
81.19
81.54
82.73
81.57
82.26
81.82
81.59
80.90
88.70
84.72
83.16
82.66
82.27
82.15
81.94
81.53
81.37
81.34
81.13
85.11
82.82
82.88
Well
number
(C-9-1)4ddc-1
Continued
VC-9-1)20ndd-1
(C-9-1 )20ddd-1
Date
10-18-1990
11-20-1990
12-18-1990
01-22-1991
03-04-1991
03-11-1992
03-25-1964
04-29-1964
05-12-1964
06-02-1964
07-01-1964
09-29-1964
10-06-1964
11-06-1964
12-07-1964
03-04-1965
05-18-1965
06-03-1965
03-10-1967
04-05-1967
04-02-1990
03-04-1991
02-07-1964
03-11-1964
04-29-1964
05-12-1964
06-02-1964
07-01-1964
08-18-1964
09-04-1964
10-06-1964
11-05-1964
12-07-1964
01-06-1965
02-03-1965
03-02-1965
04-07-1965
05-04-1965
06-09-1965
07-01-1965
10-15-1965
12-30-1965
03-25-1966
04-05-1966
08-11-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
Water
level
81.67
81.44
81.29
81.27
81.01
80.86
195.1
193.3
194.0
194.2
195.1
203.2
202.3
200.5
199.77
198.40
199.71
199.1 .
207.33
207.01
199.82
200.34
135.60
134.90
134.40
134.40
134.60
135.90
138.20
138.50
139.90
139.20
139.45
139.63
138.81
138.52
138.21
140.79
140.68
141.39
143.50
145.30
141.73
141.73
147.93
146.73
145.28
39
Table 3.—Water levels in selected w^/Zs—Continued m
Well Date
number
(C-9-1)20ddd-1 04-05-1967
Continued 03-21-1968
03-19-1969
03-20-1970
09-09-1970
03-15-1971
10-06-1971
03-03-1972
09-27-1972
03-14-1973
03-13-1974
03-11-1975
03-09-1976
03-10-1977
03-10-1978
03-12-1979
03-04-1980
03-04-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-10-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-09-1989
05-12-1989
06-22-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
10-23-1989
12-20-1989
01-30-1990
03-08-1990
04-02-1990
04-06-1990
06-05-1990
08-03-1990
09-07-1990
10-18-1990
12-18-1990
03-05-1991
09-10-1991
03-11-1992
(C-9-1)26bda-3 04-09-1964
05-26-1964
10-09-1964
03-17-1965
06-28-1965
12-13-1988
05-15-1989
Watar
level
144.76
146.92
152.32
151.30
161.48
157.20
159.19
155.29
161.55
160.22
159.05
159.48
159.45
160.45
161.23
158.70
163.25
149.10
149.72
148.18
143.80
141.72
142.71
140.96
139.75
138.66
138.39
138.74
139.21
139.50
139.76
138.90
138.20
137.94
137.80
137.73
138.32
139.25
139.70
139.64
138.74
137.98
139.42
137.57
-4.5
-5.0
-5.3
-3.9
-5.3
-7.0
-6.2
Well
number
(C-9-1 )26bda-3
Continued
(C-9-1)28ccb.1
Date
06-22-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
12-20-1989
04-09-1990
05-09-1990
01-10-1963
02-13-1963
03-14-1963
06-10-1963
10-29-1963
11-14-1963
12-19-1963
01-17-1964
02-24-1964
03-23-1964
04-28-1964
05-11-1964
09-29-1964
10-06-1964
12-07-1964
01-06-1965
02-03-1965
03-02-1965
04-07-1965
06-09-1965
10-15-1965
12-30-1965
03-25-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
04-05-1967
03-21-1968
03-19-1969
03-20-1970
03-14-1973
03-13-1974
03-11-1975
03-09-1976
03-10-1977
03-10-1978
03-12-1979
03-04-1980
03-04-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-10-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
Water Well Date
level number
•7.0 (C-9-1 )28ccb-1 03-02-1987
•6.2 Continued 03-01-1988
-5.7
•5.7
-5.7
-5.5
-9.3
03-03-1989
03-08-1990
03-04-1991
03-11-1992
-7.0 (0-9-1)29800-1 04-03-1963
126.60
126.50
126.50
129.00
133.00
132.40
131.80
131.10
130.10
130.60
130.20
130.20
136.40
136.20
137.29
135.59
135.34
135.05
134.42
137.55
141.50
148.20
138.13
143.13
142.05
140.60
142.53
142.69
148.32
150.56
139.50
139.25
138.25
138.30
136.30
135.91
137.13
138.67
139.30
137.22
133.94
132.09
132.91
05-10-1963
06-10-1963
09-11-1963
10-28-1963
11-14-1963
12-19-1963
01-16-1964
02-24-1964
03-25-1964
04-29-1964
05-12-1964
06-05-1964
09-04-1964
11-06-1964
12-07-1964
03-04-1965
03-29-1966
03-10-1967
04-05-1967
03-21-1968
03-19-1969
03-20-1970
03-15-1971
03-03-1972
03-14-1973
03-13-1974
03-11-1975
03-09-1976
03-10-1077
03-10-1978
03-12-1979
03-04-1980
03-04-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-10-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1967
03-01-1988
03-09-1989
03-08-1990
04-02-1990
03-04-1991
03-11-1992
Water
leve)
130.98
133.53
128.43
127.79
127.65
127.62
205.50
205.70
216.70
214.50
211.20
210.80
210.30
209.90
209.50
209.70
209.20
209.20
213.60
216.60
216.20
217.29
215.40
221.20
222.30
221.86
227.00
228.40
230.34
231.10
235.02
227.95
226.85
228.52
228.16
227.64
227.19
226.59
227.00
227.98
228.37
225.17
220.78
216.53
219.59
217.57
216.40
214.97
214.50
214.26
214.28
213.37
i
40
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
well Date
number
(C-9-1)29bCC-1 05-10-1963
06-10-1963
07-11-1963
08-12-1963
09-11-1963
10-29-1963
11-14-1963
12-19-1963
01-16-1964
02-24-1964
03-25-1964
04-29-1964
05-12-1964
06-02-1964
03-04-1965
03-10-1967
04-06-1967
03-20-1970
03-21-1990
04-02-1990
{C-10-1)4bbb-1 07-23-1962
08-16-1962
09-14-1962
10-15-1962
12-03-1962
01-10-1963
02-13-1963
03-11-1963
10-28-1963
11-14-1963
12-19-1963
01-17-1964
02-24-1964
03-23-1964
04-28-1964
05-11-1964
06-01-1964
09-04-1964
10-06-1964
12-07-1964
01-06-1965
02-03-1965
03-02-1965
07-01-1965
12-30-1965
03-24-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
04-05-1967
03-21-1968
Water Well Date Water
level number level
287.0 (C-10-i)4bbb-1 03-19-1969 169.58
287.7 Continued 03-20-1970 161.62
288.5
289.9
290.7
292.0
291.9
292.0
291.9
291.4
292.0
291.1
291,1
291.13
296.6
304,6
304.6
309.6
298.64
300,10
168.30
172.50
151.00
151.50
150,30
149,90
149,60
150.20
159,70
155,60
154.30
153.60
152.90
152.70
152.30
03-03-1972 161.96
03-14-1973 152.24
03-13-1974 149.29
03-11-1975 151.45
03-30-1977 147.16
03-12-1979 148.08
03-04-1980 151.44
03-04-1981 153.57
03-01-1982 155.87
03-02-1983 154.89
03-10-1984 152.22
03-04-1985 150.66
03-11-1986 151.80
03-02-1987 150,06
03-01-1988 151.13
12-15-1988 147.61
02-23-1989 147.17
03-03-1989 147.35
05-12-1989 146.95
06-22-1989 146.74
07-18-1989 146.93
08-18-1989 146.69
09-15-1989 146.97
11-17-1989 147,17
01-30-1990 146,71
03-08-1990 146.76
05-09-1990 146.70
07-05-1990 147,42
09-07-1990 147.25
11-20-1990 147.18
01-22-1991 147.13
03-05-1991 147,04
03-11-1992 147.15
152.40 (C-10-l")4cbb-1 04-10-1962 143.76
152.90
162.20
161.20
165.51
161.75
157.72
156.01
162.95
163.59
158.51
163.85
161.00
160.46
163.02
03-08-1967 149.82
04-05-1967 151.88
03-21-1968 150.52
03-19-1969 157.17
03-20-1970 154,38
03-15-1971 153.45
03-03-1972 143.52
03-14-1973-140.78
03-13-1974 142.39
03-11-1975 140.06
03-09-1976 135.05
03-10-1977 134.28
03-10-1978 131.78
03-12-1979 134.05
WellDate
number
(C-10-1)4cbb-1
Continued
Water
03-04-1980
03-04-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-10-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-03-1989
05-12-1989
03-08-1990
03-04-1991
03-11-1992
\C-10-1)15cca-1 10-30-1964
02-14-1991
(C-10-1)17bba-1
(G-10-1)17bba-2
03-07-1991
04-21-1989
05-16-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
09-18-1989
10-23-1989
12-18-1989
01-30-1990
03-07-1990
05-09-1990
07-05-1990
08-08-1990
09-07-1990
10-18-1990
11-20-1990
12-18-1990
01-22-1991
03-04-1991
09-10-1991
03-11-1992
02-23-1989
05-16-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
06-16-1989
09-18-1989
10-23-1989
12-18-1989
01-30-1990
03-07-1990
level
138.53
148.75
150.06
149.91
.147.45
141.20
141.44
139.01
138.41
138.16
135.40
135.28
135.86
136.06
31.80
28.47
28.29
265,56
265.83
265.93
266.24
266.31
266.41
266.19
266.02
265.69
265.71
265.81
266.42
266.64
266.75
266.93
266.82
266.65
266.99
266.71
267.71
268.04
271.90
272.66
265.68
266.03
266.08
266.23
266.00
265.87
265.47
265.46
41
Table X—Water levels in selected wells—-ConiXnned
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
(C-10-1)17bha-2 05-09-1990
Continued 08-08-1990
09-07-1990
10-18-1990
11-20-1990
12-18-1990
01-22-1991
03-04-1991
09-10-1991
03-11-1992
(G-10-1)18ccc-1 01-20-1989
02-23-1989
04-21-1989
05-16-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
09-18-1989
11-17-1989
01-24-1990
03-07-1990
04-05-1990
06-05-1990
08-08-1990
09-07-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
01-22-1991
03-05-1991
03-11-1992
(C-10-1)24ddC-1 12-20-1966
01-05-1967
02-05-1967
03-05-1967
04-05-1967
05-05-1967
07-10-1967
08-05-1967
09-05-1967
10-05-1967
11-05-1967
12-05-1967
03-21-1966
04-05-1968
05-05-1968
06-05-1968
07-05-1968
08-05-1968
09-05-1968
10-05-1968
11-05-1968
265.54
266.41
266.52
266.74
266.65
266.63
266.75
266.56
267.71
267.75
3,S?.16
352.01
351.83
351.91
351.89
352.0)3
351.99
352.17
352.37
352.27
352.06
352.13
352.49
352.69
3,S?.97
352.73
353.58
353.46
355.42
217.8
217.28
217.06
216.54
216.29
216,61
219.59
223.15
224.55
222.73
219.22
217.57
215.90
215.3
214.92
216.47
217.31
217.88
222.59
226.26
225.29
(C-10-1)24ddc-1 12-05-1968
Continued 03-19-1969
03-20-1970
03-15-1971
03-12-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
08-12-1977
03-10-1978
08-25-1976
03-12-1979
09-17-1979
03-03-1980
09-03-1980
03-04-1981
09-17-1981
03-01-1982
09-20-1982
03-02-1983
09-21-1983
03-10-1984
09-11-1984
03-04-1985
09-10-1985
03-11-1986
09-08-1986
03-02-1987
09-11-1987
03-01-1988
09-14-1988
12-12-1988
01-20-1989
03-09-1989
04-21-1989
05-12-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
09-18-1989
10-23-19a9
11-17-1989
12-18-1989
01-24-1990
02-15-1990
03-07-1990
05-09-1990
06-05-1990
07-02-1990
08-08-1990
09-07-1990
10-18-1990
220.78
216.30
222 70
214.34
212.30
212.60
212.51
210.66
231.63
212.64
220.10
212.67
212,70
211.32
217.59
211.09
218.80
212.26
217.27
210.54
211:35
206.60
210.37
205,18
212.92
206.60
215.02
208.14
218.29
209.65
219.21
212.59
211.37
210.59
212.52
217.62
220.28
220.40
220.12
219.98
217.18
214.92
214.25
212.84
212,16
211.93
213.94
215.54
223.73
224.36
222.00
217.98
(C-10-1)24ddc-1 11-20-1990
Continued 12-18-1990
01-22-1991
03-05-1991
09-10-1991
09-13-1991
VC-10-1)25abd-1 02-04-1964
07-01 •! 964
08-19-1964
05-18.1965
06-10-1965
03-30-1966
03-21-1990
03-05-1991
(C-10-1)30baa-1 09-18-1989
11-17-1989
01-24-1990
02-15-1990
03-07-1990
05-09-1990
06-05-1990
(C-10-1)34hhh-1 03-24-1964
05-14-1964
06-10-1964
07-02-1964
08-19-1964
09-04-1964
10-09-1964
12-07-1964
01-06-1965
02-03-1965
03-02-1965
04-07-1965
05-04-19B5
06-09-1965
07-01-1965
10-15-1965
03-25-1966
08-29-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
12-08-1967
12-21-1968
12-19-1969
12-20-1970
03-03-1972
12-03-1972
03-09-1973
12-09-1973
214.89
214.04
213.30
212.54
222.32
223.16
259.8
263.4
266.8
295.8
280.8
252.5
242.82
245.15
226.10
225,96
225.93
225.71
225.58
225.74
228.67
96.1
96.5
96.5
97.4
96.6
96.8
97.0
96.70
96.56
96.79
96.82
96.88
97.01
97.33
99.15
95.60
99.58
96.76
99.15
97.47
97.47
97.60
97.53
95.86
90.59
94.59
94.29
98.29
42
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
(G-10-1)34bbb-1 03-12-1974 87.03
Continued 12-12-1974 91.03
03-07-1991 89.39
(G-11-1)6bdd-1 03-10-1975 259.40
Continued 03-09-1976 256.60
03-10-1977 249.31
03-19-1990 232.96
(C-10-2)13bcc-1
(C-ll-l)ebdd-l
01-20-1989
02-24-1989
04-21-1989
05-15-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
09-18-1989
10-23-1989
11-17-1989
12-18-1989
01-24-1990
03-07-1990
04-05-1990
06-05-1990
07-05-1990
08-08-1990
10-18-1990
11-20-1990
01-22-1991
03-05-1991
04-15-1964
05-15-1964
06-05-1964
07-02-1964
08-19-1964
09-28-1964
10-08-1964
11-03-1964
12-07-1964
03-02-1965
05-04-1965
06-09-1965
07-01-1965
10-15-1965
11-03-1965
03-25-1966
03-11-1967
04-05-1967
03-21-1968
03-19-1969
03-20-1970
09-09-1970
03-16-1971
10-06-1971
03-03-1972
03-13-1974
161.62
162.37
04-06-1990
163.52 (D-7-2)32dad-1 12-12-1980
164.19
164.74
165.32
165.74
166.29 (D-7-!
166.88
167,15
166,99
168.27
168.71
168,93
169,60
170.00
170.35
171.24
171,21
172,02
172.24
244.68
246.50
247,10
247.60
253,00
249.70
253.60
249,40
248.63
247.68
249.73
02-26-1981
03-09-1982
03-04-1991
2)34dcd-1 09-21-1959
04-02-1964
05-13-1964
08-03-1964
10-20-1964
03-05-1965
06-23-1965
03-11-1969
03-17-1970
03-24-1970
03-17-1971
03-09-1972
03-07-1973
03-26-1981
03-12-1982
03-01-1983
03-09-1984
03-04-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
03-02-1988
03-09-1989
03-05-1990
03-05-1991
03-13-1992
281.53 (D-7-2)36dCC-2 09-07-1938
277.10
267.00
257.48
250.71
256.20
255.77
258.00
258.42
257.10
271,64
254.60
261.44
254.34
249.74
12-12-1938
01-30-1939
03-17-1939
04-13-1939
06-13-1939
08-03-1939
10-17-1939
01-04-1940
02-28-1940
04-13-1940
05-02-1940
06-17-1940
01-21-1941
03-18-1941
234.3
•32.4
-32.7
-33.3
•22.7
-9.8
-8.9
-8.0
-7.3
-6.2
-8.3
-7.6
-9.2
-9.8
-9.6
-9.7
•10.2
-9.9
-8.4
-9,4
•10.4
-11.0
-10.9
-11.3
•11.0
-8,8
-7.1
-8.7
-6.6
-9.1
-13.0
-13.4
-14.2
-15.0
-15.3
-15.0
-11.9
-12.3
-15.0
-16.2
-16.1
-17.0
-13.6
-14.3
-15.6
Well
number
Date Water
level
(D-7-2)36dcc-2
Continued
12-11-1941
03-27-1942
06-27-1942
12-26-1942
03-29-1943
12-29-1943
03-24-1944
12-27-1944
03-30-1945
12-17-1945
03-07-1946
12-17-1946
04-07-1947
12-17.1947
03-30-1948
12-23-1948
03-17-1949
12-16-1949
03-23-1950
12-19-1950
04-04-1951
12-26-1951
04-08-1952
12-11-19.'>2
04-21-1953
12-08-1953
03-24-1954
12-29-1954
04-22-1955
12-22-1955
03-30-1956
12-19-1956
04-01-1957
12-06-1957
03-18-1958
12-04-1958
03-18-1959
12-24-1959
03-23-1960
12-09-1960
03-23-1961
01-05-1962
03-06-1962
12-06-1962
03-12-1963
08-27-1963
12-16-1963
03-11-1964
04-09-1964
06-01-1964
07-09-1964
08-03-1964
-13.8
-15.4
-13.9
-15.2
-17.0
-14.7
-15.3
-14.0
-15.2
-16.4
-17.0
-18.4
-16.0
-17.2
-17.9
-15.7
-17.2
-17.1
-17.1
-16.7
-18.5
-18.3
-18,1
-18.2
-18.8
-15.1
-17.4
-14.5
-15.3
-13,8
-16.9
-14.9
-17.2
-16.5
-18.1
-15.3
-16.3
-14,5
-15.6
-14.1
-15.9
-14.2
-14.6
-15.6
-16.9
-10.4
-15.0
-15.9
-14.6
-15.1
-13.6
-12.7
43
Table 3,—Water levels in selected we//s—Continued
Well Date
number
(D-7-2)36dcc-2 09-01-1964
Continued 12-03-1964
03-01-1965
10-06-1965
12-26-1965
03-24-1966
08-17-1966
12-20-1966
03-27-1967
10-02-1968
03-26-1981
03-11-1982
03-01-1983
03-09-1984
03-04-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
03-03-1988
12-13-1988
01-27-1989
03-01-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
08-24-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-19-1989
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-05-1990
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-02-1990
09-05-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-04-1991
03-13-1992
(D-7-3)18dCC-1 12-11-1980
03-26-1981
03-09-1982
02-04-1991
03-05-1991
Water
level
-8.6
-12.1
-15.9
-14.4
-6.5
-6.2
-3.4
-3.4
-6.2
-10.9
-12.8
-13.3
-14.8
-15.9
-16.0
-16.3
-15.9
-14.2
-13.0
-11.6
-12.6
-9.8
-10.0
-10.3
-9.0
-9.2
-7.9
-9.7
-10,3
-11.0
-12.2
-13.1
-12,5
-14,1
-14,2
-13.8
-13,8
-10.1
-11.9
-11.1
-12.1
-12.3
-12.2
-12.5
-11.4
-13.5
-35.5
-33.6 .
-31.9
-18.8
-18.9
Well
number
(D-7-3)28cab-1
(D-7-3)31cac-2
(D-7-3)32bcd-1
(D-7-3)33baa-6
Date
03-01-1961
03-30-1964
05-12-1964
09-15-1964
06-19-1989
07-19-1989
08-24-1989
09-20-1989
10-26-1989
12-19-1989
01-23-1990
02-13-1990
03-05-1990
04-09-1990
05-10-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-02-1990
09-05-1990
10-16-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-04-1991
11-02-1964
09-13-1989
12-04-1980
03-26-1981
03-09-1982
02-06-1991
03-04-1991
08-31-1935
03-02-1936
10-03-1936
03-03-1937
09-23-1937
05-17-1938
09-14-1938
03-24-1939
09-21-1939
03-16-1940
09-24-1940
03-18-1941
12-10-1941
03-27-1942
06-27-1942
12-26-1942
03-29-1943
12-29-1943
Water Well Date
level number
-15.0 (D-7-3)33baa-6 03-24-1944
-16.4 Continued 12-27-1944
-17.0
-18.5
-17.8
-17.6
-12.4
-16.6
-16.5
-16.1
•15.5
-15.9
-15.7
-15.3
-15.3
-16.2
-14.9
-15.9
-15.5
-15.4
-15.3
-15.3
-15.2
-14.8
-11.2
-14,3
-12.8
-11.8
-13,5
-13,1
-13.2
-6,8
-6.4
-8.7
-7.2
-9.0
-8.6
-9.6
-8.0
-8.1
-8.1
-8.2
-8.2
-10.6
-8.6
-12.4
•11.3
-9.7
-9.0
03-29-1045
12-17-1945
03-07-1946
12-17-1946
04-07-1947
12-17-1947
03-30-1948
12-23-1948
03-17-1949
12-16-1949
03-22-1950
12-19-1950
04-04-1951
12-28-1951
04-08-1952
12-11-1952
04-21-1953
12-08-1953
03-24-1954
12-29-1954
04-22-1955
12-22-1955
03-30-1956
12-19-1956
04-01-1957
12-06-1957
03-18-1958
12-04-1958
03-18-1959
12-24-1959
03-23-1960
12-09-1960
03-23-1961
01-05-1962
03-06-1962
12-06-1962
03-07-1963
08-27-1963
12-16-1963
04-09-1964
05-28-1964
07-09-1964
08-03-1964
09-01-1964
10-05-1964
11-02-1964
12-03-1964
01-05-1965
02-01-1965
03-01-1965
Water
level
-8.4
-10.7
-9.8
-11.7
-10.7
-11.5
-10.6
-11.3
-10.0
•10.9
-9.6
-11.1
-9.9
-11.3
-9.7
-11.3
-10.5
•17.3
•14.0
•12.5
-11.7
-10.0
-9.6
-9.6
-9.2
-9.5
-9.9
-11.6
-11.0
-13.8
-11.9
-8.9
•8.6
-8.7
•7.1
•6.6
-7.1
-9.7
•8.9
-5.6
-7.7
-6.2
-7.2
-7.3
-7.4
-6.4
-7.0
-7.7
-7.9
•8.0
-8.3
-7.0
44
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well Date
number
D-7-3)33baa-6 04-05-1965
;ontlnued 05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-06-1965
12-28-1965
03-24-1966
08-17-1966
10-02-1968
03-11-1969
09-03-1969
03-17-1970
09-08-1970
03-17-1971
10-06-1971
03-09-1972
09-26-1972
03-07-1973
09-05-1973
03-07-1974
03-06-1975
08-16-1975
03-04-1976
08-12-1976
03-07-1977
08-10-1977
03-08-1978
08-22-1978
03-15-1979
09-18-1979
03-06-1980
09-03-1980
03-02-1981
09-03-1981
03-02-1982
09-20-1982
03-01-1983
09-21-1983
03-09-1984
09-10-1984
03-04-1985
09-10-1985
03-10-1986
09-08-1986
03-04-1987
09-11-1987
03-02-1988
09-14-1988
03-10-1989
06-19-1989
07-19-1969
08-24-1989
Water
level
-7.7
-7.9
-10.1
-11.3
-12,0
-10,3
-8,8
-5,3
-11.3
-10.4
-11.4
-10,7
-9,1
-9.4
-11.7
-9.9
-7.4
-8.9
-11.6
-11,1
-9,6
-14.4
-11.6
-6.2
-8.9
-3.2
-5.5
-7.9
-8.3
-9.7
-8,3
-10.6
-9,2
-6,6
-9.0
-14.5
-12.1
-17
-15.4
-19.4
-16.5
-16.4
-14.2
-16.5
-13.9
-9.9
-7.3
-5.8
-8.6
-7.3
-5.0
-5.0
Well
number
(D-7-3)33baa-6
Continued
(D-7-3)33ccc-5
Date
09-19-1989
10-24-1989
11-13-1989
12-19-1989
03-05-1990
03-04-1991
09-12-1991
03-13-1992
03-15-1938
09-25-1938
03-24-1939
09-21-1939
02-29-1940
10-01-1940
06-07-1964
09-01-1964
10-05-1964
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-05-1965
12-28-1965
03-24-1966
08-13-1966
12-20-1966
01-21-1967
02-21-1967
03-27-1967
03-19-1968
03-11-1969
03-24-1970
03-17-1971
03-09-1972
03-12-1973
03-07-1974
03-07-1975
03-04-1976
03-07-1977
03-08-1978
03-15-1979
03-06-1980
03-02-1981
03-02-1982
03-01-1983
03-09-1984
03-04-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
03-03-1988
Water Well Date
level nurr
-5.5 (D-7-
iber
3)33ccc-5 12-13-1988
-5.6 Continued 01-26-1989
•5.5
•6.0
•7.0
•4.7
-4.9
-6.2
-3.6
-8.7
-7.2
-7.3
-7.7
-7.1
-9.5
-5.5
•5.9
-8.0
-8.3
-7.9
-9.5
-10.7
-13.8
-12.0
-10.5
-4.2
-7.9
03-01-1989
04-18-1989
05-15-1989
06-19-1989
07-19-1989
08-24-1989
09-19-1989
10-26-1989
11-14-1989
12-19-1989
01-23-1990
02-13-1990
03-05-1990
04-09-1990
05-10-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-02-1990
09-05-1990
10-16-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-04-1991
03-13-1992
-7.6 (D-7-3)33ccc-6 01-21-1967
-6.2
-7.1
03-08-1991
-8.1 (D-8-1)2ccd-1 11-01-1988
-11.3
-12.1
-10.9
-10.9
-10.5
-12.2
-11.7
-13.4
-10.2
-3,5
-9.1
-9.2
-10.6
-10.2
-14.1
-18.0
-19.0
-16.3
-15.9
-9.8
12-12-1988
01-23-1989
02-24-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1969
08-15-1989
12-20-1989
02-12-1990
03-06-1990
04-02-1990
05-08-1990
07-05-1990
09-06-1990
11-18-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
02-15-1991
03-05-1991
04-05-1991
Water
level
-8.5
-9.9
-9.9
-8.2
-8.7
-6.4
-5.7
-5.3
-5.7
-6.7
-6.6
-7.6
-6.0
-8.0
-8.3
-7.8
-5.9
-6.4
-2.2
-2.5
-1.8
-3.5
•4.6
-4.7
-4.7
-5.2
-7.1
-21.8
-14.3
5.94
5.95
5.90
5.76
5.52
5.66
5.82
6.34
6.48
6,49
6.26
6.32
6.36
6.70
7.00.
7.11
7.07
7.01
7.10
6.87
6.99
45
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
•
Well Date
numt>er
(D-8-1)2ccd-1 05-08-1991
Continued 06-14-1991
08-12-1991
09-30-1991
01-15-1992
03-13-1992
(0-8-1)1 Obcb-1 11-22-1988
12-12-1988
01-23-1989
02-24-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-20-1989
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-06-1990
04-02-1990
05-08-1990
06-05-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-06-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-05-1991
07-03-1991
08-21-1991
10-01-1991
01-15-1992
(D-8-1)inbch-2 11-22-1988
12-12-1988
01-23-1089
02-24-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-18-1989
09-15-19a9
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-20^ig89
Water
level
6.92
6.80
7.04
7.01
6.96
6.76
14.11
14.28
14.38
14.50
14.62
14.63
14.68
14.85
14.86
14.99
15.00
15.18
15.49
15.62
15.65
15.78
15.93
16.08
16.14
16,20
16.34
16.50
16.70
16.83
17.00
17.06
17.01
17.07
17.06
17.02
17.15
42.58
42.39
41.92
41.45
40.65
40.88
41.63
42.31
42.88
43.25
43.26
43.20
43.07
Well
number
(D-B-1)10br.b-2
Continued
(0-8-1)13aaa-1
Date
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-06-1990
04-02-1990
05-08-1990
06-05-1990
07-05-1990
08-03-1990
09-06-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-05-1991
07-03-1991
08-21-1991
10-01-1991
01-15-1992
05-02-1936
12-01-1936
03-03-1937
09-23-1937
04-06-1938
09-12-1938
03-24-1939
09-21-1939
03-19-1940
09-20-1940
03-18-1941
11-27-1941
03-27-1942
12-26-1942
03-29-1943
12-29-1943
03-24-1944
12-27-1944
03-30-1945
12-17-1945
03-07-1946
12-17-1946
04-07-1947
12-17-1947
03-30-1948
12-23-1948
03-17-1949
12-16-1949
03-22-1950
12-19-1950
04-04-1951
12-26^1951
12^08-1953
Water
level
42.76
42.60
42.30
42.10
42.27
42.60
43.02
43.33
43.34
43.24
43.30
43.31
43.17
43.34
43.47
43.53
43.42
43.35
-13.4
-13.8
-14,7
-13.0
-18.0
-13.2
-17.3
-15,4
-17.5
-14.0
-16.7
-15.2
-16.2
-14.0
-15.0
-15.8
-16,1
-14.6
-14.6
-16.3
-16.7
-17.0
-16.7
-15.0
-16.4
-15.3
•16.3
-15.9
-14.9
•15.3
•15.8
•15.6
•15.5
Well
number
(D^8^1)13aaa^1
Continued
(D^e^1)13bdd^1
P^8-1)20abb^1
(D^8-1)23bdd-l
Oate
09-01-1964
10-05-1964
11-02-1964
12-03-1964
09-20-1989
03-04-1991
07-07-1964
03-05-1991
11-01-1988
12-12-1988
01-23-1989
02-24-1989
04-19-1969
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-20-1989
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-06-1990
04-02-1990
05-08-1990
07-05-1990
08-03-1990
09-06-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
01-24-1991
03-05-1991
06-09-1937
12-13-1988
01-26-1989
03-01-1989
04-19-1989
05'-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
08-24-1989
09-15-1989
10-26-1989
11-14-1989
12-20-1989
01-23-1890
02-12-1990
Water
level
•6.6
•9.5
•10.9
-11.9
-10.8
-11.3
-2.0
-1.5
12.64
12.92
12.88
12.83
11.50
12.65
13.19
13,71
14.10
14.50
14.68
14.67
14.68
14.51
14.41
14.22
14.15
14.17
14.80
15.20
15.67
16.02
15.88
15.75
15.68
-7.3
-11.9
-11.9
-12.0
•10.3
•10.2
-10.6
-11.0
-10.8
-10.8
-11.1
•10.7
-10.2
•9.6
-9.4
-9.5
•
46
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D-8-1)23bdd-1
Continued
(D-8-1)25aba-1
(D-8-1)25cbb-1
(D-8-1)36bcc-1
(D-8-2)1baa-1
(D-8-2)2caa-1
(D-8-2)2cda-1
(D-8-2)2daa-1
Date
03-06-1990
04-02-1990
05-08-1990
06-05-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-05-1991
03-24-1967
02-20-1991
03-05-1991
07-21-1964
02-20-1991
03-04-1991
07-21-1964
03-07-1991
04-08-1964
08-06-1964
08-08-1989
11-12-1951
08-06-1964
09-21-1989
08-06-1964
09-21-1989
03-04-1991
08-06-1964
04-19-1989
05-16-1989
06-22-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
08-24-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-20-1989
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-05-1990
04-02-1990
Waler
level
-10.1
-9.1
-9,1
-9.2
-9.3
-9.1
-7.9
-9.3
-9,3
-8.6
-9.0
-8,0
-12.9
-6.6
-6.5
-15.2
-11.0
-11.8
-15.9
-10.9
-11.0
-14.6
-10.3
-16
-16.7
-11,6
-6.2
-5.5
-4.7
-25.8
-26.7
-24.4
-23.6
-24.0
-22.8
-22.5
-22.9
-23.2
-24.6
-24.5
-24.8
-25.1
-25.5
-25.7
Well
number
(0-8-2)3aad-1
(D-8-2)4abb-1
(D-8-2)4abc-1
^D-8-2)4bab-1
(D-8-2)4cba-2
Date
05-01-1964
09-15-1989
06-20-1964
09-12-1989
03-05-1991
04-06-1964
05-12-1964
08-04-1964
03-05-1965
06-23-1965
09-12-1989
03-25-1963
08-20-1964
09-12-1989
03-03-1937
09-23-1937
03-14-1938
09-27-1938
03-24-1939
09-21-1939
04-12-1940
09-20-1940
03-18-1941
12-29-1941
03-27-1942
12-26-1942
03-29-1943
12-29-1943
03-24-1944
12-27-1944
03-30-1945
12-17-1945
03-07-1946
12-17-1946
04-07-1947
12-17-1947
03-30-1948
03-17-1949
12-16-1949
03-23-1950
12-19-1950
04-04-1951
12-26-1951
04-09-1952
12-16-1952
04-21-1953
03-24-1954
12-29-1954
Water
level
-10.0
-15.8
-8.8
•12.4
•14.1
•12.5
•12.7
•12.2
•12.5
-12.7
-11.3
-22.0
-15.2
-4.4
-26.1
-24,8
-28.1
-24.8
-29.4
-26.8
-29.5
-25.8
-29.8
•27.9
-27.6
-29.7
-29.9
-29.5
-30.8
-30.7
-32.1
•31.6
-32.5
-31.6
-34.1
-33.3
-35.2
-34.5
-35.1
-36.8
-35.8
-35.0
•34.4
-35.0
•38.1
•37,8
•37.4
•35.1
Well
number
(D-8-2)4cba-2
Continued
Date
04-22-1955
12-22-1955
03-30-1956
12-19-1956
04-01-1957
12-06-1957
03-18-1958
12-04-1958
03-18-1959
12-24-1959
03-23-1960
12-09-1960
03-23-1961
01-05-1962
03-06-1962
12-06-1962
03-07-1963
08-27-1963
12-16-1963
03-11-1964
04-09-1964
05-28-1964
07-09-1964
08-03-1964
09-01-1964
10-05-1964
11-02-1964
12-03-1964
01-05-1965
02-02-1965
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-21-1965
12-28-1965
03-25-1966
08-23-1966
12-30-1966
01-27-1967
02-10-1967
03-01-1967
03-16-1967
04-13-1967
04-27-1967
03-19-1968
10-02-1968
03-11-1969
09-04-1969
03-24-1970
09-06-1970
Water
level
-34.7
-33.4
-33.4
-34.2
-35.6
-35.8
-36.7
-35.5
-36.5
-32.9
-35.1
-32,6
-35.1
-28.1
-29.9
-28.4
-26.3
-17.6
-20.2
-21.3
-20.6
-19.3
-18.9
-18.2
-17.0
-18.4
-19.6
-19.8
-20.8 •
-21.7
-21.7
-22.3
-19.6
-19.8
-19.9
-20.8
•22,1
-20.2
-18.0
-19,7
-20.9
•20.0
•21.0
-21.0
-21.0
-20.6
-21.8
-20.5
•23.4
-19.4
-22.4
-21.1
47
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D-8-2)4cba-2
Continued
Oate
03-17-1971
10-06-1971
03-09-1972
09-26-1972
03-07-1973
09-05-1973
03-08-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
08-13-1976
03-08-1977
08-10-1977
03-09-1978
08-28-1978
03-15-1979
09-18-1979
03-05-1980
09-04-1980
03-02-1881
09-03-1981
03-02-1982
09-20-1962
03-01-1983
09-21-1983
03-09-1984
09-10-1984
03-04-1985
09-10-1985
03-10-1986
09-08-1986
03-04-1987
09-11-1987
03-02-1968
09^14-1988
12-13-1988
01-26-1969
03-01-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
08-24-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-14-1989
12-19-1989
01-23-1990
03-05^1990
04-02^1990
05-06^1990
06^04.1990
Water
ievel
-22.7
-21.2
-22.4
•20.3
-22.5
-21.5
-25.8
-24.6
-25.6
-16.4
-22.6
-21.2
-19.2
-14.6
-23.2
-18.8
-21.1
-20.9
-23.9
-19.6
-22.1
-20.5
•23.6
-21.0
-23.7
-14.2
-24.8
-20.9
-24.2
-19.1
-23.0
-19.5
-19.5
-17.9
-18.7
-20.3
-20.3
-17.9
-17.6
-16.5
-15.8
-15.9
-15.3
-15.5
-15.5
-16.1
-16.2
-16.4
-17.0
-16.7
-14.7
-14.7
Well
number
(0-8-2)4cba-2
Continued
'(D-8-2)4cbb-1
(D-8-2)4cdc-4
(D-8-2)4dad-1
(D-8-2)7dda-1
(D-8-2)7ddd-1
(D-8-2)10adb-1
(D-8-2)13abc-1
(D-8-2)14cad-1
(D-e-2)16caa-1
Date
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
03-01-1991
09-10-1991
03-13-1992
04-28-1964
09-15-1989
08-20-1964
03-04-1991
04-03-1964
05-19-1964
08-04-1964
10-08-1964
03-08-1965
06-23-1965
09^28-1989
03-30-1965
03-04-1991
12-16-1963
03-01-1991
09^28-1989
03^01-1991
08-30-1961
04-02-1964
05-13-1964
08-25-1964
10-07-1964
03-04-1965
06-22-1965
09-28-1989
09-02-1964
02-20-1990
03-05-1991
04-13-1937
09-23-1937
04-06-1938
09-13-1938
03-24-1939
10-13-1939
04-04-1940
Water
level
•11.8
-13.3
-14.7
-14.8
•16.6
-17.6
-14.6
-16.3
-39.0
-6.1
-12.7
-13.0
-43.8
-43.7
-43.7
-42.7
-45.4
-45.2
-13.4
-7.7
-4.9
-10,9
-9.3
-20.1
-19.7
-22.0
-28.1
-28.5
-18.7
-22.5
-29.5
-26.6
-18.4
-4.5
-3,4
-3.5
-37.3
-32.4
-41.9
-36.0
-39.2
-35.7
-40.6
WeH
number
(D-8-2)16caa-1
Continued
Date
01^21 •I 941
09^02^1964
10-05-1864
11-02-1864
12-03-1864
01-05-1865
02-02^1965
03^0M865
04-05-1865
05-03-1865
06-07-1865
07-02-1865
10-21-1965
12-29-1965
03-25-1966
06-23-1966
12-20-1966
01-20^1867
02-20-1867
03-27-1867
03-19-1968
10-02-1868
03-11-1869
09-03-1969
03-15-1970
09-08-1970
03-17-1971
10-06-1971
03-10-1972
09-26-1972
03-08-1973
09-05-1973
03-08-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
08-13-1976
03-08-1977
08-10-1977
03-09-1978
08-23-1978
03-15^1979
09-17-1979
03-05-1980
09-04-1980
03-03-1981
09-03-1881
03-02-1982
09-20-1982
03-03-1983
09-21-1983
03-09-1984
08-10-1984
Water
level
-39.8
•33.5
-33.4
-34.7
-35.8
-36.0
-36.8
-37.4
-37.6
-37.6
-37.7
-36.7
-39.6
-38.8
-36.6
-35.4
-38.1
•36.4
-36.8
•37.5
-36.4
-37.5
-41.6
-39.5
-42.7
-38.7
-40.7
-38.4
-40.4
-36.6
-40.6
-37.8
-42.2
-41.4
-43.0
-36.4
•39.5
-34.2
-37.4
-33.8
-38.9
-35.1
-38.7
•36.3
•39.4
•35.9
-37,8
-39.6
•42.3
•44
-47.4
•48.4
^ r
• ;
48
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
(0-8-2)16caa-1
Continued
03-05-1965
09-10-1985
03-10-1986
09-08-1986
03-04-1967
09-11-1987
03-02-1988
09-14-1968
12-13-1986
01-26-1969
03-01-1989
04-19-1989
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-26-1989
11-14-1989
12-19-1969
01-23-1990
02-12-1990
03-05-1990
04-02-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
(D-6-2)21aaa-1
-50.1
-46.0
-47.0
-41.1
-44.2
-37.4
-38.0
-32.1
-31,0
-36.4
-36.3
-33.8
-32,4
-29.9
-29.0
-28.3
-28,3
-28,9
-29.3
-28.3
-32.9
-33.1
-33.7
-33.4
-32.6
-29.6
-27.7
-27.2
(0-8-2)16dbb-2 09-02-1964 -5.0
03-04-1991 -4.2
(D-8-2)17ada-1 09-03-1964 -6.3
03-01-1991 -5,4
(0-8-2)17CCC-2 04-03-1964
05-19-1964
07-23-1964
09-03-1964
10-08-1964
03-08-1965
06-24-1965
08-17-1989
-20.6
-19,7
-17.3
-15.4
-16.9
-20.8
-17,4
-8,5
(0-8-2)19add-1 09-03-1964 -13.6
03-01-1991 -12.6
(D-8-2)20cad-2 03-28-1967 -10,7
03-01-1991 -2.7
03-03-1937 -25.6
09-14-1964 -20.0
08-28-1989 -6.8
(0-8-2)21 ddd-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-2
(D-8-2)24bdc-2
(D-8-2)25dac-3
04-02-1964
05-18-1964
09-15-1964
03-24-1965
06-24-1965
10-02-1989
03-25-1963
04-08-1964
05-20-1964
09-17-1964
03-17-1965
06-24-1965
08-17-1989
08-15-
03-19-
03-17-
10-12-
03-06-
03-08-
03-11-
03-07-
03-05-
03-08-
03-09-
03-15-
03-05-
03-03-
03^02-
03-03-
03-12-
03-05-
03-10-
03-02-
03-02-
11-02-
12-14-
01-17-
02-23-
03-03-
04-18-
05-15-
49
1961
1970
1971
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1988
1988
1989
1989
1989
1989
1989
-18.4
-17.5
-14.8
-18.5
•19,2
-12.5
09-15-1964 -15.2
07-19-1989 -15.1
03-04-1991 -15.4
09-15-1964 -11.4
07-19-1989 -7.8
03-04-1991 -10.9
-12,0
-9.7
-9.3
-3.7
-11.4
-6.6
-1.5
30.00
28.17
29.88
30.14
31.02
30.90
26.24
26,80
26.13
29.54
34.48
32.06
34.40
30.20
31.24
24.24
16.51
14.38
19,95
22.74
28.72
35.15
33.21
32.76
33.85
33.51
35.13
35.77
(D-8-2)25dac-3
Continued
(D-8-2)26aad-3
06-20-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
09-19-1989
10-24-1989
11-13-1989
12-19-1989
01-25-1990
02-13-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
06-02-1990
09-04-1990
10-22-1990
11-19-1990
12-18-1990
01-23-1991
03-05-1991
09-12-1991
03-12-1992
03-25-1964
05-22-1964
09-17-1964
10-14-1964
03-22-1965
07-01-1965
01-31-1991
03-06-1991
(D-8-2)27acd-1
(D-8-2)28cbd-3
09-23-1964
02-20-1991
03-05-1991
(D-8-2)29aaa-7
37.27
40.07
41.51
40.18
39.10
37.20
35.89
35.60
35.32
35.44
36.38
38.29
38.79
41.87
43.70
43.56
40.45
39.15
38.65
38.88
38.42
43.76
37.47
38.1
37.2
43.9
42.1
39.9
39.8
35.80
35.45
(D-8-2)26abb-3 09-23-1964 -2.9
03-04-1991 -3.9
-2.5
-5.2
-5.2
11-04-1944 -4
09-25-1964 -5.7
07-31-1989 -6.6
(D-8-2)28cca-2 09-25-1964 -1.0
03-01-1991 -4.1
09^27^1957 -12.0
09-25-1964 -11.9
11-02-1964 -12.7
12-03-1964 -12.8
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D-8-2)29aaa-7
Continued
(0-8-2)29bcd-2
(D-6-2)29cab-1
(0-8-2)31 cbb-1
Oate
01-05-1965
02-02-1965
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
10-21-1965
12-30-1965
03-25-1966
04-13-1966
08-23-1966
03-24-1967
03-19-1968
03-11-1969
03-24-1970
03-18-1971
03-10-1972
03-07-1973
03-11-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
03-08-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-02-1982
03-03-1983
03-09-1984
03-05-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
03-02-1988
03-10-1989
03-06-1990
03-05-1991
03-12-1992
04-06-1964
05-19-1964
09-25-1964
10-08-1964
03-08-1965
06-24-1965
08-17-1989
09-25-1964
08-17-1989
03-04-1991
09-28-1964
Water Well Date
level nun
-13,1 (D-e-
-13.8
-14.2
-14.1
-13.2
-12.0
-14.8
-16,2
-14.2
-14,5
-12.1
•14.9
•16.3
•16,1
•16.4
•16.1
•16.0
-14.0
-16.0
-14.0
-12.1
-11.6
-9.4
•11.2
•7.8
-9.1
-8.7
-11.0
-10.6
-10,8
-10.6
-9.2
-7.3
-7.9
-7.5
-6.9
-6.6
-24,0
-24.4
-22.7
-22.9
Iber
2)31cdb-1 08-04-1964
09-01-1964
10-01-1964
11-02-1964
12-03-1964
01-05-1965
02-02-1965
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-21-1965
12-29-1965
03-25-1966
08-24-1966
12-20-1966
03-24-1967
03-20-1968
. 03-21-1969
03-24-1970
08-18-1971
03-11-1972
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
08-09-1989
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-05-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-07-1991
09-10-1991
03-12-1992
-24,4 (D-8-2)31cdb-2 09-27-1968
-23.7
-19.6
-25.3
-22.0
-26.4
-12.5
03-12-1970
03-18-1971
03-11-1072
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
11-14-1989
Water
level
•6.3
•5.8
•5.8
-6.5
-6,5
-7.2
-7.2
-7.7
•7.8
•8.0
-7.4
-7.9
-8.9
-9.5
-8.5
-6.8
-7.2
-8.8
-8.2
-8.4
-15.3
-13.3
-15,4
-14,6
-12.9
-10.9
-8.3
-5.6
-13,0
-7.2
-5.6
-5.6
-5.6
-5.0
-7.1
-14.3
-14.2
-14.3
-15.0
-5.9
-14.8
-18
-31.7
-31.3
-29.4
-28.4
-30.2
-29.8
-30.7
-30.0
Well Date
number
(0-8-2)31 cdb-2 01-23-1990
Continued 03-06-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-24-1991
03-07-1991
03-12-1992
(D-8-2)34acd-1 06-20-1946
09-28-1964
07-31-1989
03-05-1991
(D-8-2)34dda-1 09-29-1964
11-03-1964
12-04-1964
01-05-1965
02-02-1965
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-20-1965
12-29-1965
03-25-1966
04-18-1966
08-23-1966
03-24-1967
03-20-1968
03-17-1969
03-24-1970
03-18-1971
03-10-1972
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
03-08-1977
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-02-1982
03-03-1983
03-12-1984
03-05-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
12-13-1988
01-26-1989
03-01-1989
Water
leve)
-29.7
-29.9
-28.9
-28.9
-28.8
-30.2
-28.8
-3.0
-3.7
-4.4
-7.4
-12.4
-13.3
-13.9
-14.6
-14.5
-14.9
-14.7
-14.5
.-14.2
•13.6
-15.0
-15.0
-14.3
-14,8
-10.9
-15,0
-15.8
-17.1
-187
-17.4
-17.3
-18.0
•18.0
-18.1
-16.8
-13.8
-14.9
-13.7
-15.5
-157
-16.2
-17.6
•18.9
-17.7
-15.8
-9.8
-13,2
•13.4
i
08-01-1989 -14,4
08-28-1989 -14.8
50
Tible 3,—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D-8-2)34dda-1
Continued
(D-8-2)36dbd-3
((D-8-3)5bca.1
(D-8-3)7abc-1
1
F (D-8-3)8abd-1
|k w
Date
04-18-1989
05-15-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-16-1989
09-19-1989
10-26-1989
11-14-1989
12-19-1989
02-13-1990
03-09.-1990
09-29-1964
02-06-1991
03-06-1991
11-04-1964
09-14-1989
03-04-1991
08-03-1989
03-04-1991
03-26-1964
05-13-1964
10-14-1964
03-05-1965
06-30-1965
03-19-1967
03-19-1968
03-08-1969
03-19-1970
03-07-1971
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-10-1975
03-05-1976
03-09-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-06-1980
03-02-1981
03-02-1982
03-03-1963
03-09-1984
03-04-1985
03-10-1986
03-04-1987
03-02-1988
03-02-1989
04-19-1989
Water
level
-9.9
-9.0
-8.3
-6.5
-5.9
-6.5
-6.5
-8.1
-8.4
-10.5
-11.0
6.9
9.6
9.1
-14.5
-7.0
-9.7
-16.0
-23.5
6,41
6.40
10.5
6.3
6,6
6,15
6.05
4.56
3,83
4,47
2.95
2.95
5.43
3.39
4.46
5.60
4.34
4.45
3.17
3,67
.65
flowing
flowing
flowing
flowing
2.32
3.98
4.94
Well
number
(D-8-3)8abd-1
Continued
(D-B-3)11caa-1
(0-8-3)1 lccc-1
(0-8-3)1 lccc-2
{D-8-3)14acc-1
Date
05-15-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
09-19-1989
10-24-1989
11-13^1989
12-19-1989
01-23-1990
02-13-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
07-02-1990
08-02-1990
09-04-1990
10-16-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-04-1991
03-13-1992
06-19-1969
07-19-1989
09-19-1989
11-13-1989
01-23-1990
02-14-1990
03-05-1990
05-08-1990
07-02-1990
10-22-1990
12-17-1990
03-05-1991
06-08-1965
07-02-1965
03-27-1967
02-04-1991
03-06-1991
01-30-1991
03-07-1991
08-19-1963
04-01-1964
05-12-1964
10-14-1964
03-19-1965
06-30-1965
Water
level
7.00
12.59
10.14
12.97
12.21
11.25
7.23
5.23
4.77
4,46
4,31
5.37
8.68
10.02
13.18
14.05
14.05
8.96
7.30
6.73
6.55
6.14
5.35
180.39
182.5
184,50
182,60
181.19
181.39
181.67
182.65
185.08
187.76
185.67
185.60
138,13
136,42
143.50
137.00
140,00
45.05
46.16
165.30
171.0
171.4
171.1
169.7
167,0
Well
number
(0-8-3)14acc-1
Continued
(0-8-3)14bab-1
(D-8-3)17ada-1
(0-8-3)17cdc-2
«
(0-8-3)18aaa-3
(0-8-3)18ccd-1
^(D-8-3)22cbd-3
Date
10-20-1865
12-28-1865
03-23-1966
04-13-1966
08-25-1966
02-21-1967
03-27-1967
12-15-1988
01-17-1989
02-23-1989
04-18-1989
05-15-1989
06-19-1989
08-24-1989
10-24-1989
01-23-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-31-1990
08-02-1990
09-05-1990
10-22-1990
11-19-1990
01-23-1991
03-05-1991
09-13-1991
03-13--! 992
10-09-1969
10-31-1969
11-24-1989
12-22-1989
04-13-1965
02-25-1991
03-07-1991
03-23-1964
03-05-1991
03-07-1991
04-13-1965
02-26-1991
03-04-1991
01-08-1962
02-13-1962
03-14-1962
04-11-1962
04-03-1964
05-12-1964
Water
level
165.1
165.62
168.00
168.82
175.52
172.56
172.34
170.76
169.82
170.53
171.48
171.47
172.27
175.46
174.41
172.18
172.39
172.86
175.23
179.75
180.70
178.84
177.49
177.36
177.05
178.60
175.37
146.45
145.93
145.02
144.85
23.60
24.11
24,43
143.70
142.22
-2.1
-2.7
•6.7
•6.4
160
175.5
175.4
175.4
176.1
176.1
51
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D^8-3)22cbd^3
Continued
(D^8-3)26bcd^1
(D^8-3)26cbd-1
(0-e-3)26cbd-2
(D-8-3)26cca-2
(D-8-3)27adc-1
(D-8-3)27adc-2
Date
10-14-1964
12-04-1964
03-19-1965
06-30-1965
03-06-1991
03-30-1989
06-28-1989
07-31-1989
08-30-1989
09-28-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-22-1989
03-08-1991
07-31-1989
08-30-1989
09-29-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-22-1989
03-08-1991
03-29-1989
06-29-1969
07-31-1989
08-30-1989
09-29-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1969
12-21-1989
03-08-1991
03-29-1989
06-29-1989
07-31-1989
08-30-1989
09-28-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-21-1989
03-08-1991
10-10-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-22-1989
03-08-1991
03-30-1969
06-28-1989
Water
level
176.3
175.7
173.9
172.1
179.88
175.64
177.89
178.22
178.91
179.47
179.91
180.54
180.91
189.04
222.45
223.02
223.68
223.68
224.29
224.77
231.16
34.72
36.69
36.96
37.22
37.46
37.36
37.02
36.58
36.13
20.43
21.32
21.67
22.06
22.49
22.77
22.72
22.70
21.66
90.13
90.62
91.05
91.34
96.57
156.15
158.59
Well
number
(D-6-3)27adc-2
Continued
(D-8-3)27bad-1
(D-8-3)27bad-2
(D-8-3)30dba-1
(D-8-3)33cac-1
(D-8-3)34bab-1
Date
07-31-1989
08-30-1989
09-29-1989
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-26-1989
03-08-1991
10-31-1989
11-24-1989
12-22-1989
03-08-1991
01-05-1990
03-08-1991
05-24-1989
03-06-1991
10-15-1964
03-07-1991
11-13-1961
12-06-1961
01-22-1962
02-14-1962
03-14-1962
04-11-1962
03-27-1964
04-22-1964
05-21-1964
07-23-1964
10-14-1964
12-04-1964
01-05-1965
02-01-1965
03-03-1965
04-06-1965
05-03-1965
06-08-1965
07-02-1965
10-20-1965
12-29-1965
01-25-1966
02-15-1966
03-10-1966
04-05-1966
05-05-1966
06-05-1966
07-05-1966
08-05-1966
09-10-1966
Water Well Date
level number
159.41 (D-8-3)34bab-1 10-05-1966
160.15 Continued 11-15-1966
160.71
160.58
160.32
160.17
165.40
151.52
149.61
148.76
149.39
180.29
185.36
114.46
113.73
58.00
62.41
153,50
153.50
153.40
154,20
154.50
154.50
161,20
160.68
160.70
164.20
163.10
161.29
160.36
160.09
159,44
159.05
158.81
157.86
158.08
155.82
154.05
154.37
154.38
154.31
154.83
155.35
155,70
163.48
161.58
162.35
12-15-1966
01-10-1967
02-05-1967
03-05-1967
04-05-1967
05-05-1867
07-10-1867
08-05-1867
09-05-1967
10-05-1967
11-05-1967
12-05-1967
01-05-1968
02-05-1066
03-05-1966
04-05-1968
05-05-1968
06-05-1968
07-05-1968
08-05-1966
09-05-1968
10-05-1968
11-05-1968
12-05-1968
01-05-1969
02-05-1969
03-05-1969
04-05-1969
05-05-1969
06-05-1969
07-05-1969
08-05-1969
09-05-1969
10-05-1969
11-05-1969
12-20-1969
01-05-1970
02-05-1970
03-05-1970
04-05-1970
05-05-1970
06-05-1070
07-05-1970
08-05-1970
09-05-1970
10-05-1970
11-05-1970
12-05-1970
01-05-1971
02-05-1971
Water
level
161.44
159.44
158.52
158.48
158.11
158.41
156.01
158.28
158.63
159.07
159.03
157.82
156.91
156.15
155.80
155.85
155.48
155.60
155.30
154.67
157.65
156.25
154.85
153.38
152.72
151.89
151.51
151.10
151.01
150.64
150.02
149.80
148.60
150.00
149.00
148.52
147.21
147.19
147.22
147.40
147.57
148.28
148.69
149.30
149.19
150.38
155.05
150.50
150.06
150.09
149.80
149.57
52
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
<»
«
Well Date
number
(D.8-3)3'»bab-1 03-05-1971
continued 04-05-1971
05-15-1971
06-05-1971
07-05-1971
08-05-1971
09-05-1971
10-05-1971
11-05-1971
12-05-1971
01-05-1972
02-05-1972
03-05-1972
04-05-1972
05-05-1972
06-05-1972
07-05-1972
08-05-1972
09-05-1972
10-05-1972
11-05-1972
12-05-1972
01-05-1973
02-05-1973
03-05-1973
04-05-1973
05-05-1973
06-05-1973
07-05-1973
08-05-1973
09-05-1973
10-05-1973
11-05-1973
12-05-1973
01-05-1974
02-05-1974
03-05-1974
04-05-1974
05-05-1974
06-05-1974
07-05-1974
08-05-1974
09-05-1974
10-05-1974
11-05-1974
i^•05•^9^4
01-05-1975
02-05-1975
03-05-1975
04-05-1975
05-05-1975
06-05-1975
Water
level
149.57
150.83
150.15
150.38
152.04
153.30
152.53
150.94
149.05
148.58
146.52
148.54
149.41
.148.88
149.14
151.38
153.36
154.98
153.72
153.11
151,58
150.88
150.85
150.70
150.37
150,47
150.00
150,76
151.85
150.63
150.51
148.62
147.61
147.02
146.48
146.10
146.03
146.11
146.09
146.94
147.83
149.16
148.78
147.84
146.40
145.28
144.76
144,67
144.55
145.08
145.26
144.94
Well Date
number
(D-8-3)34bab-1 07-05-1975
Continued 08-05-1975
09-05-1975
10-05-1975
11-05-1975
12-05-1975
01-05-1976
02-05-1976
03-05-1976
04-05-1976
05-05-1976
06-05-1976
07-05-1976
08-05-1976
09-05-1976
^D^t^•^976
11-05-1976
12-05-1976
01-05-1977
02-05-1977
Q3-(a-1977
04-05-1977
05-05-1977
06-05-1977
07-05-1977
08-05-1977
09-05-1977
10-05-1977
11-05-1977
12-05-1977
01-05-1978
02-05-1978
03-05-1978
04-05-1978
05-05-1978
06-05-1978
07-05-1978
08-05-1978
09-05-1978
10-05-1978
11-05-1978
12-05-1978
01-05-1979
02-05-1979
03-05-1979
04-05-1979
05-05-1979
06-05-1979
07-05-1979
08-05.1979
09-05-1979
10-05-1979
water
level
144.45
144.65
145.42
143.30
142.37
141.11
141.94
141.69
142.31
142.25
142.59
145.20
146.62
148.12
149.93
148.15
146.60
145.90
145.90
145.91
146.18
145.74
147.30
148.41
154.47
152.67
152.91
153.01
151,45
151.00
150.73
150.48
150.34
150.77
150.21
150.08
152.68
152.83
152.42
149.70
148.51
147.77
147.85
147.77
148.05
147.98
147.93
149.00
150.87
151.28
149.43
149.07
Well
number
(D-8-3)34bab-1
Continued
Date
11-05-1979
12-05-1979
01-05-1980
02-05-1980
03-05-1980
04-05-1980
05-05-1980
06-05-1960
07-05-1980
08-05-1980
09-05-1980
10-05-1980
11-05-1980
12-05-1980
01-05-1981
o^-05^^96^
03-05-1981
04-05-1981
05-05-1981
06-05-1981
07-05-1981
08-05-1981
09-05-1981
10-05-1981
11-05-1981
12.05^1981
01-05-1982
02-05-1982
03-05-1982
04-05-1982
05-05-1962
06-05-1982
07-05-1982
08-05-1982
09-05-1982
03-10-1983
03-04-1985
03-10-1986
03-02-1987
03-02-1988
11-02-1988
12-14-1988
01-17-1989
02-23-1969
03-03-1989
04-18-1989
05-15-1989
06-19-1989
07-19-1989
08-16-1989
09-19-1989
10-24-1989
Water
level
147.85
147.10
146.77
146.69
146.59
146.73
146.09
146.02
146.02
146.44
145.45
144.37
143.31
143.16
143.42
143.84
144.21
144.83
145.23
145.24
146.96
149.56
148.34
147.70
146.33
146.15
146.05
146.51
146.53
146.56
146.09
144.62
144.45
143.79
143.21
139.47
124.22
130.40
126.81
135.79
143.39
141.98
142.16
143.09
142.99
144.26
144.91
145.52
149.10
148.64
148.07
147.02
53
Table 3.—Water levels in selected we/Zs—Continued
Well
number
(D-8-3)34bab-1
Continued
(D-8-3)34bbb-1
(0-9-1 )1lacc-2
(D-9-1)11baa-1
Date
11-13-1989
12-19^1989
01-25-1990
02-14-1390
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
07-02-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
10-22-1990
1M9^1990
12^17^1990
01-22-1991
03-06-1991
09-10-1991
03-19-1992
06-02-1969
07-19-1989
09-18-1989
10-24-1989
11-13-1989
12-19-1989
01-25-1990
02-14-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-10-1990
06-04-1990
07-02-1990
08-02-1990
09-05-1990
10-22-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
09-12-1991
03-13-1992
06-20-1989
03-06-1991
01-23-1969
06-20-1989
09-18-1989
11-14-1989
02-14-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
Water Well Oate
level number
145.84 (D-9-1)11baa-1 08-02-1990
143.98 Continued 09-05-1990
142.24
141.39
141.07
140.99
146.40
147.93
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
147.11 (D-9-1)14aad-1 01-06-1965
146.09
144.99
144.28
143.44
142.75
147.47
144.98
72.52
75.13
74.93
74.07
73.12
71.73
70.32
69.66
69.41
69.25
69.98
70.73
72.81
74.18
74.38
73.52
72.55
72.01
71.42
70.87
74.43
72.38
69.74
77.79
59.93
58.98
57.05
58.17
60.33
60.72
61.28
61.77
61.89
02-01-1965
03-02-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-08-1965
07-01-1965
10-21-1965
12-30-1965
03-23-1966
04-1VI966
12^19-196e
03-30^1967
03^20^1968
03^20-1969
03-19-1970
03-16-1971
03-06-1972
03-09-1973
03-12-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
03-09-1978
03-21-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-198^
03-02-19R1
03-12-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-03-1989
03-06-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
09-10-1891
03-12-1992
Water Well Oate
level number
59.77 (0-9-1 )14aad-2 03-14-1990
58.59
58.83
59,68
60.48
61.31
62.10
03-21-1990
10-18-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
(D-0-1)14ddd-1 10-15-1964
60.02
59.77
59.48
01-31 •I 991
03-06^1991
59.37 (0-9-1 )23ada-1 11-14-1961
59.16
65.15
66.90
57.06
56.00
55.95
56.68
57.24
57.34
56.25
55.46
55.78
55.89
55.14
57.49
56.81
58.74
57.86
63.23
61.00
59.94
59.12
57.54
56.37
55.20
53.22
53.75
54.87
55.40
57.49
56.66
57.22
57.35
56.74
57.04
57.37
57.57
65.90
57.24
12-2M961
01 •I 8^1962
03^05^1962
04^03-1962
05-15^1962
06-05-1962
09-10-1962
10-18-1962
11-15-1962
12-28-1962
01-30-1963
02-26-1963
03-22-1963
03-26-1964
05-15-1964
06-01-1964
10-12-1964
12-04-1964
01-06-1965
02-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
10-21-1965
12-30-1965
03-23-1966
04-11-1966
04-12-1966
08-24-1966
12-19-1966
03-25-1967
03-20-1966
03-18-1969
03-19-1970
03-16-1971
03-06-1972
03-09-1973
03-12-1974
03-10^1975
03^06^1976
03^09^1977
Water
level
26.40
26.39
28.50
28,49
28.60
28.70
34.70
30.58
30,60
24.20
24.50
24.70
24.80
24.80
25.20
24.90
27.30
25.40
24.20
23.10
22.50
22.10
22.50
27.25
26.90
27.2
28.30
26.77
25.97
25.56
24.68
24.45
22.05
20.27
19.49
19.34
19.57
26.03
22.08
22.02
16.77
12.20
11.85
12.30
11.87
18.12
9.28
15.09
11.45
17.49
..
54
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
Date
(D-9-1)23ada-1
continued
O
(D-9-1)23daa-1
VD-9-1)24acb-1
(0-9-1 )25ada-1
(D-g-1)25ada-3
Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
Well
number
Date Water
level
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-12-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-03-1989
03-06-1990
03-06-1991
03-12-1992
10-14-1964
03-06-1991
10-14-1964
03-08-1991
12-02-1937
12-21-1937
02-25-1938
04-06-1938
06-02-1938
08-26-1938
10-09-1938
12-23-1938
03-17-1939
04-14-1939
06-19-1939
08-25-1939
10-13-1939
01-04-1940
07-20-1989
03-07-1991
04-14-1964
05-27-1964
07-09-1964'
08-03-1964
08-31-1964
10-01-1964
11-03-1964
12-04-1964
01-06-1965
02-01-1965
03-02-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
24.39 (D-9-1)25ada-3 06-08-1965
17.58 Continued 07-01-1965
16.75
10.78
15.76
5.88
2.70
3.59
7.35
6.63
11.58
15.53
19.29
23.04
10-21-1965
12-30-1965
03-28-1966
08-24-1966
03-28-1967
03-20-1968
03-18-1969
03-24-1970
03-18-1971
03-11-1972
07-20-1989
21.60 (D-9-1)26aab-1 11-14-1961
44.80
39.71
7.20
3.41
-14.4
-13.6
-11.6
-10.9
-10.4
-13.7
-13.4
-14.3
-13.4
-12.8
-10.5
-10.5
-10.7
-10.8
-12,4
-7.6
-5.7
-5,4
-6.5
-7.4
-6.4
-5.7
-6.4
-7.0
-7.3
-8.0
-8.0
-7.9
-8.1
12-21-1961
01-18-1962
03-05-1962
04-03-1962
06-05-1962
09-10-1962
10-18-1962
11-15-1962
12-28-1962
01-30-1963
02-26-1963
03-22-1963
05-15-1964
10-12-1964
12-04-1964
01-06-1965
02-01-1965
03-02-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
07-01-1965
10-21-1965
12-30-1965
03-23-1966
04-11-1966
12-19-1966
01-18-1967
02-15-1967
03-18-1967
03-20-1968
03-18-1969
03-19-1970
03-16-1971
03-06-1972
03-09-1973
03-12^1974
03^10^1975
-9.0
-10.7
-10.8
-12.3
-10.2
-7.7
-8.0
-10.6
-13.7
-14.4
-14.8
-15.0
-12.8
63.50
63.90
63.70
64.20
64.40
65.60
67.30
65.10
64.00
62.30
61.70
61.30
61.50
66.70
68,70
66.60
65.49
65.14
64.53
63.81
63.77
65.62
61.21
58.80
57.86
57.82
61.95
61.55
61.33
61.02
54.58
49.00
48.37
48.80
47.81
56.45
44,80
52.02
(D-9-1)26aab-1
Continued
(D-9-1)27aca-1
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-12-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1986
11-22-1988
12-14-1988
01-23-1989
02-24-1989
03-03-1989
04-19-1989
05-16-1989
06-20-1989
07-17-1989
08-18-1989
09-18-1989
10-25-1989
11-14-1989
12-18-1989
01-23-1990
02-14-1990
03-06-1990
04-06-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-05-1990
10-17-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
03-12-1992
02-14^1967
03-18-1967
03-20-1968
03-20-1969
03-18-1870
12-14-1888
01-23-1989
02-27^1989
04-21 •I 989
47.20
54.93
63.60
55.58
54.70
46.37
53.49
40.78
33.38
33.28
40.39
38.82
47.45
51.28
51.42
52.02
52.36
52.53
52.82
53.30
54.91
56.22
57.19
58.46
56.89
56.93
56.85
57,06
57,01
57,21
57.28
58.41
58.64
59.92
60.43
61.41
62.20
61.84
61.88
61.88
61.92
60.28
230.94
231.14
230.64
229.61
229.00
228.29
226.67
230.87
227.30
55
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued m
Well
number
P-9-1)27aca-1
Continued
(0-9-1 )32bbd-1
(D-9-1)36acb-1
(D-9-1)36bbc-1
Date
05-16-1868
06-20-1888
07-17^1989
08^24-1969
10-25-1989
12-12-1988
01-23-1989
02-24-1988
04-19-1968
05-12-1989
06-20-1989
07-18-1989
08-15-1989
09-15-1989
10-23-1989
11-17-1989
12-20-1989
01-23-1990
02-14-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-08-1990
06-05-1990
07-03-1990
08-03-1990
09-06-1990
10-18-1990
12-17-1990
03-05-1991
03-12-1992
05-16-1969
03-06-1991
07-09-1961
10-12-1961
11-13-1961
12-22-1961
01-19-1962
03-05-1962
04-04-1962
05-14-1962
06-05-1962
07-31-1962
10-22-1962
11-15-1962
12-28-1962
01-29-1963
02-26-1963
05-03-1963
06-17-1963
Water
level
227.12
226.72
226.80
226.65
226.86
13.70
14.30
14.82
15.43
15.60
15.07
14.33
13.76
13.73
12.89
13.19
13.47
13.75
13.98
14.21
14.56
14.84
15.04
15.13
15.13
15.12
15.12
15.22
15.95
14.39
97.41
102.41
104
106.00
106.70
106.80
107.10
107.30
107.50
106.30
102.40
105.60
100.00
99.10
98.90
99.90
100.50
106.00
112.20
Well
number
(0-9-1 )36bbc-1
Continued
Date
08-05-1963
09-19-1963
10-17-1963
11-26-1963
12-18-1963
01-24-1964
04-02-1864
05-14-1964
10-08-1964
03-23-1965
06-29-1965
03-18-1967
03-20-1968
03-18-1969
03-19-1870
03-16-1871
03-14-1872
03-09-1973
03-12-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
03-10-1978
03-15-1979
03-12-1980
03-03-1981
03-02-1982
03-02-1983
03-12-1984
03-04-1985
03-11-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-10-1989
05-16-1989
06-22-1989
07-17-1989
08-18-1989
09-18-1989
10-25-1989
11-14-1989
01-25-1990
02-14-1990
03-07-1990
04-06-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
08-08-1990
09-05-1990
10-17-1880
11-18^ig80
12-18^1880
Water Well Date
level number
112.40 (D-8-1)36bbc-1 01-23-1881
113.80 Continued 03^06-1891
110.80
108.20
107.70
08-12-1991
03-12-1992
107.40 (D-9-1)36cdb-1 10-14-1864
106.50
107.70
03-08-1991
111.80 (D-8-1)36cdd-1 03-02-1962
102.20
125.40
103.69
96.80
93.24
92.57
90.35
91.30
97.51
87.77
92.73
90.09
85.93
104.27
96.02
86.60
89.88
96.04
64.29
76.68
76.32
84.99
82,38
91.69
95.58
96.31
95.76
97.57
99.16
100.54
98.83
98,40
98,74
98.95
99.29
99.75
100.17
103.63
111.28
106.52
103.92
102.53
102.23
04-03-1962
05-14-1962
06-04-1862
07-24-1962
10-17-1862
11-14-1962
12-17-1862
01-28-1863
02-25-1863
03-22-1863
05-03-1863
06-14-1863
08-05-1963
09-19-1863
10-18-1863
11-22-1863
12-18-1963
01-03-1964
01-22-1964
03-24-1964
05-15-1964
10-08-1964
12-04-1964
01-06-1965
02-01-1865
03^02^1865
04^05^1965
05^03^1965
06-08-1965
10^21 •I 865
12^30-1865
03-23-1866
12-19-1866
03-25-1967
03-20-1968
03-20-1969
03-19-1970
03-16-1871
03-06-1872
03-09^ig73
03-12-1974
. 03-10-1975
03-08-1876
Water
lOVVI
102.55
102.20
100.91
100.86
170.10
167.64
190.50
191.30
189.50
185.40
181.00
182.50
181.30
181.60
182.70
183.60
184.60
187.70
188.80
206.60
195.10
193.70
191.50
191.00
181.00
180.60
181.07
181.60
190.80
186.87
189.19
189.30
188.86
187.42
187.13
199.40
179,00
180.09
182.52
186.99
187.87
181.14
176.89
176.35
174.48
173.52
183.65
173.23
183.87
172.65
56
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
41
WellDate
number
(0-9-1 )36cdd-1
Continued
(0-9-2)1 bcb-1
(D-9-2)2add-1
(D-9-2)2dad-1
(D-9-2)2dad-2
Water
03-09-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980 1
level
78.93
69.05
79.96
80.52
03-03-1981 172,83
03-01-1982 179,49
03-02-1983 165.95
03-12-1984 157.25
03-04-1985 156.19
03-11-1986 166,42
03-02-1987 153.49
03-01-1988 177.55
11-01-1988 175.71
12-22-1988 183.09
01-17-1989 185.19
02-23-1989 178,37
03-10-1969 165.19
05-18-1989 189.66
03-07-1990 187.86
03-06-1991 187.52
03-12-1992 185.57
10-10-1966
04-04-1967
03-05-1991
09-30-1964
06-17-1989
04-10-1967
03-05-1991
11-29-1956 -
09-30-1964
03-20-1967 -
03-20-1968
03-17-1969
03-24-1970
03-18-1971
03-10-1972
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
03-08-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-1982
03-03-1983
03-12-1964
-6
-9.5
-7.2
12.0
-1.6
14.6
-.6
16
-6.0
15.2
15.1
18,4
•19,5
19,1
•20,5
17,4
21,4
-21.2
•18.7
•16.2
14.2
•14.8
-3.5
-14.3
-14.4
•19.2
24.3
Well
number
(D-9-2)2dad-2
Continued
(D-9-2)3aba-4
(D-9-2)4cdc-1
(D-9-2)5acc-1
(0-9-2)5bcc-2
(D-9-2)5bcd-1
(D-9-2)5cbb-3
(D-9-2)5ccd-2
Date
03-05-1985
03-10-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
03-01-1989
04-18-1989
05-15-1969
06-19-1969
07-19-1989
09-19-1989
11-13-1989
12-18-1969
01-25-1990
03-06-1990
04-09-1990
05-09-1990
06-04-1990
07-02-1990
08-02-1990
09-04-1990
10-17-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-04-1991
03-12-1992
11-03-1964
02-20-1991
03-04-1991
02-10-1967
02-22-1991
03-06-1991
01-10-1967
08-09-1989
03-06-1991
09-30-1964
08-09-1989
02-25-1967
08-09-1989
09-30-1964
08-28-1989
03-06-1991
06-21-1990
07-02-1990
Water
level
-28.6
-24.6
-22.9
-15.6
-14.4
-11.7
-9.8
-7.2
-3.0
-6.0
-9.2
-9,9
-10.1
-10.7
-10.6
-7.9
-6.6
-3.9
-2.9
-3.2
-6.6
-7.5
-8.5
-8,8
-9.6
-10.2
-11,30
-15,5
-15,4
•11.70
12.90
13,00
-36.00
-26.4
-32.3
-19.6
-14.2
-18
-8.1
-19.8
-17.5
-21.1
3
3.44
Well
number
(D-9-2)5ddd-1
(D-9-2)6add-4
(D-9-2)6add-5
(D-9-2)6ddb-1
(D-9-2)7bdd-1
(D-9-2)7cda-2
(D-9-2)7dcc-1
(D-9-2)9bac-1
Date
06-21-1990
07-02-1990
02-06-1991
03-06-1991
04-01-1964
07-19-1989
04-10-1963
07-19-1989
09-30-1964
03-07-1991
10-05-1964
03-06-1991
10-05-1964
01-30-1991
03-06-1091
10-05-1964
02-22-1991
03-06-1991
09-18-1961
10-12-1961
11-14-1961
12-27-1961
01-19-1962
03-06-1962
04-04-1962
05-15-1962
06-11-1962
07-02-1962
09-11-1962
10-22-1962
11-19-1962
12-28-1962
01-30-1963
02-27-1963
03-26-1963
05-03-1963
06-17-1963
09-20-1963
10-17-1963
11-26-1963
12-20-1963
01-15-1964
03-19-1964
06-25-1964
10^)1-1964
Water
leve)
5
5.27
6.35
5.96
-22.9
-23.3
-15.0
-31.2
-16.8
-18.0
15.50
20.16
7.50
8.66
8.02
12.30
8.20
7.94
43.00
40.40
39.70
39.60
39.70
39.30
39.10
37.50
35.70
35.20
41.00
36.80
36.50
36.10
35.20
37.50
38.70
40.00
40.20
40.10
38.20
37.50
36.60
35.80
35.60
36.80
38.20
57
T^ble 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Wen Date
number
(0-9-2)9bac-1 06-28-1965
Continued 10-10-1966
03-25-1967
03-07-1968
03-13-1969
03-05-1970
02-25-1971
03-10-1972
03-08-1973
03-11-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
03-08-1977
08-11-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-01-1982
09-20-1982
03-02-1983
09-21-1983
03-12-1984
09-10-1984
03-05-1985
09-10-1985
03-10-1986
09-08-1986
03^02^1987
09-11-1987
03-01-1988
09-14-1988
03-03-1989
09-18-1989
03-06-1990
03-06-1991
09-12-1991
03-12-1992
(0-9-2)1 Odac-1 08-31-1966
09-20-1989
03-04-1991
(0-9-2)11aaa-1 08-31-1935
10-08-1935
11-19-1935
12-14^1935
01-23^1936
03-05-19.'H6
05-02-1936
06-20-1936
08-08-1936
10-03-1936
11-30-1.936
Water
level
34.90
36.81
38.39
35.55
34.61
33.98
33.70
34.40
35.65
32.30
31.23
32.55
33.97
63.20
35.67
35.14
33.96
32.55
30.95
27.67
27.67
26.12
27.62
28.33
28.98
28.77
30.20
29.63
35.05
32.30
34.61
33.96
36.29
37,47
36.85
37.90
-23.0
-27.5
-20.9
-25.4
-25.6
-25.5
-25.4
-25.6
-25.3
-25.2
-26.7
-28.2
-29.2
-29.4
Well Date
number
(0-9-2)11aaa-1 02-03-1937
ConUnued 03-03-1937
04-13-1937
06-10-1937
08-01-1937
09-23-1937
11-02-1937
12-12-1937
02-14-1938
04-06-1938
05-05-1938
06-02-1938
08-26-1938
10-29-1938
12-23-1938
03-17-1939
04-14-1939
06-19-1939
08-25-1939
10-13-1939
01-04-1940
04-12-1940
05-01-1940
06-14-1940
01-21-1941
11-14-1941
12-29-1941
01-29-1942
03-26-1942
06-27-1942
03-29-1943
12-29-1943
03-24-1944
12-27-1944
03-29-1945
12-17-1945
03-07-1946
12-17-1946
04-07-1947
12-19-1947
03-30-1948
03-17-1949
12-16-1949
03-22-1950
12-19-1950
04-04-1951
07-19-1951
12-26-1951
04-09-1952
12-16-1952
04-21-19.'W
12-08-1953
Water
level
-29.0
•28.5
•28.4
-27.9
-29.0
-29.1
-29.6
-29.8
-29.5
•29.2
•29.1
•29.1
•30.7
•31.8
•31.8
•32.9
-31.2
-30,8
-30.0
-30.0
-30.0
-25.2
-25.3
-28.2
-29.5
-30.0
-31.3
-31.4
-31.2
-29.8
-39.0
-38.2
-37.0
-41.4
-40.7
-43.0
-41.5
-42,3
-40.9
-39.2
-41.4
-43.7
-43.3
-42.8
-44.5
-42.7
-41.9
-41.9
-39.8
-55.3
-53.5
-50.4
Well Date
number
(0-9-2)11aaa-1 03-24-1954
Continued 12-29-1954
04-22-1955
12-22^1955
03^30^1956
12-19^1956
04-01-1957
12-06-1957
03^1B^1958
12^04^1958
03-18-1959
12-24-1959
03-23-1960
12-09-1960
01-05-1962
03-06-1962
12-06-1962
03-12-1963
08-27-1963
12-16-1963
04-09-1964
05-28-1964
07-09^1964
08-03-1964
08-31-1964
10-01-1964
11-03^1964
12^04-ig64
01 •05-1965
02-02-1965
03-01-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-02-1965
10-21-1965
12-29-1865
03-25-1866
08-25-1866
12-19-1966
03-25-1967
03-20^1868
10-02-1868
03-17-1969
09-03-1969
03-24-1970
09-09-1970
03-18-1971
10-06-1971
03-10-1972
09-26-1972
03-08-1973
Water \
level \
-48.0 r
-43.0
-40.2 • \
-39.8 : I
-39.4 K
-37.6 [
-36.0
•41.4 [
•41.7 '•
•40.3
-46.1 [
-41.0 f
-39.8 f
-36.0 \
-34.2 [
-31.2 \
-31.3 [
-30.9 • f
-27.9 F
-28.2 [
-27.1 ; \
-26.8 JKjk
-26.2 W f
-25.9
-25.8 i
•26.2 \
-26.9 i
-27.0 ;
-27.5 \
-27.5 • i
-28.0 [
-28.1 \
-28.2 •
-28.1
-28.6
-31.8 \
-33.2
•33.0 I
•33.1 r
•32.5 i
-31.4 i
•35.0 i
-36.9
-40.8
-42.1
-42.3
•40.5
•40.9
•42.6 Jt ^1
•40.4 ^
•40.5
58
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
well
number
(0-9-2)11aaa-1
Continued
m w
(0-9-2)11aca-3
(0-9-2)17ada-1
[^ m
w,
Date
09-06-1973
03-11-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
08-16-1976
03-11-1977
08-10-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
08-23-1979
03-05-1980
09-04-1980
03-03-1981
09-03-1981
03-01-1982
09-20-1962
03-03-1983
03-12-1984
09-10-1984
03-05-1985
09-10-1985
03-10-1986
09-08-1986
03-02-1987
09-11-1987
03-01-1988
09-14-1988
03-10-1989
07-19-1989
09-19-1989
03-06-1990
03-04-1991
09-12-1991
03-12-1992
10-06-1964
07-19-1989
03-04-1991
11-03-1964
12-04-1964
01-06-1965
02-01-1965
03-03-1965
04-05-1965
05-03-1965
06-07-1965
07-01-1965
10-21-1965
12-29-1965
03-23-1966
08-23-1966
Water Well Date
level num
-44.5 (D-9-S
ber
>)17ada-1 12-20-1966
-50.0 Continued 03-27-1967
-50,7
-49.0
-45.5
-42.8
-37.0
-35.2
-36.7
-32.6
-36.1
-39.2
-41.0
-39.0
-39.0
-48,6
-53.8
-67.8
-74.3
-72.1
-67.3
-58.7
-59,7
-56.6
-50.9
-44.9
-39,2
-37.6
-34
-34.9
-31.6
-28.8
-26.6
-27.7
-19.3
-22.5
-22.3
112.79
113.25
113.80
114.50
114.93
115.31
115.20
112.90
113.66
108.05
109.92
111.95
115.30
03-20-1968
03-18-1969
03-19-1870
03-16-1971
03-06-1972
03-08-1973
03-12-1974
03-07-1975
03-05-1976
03-08-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-12-1984
03-05-1985
03-10-1986
03-02-1987
03-01-1988
11-02-1988
12-22-1988
01-17-1989
02-23-1969
03-03-1989
04-19-1989
05-15-1969
06-20-1989
07-17-1989
08-16-1989
10-25-1989
11-14-1989
12-18-1989
01-25-1990
02-14-1990
03-07-1990
04-06-1990
05-08-1990
06-04-1990
07-03-1990
08-02-1990
09-04-1990
10-17-1990
11-19-1990
12-17-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
03-12-1992
Water Well Date
level number
112.45 (D-9-2)ieaca-1 10-07-1964
113.39
110.80
109.70
02-22-1991
03-06-1991
110.07 (0-9-2)20ccc-1 05-09-1962
110.62
115.57
111.68
109,82
110.75
111.23
112.08
114.88
112.78
112.72
110.56
110.59
106.07
105.90
106.13
106.39
108.83
10-17-1962
11-15-1962
12-17-1962
01 •29-1963
02-26-1963
03-22-1963
12-24-1963
03-01-1964
03-24-1964
05-21-1964
07-24-1964
10-09-1964
03-23-1965
06-28-1965
02-15-1991
03-05-1991
113.43 (D-9-2)22cad-1 04-20-1989
112.04
111.96
112.16
112.41
112.63
113.77
116.57
116.89
117.19
116.87
113.92
113.70
113.74
114.01
114.28
114.59
115.35
117.01
07-10-1989
09-18-1,989
10-25-1989
11-13-1989
01-25-1990
02-14-1990
03-06-1990
04-06-1990
06-04-1990
09-05-1990
10-17-1990
11-19-1990
12-18-1990
01-23-1991
03-06-1991
09-12-1991
03-12-1992
117.73 (0-g-2)24bda-1 03-02-1988
119.02
118.70
119.17
117.43
116.50
116.58
117.20
117.42
118.17
04-20-1989
05-15-1989
06-19-1989
08-18-1989
10-25-1988
01-25-1990
03-07-1990
05-09-1990
10-22-1990
01-23-1991
03-04-1991
Water
level
17.20
17.42
17.15
23.0
21.5
21.8
20.2
21.9
21.5
21.4
20.5
22.00
21.7
21.1
21.6
21.3
21.2
21.1
20.49
20.40
136.05
134.11
137.20
138.24
138.50
139.45
139.72
139.87
139.97
133.17
137.52
138.74
139.36
139.74
139.63
140.26
136.08
138.96
283.55
284.16
284.26
284.50
284.76
284.64
285.05
285.35
285.68
286.44
286.73
286.90
59
Table 3.—Water levels in selected wells—Continued
Well
number
(D-9-2)25bbc-1
(D-9-2)29acd-1
(D-9-2)30cbb-2
(D-9-3)5cdc-1
Date
05-01-1989
03-06-1991
06-18-1964
07-09-1964
08-03-1964
08-31-1964
10-01-1964
11-03-1964
12-04-1964
.01-06^1965
02-01-1965
03-02^1965
04^05-1865
05-03-1965
06-08-1865
08-09-1989
03-25-1967
03-20-1968
03-18-1969
03-19-1970
03-16-1971
03-06-1972
03-09-1973
03-12-1974
03-10-1975
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
03-09-1978
03-15-1979
03-05-1980
03-03-1981
03-01-1982
03-02-1983
03-12-1984
03-04-1985
08-03-1989
10-01-1964
12-04-1964
03-01-1965
06-08-1965
12-29-1965
03-23-1966
12-19-1966
Water
level
72.51
80.03
-12.5
-11.7
-11.6
•11.3
-11.2
-11.4
-11.8
-11.9
-12.7
-12.5
-12.6
-12.9
-12.8
-12.6
13.25
9.00
6.46
6.04
5.05
5.02
9.44
2.52
5.90
3.93
8.02
14.10
8,04
8.11
4.08
8.00
Flowing
Flowing
Flowing
7.74
40.98
41.17
41.23
41.29
40.12
39.56
40.19
Well
number
(D-9-3)5cdc-1
Continued
(D-9-3)6abb-1
(D-9-3)6cbc-1
(D^9-3)7aab^1
(O-IO-l)lcbb-l
(D-10-1)17cca-1
Date
02-25-1981
03-04-1881
03-11-1964
02-08-1991
03-04-1991
10-13-1965
03-05-1981
04-01-1973
02-20-1991
03-04-1991
02-13-1962
03-02-1962
04-03-1962
05-14-1962
06-04-1962
07-03-1962
08-06-1962
09-10-1962
10-17-1962
11-14-1962
12-17^1962
0V29^1963
02-25^1963
03-22-1963
01-07-1964
03-24-1964
05-15-1964
07-27-1964
10-09-1964
03-23-1965
06-28-1965
02-21-1991
03-07-1991
03-19-1964
04-15-1964
06-01-1964
07-09-1964
08-03-1964
08-31-1964
10-01-1964
11-03-1964
Water
level
40.68
40.74
8.10
10.39
9.60
80.50
86.23
80.00
91.49
91.50
273.6
273.0
275.4
270,6
276.7
253.4
2637
269,4
265.7
264.6
265.2
266.2
268.8
269.2
274.6
275.2
275.5
266.2
273.7
269.4
254.0
269.98
270.14
32.40
32.52
32.62
32.53
32.52
32.35
32.40
32.46
Well
number
(D-10-1)17cca-1
Continued
Date
12-02-1964
01-06-1965
02-02-1965
03-02-1965
04-07-1965
05-04-1965
06-09-1965
07-01-1965
11-02-1965
12-30-1965
03-25-1966
06-22-1966
12-19-1966
03-08-1967
03-21-1968
03-20^1969
03^20^1970
03-15-1971
03-03-1972
03-09-1973
03-12-1874
03-10-1875
03-08-1976
03-09-1977
02-14-1991
03-05-1991
Water
level
32.53
32.64
32.63
32.59
32.73
32.68
32.56
32.35
32.10
32.07
32.26
31.91
32.08
32.23
31.07
31.46
31.18
31.46
.31.16
31.72
30.80
31.40
31.00
32.18
32.16
31.22
'Actual location is differenl from
historic records. See footnotes, table 1.
•
60
L
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells
^ell number: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data sites.
Discharge: Natural flow except where noted P, pumped; flow measured except where noted e, estimated.
Date Discharge
Well number (gallons per minute)
(C-9-1 )26bda-3 11-15-39 1.0
08-18-89 .8
09-15-89 .8
10-23-89 1.0
12-20-89 1.0
(D-7-2)32dad-1 03-24-78 40
1 (D-7-2)33dcc-1 04-03-67 33
08-10-89 30
(D-7-2)35ccd-1 04-13-37 1.8
06-11-37 2.0
08-01-37 1.7
09-23-37 1.6
11-02-37 1.4
12-23-37 1.9
02-14-38 2.1
04-06-38 2.4
05-05-38 2.5
06-02-38 2.5
06-13-38 2.3
08-25-38 1.6
02-28-40 2.4
04-13-40 2.0
05-01-40 2.6
(D-7-2)35ccd-2 07-18-61 90
07-18-61 150 P
09-13-89 0
(D-7-2)36bbb-1 10-30-43 30
03-17-65 60
(D-7-2)36ccb-1 10-01-61 300
07-07-89 112
(D-7-2)36dcc-2 05-02-40 1,7
06-01-64 .5
07-09-64 .5
09-01-64 2,0
03-24-66 12
(D-7-2)36dcc-2 08-24-89 .1
09-15-89 .1
10-23-89 .1
11-14-89 .1
12-00-89 .1
01-23-90 .1
^ (D-7-3)29dcc-1 03-11-53 70
08-04-64 35
61
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
(D-7-3)31cac-2
(D-7-3)33baa-6
(D-7-3)33ccc-5
(D-8-1)13aaa-1
(D-8-1)l3daa-3
(D-B-1)14dad-1
(D-8-1)23bdd-1
(D-8-1)25aad-1
10-08-64
11-02-64
09-13-89
10-07-35
03-02-36
05-02-36
06-20-36
08-08-36
10-03-36
12-01-36
02-03-37
06-11-37
08-01-37
09-23-37
06-02-38
12-23-38
02-21-39
03-24-39
04-13-39
04-13-40
05-02-40
07-09-64
07-00-89
11-13-89
12-00-89
04-01-05
07-00-89
08-24-89
10-26-89
11-14-89
12-00-89
01-23-90
05-02-36
04-12-40
05-01-40
07-06-64
05-14-66
05-14-66
01-31-67
03-00-18
08-24-89
09-15-89
11-14-89
12-20-89
01-23-90
02-07-53
07-21-64
08-01-89
38
35
24
12
11
14
19
19
15
14
12
19
20
16
19
15
12
9.6
10
11
13
7.5
3.5
4.4
4.0
65
12
11
11
10
12
12
30
21
25
48
30
80 I
25
3.0
1.1
.9
.9
1.0
.9
6.5
2.0
.6 i
62
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
(D-8-2)1baa-1
1 (D-8-2)2acc-1
(D-8-2)2caa-1
(D-8-2)2cda-1
(D-8-2)2daa-1
(D-8-2)3aad-1
(D-8-2)3ccd-1
{D-8-2)4abb-1
(D-8-2)4abb-2
(D-8-2)4abc-1
^ (D-8-2)4bab-1
(D-8-2)4cba-2
^ (D-8-2)4cbb-1
(D-8-2)4dad-1
(D-8-2)7cab-1
(D-8-2)cbd-1
(D-8-2)9aad-1
(D-8-2)10adb-1
05-12-63
08-06-64
06-30-61
08-06-64
11-12-51
08-06-64
09-21-89
08-06-64
09-21-89
04-12-48
08-06-64
08-24-89
09-15-89
10-23-89
01-23-90
03-17-65
03-17-65
09-15-89
12-07-61
08-20-64
09-12-89
08-20-64
09-12-89
05-23-50
07-09-64
09-12-89
03-25-63
08-20-64
09-12-89
04-01-36
08-24-89
09-15-89
10-23-89
11-14-89
12-19-89
01-23-90
07-06-64
09-15-89
03-00-63
08-00-64
09-28-89
05-07-47
08-20-64
04-15-62
08-20-64
08-24-64
09-28-89
05-31-66
06-06-66
09-28-89
50
60
50
45
40
30 P
.8
15 P
3.0
80
72
.7
.9
.9
1.4
30
30
6
40
35
3.0
.5
.2
35
30
.8
80
75
.5
30
4.8
5
5.4
5.8
6.0
5.64
36
.2
60
70
5.4
35
30
35
30
35
7.2
80
60
7.5
63
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
(D-8-2)10bdd-1
(D-8-2)12ddc-1
(D-8-2)13abc-1
(D-8-2)13bdd-1
(D-8-2)14dcc-1
(D-B-2)16caa-1
(D-8-2)17add-5
(D-8-2)17add-6
(D-8-2)17ccc-2
(D-8-2)17dab-2
(D-8-2)17ddd-1
(0-8-2)21 bbb-2
(D-8-2)21 ddd-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-1
(D-8-2)22cdc-2
(D-8-2)23dbd-3
(D-8-2)24bdc-2
(D-8-2)28cbd-3
(D-8-2)28daa-1
(D-8-2)29bcb-1
(D-8-2)29bcd-2
(D-8-2)29cab-1
(D-8-2)30bad-1
(D-8-2)31bcd-i
12-00-55
09-28-89
09-08-61
08-30-61
08-25-64
09-28-89
12-20-62
08-25-64
08-05-39
09-02-64
09-15-89
11-14-89
12-00-89
01-23-90
11-04-62
06-07-50
10-21-59
09-03-64
07-02-59
07-13-44
06-26-56
10-15-36
09-15-64
05-22-35
07-00-89
05-17-57
07-00-89
04-12-40
05-01-40
09-15-64
03-25-63
09-17-64
11-04-44
09-25-64
07-31-89
06-20-39
09-25-64
12-22-66
03-27-67
07-10-52
09-25-64
07-28-47
09-25-64
12-04-44
09-28-64
08-04-64
11-14-89
40
4.5
225
250
88
2.5
175
135
30
10
7.1
7.3
6.9
7.6
12 P
4 P
10
60
5 P
6.0 P
6.0 P
45
30
60 P
11
100
1.0
1.0
.1.0
.5
45
30
1.0
1.3
.2
5.0
1.0 P
25
50
35
10
35
63
3.0
1.5
38
22
64
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
4
(D-8-2)31 cbb-1
(D-8-2)31cda-1
(D-8-2)31cdb-1
(0-8-2)31cdb-1
(0-8-2)31 cdb-2
(D-8-2)34acd-1
(0-8-3)4caa-2
(D-8-3)4caa-3
(0-8-3)4cad-1
(0-8-3)5bca-1
(D-8-3)6ddd-1
(0-8-3)6ddd-2
(0-8-3)7aad-1
(D-8-3)7abc-1
(0-8-3)7aca-2
(D-9-1)1bac-1
(D-9-1)13bdb-2
(D-9-1)25aac-1
(D-9-1)25aad-1
(D-9-1)25aad-2
(0-9-1 )25aca-1
(0-9-1 )25ada-1
08-28-89
07-21-89
08-04-64
10-21-65
12-29-65
03-25-66
08-24-66
03-24-67
08-31-67
08-09-89
09-27-68
07-21-89
06-20-46
09-28-64
07-31-89
1945
06-08-45
08-06-64
03-31-65
06-18-35
03-06-36
05-27-64
11-04-64
09-14-89
07-07-89
10-01-64
07-07-89
09-02-48
03-31-65
06-20-72
07-14-48
03-31-65
11-10-76
11-04-64
08-04-89
06-15-34
10-14-64
06-12-90
05-27-64
08-03-89
05-27-64
08-03-89
1938
08-30-89
07-05-34
02-25-38
06-02-38
07-09-64
07-20-89
46
72
6.0
5.5
8.0
5.8
5.4
5.8
4.6
2.6
700
264
2.5
1.3
.7
30
120
30
140
300
325
15
40
1.0
47
25
105
140
87
450
120
125
130
30
18
39
3.0
14
50
69
10
13
14
1.1
70
36
30
10
12
65
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
(D-9-1)25ada-2
(D-9-1)25ada-3
(D-9-1)25ada-4
(D-9-1)25ada-5
(0-9-2)1 bcb-1
(D-9-2)2add-1
(D-9-2)2dad-2
(D-9-2)5acc-1
(D-9-2)5bcc-1
(D-9-2)5bcc-2
(D-9-2)5bcd-1
(0-9-2)5bcd-2
(D-9-2)5bdd-2
(0-9-2)5bdd-4
(D-9-2)5cbb-3
(D-9-2)5ccc-1
(D-9-2)5ddb-1
(D-9-2)5ddc-P
(D-9-2)6add-4
07-09-64
07-20-89
07-09-64
10-21-65
12-30-65
03-28-66
08-24-66
03-28-67
07-20-89
07-09-64
07-20-89
07-09-64
07-20-89
10-10-66
10-10-66
07-00-89
12-00-36
09-30-64
08-17-89
11-29-56
09-00-89
11-13-89
12-18-89
01-25-90
08-09-89
04-26-53
11-23-56
09-30-64
08-09-89
02-25-67
04-07-70
08-09-89
09-23-64
09^11-64
03-17-67
01-02-69
05-11-61
09-30-64
08-28-89
08-04-64
08-17-89
05-11-74
08-01-34
10-08-35
07-09-64
05-20-61
09-11-64
07-00-89
30
12
15
23
19
15
12
14
14
30
22
30
14
300
900
44
45
30
.5
35
16
21
16
17
10
38
30
30
8.0
70
125
251
6.0
220
92
450
25
45
23
30
10
15
450
25
15
130
100
100
:.
4
66
Table 4.—Discharge of selected wells—Continued
Well number
Date Discharge
(gallons per minute)
(D-9-2)6add-5
(D-9-2)6ddb-1
(0-9-2)1 Odac-1
(0-9-2)11aca-3
(D-9-2)29acd-1
(D-9-2)30bcb-2
(D-9-2)30cbb-2
04-10-63
10-05-70
08-31-66
12-13-58
03-21-50
06-18-64
07-09-64
08-31-64
08-09-89
07-09-64
08-03-89
06-29-57
'' Actual location is different from historic records.
450
150
41
250
7
75
75
70
100
30
15
40 P
See footnotes, table 1.
m
67
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
[mg/L, milligrams per liter;
Well numtjer: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data sites.
Date sampled: Except R, date received by laboratory (Cordova, 1969, table 5).
Specific conductance: |xS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius, measured in the
Temperature: ° C, degrees Celsius.
Well number
(C-8-1)20cdb-2
(0-8-1 )20cdb-3
(C-8-1)20cdb-4
(C-8-1)29dda-1
(C-8-1)35dcb-1
(C-9-1 )3ddb-1
(C-9-1 )4ccc-1
Date
sampled
07-13-81
07-07-89
06-13-90
08-19-91
07-30-80
07-25-83
07.12-89
07-12-89
07-25-83
08-23-89
07-11-90
07-06-60
06-15-64
04-28-66
08-08-90
05-04-65
04-28-66
07-13-81
07-12-89
08-23-89
07-11-90
08-21-75
08-16-76
07-12-77
08-24-78
07-17-79
08-01-79
07-31-80
09-03-80
07-15-81
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
1,300
1,340
1,310
1,260
1,290
1.260
1,350
1,340
2.870
3,550
3,480
1,700
1,630
1,590
1,840
1,340
1,260
1,300
1,790
1,400
1.300
750
790
800
900
1,000
1,100
1,210
1.200
1,220
pH.
field
(standard
units)
—
7.7
6.3
7.6
—
—
7.7
7.7
—
7.9
7.7
—
—
—
—
7.9
7.6
—
7.6
7.6
7.8
6.8
7.4
6.6
6.8
7.7
—
7.6
7.9
Temperature
(°C)
26.5
26.0
24.0
25.5
24.0
25.5
25.0
25.0
18.0
22.5
18.5
—
20.5
14.0
19.5
14.5
14.5
15.5
14.5
14.5
17.5
14.5
14.0
14.0
14.0
16.0
16.0
15.5
15.0
14.5
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
—
340
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
370
410
490
450
270
230
—
—
—
160
170
180
210
250
—
270
280
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
76
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
88
88
130
120
60
56
—
—
—
40
46
44
54
_^
62
—
66
70
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
37
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
36
45
43,
36
29
22
—
—
—
.^
15
14
16
19
.^_
23
—
25
26
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
—
130
—
—
—
—
• —
—
—
—
170
170
170
160
180
170
—
—
—
__
92
100
98
100
^_
110
—
130
120
68
water from selected wells
—, no data; <, less than]
field.
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOa)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NOa-i-NOa
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
100 210 .60 20
#
22
22
27
20
15
176
68
130
120
65
95
98
390
400
400
370
280
240
<.10
—
—
—
71
61
—
863
913
1,010
1,020
810
712
.80
8,1
8,1
8.0
9.2
148
144
140
140
59
62
59
64
110
130
140
160
.30
.30
.30
.30
58
58
56
56
477
512
505
558
1.30
1.60
—
2.60
11 130 87 210 .30 60 658 3.80
#
11
8.6
140 80
84
240
240
.30
.20
60
62
717
703
4.70
6.00
69
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
(C-9-1 )4ccc-1
(C-9-1 )4ddc-1
(C-9-1 )5ddc-1
^C-9-1)20cdd-1
(C-9-1 )20ddd-1
(C-9-1 )26bda-3
(C-9-1 )28ccb-1
Date
sampled
07-07-82
08-16-85
06-30-86
07-02-87
06-15-88
08-07-90
05-28-64
06-09-64
06-17-65
04-28-66
07-16-79
07-31-80
08-07-90
08-29-90
08-19-64
04-27-66
06-22-81
07-28-86
07-05-89
06-13-90
07-23-90
06-23-65
05-09-66
07-10-73
07-16-79
07-31-80
08-07-90
01-25-61
04-06-61
05-26-64
07-07-89
04-05-63
09-11-63
06-09-64
06-17-65
Specific
conductance
(jiS/cm)
1,230
1,460
1,400
—
1,390
1,050
980
980
1,050
1,070
1,750
1.800
1.320
790
720
730
810
800
1,090
1,080
1,060
720
740
690
700
720
710
2,130
2,030
2,200
2,320
800
830
940
980
pH.
field
(standard
units)
—
8.0
—
7.7
7.5
7.7
8.5
8.4
8.3
7.6
—
7.6
7.7
8.2
7.5
—
—
7.9
6.9
7.8
—
8.0
7.9
—
7.8
7.8
8.1
7.9
7.4
—
—
—
—
Temperature
(°C)
14.0
13.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
14.0
16.5
16,5
16.5
18.5
17.0
16.5
20.0
15.0
16.0
14.0
16.5
16.0
18.0
18.5
17.0
17.0
16.5
17.0
19.0
17.0
17.5
--
—
11.0
12.5
—
—
18.5
18.5
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
—
380
—
350
—
240
200
210
230
220
__
—
310
180
130
130
—
—
220
—
„_
144
150
130
—
130
370
330
450
400
191
223
219
235
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
—
93
—
86
—
61
55
54
59
55
,
'—
80
45
34
34
—
—
56
—
32
37
34
—
34
81
56
100
81
48
62
35
63
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
36
—
34
—
22
16
18
21
21
^^
—
26
16
11
11
—
—
19 •
—
.
15
14
.12
—
^_
11
41
45
46
48
17
17
20
19
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
150
—
290
—
99
120
120
130
130
,
—
120
81
—
110
—
—
110
—
_
91
90
85
—
^_
88
280
280
280
270
94
101
104
107
!
'i
^ m
70
water from selected wells—Continued
I 0
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
^_
9.9
8.5
9.1
15
14
14
17
15
9.7
—
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
^_^
—
—
—
—
—
~
—
—
—
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
^^
110
210
63
78
74
100
95
59
61
73
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
_.
320
300
170
190
180
200
200
290
110
100
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
1
.30
.30
.10
—
—
—
.20
.20
—
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOs)
._
60
58
60
—
—
—
77
67
58
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
^^
895
1,110
581
549
551
609
598
759
484
Nitrogen
NOa-i-NOg,
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
__
9.80
9.20
3.90
—
—
—
••^
2.10
1.10
8.2 84 100 434
69 150 .30 59
I
10
10
8.9
8.4
34
34
37
11
11
13
13
152
84
73
53
53
110
99
150
100
80
102
98
115
98
94
86
87
460
470
490
530
112
146
151
165
.20
.40
64
67
66
408
434
459
1,150
1,110
1,270
1.60
71
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
(C-9-1)28ccb-1
(C-9-1 )29acc-1
(C-9-1 )29bcc-1
(C-9-1)34ccc-1
VC-9-1)34acd-1
(C-9-1 )34ddc-1
(C-10-1)3ddb-1
(C-10-1)4bbb-1
Date
sampled
04-27-66
07-31-80
07-15-81
07-07-82
07-17-84
07-03-85
06-12-86
08-07-90
05-23-63
05-28-64
06-18-65
04-27-66
07-31-80
06-22-81
06-19-65
05-06-66
07-02-85
08^21-75
07-17-79
08-01-79
09-03-80
07-02-86
10-09-62
04-27-66
08-17-72
04-27-66
10-12-71
06-04-91
10-09-62
08-05-70
08-11-72
09-09-74
11-01-62
04-03-63
09-11-63
Specific
conductance
(jiS/cm)
960
1,120
1,170
1,120
1,140
2,310
1,120
810
760
770
760
710
960
950
930
860
740
1,400
1,550
1,600
1,700
1,510
1,120
1,050
1,200
930
1,050
1,040
2,140
2.760
4,010
1.560
690
670
800
pH.
field
(standard
units)
—
7.7
—
7.5
8.0
7.6
7.9
8.5
8.4
8.5
7.7
—
—
8.1
7.5
—
6.6
—
7.6
7.1
—
8.2
7.8
7.7
7.6
7.5
7.5
—
—
—
—
—
8.3
8.1
Temperature
(°C)
14.5
19.5
18.0
18.5
18.5
17.5
18.5
19.0
—
—
15.0
15.0
17.0
16.5
17.0
17.0
15.5
17.5
17.0
19.0
17.5
17.5
—
11.5
12.0
13.0
12.5
15.0
—
13.0
14.0
19.5
—
—
—
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
243
—
300
—
280
310
—
180
120
150
170
150
—
—
290
350
—
520
—
—
590
—
350
410
390
330
330
320
400
560
910
530
107
110
150
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
64
—
77
—
71
81
—
50
29
37
38
36
—
—
73
89
—
110
—
' —
130
—
60
82
77
66
63
61
61
91
150
120
30
26
36
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
20
—
25
—
24
26
—
14
11
13
18
14
—
—
26
32
—
59
—
—
65
—
48
49
48
40
42
41
60
81
130
57
10
10
14
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
107
—
100
—
100
110
—
81
110
110
100
100
—
—
71
71
—
93
—
—
100
—
78
80
77
69
69
67
320
—
560
100
98
98
110
72
water from selected wells—Continued
4
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
15
12
14
12
11
6.3
7.0
7.0
8.6
9.0
9.0
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
OaCOg)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
I
::
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
118
110
110
110
64
78
96
110
82
150
170
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
166
210
210
220
100
100
100
110
110
170
170
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
—
.20
.30
.30
.40
—
—
—
=
_^
'Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOj)
—
70
65
68
74
—
—
—
^-~
....
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
—
895
694
728
474
426
446
462
439
533
603
Nitrogen
NOa-i-NOg.
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
—
4.30
5.20
5.80
1.60
—
—
.
—
—
-
14 199 100 300 .20 65 864 .75
14 190 120 360 .30 65 983 3.20
11
12
11
12
9.2
8.4
3.5
30
6.3
17
9.3
9.3
10
—
—
143
144
—
—
351
405
195
—
—
—
84
99
96
33
35
25
200
310
620
100
42
44
70
240
240
250
230
220
220
400
550
830
320
82
83
130
.50
.20
—
—
60
—
65
—
35
51
63
—
583
654
705
531
525
572
1,240
1,680
2,590
898
371
448
.73
73
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Date
Well number sampled
(C-10-1)4bbb-1 06-16-65
04-27-66
07-10-73
08-03-73
09-05-74
08-30-76
08-25-78
08-01-80
08-07-90
(C-10-1)4cbb-1 04-05-62
08-06-62
09-14-62
06-07-63
09-11-63
06-09-64
10-02-64
06-16-65
04-27-66
09-05-69
08-05-70
10-07-71
08-11-72
08-03-73
09-06-74
08-16-76
07-12-77
07-17-79
08-01-79
08-01-80
09-03-80
07-13-81
07-07-82
07-18-84
07-03-85
06-30-86
Specific
conductance
(HS/cm)
1,330
1,340
1,320
1,230
1,350
1,160
1,100
1,200
2,460
1,770
1,440
1,390
1.310
1,280
1.300
1,350
1,320
1,330
1.230
1,290
1,260
1,110
1,100
1,150
1,050
1,000
1.100
1,150
1,510
1.500
1.750
1,900
1,740
1,830
2,490
pH.
field
(standard
units)
8.1
7.4
7.7
—
—
—
—
—
7.5
8.5
8.2
7.5
8.3
7.8
8.2
8.3
7.5
7.7
7.9
7.6
—
7.7
—
7.2
6.5
—
7.9
—
7.6
7.8
—
7.4
—
7.6
Temperature
(°C)
18.5
15.5
19.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
19.5
18.0
—
—
—
—
—
19.0
_
19.0
19.5
17.0
18.0
16.5
18.5
19.0
19.0
19.0
20.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
—
19.0
19.5
17.5
18.5
19.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
430
420
380
—
—
—
—
—
440
370
400
420
390
380
447
670
410
400
420
370
—
330
—
320
270
—
330
—
480
530
—
610
—
900
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
100
100
92
—
—
_
—
• —
—
110
94
120
130
100
100
123
190
100
93
100
89
—
62
—
82
68
—
83
—
120
130
—
130
—
220
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
42
41
37
—
—
.^
—
—
—
39
34
25
22
33
31
34
49
39
40
39
35
—
30
—
27
25
—
31
—
43
49
—
69
—
84
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
100
110
110
—
—
^
—
—
—
180
140
130
120
110
120
118
110
110
—
150
100
—
97
—
97
92
—
95
—
110
120
—
110
—
150
r
74
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NO2+NO3
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
12
14
11 135
200
200
140
240
240
230
768
778
701
15 300 310 1,020
I
4
4
14
13
13
11
13
13
13
15
—
—
10
9.0
11
9.7
11
12
11
13
—
15
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
162
149
148
153
158
160
140
140
—
—
—
—
220
240
240
200
230
336
260
210
160
300
180
160
120
100
99
88
95
140
—
100
240
230
220
220
230
235
230
220
200
190
180
160
160
150
220
360
420
380
—
710
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—-
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.30
—
.20
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
60
—
—
64
60
64
68
65
68
62
—
67
831
839
825
755
777
906
788
767
. 896
683
693
669
602
706
898
988
1,040
—
1,440
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
3.80
—
3.30
3.60
3.70
5.20
— .
3.50
75
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
Date
sampled
Specific
conductance
(jiS/cm)
pH.
field
(standard
units)
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
Temperature as
(°C) CaCOg)
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
(C-10-1)4cbb-1 08-07-90 740 7.5
(C-10-1)9ccc-1 06-13-61 2.710 7.8
09-06-62 2,670 7.7
06-06-63 2,540 7.8
09-24-63 2,320 7.5
20.5 200
1,200
1,100
1,100
930
52
270
250
260
210
18
120
110
110
99
61
86
99
100
94
05-28-64
08-07-64
04-28-66
08-11-72
09-09-74
2,530
2,280
2,200
1,920
1,940
8.1
8.0
7.4
7.3
16.5
16.5
18.5
17.0
18.0
1,100
1,000
920
740
740
250
230
210
170
170
110
110
94
77
77
100
100
110
100
100
07-17-79 2,000 — 18.0
08-04-80 2,100 — 17.0
07-25-83 2.020 — 18.0
07-28-86 1,670 — 18.0
07-12-89 1,980 7.3 17.5
08-18-89 1,960 7.4 18.0
(C-10-1)1 Oddc-3 06-04-91 2,800 — 14.5
^(C-10-1)15cca-1 06-04-91 3,000 7.2 15.0
(C-10-1)17aaa-104-27-65 770 7.5 19.5
10-12-71 1,390 7.3 18.0
690
960
710
320
560
160
170
140
84
140
70
130
88
26
50
120
220
380
30
45
w
08-17-72
07-10-73
09-09-74
08-21-75
08-16-76
1,550
1,620
1.780
1.800
2.120
7.6
7.5
6.8
6.9
20.0
20.0
20.0
18.5
19.5
630
730
730
830
980
160
190
180
210
250
57
63
69
73
86
47
54
53
55
58
07-12-77 2.180 6.8
VC-10-1 )25abd-106-06-61 1,560 8.0
07-07-61 1,570 8.3
08-09-61 1,540 7.9
08-31-62 1,460 7.8
19.5 1.100
480
490
490
380
290
110
110
110
75
95
52
50
50
47
61
130
140
140
150
06-01-64
08-04-80
07-15-81
07-02-86
07-11-90
1.700
2.150
2,300
2,100
2,090
8.1
7.2
17.0
17.5
18.5
17.5
18.5
410
520
64
110
61
60
190
230
76
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
11
16
17
15
17
17
16
18
12
14
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
—
—
—
—
^^
—
• —
134
136
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
38
580
560
610
490
630
580
510
310
290
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
73
480
490
460
410
430
380
370
330
300
Fluoride.
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
.20
—
—
—
—
-_
—
—
—
.20
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
78
—
—
—
—
—
—
60
62
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
455
1,610
1,560
1,600
1,360
1,580
1,480
1,390
1,140
1,210
Nitrogen
NOg-l-NOg,
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
2.70
—
—
—
—
^^
—
—
—
25.0
# —
14
8.7
—
12
12
14
16
14
15
16
11
11
11
12
—
—
—
145
126
117
113
112
107
109
98
—
—
—
—
370
190
370
67
140
170
200
230
330
420
530
110
130
130
120
310
790
650
99
200
230
250
260
260
300
310
250
250
260
260
,10
.30
.40
—
—
—
.10
.10
,10
.10
—
—
—
—
61
59
41
59
—
59
58
58
56
57
55
—
—
—
—
1,710
1,860
484
663
805
897
1,120
1,250
1,460
1,420
861
875
884
813
—
—
—
—
—
_
—
43.0
42.0
46.0
,^_
—
—
—
..^.
18 160 360 962
#
14 120 340 .60 51 1.1.20 <.10
77
T^ble 5.—Chemical analyses of
Date
Well number sampled
(C-10-1)25abd-1 07-31-90
(C-10-1)29cdd-1 04-14-61
07-10-61
04-04-63
08-07-64
04-28-66
07-16-79
07-10-90
07-31-90
08-20-91
(C-10-1)29ddd-1 04-04-63
09-10-63
07-24-64
08-07-64
04-28-66
08-20-91
(C-10-1)31 Cdd-1 06-21-63
09-26-63
06-03-64
10-08-64
04-28-66
07-16-79
07-13-81
07-31-90
(C-10-1)32ccc-1 06-06-61
07-10-61
09-06-62
04-03-63
09-10-63
06-16-64
08-07-64
06-15-66
07-17-79
08-04-80
(C-11-1)6abc-1 07-10-63
Specific
conductance
(HS/cm)
2,130
1,430
570
480
590
580
600
780
770
690
3,180
1,710
2,710
3,340
3,650
3,460
450
600
470
470
580
750
800
880
690
650
680
630
580
560
700
740
1,150
1,150
510
pH.
field
(standard
units)
7.2
7.6
8.1
8.4
8.0
7.6
—
7.5
7.4
6.9
7.9
8.0
8.0
8,0
7.1
6.9
8.4
7.9
8.3
8.3
8.0
—
—
7.4
8.1
7.8
7.7
8.3
8.1
8.3
8.0
8.0
—
—
8.2
Temperature
(°C)
18.5
—
—
—
23.0
21.0
20.0
23.0
22.5
22.5
—
20.0
18.0
17.0
21.5
—.
—
—
19.0
18.5
18.5
21.0
18.5
—
—
—
—
20.0
20.0
20.0
19.5
19.5
—
Hardness,
totai
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
—
630
210
150
220
220
—
300
—
—
1,000
1,000
1,100
1,400
1,700
—
150
180
180
180
230
—
—
—
260
240
250
220
190
190
260
280
—
—
170
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
110
54
29
62
58
— •
78
—
—
210
250
240
330
410
28
41
40
38
59
—
—
—
66
63
67
54
45
47
65
73
—
—
43
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
—
87
19
20
16
18
—
26
—
—
130
100
110
140
170
—^
19
19
19
20
21
—
—
—
22
20
20
21
19
17
23
24
—
—
16
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
—
71
28
30
26
26
—
27
—
—
110
100
110
120
130
_
26
38
24
25
26
—
—
—
36
36
37
37
37
36
38
36
—
—
30
#
i>
78
water from selected wells—^Continued
Potassium,.
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
,
19
9,8
5.9
9.8
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
...^
—
—
—
—
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
.^
44
36
41
46
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
370
63
69
58
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
_^
.30
—
—
—
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
46
—
—
—
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
, -
811
306
249
315
Nitrogen
NOa-i-NOg,
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
^^
—
—
—
—
9.4 40 62 308
9.4 31 100 .30 70 511 17.0
#
22
23
24
24
27
6.3
10
6,3
6,3
670
420
480
790
950
26
67
40
47
570
560
560
590
660
56
83
54
63
1,740
1,490
1,560
2,020
2,400
224
309
255
260
5.9 44 67 317
9.4 83 83 385
10
10
9.4
10
9.8
10
9,9
62
64
71
74
64
63
55
75
79
78
83
77
87
86 .50 62
362
375
347
322
310
393
440
•
7,0 67 58 279
79
Table S.^^hemical analyses of
Well number
(C-11-1)6abc-1
(C-11-1)6bdd-1
(D-7-2)34dcd-1
(D-7-3)28bdb-1
(D-7-3)30aaa-1
(D-7-3)33baa-6
Date
sampled
07-24-64
06-10-65
08-21-75
07-12-77
07-13-81
07-11-89
07-18-90
08-31-64
06-11-65
07-13-81
07-18-90
07-31-90
05-13-64
06-22-65
03-26-81
06-21-63
06-24-63
05-11-64
10-14-68
09-03-69
10-08-71
06-18-72
06-18-73
09-09-74
08-18-75
08-12-76
07-12-77
08-22-78
07-30-79
09-03-80
07-30-81
08-28-81
02-11-59
04-21-60
09-15-60
Specific
conductance
(HS/cm)
520
470
580
620
610
590
610
520
460
560
550
560
710
570
640
1,490
1,340
1,470
1,120
1.170
1.000
1,120
1.120
1.160
1,050
1,150
1,150
1,150
1,200
1,120
1,180
490
540
540
500
pH.
fiekl
(standard
units)
8.3
8.3
7.0
7.0
—
7.7
7.6
7.6
8.2
—
7.6
7.7
8.5
8.6
—
7.5
8.0
8.0
7.8
7.9
8.0
8.0
—
—
—
—
7.9
8.4
^^
—
7.8
8.1
8.3
Temperature
(°C)
18.0
18.5
18.0
19.0
20.5
19.0
19.5
18.5
19.0
20.5
19.5
19.5
13.5
14.0
13.5
—
18.0
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
14.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
180
160
230
240
—
—
210
170.
—•
220
—
240
160
—
730
590
760
470
530
__
450
450
460
—
—
—
480
—
__
170
270
260
250
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
42
36
62
68
—
—
—
57
43
—
57
—
46
16
—
190
130
190
73
81
73
73
77
—
—
—
82
—
_
44
71
69
69
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
as Mg)
18
16
18
18
—
—
16
15
—
18
—
30
29
—
63
63
68
69
80
._
64
64
64
—
....
• —
—
66
—
15
22
22
20
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
33
29
28
28
—
:—
—
32
25
—
25
—
73
75
- ^
%
60
60
—
_ 1
63
63
60
—
—
—
60
—
^^
33
—
—
15 d
80
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
7.4
7.0
7.2
7.3
Alkalinity.
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
—
—
159
160
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
50
51
35
43
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
65
58
60
66
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
—
—
—
.20
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
—
57
57
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
285
253
363
386
Nitrogen
NO2+NO3,
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
. :__
6,6
27
29
58
55
57
248
7.1 26 58 .30 62 374 1.00
5.9
5,5
212
7.0
5.1
—
—
5,7
5.7
7.2
—
—
52
70
30
30
—
5.3
11
540
520
560
440
410
430
430
430
43
44
78
86
82
87
80
84
84
86
—
—
4
-
-
1.4
—
.70
.70
1.0
404
334
1,080
910
1,080
786
733
738
738
6,8 34 450 85 .30 1.0 772 <.10
2.5
-
-
1.1
—
235
230
222
<5.0
43
45
46
28
13
14
14
.30
.20
5.8
11
10
9.8
248
318
314
311
.11
81
Table S.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
(D-7-3)33baa-6
(D-7-3)34cdb-1
(D-8-1)3dda-1
(D-8-1)10bcb-1
(0-8-1)11bac-1
(D-8-1)35cac-2
(D-8-2)2daa-1
Date
sampled
05-26-61
08-12-76
08-10-77
08-22-78
09-03-80
09-03-81
09-20-82
07-29-83
07-17-84
08-02-85
07-03-86
07-29-87
06-15-88
06-09-89
07-19-90
07-22-91
10-14-60R
09-09-74
08-18-75
08-12-76
07-12-77
08-25-78
07-30-79
09-02-80
07-30-81
09-20-82
06-15-88
07-20-89
07-19-90
07-22-91
05-06-91
07-03-91
06-14-91
09-04-80
08-06-64
Specific
conductance
(HS/cm)
530
560
540
540
580
580
580
560
530
880
580
—
550
560
540
540
—
460
350
590
600
590
500
540
630
600
580
580
590
600
7,960
9,400
740
850
450
pH.
field
(standard
units)
7.7
—
—
—
—
...,
—
7.2
7.4
7.5
7.2
—
—
7.2
7.4
7.4
—
8.2
6.7
6.8
6.7
6.8
7.8
—
8.2
7.7
—
7.5
6.2
6.3
7.7
—
7.7
Temperature
(°C)
12.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
13.0
12.5
13.0
13.5
12.5
13.5
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
12.5
.^
— •
18.5
16.5
15.5
17.0
19.0
18.5
17.0
14.0
12.5
13.0
26.5
17.5
13.0
25.0
36.0
16.0
15.5
16.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
270
—
—
—
—
—
260
260
—
270
260
—
270
—
..,^
270
220
190
300
290
300
250
—
290
^ -
290
—
—
290
1.300
1.600
210
—
210
Calcium.
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
74
—
—
—
—
__
—
68
68
.—
68
68
—
70
—
^^
72
56
47
72 .
70
74
61
—
69
^_
69
—
—
70
360
440
50
—
51
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
21
—
—
—
—
__
— •
22
22
—
24
22
—
22
—
^__
23
20
18
28
29
27
24
—
28
_^
29
—
—
27
97
110
20
21
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
__
—
—
—
—
^_
—
14
14
—
20
14
—
13
—
^^
17
8.8
3.6
16
17
18
11
—
17
_
17
—
16
1,200
1,500
50
^_
.»
•
4
82
f water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
assort
Chtoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOg)
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NOa-FNOg
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
228 45 14
1.6
1.7
2.1
1.9
47
45
64
43
14
10
19
12
.20
.20
.20
.20
11
11
12
11
314
313
348
310
.76
1.00
.80
.91
41 11 .10 11
5.2
1.8
.50
2.3
2.2
2.4
1.8
224
202
179
236
240
220
210
55
31
14
59
58
57
46
26
11
3.3
19
15
20
12
.10
.20
—
.20
.20
.10
.20
11
9.3
6.8
12
12
12
10
345
263
200
356
346
350
296
—
.92
—
1.30
_.,
1.40
1.00
2.1 57 14 .20 13 349 1.10
3,2 54 15 .30 13 354 1.40
2,1 55 15 .20 12 344
140
190
14
820
1,000
20
2,200
2,700
140
2.9
3.0
.90
20
24
52
5,190
6,340
424
17 12 25
83
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
(D-8-2)2daa-1
(0-8-2)4cba-2
(D-8-2)12ddc-1
(D-8-2)12ddc-2
(D-8-2)13abc-1
(D-8-2)16caa-1
(D-8-2)23dca-2
Date
sampled
06-09-89
08-13-76
09-20-82
05-03-65
10-14-68
09-03-69
08-05-70
10-14-71
08-11-72
06-18-73
09-12-74
08-13-76
05-27-64
08-25-64
09-03-69
08-05-70
10-14-71
08-11-72
06-18-73
09-12-74
08-13-76
08-01-79
09-04-80
07-29-81
09-20-82
07-26-83
07-17-84
05-13-64
08-17-90
08-13-76
09-17-79
09-20-82
05-27-64
10-14-68
07-30-70
Specific
conductance
(fiS/cm)
480
440
440
630
790
740
770
780
720
800
870
750
440
460
480
490
490
460
470
520
500
500
530
520
520
510
510
450
520
390
360
400
440
410
390
pH,
field
(standard
units)
7.8
—
—
7.7
8.1
7.8
8.7
—
—
8.0
—
—
8.4
8.0
8.2
—
—
—
—
7.9
—
7.8
—
7.6
8.3
7.9
—
—
—
8.0
8.6
Temperature
(°C)
15.0
15.0
15.5
12.0
14.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
13.0
—
14.0
12.5
16.5
15.0
14.0
12.5
15.5
14.5
14.0
16.0
15.5
14.0
15.0
16.0
16.0
15.5
16.0
14.0
15.5
15.5
15.0
16.5
16.5
15.0
14.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
220
— •
—
190
280
260
280
•—
—
270
._
—
200
230
240
240
—
—
—
—
^^
250
—
240
—
240
230
250
—
__
—
200
170
170
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
as Ca)
52
—
—
30
56
30
—
—
—
62
_
—
46
53
49
—
—
—
—
^_
57
—
54
—
55
49
59
—
__
—
46
38
—
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
21
—
—
27
35
44
—
—
—
29
__
—
20
24
28
—
—
—
—
_
25
—
25
—
__
26
25
25
—
_
«
20
18
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
15
—
—
75
—
—
—
—
71
^_
—
25
—
—
—
—
—
—
_
12
—
13
—
_
13
12
11
—
_
_
25
—
^^
#
•
n
84
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NOa-HNOg
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
17 9.1 .20 26
262
338
312
332
7.0
26
26
—
54
58
53
—
12
24
366
477
412
7.9 338 25 52 26 475
27 —
—
232
237
36
22
21
_
9.9
10
15
_
38
25
270
3.3
3.0
220 30
25
16
17
.20
.20
28
29
304
298
.04
3.1
2.3
2,4
25
40
30
15
17
11
.20
—
1.1
27
—
27
300
257
306
<.10
—
<.10
—
200
203
16
6.5
—
14
10
—
25
24 239
85
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
Date
sampled
Specific
conductance
(HS/cm)
pH,
field
(standard
units)
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
Temperature as
(°C) CaCOg)
Calcium.
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
(D-8-2)26cbd-3 08-30-89 980
(D-8-2)29add-1 05-03-65 510
08-13-76 540
(0-8-2)31 cbb-1 08-30-89 650
(0-8-2)31 cda-1 06-06-89 500
(0-8-2)31 cdb-1 08-30-89 1,270
(0-8-2)31 cdb-2 08-04-64 430
07-21-65 360
06-06-89 3,050
(0-8-2)32daa-1 09-05-80 850
(D-8-2)34acd-1 07-21-65 660
08-30-89 710
(D-8-2)34dda-1 05-03-65 610
07-12-89 660
(D-8-2)36dbd-3 08-23-89 1,190
(D-8-3)11abb-1 06-27-89 500
(D-8-3)33acb-1 06-03-64 750
08-22-89 900
07-27-90 900
(0-9-1 )14aad-2 07-25-83 470
(0-9-1)14ada-1 07-27-90 870
(0-9-1 )14ada-2 06-03-64 600
09-04-80 760
07-25-83 760
08-09-85 780
07-23-90 840
(D-9-1)23ada-1 07-05-62 380
08-07-62 410
06-11-63 380
08-28-63 420
07-27-79 650
(D-9-1)26aaa-1 07-05-89 660
08-22-89 650
(D-9-1)26aab-1 06-03-64 500
09-04-80 750
7.5
7.7
8.7
6.9
8.8
7.9
7.6
7.6
8.3
7.7
7.7
7.8
8.8
8.1
7.4
8.4
22.0
14.0
15.5
13.5
20.0
19.0
19.0
28.0
16.5
13.5
14.0
13.5
19.0
17.0
9.0
13.0
18.0
14.0
12.0
13.5
13.0
13.0
12.0
12.0
12.5
11.5
11.0
14.5
15.5
240
150
120
280
270
260
280
360
370
250
170
210
150
170
300
220
54
34
19
43
55
53
49
85
86
46
40
48
20
27
74
37
25
17
18
41
31
31
38
37
37
33
17
21
25
26
27
30
17
30
40
36
35
56
48
34
30
5.5
6.4
16
16
18
24
<l
86
]
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOz)
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NOj-l-NOg
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
225 33 12 49 325
10
29
41
15
12
63
215
24
•
3.5
4.0
2.6
2.3
307
1.9
3.9
3.0
19.
19
19
—
.40
—
26
30
388
362
—
160
98
94
100
54
51
37
46
.30
.20
17
25
456
531
522
349
.60
7.80
1,2
1.2
2,0
1.6
8.6
16
43
44
7.1
8.2
20
21
178
216
196
218
•
2.3.
29
75
19
26
.20 19
286
87
'Dible 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
Date
sampled
Specific
conductance
(jiS/cm)
pH.
fiekl
(standard
units)
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
Temperature as
fC) CaCOg)
Calcium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
(D-9-1)26aab-1 07-11-89 580 7.5 13.0
(D-9-1)26add-1 08-09-85 680 — 13.5
07-31-90 620 7.4 11.0
^(D-9-1)35abb-1 06-03-63 460 8.4 —
08-29-63 330 7.9 —
230
150
58
26
21
21
6.4
6.7
07-02-65 290 8.5 _ 140 19
07-15-81 530 — 11.5 — —
07-23-90 530 7.5 11.0 270 66
(D-9-1)35bcd-2 07-16-81 700 — 14.0 — —
07-02-87 520 — 13.0 — —
23
26
7.1
6.7
08-01-90 660 7.8 18.0 — —
(D-9-1)36acb-1 05-18-89 500 7.8 19.5 — —
07-10-89 470 7.7 12.0 — —
(D-9-1)36bbc-1 07-05-62 470 7.5 — 220 56
08-07-62 480 7.7 — 250 52
07-01-63 330 8.5 — 160 30
08-29-63 480 7.4 — 240 60
07-13-64 480 7.5 10.0 250 63
07-02-65 290 7.7 9.5 140 21
07-29-65 300 8.3 9.5 150 24
20
28
21
22
23
22
22
6.2
6.4
6.2
6.2
6.4
6.5
6.4
m
09-03-69
08-11-72
09-12-74
08-16-76
07-12-77
500
520
520
520
480
7.9
7.3
6.5
9.0
10.0
10.5
10.0
10.0
260
280
270
61
75
70
26
23
23
5.9
6.1
07-15-81 530 7.6 11.0 270 69
06-25-89 500 — 10.0 250 62
07-23-90 490 7.4 10.0 260 63
(D-9-1)36cdd-1 07-13-64 560 7.5 9.5 300 78
07-31-81 590 — 11.5 — —
23
22
24
26
6.7
5.9
6.0
7.1
07-11-89 520 7.7 12.0
08-16-89 690 7.7 12.0
07-27-90 500 7.5 10.0
(D-9-2)5ddb-1 05-24-89 1,000 7.0 14.0
• (D-9-2)6ddb-1 05-24-89 800 7.4 14.0
260 68 21 6.4
88
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOg)
Soiids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NOa-i-NOg,
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.6
14
24
31
18
12
8.9
9.9
26 .30 19
240
168
159
293 2.20
1.2
1.2
1.6
1.2
1.2
.80
.80
18
26
24
24
31
24
31
11
9.2
7.8
8.2
8.2
11
8.9
239 14 12 15
289
255
173
252
267
153
164
288
•
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.2
230
220
—
—
—
21
22
22
15
13
41
14
13
28
25
25
9.6
.20
.20
.20
.30
.30
—
15
16
17
16
17
—
303
285
309
276
298
321
2.20
—
2.20
1.50
1.70
—
1.2 20 13 .30 14 297 1.50
89
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
.
Well number
(D-9-2)9bac-1
(0-9-2)11aaa-1
(D-9-2)15cda-1
(0-9-2)19aca-1
(D-9-2)19acb-1
(D-9-2)36acd-1
Date.
sampled
07-05-62
08-07-62
07-02-63
08-01-63
08-22-63
07-14-64
07-27-65
07-30-70
08^11-72
07-30-73
09-12-74
08-13-76
07-12-77
08-23-78
07^27^79
08^01-79
07-30-81
09-20-82
08-09-84
07-02-87
08-23-89
09-04-90
08-19-91
05-17-64
08-16-76
09-20-82
07-19-90
07-30-81
07-10-89
07-02-87
07-10-89
09-05-80
07-26-83
07-02-86
05-11-89
Specffic
conductance
(HS/cm)
490
570
550
690
680
520
550
680
660
730
560
700
650
650
670
670
690
650
640
580
640
610
630
520
570
550
550
600
540
420
690
490
510
570
540
pH.
fieU
(standard
units)
8.3
6.0
8.1
7.7
7.4
8.3
8.2
8.1
—
—
._
7.3
6.5
6.8
—
7.4
—
7.4
7.3
7.5
7.5
7.8
—
,
7.5
—
7.6
—
8.0
—
—
—
6.9
Temperature
(°C)
—
—
—
—
14.5
14.0
12.5
14.5
14.5
17.0
14.0
14.5
14.0
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.5
14.0
14.0
15.0
14.5
14.5
14.0
14.0
14.5
14.5
14.0
13.0
14.0
14.5
14.5
16.0
12.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
140
210
210
290
250
190
200
290
—
—
310
300
290
—.
—
280
—
290
270
.,_
230
—
240
—
270
—
—
—
_
—
—
—
—
Caldum,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
21
42
41
73
59
31
34
67
—
— •
78
73
71
—
66
—
69
67
56
—
61
—
-
66
—
—
—
..^.
—
—
—
• —
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
21
25
25
26
26
27
27
29
—
—
—
27
28
27
—
—
27
—
28
26
_^
21
—
22
—
.^_
26
—
—
—
^..
—.
—
—
—
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
40
34
34
33
31
34
35
—
—
—
—
30
30
29
. —
30
—
32
180
•
36
—
—
—
^..
15
—
—
—
_^
—
—
—
—
•
•
m
90
•
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
Alkalinity,
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
Sulfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCi)
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
Solids,
sum of
constituents.
dissolved
(mg/L)
Nitrogen
NO2+NO3
dissolved
(mg/L
asN)
12
9.4
9.0
9.0
8.6
50
49
61
52
33
37
37
37
42
41
265
309
314
386
344
9.8
9.4
268
83
66
41
36
35
33 51
294
307
9.0
8,3
8.2
261
250
250
48
51
45
32
31
29
.30
.20
.20
49
49
45
448
423
417
4.00
—
3.40
8.1 44 25 .20 53 423 3.00
9.1
8.5
10
47
110
34
27
30
25
33
24
.30
.30
.20
_
51
50
56
_
440
644
402
3.40
3.40
2.90
1.2 28 19 .20 13 307 1.10
91
Table 5.—Chemical analyses of
Well number
(D-9-3)5bbd-1
(D-10-1)1acd-2
(D-10-1)2adb-1
(D-10-1)2ddd-1
Date
sampled
07-14-64
09-03-69
10-14-71
08-11-72
07-31-73
08-17-76
07-12-77
08-23-78
08-01-79
09-04-80
07-14-89
07-29-65
07-05-66
07-30-80
07-14-89
08-17-90
08-22-89
(D-10-1)19bad-1 07-15-81
06-30-86
(D-10-1)19bdc-1 09-04-80
07-02-86
(D-10-1)30bac-1 08-09-85
07-12-89
08-29-90
Specific
conductance
((iS/cm)
380
560
530
650
550
670
620
590
650
600
730
—
530
530
500
540
570
2,100
2,060
2,000
2,130
3,800
3,550
3,410
pH,
fiekl
(standard
units)
8.5
7.9
—
7.5
—
7.2
6.5
6.8
—
—
7.2
—
7.8
—
7.6
7.9
7.3
—
' —
—
—
7.1
7.4
Temperature
(°C)
12.0
11.0
12.5
12.6
12.0
12.5
12.5
12.5
12.5
15.5
15.0
—
9.5
11.0
12.0
10.5
10.0
23.0
21.0
21.5
21.5
22.0
23.5
24.0
Hardness,
total
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
170
270
—
320
—
300
310
300
—
—
_
170
280
—
—
270
—
—
—
—
...
—
—
500
Caldum,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCa)
27
65
—
73
•—
75
75
72
—
—
—
75
—
—
71
—
—
—
—
—
—
110
Magnesium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asMg)
26
27
—
33
. —
28
31
29
—
—
—
22
—
—
22
—
— •
—
• —
....
—
—
54
Sodium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asNa)
14
—
—
18
—
16
19
18
—
—
^.*
—
5.3
—
—
6.4
—
—
—
—
_^
—
—
460
4
' Actual location is different than historic record. See footnote, table 1.
4>
92
T
water from selected wells—Continued
Potassium,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asK)
1.2
—
1.6
1.3
1.5
1.6
Alkalinity.
field
(mg/L
as
CaCOg)
248
261
253
250
200
Sutfate,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asS04)
44
35
55
53
56
54
Chloride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asCI)
16
19
22
19
21
28
Fluoride,
dis-
solved
(mg/L
asF)
—
—
.20
.10
.20
Silica,
dis-
solved
(mg/L as
SiOa)
13
15
12
13
13
Solids,
sum of
constituents,
dissolved
(mg/L)
212
327
374
360
369
338
Nitrogen
NO2+NO3,
dissolved'
(mg/L
asN)
__
—
—
.90
—
.94
.80 30 17 291
1.3 21 21 1.1 13 296 2.10
38 120 860 .30 36 1,860 .50
93
Table 6.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected springs
I—, no data]
Location of spring or measurement site: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-
data sites.
Discharge: ft^/s, cubic feet per second.
Temperature: "C, degrees Celsius.
Specific conductance: |xS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius.
Location
of
spring
(D-7-3)28d-S1
(D-7-3)30a-S1
(D-7-3)32dba-S1
(0-8-3)3a-S1
(D-8-3)3dbb-Sl
(D-8-3)9d-S1
(0-9-2)1 labd-SI
(0-9-2)29ac-S1
(D-9-2)29cbb-Sl
(0-9-1 )25aac-Sl
(0-9-1 )25adb-Sl
Location of
measuremeni
site
(D-7-3)28bcd
(D-7-3)30abb
(0-7-3)31 add
(0-8-3)3abc
(0-8-3)3dbb
(D-8-3)9bac
(0-9-2)11abd
(0-9-2)29acc
(D-9-2)29cbb
(D-9-1)24ddc
(0-9-1 )25ada
Name of
spring
Spring Creek
Unnamed springs
Wood Springs
Wheeler Springs
Clyde Springs
Holley Springs
Salem Lake Springs
Unnamed springs
Spring Lake Springs
North Holladay Springs
Date of
measure-
ment
07-02-90
10-16-90
04-02-91
11-14-90
05-31-90
10-16-90
04-02-91
05-31-90
10-16-90
04-02-91
05-31-90
10-16-90
04-02-91
05-25-90
10-22-90
04-02-91
06-01-90
10-22-90
08-22-89
06-01-90
10-17-90
, 06-12-90
10-17-90
South Holladay Springs 06-12-90
10-17-90
^ Indudes about 0.5 ft^/s from Matson Springs.
^ indudes 0.14 ft^/s from Matson Springs.
3 Estimated.
'• Indudes about 0.4 ft^/s from flowing wells.
Dis-
charge
(ft^/s)
15
16
15
.12
^3.8
^3.9
22.9
1.1
.89
3l
.55
.72
.02
3.4
4.1
2.4
5.0
6.1
^1.0
^3.3
'2.4
1.1
.78
.67
.46
Temper-
ature
(°C)
15.5
14.0
11.0
15.5
15.0
14.0
14.0
13.0
13.0
18.5
9.0
16.0
10.0
—
14.0
13.0
13.5
8.0
16.0
8.5
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
z
840
E
—
1 -ll
—
—
—
— •
—
4 k
94
]
Table 7.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected springs, drains, and sloughs during seepage studies
[—, no data]
Location of measurement site: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data
sites. Listed in downstream order.
Inflow and outflow: Measured inflow to or outflow from the spring channel.
Discharge: ft^/s, cubic feet per second. Used to determine ground-water discharge to springs and drains.
Upstream measurement plus Inflow minus outflow may not equal downstream measurement
because of stream leakage, ground water discharge, or measurement error.
Temperature: ''C, degrees Celsius.
Speciflc conductence: (xS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius.
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge Temperature
(ft^/s) (°C)
Specific
conductance
(nS/cm)
Spring Creek north channel, November 14,1990
(0-7-3)28bca 15 13.0
(D-7-3)20bda 15 12.5
(0-7-3)20bbd Inflow from industrial effluent .43 38.0
(0-7-3) 19bda 15 15.0
Spring Creek south channel, November 14,1990
(0-7-3)28bcb 2.1 12.0
(0-7-3)20cdb Inflow from flown ng well .22 —
(0-7-3)20cdb Inflow from waste-water treatment plant 5.1 —
(D-7-3)20cdb 9.4 12.5
Wood Springs channel, November 14,1990
(0-7-3)31 add ^3.9 13.5
(0-7-3)30cdd 6.4 8,0
Matson Springs channel, November 14,1990
(0-7-3)32ddd Inflow from fiowing well 1.1 16.0
890
1,070
880
1,180
1,050
780
620
760
560
(0-7-3)32cda
(D-7-3)32cda
(0-7-3)31 cdb
Outflow to Wood Springs area
2.6
1.5
1.6
14.0
14.0
470
610
95
Table 7.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected springs, drains, and sloughs during seepage studies—
Continued •
Location of
measurement
site
(D-8-3)5cdc
(D-8-3)5cdc
(D-8-3)5ccc
(D-8-3)6ddd
(D-8-3)6ccd
(0-8-2)1 dda
(D-7-2)36dcc
(0-8-3)9bac
(0-8-3)5cdc
(0-8-3) 18add
(D-8-3)8cbd
(0-8-3)5ccc
(0-9-2)29cbb
(0-9-2)30dad
(D-9-2)30daa
(0-9-2) 19bba
(0-9-2) 18ccd
(0-9-1 )13ddd
(D-9-1)13ddc
(D-9-2)7bba
(D-8-1)36dba
Inflow
and Discharge
outflow (f?/s)
Dry Creek, November 15,1990
1.9
Inflow fi-om Holley Springs 4.5
Inflow fi-om unnamed springs 4.8
Inflow from flowing wells .20
Inflow from waste-water treatment plant 3.7
Inflow from unnamed drains .38
16
Holley Springs channel, November 15,
5.0
4.5
Temperature
(°C)
9.0
8.0
8.0
—
—
10.5
9.5
1990
10.0
8.0
Unnamed channel, November 15,1990
1.2
1,4
4.8
Spring Creek (near Payson), March 28,
22.8
Inflow from unnamed field drain .06
Outflow to West Ditch area . 18
4.1
Inflow from West Ditch 1.0
Inflow from South Holladay Springs .61
Inflow from North Holladay Springs 1.4
6.8
7.9
7.0
8.0
8.0
1991
8.5
9.0
10,5
—
—
—
—
8.0
9.0
Specific
conductance
(|iS/cm)
840
900
940
—
—
580
1,070
910
900
1,070
1,130
940
470
1,020
485
—
—
—
—
710
760
w
m
96
Table 7.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected springs, drains, and sloughs during seepage studies—
Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge Temperature
(ft^/s) (°C)
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
p-8-1)36aad
0-8-1 )36dba
0-8-1 )36dba
0-8-1 )23aba
0-9-1 )24ddc
0-9-1)13ddc
0-9-1 )25ada
0-9-1 )25ada
0-9-1 )13ddd
0-9-1 )12bdd
0-8-1 )36dba
D-8-2)35cdd
0-8-2)35cdc
D-9-2)3abc
0-9-2)3bca
0-8-2)33bbc
D-8-2)32aac
0-8-2)31 bb
0-8-1 )36aad
Beer Creek and Benjamin Slough, March 28,1991
Beer Creek 22 12.5
Inflow from Spring Creek 7.9 9.0
Inflow from Dry Hollow 1.2 11.5
Benjamin Slough 33 12.0
North Holladay Springs channel, March 28,1991
.82 15.0
1.4 —
South Holladay Springs channel, March 28,1991
l59
Inflow from flowing wells 14
.61
Dry Hollow, March 28,1991
.36
1.2
Beer Creek, March 29,1991
1.9
Inflow from waste-water treatment plant .62
Inflow from Salem Lake 6.4
10
14
Inflow from waste-water treatment plant 1.3
Inflow from flowing wells 1.2
20
12.0
11.5
'14.0
1,040
760
1,400
1,060
700
750
1,400
4.5
7.5
10.5
7.0
9.0
1,350
1,110
770
940
990
'880
•
•• Includes 1.5 ft'/s from Matson Springs.
^ Includes about 0.4 ft^/s from flowing wells,
^ Includes 0.11 ft^/s from flowing wells.
* Average of two flowing wells.
97
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals
[—, no data] •
Location of measurement site: See figure 1 for explanation of the numbering system for hydrologic-data sites. Listed
in downstream order. Unknown, exact location not known, is t)etween known listed locations.
Inflow and outflow: Measured inflow to and outflow from the stream. Calculated inflow or outflow was determined by
measuring the stream above and below the inflow or outflow. Diversion number refers to system used by the
Strawberry Highline Canal Company.
Discharge: ft^/s, cubic feet per second. Used to determine interaction between streams and ground-water system.
Upstream measurement plus inflow minus outflow may not equal downstream measurement because of stream
leakage, ground-water discharge, or measurement error.
Temperature: °C, degrees Celsius.
Specific conductance: ^S/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius.
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft^/s)
Temperature
CO
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
Spanish Fork River, August 30,1965
(D-8-3)33acc 11 —
(0-8-3)32daa Infiow fi-om Mill Race Canal 1.0 —
(0-8-3)32cac 9.7 —
Spanish Fork River, September 3,1965
(D-8-3)34cda 3.8 —
(D-8-3)34bbc Inflow from springs 1.1 —
(D-8-3)34bbb 7.4 —
Spanish Fork River, September 13,1965
(0-8-3)34bbb 8.9 11.5
(0-8-3)28ddc Inflow from industrial effluent .48 —
(D-8-3)33acb 7.4 —
Spanish Fork River, Octobers, 1965
(D-8-2)25ada 18 11.5
(D-8-2)25bab Inflow from ditch .48 —
(D-8-2)23dca 23 13.5
Spanish Fork River, October 8,1965
(D-8-2)23dca 32 —
(D-8-2)22dad Inflow from South Field Canal 4.0 —
(D-8-2)22da Inflow from ditch .06 —
(D-8-2)22add 33 —
«>
98
"i^
it
•
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Specific
Temperature conductance
CC) inS/cm)
Location of
measurement
site
(0-8-2) 15dcd
(0-8-2) 15d
(0-8-2)15cab
(0-8-2) 15cab
Unknown
(D-8-2)9aad
(0-9-3)2cab
(D-8-3)35ccc
(D-8-3)34cdd
(D-8-3)34bbb
(0-8-3)28ddc
(0-8-3)33acb
(0-8-3)33acc
(0-8-3)31 acd
(0-8-3)30ccc
(D-8-2)25add
(D-8-2)25ada
(D-8-2)25ada
(D-8-2)23dca
(D-8-2)22dad
(0-8-2)22da
(0-8-2)22da
(0-8-2)22add
Inflow
and Discharge Te
outflow (ft^/s)
Spanish Fork River, October 12,1965
25
Inflow fi-om ditch .28
22
Spanish Fork River, October 13,1965
36
Inflow from drains .22
31
Spanish Fork River, June 1,1966
107
Outflow to East Bench Canal 103
18
20
Inflow from industrial effluent .03
21
Spanish Fork River, June 2,1966
31
Inflow from drain 1.1
Inflow from ditch .60
31
Spanish Fork River, Junes, 1966
18
Inflow from drains ,03
21
Inflow from South Field Canal ,39
Inflow from ditch .31
Inflow from ditch .05
21
99
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of ^^
water from selected streams and canals—Continued ^B
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft^/s)
Temperature
(°C)
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
Spanish Fork River, September 29,1966
(D-8-3)34cda
(D-8-3)34bbb
(D-8-3)33acb
(D-B-3)33acc
(D-8-3)32cac
(0-8-3)31 baa
(D-8-3)30c
(D-8-2)25add
(0-8-2)25ada
(D-8-2)23dca
Unknown
(D-8-2)22aba
(0-8-2)15dca
Unknown
(D-7-2)32ddd
3.9
7.2
6.7
—
15.5
—
Spanish Fork River, September 30,1966
Inflow
20
22
21
1.1
23
Spanish Fork River, October 3,1966
•
Inflow from ditches
Outflow to South Ditch
Inflow from ditches and well
77
78
.33
27
49
.60
39
—
—
—
—
15.5
11.0
12.0
—
—
13.0
—
;
—
500
520
—
—
520
—
—
i
i
i tf
1
•^ •1
1 ^
•-••
r-'i
«»
:^
"•'
i
I
100
T
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Specific
Discharge Temperature conductance
(ft3/s) (°C) (nS/cm)
(D-8-3)34cda
(D-8-3)34acc
(D-8-3)34aba
(0-8-3)27acc
(0-8-3)23bdd
(D-8-3)23bdd
(0-8-3) 14aac
(D-8-3)14aac
(0-8-3)1 Iddb
(0-8-3) llddb
(0-8-3) 11 ddb
(0-8-3)1 ladb
(0-8-3) llaac
(0-8-3)1 laac
(0-8-3) 11 aba
(0-8-3) 11 aba
(0-8-3)2dcd
(0-8-3) 2dca
(D-8-3)34acc
(0-8-3)34aba
(D-8-3)27acc
(D-8-3)23bdd
(0-8-3) 14aac
(0-8-3)1 Iddb
(0-8-3) 11 ddb
(0-8-3)1 laac
(D-8-3)2dcd
Outflow to ditch
Outflow to pump
Mapleton Lateral, May 26,1966
Calculated inflow from Maple Creek
Outflow to ditch
Outflow to ditch
Calculated outflow to Fullmer Ditch
43
40
41
39
40
6.8
34
,97
33
7,5
11
30
11
17
17
8,6
7,9
7.7
Mapleton Lateral, September 29,1966
Outflow to ditch
Outflow to ditch
18
17
18
18
19
,14
18
,88
18
11.0
13,0
15,0
16,0
11.0
101
Table ^.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and cfl/ifl/,^~Continued
Location of
measuremerit
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft'/s)
Temperature
(°C)
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
(D-8-3)33dbb
Unknown
Unknown
(0-9-2) 16adc
(0-9-2)31 ace
(0-9-2)31 cbd
(D-9-1)36dad
(D-9-1)36dad
(D-9-1)36acb
(0-9-1 )36bbc
(D-9-1)36bbc
(0-9-1 )35aaa
(D-9-1)35aaa
(D-9-1)35abb
(0-9-1 )26cbb
(D-8-3)33dbb
(D-9-3)5aaa
(D-9-3)5adb
(D-9-3)7dbc
(D-9-3)7dbc
(D-9-3)7cdb
(0-9-2) 13abc
(0-9-2) 13bad
(0-9-2) 13bd
(0-9-2) 14daa
(0-9-2) 14CCC
Strawberry Highline Canal, September 28,1965
44 —
Inflow .17 —
Outflow 3.3 —
37 —
Strawberry Highline Canal, May 31,1966
79 —
Outflow to diversion #24A
Outflow to diversion #25
Outflow to diversion #26
Inflow from well
Outflow to diversion #27
Inflow from well
2.4
2.1
70
3.7
66
4.4
3.6
70
8.7
78 15.5
Outflow to diversion #3
Strawberry Highline Canal, June 1,1966
139 14.0
13 —
124 —
121 —
5.1 — Calculated outflow to diversion #7
Outflow to diversion #8
Calculated outflow to diversion #10
Outflow to diversion #10-1
Outflow to diversion #11
.01
111
3.1
4.4
2.8
100
102
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
arid
outflow
Discharge
(ft'/s)
Temperature
CO
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
Strawberry Highline Canal, June 2,1966
(0-9-2)14CCC
(0-9-2)22bba
(D-9-2)22bbb
(0-9-2)21 bab
(0-9-2)21 bba
(0-9-2)21 bb
(0-9-2)21 bob
(0-9-2)21 bcb
(0-9-2)31 acc
(0-8-3)33dbb
(D-9-3)5aaa
(0-9-3)5adb
(0-9-3)7dbc
(0-9-2) 13abc
(0-9-2) 14cda
(0-9-2) 14CCC
Outflow to diversion #14.5
Outflow to diversion #18
Outflow to diversion #19
Outflow to diversion #19.5
Outflow to diversion #20
Outflow to diversion #20B
Strawberry Highline Canal,
Outflow to diversion #3
Outflow to diversion #12
85
.65
77
1.4
5.2
1.1
27
3.2
41
September 26,
73
.19
73
72
71
2.8
68
12.0
—
13.0
—
—
—
—
—
16.0
1966
—
—
—
14.0
14.5
—
—
•
103
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Specific
Discharge Temperature conductance
(ft^/s) CC) (tS/cm)
Strawberry Highline Canal, September 27,1966
13.0
(0-9-2) 14CCC
(0-9-2)22bba
(0-9-2)21 bab
(0-9-2)21 bcb
(D-9-2)20ddb
(0-9-2)31 acc
(0-9-2)31 cbd
(0-9-1 )36dad
(0-9-1 )36bbc
(0-9-1 )35aaa
(0-9-1 )35a
(0-9-1 )26cbb
(0-8-3)32dda
(D-8-2)25dbc
(D-8-3)32dda
(0-8-3)31 odd
(D-8-2)36acd
(D-8-2)36acb
(0-8-2)25dbc
(0-8-3)32dda
(0-8-3)320
(0-8-3)31 cdd
(0-8-3)36acd
(D-8-3)25dbc
Outflow to diversion #16
Outflow to diversion #20A
Outflow to diversion #21
Outflow to diversion #24A
Outflow to diversion #25
Outflow to diversion #27
Outflow to diversion #27.5
South Field Canal,
64
64
7.0
6,0
,20
48
.01
1.5
45
4.0
2.4
44
September 13,1965
10
10
South Field Canal, June 8,1966
Outflow
33
32
35
4.9
30
South Field Canal, October 3,1966
Outflow
17
4.3
13
14
13
14.0
14.5
15.5
15.5
12.0
15.0
11.5
11.5
*
104
|_ Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
Jjj^ water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft'/s)
Temperature
CO
Speciflc
conductance
(\iS/cm)
South Field Canal, October 5,1966
(D-8-2)25dbc
(D-8-2)23ccc
(0-8-3)33acc
(0-8-3)33cab
(0-8-3)32add
(0-8-3) 19cdc
(0-8-3)33acc
(0-8-3)32bab
(0-8-3)30ddd
(0-8-3)30dbb
(D-8-3)30b
(0-8-3)19cdc
(0-8-3)19cca
(0-8-2)24dca
(D-8-3)33acc
(0-8-3)32bab
(0-8-3)32bb
(0-8-3)30dbb
(0-8-3)19cdc
(0-8-3) 19cca
(D-8-2)24dca
4.9
4.6
Mill Race Canal, August 30,1965
56
Outflow 8.9
Outflow to Spanish Fork River 1.0
45
Mill Race Canal, June 9,1966
51
57
55
59
Outflow .61
55
Outflow 3.0
50
Mill Race Canal, September 30,1966
39
38
Outflow 5.7
34
34
Outflow 2.5
34
—
12.0
14.5
—
—
16.5
—
13.0
15.0
—
—
15.0
—
— .
—
—
—
—
—
—
105
Ikble 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of ^g^
water from selected streams and canals—Continued ^g§
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft^/s)
Temperature
CC)
Specific
conductance
(nS/cm)
East Bench Canal, August 25,1965
(D-8-3)34ddd
(D-8-3)27ccb
(0-8-3)34ddd
(D-8-3)27ccb
(D-8-3)27cbc
(D-8-3)28dac
(0-8-3)28dac
(0-8-3)28dbb
(0-8-3)28bbd
(D-8-3)29aaa
(D-8-3)34ddd
(0-8-3)27ccb
(D-8-3)28dac
(D-8-3)29aaa
(0-8-2)22aba
(0-8-2)15caa
(0-8-2) 16dad
(0-8-2) 16dcc
(0-8-2)21 bbd
(D-8-2)20caa
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
Outflow
14
12
East Bench Canal, June 15,1966
78
75
9.0
16
2.6
8.6
8.3
32
East Bench Canal, October 6,1966
17
15
9.3
5.7
South Ditch, June 17,1966
52
18
15
17
1.9
14
—
—
—
18
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
9.0
—
9.5
15.0
15.5
16.0
16.5
—
16.5
•
106
Table 8,—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
(0-8-3)1 dbc
(0-8-3)1 cac
(0-8-3)1 cca
(0-8-3)1 ccb
(D-8-3)2ddb
(D-8-3)2dca
{D-8-3)2dca
(0-8-3)2dca
(0-8-3)2ccb
(D-8-3)3dda
(0-8-3)3dda
(D-8-3)3dda
(D-8-3)3acc
(0-8-3)3bbd
(0-8-3)4aaa
(0-8-3)3dda
(0-8-3)4aaa
(D-8-3)3dda
(D-8-3)4aaa
(0-8-3)4aaa
(0-7-3)29dcc
Inflow
and Discharge Temperature
outflow (ft'/s) CO
Hobble Creek, August 17,1965
.77
5.4
5.2
Inflow from canal 1.7
6,7
Inflow from Mapleton Lateral 11
Outflow to canal 7.7
5.3
Outflow to irrigation ditch 5.0
Calculated inflow from pipe .48
2.8
Hobble Creek, August 18,1965
2.8
Inflow from springs .20
Inflow from drains .87
13
Hobble Creek, August 19,1965
4.7
18
Hobble Creek, August 23,1965
1.5
9.9
Hobble Creek, September 22,1965
26
29
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
11.5
12.0
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
107
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
(0-8-3)1 cac
(D-8-3)2ddb
(D-8-3)2dca
(0-8-3)2
(D-8-3)3d
(D-8-3)3b
(D-8-3)4aaa
(0-8-3)1 cac
(D-8-3)2ddb
(0-8-3)2dca
(D-8-3)2ccb
(D-8-3)3dda
(0-8-3)3dbb
(0-8-3)3b
(0-8-3)4aaa
(0-8-3)4aaa
(0-7-3)29dcc
(0-8-4)6abb
(0-7-3)29dcc
(O-7-3)30acc
(0-7-3)30bda
Outflow
Outflow
inflow
and
outflow
Discharge Temperature
(ft'/s) CC)
Hobble Creek, May 24,1966
Calculated inflow from pipe
Inflow from springs
Hobble Creek,
Hobble Creek,
Outflow to irrigation ditch
Inflow from Wheeler Springs
Outflow
18
20
8.4
7.6
2.6
1.6
19
September 23,1966
3.8
2.8
September 27,1966
1,2
1.9
1.0
4.8
.64
7,5
Hobble Creek, October 4,1966
5,2
5.4
Hobble Creek, May 23,1990
Hobble Creek,
17
November 14,1990
19
.04
21
8.5
9.5
—
—
—
—
—
10.5
11.5
—
—
13.0
13.0
—
13.5
11.5
12.0
14.5
8.5
—
9.0
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
410
600
—
560
540
540
—
520
—
540
#
108
•
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Specific
Discharge Temperature conductance
(ft'/s) CC) (nS/cm)
0-8-3)1 acc
P-8-3)2adb
0-8-3)1 acc
Unknown
D-8-3)2adb
D-8-4)6bab
0-8-3)1 acc
0-8-4)6bab
0-8-3)1 acc
0-8-3)4aaa
0-8-3)4bbd
0-8-3) 12bbb
0-8-3) 11 aba
0-8-3)11 baa
0-8-3)1 cdc
Unknown
0-8-3)3cdc
SpringviUe Highline Canal, June 3,1965
8.3
7,5
SpringviUe Highline Canal, July 23,1965
8.0
Outflow
6.1 —
SpringviUe Highline Canal, May 23,1966
6.7 —
6.4 —
SpringviUe Highline Canal, September 28,1966
11 11.0
8.8 10.5
Swenson Ditch, September 29,1966
7.9 —
7.1 —
Fullmer Ditch, May 25,1966
9.4 —
Inflow from Mapleton Lateral 10 —
18 —
Fullmer Ditch, October 5,1966
13 9.0
Outflow 1.3 —
7.5 —
420
430
440
•
109
Table 8.—Measurements of discharge, temperature, and specific conductance of
water from selected streams and canals—Continued #
Location of
measurement
site
Inflow
and
outflow
Discharge
(ft^/s)
Temperature
CO
Specific
conductance
(^S/cm)
Area of West Fields Irrigation Company, November 15,1990
2Measurements given below include all known surface inflow and outflow from the West Fields Irrigation
ompany area)
930
485
22,460
895
925
930
410
990
(D-8-2)24acc
(D-8-2)23dba
(D-8-2)9aad
(D-8-2)4aab
(D-7-2)34ddc
(D-7-2)35ccc
(D-7-2)35ccd
(D-8-2)2abb
(0-8-2)1 bbb
(0-9^2)21 bbc^
(D-9-2)20bc
(0-9-2)1 Seed
(D-10-1)13d
(C-11-2)13cdc
Inflow from 9.6
Mill Race Canal
Unnamed inflow ^05
Unnamed outflow .08
Unnamed outflow .42
Unnamed outflow 2.8
Unnamed outflow 1.4
Unnamed outflow 1.8
Unnamed outflow .03
Unnamed outflow .8
Peteetneet Creek West Ditch, March 28,
3.4
Inflow .18
,96
Summit Creek, May 23,1990
17
Kimball Creek, May 25,1990
.15
7.5
—
11.5
9.0
8.0
9.0
8.5
12.0
9.5
1991
—
—
—
12.0
17.5
^ Estimated.
^ Specific conductance is higher than other values because the flow at this site is composed mainly of
ground-water discharge.
110 -ic us, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: t093 -780-348
APPENDIX O – UTAH DNR WATER RIGHTS DIVISION SEARCH

APPENDIX P – LINEAMENT STUDY

•
•
•

Lineament Study
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
f
•
t
EVALUATION OF LINEAMENTS AT THE
PROPOSED PROVO CITY LANDFILL,
GOSHEN VALLEY, UTAH
by
ROBERT M. ROBISON
UTAH COUNTY GEOLOGIST
APRIL 20, 1987
CONTENTS
INTRDUCTION 2
TRENCH LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS 5
DISCUSSION 7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
SELECTED REFERENCES 11
APPENDIX 12
#
#
t
t INTRODUCTION
•
The proposed Provo City landfill is located in Goshen
Valley, Utah, in Sec. 17, T. 9 S., R. 1 W., SLB&M (Fig. 1). The
site is about 2 miles west of the southern end of Utah Lake and
approximately 2 miles east of the Tintic Mountains. Elberta City
is approximately 5.5 miles to the south.
The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate lineaments
in Section 17 to determine if they were formed by surface fault
rupture. Several lineaments were identified by the Utah County
Geologist (Robison, 1986a) and Environmental Science and
Engineering (ESE, Whiting, 1986) which may have been produced by
faulting. The Utah County Board of Adjustments (minutes dated
January 13, 1987) authorized an investigation of all lineaments.
The Utah County Geologist had the responsibility to locate
exploratory trenches and make the interpretation as to the
presence/location of any faults found.
The scope of this investigation included a review of
pertinent literature and aerial photographs, field
reconnaissance, and the excavation, logging, photographing, and
interpretation of eight trenches (Fig. 2). Trench locations were
selected during a field reconnaissance on March 6, 1987, by the
Utah County Geologist. Duane Whiting of ESE, Steve Sevier of
Elberta Farms, and Dale Stephenson and Carl Carpenter of Provo
City were present when the trenches were sited.
t
COUNTY
i
9
Figure 1. Map showing the location of the study area,
Section 17, T. 9 S., R. 1 W., SLBfcM, Goshen Valley, Utah.
Single digit numbers refer to trenches. See text for logs
and descriptions of trenches.
f
9
9
9
Figure 2. December, 1986, aerial photograph of the
study area. Lineaments are labeled Ll to LA. Trench
locations are labeled 1 to 7. Scale is approximately
1:11,500.
Eight trenches were excavated on March 24, 25, and 26, 1987
(Fig. 2) across lineaments Ll, L2, and L4. Lineament L3 had no
surface expression or traceable linear features, and hence was
not trenched. Kimm Harty and Suzanne Hecker of the Utah
Geological and Mineral Survey logged trench # 1 (Fig. 2). Robert
M. Robison (Utah County Geologist) and John D. Garr (EarthFax
Consultants) logged the other trenches. EarthFax Consultants
were hired by Environmental Science and Engineering to
participate in the investigation.
TRENCH LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS
Trenches were numbered from north-to-south on the eastern
lineament (Ll, trenches numbered 1 to 4, Fig.2) and from south<-
tornorth on the western lineament (L2, trenches numbered 5 to 7,
Fig. 2). The eighth trench (number 2a, Fig. 2) was parallel to
trench number 2 to verify continuity of the sediments through a
disturbed area. Horizontal level lines were used for elevation
control and reference to bedding and features in logging
trenches. The original scale of the trench logs was 1:50.
Five units were recognized in trench number 1 and were
correlated in all of the trenches. A detailed explanation of
each unit giving the type of deposit, thickness, color, texture
and features, and genesis, is included in the appendix. A
summary of the location and principal features in each trench is
given below:
9
9
9
9
9
•
Trench Number 1. This trench was across the north end of
lineament Ll (Fig. 2, Appendix A). Five stratigraphic units were
delineated in this trench. The continuity of the beds can be
seen in trench log #1 (Appendix A). Stringers of sand can be
traced through the deposits. The fractures in the clayey
sediments may be the result of shrinking from desiccation, or
from liquefaction.
Trench Number 2. This trench was along lineament L4 (Fig.2), A
total of 4 sedimentary units were logged in the trench. A large
burrow(?) in the central portion of the trench made linear
continuity of deposits unclear. A second trench (2a, Fig. 2) was
excavated parallel to trench 2 which had continuous bedding in
the region of the burrow. No logs were made of trench 2a, but
photos (not included in this report) were taken.
Trench Number 3. A 5+ m high scarp was present at the site of
trench number 3. A 36 m long trench was excavated across this
scarp to ensure that any faults would be discovered (trench #3,
Appendix A). Five stratigraphic units were logged in this
trench.
Trench Number 4. This trench was located at the south end of
lineament Ll (Fig. 2). Three continuous stratigraphic units were
found.
Trench Number 5. Trench 5 was located at the south end of
lineament L2 (Fig. 2). Three sedimentary units were identified.
Unit 1 was subdivided into units 1 and la because of the presence
of lacustrine(?) gastropods in unit la (Appendix A). Sand filled
fissures were common. 9
Trench Number 6. Trench number 6 was located in the central
portion of lineament L2 (Fig. 2). Three sedimentary units were
found (Appendix A). Fissures were common and most were filled
with sand. Several small ( < 2 cm) fissures were open within
unit 3.
Trench Number 7. Trench 7 (Fig. 2) was located on the north end
of lineament L2. A 3 m (9 foot) scarp was trenched approximately
11 feet deep, which revealed only eolian sand. The scarp was
apparently a dune slip face (lee slope). The trench walls were
very unstable and no logs were made of the trench. Photographs
were taken of the trench but were not included in this report. 9
DISCUSSION
Sediments and features of Pleistocene Lake Bonneville
dominate the study area. The western margin of the site is
approximately at the Provo shoreline of the lake occupied 14,000
- 15,000 years ago. Shoreline deposits are chiefly gravel which
grades eastward to offshore facies of sand, silt, and clay. Most
of the lake sediments are beneath a thin covering of sandy
Holocene alluvium and eolian material. In addition to these
surficial deposits, trenches exposed sand and gravel. Deposits
representing the transgression of Lake Bonneville about 25
thousand years ago (unit 5, Appendix); deep lake clays of the 9
t
t
t
highstand about 15 to 16 thousand years ago (units 3 and 4) and
the drop to the Provo Shoreline 15 thousand years ago, and the
regression of the lake out of the study area about 13 to 14
thousand years ago (unit la and 2). For a more complete
discussion of the history of Lake Bonneville see Currey and
Oviatt (1985).
The lineaments identified for study varied in surficial
expression and probable origin. The aerial photographs used by
Robison (1986) to identify lineaments were taken in 1959, and the
photos used by ESE were taken in 1986 photos. Lineament number 1
(Fig. 2) was less visible on the 1986 photo as compared to the
1959 photo, and was at a slightly different orientation.
Lineament number 2 (Fig. 2) was more evident on the 1986 photos.
In addition to surface faulting, possible origins of the
lineaments include grazing patterns, animal trails, fence lines,
abandoned canals or ditches, differential erosion of surficial
material, or natural drainage lines. The change in the character
of the lineaments in the 27 years between the photos may be the
result of stabilization after previous land uses, continued
erosion of natural features. Also, several sand dunes are present
roughly parallel to the lineaments.
No existing geologic or surficial maps indicate surface
fault ruptures in this area, and none were found in the
investigation. Faulting at depth has been inferred by Cordova
(1970), but no faults were extended to the ground surface.
Several trenches exhibited layers of sediments with sandr-filled
fissures with little or no offset. These fissures trended roughly
parallel to lineaments, but none were found which reached the
8
ground surface and are not the cause of the lineaments. The sandr
filled fractures may be the result of either liquefaction or
desiccation. If they resulted from earthguake-induced
liquefaction, the earthquake causing the liquefaction would not
necessarily have had an epicenter at the location of the
liquefaction. A large earthquake on the Wasatch Fault, about 12
miles east, would shake the study area sufficiently hard to
induce liquefaction when groundrwater conditions were favorable.
The earthquake would have had to occur after deposition of the
clayey sediments (unit 3, Appendix A) about 13,000 to 12,000
years ago, but before the water table had dropped, possibly about
10,000 years ago.
If the sandr-filled features are the result of desiccation,
then a triggering earthquake is not necessary. The fissures
could have formed any time following the retreat of Lake
Bonneville from this level about 12 ka. Surface water or wind
could have carried the sand into the fissures. Locally, some of
the fissures were open (+/rl cm) within unit 3.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The trenches revealed no features which could be interpreted
as tectonic faults. The trenches were sufficiently deep to
encounter well-bedded late Pleistocene (Lake Bonneville age) and
Holocene sediments in which offsets due to faulting would have
been readily apparent. The lineaments must be the result of
past land uses, meandering drainages, and/or wind erosion and
deposition.
9
9
9
0 Small sand filled fractures in trenches may be result of
liquefaction during times of higher ground-!-water or from
desiccation as sediments dried. Under present conditions, the
liquefaction potential for this area is very low (Anderson and
others, 1986). There appears to be no surface fault rupture
hazard at the site, however, trenches or other excavations
produced from the construction of the landfill should be
periodically inspected by the Utah County Geologist to check for
possible faults in areas not covered by this investigation.
•
•
10
SELECTED REFERENCES 9
Anderson, L.R., Keaton, J.R., and Bischoff, J.E., 1986,
Liquefaction potential map for Utah County, Utah: Utah
State University and Dames and Moore unpublished report for
the U.S. Geological Survey, 46 p.
Cordova, R.M., 1970, Ground water conditions in Southern Utah
Valley and Goshen Valley, Utah: Utah Department of Natural
Resources Technical Publication No. 28, 79 p.
Currey, D.R., and Oviatt, C.G., 1985, Durations, average rates,
and probable causes of Lake Bonneville expansions, still
stands, and contractions during the last deep:-lake cycle,
32,000 to 10,000 years ago: ^il Kay, P.A., and Diaz, H.F.,
eds. Problems of and prospects for predicting Great Salt
Lake levels. Conference Proceedings, Center for Public
Affairs and Administration, University of Utah, p. 9r24.
Robison,R.M., 1986a, Elberta landfill site: Unpublished Utah
County Planning Commission Letter, 2 p.
1986b, Elberta landfill site (Provo, Utah) 9
Unpublished Utah County Planning Commission Letter, Dec,
1986, 4 p.
Whiting, Duane, 1986, Evaluation of hydrologic and seismic
conditions, proposed sanitary landfill site in Goshen
Valley, Utah: Unpublished report by Environmental Science
and Engineering to Elberta Farms, Inc., Elberta, Utah, 55 p.
f
11
t APPENDIX
EXPLANATION FOR TRENCH LOGS
UNIT
t
DESCRIPTION
Sand, silt (SP, SM, ML): some organic
material, gravel present locally; unit may be
>1 m thick; light brown to tan, Munsell color
is 2.5Y 7/2 (dry) to 2.5Y 6/4 (damp); if sand
is predominant, color may be 10YR 5/3 .
Material is eolian sand, loess and/or
alluvium, roots are present and burrows are
abundant. This unit is the present ground
surface and is probably still being deposited.
Unit la has sand with features and color
similar to unit 1. This unit is bedded with
pockets of gastropods, indicating that it may
be lacustrine in origin and older than unit 1,
possibly 13,000 to 14,000 years ago.
Interbedded clay, silty clay and clayey silt,
fine sand, (CL, CL-ML, SM): clay content
increases toward bottom Of unit, sand
increases toward top of unit; unit thickness
may be 2.6 m; color is green to gray, lower
unit is 5Y 5.5 to 6.1 with laminations of 2.5Y
8/2 , unit grades upward to 5Y 7/2; laminated,
may have sand filled fractures locally;
probably represents the regressive deposits of
Lake Bonneville, about 15,000 - 14,000 years
ago.
(
1 \
^
1
1
\
1
t
Blocky clay (CH): homogeneous, maximum thick-
ness about 1 m; brown to reddish brown 10YR
5/2r3; some laminations or mottling present;
may locally have sand filled fissures. CaC03
horizon may be present at the top of unit;
these deposits may represent the deep water
cycle of Lake Bonneville, about 18,000 years
ago.
12
I e • ^ O
.5---.
Interbedded clay, silty clay and clayey silt,
some fine sand (CL, CLi-ML, SM) : clay content
decreases at the base of unit; resembles unit
2; thickness is about .9 m maximum;
laminated, color is green to gray, 5Y 6/1 with
streaks of 5Y 8/1 to 7/2; some sand filled
fissures present; this unit was probably
deposited in the deepening waters of the
transgression of Lake Bonneville, about 19,000
to 20,000 years ago.
Interbedded gravel, sand, (GM, SM):
bedded gravel, moderately to well sorted in
places, maximum clast size 10 cm; unit
thickness exceeds 1.2 m; light brown, 10YR
5/4 , a layer of red sand (oxidized iron
stain) may be present at the contact between
unit 4; liquefaction features (small diapirs)
may be present at the upper contact; this unit
may represent the transgressive gravels of
Lake Bonneville, about 20,000 years ago.
9
9
9
13
I T/^ENCH * /
£•^57"
Hoylzonal
Co/oiTol
L/ne
Q-roupipi £?mr^ce.
Baycl Fi/leti
Fissures
l!<:puefied Zone
O /rr,
O / P.3 -PI-
t
TRENCH ^2
Basf
Q-you/^d Bar-I^cc
Hor/-z.ontal Confyol L 3 Lirrow
%
9
f^£Bt
H£>pizo/ital Control Line
9
West
9
ce.
ContPnuied 3<^low
^ '
..,.••
." ,*",
- -
...- •
' . 1 -
West
*- i"-! ,•-' '.'•
T
HorjZ/onfiil Cdn-typl Line
O . . In)
H—H 1
•—r—1 »
o / a 3 Pf %
nd 3ur-Pac^
WGSf-
TRENCH ^ 3
Bpisf
/lp>rizont£ii Confrol
L/ne
(j-rao/nd 3L
OonfPn u&d
•fyotn
Cfrouncl SfLir
TIRE NCH ^ 4-
Eas-t
J^p>yi2.onfal Control
L/ne
t TRENCH ^ 5
W^et
^rr-canc
Hpfr/'ZonfpiI Control L//?e
9 • ("»
I—I—I—I-
O I z s -PI-
9 TKENCH * P>
Cf round Sur-P/acG.
Hi>riz£>/)t^i/ Control
L/n-e
Band Filled Fissures
%
9
B^73t
-••..•-A^A^»'^>*>........ ,,,,, •-" ---l''-
••:^^sx. .,.....•- .'.•••vicAiwte8u-(a .""••'^•i .-. .*""'**"-rV" "i I-•• ••--'^---••'-'-1 ,'y-^-- -. vj....jat.- ...-*.'-••• >..
"^^^l^'^t^j^-^ ^•''t;:^^*?^'''-vv •'*"'
#
#
APPENDIX Q – SEISMIC ANALYSIS

•
Seismic Analysis
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
APPENDIX J
SEISMIC ANALYSIS FOR
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
BAYVIEW LANDFILL, CELL 1
ISSUED JULY 1996
PREPARED BY
HDR ENGINEERING, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Number Title Page No.
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Purpose 1-1
1.2 Scope 1-1
SECTION 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2-1
2.1 Location 2-1
2.2 Soils 2-1
2.3 Geology 2-3
2.4 Seismicity 2-3
2.5 Adopted Design Values 2-10
SECTION 3.0 STATIC AND PSEUDO-STATIC STABILITY ANALYSES 3-1
3.1 Cases Considered 3-1
3.1.1 Cell 1, Stage 1 Excavation 3-1
3.1.2 Cell 1, Stage 1 Liner and Leachate Collection System 3-1
3.1.3 Cell 1, Stage 2 Excavation 3-1
3.1.4 Cell 1, Stage 2 Liner and Leachate Collection System 3-1
3.1.5 Cell 1, Stage 2 Operational Filling 3-2
3.1.6 Cell 1, Filled 3-2
3.1.7 Cell 1, Closiore Cap 3-2
3.1.8 Stormwater-Leachate Basin 3-2
3.1.9 Adopted Design Cases , 3-2
3.2 Methodology 3-3
SECTION 4.0 SITE SPECIFIC GROUND MOTIONS 4-1
4.1 Approach 4-1
4.2 Site Classification 4-1
4.3 Free Field Aceleration 4-2
4.4 Peak Acceleration at Top of Landfill 4-2
SECTION 5.0 DEFORMATION ANALYSIS 5-1
5.1 Approach 5-1
5.2 Allowable Deformation 5-1
5.3 Excavations and Fills 5-1
5.4 Liner and LCRS Systems 5-2
5.5 Closure Cap System 5-2
Seismic Evaluation i HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
SECTION 6.0 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 6-1
6.1 Findings .....6-1
6.2 Conclusions 6-1
REFERENCES
LIST OF TABLES
Number IMfi Page No.
2.1 Summary of Regional and Site Seismicity 2-10
2.2 Soil Stratigraphy and Physical Properties 2-10
3.1 Adopted Interface Friction Values 3-4
3.2 Global Stability of Cut and Fill Slopes 3-4
3.3 Stability of Cell 1 Liner and Closure Cap Slopes 3-5
4.1 Free Field Acceleration (PGA) 4-2
5.1 Estimated Pennanent Deformations 5-1
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Title Page No.
2-1 Boring Location Plan 2-2
2-2 Geographic Location 2-4
2-3 Aquifer Cross Section G-G Goshea Valley, Utah 2-5
2-4 Probabalistic Earthquake Acceleration 2-6
2-5 Quaternary Tectonic Features and Seismicity of Utah 2-7
2-6 Quaternary Faults and Folds, Utah 2-9
3-1 Cell 1 Liner and LCRS Stability 3-6
5-1 Cell 1 Liner and LCRS Deformations 5-3
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
A - Design Earthquake Motions
B - Static and Pseudo Static Stability Analyses
C - Site Seismic Response Analyses
D - Seismic Deformation Analyses
% Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
HDR Engineering, Inc.
July 1996
SECTION 1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpffge
The Bayview Landfill (the Site) is located in a Seismic Impact Zone, as defined
by the State of Utah Administrative Rules (Utah Department of Environmental Quality,
1996).
This report provides analyses demonstrating that, "...all contaiimient
structures...and surface water control systems are designed to resist the maximum
horizontal acceleration in lithified earth material for the site."
These analyses have been conducted in accordance with the State of Utah
Administrative Rules and EPA guidance presented in RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic
Design Guidance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Facilities, (EPA, 1995).
1.2' Scope
The scope ofthis report includes a literature review of regional and local
seismicity, demonstration analyses ofthe seismic performance ofthe Site features and a
report of findings and conclusions. This report is divided into the following sections:
• Section 2 - Site Conditions - presents soils, geology and seismicity data for the
Site.
• Section 3 - Static and Pseudo-Static Stability Analyses - presents stability
analyses for Cell 1 components; run-on/run-off controls; and the stormwater-
leachate basin.
• Section 4 - Site Specific Ground Motions - presents site specific seismic
response ofthe Site soils and landfill features
• Section 5 - Deformation Analyses - presents estimates of deformations ofthe
Site soils and landfill features
• Section 6 - Findings and Conclusions - discusses the impact ofthe estimated
deformations on the fimction ofthe landfill features.
Seismic Evaluation I-I HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
SECTION 2.0
SITE CONDITIONS
2.1 Location
The Site is located in Sections 17 and 18, T9S, RIW, of Utah County. The site is
approximately 5.5 miles north of Elberta, Utah and directly west of state Highway 68.
The approximate latitude and longitude ofthe site are 40°02'N by 111 °58'W.
2.2 Soils
Information on the site soils has been obtained fiom regional references, on-site
soil borings and on-site monitoring well logs. The locations ofthe on-site borings and
monitoring wells are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 2-1.
The surficial soils consist of mostiy Lake Bormeville Group, Provo Formation
gravel, sand, silt and clay that were deposited in Lake Bormeville during Pleistocene time
(Bissell, 1963). These soils were derived fi'om erosion ofthe East Tintic Mountains and
carried by streams into the ancient lake where they were deposited as beach, bar and spit
deposits along the fluctuating shoreline (Hintze and Fuhriman, 1983). This fluctuating
lakeshore environment created cycles of saturation and dessication, resulting m well
consolidated deposits, commonly cemented with calcium carbonate (Chen and
Associates, Inc., 1980).
Nine 50 feet deep soil borings were made on the site during site selection (Chen
and Associates, Inc.) and site development (Rollins, Brown and Gunnell, Inc., 1983).
The site-specific soil borings in the vicinity of Cell 1 indicate the soils consist of
interbedded layers of dense to very dense sand (SW, SP, SC); medium dense to very
dense gravel (GM, GW); and firm to very hard, low plasticity silt (ML) and clay (CL).
Standard Penetration blow counts range fi'om 13 to refusal in the silts and clays; 30 to
110 in the sands; and 85 to 125 in the gravels. No stratigraphic continuity was noted
among the borings (Hintze and Fuhriman, 1983).
The six shallow monitoring wells shown on Figure 2-1 were advanced to nominal
depths of 75 feet (Roy F. Weston, Inc., 1994). The soil types and discontinuous
stratigraphy were similar to those observed in the soil borings.
The six deep monitoring wells shown on Figure 2-1 were advanced to depths
ranging from 165 to 520 feet deep to encounter the "Shallow Pleistocene Aquifer." None
ofthe borings encountered bedrock. These deeper borings indicated a trend to a more
cemented soil structure and coarser gravel sizes at depths below 100 feet. The boring
logs and gradation data (Bissell, 1963) indicate that cobble and boulder size materials are
present.
Seismic Evaluation 2-1 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
N a
Scale: 1"=800'
JL_ SMW-3. DMW-5
V^
«
Review of well logs summarized by the United States Geologic Survey (USGS,
1993) indicates that wells in nearby sections have been drilled to 800 feet without
encountering bedrock.
Perched water table aquifers have been encoimtered within the Lake Bonneville
Group deposits (Dustin and Merritt, 1980). However, culinary wells are advanced
hundreds of feet deep to obtain adequate yield (USGS, 1993).
2.3 Geology
The Site is located in northwestem Goshen Valley, in the Great Basui portion of
the Basin and Range Physiographic Province (Figure 2-2, after Dustin and Merritt, 1980).
The eastem boundary ofthe Basin and Range Province is formed by the Wasatch Range,
approximately 25 km east ofthe site (Hecker, 1993).
This Province is characterized by block faulting that has produced roughly
parallel fault-block mountains that are separated by flat valley bottoms filled with alluvial
and lake deposits.
The Goshen Valley is boxmded by the East Tintic Mountains on the west, Utah
Lake on the north, West Moimtain on the east, and Long Ridge on the south.
A cross-section of Goshen Valley, cut as shown on Figure 2-2, is presented on
Figure 2-3 (Dustin and Merritt, 1980). The bedrock at the site is interpreted to consist of
Miocene Epoch conglomerates, overlying Ogliocene Epoch volcanic flow materials and
conglomerates, overlying Paleozoic Era limestones and dolomites.
2.4 Seismicity
The probabilistic bedrock acceleration at the Bayview site is 0.5g (490 cm/sec^) as
detennined from the U.S. Geological Siirvey Map MF-2120 (Figure 2-4, after
Algermissen etal., 1990). The associated probabilistic maximum earthquake magnitude
is 7,3 (Algermisson, et.al., 1982). An overview of state-wide seismicity is presented on
Figure 2-5 (after Hecker, 1993). Earthquake magnitudes (M) greater than 2, as recorded
during the tune period 1962-1989, are also shown on this figure.
The maximum credible earthquake (MCE) for the Bayview site carmot be
determined from the probabilistic maps. These map accelerations have been established
on a probability basis and often eliminate peak accelerations that are judged as having the
smallest chance ofoccurrence.
Seismic Evaluation 2-3 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
N
®
ifivi^;^"^;
After Dustin and Merritt, 1980
Q . Profile Axis
(based on well logs) Q 1
Scale
Miles
HDR Engineerhg, Inc.
Geographic Location
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Date
May 1996
Figure
2-2
%
r4CtD
UJ£IS
Restricting Layer Unconsolidated Deposits of
Probable Pleistocene and
Tertiary Ages Limestone &
Shale of Probable Paleozoic
Age.
Horizontal Scale
P 1 2
Miles
Atfer Dustin and Merritt, 1980
HDR Engineerfrig, Ina
Aquifer Cross Section G-G
Goshea Valley, Utah
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Data
May 1996
Figura
2-3
Scale: 1" =600,000*
After Algermissen, et.al., 1990
HDR Engineering, he.
Probabalistic Earthquake Acceleration
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Date
May 1996
Figure
2-4
3v ^
y\
Wif I \/y> ''y^-]'! .
-'.p-4Cfl^/:xA: '• y . . '••\^., •- • .
m-A .' ' -A'. ' ' N
100 Km
J I I » 1 I—>—I—I
Krinitsky (1989) has proposed a deterministic method, which considers the
capability of a fault to produce an earthquake, independent ofthe probability of
occurrence or retum period. This method is based on the following premises:
• All earthquakes are caused by movement on faults.
• Whether or not a fault will produce earthquakes can be judged by the recency
of previous fault movement.
• The size ofthe potential earthquake is in proportion to the size ofthe fault.
• Faults tend to produce earthquakes that are characteristic of each feult.
The MCE for a fault can be detennined from measurements of fault length and
surface displacement. The intensity and acceleration at the site can then be determined
from source-to-site distance-attenuation relationships.
The Site is located in the "Wasatch Front iregion," defined as the geographical
area from latitude 38°55'N to 42°30'N, and from longitude 110°25'W to 113°10'W
(Hecker, 1993). The average regional recurrence interval for surface-faulting earthquakes
(M>6 to 6.5) within the Wasatch Front region is 125 to 300 years. However, earthquakes
below this M = 6.5 threshold for surface faulting may be capable of producing damaging
ground motions. Faults in the vicinity ofthe Site are shown on Figure 2-6 (after Hecker,
1993).
The design earthquakes for the Bayview site were determined using the following
steps, after Krinitsky (1989):
• Detemiine capable faults in the site vicinity. Capable faults are active faults
judged capable of generating felt earthquakes. The criteria established by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Krinitsky, 1989) and the historic tectonic
data (Hecker, 1993) were used to screen the potential faults.
• Determine the Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) for each capable fault.
As discussed previously, the size ofthe potential earthquake is in proportion
to the size ofthe fault. Relationships presented in Krinitsky (1989) were used
to determine the soiirce magnitude (MQ) from fault mpture length and
displacement.
Determine the Modified Mercali Intensity (MMI) and maximum horizontal acceleration
(MHA) ofthe MCE at the Bajrview site. Source-to-site attenuation, intensity and
acceleration at the Bayview site were determined in accordance with Krinitsky (1989).
Seismic Evaluation ' 2-8 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Not to Scale
After Hecker, 1993
KR
HDR Engineering, Inc.
Quaternary Faults and Folds, Utah
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Dita
May 1996
Figure
2-6
Details of these analyses are presented in Attachment A. The results of these
analyses are presented on Table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Summary of Regional and Site Seismicity
FAULT DATA
Fault
Name
TopliffHill
Mecur
East Tintic Mountains
Wasatch - Provo segment
Long Ridge
Wasatch - Nephi segment
Distance to
Site (Km)
22
24
18
24-36
14
18-21
MCE
(Mo)
6.8
7.0
6.7
7.2
6.8
7.2
SITE DATA
MMI
(-)
VIII
IX
VIII
IX
VIII
IX
MHA
(%g)
0.30
0.30
0.38
0.40
0.47
0.50
2.5 Adopted Design Values
The regional soil stratigraphy and site-specific boring logs were reviewed to
establish a design profile for use in subsequent stability analyses. Soil shear strengths
were based on the laboratory soil testing program and correlations with the Standard
Penetration Test results (Department ofthe Navy, 1982). Waste shear strengths were
based on EPA data (EPA, 1995). The adopted stratigraphy and corresponding physical
properties are summarized on Table 2.2.
DEPTH
Waste
0-100
100-800
800+
Soil Stratigra]
UNIT WEIGHT
(pcf)
50
110
120
120
Table 2.2
phy and Physical Properties
COHESION (c)
(psf)
150
0
0
0
FRICTION (({))
(degrees)
22
40
45
45
The adopted design earthqiiake for the Bayview landfill site is a MMI = IX, with a
corresponding MHA of 0.50g. This deterministic value is consistent with the
probabilistic values of MQ = 7.3 and MHA = 0.50g presented by Algermisson (1982,
1990).
Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
2-10 HDR Engineering, Inc.
July 1996
%
SECTION 3.0
STATIC AND PSEUDO-STATIC STABILITY ANALYSES
3.1 Cases Considered
Stability analyses were conducted to determine the factor of safety against slope
failures under static and pseudo-static loading conditions. The following landfill features,
shown on Figure 2-1, were considered:
3.1.1 Cell 1. Stage 1 Excavation
Stage 1 of Cell 1 was constmcted in 1989. The cell was excavated at 1V:4H (25
percent) slopes, to a maximum depth of nominally 40 feet. There was approximately 20
feet of relief m the original ground surface topography, resulting in higher slopes in the
northern and westem portions ofthe cell. These higher slopes are broken with a nominal
10 feet wide drainage bench approximately midway on the slope.
3.1.2 Cell 1. Stage 1 Liner and Leachate Collection System
The exisiting liner system for this stage consists of a 40-mil smooth High Density
Polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane sandwiched between two layers of 12 ounce per
square yard nonwoven geotextile. The lower geotextile was used to provide a cushion
against puncture from the imderlying granular subgrade. The upper geotextile was used
to provide the tensile strength necessary to resist the forces generated by the 2 feet thick
leachate collection/protective cover layer sliding down the 1 V:4H smooth HDPE surface.
3.1.3 Cell 1. Stage 2 Excavation
Stage 2 of Cell 1 is proposed for development. The proposed side slopes will
match the Stage 1 grades and will consist of 1 V:4H (25%) slopes, to a maximum depth of
nominally 40 feet along the westem and southem portions of tiie cell. These slopes are
consistent witii Utah Admmistirative Code R315-303-4 (3), (UDEQ, 1996).
3.1.4 Cell 1. Stage 2 Liner and Leachate Collection Svstem
The proposed Stage 2 system will consist of a 60 mil smooth HDPE
geomembrane over a cushion geotextile or a sand cushion layer.
The leachate collection/protective cover layer will consist of 2 feet of native
dune sand. The side slope portions ofthe leachate collection/protective cover layer will
be reinforced with a high strength geotextile to provide cushioning and increased side
slope stability under both static and seismic loading.
Seismic Evaluation 3-1 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
3.1.5 Cell 1. Stage 2 Operational Filling
It is anticipated that the Stage 2 waste fills will be placed in 10 feet thick lifts,
similar to the current operations for Stage 1. Fill slopes typically vary, with steeper
slopes occuring at the working face. Two fill heights will be considered: 1) El. 4760+,
representing a waste backfill to the initial ground surface, and 2)E1, 4780, representing
approximately 20 feet ofwaste above the initial ground surface.
3.1.6 Cell 1. Filled
The proposed waste fill slopes average 5 percent from the crest at El. 4812 to a
variable slope break, rangmg from El. 4800 to 4780. The side slopes are 1V:4H (25%)
from the slope break to original grade. Maximum waste fill heights in Cell 1 are 90 feet
above the cell bottom and 50 feet above original grade. These slopes are consistent with
UtahAdministrative Code R315-303-4 (4) (UDEQ, 1996).
3.1.7 Cell 1. Closure Cap
The proposed Cell 1 final cover liner will consist of a 60 mil Low Density
Polyethylene (LDPE) smooth geomembrane; overlain by 12 inches of native sand
drainage material; overlain by 6 inches of vegetative cover soil. This liner system will
overlay a 12 inch gas transmission layer composed of native sand soils.
3.1.8 Stormwater-Leachate Basin
The Stormwater-Leachate Basin was constmcted in 1989. The basin was
excavated at 1V:3H slopes, to a maximum depth of nominally 24 feet. The basin is lined
with a geotextile cushion layer and a 60 mil smooth HDPE geomembrane. A second,
sacrificial 40 mil HDPE geomembrane is used for weather protection on the sideslopes.
Six inches of concrete is used on the basin floor.
3.1.9 Adopted Design Cases
These features were consolidated into the following cases for analysis:
• Cell 1, excavation slopes, considering global soil stability.
Cell 1, liner and leachate collection system (LCRS), considering side slope
stability
• Cell 1, Stage 2 operational filling, considermg sUding on cell floor liner and
LCRS.
Seismic Evaluation 3-2 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
%
• Cell 1, final waste fill slopes, considering waste fill stability.
• Cell 1, closure cap, considering side slope stability
• Stormwater-leachate basin, considering global soil stability.
3.2 Methodology
Both static and pseudo-static conditions were evaluated. The generalized factor of
safety against a slope failure is defmed as: F.S. = s/x, where s is the available shear
strength ofthe slope and T is the shear strength required for just-stable equilibrium.
The Simplified Bishop curcular arc method was used to evaluate the global
stability ofthe excavated and filled slopes. The computer program REAME (EPA, 1986)
was used to conduct these analyses. This program searches for the potential failure
surface which produces the lowest factor of safety. The location ofthis failure surface is
a function ofthe site geometry (slope angle and height); material stratigraphy and
physical properties; and loadings (weight of soil and/or waste above the failure surface).
The sliding block (wedge) metiiod (USACE, 1970) was used to evaluate the
sliding stability along the bottom liner and the LCRS system. The computer program
UTEXAS3 (Wright, 1991) was used to conduct these analyses. The failure surface is
defined by the bottom of the cell.
The infinite slope method (USACE, 1970) was used to evaluate the stability ofthe
cell liner and LCRS system and the closure cap system. Generally, the failure surfaces
for these features are defined by planar interfaces with the geosynthetic components.
For a given slope geometry, the interface fiiction angle, 5, between adjacent
materials normally control slope stability, with the lowest interface fiiction angle
controlling overall slope stability. Adopted fiiction values for the geosynthetic interfaces
are presented on Table 3.1.
A minimum static safety factor of 1.3 was adopted (EPA, 1993). The pseudo-
static seismic coefficient (k^) was iterated for both the circular arc and the infinite slope
analyses to determine the yield acceleration (ky) corresponding to a factor of safety of 1.0.
This yield acceleration is used to estimate the cell liner, cell leachate collection system
and closure cap deformations (Section 5).
Seismic Evaluation 3-3 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Table 3.1
Adopted Interface Friction Values
INTERFACE
LOWER UPPER
FRICTION
ANGLE (8)
LINER AND LCRS
Soil Subgrade
Cushion Geotextile
-or- Sand Cushion
Smootii 60 mil HDPE
Cushion Geotextile
-or-Sand Cushion
Smootii 60 mil HDPE
Granular LCRS
•27"
27°
90
170
17°
CLOSURE CAP
Granular Gas Vent
Smootii 60 mil LDPE
Smootii 60 mil LDPE
Granular Cap Drain
25°
25°
The results ofthe static and pseudo-static stability analyses for the excavations
and waste fills are presented in Attachment B and summarized on Table 3.2. The results
indicate that the static factor of safety is adequate for the existing and proposed cut and
fill slope geometry. The yield accelerations at a safety factor of 1.0 are near the the
adopted peak bedrock acceleration, suggesting minimal permanent deformation (EPA,
1995). The estimated magnitude ofthis deformation is quantified in Section 5.
Table 3.2
Global Stability of Cut and FiU Slopes
FEATURE
Cell 1,1 V:4H Excavation Slopes
Cell 1,1V:4H Waste Fill Slopes
Stormwater-Leachate Basin, 1V:3H Slopes
STATIC FACTOR
OF SAFETY
2.5+
2.5+
2.5+
YIELD
ACCELERATION
0.52g
0.44g
0.52g
The results ofthe static and pseudo-static stability analyses for the cell liner and
LCRS and the closure cap are presented in Attachment B and summarized on Table 3.3.
Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
3-4 HDR Engmeermg, Inc.
July 1996
Table 3.3
Stability of Cell 1 Liner and Closure Cap Slopes
FEATURE
Side slope Imer and LCRS
Bottom Imer and LCRS
Closure Cap
5
9
17
9
17
25
F.S.
Fig 3-lA
Fig 3-lB
3.25
5.18
1.87
kv
Fig3-1A
Fig 3-lB
0.15
0.25
0.21
^regd
Fig 3-lA
Fig 3-lB
None
None
None
Infinite slope analyses at the liner - LCRS interface indicate that the 9° and 17°
interfaces will not meet the minimum static factor of safety on a 1 V:4H (14 degrees)
slope.
Tensile reinforcement, similar to that used in the Stage 1 constmction, is required
to provide additional resistance against both static and pseudo-seismic forces. Higher
reinforcement levels will increase both the static safety factor and the yield acceleration at
which permanent displacements begin. The relationship among the interface fiiction
angle (5), static factor of safety (FS), yield acceleration (ky) and the required
reinforcement strength (Tj^qd) is shown on Figure 3-1.
% Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
3-5 HDR Engineering, Inc.
July 1996
15*
3.00
2.50
o
(/J
2.00 --
"5 1.50-^
o
Lt. 1.00
0.50 --
3.50
Figure 3-1A
40' High IV: 4H Slope
Interface Friction = 9*
0.2 0.3 0.4
Pseudo-Static Seismic Coefficent
0.5
Figure 3-IB
40' High IV: 4H Slope
Interface Friction = 17*
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Pseudo-Static Seismic Coefficent
HDR Engineering; Inc.
Cell 1 Liner and LCRS Stability
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Date
Moy 1996
Figure
3-1
SECTION 4.0
SITE SPECIFIC GROUND MOTIONS
%
4.1 Approach
The MHA selected in Section 2 is the maximum horizontal acceleration in the Site
bedrock and does not reflect the effect ofthe overlying soils on the horizontal
acceleration developed at the ground surface or at the top ofthe closed Cell 1.
These ground motions were determined using the "Simplified Analysis" presented
in EPA, 1995. This Simplified Analysis is considered appropriate for the Site, based on
considerations ofthe soil stratigraphy and geology. The Simplified Andysis consists of
the following steps:
• Classify the site, based on shear wave velocity in the upper 100 feet ofthe soil
column.
• Estimate the free field peak ground surface acceleration (PGA), based on the
site classification and the MHA in the bedrock.
• Estimate the peak acceleration at the top ofthe landfill, based on the PGA and
the seismic response ofthe waste.
Details ofthis Simplified Analysis are presented in Attachment C.
4.2 Site Classification
The shear wave velocity was based on Utah Geologic Survey (UGS) experience in
the area (Christensen, 1996) and the Site-specific soil borings.
The UGS has classified this area of Utah Coimty as a "hard site," generally
considered as having a shear wave velocity greater than 400 meters per second (m/s).
Site-specific shear wave velocities were computed fiom the Standard Penetration
Test data (N values) reported in the geotechnical investigations (Department ofthe Navy,
1982). The computed average shear wave velocity in the upper 100 feet was 386 m/s.
Based on this range in shear wave velocity, the site was classified as a medium
stiff (200 to 375 m/s) to stiff (375 to 700 m/s) site (EPA, 1995). Botii classifications
were carried forward for ftirther analysis.
Seismic Evaluation 4-1 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landflll July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
4.3 Free Field Aceleration
The PGA was determined from Ihe site classification and the MHA (Section 2).
Both the medium stiff and stiff classification ranges were considered. The results are
presented on Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
Free Field Acceleration (PGA)
SITE CLASSIFICATION
Medium Stiff
Stiff
MHA
0.50
0.50
PGA
0.50
0.50
The results ofthis analysis indicate the Site soils provide little attenuation or
amplification to the MHA. This is a function of both the site soils and the high MHA
(EPA, 1995).
4.4 Peak Acceleration at Top of Landfill
The peak acceleration at the top ofthe landfill was determuied from the PGA and
the seismic response ofthe waste mass, using the recommended "soft-soil site"
ampUfication curve of Idriss (EPA, 1995).
The results ofthis analysis indicate a peak acceleration of 0.42 g at the top ofthe
landfill, suggesting a slight attenuation through the waste mass.
Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
4-2 HDR Engineering, Inc.
July 1996
#
SECTION 5.0
DEFORMATION ANALYSIS
5.1 Approach
Pennanent deformations resulting from the adopted design seismic event were
estimated for each ofthe landfill features identified in Section 3. Chart solutions, based
on the "Newmark sliding block" method, were used to quantify these deformations.
The Newmark method is based on the premise that permanent deformations (U)
accumulate along a failure surface when the acceleration m the failure mass (amsx)
exceeds the yield acceleration (ky) along the failure surface. The yield acceleration and
the mass acceleration for each feature are presented in Sections 3 and 4, respectively.
The results of these analyses are presented in Attachment D and discussed in the
following.
5.2 Allowable Deformation
An upper limit of 30 cm.(l foot) was established as the maximum tolerable
deformation for the geosynthetic components (EPA, 1995). For a 40 feet high 1V:4H
slope with a slope length of 165 feet, the elongation from this maximum 1 foot of
deformation would be 0.6 percent (1ft -^ 165ft, as a percent). The yield elongation for 60
mil smooth HDPE is nominally 12 percent (NSF, 1991), indicating adequate reserve
elongation capacity.
5.3 Excavations and Fills
The permanent deformations for the Cell 1 excavations, the stormwater-leachate
basin and the Cell 1 waste fill were estimated from the Makdisi and Seed chart version of
the Newmark method (EPA, 1995). These estimates are presented in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1
Estimated Permanent Deformations
FEATURE
Cell 1 excavations
Cell 1 waste fill
Stormwater-leachate basm
kv
0.52g
0.44g
0.52g
^ax
0.50g
0.50g
0.50g
u
<1 cm.
<1 cm
<1 cm
m
The estimated deformations are minor and reflect the high yield strength along the
failure surface relative to the mass acceleration from the design earthquake event.
Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
5-1 HDR Engineering, Inc,
July 1996
5.4 Liner and LCRS Systems
The permanent deformations for the Cell 1 liner and LCRS were estimated from
the Makdisi and Seed chart version ofthe Newmark method (EPA, 1995). These
estimates are presented on Figure 5-1.
As shown on Figure 5-1, the 9° cushion geotextile - smooth HDPE interface
requires a minimimi tensile reinforcement of 8.2 kips per linear foot (Idf) to limit
permanent deformations to less than 30 cm. The 17° sand cushion - smooth HDPE
interface requires a minimum tensile reinforcement of 3.5 kips per linear foot (klf) to
limit permanent deformations to less than 30 cm.
5.5 Closure Cap System
The permanent deformations for the Cell 1 closure cap were estimated from the
Hynes and Franklin chart version ofthe Newmark method (EPA, 1995). None ofthe
estimated deformations exceeded 10 cm. No remforcement is required for this proposed
clossure cap.
4
Seismic Evaluation
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
5-2 HDR Engineering, Inc.
July 1996
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Reinforcement Tension, T, (KLF)
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Reinforcement Tension, T, (KLF)
WR Engneering, ha
Ceil 1 Liner and LCRS Deformations
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Bayview Landfill
Dote
May 1996
Rgure
5-1
SECTION 6.0
FmDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
6.1 Findings
The Bayview Landfill site is located in a Seismic Impact Zone. Both
deterministic and probabilistic methods indicate a peak bedrock acceleration of 0.5g. The
dense granular soils offer little amplification or attenuation ofthe bedrock acceleration
through the overlying soil colimm.
The cut and fill slopes and run-on/run-off stmctures have adequate static factor of
safety and indicate minimal pennanent deformations (U<1 cm) in response to the design
seismic event.
The side slope liner and LCRS system will require a geosynthetic reinforcement
to increase the static factor of safety and limit permanent deformations in response to the
design seismic event. Either sand or a geotextile can be used as a cushion beneath the
geomembrane.
The closure cap system has an adequate static factor of safety and indicates
acceptable permanent deformation (U<10 cm) in response to the design seismic event. ; \
No reinforcement is required. ^^
6.2 Conclusioi^s
These demonstration analyses indicate that the proposed Bayview landfill
components are designed to resist the "maximmn horizontal acceleration" at the site.
Seismic Evaluation 6-1 HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
9
*
REFERENCES
Bissell, H. J., (1963), I<3fe5ow2evi7/e.- Geology of Southern Utah Valley, Utah,
Geological Survey Professional Paper 257-B.
Algermissen S.T. etal., (1982), Probablilistic Estimates of Maximum Acceleration and
Velocity in Rock in the Contiguous United States, Open-File Report 82-1033, U.S.
Geological Survey.
Algermissen S.T. etal., (1990), Probablilistic Earthquake Acceleration and Velocity
Maps for the United States and Puerto Rico, Map MF-2120, U.S. Geological
Survey.
Chen and Associates, Inc, (1980), "Proposed Sanitary Landfill Site, City of Provo, Utah,"
Job No. 130U, Chen and Associates, Inc. Salt Lake City.
Christensen, G.E., (1996), Utah Geological Survey, personal communication.
Departinent of tiie Navy, (1982), Soil Mechanics Design Manual 7.1, NAVFAC DM-7.1,
Department ofthe Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria,
VA.
Dustin, J.D. and Merritt, L.B., (1980), Hydrogeology of Utah Lake with Emphasis on
Goshen Bay, Water Resources Bulletin 23, Utah Geological and Mineral Survey,
Salt Lake City, UT.
Environmental Protection Agency, (1986), Geotechnical Analysis for Review of Dike
Stability (GARDS), EPA 1600/2-86-109a, Office of Research and Development,
Cincinnatti, OH.
Environmental Protection Agency, (1993), Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria,
EPA/530/R-93-017, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washmgton, DC.
Envfronmental Protection Agency, (1995), RCRA Subtitle D (258) Seismic Design
Guidance for Municipal Solid Waste Landflll Facilities, EPA/600/R-95/051,
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
Hecker, S., (1993), Quaternary Tectonics of Utah With Emphasis on Earthquake-Hazard
Characterization, Bulletin 127, Utah Geological Survey, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Hmtzc, L.F. and Fuhriman, D.K., (1983), "Geohydrology Stiidy of Proposed West Lake
Landfill Site."
Seismic Evaluation HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landfill July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
Krinitsky, E.L., (1989)," Empirical Earthquake Ground Motions for an Engineering Site
with Fault Sources: Tooele Army Deport, Utah," Bulletin ofthe Association of
Engineering Geologists, Vol. XXVI, No. 3, pps. 283-308.
National Sanitation Foundation, (1991), Flexible Membrane Liners, ANSI/NSF 54-1991,
NSF Intemational, Ann Arbor, MI.
Rollins, Brown and Gunnell, (1983), Letter report of Subsoil Investigation Submitted to
Provo City Department of Engineers. Rollins, Brown and Guimell, Inc., Provo,
Utah..
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (1970), Stability of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams, Engineer
Manual EM 1110-2-1902, Department of tiie Army, Corps of Engineers, Office of
the Chief of Engineers, Washington, DC.
U. S. Geological Survey, (1993). Selected Hydrologic Data For Southern Utah and
Goshen Valleys, Utah, 1890-1922, Utah Hydrologic Data Report No. 50:
prepared in cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division
of Water Rights.
Utah Department of Environmental Quality, (1996), Solid Waste Permitting and
Management Rules, Utah Administrative Code (R315-301 through 320), Revised
as of February 15,1996, State of Utah, Department of Environmental Quality,
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, Salt Lake City, UT.
Roy F. Weston, Inc., (1994), Application For A Permit To Operate A Class I Landfill.
Bayview Landfill, South Utah SW District, Roy F, Weston, Inc., Denver, CO.
Wright, S.G., (1991), UTEXAS3, A Computer Program for Slope Stability Calculations,
Shinoak Software, Austin, TX.
Seismic Evaluation HDR Engineering, Inc.
Bayview Landflll July 1996
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
A ATTACHMENT A
DESIGN EARHTQUAKE MOTIONS
Jab)«x Na
HDR Computation
Project ^^^v)\£.N-J L^tJt^f^VV-X—
KR
Subjtct \,.U-»-^'^v^.*— '^JC'VtvAxC, ^\/^,\.AMi,Ti.'a^
I Computed &V-55
Checked IM-
Task 'S-g^^cr iS&S^CssVJ -ClQ H UiOTlw/Nt) Sheet
Date
Date
4-z«? -qt.
^^^-96
Of
<3B.J^(yrNJe:'> % \^ Ufe'^^MivJs^ oi<c.A.-e>us P=A,UC\S. ^ri.<iv*y^£> -sos;
Ao°vJ
\\.e.°\M
n (^^ ^«^^
Jobhkx \No.
HDR Computation ia^
I Projea I Computed
Subject Checked
Task Sheet
Date
Date
Of
Cp: ''A-qrv.os •p-^roc^^fe
%
*
« rv\6>Jc;t**>->5 f^lt-^Ki^ <SpjwjtO!i •a(>^i^c3& uji.Trw.»o. vjk.'yr '^'SvOco LMI_ ^ MJt|oie
<9 Top ^'/T"' ^''^
•> -^-sr Tittle
•A-^. :<r^ c^ti-^:^^
Uiali Cfohgicai Survey 4?
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SLff RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT min^T
(LocaUon No.) XlCP years (Time Period
• XlO' years ago)
Goose Creek Mountains (Caults)
(6-18)
Parameter values: Quatemaiy(?)
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL
XIO* years
(Time Period
XIO' yean ago)
DISPLACEMENT
PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
mete» Idlometen
-I-
Age Ciiteria : fault control of bedroclc-alluviiim contact
References ; DoeOing and otheis, 1980
Grouse Creek and Dove Creek Mountains (faults)
(6-19)
Parameter values: middle to late Pleistocene(7) I
Age Criteria
References
Comments
faulted colluvium
Compton, 1972
Faults are mapped as Quateinaiy(7) (plate 1) where faulting has uplifted Pliocene to early Pleistocene gravels,
and where lineaments and alignel springs suggest active faulting (Todd, 1973; this study).
Sheeprock fault zone
(7-1)
Parameter values: Ute Pleistocene(7) I
Age Criteria : scarp morphology
References : Bamhard and Dodge, 1988
Comments : From scarp-profile data, the Sheeprock scarps appear to be older than the TopliC HDl, Stansbuty, and Mercur
scarps (location nos. 7-7,7-10, and 7-14). Diffusion-equation modeling of the scarps, which probably represent
multiple events (witb a cumulative displacement of <11.5 meters), yielded an age of about 53,000 years (Hanks
and others, 19S4). Is contrast, Everitt and Kaliser (1980) concluded that scaip morphology suggests a possible
Holocene age for latest faulting. The embayed character of the range front suggests a long period of iiiactivi^
preceding the recent episode of faulting (Everitt and Kaliser, 1980).
Silver Island Mountains
- southeast side (fault)
(7-2)
Parameter values: 3-5 7 I
Age Criteria
References
Comments
I I 0.6 7
artifacts
D.B. Madsen, written and verbal communication, 1987,1988
Lake Bonneville deposits are vertically displaced 0.6 meters across the fault. Diagnostic artifacts in faulted
sediments near fault-line springs and correlations between basal spring-related peat layers and Holocene lake
levels provide an estimate of the time of origin of the springs and, presumably, the time of faulting.
Cedar Valley
- south end (fault)
(7-3)
Parameter values:
Age Criteria
References '
Comments
late Quateniaiy(?) | | ' |
0-&00;COO y^Z.
range-front morphology
Anderson and Miller, 1979
Anderson and Miller (1979) indicated that Quatemaiy(7) alluvium may be displaced, and th^ mapped the fault
as late Pleistocene (<500,000 years old), although an aerial pholo check for this study yielded no clear evidence
of faulted alluvium.
^s Quaternary Tectonics of Vuh
RECURRENCE-
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SLIP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mm^
(Location No.) XIO* years (Time Period
XIO* years ago)
Silver Island Mountains
- west side (fault)
(7-4)
Parameter values: Quatemaiy(7)
fault control ot bedrock-alluvium contact
Moore and Sorensen, 1979
Age Criteria:
References :
Lakeside Mountains
- west side (fault)
(JS)
Parameter values: Quateniaiy(?)
INTERVAL
XlO'yean
(Time Period
XlOi* years ago)
DISPLACEMENT
PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
meters kilometen
'I-
I I
%
Age Criteria : fault contrcd of bedrock-alluvium contact
References : Moore and Sorensen, 1979; Young, 1955
Comments : Arabasz and others (1989) included the fault (queried as to state of activity) in a compilation of seismic sources
in the region. They reference T.P. Bamhard as having identified the feature as a lineament that be feels is
probably not related to faulting because it parallels topographic contours, and thus may be a shoreline feature.
Xxxskout Pass ^
- south side (fault)
(7-6) .
Parameter values: Quatemary(7) | | |
Age Criteria : fault control of bedrock-alluviimi contact
References : Moore and Sorensen, 1979
TopliC ISU fault zone
(7-7)
Parameter values: /-:? late Pleistocene(7) | | |
/Of OCO—/SO, b^JP-
Age Criteria : scaip morphology; shoreline relations
References : Bamhard and Dodge, 1988
Comments : Everitt and Kaliser (1980) interpreted a lauUed alluvial fan as younger than the Bonneville shoreline, whereas
Bamhard and Dodge (1988) mapped the same surface as wave-etched and older than the Bonne\ilIe shoreline.
' From scaip-profile data, tbe Topliff Hill scarps appear to be younger than the Sheeprock, Stansbuiy, and Mercur
fault scarps (location nos. 7-1, 7-10, and 7-14). The Topliff Hill scarps show evidence fbr recurrent movement.
with a cumulative maximum displacement of 5.8 meters. South of the scaips, the range-front (mapped as a
Quatemaiy(7) fault, plate 1) rises in elevation, is linear and faceted, and has an active alluvial apron (Eveiitt and
KaUser, 1980).
•J'«P*M A^jfc/»J/r3»^,/2^ ;2..
JO Quaternary Tectonics cf Utah
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SLIP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mm^
(Location No.) XIO^ years
Saint John Station fault zone
(7-13)
Parameter values:. late Pleistocene
^1-
(Time Period
"Kit? years ago)
-I-
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL
XIO' years
(Time Period
XIO' years ago)
DISPLACEMENT
PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
meters kilometers
-I-
Age Criteria : presence of scaips on alluvium; relations to lacustrine features
References : Bamhard and Dodge, 1988; Everiu and Kaliser, 1980
Comments : Small-displacement faults in alluvium (not shown on plate 1) lie several kilometers southeast of the Saint John
Sution fault zcme within a portion of the Tooele Army Depot and are buried beneath an unfaulted soil estimated
to be older than 125,000 years (Krinltzsky, 1989: U.S. Department of the Army, 1989).
Mercur fault zone
(7-14)
^ t
Parameter values: late Pleistocene(7) | I Cf-Af I /('
Age Criteria ; scarp morphology; lacustrine stratigraphy ..-•
References ; Bamhard and Dodge, 1988
Comments : Reinterpretation of a trench log that was presented bv Everitt and Kaliser (19801 as evidence for posl-Bonnevllle
fanltine shows a pre-existing fault scarp buried by Bonneville transgressive deposits. A shallow trench excavated
across a feature identified by Everitt and Kaliser (1980) as a fkult scaip in a post-lake teirace likewise revealed a
buried pre-Bonneville fault scarp. From scarp proGle data, the Mercur scaipsrecord displacements of 1.8-5.6
meters and appear to be younger than the Sheeprock and Stansbuiy scaips (location nos. 7-1 and 7-10), but older
than the Topliff Hill scarps (location no. 7-7). Faulted alluvium exposed in a mining shaft, together with an
uplifted bedrock pediment, suggest a minimum of 60 meters of Quaternary displacement on tbe fault (Everitt and
Kaliser, 1980).
northem Oquinh fault zone
(7-15)
Parameter values: 9 -13J 0.21 - 0 J3 'dm
(<9 -13.5)
2.9-4.8 b
Age Criteria : scaip motphology; shoreline relations
References : Bamhard and Dodge, 1988; Everitt and Kaliser, 1980
Comments - : Scarp morphology is more similar to the Bonneville shoreline scarps than to tbe Drum Mountains fault scarps
(location no. 8-1), which have been dated at about 9,000 years old. This suggests an age close to but not greater
ihan tbe Provo shoreline, which has been offset across the fault. Compound scarps, with as much as twice the
height of the single-event scarps (and with surface displacements of up to 7.3 meters), record an older,
pre-Bonneville displacement modiCed by lacustrine erosion. Hanks and otheis (1984) considered the Oquirrh
Mountain fault scaips to be older than the Bonneville shoreline and tentatively assigned them a poorly
constrained diffusion-model age of 32,000 years. The southern half of the mapped fault Is expressed as a
prominent break in slope at the base of the range front,-where Bamhard and Dodge (1988) found no direct
evidence of post-Bonneville faulting. However, Tooker and Roberts (1938) mapped several short faults in
Bonneville and post-BonnevilIe(7) deposits at the north end of tbe range-front embayment Because the
calculated slip rate is based on scaip height rather than displacement, the values may be too high by a factor of
two. Youngs and others (1987, in press) inferred a slip rate of 0.1-02 mm^ for the fault.
f^ ..K^^fffrsf^ , .^ ^ ;?.
Utah Geological Survey 55
RECURRENCE -
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SUP RATE INTERVAL DISPLACEMENT
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mm^ XIO* years PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
(Location No.) XlO'yean (Time Period (Time Period metecs kilometen
XlO^ yean ago) XIO' yean ago)
i
East Tintic Mountains
- west side (faults)
(8-16)
Parameter values: middle to late Pleistocene | . | \ -4- •'9
Age Criteria : scaip morphology
References : Bucknam and Anderson, 1979a
. Comments : Alluvial scarps appear on aerial photos as Isolated, highly dissected renmants surrounded bv several different ayes
of unfaulted alluvium and appear to be among Xiit oldest in westem Utah. Steep faceted bedrock spun iiortb and
south of Silver City (Goode, 1959) suggest active uplift north of the scarps. In addition, faults in alluvium (not
shown on plate 1) were observed northwest of Eureka, about 2 kilometers east of the range front (Goode, 1959).
Anderson and Miller (1979) mapped buried Quatemaiy(?) faults extending to the north and south of the alluvial
scarps. These faults and faults that form bedrock-alluvium contacts at the south end of the East Tintic
Mountains (Mortis, 1987) are mapped es Quatemary(7) on plate 1. On the east side of the mountain ranpe.
faults in pre-Bonneville alluvium (not shown on plate 1) were recognized in a tunnel at the south end of Goshen
VaUey (Goode, 1959).
Maple Grove (faults)
(8-17)
Parameter values: late Pleistocene(?) Ill
Age Criteria : scarp morphology; fault control of bedrock-alluvium contact
References : Bucknam and Anderson, 1979a; Oviatt, 1992
Comments : Crestal rounding and dissection suggest that fault scaips are older than the Bonneville shoreline. The steepness
of scarp slopes (up to 47°) is attributed to the coarseness of the alluvium. Evidence of Holocene faulting, present
in scarps to the north and south, was not noted for the Maple Grove scarps. The scarps represent displacements
of up to 12 meten.
Scipio (Caults)
(8-18)
Parameter values: late Pleistocene ^ | | |
Age Criteria: scarp morphology
References : Bucknam and Anderson, 1979a; Osfatt, 1992
Conmients : Evidence of Holocene faulting, present in scarps to the north and south, is not seen in the subdued morphology
of the Scipio fault scaips. Faults mapped as Quateniaiy(7) in age on plate 1 are concealed vall^-fiU structures.
%
82 Quaternary Tectonics of Utah
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST , SUP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mmfyr XlO'yean
(Location No.) XlO'yean (Time Period (Tune Period
XIO' yean ago) XIO' yean ago)
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL DISPLACEMENT
PER EVENT
meten
RUPTURE LENGTH
kilometen
Towanta Flat graben
(12-2)
Parameter values: 130-500
-1-
I I (130-500)
On
Age Criteria : soil development; cobble weathering
References : Martin and othen, 1985; Nelson and Weisser, 1985
Comments : Some worken (Hansen, 1969a, 1969b; Utah Geological and Mineral Survey, 1977) have assigned late Pleistocene
and Holocene ages to the scarps, based on estimated ages of faulted deposits and the freshness of the scarps.
Nelson and Weisser (1985) concluded that there b no significant net tectonic displacement across the graben
(although the throw across bidividual scarps has been Zl-2.6 meten per event). This lack of net slip, together
with an orientation that diffen from planes deCned by microseismicity, the limited extent of tbe scarps, and an
average recurrence interval that is less than half as long as tbe time since the most recent event, suggests that the
faults may not have a seismogenic origin and may not be capable of signiCcant future surface-rupturing events. A
reported late Pleistocene fault east of Tabiona that lies along the projected strike of the Towanta Flat faults
(Ritzma, referenced in Anderson and Miller, 1979) shows no displacement in bedrock. An anomakjus linear
drainage used to infer the presence of the fault (Rit^na, referenced in Martin and othen, 1985) is apparently a
strike stream. '
Wasatch fault zone
- Provo segment
(12-3)
Parameter values:
Age Criteria
References
Comments
OJ - 0.6 e
'^1
I
1.1 -13
(<S3)
1.0 -1.7 '
(<15)
2.4
(<53)
I 1.5-3.0 n 69S
I I
'^Q TL; lacustrine stratigraphy
Lund and othen, 1991; Machette, 1989, in press; Machette and othen, 1991,1992
Based on £ault geometry and apparent recency of movement as indicated by scarp morphology, Machette and
othen (1986) tentative^ subdivided the Provo segment (as originally proposed by Schwartz and Coppersmith,
1984) into three subsegments (from north to south, the American Fork, Provo "restricted sense," and Spanish
Fork). However, based on the timing of the last two events deciphered Ccom trench studies, the entire length of
the Wasatch fault zone in Utah Valley appean to be a single segment (Machette, 1989, b press; Lund and othen,
1991; Machette and othen, 1991). The penultimate event occuned about 2,600-3,000 yean ago; based on results
from the northem end of the segment (at American Fork), the prior two events occurred about 5,300 and
5,500-8,000 yean ago. A conflicting chronology of faulting fhim a site near tbe southem boundary of the
segment (at Water Canyon, where two events have occurred in the last 1,000 yean) m^ be explained by spatial
overiap of the Nephi and Provo segments, whereby events bom both segments are recorded at the site (Machette,
1989, in press; Ostenaa, 1990). The slip-rate and recunence data are from the American Fork site, where rates
of activity appear to have been constant during post-Bonneville time. However, at the Hobble Creek site (east of
Spanish Fork), there is two-to-three times more displacement recorded in Bonneville transgressive deposits than
in Provo-age regressive deposits. T\venty to thirty meten of displacement in Just a few thousand yean represents
slip lates as high as 10 min^ and may be related to tbe presence of Lake Bonneville. Six or seven post-Frovo
events are inferred to have occurred at the site, yielding an average recurrence interval of 1,700-2,600 years. The
Woodland Hills splay of the Spanish Fork subsegment has evidence for three or four events, totaling 3 meten of
displacement, in about the past 130,000 yean, yielding a slip rate of 0.01-0.02 mtn/yr and an average recurrence
interval of about 40,000-65,000 yean. Movement on tbe splay apparently occun during only some of the events
on the main fault, although tbe most recent event on tbe spU^ occurred about 1,000 yean ago and may be
correlative with the most recent event on the main fault. Movement on a couple of short subsidiary faults at the
northern end of Utah Valley appears to have occurred during, and nay be related to, the recession of Lake
Bonneville.
88 Quaternary Tectonics ef Utah
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SUP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mm^
(Location No.) XIO* yean (Time Period
' XIO^ yean ago)
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL
XlO'yean
(Time Period
XIO' yean ago)
IBISPLACEMENT
PER EVENT
meten
RUPTURE LENGTH
kilometen
East Canyon fault
- southern segment
G2-17)
Parameter values late Quatemaiy(7) 12 7
Age Criteria : lange-front moipbology
References : Sullivan, Ndson, and othen, 1988
Comments : For Ihe purpose of seismic-hazaid assessment, values for slip rate, recurrence Interval, and single-event
displacemeiit are infened to be similar to those calculated for the Morgan fault (location no. 11-18), based on
similarities in fault length and escarpment morphology. The estimated fnarimiim credible earthquake for the fault
is 6Ji-<.75 (MJ.
Bear River fault zone
(12-18)
Parameter values: 2.4 7 e
I
05-2.7 7 I 23 - Z4-1- 7
I (<4.«
<l-S+n 34-40
«
Age Criteria: **C
References : West, 1988,1989, in press
Comments : The Bear River t^ult zone. (BRF3^ extends from southeast of Evanston, Vi^omhig'to the Uinta Mountains in
Utah, where it ends at a complex Juncture with the North Flank fault. The trend of scaips at the southem end of
the zone is shaip^ discordant viitb the main, northerly trend of faulting, perhaps due to the buttressing effect of
the Uinta Mountains. The fault lies between the leading edges of the Absaroka and Darby-Hogsbadc thrust faults
and appean to be a new (Holocene) feature superimposed on older thrust-belt stmcture. The independent
seismic potential of the Absaroka and Darby-Hogsback faults is unclear. A 5<kilometer-long Holocene scarp (tbe
Martin Randi scarp), together with at least 10 kilometen of related surface warping, lies west of the BRFZ in
Wyoming and is coincident with the Absaroka thrust. The age of most recent movement on this bult is
consistent >mth that on the BRFZ, suggesting that it represents movement that is simultaneous and sympathetic
with that on tbe main fault zone. Scarp hdghts and tectonic displacements increase markedly &om north to south
along the BRFZ. The southernmost scarp, which displaces Pinedale glacial deposits, is 15+ meten high,
suggesting that it may have formed from more than two Holocene events. The range in slip rates reflects the
range in displacement along the fault zon& Fault-activity paiameten for the BRFZ are comparable to values fbr
the Wasatdi fault zone (see location nos. 6-6,11-22,12-3,12-6, and 13-21). There is no evidence to suggest that
the BRFZ is segmented. Documented ages of faulting (4,600 and -2,400 yean ago) are considered to be
piaTimiup estintates because the residence times of organic matter in the dated soils have not been incorporated
into tbe ages. The youthfulness of faulting is demonstrated by tbe presence of beheaded and revened drainages,
sag ponds, and displacements in the youngest flood-plain deposits. Northem portions of the BRFZ in Utah are
expressed only as drainage lineaments or are obscured by recent landsliding. Assuming that it is planar and
basement-penetrating, the BRFZ may be capable of producing earthquakes as large as 7.S (M^.
Utah Lake (faults and folds)
(12-19)
I Parameter values: latest Pleistocene to HoIocene(7) |
Age Criteria : lacustrine stratigraphy; deptb lo faulted sediments
References : Brimhall and Merritt, 1981
Comments : Fault locations, based on widely spaced seismic-reflection transects, are uncertain. Acoustical profiles show a
penistent 8-15 meter-deep layer identified as the Provo Formation that is displaced from <2 to 5 meten across
individual faults and folds beneath the lake. Machette (1989, in press) interpreted the layer as lake bottom
sediments probably deposited during the regressive phase of Lake Bonneville The reflection profiles suggest that
dispbcements decrease upward in strata above the marker horizon and occur within several meten of the lake
bottom.
%
*?;
jjiah Geological Survey 89
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SLIP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mnvyr
(Location No.) XIO' yean (Time Period
XIO^ yean ago)
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL DISPLACEMENT
XlO'yeaB PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
(Tune Period meten kilometen
Xio' yean ago)
Salt Creek area (fold)
(13-1)
Parameter values: Quatemaiy(7)
Age Criteria : deposit characteristics
References : Witkind and Spiinkel, 1982
Comments : Pleistocene(7) deposits are tilted northwestward oa the flank of a small diapirie fold.
Juab Vallqr
- west side (faults)
(13-2)
Parameter values: late Quatemaiy | | |
Age Criteria : presence of scarps on alluvium
References : R.M. Robison, written communication, 1989; Sullivan and Baltzer, 1986
Comments : The scarps, which show a cumulative displacement of —1 meter, are most likely tectonic, but alternatively may be
related to lateral spreading. Although not defined by a bedrock escarpment, a fault has been inferred along tht
east side of Juab Valley near the contact between Tertiary volcanic rocks and unconsolidated valley fill The
east-dipping fault is thought to intersect the Wasatch fault zone well above the seismogenic crust and thus to be
antithetic to the Wasatch fault zone and nol an independent seismic source.
Long Ridge
- west side (fault)
(13-3)
Parameter values: middle to late'Pleistocene(7) | | |
Age Criteria ; presence of scaips on alluvium
References : Meibos, 1983
Comments : The fault both cuts and is covered by 'oldei" unconsolidated alluvium and forms the contact between bedrock and
alluvium along much of its length.
Long Ridge
- northwest side (fault)
(13-4)
Parameter values: Quatemary(7)
Age Criteria : range-front morphology
References : Sullivan and Baltzer, 1986
/o /PUTS a)
94 Quaternary Tectonics of Ulah
NAME OR LOCATION AGE OF MOST SLIP RATE
OF FEATURE RECENT MOVEMENT mm/yr
(Location Na) XIO? yean (Time Period
XIO^ yean ago)
Price River area (faults)
(13-19)
Parameter values Quateniaiy(7)
•I-
-RECURIfflNCE J
INTERVAL DISPLACEMENT
XlO^yean PER EVENT RUPTURE LENGTH
(Time Period meten kilometen
XIO' yean ago)
I I
Age Criteria : geomorphic position; structural setting; presence of lineaments
References : Howard and others, 1978; Osterwald and othen, 1981
Comments : Some faults within the zone displace pre-Wisconsui-age pediments less than 2 meten. Most are normal faults
that dip steeply or vertically. Stniaural relations indicate that tbe Gault zone forms the crest of a broad, collapsed
anticline. The fault zone is similar in trend, pattern, and length to &ults along the aest of the Moab-Spanish
Vall^ anticline (primarily location no. 18-2), although it is not as strongly developed. The faults are inferred to
be related to a salt anticline at the northem margin of the Paradox basin. Earty to middle Pl^tocene pedimenu
north of the fault zone steepen sharply at the base of the Book Cliffs and may be warped due to elastic rebound
of the Mancos Shale during erosional unloading and/or monoclinal folding (not indicated on plate 1). The
ancestral course of Whitmore Canyon (near Suniiyside) also appean (o be warped.
Japanese and Cal Vall^ (faults)
(13-20)
Parameter values: middle to late Pleistocene I I
Age Criteria : scarp morphology; fault control of bedrock-alluvium contact; basin closure
References : Anderson and othen, 1978; Oviatt, 1992; WiUis, 1991; Witkind and others, 1987
Comments : Alluvial scaips are up to 4 meten high. The pattem of faulUng in Japanese Vall^ suggested to V^tkind and
othen (1987) that the graben-fonned vall^ may be a collapse feature, peifaaps telated to dissolution of salt from
the underiying Aiapien Shale. However, Willis (1991) interpreted the faults as basin-range-type extensional faults.
Wasatch fault zone
- Nephi segment
(13-21)
Parameter values:
Age Criteria:
References :
Comments :
03-0J7e I 0.8-137 | 1.7-2.77 | 1.4-2Jn | 42J .^
Seo-SfeewpJ (<5.5 7) 1 (<5J7) I I
^^C; scaip morphology
Jackson, 1991; Machette and others, 1991,1992; Schwartz and Coppenmith, 1984
Scarp morphology and contmui^ suggest vety recent displacement (—300-500 yean ago), although a combuiation
of "C and TL dates suggest an age of about 1,200 yean for Ihe most recent event. Schwartz and Coppenmith
(1984) determined that the penultimate event occurred before about 4,000 yean ago, whereas Jackson (1991)
constrained the event between about 3,000 and 3,500 yean ago. The third-to-last «vent may have occuired
between 4,000 and 4,500 yean ago (Jackson, 1991). Thus, actual middle to late Holocene recurrence intervals
may vaiy froin less than 1,000 yean to more than 3,000 yean. Three middle to late Holocene events post-date a
late Pleistocene(7) fan at the southem end of the segment (at Red Canyon), suggesting a possible hiatus in
faulting activity during latest Pleistocene to early Holocene time (Jackson, 1991). The range in displacement-per-
event and slip-rate values reflects a systematic decrease in slip between the middle (larger values) and southern
end (smaller values) of tbe segment. The Benjamin fault, which extends into Utah Vall^, may be the northem
extension of the Neplu segment (wbiiA would then lotal about 50 kilometers In length). Sediments of the Provo
phase of the Bonneville lake cyde are offset as much as 2 meten along this fault (Machette, 1989, in press).
There is a 15-kilometer-Iong gap in Holocene faulting between the Nephi segment and the Levan segment to the
south. Faults associated with young scarps north of the town of Nephi are probably continuous with near-surface
faults in the town Uentified from seismic-reflection data (Crone and Harding, 1984b). A number of small faults
ni Quatemaiy deposits have been identified on the western Qaiik of the Gunnison Plateau east of Nephi (not
shown on plate 1; Biek, 1991).
%
JobNa Na
HDR Computation KR
I Project
Subjea
Task
I Computed
Checked
Sheet
Date
Of
c2. U)e:f^sii-fftJs. A/C^ gyg c^pAScjSr f^uur^
J./ c/iC iz^ ^ ^/&^' 4—1 7 4-2-'BBiJO(i~j
C^l
I
i
>9
•J3tti
X ^ ^ ^ X
s£ i< vs !<. <i ^~•
fsl to t«l
i ^ ^ I i I
vS
o vs K
tr "?.
1 VJ\
^ ^ 4 ^
r-
>i t<
3 <i
^ ^
i 5
\0 I
ifi
1-
mhl
r- ^ ::5 -.o 4 P \ -r \ \ * »
r fl. * TJ SD "IS
.^ 8J3
03
s
g 7J
a
i
1 7.0
1 ~ ^, «-5
6.0
-
^
4 . ...--
_ ^
•
\y y»
^
c
/
^/ • .
/ ^
• / •^-"•'^
. !.j/ .^^^
. •
• . ^^ y"^ 7 y**'A
/ * \/ *
—1 1 L
• 1/i .^» •
t dr^ • ,^* V •••
•
1 I
.r.f
E *-A' TO tSTlMATE UAOHmiOt:
«-a'TO MTiMATi nupTOne
10 60 100 500
LENSTH OF SURFACE RUPTURE, N KILOMETERS
Fisurt 4-1. RaUtion ol length of MJHM* niptur* to Hrthqualw magnltiid* (Benllli, Muk, ond Lionkuihpar
6.0 6.5 7.0 7.3 B.0
EARTHQUAKE MAGNTTUDE Outs)
FIgur* 4-2. Roktlon of mnlfflum nirioe* dlaplmmMit te Mrthqtuka mognltud* (Bonttti^ Mark,:
Ll«ika«np«r 1U4) .
JsbNa Na
^fDR Computation^ i3i
[Project
Subject
Task
I Computed [Date
Checked Date
Sheet Of
3 J>Sy=e^f~iitJS a^ /cr SirB
TT
^^^WJ^ -^ "SoO^-j^S O.--A?-0^ o^ ^jSp 1. , Bf^ O=>JO ;
50 PERCSNTtl-e C ^ J
1.0
z
Q
a:
K
UJ
GJ O.t
(J
CJ c
cc
Z o
*» o.ot
a
X .
I 1 IIII 1—1111 IIII TT
' • ""I ' IIIIIII
M = 5.0
Ill 1 1—L
DISTANCE , KM
Figure 31. Joyner and Boore (1981) magnitude-distance chare
acceleration, mean.
84 PSHCENTtl-E C "/ + cr ^
DISTANCE , KM
Figure 33. Joyner and Boore (1981) magnitude-distance charr
acceleration, mean and SD.
?=*.\jL\jr "ti>CTK 'taxTc. '\)gt»-
%
^A.'^tv.r 3S> wlfe.vAe
U*v\& yy&&€
\ko .^iii> ^(-^^^g^
0.\6
o.to
,o.zf
0.30
0.56
a.40
0.^0 •
CJ'.:>E. a a - 0.50 c, (<?-^0 c^luA) Ar IBMJ^'^ S'/TC
ATTACHMENT B
STATIC AND PSEUDO STATIC STABILITY ANALYSES
JobNa iNo.
HDR Computation
^
I Project '5»>f\J\B>J l>.UDp>t—
Subject \-t>A::^"^\\Jc.. •3£\-&v\'>c^ ^N/K\-^VY\PV\
Computed
Checked
Sheet
IgjLti
^^
\
[Date S-^N-*^^
Date 4-t/-*iC
%
*\ (!cf3fi6 Cf ^6(4iee^6s I S*.fc^<_^T:H of Sjix^ fr,»j> ^xv--^i'wiL. "^MKAs.^ 'tH mro-z-iqo2..
"be^oTNgNT op ^ fcc^AVj. I iq'^
6) GsosvLki-Rii-gav- "^EiEfr-^i-c^ \v>^6T>rviL.-^ . SS^'S.N^->.'«H «^ ^WoT* - \jkVieB Surges
'NG^
^'^^
\ "^ar^x^ 'p^-^' •\v-fc. '^ VAb:^eip-L(!i.i_ p'w>'^:&g:]\'^^
4nto-vu<io
X ^ tAtM^ t>c;s.t.pji.t3V'"SM->
o-loO '?!f 40"
45
xK^-^'tcb "tevise-jXSk^ i>.Mt>s,-'svofS ^(&p*>v^L_
S UsOe^ VOiTSS-fKCc
u»-i«e-l i-c-t-ts
if
\
QJUl.St^tw/^ feeo^V-TV.'JE.
C»^-wo. G,L5\|e(\-\ 'Se.V'- ^o I'.v.v.^ •Stvftcft.-^ L5s>S:
Ow^riious
CJCivC\^=>U.'b
JobNa NoL
HDR Computation KR
Project
Subject
Task
Computed
Checked
Sheet
y
2-
Date
Date
Of
•2.. ^Ax fx-p^ esT^-^w-vtvy
. 2..^
r^'"'-f,, .
0 _
. \
\o
X. ^
^"^^^^^^^
-
1 1 1 1 U
Eusf "O.&Z '
1 ^
0.\ O.li O.^ OJif V.S C>.!a
#
f «•
BAVUIEU Lfl[fl)FILL CELL 1 PHASE 2 CUT SLOPE STABILITY File! PH2CS$
Hydpaulic Condition ?: User Defined
Consolidated Mined Soil PapaHeteps
Factor of Safety = 2.46, Failure Center: ( 628 , 4948 ), Radius: 224
J^5>. . f.
UoS
dluo-
<w.wo
\
- VlOpeff
P.-<)>
o
p.Z.
0.3
<se.uL- i.
4-iz.e.
(^*4-o*
4nis
. ( 273 , 4590 ) . SCALE .: 1 inch = 78.00001 feet .
*********************************************************************
* *
* GARDSSUMMARY *
* *
* Project: BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1 PHASE 2 CUT SLOPE STABILITY *
* File: PH2CSS *
* *
* GARDS Version 2.00 *
* developed by *
* Departinent of Civil and Environmental Engineering *
* University of Cincinnati *
* under contract to *
* U.S. Envirorimental Protection Agency
* Land Pollution Control Division *
* Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory *
* *
************************************************************************
*
************************************************************************
* Site Characteristics *
************************************************************************
* rm^ it
* The seismic coefficient is . 0.1G<.^°\jj *
* The design earthquake magnitude is 7.20 *
* *
* The maximum flood elevation in this case is 0 • *
* *
* The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is. . 0 *
* *
* The design waste elevation in the cell is ..... . 0 *
* *
* The soil number representing the clay liner is. . . . 0 *
* *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Section Geometry *
************************************************************************
* *
* The number of soil boundary lines for this section is 2 *
*
*
*
*
*_
*
*
*
*
*
*
Line 1 Point
1
2
X
0
1140
4660
4660
Line 2 Point
1
2
3
4
X
0
500
640
1140
4760
4760
4725
4715
*
*
*
*
-*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
%
************************************************************************
* Soil 1 Properties *
************************************************************************
* *
* Unconsolidated Consolidated Consolidated *
* Undrained Undrained Drained *
* Cohesion 0 0 0 (Ib/sq.ft) *
* Phi Angle 0 0 40 (degrees) *
* *
* *
* Unit Weight 110.000 (Ib/cu.ft) *
* Clay Content 0.000 (%) *
* Overconsolidation Ratio .... 0.000 *
* Initial Void Ratio 0.000 *
* Compression Index 0.000 *
* Recompression Index 0.000 *
* Permeability 0.000 (ft/yr) *
* Median Grain Size 0.000 (mm) *
* Plasticity Index 0.000 (%) *
* Liguid Limit ... 0.000 (%) *
* Standard Penetration Number . . 0.000 (blows/ft) *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* User Defined *
* Piezometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition *
* 7: User Defined *
************************************************************************
* *
* Point X y *
* *
* 1 0 4660 *
* 2 1140 4660 *
************************************************************************
%
************************************************************************
*
*
•ie
*
*
*
*
***
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ROTATIONAL FAILURE RES
Automatic Grid Search
U L T S
*
*
*
*
4-
The slopes were analyzed for failure arcs having centers in *
areas defined by the following parallelograms: *
*********************************************************************
ml.
Slope 1
Co-ord. Point 1 Point 2 Point 3
X 500 640 675
y 4769 4734 4795
The number of divisions between points 1 and 2
The number of divisions between points 2 and 3
The X—increment used in the search was . . .
The Y—increment used in the search was . . .
were
were
Point 4
535
4830
4
4
10
10
*
*
*
*
*
*
_ *
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
%
************************************************************************
* *
* ROTATIONAL FAILURE RESULTS *
* . *
************************************************************************
* *
* Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined *
* *
* Consolidated Drained (CD) Case *
* Seismic Coefficient =0.10 *
* *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
safety
Factor
2.46
2.46
2.46
2.46
2,46
2.46
2.46
2.47
2.47
2.47
2.47
2.47
2.47
2.48
2.48
2.48
2.49
2.49
2.50
Failure
Radius
223.8
221.3
226.2
218.9
216.4 .
224.3
214.0
211.6
209.1
223.2
208.6
206.1
217.9
198.4
209.6
188.6
178.9
210.1
169.1
X-
Co-ord
620.0
620.0
620.0
620.0
620.0
622.5
620.0
620.0
620.0
617.5
617.5
615.0
615.0
615.0
622.5
615.0
615.0
625.0
615.0
Y-
Co-ord
4947.5
4945.0
4950.0
4942.5
4940.0
4947.5
4937.5
4935.0
4932.5
4947.5
4932.5
4932.5
4942.5
4922.5
4932.5
4912.5
4902.5
4932.5
4892.5
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
•»
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
If Project
I Subject
Task
3.
3.1 ,iK/iTsi.>— -SUopee;
M?^-'
I Computed
Checked y/
Sheet
KR
Date
Date
-^H
Of
~\
•^k/f=. c5eo-{e^
te3 M\L SK^QaXH: '-^J<'~
CUOrtitoA SSoTiSVY>''-£
•A'
A
•j,^ \v.if^\vj\T^ -Su=i^ ^\'S\=.t<S> I QjsYN'jUes- seviNV.'.o.r.A, v^l FsB-ito-S\B."\IC- CX^>^^'
/- Sir'
Tpe»-if
ot o
_/^H^'
W= Y-tt, L -r I f= Y^ L -^
^pr-^ 11^ 7" IOO
VJSJT
•^ 1.0
)^-r
K*-f
(iSA V-.-AA^^^i"^
(1.0 -^ <!.•».-T^'V ;vi.uf
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
1 Project
Subject
Task
I Computed
Checked
Sheet
KR
Date
Date
Of
%
BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1 PHASE 2
LINER & LCRS SLOPE STABILITY
STATIC AND PSEUDO-STATIC ANALYSES
(INFINITE SLOPE METHOD)
SLOPE PROPERTIES
•
height
slope
length
LCRS PROPERTIES
thickness
density
INTERFACE FRICTIO
friction
40.0
14.0
165.3
2.0
100.0
N
9.0
(ft.)
(degrees)
(ft)
(ft)
(pcf)
(degrees)
•
&eoTeu:riv^ (kiLSvV^cr^ 1
' 1 FACTOR OF SAFETY |
Treinf
(klO
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.6
15.0
Seismic Coefficient, (-)
0
0.64
0.76
0.69
1.01
1.14
1.26
1.57
1.89
2.20
2.51
0.1
0.45
0.54
0.63
0.71
0.80
0.89
1.11
1.33
1.65
1.78
0.2
0.35
0.42
0.48
0.55
0.62
0.69
0.86
1.03
1.20
1.37
0.3
0.28
• 0.34
0.40
0.45
0.51
0.56
0.70
0.84
0.98
1.12
0.4
0.24
0.29
0.33
0.38
0.43
0.47
0.59
0.71
0.83
0.95
0.5
0.21
0.25
0.29
0.33
0.37
0.41
0.51
0.61
0.72
0.82
JobNa No.
HDR Computation KR
{Project
Subject
Task
Computed
Checked
Sheet
Date
Date
Of
3.00
2.50 =H:
2.00
IU
u.
<
(0.
u.
o
DC
g
s
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.1 0.2 0.3
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT
0.4 0.5
m
JobNa Na
HDR Computation KR
IProject
Subject
Task
Computed
Checked
Sheet
Oate
Date
Of
«
BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1
LINER AND LCRS CAP SLOPE STABILITY
STATIC AND PSEUDO-STATIC ANALYSES
(INFINITE SLOPE METHOD)
.
SLOPE PROPERTIES
height
slope
length
LCRS PROPERTIES
thickness
density
INTERFACE FRICTIO
friction
40.0
14.0
165.3
2.0
100.0
N
17.0
(ft.)
(degrees)
(ft)
(ft)
(pcf)
(degrees) SMJt 1 CJuSS^.Ven^
FACTOR OF SAFETY
Treinf
(klf)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0
Seismic Coefficient, (-)
0
1.23
1.35
1.48
1.60
1.73
1.85
2.16
2.48
2.79
3.10
0.1
0.87
0.96
1.04
1.13
1.22
1.31
1.53
1.75
1.97
2.19
0.2
0.67
0.74
0.81
0.88
0.94
1.01
1.18
1.36
1.53
1.70
0.3
0.55
0.60
0.66
0.71
0.77
0.83
0.97
1.11
1.24
1.38
1 0.4
0.46
0.51
0.56
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.82
0.93
1.05
1.17
0.5
0.40
0.44
0.48
0.52
0.56
0.60
0.71
0.81
0.91
1.01
m
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
Project
Subject
Task
KR
(Computed Date
Checked Oate
Sheet Of
3.50
0.1 0.2 0.3
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT
k®^e>."i-°
0.4 0.6
Job No. Na
HDR Computation
IProject [Computed
Subject Checked y
Task Sheet
KR
Date
I Date
Of
t
'i
4&00 _
r
4-100 —I—
Zoo
-1-
4eo Uco Scao . lc>eo
-*->
%
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
[Project
Subject
Task
[Computed
Checked ^
Sheet
KR
Date
Oate
Of
•f-VLJL- Gi VT6^4-
/.ze
O.S4-
^
0
0.1
O.L
0.^
PiL-L- ® 4lSC>
5-=\T
/.Z-d.
f^lu^Ca 4-74S
HEADING
Bayview Landfill Cell 1
Sliding During Operational Filling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
PROFILE LINiES
1 I Waste Fill to 4764
225 4764
615 4764
865 4714
2 2 Side Slope LCRS
0 4764
225 4764
365 4724
3 3 Bottom LCRS
365 4724
865 4714
999 4714
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
1 Waste Fill
50
C
150 22
N
2 Side Slope LCRS /'ivicAAAX>g«> s<£>H <,\-e>CseT^
100 ^
C
0 24
N .
3 Bottom LCRS /er€oT'5Scn^'^-=fc- COL-S*4-\<5-^ )
100 ^ ' ^
C
0 9
N
^sucsiKiex- Kv-joY^ec L-^^^~^
%
ANALYSIS
N
217 4764
365 4722
863 4712
865 4714
Seismic ^) T- -:. z_ t ho
0.4 1^— v-f^J^^^ ^f-^ 3ps^\.^'3
Procedure
C
0.0
COMPUTE
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
TABLE NO. 1
0t*t'li*t*****$i******************it***tt******
* COMPUTER PROGRAM DESIGNATION - UTEXAS3 *
* Originally Coded By Stephen G. Wright *
•VersionNo. 1.107 *
* Last Revision Date 10/13/91 •
* (C) Copyright 1985-1991 S. G. Wright *
* All Ri^ts Reserved *
t*iHr***t***1f*ilHfitiiHf***i¥-¥i^ilr^iiltt*************-*
* *
* RESULTS OF COMPUTATIONS PERFORMED USING THIS COMPUTER *
* PROGRAM SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES UNLESS THEY •
•HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY INDEPENDENT ANALYSES, EXPERIMENTAL *
* DATA OR FIELD EXPERIENCE. THE USER SHOULD UNDERSTAND THE •
* ALGORITHMS AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES USED IN THE COMPUTER •
* PROGRAM AND MUST HAVE READ ALL DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS •
* PROGRAM BEFORE ATTEMPTING ITS USE. *
* >•>
* NEITHER THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS NOR STEPHEN G.WRIGHT*
* MAKE OR ASSUME LL^BILITY FOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR *
* IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE ACCURACY, RELL\BILnY, USEFULNESS •
•OR ADAPTABILITY OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM. *
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview Landfill Cell 1
Sliding.DuTing Operational Filling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 2
* NEW PROFILE LINE DATA •
PROFILE LINE 1 - MATERIAL TYPE = 1
Waste Fill to 4764
Point X Y
1 225.000 4764.000
2 615.000 4764.000
3 865.000 4714.000
PROFILE UNE 2 - MATERIAL TYPE = 2
Side Slope LCI^
Point X Y
%
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 365.000 4724.000
PROFILE LINE 3 - MATERL\L TYPE = 3
Bottom LCRS
Point X Y
1 365.000 4724.000
2 865.000 4714.000
3 999.000 4714.000
All new profile lines defined - No old lines retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
Sliding During Operational Filling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 3
* NEW MATERIAL PROPERTY DATA - CONVENTTONAL/FIRST-STAGE COMPUTATIONS
t****1t*.***it*******tf****t*%tit»**i*t***tftititi**ti*****ltt******i*****i^********
DATA FOR MATERL\L TYPE 1
Waste Fill
Unit weight of material = 50.000
CONVENTIONAL GSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion 150.000
Friction angle 22.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 2
Side Slope LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 24.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERL^L TYPE 3
Bottom LCRS
Unit weight of material °= 100.000
CONVENTIONAL QSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion r - .000
Friction angle 9.000 degrees
No (pr zero) pore water pressures
All new material properties defined - No old data retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 • (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational Filling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeflf varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 15
* NEW ANALYSIS/COMPUTATION DATA *
Noncircular Shear SuTface(s)
Computations Perfonned for Single Shear Sur&ce
Shear Surface Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 217.000 4764.000
2 365.000 4722.000
3 863.000 4712.000
4 . 865.000 4714.000
Procedure used to compute the factor of safety: CORPS
Specified side force inclination = .00 degrees
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENT EITHER DEFAULT OR PREVIOUSLY DEFINED VALUES:
Initial trial estimate for tiie factor of safety = 3.000
Maximum number of iterations allowed for
calculating the factor of safety = 40
Allowed force imbalance for convergence = 100.000
AUowed moment imbalance for convergence = 100.000
Number of increments for slice subdivision = 30
Depth of water in crack = .000
Unit weight of water in crack = 62.400
Seismic coefficient c^ .000
%
Conventional (single-stage) computations to be perfonned
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Inter&ce/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 16
* NEW SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA •
***************************
NOTE - NO DATA WERE INPUT, SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA
WERE GENERATED BY THE PROGRAM
Slope Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 .000 4764.000
2 .225.000 4764.000
3 615.000 4764.000
4 865.000 4714.000
5 999.000 4714.000
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input fUe: of64g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
ikit^iiftt^^tit****^^***********************************************
* Coordinate, Weigiht, Strengdi and Pore Water Pressure •
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Infonnation is for tiie Critical Shear Surface in the *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) *
ice Mati. Friction Pore
Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
908.2 2 .00 24.00 .0
7359.9 2 .00 24.00 .0
12997.1 2 .00 24.00 .0
18634.3 2 .00 24.00 .0
24271.5 2 .00 24.00 .0
SUce
No. X
217.0
1 221.0
225.0
2 235.0
245.0
3 255.0
265.0
4 275.0
285.0
5 295.0
305.0
Sl
Y
4764.0
4762.9
4761.7
4758.9
4756.1
4753.2
4750.4
4747.5
4744.7
4741.9
4739.0
6 315.0 4736.2 29908.7 2
325.0 4733.4
7 335.0 4730.5 35545.9 2
345.0 4727.7
8 355.0 4724.8 41182.1 2
365.0 4722.0
9 375.4 4721.8 46051.6 3
385.8 4721.6
10 396.3 4721.4 46490.5 3
406.7 4721.2
11 417.1 4721.0 46927.4 3
427.5 4720.7
13 437.9 4720.5 47365.8 3
448.3 4720.3
13 458.8 4720.1 47802.8 3
469.2 4719.9
14 479.6 4719.7 48241.7 3
490.0 4719.5
15 500.4 4719.3 48678.1 3
510.8 4719.1
16 521.3 4718.9 49117.1 3
531.7 4718.7
17 542.1 4718.4 49553.9 3
552.5 4718.2
18 562.9 4718.0 49992.3 3
573.3 4717.8
19 583.8 4717.6 50429.2 3
594.2 4717.4
20 604.6 4717.2 50866.1 3
615.0 4717.0
21 625.3 4716.8 48754.4 3
635.7 4716.6
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input fUe: of64g.dat
Bsyview LandfiU Cell 1
Sliding During Operational FUUng @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
* Coordinate, Weight, Strength and Pore Water Pressure *
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface in tiie *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) *
**************************************************************
SU(« SUce Mati. Friction Pore
No. X Y Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
635.7 4716.6
23 646.0 4716.4 44913.7 3 .00 9.00 .0
656.3 4716.1
23 666.7 4715.9 41073.5 3 .00 9.00 .0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
677.0 4715.7
24 687.3 4715.5 37232.8 3
697.7 4715.3
25 708.0 4715.1 33392.6 3
718.3 4714.9
26 728.7 4714.7 29551.9 3
739.0 4714.5
27 749.3 4714.3 25711.8 3
759.7 4714.1
28 770.0 4713,9 21871.1 3
780,3 4713.7
29 790.7 4713,5 18030.9 3
801.0 4713,2
30 811.3 4713.0 14190.2 3
821.7 4712.8
31 832.0 4712.6 10350.0 3
842.3 4712.4
32 852.7 4712.2 6509.2 3
863.0 4712.0
33 864.0 4713.0 222.0 3
865.0 4714.0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
TABLE NO. 27
iim****n!****$L***nt****m***************ii****f *******************
* Seismic Forces and Forces Due to Sur&ce Pressures for *
* Individual SUces for Conventional Computations or the *
* First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Infonnation is for the Critical Shear Surface in the *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) *
*************************************************************
%
FORCES DUE TO SURFACE PRESSURES
Yfor
iismic Normal Shear
Y
SUce Seismic
No. X
1 221.0
2 235.0
3 255.0
4 275.0
5 295.0
6 315.0
7 335.0
8 355.0
9 375.4
10 396.3
11 417.1
12 437.9
13 458.8
Force
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Seismic
Force
4763.4
4761.0
4757.9
4754.9
4752.1
4749.2
4746.3
4743.5
4742.0
4741.8
4741.6
4741.4
4741.1
Normal
Force
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Shear
Force
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
X
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
479.6
500.4
521.3
542.1
562.9
583.8
604.6
625.3
646.0
666.7
687.3
708.0
728.7
749.3
770.0
790.7
811.3
832.0
852.7
864.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4740.9
4740.7
4740.5
4740.3
4740.1
4739.9
4739.7
4738.4
4736.2
4733.9
4731.6
4729.4
4727.1
4724.9
4722.6
4720.4
47182
4716.0
4714.0
4713.6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input file: of64g.dat
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 29
******************************************************************
* INFORMATION GENERATED DURING ITERATIVE SOLUTION FOR THE FACTOR *
• OF SAFETY BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MODIFIED SWEDISH PROCEDURE •
******t,:)i^1t-tHf,t*****************lt*******************************^***
Trial Factor Force Imbalance
Iteration of Safety (lbs.) DELTA-F
1
2
3
4
3.00000
3.32297
3.36087
336130
-.790E-+O4
-.758E+03
-.843E+01
-.219E-02
.323
.379E-01
.431E-03
.112E-06
Factor of Safety 3.361
Side Force Inclination .00
Number of Iterations 4
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input fUe: of54g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 38
****************************************************^i^i********i,
%
* Final Results for Stresses Along the Shear Surface *
* (Results for Critical Shear Sur&ce in Case of a SearcL) *
*********************************************i^iHHH,****^^,^tt****
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 3.361
—— VALUES AT CENTER OF BASE OF SLICE-
Total Effective
Slice Nonnal Normal Shear
No. X-center Y-center Stress Stress Stress
1 221.0 4762.9 109.4 109.4 14.5
2 235.0 4758.9 354.7 354.7 47.0
3 255.0 4753.2 626.3 626.3 83.0
4 275.0 4747.5 898,0 898.0 118.9
5 295.0 4741.9 1169.6 1169.6 154.9
6 315.0 4736.2 1441.3 1441.3 190.9
7 335.0 4730.5 1712.9 1712.9 226.9
8 355.0 4724.8 1984.5 1984.5 262.9
9 375.4 4721.8 2208.4 2208.4 104.1
10 396.3 4721.4 2229.4 2229.4 105.1
11 417.1 4721.0 2250.4 2250.4 106.0
12 437.9 4720.5 2271.4 2271.4 107.0
13 458.8 4720.1 2292.4 2292.4 108.0
14 479.6 4719.7 2313.4 2313.4 109.0
15 500.4 4719.3 2334.3 2334,3 110.0
16 521.3 4718.9 2355.4 2355.4 111.0
17 542.1 4718.4 2376.3 2376.3 112.0
18 562.9 4718.0 2397.4 2397.4 113.0
19 583.8 4717,6 2418.3 2418.3 114.0
20 604.6 4717.2 2439.3 2439.3 114.9
21 625.3 4716.8 2356.9 2356.9 111.1
22 646.0 4716.4 217U 2171.2 102.3
23 666.7 4715.9 1985.5 1985.5 93.6
24 687,3 4715,5 1799.9 1799.9 84.8
25 708.0 4715.1 1614.2 1614.2 76.1
26 728.7 4714.7 1428.6 1428.6 67.3
27 749.3 4714.3 1242.9 1242.9 58.6
28 770.0 4713.9 1057J 1057.3 49.8
29 790.7 4713.5 871.6 871.6 41.1
30 811.3 4713.0 686.0 686.0 32.3
31 832.0 4712.6 500.3 500.3 23.6
32 852.7 4712.2 314.7 314.7 14.8
33 864.0 4713.0 116.5 116.5 5.5
CHECK SUMS - (ALL SHOULD BE SMALL)
SUM OF FORCES IN VERTICAL DIRECTION = .02 (= .215E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED . lOOE+03
SUM OF FORCES IN HORIZONTAL DIRECTION = .00 (= .179E-02)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .lOOE+03
SHEAR STTIENGTH/SHEAR FORCE CHECK-SUM = ,01 (= .999E-02)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .100E403
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 • (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:46:18 Input fUe: of64g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational Filling @ 4764
GeotextUe Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 39
***********************************************-^-ifi^if**********tf**
* Final Results for Side Forces and Stresses Between SUces. *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surface in Case of a Search.) *
**************************************************:t*************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 3.361
VALUES AT RIGHT SIDE OF SLICE —
Side Force
Slice Side Inclination
No. X-Right Force (degrees)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
225.0
245.0
265.0
285.0
305.0
325.0
345.0
365.0
385.8
406.7
427.5
448.3
469.2
490.0
510.8
531.7
552.5
573.3
594.2
615.0
635.7
656.3
677.0
697.7
718.3
739.0
759.7
780.3
801.0
821.7
842.3
863.0
132.
1206.
3102.
5819.
9359.
13721.
18906.
24910.
23666.
22411.
21143.
19864.
18573.
17270.
15955.
14629.
13290.
11940.
10578.
9201.
7884.
6671.
5561.
4555.
3653.
2855.
2161.
1570.
1083.
700.
420.
244.
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
33 865.0 0. .00
END-OF-FILE ENCOUNTERED WHILE READING COMMAND
WORDS - END OF PROBLEM(S) ASSUMED
%
m
HEADING
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64S.DAT
PROFILE LINES
1 1 Waste FUl to 4764
225 4764
615 4764
865 4714 .
2 2 Side Slope LCRS
0 4764
225 4764
365 4724
3 3 Bottom LCRS
365 4724
865 4714
999 4714
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
1 Waste FUl
50
C
150 22
N .
2 Side Slope LCRS ' ^(VJCUAEIS^ g.\j55 ^^joPe. "^ )
100 ^
C
0 24
N
3 Bottom LCRS [ So>^.Si:> OVA.-^JVA^JVSN
100 *• •"
C
0 17
N
ANALYSIS /''SUiwiiNifa ^S-c^ei U=.p.ej"^
N
217 4764
365 4722
863 4712
865 4714 •
Seismic f L|J^
0.3 _-=— IT'E^.A^^S" Oj o.l ^erpi. -p ?=S ^ Woo
Procedure
C
0.0
COMPUTE .
%
•
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: ofe4s.dat
TABLE NO. 1
******************************************
* COMPUTER PROGRAM DESIGNATION - UTEXAS3 •
* Originally Coded By Stephen G, Wright *
* VersionNo. 1.107 *
* Last Revision Date 10/13/91 •
* (C) Copyright 1985-1991 S. G. Wright •
* AU Ri^ts Reserved •
******************************************
**************************************************************
* . . *
* RESULTS OF COMPUTATTONS PERFORMED USING THIS COMPUTER •
* PROGRAM SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES UNLESS THEY •
* HAVE BiEEN VERIFIED BY INDEPENDENT ANALYSES, EXPERIMENTAL *
* DATA OR FIELD EXPERIENCE. THE USER SHOULD UNDERSTAJJD THE *
* ALGORITHMS AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES USED IN THE COMPUTER *
* PROGRAM AND MUST HAVE READ ALL DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS *
•PROGRAM BEFORE ATTEMPTING ITS USE. *
* NEITHER THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS NOR STEPHEN G.WRIGHT*
* MAKE OR ASSUME LL^BILITY FOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR *
* IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE ACCURACY, RELIABBLITY, USEFULNESS •
* OR ADAPTABILITY OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM. *
* *
**************************************************************
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU I
SUding During Operational Filling @ 4764 ,
GeotextUe Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 2
*************************
* NEW PROFILE LINE DATA *
*************************
PROFILE LINE 1 - MATERIAL TYPE = 1
Waste FUl to 4764
Point X Y
1 225.000 4764.000
2 615.000 4764.000
3 865.000 4714.000
PROFILE LINE 2 - MATERLVL TYPE = 2
Side Slope LCRS
Point X Y
*
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 365.000 4724.000
PROFILE LINE 3 - MATERIAL TYPE = 3
Bottom LCRS
Point X Y
1 . 365.000 4724.000
2 865.000 4714.000
3 999.000 4714.000
AU new profile lines defined - No old Unes retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input fUe: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FiUing @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 3
***********************************************it**i^**,^it^i^**iH^^i,HHi*****
* NEW MATERL\L PROPERTY DATA - CONVENTTONAL/FIRST-STAGE COMPUTATIONS
*******************************************it***t^1H,^f^iit^^^i**i^^i^it^^^^if^ii^
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 1
Waste FUl
Unit weight of material = 50.000 j
I
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion 150.000
Friction angle 22.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 2
Side Slope LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 24.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 3
Bottom LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
«
CONVENTIONAL GSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 17.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
AU new material properties defined - No old data retmed
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1,107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S, G, WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s,dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FiUing @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G,DAT
TABLE NO, 15
*********************************
• NEW ANALYSIS/COMPUTATION DATA •
*********************************
Noncircular Shear Surface(s)
Computations Performed for Single Shear Sur&ce
Shear Surface Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 217,000 4764,000
2 365.000 4722.000
3 863.000 4712.000
4 865.000 4714.000
Procedure used to compute the factor of safety: CORPS
Specified side force inclination = .00 degrees
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENT EITHER DEFAULT OR PREVIOUSLY DEFINED VALUES:
Initial trial estimate for the factor of safety =" 3.000
Maximum number of iterations aUowed for
calculating the factor of safety >= 40
Allowed force imbalance for convergence = 100.000
AUowed moment imbalance for convergence = 100.000
Number of increments for sUce subdivision " 30
Deptii of water in crack = .000
Unit weight of water in crack = 62.400
Seismic coefficient = .000
Conventional (single-stage) computations to be performed
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Inputfile:of64s.dat
Bayview LandfUl CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
Geotextile Inter&ce/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 16
***************************
* NEW SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA *
***************************
NOTE - NO DATA WERE INPUT, SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA
WERE GENERATED BY THE PROGRAM
Slope Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 615.000 4764.000
4 865.000 4714.000
5 999.000 4714.000
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT (I
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat V^
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
Sliding Ehiring Operational FiUing @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
*****************************************t********************
* Coordinate, Weight, Strengdi and Pore Water Pressure *
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for die Critical Shear Surface in tiie *
* Case of an Automatic Search.) *
***********i^****************************it^^*****t,*****ii,**tiiti**^
ice Mati. Friction Pore
Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
908.2 2 .00 24.00 .0
7359.9 2 .00 24.00 .0
12997.1 2 .00 24.00 .0
18634J 2 .00 24.00 .0
24271.5 2 .00 24.00 .0
Slice
No. X
217.0
1 221.0
225.0
2 235.0
245.0
3 255.0
265.0
4 275.0
285.0
5 295.0
305.0
Sll
Y
4764.0
4762.9
4761.7
4758.9
4756.1
4753.2
4750.4
4747.5
4744.7
4741.9
4739,0
t
•
6 315.0 4736.2 29908.7 2
325.0 4733.4
7 335.0 4730.5 35545.9 2
345.0 4727.7
8 355.0 4724.8 41182.1 2
365.0 4722.0
9 375.4 4721.8 46051.6 3
385.8 4721.6
10 396.3 4721.4 46490.5 3
406.7 4721.2
11 417,1 4721.0 46927.4 3
427.5 4720.7
12 437.9 4720.5 47365.8 3
448.3 4720.3
13 458.8 4720.1 47802.8 3
469.2 4719.9
14 479.6 4719.7 48241.7 3
490.0 4719.5
15 500.4 4719,3 48678,1 3
510.8 4719.1
16 521,3 4718,9 49117,1 3
531,7 4718.7
17 542,1 4718.4 49553.9 3
552.5 4718.2
18 562.9 4718.0 49992.3 3
573.3 4717,8
19 583.8 4717.6 50429.2 3
594.2 4717.4
20 604.6 4717.2 50866.1 3
615.0 4717.0
21 625.3 4716.8 48754.4 3
635.7 4716.6
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1,107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S, G, WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Slidmg During Operational Filling @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
**************************************************************
* Coordmate, Weight, Strength and Pore Water Pressure *
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface m the *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) •
***************************************************lt^lHt^llf*^^L**
SUce SUce Mati. Friction Pore
No. X Y Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
635.7 4716.6
22 646.0 4716.4 44913.7 3 ,00 17.00 .0
656.3 4716.1
23 666.7 4715.9 41073.5 3 .00 17.00 .0
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
677.0 4715.7
24 687.3 4715.5 37232.8 3
697.7 4715.3
25 708.0 4715.1 33392.6 3
718.3 4714.9
26 728.7 4714.7 29551.9 3
739.0 4714.5
27 749.3 4714.3 25711.8 3
759.7 4714.1
28 770.0 4713.9 21871.1 3
780.3 4713.7
29 790.7 4713.5 18030.9 3
801,0 4713.2
30 811.3 4713.0 14190.2 3
821.7 4712.8
31 832.0 4712.6 10350.0 3
842.3 4712.4
32 852.7 4712.2 6509.2 3
863.0 4712.0
33 864.0 4713.0 222,0 3
865.0 4714.0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4764
GeotextUe Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 27
********************************************************iii****
* Seismic Forces and Forces Due to Surfece Pressures for •
* Individual SUces for Conventional Computations or the *
* First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface in the *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) *
**************************************iftr*iHi****tfHii^ti^****inti***
FORCES DUE TO SURFACE PRESSURES
Yfor
SUce . Seismic Seismic Normal Shear
No. X Force Force Force Force X Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
221.0
235.0
255.0
275.0
295.0
315.0
335.0
355.0
375.4
396.3
417.1
437.9
458.8
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4763.4
4761.0
4757.9
4754.9
4752.1
4749.2
4746.3
4743.5
4742.0
4741.8
4741.6
4741.4
4741.1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
,0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
#
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
479.6
500.4
521.3
542.1
562.9
583.8
604.6
625.3
646.0
666.7
687.3
708.0
728.7
7493
770.0
790.7
811.3
832.0
852.7
864.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4740.9
4740.7
4740.5
4740.3
4740.1
4739.9
4739,7
4738.4
4736,2
4733,9
4731,6
4729,4
4727.1
4724,9
4722,6
4720,4
47182
4716.0
4714.0
4713.6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
,0
,0
%
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time; 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FiUing @ 4764
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 29
***************************************************^^tt***********
* INFORMATION GENERATED DURING ITERATIVE SOLUTION FOR THE FACTOR *
* OF SAFETY BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MODIFIED SWEDISH PROCEDURE •
******^***^*******lt^********,^^*1^**^*^,*************l^*^,^l,^^l^***l^l^^****
Trial Factor Force Imbalance
Iteration of Safety (UJS.) DELTA-F
1 3.00000 -.527E+05 1.34
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
2 3.50000 -.358E405 1.23
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
3 4.00000 -.231E+05 1.04
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
4 4.50000 -.132E-K)5 .749
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
5 5.00000 -.526E+04 .368
6 5.36843 -.359E+03 .290E-01
7 5.39738 -.193E-H)1 .157E-03
8 5.39754 .360E-01 -.294E-05
Factor of Safety 5.398
Side Force Inclination .00
Number of Iterations 8
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4764
GeotextUe Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 38
^i***itt,^t*******************************************************
* Final Results for Stresses Along the Shear Surface *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surfece m Case of a Search.) *
***************************************************************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 5.398
VALUES AT CENTER OF BASE OF SLICE-
Total Effective
Slice Normal Normal Shear
No. X-center Y-center Stress Stress Stress
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
221.0
235.0
255.0
275.0
295.0
315.0
335.0
355.0
375.4
396.3
417.1
437.9
458.8
479.6
500.4
521.3
542.1
562.9
583.8
604.6
625.3
646.0
666.7
687.3
708.0
728.7
749.3
770.0
790.7
4762.9
4758.9
4753.2
4747.5
4741.9
4736.2
4730.5
4724.8
4721.8
4721.4
4721.0
4720.5
4720.1
4719.7
4719.3
4718.9
4718.4
4718.0
4717.6
4717.2
4716.8
4716.4
4715.9
4715.5
4715.1
4714.7
47143
4713.9
4713.5
110.9
359.6
635.0
910.4
1185.8
1461.2
1736.6
2012.0
2208.0
2229.0
2250.0
2271.0
2291.9
2313.0
2333.9
2354.9
2375.9
2396.9
2417.9
2438.8
2356.4
2170.8
1985.2
1799.5
1613.9
14283
1242.7
1057.1
871.5
110.9
359.6
635.0
910.4
1185.8
1461.2
1736.6
2012.0
2208.0
7?.?,9.0
2250.0
2271.0
2291.9
2313.0
2333.9
2354.9
2375.9
2396.9
2417.9
2438.8
2356.4
2170.8
1985.2
1799.5
1613.9
14283
1242.7
1057.1
871.5
9.2
29.7
52.4
75.1
97.8
120.5
1433
166.0
125.1
126.3
127.4
128.6
129.8
131.0
132.2
133.4
134.6
135.8
137.0
138.1
133.5
123.0
112.4
101.9
91.4
80.9
70.4
59.9
49.4
%
30
31
32
33
8113
832.0
852.7
864.0
4713,0
4712,6
4712.2
4713.0
685.8
500.2
314,6
117,7
685,8
500,2
314,6
117,7
38.8
283
17.8
6.7
CHECK SUMS - (ALL SHOULD BE SMALL)
SUM OF FORCES IN VERTICAL DIRECTION = .03 (= .259E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED ,100E-H)3
SUM OF FORCES IN HORIZONTAL DIRECTION = ,00 (= ,218E-02)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED ,100E-K)3
SHEAR STRENGTH/SHEAR FORCE CHECK-SUM = ,06 (= ,564E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED ,100E+03
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WMGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 10:59:10 Input file: of64s.dat
Bayview LandfUl CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FUUng @ 4764
Geotextile Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF64G.DAT
TABLE NO. 39
****************************************************************
* Final Results for Side Forces and Stresses Between SUces. *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surface in Case of a Search.) *
****************************************************************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 5398
VALUES AT RIGHT SIDE OF SLICE —
SUce
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Side Force
Side Inclination
X-Rigjit Force
225.0
245.0
265.0
285.0
3.05.0
325.0
345.0
365.0
385.8
406.7
427,5
4483
469,2
490,0
510,8
531,7
552,5
5733
594,2
615,0
179,
1626.
4183,
7848,
12622,
18505,
25497,
33595.
31914.
30216.
28503.
26773.
25028.
23266.
21489.
19695.
17886.
16060.
14219.
12358.
(degrees)
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
.00
.00
,00
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
635,7
656,3
677,0
697,7
7183
739.0
759,7
7803
801,0
821,7
8423
863,0
865,0
10577,
8937,
7437,
6078,
4858.
3779.
2840.
2041,
1383.
865.
487.
249.
0.
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
END-OF-FILE ENCOUNTERED WHILE READING COMMAND
WORDS - END OF PROBLEM(S) ASSUMED
4
t»
HEADING
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Geotextile Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
PROFILE LINES
1 1 Waste FUl to 4764
225 4764
275 4780
665 4780
865 4714
2 2 Side Slope LCRS
0 4764
225 4764
365 4724
3 3 Bottom LCRS
365 4724
865 4714
999 4714
MATERL\L PROPERTIES
1 Waste FUl
50
C
150 22
N
2 Side Slope LCRS
100
C
0 24
N
3 Bottom LCRS
100
C
0 9
N
ANALYSIS
N
217 4764
365 4722
863 4712
865 4714
Seismic
0.2
Procedure
C
0.0
COMPUTE .
UTEXAS3 -'VEK 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input file: of80g.dat
TABLE NO. 1
******************************************
* COMPUTER PROGRAM DESIGNATION - UTEXAS3 *
* OrigmaUy Coded By Stephen G. Wright •
•VersionNo. 1.107 *
* Last Revision Date 10/13/91 *
* (C) Copyright 1985-1991 S. G. Wright *
* All Ri^ts Reserved *
******************************************
************************************************************i^4
* *
* RESULTS OF COMPUTATTONS PERFORMED USING THIS COMPUTER •
* PROGRAM SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES UNLESS THEY *
* HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY INDEPENDENT ANALYSES, EXPERIMENTAL •
•DATA OR FIELD EXPERIENCE. THE USER SHOULD UNDERSTAND THE *
* ALGORITHMS AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES USED IN THE COMPUTER *
* PROGRAM AND MUST HAVE READ ALL DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS *
* PROGRAM BEFORE ATTEMPTTNG ITS USE. *
* NEITHER THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS NOR STEPHEN G.WRIGHT*
* MAKE OR ASSUME LIABILITY FOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR *
* IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE ACCURACY, RELL^ILITY, USEFULNESS *
* OR ADAPTABILITY OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM. *
**************************************************************
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input fUe: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational Filling @ 4780
Geotextile Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 2
*************************
* NEW PROFILE LINE DATA •
*************************
PROFILE LINE 1 - MATERLVL TYPE = 1
Waste FiU to 4764
PoiQt X Y
1 225.000 4764.000
2 275.000 4780.000
3 • 665.000 4780.000
4 865.000 4714.000
PROFILE LINE 2 - MATERIAL TYPE = 2
Side Slope LCRS
%
*
m
Point X Y
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 365.000 4724.000
PROFtt-E LINE 3 - MATERLU. TYPE = 3
Bottom LCRS
Point X Y
1 365.000 4724.000
2 865.000 4714.000
3 999.000 4714.000
All new profile lines defined - No old Unes retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input fUe: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding-During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 3
***********************************************************ti**********
* NEW MATERIAL PROPERTY DATA - CONVENTTONAL/FIRST-STAGE COMPUTATIONS
********************************************************^^,t^tit********
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 1
Waste FiU
Unit weight of material = 50.000
CONVENTIONAL aSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion -- 150.000
Friction angle 22.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 2
Side Slope LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
CONVENTIONAL aSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion ,000
Friction angle 24,000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERL\L TYPE 3
Bottom LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 9.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
AU new material properties defined - No old data retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input file: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4780
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80GJ)AT
TABLE NO. 15
*********************************
* NEW ANALYSIS/COMPUTATION DATA •
*********************************
Noncircular Shear Surfece(s)
Computations Performed for Smgle Shear Surface
Shear Surface Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 217.000 4764.000
2 365.000 4722.000
3 863.000 4712.000
4 865.000 4714.000
Procedure used to compute die fector of safety: CORPS i
Specified side force inclination = .00 degrees
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENT EITHER DEFAULT OR PREVIOUSLY DEFINED VALUES:
Initial trial estimate for the factor of safety = 3.000
Maximum number of iterations aUowed for
calculating die factor of safety °= 40
AUowed force imbalance for convergence <= 100.000
AUowed moment imbalance for convergence = 100.000
Number of increments for sUce subdivision = 30
Depth of water in crack « .000
Unit weight ofwater in crack = 62.400
%
Seismic coefficient = .000
Conventional (single-stage) computations to be performed
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input file: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80GJ)AT
TABLE NO. 16
***************************
* NEW SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA *
***************************
NOTE - NO DATA WERE INPUT, SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA
WERE GENERATED BY THE PROGRAM
Slope Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 275.000 4780.000
4 665.000 4780.000
5 865.000 4714.000
6 999.000 4714.000
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (Q 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Ii^iut fUe: ofSOg.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
**************************************************************
* Coordinate, Weight, Strengtii and Pore Water Pressure •
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface in tiie *
* Case of an Automatic Search.) *
**************************************************************
Slice SUce Mati. Friction Pore
No. X Y Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
217.0 4764.0
1 221.0 4762.9 9082 2 .00 24.00 .0
225.0 4761.7
2 2333 4759.4 7963.5 2 .00 24.00 .0
241.7 4757.0
3 250.0 4754.6 16322.0 2 .00 24.00 .0
2583 47523
4 266.7 4749.9 24681,8 2 .00 24.00 ,0
275,0 4747,5
5 284.0 4745.0 33453.4 2
293.0 4742.4
6 302.0 4739.9 38018.0 2
311.0 47373
7 320.0 4734.8 42584.3 2
329.0 47322
8 338.0 4729.7 47149,4 2
347.0 4727,1
9 356,0 4724.6 51715.7 2
365.0 4722.0
10 375.7 4721.8 64516.4 3
386.4 4721.6
11 397.1 4721.4 64979.9 3
407.9 4721.1
12 418.6 4720.9 65441.9 3
429.3 4720.7
13 440.0 4720.5 65905.4 3
450.7 47203
14 461.4 4720.1 66366.8 3
472.1 4719.8
15 482.9 4719.6 66830.8 3
493.6 4719.4
16 504.3 47192 67292.4 3
515.0 4719.0
17 525.7 4718.8 67755.9 3
536.4 4718.6
18 547.1 47183 682173 3
557.9 4718.1
19 568.6 4717.9 68681.4 3
579.3 4717.7
20 590.0 4717.5 69142.8 3
600.7 47173
21 611.4 4717.1 696063 3
622.1 4716.8
UTEXAS3 - VER, 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input file: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
GeotextUe Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
**********************************************************i^t**
* Coordinate, Weight, Strength and Pore Water Pressure *
* Information for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for tiie Critical Shear Surface in tiie *
* Case of an Automatic Search.) *
***************************************************m**********
SUce SUce Mati. Friction Pore
No. X Y Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
622.1 4716.8
22 632.9 4716.6 700682 3 .00 9.00 .0
.00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
643.6 4716.4
23 654.3 47162 70532.6 3
665.0 4716.0
24 674.9 4715,8 62350.1 3
684.8 4715.6
25 694,7 4715,4 56276,7 3
704.6 47152
26 714.5 4715.0 50202.8 3
724.4 4714.8
27 7343 4714.6 44128.9 3
7442 4714.4
28 754.1 47142 38055.5 3
764.0 4714.0
29 773.9 4713.8 31981.6 3
783.8 4713.6
30 793.7 4713.4 25907.7 3
803.6 47132
31 813.5 4713.0 198343 3
823.4 4712.8
32 833.3 4712.6 13760.4 3
8432 4712.4
33 853.1 47122 7689.0 3
863.0 4712.0
34 864.0 4713.0 235.0 3
865.0 4714.0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input file: ofS0g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
GeotextUe Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G,DAT
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
9.00
.0
.0
.0
,0
,0
.0
,0
.0
,0
,0
.0
,0
TABLE NO. 27
*************************************************************
* Seismic Forces and Forces Due to Surface Pressures for *
* Individual SUces for Conventional Computations or the *
* First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface in the *
* Case of an Automatic Search.) *
*******************^************************************i,****
FORCES DUE TO SURFACE PRESSURES
Yfor
SUce Seismic Seismic Normal Shear
No. X Force Force Force Force X Y
%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
221.0
233.3
250.0
266.7
284.0
302.0
320.0
338.0
356.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4763.4
4762.4
4762.5
4762.7
4761,5
4759,0
4756.4
4753.9
47513
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
10
n 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
375.7
397.1
418.6
440.0
461.4
482.9
5043
525.7
547.1
568.6
590.0
611.4
632.9
6543
674.9
694.7
714.5
7343
754.1
773.9
793.7
813.5
8333
853.1
864.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4750.0
4749.7
4749.5
4749,3
4749,1
4748,9
4748,7
4748,4
47482
4748.0
4747.8
4747.6
4747.4
4747.1
47453
4741.8
4738.4
4734.9
4731.5
4728.0
4724.6
47212
4717,8
4714,6
4713,6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
,0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
,0
.0
.0
,0
,0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
,0
,0
,0
.0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1,107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Tune: 11:13:51 Input fUe: ofSOg.dat v
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUdmg During Operational FUling @ 4780
Geotextile Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 29
tiit*************************************************^:**************
* INFORMATION GENERATED DURING ITERATIVE SOLUTION FOR THE FACTOR *
* OF SAFETY BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MODEFIED SWEDISH PROCEDURE *
i,4***********************************************i^********ititi******
Trial Factor Force Imbalance
Iteration of Safety Qbs.) DELTA-F
1 . 3.00000 -.846E+04 237
2 323701 -.611E+03 .199E-01
3 325688 -.368E+01 .121E-03
4 325700 283E-01 -.933E-06
Factor of Safety 3257
Side Forte IncUnation .00
Number of Iterations 4
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 biput file: ofSOg.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1 /
%
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Geotextile Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G J>AT
TABLE NO. 38
***************************************************************
* Final Results for Stresses Along the Shear Surface *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surface in Case of a Search.) *
***************************************************************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 3.257
VALUES AT CENTER OF BASE OF SLICE-
Total Effective
SUce Normal Normal Shear
No. X-center Y-center Stress Stress Stress
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
221.0
233.3
250.0
266.7
284.0
302.0
320.0
338.0
356.0
375.7
397.1
418.6
440.0
461,4
482.9
504.3
525.7
547.1
568.6
590.0
611.4
632.9
6543
674.9
694.7
714.5
734.3
754.1
773.9
793.7
813.5
8333
853.1
864.0
4762.9
4759.4
4754.6
4749.9
4745,0
4739.9
4734.8
4729.7
4724.6
4721.8
4721.4
4720.9
4720.5
4720.1
4719.6
47192
4718.8
47183
4717.9
4717.5
4717.1
4716.6
47162
4715.8
4715.4
4715.0
4714.6
47142
4713.8
4713.4
4713.0
4712,6
4712,2
4713,0
1093
460,0
942.8
1425.6
1789.1
20332
2277.5
2521.6
2765.8
3007.8
3029.4
3051.0
3072.6
3094.1
3115.7
31372
3158.9
3180.4
3202.0
3223.5
3245.1
3266.7
32883
3145.9
2839.5
2533.0
2226.6
1920.1
1613.7
13072
1000.8
6943
387.9
123.5
1093
460.0
942.8
1425.6
1789.1
20332
2277.5
2521.6
2765.8
3007.8
3029.4
3051.0
3072.6
3094.1
3115.7
31372
3158.9
3180.4
3202.0
3223.5
3245.1
3266.7
3288.3
3145.9
2839.5
2533.0
2226.6
1920.1
1613.7
13072
1000.8
694.3
387.9
123.5
14.9
62.9
128.9
194.9
244.6
277.9
3113
344.7
378.1
1463
1473
148.4
149.4
150.5
151.5
152.6
153.6
154.7
155.7
156.8
157.8
158.9
159.9
153.0
138.1
1232
1083
93.4
78.5
63.6
48.7
33.8
18.9
6.0
•I
CHECK SUMS - (ALL SHOULD BE SMALL)
SUM OF FORCES IN VERTICAL DIRECTION = .03 (= 335E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .lOOE+03
SUM OF FORCES IN HORIZONTAL DIRECTTON = .00 (= 316E-02)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .lOOE+03
SHEAR STRENGTH/SHEAR FORCE CHECK-SUM = .06 (= .625E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .lOOE+03
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:13:51 Input fiile: of80g.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Geotextile Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80G.DAT
TABLE NO. 39
****************************************************************
• Final Results for Side Forces and Stresses Between SUces. *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surface in Case of a Search.) •
**********************************************************i^***^m
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 3.257
VALUES AT RIGHT SIDE OF SLICE —
Side Force
SUce Side Inclination
No. X-Right Force (degrees)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
?7,5.0
241.7
258.3
275.0
293.0
311.0
329.0
347.0
365.0
386.4
407.9
4293
450.7
472.1
493.6
515.0
536.4
557.9
5793
600.7
622.1
643.6
665.0
684.8
704.6
724.4
129.
1256.
3567.
7062.
11798.
17181.
23210.
29886.
37210.
35370.
33516.
31650.
29770.
27876.
25970.
24050.
22118.
20172.
18212.
16240.
14254.
1?,?,56.
10248.
8470.
6864.
5432.
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
7442
764.0
783.8
803.6
823.4
8432
863.0
865.0
4173.
3088.
2175.
1436.
870.
478.
259.
0.
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
END-OF-FILE ENCOUNTERED WHILE READING COMMAND
WORDS - END OF PROBLEM(S) ASSUMED
%
HEADING
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
SUdmg During Operational FUling @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
PROFILE LINES
1 1 Waste FiU to 4764
225 4764
275 4780
665 4780
865 4714
2 2 Side Slope LCRS
0 4764
225 4764 .
365 4724
3 3 Bottom LCRS
365 4724
865 4714
999 4714
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
1 Waste FUl
50
C
150 22
N
2 Side Slope LCRS
100
C
0 24
N
3 Bottom LCRS
100
C
0 17
N
ANALYSIS •
N
217 -4764
365 4722
863 4712
865 4714
Seismic
0.30
Procedure
C
0.0
COMPUTE
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
TABLE NO. 1
*****************************************
COMPUTER PROGRAM DESIGNATION - UTEXAS3 *
OriginaUy Coded By Stephen G. Wright *
VersionNo. 1.107 *
Last Revision Date 10/13/91 *
(C) Copyright 1985-1991 S,G, Wright •
All Ri^ts Reserved *
*****************************************
*************************************************************
*
RESULTS OF COMPUTATIONS PERFORMED USING THIS COMPUTER *
PROGRAM SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR DESIGN PURPOSES UNLESS THEY *
HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY INDEPENDENT ANALYSES/EXPERIMENTAL •
DATA OR FIELD EXPERIENCE, THE USER SHOULD UNDERSTAND THE •
ALGORITHMS AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES USED IN THE COMPUTER *
PROGRAM AND MUST HAVE READ ALL DOCUMENTATION FOR THIS *
PROGRAM BEFORE ATTEMPTING ITS USE. *
*
NEITHER THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS NOR STEPHEN G. WRIGHT *
MAKE OR ASSUME LL\BILrTY FOR ANY WARRANTIES, EXPRESSED OR *
IMPLIED, CONCERNING THE ACCURACY, RELIABILITY, USEFULNESS •
OR ADAPTABILITY OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM. •
*
*************************************************************
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
Bayview LandfUl CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Sand hiterface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 2
*************************
* NEW PROFILE LINE DATA •
*************************
PROFTLELINE 1 - MATERL\L TYPE = 1
Waste FiU to 4764
Point X Y
1
2
3
225.000
275.000
665.000
865.000
4764.000
4780.000
4780.000
4714.000
%
PROFILE LINE 2-
Side Slope LCRS
MATERIAL TYPE =2
Point X Y
1 .000 4764.000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 365.000 4724.000
PROFUJBLINE 3-MATERIALTYPE = 3
Bottom LCRS
Point X Y
1 365.000 4724.000
2 865.000 4714.000
3 999.000 4714.000
AU new profile lines defined - No old lines retamed
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: of80s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 3
******************************************,ti***************************
* NEW MATERIAL PROPERTY DATA - CONVENTTONAL/FIRST-STAGE COMPUTATTONS
**************************************1f^^^i^:t^^,i^H*iH,*^i***iHi************
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 1
Waste FUl
Unit weight of material = 50.000
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion 150.000
Friction angle 22.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 2
Side Slope LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
CONVENTIONAL (ISOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 24.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
DATA FOR MATERIAL TYPE 3
Bottom LCRS
Unit weight of material = 100.000
%
CONVENTIONAL GSOTROPIC) SHEAR STRENGTHS
Cohesion .000
Friction angle 17.000 degrees
No (or zero) pore water pressures
AU new material properties defined - No old data retained
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1,107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S, G, WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding'During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 15
*********************************
• NEW ANALYSIS/COMPUTATION DATA •
*********************************
Noncircular Shear Surface(s)
Computations Performed for Single Shear Surface
Shear Surfece Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 217.000 4764.000
2 365.000 4722.000
3 863.000 4712.000
2 365.000 4722.000 |
I
4 865.000 4714.000 '
Procedure used to compute tiie fector of safety: CORPS
Specified side force inclination = .00 degrees
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENT EITHER DEFAULT OR PREVIOUSLY DEFINED VALUES:
Initial trial estimate for the fector of safety = 3.000
Maximum number of iterations aUowed for
calculating tiie fector of safety = 40
AUowed force imbalance for convergence = 100.000
Allowed moment imbalance for convergence = 100.000
Number of mcrements for sUce subdivision = 30
Depth of water in crack = .000
Unit weigiht of water in crack - 62.400
Seismic coefficient = .000
Conventional (single-stage) computations to be performed
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Tune: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Sand iiterface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 16
***************************
* NEW SLOPE GEOMETHY DATA •
***************************
NOTE - NO DATA WERE INPUT, SLOPE GEOMETRY DATA
WERE GENERATED BY THE PROGRAM
Slope Coordinates -
Point X Y
1 .000 4764,000
2 225.000 4764.000
3 275.000 4780.000
4 .665.000 4780.000
5 865.000 4714.000
6 999.000 4714.000
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
Bayview Landfill CeU 1
SUding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Sand Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 26
*************************************************:^********tf***
* Coordinate, Weight, Strengtii and Pore Water Pressure •
* Infonnation for Individual SUces for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for die Critical Shear Surfece in the *
* Case ofan Automatic Search.) *
*****************************************t,********************
ice Mati. Friction Pore
Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
9082 2 .00 24.00 .0
7963.5 2 .00 24.00 .0
16322.0 2 .00 24.00 .0
24681.8 2 .00 24.00 .0
SUce '
No. X
217.0
1 221.0
225.0
2 2333
241.7
3 250.0
2583
4 266.7
275.0
Sli
Y
4764.0
4762.9
4761.7
4759.4
4757.0
4754.6
4752.3
4749.9
4747.5
9
5 284.0 4745.0 33453.4 2
293.0 4742.4
6 302.0 4739.9 38018.0 2
311.0 47373
7 320.0 4734.8 42584.3 2
329.0 47322
8 338.0 4729.7 47149.4 2
347.0 4727.1
9 356.0 4724.6 51715.7 2
365.0 4722.0
10 375.7 4721.8 64516.4 3
386.4 4721.6
11 397.1 4721.4 64979.9 3
407.9 4721.1
12 418.6 4720.9 65441.9 3
429.3 4720.7
13 440.0 4720.5 65905.4 3
450.7 47203
14 461.4 4720.1 66366.8 3
472.1 4719.8
15 482.9 4719.6 66830.8 3
493.6 4719,4
16 504.3 47192 67292.4 3
515.0 4719,0
17 525,7 4718.8 67755.9 3
536.4 4718.6
18 547.1 47183 682173 3
557.9 4718.1
19 568.6 4717.9 68681.4 3
579.3 4717.7
20 590.0 4717.5 69142.8 3
600.7 4717.3
21 611.4 4717.1 696063 3
622.1 4716.8
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48. Inputfile: ofSOs.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUdmg During Operational FUUng @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80SJ3AT
TABLE NO. 26
**************************************************************
* Coordinate, Weight, Strengtii and Pore Water Pressure *
* Information for Individual Slices for Conventional *
* Computations or First Stage of Multi-Stage Computations. *
* (Information is for the Critical Shear Surface in tiie *
* Case of an Automatic Search.) *
**************************************************************
SUce SUce MatL Friction Pore
No. X Y Weight Type Cohesion Angle Pressure
622.1 4716.8
22 632.9 4716.6 70068.2 3 .00 17.00 .0
.00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
24.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
643.6 4716.4
23 6543 47162 70532.6 3
665.0 4716.0
24 674.9 4715.8 62350.1 3
684.8 4715.6
25 694.7 4715.4 56276.7 3
704.6 47152
26 714.5 4715.0 50202.8 3
724.4 4714.8
27 734.3 4714.6 44128.9 3
7442 4714.4
28 754.1 4714.2 38055.5 3
764.0 4714.0
29 773.9 4713.8 31981.6 3
783.8 4713.6
30 793.7 4713.4 25907.7 3
803.6 47132
31 813.5 4713.0 198343 3
823.4 4712.8
32 833.3 4712.6 13760.4 3
8432 4712.4
33 853.1 47122 7689.0 3
863.0 4712.0
34 864.0 4713.0 235.0 3
865.0 4714.0
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input fUe: of80s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational FUling @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
17.00
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
TABLE NO. 27
^iit***********************************************************
• Seismic Forces and Forces Due to Surfece Pressures for *
• Individual SUces for Conventional Computations or the *
• First Stage of MuM-Stage Computations. *
• (Uiformation is for the Critical Shear Surface m the *
• Case of an Automatic Search.) *
1^************************************************************
FORCES DUE TO SURFACE PRESSURES
Yfor
SUce Seismic Seismic Normal Shear
No. X Force Force Force Force X Y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
221.0
2333
250.0
266.7
284.0
302.0
320.0
338.0
356.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4763.4
4762.4
4762.5
4762,7
4761,5
4759.0
4756.4
4753.9
47513
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
«
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
375,7
397,1
418.6
440,0
461.4
482.9
504.3
525.7
547.1
568.6
590.0
611.4
632.9
654.3
674.9
694.7
714.5
734.3
754.1
773.9
793.7
813.5
8333
853.1
864.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
4750.0
4749.7
4749.5
4749.3
4749.1
4748.9
4748.7
4748.4
47482
4748.0
4747.8
4747.6
4747.4
4747.1
4745.3
4741.8
4738.4
4734.9
4731.5
4728.0
4724.6
47212
4717.8
4714.6
4713.6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0
.0
,0
.0
,0
,0
.0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
,0
.0
,0
.0
,0
.0
,0
.0
,0
,0
,0
,0
,0
.0
.0
.0
.0
,0
.0
.0
m
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1.107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: of80s.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
Sliding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Sand iQterface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 29
******************************************************************
• INFORMATION GENERATED DURING ITERATIVE SOLUTION FOR THE FACTOR •
• OF SAFETY BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MODIFIED SWEDISH PROCEDURE *
******************************************************************
Trial Factor Force Imbalance
Iteration of Safety (lbs.) DELTA-F
1 3.00000 -.719E-K)5 1.27
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
2 3.50000 -.476E+05 1.14
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
3 4.00000 -292E+05 ,910
Reduced value - Deha was too large 500
4 4.50000 -.149E-K)5 .588
Reduced value - Delta was too large 500
5 5.00000 -349E+04 .169
5,16912 -,113E+03 ,587E-02
5,17499 .141E+00 ,734E-05
Factor of Safety 5,175
Side Force Inclination ,00
Number of Iterations 7
UTEXAS3 - VER. 1,107 -10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input file: ofSOs.dat
Bayview LandfiU CeU 1
SUding During Operational Filling @ 4780
Sand Interface/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 38
**i^************************************************************
* Final Results fbr Stresses Along tiie Shear Surfece *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surface in Case of a Search.) *
***************************************************************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 5.175
VALUES AT CENTER OF BASE OF SLICE-
Total Effective
SUce Normal Normal Shear
No. X-center Y-center Stress Stress Stress
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
221.0
233.3
250.0
266.7
284.0
302.0
320.0
338.0
356.0
375.7
397.1
418.6
440.0
461.4
482.9
5043
525.7
547.1
568.6
590.0
611.4
632.9
654.3
674.9
694.7
714.5
4762.9
4759.4
4754.6
4749.9
4745.0
4739.9
4734.8
4729.7
4724.6
4721.8
4721.4
4720.9
4720.5
4720.1
4719.6
47192
4718.8
4718.3
4717.9
4717.5
4717.1
4716.6
47162
4715.8
4715.4
4715.0
110.8
466.4
956.0
1445.6
18142
2061.8
2309.4
2557.0
2804.6
30072
3028.8
30503
3071.9
3093.5
3115.1
3136.6
31582
3179.7
32013
3222.8
3244.4
3266.0
3287.6
31453
2838.9
2532.5
110.8
466.4
956.0
1445.6
18142
2061.8
2309.4
2557.0
2804.6
30072
3028.8
3050.3
3071.9
3093.5
3115.1
3136.6
31582
3179.7
32013
3222.8
3244.4
3266.0
3287,6
31453
2838,9
2532.5
9.5
40.1
822
124.4
156.1
177.4
198.7
220.0
2413
177.7
178.9
1802
181.5
182.8
184.0
1853
186.6
187.9
189,1
190,4
191.7
192.9
1942
185.8
167.7
149.6
27 7343 4714.6 2226.1 2226.1 131.5
28 754.1 47142 1919.7 1919.7 113.4
29 773.9 4713.8 16133 16133 953
30 793.7 4713.4 1306.9 1306.9 772
31 813.5 4713.0 1000.5 1000.5 59.1
32 8333 4712.6 694.1 694.1 41.0
33 853.1 47122 387.9 387,9 22.9
34 864.0 4713.0 124.9 124.9 7.4
CHECK SUMS - (ALL SHOULD BE SMALL)
SUM OF FORCES IN VERTICAL DIRECTION = ,04 (= 383E-01)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED ,100E403
SUM.OF FORCES IN HORIZONTAL DIRECTION = .00 (= 304E-02)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED . lOOE+03
SHEAR STRENGTH/SHEAR FORCE CHECK-SUM = .13 (= .130E+00)
SHOULD NOT EXCEED .lOOE+03
UTEXAS3 - VER, 1.107 - 10/13/91 - (C) 1985-1991 S. G. WRIGHT
Date: 5:16:1996 Time: 11:18:48 Input fUe: ofSOs.dat
Bayview Landfill CeU I
SUding During Operational FiUing @ 4780
Sand Interfece/Seismic Coeff varies/OF80S.DAT
TABLE NO. 39
****************************************************************
* Final Results for Side Forces and Stresses Between SUces. *
* (Results for Critical Shear Surfece in Case of a Search.) *
****************************************************************
CORPS OF ENGINEERS' PROCEDURE USED TO COMPUTE FACTOR OF SAFETY
Factor of Safety = 5.175
VALUES AT RIGHT SIDE OF SLICE —
Side Force
SUce Side IncUnation
No. X-Right Force (degrees)
m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
225.0
241.7
2583
275.0
293.0
311.0
329.0
347.0
365.0
386.4
407.9
429.3
450.7
472.1
493.6
515.0
175.
1712.
4863.
9628,
16085,
23424,
31643.
40745.
50730.
48216.
45685.
43135.
40568.
37982.
35379.
32757.
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
536,4
557.9
579.3
600.7
622.1
643.6
665.0
684.8
704.6
724.4
744.2
764.0
783.8
803.6
823.4
8432
863.0
865.0
30118.
27460.
24784.
22091.
19379.
16650.
13907.
11478.
9285.
7329.
5610.
4127.
2881.
1872.
1099.
563.
264.
0.
.00
.00
,00
,00
.00
,00
,00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
END-OF-FILE ENCOUNTERED WHILE READING COMMAND
WORDS - END OF PROBLEM(S) ASSUMED
t A0
Aloo
ASoo,.
I
i
23o fM5 (ebO
6= •2.-2.°
iUS O-O
-I
ino
E^O
4<oOO ^ f
» ^ec3 4«p \j30 g©o ^ceo vzeo
t I
* '3\
Z
o
o
o
3
•D
C
t-f
fi)
o
(0
I
o
UpbNa \Nex.
HDR Computation
IProject
Subject
Task
4.Z
4.3
Computed
Checked
Sheet
F-^ '- -z.s-t-
KR
Date
Oate
Of
^7^i2,/Ti/^J5i /^ect^to - STAfiC P'-S f^}^ S,A/rV= a'yiii./:<7'VTj- ^45- -f-.. I. I hJ/
^^ 0.fO
L« 0.44-
o O.l o.z 0.5 0,4- 0.6
t #
BflVVIEi^ LANDFILL CELL 1 CLOSURE CAP
Hydpaulic Condition 7: lisev Mined
File: ClCCSl
4(^D Thh/ .S"oi«_3
. ( 78 , 4394 ) . SCALE .: 1 inch = ISO fept
BAVVIEU LANDFILL CELL 1 CLOSURE CAP File'. ClCCSi
Hydraulic Condition 7; User Defined
Consolidated Drained Soil Papaneteps
Factor of Safety = 2.88, Failure Center: ( 247 i 4913 ), Radius: 150
fVA'Sfe
C&\tfl\ ^_.
fn>tJ SoiL£.
I^jr So p^
.^U>
. ( 83 , 4Si98 ) SCALE .: 1 inch = 70.61313191 feet
%
*****************************************************************
* *
* GARDSSUMMARY *
* *
* Project: BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1 CLOSURE CAP *
* File: C1CCS1 *
* *
* GARDS Version 2.00 *
* developed by *
* Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering *
* University of Cincinnati *
* under contract to *
* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency *
* Land Pollution Control Division *
* Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory *
* *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Site Characteristics *
************************************************************************
* The seismic coefficient is . 0.1(>|TOO.SO*
* (. *
* The design earthquake magnitude is 7.20 *
* *
* The maximum flood elevation in this case is 0 *
* *
* The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is. . 0 *
* *
* The design waste elevation in the cell is 0 *
* *
* The soil number representing the clay liner is. . . . 0 *
* *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Section Geometry *
************************************************************************
* *
* The number of soil boundary lines for this section is 3 *
*
*
*
*
*-
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*-
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Point
1
2
0
1500
Line 1 Point X Y *
- *
4660 *
4660 *
*
Line 2 Point X Y *
*
*
*
*
*
*
.: *
Line 3 Point X Y *
_. *
4764 *
4764 *
4800 *
4805 *
4800 *
4770 *
4750 *
4750 *
************************************************************************
Point
1
2
3
4
5
Point
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
180
225
365
1100
1250
4764
4764
4724
4710
4750
0
180
330
475
660
1170
1250
1500
************************************************************************
* Soil 1 Properties *
************************************************************************
*
*
*
*
*
*
*_
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Unconsolidated Consolidated Consolidated
Undrained Undrained Drained
Cohesion
Phi Angle
0
0
0
0
0
40
(Ib/sq.ft)
(degrees)
unit Weight 110
Clay Content
Overconsolidation Ratio . .
Initial Void Ratio ....
Compression Index .....
Recompression Index ....
Permeability
Median Grain Size
Plasticity Index
Liqxiid Limit
Standard Penetration Number
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
0.000
0.000
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
(Ib/cu.ft)
(%)
(ft/yr)
(mm)
(%)
(%)
(blows/ft)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
• *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
t ************************************************************************
* Soil 2 Properties *
************************************************************************
* *
* Unconsolidated Consolidated Consolidated *
* Undrained Undrained Drained *
* *
* Cohesion 0 0 150 . (Ib/sq.ft) *
* Phi Angle 0 0 22 (degrees) *
* . *
* *
* unit Weight 50.000 (Ib/cu.ft) *
* Clay Content 0.000 (%) *
* Overconsolidation Ratio .... 0.000 *
* initial Void Ratio 0.000 *
* Compression Index 0.000 *
* Recompression Index 0.000 *
* Permeability 0.000 (ft/yr) *
* Median Grain Size 0.000 (mm) *
* Plasticity Index . 0.000 (%) *
* Liquid Limit 0.000 (%) *
* Standard Penetration Number . . 0.000 (blows/ft) *
************************************************************************
m
************************************************************************
* User Defined *
* Piezometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition *
* 7: User Defined *
************************************************************************
* *
* Point X Y *
* 1 0 4660 *
* 2 1500 4660 *
************************************************************************
•
«
************************************************************************
* *
* ROTATIONAL FAILURE RESULTS *
* *
* Automatic Grid Search *
* *
* The slopes were analyzed for failure arcs having centers in *
* areas defined by the following parallelograms: *
************************************************************************ *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*_
*
*
*
*
*
*
*_
*
*
*
*
*
*
Co-ord.
X
Y
Point 1
330
4809
Slope 1
Point 2
180
4773
Point 3
144
4836
Point 4
294
4872
Co-ord.
X
Y
Point 1
1170
4775
Slope 2
Point 2
1250
4755
Point 3
1270
4790
Point 4
1190
4810
The number of divisions between points 1 and 2 were 4
The number of divisions between points 2 and 3 were 4
The X-increment used in the search was 10
The Y-increment used in the search was 10
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
-*
*
*
*
*
*
*
.*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
«
************************************************************************
* *
* ROTATIONAL FAILURE RESULTS *
* *
************************************************************************
* *
* Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
*
*
*
*_
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Safety
Factor
2.08
2.08
2.08
2.08
2.08
2.09
2.09
2.10
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.18
2.19
2.19
2.21
2.24
2.27
2.36
2.36
2.36
2.39
2.39
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.43
2.45
2.47
2.49
2.49
Consolidated Drained (CD) Case
Seismic Coefficient = 0.10
Failure
Radius
150.0
147.5
152.4
159.7
140.2
149.5
150.5
130.4
120.7
148.0
110.9
101.1
99.2
99.2
97.2
151.9
82.0
90.8
93.2
88.4
91.3
. 90.3
89.8
80.0
64.9
99.6
70.3
100.7
60.5
60.5
X-
Co-ord
246.5
246.5
246.5
246.5
246.5
249.0
244.0
246.5
246.5
256.5
246.5
246.5
256.5
256.5
266.5
236.5
265.5
1215.0
1215.0
1215.0
1217.5
1212.5
1210.0
1210.0
274.5
1210.0
1210.0
294.0
1210.0
1210.0
y-
Co-ord
4913.0
4910.5
4915.5
4923.0
4903.0
4913.0
4913.0
4893.0
4883.0
4913.0
4873.0
4863.0
4863.0
4863.0
4863.0
4913.0
4847.3
4835.0
4837.5
4832.5
4835.0
4835.0
4835.0
4825.0
4831.5
4845.0
4815.0
4872.0
4805.0
4805.0
m
************************************************************************
* *
* GARDSSUMMARY *
* *
* File: C1CCS1 Date: 05-02-1996 Time: 19:15:57 *
* Project: BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1 CLOSURE CAP *
* Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined *
* *
* *
* Rotational Failure Analysis Safety Factor *
* . *
* Unconsolidated Undrained Case Not Run *
* Consolidated Undrained Case Not Run *
* Consolidated Drained Case 2.08 *
* *
* Translational Failure Analysis. ..... Not Run *
* : *
* Settlement Analysis Not Run *
* :. *
* Liquefaction Analysis Not Run *
************************************************************************
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
Project
Subject
Task
I Computed
Checked
Sheet
KR
Date
Date
Of
(^ ^C^j/\ - UffiTG^ LsA^^'f^^^f^ ^^ciSrid
^./ S::^^ZM
\%
-A to' IV-
\\
- iV; 5.4 v\
Mt^
y.
\
4o fA,»_ VAn^
^ ei_ 4-t4o
WT-
tvscD'
Jf. ^.
o.sz.
O 0.\o 0,-7p 0.30 , O.VO O.'iaO 0,loO
• 4)9
BAVUIEI^ LANDFILL LEACHATE POND STABILITV File: LPCSSl
Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined
Consolidated Drained Soil Paraneters
Factor of Safety = 2.38i Failure Center: ( 168 , 4756 ), Radius: 141
MAO
I "Wo ptf
-o
^*4-o»
(-28 , 4517 )
-^-
0.1
a-X.
0-3
Q1.4-.
Q....S.
Qi..
se. t^
\j&.
Wf
kZZ
.1-03
0.8^
_4Wc
M=>{Ar
SCALE .: 1 inch = 50 fee.t
************************************************************************
* *
* GARDSSUMMARY *
* *
* Project: BAYVIEW LANDFILL LEACHATE POND STABILITY *
* File: LPCSSl *
* *
* GARDS Version 2.00 *
* developed by *
* Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering *
* University of Cincinnati *
* under contract to *
* U.S. Environmental Protection Agency *
* Land Pollution Control Division *
* Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory *
* *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Site Characteristics *
************************************************************************
* ^'ItJC^V * /•Ml
jo.i
* The seismic coefficient is 0•''Oyt,^^(, *
* I. ' *
* The design earthquake magnitude is 7.20 *
* *
* The maximum flood elevation in this case is 0 *
* *
* The elevation of the seasonal high ground water is. . 0 *
* *
* The design waste elevation in the cell is 0 *
* *
* The soil number representing the clay liner is. . . . 0 *
* *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* Section Geometry *
************************************************************************
* *
* The number of soil boundary lines for this section is 2 *
* *
* Line 1 Point • X Y *
* . *
* 1 0 4500 *
* 2 500 4500 *
* . *
* Line 2 Point X Y *
* — *
* 1 0 4640 *
* 2 100 4640 *
* 3 115 4635 *
* 4 125 4635 *
* 5 182 4616 *
* 6 282 4616 *
* 7 354 4640 *
* 8 500 4640 *
************************************************************************
<i^
************************************************************************
* Soil 1 Properties *
************************************************************************
* *
* Unconsolidated Consolidated Consolidated *
* Undrained Undrained Drained *
* *
* Cohesion 0 0 0 (Ib/sq.ft) *
* Phi Angle 0 0 40 (degrees) *
* . *
* Unit Weight 110.000 (Ib/cu.ft) *
* Clay Content 0.000 (%) *
* Overconsolidation Ratio .... 0.000 *
* Initial Void Ratio 0.000 *
* Compression Index 0.000 *
* Recompression Index 0.000 *
* Permeability . 0.000 (ft/yr) *
* Median Grain Size 0.000 (mm) *
* Plasticity Index 0.000 (%) *
* Liquid Limit 0.000 (%) *
* Standard Penetration Number . . 0.000 (blows/ft) *
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* User Defined *
* Piezometric Surface for Hydraulic Condition *
* 7: User Defined *
************************************************************************
* *
* Point X Y *
* . *
* 1 0 4500 *
* 2 500 4500 *
************************************************************************
m
************************************************************************
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
***
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
R OTATIONAL FAILURE
Automatic Grid Search
RE S U L T S
*
*
*
*
*
The slopes were analyzed for failure arcs having centers in *
areas defined by the following parallelograms: *
*********************************************************************
a.
Co-ord.
X
Y
Co-ord.
X
Y
Co-ord.
X
Y
The
The
The
The
Point 1
100
4641
Point 1
125
4640
Point 1
354
4646
Slope 1
Point 2
115
4636
Slope 2
Point 2
182
4621
Slope 3
Point 2
282
4622
number of divisions between points
number of divisions between points
X-increment used in the search was
Y-increment used in the search was
Point 3
120
4645
Point 3
201
4654
Point 3
258
4664
1 and 2
2 and 3
were
were
Point
105
4650
Point
144
4673
Point
330
4688
4
4
10
10
4
4
4
*
*
*
*
*
_ *
*
*
*
*
*
*
_ *
*
*
*
*
*
*
_ *
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* *
* ROTATIONAL FAILURE RESULTS *
* *
************************************************************************
* *
* Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined *
* *
* Consolidated Drained (CD) Case *
* Seismic Coefficient =0.10 *
.*
m
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Safety
Factor
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.38
2.39
2.39
2.39
2.39
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.40
2.41
2.41
2.41
2.41
2.41
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.42
2.43
2.44
2.44
2.45
2.45
2.46
2.46
2.47
2.47
2.48
2.48
Failure
Radius
140.9
143.1
138.7
144.1
137.7
145.3
139.9
135.5
141.9
133.3
138.7
134.3
131.1
152.0
128.9
127.9
125.7
123.5
130.1
121.3
139.9
142.1
136.7
119.1
125.5
117.0
115.9
118.1
113.8
129.9
111.6
112.6
118.0
110.6
119.3
101.9
116.8
112.7
104.0
121.4
95.4
93.3
X-
Co-ord
168.3
168.3
168.3
170.8
167.5
168.3
167.5
167.5
170.8
167.5
170.0
168.3
167.5
168.3
167.5
165.0
165.0
165.0
165.0
165.0
165.8
165.8
165.0
165.0
168.3
165.0
162.5
162.5
162.5
170.0
162.5
165.0
167.5
160.0
160.0
160.0
168.3
158.3
158.3
158.3
158.3
160.0
Y-
Co-ord
4755.8
4758.3
4J53.3
4758.3
4752.5
4760.8
4755.0
4750.0
4755.8
4747.5
4752.5
4748.3
4745.0
4768.3
4742,5
4742.5
4740.0
4737.5
4745.0
4735.0
4755.8
4758.3
4752.5
4732.5
4738.3
4730.0
4730.0
4732.5
4727.5
4742.5
4725.0
4725.0
4730.0
4725.0
4735.0
4715.0
4728.3
4728.3
4718.3
4738.3
4708.3
4705.0
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
* *
* GARDSSUMMARY *
* *
* File: LPCSSl Date: 05-02-1996 Time: 19:36:43 *
* Project: BAYVIEW LANDFILL LEACHATE POND STABILITY *
* Hydraulic Condition 7: User Defined *
* *
* .: *
* Rotational Failure Analysis Safety Factor *
* . *
* Unconsolidated Undrained Case Not Run *
* Consolidated Undrained Case Not Run *
* Consolidated Drained Case 2.38 *
* : *
* Translational Failure Analysis Not Run *
* *
* Settlement Analysis Not Run *
* .: *
* Liquefaction Analysis Not Run *
************************************************************************
Job^kk Na
HDR Computation
IProject
Subject
Task
IW/.^'iio'
4i4e?i
KR
Computed
Checked
Sheet
Date
Date
Of
5". Z_ Usx^ /r^jtJiJ& .Suope /r^E.'vUGd . &crr\SiIi>&_ S&/smfejiTy-
'^^fj[:i^AJsoii_ - ^^'^
V ^
\
«>
JobNa ^kll
HDR Computation
IProject Computed
[Subject Checked
Task I Sheet
KR
Date
Date
Of
BAYVIEW LANDFILL CELL 1
CLOSURE CAP SLOPE STABILITY
STATIC AND PSEUDO-STATIC ANALYSES
(INFINITE SLOPE METHOD)
SLOPE PROPERTIES
height
slope
length
LCRS PROPERTIES
thickness
density
40.0
14.0
165.3
1.5
100.0
INTERFACE FRICTION
friction 25.0
(ft.)
(degrees)
(ft)
(ft)
(pcf).
(degrees)
FACTOR OF SAFETY |
Treinf
(klf)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
7.5
10.0
12.5
15.0
Seismic Coefficient, (-) |
0
1.87
2.04
Z20
2.37
2.54
2.70
3.12
3.54
3.95
4.37
0.1
1.32
144
1.56
1.68
1.79
1.91
2.21
2.50
2.80
3.09
0.2
1.02
1.12
1.21
1.30
1.39
1.48
1.71
1.94
2.16
2.39
0.3
0.83
0.91
0.98
1.06
1.13
1.21
1.39
1.58
1.76
1.95
0.4
0.70
0.77
0.83
0.89
0.96
1.02
1.18
1.33
1.49
1.65
0.5
0.61
0.66
0.72
0.77
0.83
0.88
1.02
1.15
1.29
1.43
Jobrfck Na
HDR Computation
I Project
Subject
Task
Computed
Checked
Sheet
KR
Date
Date
Of
4.50
«
•»
0.1 0.2 0.3
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT
0.4 0.5
ATTACHMENT C
SITE SEISMIC RESPONSE ANALYSES
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
Project ^j!i>Jsl\€iNJ Lf^K^v^i^sJL-
KR
Subject LKVi^^SyvA ^ "Sic V^J-OO ^sJ^JuiotcyVOA
[computed ''^.U?^. [Date ?-/.-ffc
Checked P^ iDate 6-f-^4t
Task Sge 'Setst-tic '^^JSJX^-^, |>A^\^^J££> Sheet Of
J^^^v^
•>
V _ll
fhy^ ^^ c z
o,5
'r/sf
= -Zy-M-^/> - ZoEO*'V = S.4^^to' %=-
•=» /^07v^ i^ A
^/ & S. «*^ X/O
/i- :^. %.
= /Z7D ft/rseo ^ 35fe /•y.3«o
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
I Project
Subjeq
Task
KR
Computed Date
Checked Date
Sheet Of
SpecJaJ Study
Soft
Medium Stiff.
Stiff
Rock
AVFRACT .SroJAR WA-VE VELOCTry
Less than 100 m/s
100 to 200 m/s
200 to 375 m/s.
375 to 700 m/s
(330ft/s) ;
(330 to 660 ft/s) I
(600 to 1,230 ft/s)^
(1,230 to 2,300 ft/s j (
Greater than 700 m/s ( 2,300 ft/s)
-\/e
2./ fvt- ./^/a^/u.rt^ -S-pfi^ Son... (^S:F'A)
^.S
A(/f4 * o, $o ^
0,.5£? A /*=^:s. ^y;^/^ > L<:y25 ev^/-u.4.Ti<=v^
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
\i Project {Computed
Subject Checked
Task Sheet
KR
Date
Oate
Of
a
0.8
0-7
0.6
0-5
0.4
A on Landfill — Recorded
i^^ Landfills — Non—Linear Analyses \
a Soft Ground Sites - Recorded
Idriss (1990) — Recommended
1979 Montenegro Ei.
-^1989 Loma Prlcta Eq.
-1985 Mexico City Eq
I ) < I I I 1 I I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' < ' I
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
PEAK OUTCROP ACCELERATION - a omax (g)
•»
U£^ T^A ~ ^'"^^/f- f^2_ C-t-oju-e-e c:A.p GVALU.A.TI'SYX
ATTACHMENT D
SEISMIC DEFORMATION ANALYSES
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
Project S>..-4vivc.vO UwOXS^v
KR
I Computed ?..\-_ri>. Date
Subject L-*«>-'ty\\_A^ 'Sg\-s*A.u:^ ^^^^^jukA^rv^ Checked jm-Date^- ^'"li
Task "Set-S^-ttg, 'i:)epDg-»sl>:fi'av^ MJA-'-Ht^'S Sheet Of
%
•• (ieiA- a. (L/Vjo%oue-e c-trf3
G-ScvOio --^Tivpt- tJJ'ft.pVk.-i'W- N-iJft.uj^ije'i. (^^^/k<:>i<r«N=i\T E,")
- C?. 4-'Z.(^ ipc^ GA.joSvJ-^je- Ci^f
• use hfu/Jeii * fjz.AtJ'i^^i'^ /^p./nAjJer\T l^fipt-Aeja/nsnT ^SMTV
^ps- 4,-S" oy= pcf ^^ yFfefi- C<J^^u^e«• <i.Ap
£/A t-t^A?E: b/AO£-A<=crt1«'-7-^
JobNa Na
HDR Computation KR
IProject {Computed Date
Sutject
Task
Checked Date
Sheet Of
lOOOj
k.. / y ''Nnoi
Figure 6.6 Makdisi and Seed Penuancnt Displacement Chart (Makdisi and Seed,
1978). ^p, LioCjZ. y vjj.^i'e; t^^l.^
123
JobNa ^
HDR Computation
{Project
Subject
Taafc
«
Computed
Checked
Sheet
C 7<z.
aoi
-h^-^TT-rl...,).,,.!,,,I[,.7^^71:77:^7^7 I t I I I ITTI miinii|iii7Tiwlriii|ji!il7
O.l
Yi«fd AccderotJoo / Maximum Accderotion
KR
Date
Date
Of
/CDO
foo
--J/o
1-0
T
r- 1
L.
r
L
I
i
i
i
I
Figure 6.5 HyT« and JMdin Permanera Seismic Displacement Chart (Hynes and
Franklm, 1984). ^^ ^:^^^^ .^^-r,^^
122
JobNa Na
HDR Computation KR
Project {Computed Date
Subject Checked Date
Task Sheet 4 Of
.O te.v_A- \ -€,'fti^>A^> \,av\
ft*\o4 "
o. Sz, & ( fCNrkcM.**,^*-.* ^ ^ "^2,2.^
o. 60 ^ ( >.vrkc*iwW«:n"f C- J * t-.t-^
^.
a vuuuf'
V / CM -^ 2ya e-fr, (.M^i^hisr^ SeSb Ot.i.p.'/S pp. H~1.2.)
1.0 LtiJ^ f Lc^S
^=f
I
z
I
A.
\o
F6 t>OCC\c
0.fc4-
t.zo
2.G\
^ ^./ OOWnJ^
Uf,
UK
O.bO
0-36
O.D-i
O.bO
Ao
^-1
see: AtTKcA^ej^
,^ao>ri j/ji:_h,%; y 5SS> ^Lu^av#' y=%ya_ A/.^ 7.Z 1
LtobNa Na
HDR Computation
{Projea
KR
{Computed Date
«
Subject
Task
. -.- ..._
3.0
&\-f
1
t
5
r
lo
'\-~>.o
1.9^
f.4;5
1.60
1.75
2.«i?
3.10
0==e^:A^ncs>i*rt_ Jni-j^^
o.pf
o.iz-'S'
C7./fo
©.•Z.Z-
o.?sr
0-4-'S'
0-0
Cheeked
Sheet
O.I5>
<?.z.5
O.SZ,
£7.37
0-44-
o.to
0.71
5
a<^
'^CP
£o
4o
3o
22-
3
Date
Of
te»«\iK£*^
5t^eL& BarHM.5
A
.
1
,
""''
.?./ <s> EC 4--rcA-
5= cj,^
= ^.s*:?
(J - 30 (L^ ^ 3o Om CS - /O c^ty^ ± 3<P ^/
J.2. ^ ^^ f'7«r£?
r-- f /= /7'
SurviL^ - O. S'O
7^ fdn,^ " O, Z^/O. SO ' O. SO
U sr /5)<=/.i ^ 3o <=^
JobNa NG
HDR Computation
Project
Subject
Task
Computed
Checked
Sheet
KR
Date
Oate
Of
3.ca.
O.Co.-
L,/Je^ •!• L.d:.^s
o
G? . °: (or; Iz. »5
t) y 1- 3 ^ \<:> \\ \Z-
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
Project {Computed
Subject Checked
Task Sheet
KR
Date
Date
Of
4.0 'oJ>A^Tp£ Vs.uj^
%
h =
(Uio4-=-
h,-
OtjtM4.
O.A^^
O.fe.^
o^-^V
0. 60
•^ D. 6&.
(XMa4- 0" ^"^S. { toriV csi^ (V^svcr C, "P ^^
. ^
C<>-"^ ?.SV\tJ3J4-'£>
0 i^i-f
I
i-
S'
I.C
\<?
o.iz
0.2i:>
o.$o
0.54-
o.sr
o.4^.
o.^-t-
o.zz
a ^2
O.ft
O.&f
o.fa
/.oo
I-f- .
<-\<:> 1
"ls£fon.t-t U'^wAfii
^ \Ooiv\
J
JobNa Na
HDR Computation
{Project {Computed
Subject Checked
Task Sheet 8
KR
Date
Date
Of
u ^ / d^ ^3<?<SH ( A44>i6/£.f" -f S5i2) /ijJ^^/e p=op. M - y.'Z-)
4
APPENDIX R – ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Skid for LFG
500 Ft
ORIGINAL
APPROXIMATE NEW
LEASE BOUNDARY
NEW
SI
T
L
A
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
NEW
SI
T
L
A
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
CHECKED BY:
COPYRIGHT:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CAD DWG FILE:
PROJECT NO.:
REFERENCE:
ADAPTED GRADING PLAN
PREPARED FOR CLIENT BY HDR
DEV. PLAN
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
[phone] (T)
10804 South State Route 68
Bayview Landfill
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
ORIGINAL
ISSUE:
1
SHEET TITLE
Elberta, Utah
[phone] (F)
9006003001500
DATE DESCRIPTIONMARK
11/19/21 DRAFT
SCALE IN FEET
BAYVIEW LANDFILL PLANNING
NOTES:
APPENDIX S – FLOW CAPACITY OF THE LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE

APPENDIX K
ATTACHMENT 3:
FLOW CAPACITY OF THE LEACHATE COLLECTION PIPE
Job No. Na
HDR Computation Jx]R
pWfiAMJ Landl-ilj^ . ico.p.edKlY; IQ^^M^-^in-^
\A^(Y\a\p Cn]lpr-^nn ^ii^if/n [checked ^TiiuJ \^.^'^H/o^
^\ou^ca{m\\\\c^ \iaska\t^(ijcA\pi%^<\. Pine^ Ishee. \ |o^ Q^
I Project
I Subject
Task
ba5ejLor\ ]Aou(\r\\f\.A'^ ^^aixaJioru- 4li^-flou3c6ip(:?/'^^
^or OL 3 mcKJ \mchme pine of\ a. 9% ^\o^ r^ ^
Ttve HELP m(xk\ ou.\pu^ C\C-Q ' pas. 19-^5) in^ica-fes
^a-V o^^llqiH^ \c(xchai'e^u)in b'^. n^^^-fm-for,
t\Wj cd^iiiofv ^mlu^fo^- "tn^eforc. a % \ncK
plp^ U3il 1 be able -+o h^dl^ +hc p^oi^ -P-looJ coi^^
JLA ampl^ -fac-]or or ^e^ki.
Hou3<2Ai^r^ 5+ormoca-kr #\^+ com^3 infe conitict uoi4K
t^olid (joa^+c ordaUu covjer \t:) +apicaUu^Pouo^+o
l^ocha-fe a3\iec-^bA ^u^t^f^. Cor.+amin&±^(X-^ ^
^-brmooa4er ujvW \:)C rrftrv\nni^^ Du- fce;e{)\n.Oi-Hie^fi^c
^ce ai) t)mal( as por)S\ble and tn placm(|^5oil cpue/
Qf\ all La35lre.'-PlllM!- orc/a^ ro+ odsmwiu moQ uiiU^eA
t)\r\ce +1^^ uXl6-^e 16 ncH- a-P4^idd conaci+a t^^h^ Pi^S^'^
\(\ 4A^e \and^i\\ a/\^ #^^ soil co\J^i^ nQrt^aUrarecL^
^0rL \^ a. icuad. po\ejn^\CL{ -Tor 4^5^ comr:anen-\'^ fo
ab^rb am. hofy dAu ron-tamina-icc;^ uDa-fer 4+\x+m(m
•\A-fil4raf^ \r\\o +ne %nrf^n^ oei^ Hi5+or/cai pr'ac+lc^
d+Vhc t>iU has i^hoton 44n^-i-+fie leaChdf^^oH^-por-/
Idichafe aen^ofe^ ^6 uj-eli as 4^^ ccnw+si-ormcoa-te^
Adld^V\onaWu.t)0\\ terms uoill k:)Z vn(k\(\kxa'e(l^o(fwiwr^
Job No. 3608
Computation
g||Pro/ec«_
(0
System
Bayview Landfill
cc
UJ
d
Leachate and Contaminated Water Plan
Component Leachate Collection System
Task Pipe capacity
Computed
Date
Reviewed
Date
kdf
Jul-03
^M^LO
<5-'Z^-c)^
Purpose
Find
Given
Solution
Assumptions
Equations
Calculation
Using Manning's equation, calculate pipe capacity of leachate headers.
Description
Pipe capacity
Variable Units
Q gal/day
Description
Pipe diameter [in]
Slope [ft/ft]
roughness coefficient
Value Source
8 leachate pipe diameter
0.02 design value
0.02 HDPE pipe
Description
Pipe capacity
Value Comment
719,824 gallons/day
Use Manning's Equation
Q = h^ AR^^^S^^ equation 1
n
A = cross-sectional area [ft ]
n = Manning's roughness coefficient
R = hydraulic radius [ft]
S = slope [ft/ft]
Q = flow [cfs]
Description
solve for area
solve for perimeter
solve for R
solve for Q
convert to gal/day
Equation
A = 7tr^
P = 7td
R = A/P
equation 1 above
1 cfs = 646,272 gpd
Comment Value Verification
[SF]
[ft]
[ft]
[cfs]
[gpd]
0.349
2.094
0.166666667
1.114
719,824
Sheet 2 of 2
APPENDIX T – BAYVIEW LANDFILL LFG GAS COLLECTION SYSTEM

NORTHERN UTAH ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(NUERA)
BAYVIEW LANDFILL LFG COLLECTION SYSTEM
ELBERTA, UTAH
MAY, 2019
LOCATION MAP
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
1
G001
CO
V
E
R

S
H
E
E
T
VICINITY MAP
BAYVIEW LANDFILLCACHE
WEBER
MORGAN
LAKESALT
PAYSON
OREMLEHI
LOGAN
BOUNTIFUL
SANPETE
SEVIER
GARFIELD
KANE
SALINA
RICHFIELD
ESCALANTE
36 73
15EUREKAELBERTA
UTAH
LAKE
JUAB
MILLARD
WASHINGTON
IRON
BEAVER PIUTE
15
ST. GEORGE
CEDAR CITY
18
130
59
9
14
12
89
89
6
24
62
70
21
21
257
15
50
BEAVER
PANGUITCH
KANAB
DELTA
SEVIER
COVE FORT
FILLMORE
HOLDEN
MT. CARMEL JCT.
LONG VALLEY JCT.
JUNCTION
MILFORD
ZION NTL.
PARK
PARK
BRYCE NTL.
LAKE
DAVIS
BOX ELDER
TOOELE
15
80
15
84
30
TOOELE
SALTLAKECITY
GREAT
SALT
LAKE
WENDOVER
SNOWVILLE
TREMONTON
BRIGHAM
OGDEN
CITY
UINTAHUTAH
6
6
40
40
33
87
189
PROVO
SPRINGVILLE
FRUITLAND
DUCHESNE
ROOSEVELT
CARBON
GRANDEMERY
WAYNE
SAN JUAN
163
191
191
89
276
261
95
24
24
12
10
191
262
666
70
70
72
6
BLUFF
MONTICELLO
MOAB
HANKSVILLE
GREEN RIVER
PRICE
CANYONLANDS
NATL. PARK
GLEN CANYON NATL.
RECREATION AREA
FREMONT JCT.
CASTLE GATE
RICH
SUMMIT
DAGGETT
DUCHESNEWASATCH 121
44
8084
89
30
VERNAL
HEBER
PARK CITY
EVANSTON
ECHO
LAKE
BEAR
PROJECT LOCATION
SHEET INDEX
PRESENTED BY
WRH POWER SYSTEMS
A DIVISION OF
W.R. HENDERSON CONSTRUCTION, INC
ELBERTA
GOSHEN
SANTAQUIN
GENOLA
PAYSON
WEST MOUNTAIN
H
W
Y

6
8
I-1
5
W 15200 S
S

5
6
0
0

W
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
2 of 10
G002
AB
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
,

G
E
N
E
R
A
L
LE
G
E
N
D

A
N
D

S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
,

A
N
D
GE
N
E
R
A
L

N
O
T
E
S
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C100
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
0
SCALE: 1" =
1000'1000'
1000'
500'
X X X X X
X X X X X X X X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MH
MHMHMHMH
MH
MH
MH
MH
MH
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
X X X X X X X X X X
X X
XXXXXXXXX
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C100
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
MHMHMH
MH
MH
MH
MH
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C101
CE
L
L

2
B
-
L
A
Y
E
R

A
GA
S

C
O
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

P
L
A
N
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C-DT-01
DE
T
A
I
L
S
2" PVE GATE VALVE WITH
NEOPRENE GASKETS BACKUP
FLANGES AND STAINLESS
STEEL BOLTS AND NUTS
QUICK CONNECT SAMPLE PORT
2" HDPE
HOSE CLAMP, TYP 4"x2" ECCENTRIC
REDUCING BUSHINGSLOPE FOR
DRAINAGE FROM PERIMETER
LFG HEADER
1/2" TAP AND BALL
DRAIN VALVE18" LONG x 2"Ø
FLEXIBLE HOSE
UNION DISCONNECT
TEMP GAUGE, FLOW AND
VACUUM SAMPLING
PORTS UNDER DUST CAP
2" TEE SCH 80 PVC
2"x6" REDUCING
BUSHING
EXPANSION COUPLING
WITH STAINLESS
STEEL CLAMPS 6" SDR 17 HDPE GAS
EXTRACTION WELL
WARNING FLAG
LOCKING COVER MARKED LPG
PVC BUTTERFLY VALVE WITH NEOPRENE
GASKETS, BACKUP FLANGES, STAINLESS
STEEL BOLTS AND NUTS
1/8" QUICK CONNECT COUPLING
2'x3' POLYMER CONCRETE
VALVE ENCLOSURE
3/8" P.P. TUBING
GAS COLLECTION
HEADER PIPE
6"
18"
EXISTING GROUND
6"VARIES
3/8" LABCOCK WITH BARBED
END, TYP
FULL FACE NEOPRENE
RUBBER GASKET
CONVOLUTED DUCTILE
IRON BACKUP RING, TYP
HEX NUTS WITH WASHER
(GALVANIZED CARBON STEEL)
HDPE FLANGE
ADAPTER FITTING, TYP
GAS HEADER PIPE
(SIZE VARIES)
MIN 3 THREADS AFTER
TIGHTENING STEEL BLIND FLANGE
6"x6" TEE 6" HDPE TO PVC
TRANSITION COUPLING
EXISTING 6" PVC
TO FLARE SKID
6" FLANGE ADAPTOR, TYP
6" BUTTERFLY VALVE
6" HDPE SDR 17 TO LFG
COLLECTION SYSTEM
EXISTING 6" PVC LFG PIPE
6" HDPE TO PVC
TRANSITION COUPLING
6" BUTTERFLY VALVE
2" PVE GATE VALVE WITH
NEOPRENE GASKETS BACKUP
FLANGES AND STAINLESS
STEEL BOLTS AND NUTS
QUICK CONNECT SAMPLE PORT
2" HDPE
HOSE CLAMP, TYP
18" LONG x 2"Ø
FLEXIBLE HOSE
UNION DISCONNECT
TEMP GAUGE, FLOW AND
VACUUM SAMPLING
PORTS UNDER DUST CAP
2" TEE SCH 80 PVC
2"x6" REDUCING
BUSHING
EXPANSION COUPLING
WITH STAINLESS
STEEL CLAMPS6" SDR 17 HDPE GAS
EXTRACTION WELL
6" FERNCO
REDUCING TEE
AND RISER
GAS HEADER
EXISTING GRADE
WELLHEAD ASSEMBLY, SEE DETAIL
6" RISER
8"x6" TEE
8" PERIMETER LFG HEADER,
SEE TRENCH DETAIL
6" HDPE 90° BEND
8"x6" REDUCER
TOP VIEW
SECTION VIEW
TOP VIEW
SECTION VIEW
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C-DT-02
DE
T
A
I
L
5
15
20
35
40
50
10'
5
15
20
30
5
15
25
70
80
90
X2 X3
X2 X3
X2 X5
10
30
LINER
20
LINER
LINER
PAGE NO:
DATE:
SHEET NO:
QA
/
Q
C
DE
S
I
G
N
E
D
DR
A
W
N
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
DA
T
E
BY
PR
O
J
E
C
T

N
O
.
01
-
1
7
-
0
0
0
2
BA
Y
V
I
E
W

L
A
N
D
F
I
L
L

L
F
G
CO
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M
MAY 2019
NU
E
R
A
BA
Y
V
I
E
W
LA
N
D
F
I
L
L
SS
BE
C
BE
C
C-DT-03
DE
T
A
I
L
NOTES:
BOREHOLE PIPE: 4" SCH 40 PVC
BOREHOLE SCREEN: 40" SCH 40 PVC, SLF-PERFORATED WITH 1/4"
PERFORATIONS
WELL SCREEN: 3/8"+ GRAVEL
WELL SEAT: BENTONITE CHIPS - HYDRATED
BENTONITE LAYER, TYP
BENTONITE LAYER, TYPBENTONITE
LAYER, TYP
BOREHOLE PIPE BOREHOLE PIPE BOREHOLE PIPE
APPENDIX U – CELL 1 & 2 CLOSURE

CELL 1.5
EXISTING
LEACHATE
POND
PROPOSED
LEACHATE
POND
CHECKED BY:
COPYRIGHT:
DESIGNED BY:
DRAWN BY:
CAD DWG FILE:
PROJECT NO.:
REFERENCE:
ADAPTED GRADING PLAN
PREPARED FOR CLIENT BY HDR
CLOSURE
2702 South 1030 West, Suite 10
Salt Lake City, Utah 84119
[phone] (T)
10804 South State Route 68
Bayview Landfill
Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency
CELL 1 & 2
ISSUE:
-
SHEET TITLE
Elberta, Utah
[phone] (F)
6004002001000
DATE DESCRIPTIONMARK
10/21/19 DRAFT
SCALE IN FEET
BAYVIEW LANDFILL PERMIT
NOTES:PHASE
A
PHASE
B
PHASE
C
PHASE
D
PHASE
E
PHASE
F
APPENDIX V – CLOSURE CAP EQUIVALENCY

•
•
•

Closure Cap Equivalency
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
1 Kl KLEINFELDER
METEORIC WATER INFILTRATION STUDY
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY LANDFILL
(BAYVIEW LANDFILL)
UTAH COUNTY, UTAH
For:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
September 9, 2003
This document was prepared far use only by th« client, only for tht purposes stated, and within « reasonable time from issuance. Non-
commercial, educational and scientific use of this report by regulatory' agencies is regarded as .1 "fair use" and not a violation of
copyright. Regulatory agencies may make additional copies of this document for internal use. Copies may also be made available to the
public as required by law. The reprint must acknowledge the copyright and Indicate that permission to reprint has been received.
HDR/26515.001,'SLC3R082 Page i of iii September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
}
IJf) KLEINFELDER
A Report Prepared For:
JVIr. Dick Sprague
HDR Engineering, Inc.
303 East ] 7'*' Avenue, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80203-1256
METEORIC WATER INFILTRATION STUDY
SOUTH UTAH VALLEY LANDFILL
(BAYVIEW LANDFILL)
UTAH COUNTY, UTAH
File No.; 26515.00]
Prepared By:
(g.0^ ^
Brian]. Peck,R.G.
Hydrogeologist
lee Zollinger, P.G
Senior Geologist
KLELNFELDER, INC.
849 West LeVoy Drive, Suite 200
Taylorsville, UT 84123
[phone]
September 9, 2003
HDR;265I5.001/SLC3R082 Page ii of iii Scpiember 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
1
o
1^ KLEINFELDER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1. LNTRODUCTION 1
2. MODEL CODE SELECTION 2
3. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS ...1 4
4. SOIL HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES 5
4.1 Properties ofthe In-Place Cap 5
4.2 Properties ofthe Prescriptive Cap 6
5. HYDRUS-2D MODEL DESIGN 7
6. HYDRUS-2D INFILTRATION SIMULATIONS 9
6.1 Average Climatic Conditions 9
6.2 Wettest (Worst-Case) Climatic Conditions 10
7. CONCLUSIONS II
8. LIMITATIONS ...12
9. REFERENCES 13
TABLES
1 Average Precipitation and Five Wettest Years on Record, Elberta, Utah
2 Unsaturated Hydraulic Parameters for Bayview Landflll Samples
3 General Unsaturated Hydraulic Parameters from Literature
4 Summary of Hydraulic Properties used for Prescriptive Cap Simulations
5 Summary of Model ResuUs
FIGURES
1 Site Vicinity Map
2 Soil Sample Location Map
APPENDICES
A Laboratory Report
B Site Specific Frost Depth Calculations
C Source Material Investigation Letter and Grain Size Distribution Figure
D Application for Authorization to Use
HDRy26515.001/SLC3R082 Page iii of iii September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
1^ KLEINFELDER
1. INTRODUCTION
Bayview Landfill, also called the South Utah Valley Landfill, is located approximately 5 miles
north of Elberta, Utah, along State Road 68 (Figure 1). This landfill is a Class 1 municipal solid
waste landfill and began accepting solid waste in 1990. Cell 1 is scheduled for closure during the
next year, and the South Utah Valley Solid Waste District wishes to consider modifying their
permit to include closure with an evaporative cap. Recent studies have shown that appropriate
evajX)rative caps out-perform standard clay caps in arid environments because they are less prone
to desiccation, cracking, and frost damage when compared to traditional thin clay caps. South
Utah Valley Solid Waste District would like to take advantage of long-term benefits offered by this
type of altemative cap.
The following report describes our assessment of expected long-term meteoric water infiltration or
seepage rates through an evaporative cap at Bayview Landfill constructed fi^om on-site soils.
Infiltration is defined as precipitation minus surface run-off, evaporation and plant transpiration.
The net infiltration rate multiplied by the clay cap area is the net seepage volume that may
contribute to foimation of leachate. Expected infiltration rates were established by using the
HYDRUS-2D saturated'unsaturated flow model (Version 2.0; Simunek and van Genuchten,
1999). Infiltration rates \vere determined for the standard regulatory prescribed cap and for the
proposed site-specific cap materials. The prescriptive cap simulation was constructed using clay
and silty clay materials, expected to have the lowest permeabilities. Infiltration processes are
rarely saturated, however. Unsaturated soil hydraulic properties are highly non-Jinear functions of
the pressure head (pressure head is also termed 'matric potential' and 'capillary sucfion'). Soil
moisture or saturation and hydraulic conductivity are both a function of pressure head. These three
variables interact fo control the movement of soil moisture in the vadose or unsaturated zone. To
simulate the behavior of a hypothetical prescripfive cap under the climatic conditions at the
Bayview Landfill, a bracketing range of unsaturated soil parameters were selected. The resulfing
prescriptive cap infiltration rates are then compared to the infiltration rates modeled for the actual
on-site materials.
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082 Page lof 14 September 9,2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
i KH KLEINFELDER
2. MODEL CODE SELECTION
The U.S. Salinity Laboratory's HYDRUS-2D unsaturated flow code was used to predict
infiltration through the Bayview Landfill's proposed evaporative cap. This model is a windows
based platform for running the public domain SWTVlS_2D finite element code published by
Simunek, Vogel and van Genuchten (1992, 1994).
This model code was chosen because it incorporates the Richard's equations for groundwater flow
under conditions of partial saturation and can simulate hydraulic gradients.and movement based on
soil moisture retention characteristics. The code is widely used in arid regions research. A key
factor of concem in arid environments is the upward capillary movement of water towards the
drying atmospheric interface caused by soil suction or matric potential under changing conditions
of surface soil moisture resulting from infrequent light precipitation events and the intervening
relatively long duration desiccation periods. The EPA HELP3 model code developed for
evaluation of infiltration into and leakage from landfills (Schroeder et al, 1994) only accounts for
gravity drainage of rainfall and is therefore more appropriate for sites in the eastem U.S. where
rainfall rates are much higher. In arid climates the HELP model tends to overestimate infiltration
rates because it does not account for upward movement of soil moisture toward the land surface
during drying inter\^als (Albright, 1997; Hart and Lassetter, 1999).
The H YDRUS-2D model reacts to heavy precipitation events by limiting surface infiltration to the
maximum infiltration capacity of soil based on the unsaturated flow equations; precipitation
amounts greater than this maximum rate are assumed to form runoff. The primary water budget
processes that determine net infiltration rates occur in near surface materials that are transected by
the evapotranspiration zone; the type and thickness of strata below the evapotranspiration depth do
not significantly influence percolation rates if they are more transmissive than the near surface
materials. The HELP model requires that the evapotranspiration depth be specified a priori. The.
HYDRUS-2D model handles evaporation by using maximum potential evaporation at the soil
surface. The evaporation depth is implicitly computed by HyDRUS-2D during runtime according
IrLDR/26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 2 of 14 September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inz.
1^ KLEINFELDER
to the unsaturated flow equation. The user specifies the potential maximum evaporation rate and
the simulation code computes movement of water based on saturated and'or unsaturated hydraulic
gradients that depend on antecedent moisture conditions.
HDR/265I5.001/SLC3R082 Page 3 of 14 September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
i UPI KLEINFELDER
CLIM.VTIC CONDITIONS
The HYDRUS-2D model requires specification of daily rainfall and potential evaporation to
simulate net infiltration. To obtain worst-case infiltration resuUs, plant cover was excluded from
all models prepared for this report, so potential transpiration was not quantified. It is assumed that
the addition of plants will reduce infiltration approximately equally for each cap modeled.
Potential evaporation at the Bayview Landfill site is a function of wind speed, relative humidity,
temperature, precipitation, and insolation (solar energy). Daily precipitation and potential
evapotranspiration values were obtained for the Elberta, Utah, weather station site from the Utah
Cfimate Center, University of Utah.
1^
L_-
The Utah Climate Center database precipitation values for the Elberta station have an annual
average of 10.54 inches for the period of record (1928-1990), Monthly average precipitation
amounts for Elberta are shown in Table 1.
For modeling a worst case scenario, the DSHW suggested running the five wettest years on record
in sequence. Tlie five wettest years in Elberta were 1983, 1982, 1941, 1967, and 1946, with
precipitettion rales of 19.34, 17.42, 14.28, 14.04, and 13.84 inches for these years, respectively.
Monthly values for each of these years are shown in Table 1.
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082
Copyrighl 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Page 4 of 14 September 9, 2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
SOIL HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES
Partial saturation or unsaturated flow hydraulic properties include the effective porosity, the
saturated and residual water capacity, the saturated hydraulic conductivity, and the matric potential
versus water content curve that is summarized by the van Genuchten soil moisture retention
parameters. Effective porosity is the maximum amount of water that fully saturated soil can store.
Matric potential is the physical property of a porous medium to attract water as a result of capillary
and adsorption processes. The residual capacity of a soil is the virtually irreduci'ble amount of
water in soil tliat has been exposed to desiccating conditions for a long period of time; it is defined
as having a matric potential of-15 bar, which is a pressure of about -153 meters of water. The
negative pressure is a convention for describing conditions of partial saturation; the pressure is
equal to the absolute hydraulic pressure required to drive the water firom a sample. The van
Genuchten parameters describe the shape ofthe soil matric potential (capillary suction) curve as a
function of volumetric soil moisture. From this is derived (he hydraulic conductivity versus soil
moisture curve using the equations of Mualem (1976).
4.1 PROPERTIES OF THE IN-PLACE CAP
Unsaturated hydraulic analyses were conducted on samples of potential cap materials collected
fi"om the Bayview Landfill site. Four soil samples were collected from representative locations on
February 18, 2003. These samples were selected based on the range of observed soil types at the
Landfill. The soil satnple locations are shown ou Figure 2, The samples are described as follows:
Sample ID
BVLF-l
BVLF-2
BVLF-3
BVLF-4
Location :
Soil berm
Soil stockpile
Soil stockpile
In-situ bonom of
cell 2
•JT, Soil Description ..,
Red-yellow sandy silt (SM)
Olive-brown silty sand (SM)
Olive-brown silty sand (SM)
Red-brown silty sand (SP-
SM) referred to as "mud
stone" or "hardpan"
• - Genei'ial GdiripactioD '
Uncompacted
Somewhat compacted by
equipment during placement
Somewhat compacted by
equipment during placement
In-situ compaction
HDR'26515.00]/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Page 5 of 14 September 9, 2003
i
4
lfl KLEINFELDER
The saturated hydraulic conductivity for the four samples ranges from 1.3 x 10"' to 3.8 x 10"*
cm'sec, with the hydrauhc conductivity of the olive-brown silty sand (BVL F-2 and -3) ranging
fi-om 1.3 X 10'^ to 3.8 X 10"^. Other parameters are summarized in Table 2. The laboratory report is
included in Appendix A.
4.2 PROPERTIES OF THE PRESCRIPTIVE CAP
Unsaturated flow parameters • were estimated for the regulatory prescriptive cap assuming the
prescriptive cap would be a clay material (see Table 3). Uncertainty regarding exactiy which soil
texture best approximates the low-permeability portion of the prescriptive cap material led to an
approach involving three soil types which bracket the low-permeability portion of the most
probable analogue. Three soil types were chosen that exhibited the lowest saturated hydraulic
conductivities; these are silty clay, silty clay loam and sandy clay. The hydraulic parameters for
these soils range fi-om 5.6x10"^ to 3,3x10' . The low-permeability layer was then covered with a
28-inch sandy loam topsoil to protect the low permeability layer from fi-ost damage. Site specific
fi-ost depth infotmation is presented in Appendi.x B. Soil textures used for modeling are shown in
Table 4.
The Solid Waste Rules also specify that the permeability ofthe prescriptive caps be lower than the
permeability ofthe bottom liner. The bottom liner for Cell 1 consists of an HDPE synthetic liner
placed on underlying native soil (a sandy silt lo silty sand). The effective permeability ofthis liner
system was calculated using equations developed by J J. Giroud and R. Bonaparte, 1989- To be
conservative, we assumed tliat the soil under the HDPE liner is a coarse sand, the liner makes good
contact with the underiying soil, and that the installation quality was good to excellent (one small,
circular hole per acre). We also assumed that up to 1 foot of leachate could be standing on the
liner, creating a vertical head. These assumptions were input into Giroud and Bonaparte's
equations, and the resulting predicted liner leakage rate is 470 gal/acre/day, or approximately 16
cm/year.
HDRy26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 6 of 14 September 9, 2003
Cop>Tight 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
,)
Ifl KLEINFELDER
HYDRUS-2D MODEL DESIGN
The HYDRUS-2D finite element model was discretized in the manner of a soil column test, with
one-dimensional flow from the atmospheric boundary- condition at the top ofthe column to a fi-ee-
drainage boundary at the bottom of the column. The height ofthe column was specified to be 215
cm using 50 rows and variable cell sizes from 0.5 to 5 cm. Row height was specified to be 0.5 cm
at land surface, at the seepage face, and at each side of a soil texture interface. The uppermost
boundary was specified to be an atmospheric boundary with daily time-variable records for rainfall
and evaporation potential. Water leaves the model system by gravity drainage fi-om the fi-ee
drainage boundary when it is fully saturated. The amount of water draining from the drainage
boundary was used to quantify the net amount of water infiltrating into die landfill waste.
The model for the prescriptive cap was designed to include a 71 cm (28 inch) thick topsoil layer at
the surface, underlain by 45 cm (18 inches) of clay cap material, with the base of the model domain
) consisting of 94 cm (37.5 inches) of sand to simulate the landfill waste material. A summary ofthe
materials used in the prescriptive cap simulations is shown in Table 5.
The model for the actual cap was designed to include a 5 cm (2 inch) tliick topsoil layer consistent
with normal surface disturbance, underlain by 81 cm (32 inches) of cap material, with the base of
the model consisting of 130 cm (51 inches) of the sand/waste layer. The thickness of the
evaporative cap was selected after running several models of various thicknesses to better
understand the balance between promoting maximum evaporation (by using of a thinner cap to
maintain moisture close to the evaporative surface) and providing sufficient storage for
precipitation (by using of a thicker cap that doesn't become saturated and allow breakthrough.)
The initial soil moisture pressure, an important variable influencing short term seepage rates, was
specified to be in equilibrium throughout the soil column with a -50 cm matric potential specified
at the base of the model domain for all model runs. This pressure is slightly dryer than the
subsequent dynamic equilibrium moisture at the base ofthe model. Net infiltration of rainfall at
the land surface during the five wettest year sequence is more accurately quantified by having the
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 7 of 14 September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Ifl KLEINFELDER
water content at near-equilibrium levels at the base of the soil column. Model predictions of
infilti-ation rates are sensitive to the initial soil moisture values, but the long-term dynamic
equilibrium infiltration rates are not affected by antecedent soil moisture.
Transpiration was not included in the model due to the relatively small percentage that it
constitutes relative to evaporation potential and the fact that parameters for soil moisture uptake
rates for desert shrabs and grasses are poorly documented. One study reports plant transpiration as
contributing three percent ofthe total evapotranspiration potential in Jean, Nevada, and 32 percent
for good grass cover on a landfill in Elko, Nevada (Albright, 1997). Excluding plant transpiration
is a conservative choice that tends to increase the predicted net infiltration rates. Similar plant
growth is e.\pected on both prescriptive and proposed evaporative caps, so making a comparison
between performance of these caps should not be significantly affected by the presence or absence
of vegetation.
HDRy26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 8 of 14 September 9,2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Ifl KLEINFELDER
HYDRUS-2D INFILTRATION SIMULATIONS
Three prescriptive cap design scenarios were evaluated based upon different soil textures for the
18-inch thick clay cap material. Four actual cap scenarios were evaluated based on measured soil
properties. The models were run both for average climatic conditions, and for the five wettest
years in sequence (beginning at equilibrium with the average years). Infiltration rates were
calculated for both average conditions and each ofthe five wettest years.
6.1 AVERAGE CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
Under average (normal) climatic conditions observed in nearby Elberta, Utah, the prescriptive
caps allow an average of 4.14 to 4.65 cm of infiltration to occur each year. Under the same
climatic conditions, evaporative caps constructed of the four potential soils assessed for use at
Bayview Landfill allow 2.63 to 6.55 cm of infiltration to occur each year. The olive-brown silty
sand material that has been stockpiled at the site (samples BVLFl and BVLF2) is expected to
allow infiltration rates of 2.63 to 4.12 cm/year. These results are shown on Table 5. A graph
depicting these results is shown below.
infiltration for Average Rainfall
.«>^ .ri>^ ..!.«•
^.-^ ^.-'
.\ .1. .'b ^6.
<^^ t,^^ <^^ ^^"
Type of Cap
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Page 9 of 14 September 9,2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
6.2 WETTEST (WORST-CASE) CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
Under an assumed worst-case climatic condition where the five wettest years on record at
Elberta, Utah were to occur sequentially, the three modeled prescriptive caps would allow
infiltration at rales ranging from 6.49 to 18.12 cm/year. Under the same climatic conditions,
evaporative caps constructed of the four potential soils assessed for use at Bayview Landfill
allow 3.63 to 20 cm of infiltration per year. The olive-brown silty sand material that has been
stockpiled at the site is associated with infiltration rates of 3.63 to 12.17 cm/year. These results
are shown on Table 5. A graph depicting these results is shown below.
Infiltration for Wettest Years
Prescrip 1
Prescrip 2
Prescrip 3
BVLF1
BVLF2
BVLF3
BVLF4
^'^ ^- .vO"' o.e. ,4^ ^^ ^^ ^# ^^^ ^^^
v^^ >^* ^"^ >^*^ ^'^
^C^^ r^^ ^ <^
Type of Year
HDR/'26515,001/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Page 10 of 14 September 9, 2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
CONCLUSIONS
Based on unsaturated flow modeling, it appears that a 34-inch evaporative cap, constructed from
the olive-brown silty sand material available at Bayview Landfill, will perform as well or better
than the hypothetical prescriptive cap under the arid conditions that exist in the area. The
proposed evaporative cap performed as well as the prescriptive cap during both the worst case
"wet" years, and during normal (dry) years. Both the prescriptive cap and the proposed
evaporative cap have much lower predicted infiltration rates (less than 7 cm/year) than the
leakage rate ofthe bottom liner (16 cm/year). Therefore, both caps satisfy the requirement ofthe
Solid Waste Rules that the cap be no more permeable than the liner.
To provide a more detailed description ofthe proposed capping material and provide quantitative
criteria for identifying these materials in the field, Kleinfelder perfonned a source material
investigation in May 2003 (Kleinfelder 2003). A summary of criteria that may be used to
identify suitable material (materials that are represented by BVLF-2 and BVF-3) is included in
Appendix C.
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 11 of 14 Scpiember 9,2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
i Ifl KLEINFELDER
8. LIMITATIONS
The unsaturated groundwater model described in this report was used to predict infiltration rates
based upon estimates of the regulatory prescriptive cap unsaturated hydraulic parameters and
laboratory analyses of the on-site materials. The accuracy of infiltration rate estimates resulting
from numerical models is entirely dependant upon the validity of the hydraulic parameters used
to construct the model. The simulated infiltration rates are sensitive to the unsaturated flow
parameters. These and other subsurface hydraulic parameters generally exhibit spatial
heterogeneity. Therefore, simulated infiltration rates are considered to be best estimates and not
precise predictions of actual field infiltration rates. No on-site hydraulic testing was performed
for this project by Kleinfelder, Jnc. Field tests are available which would reduce the level of
uncertainty associated with estimating subsurface hydraulic properties.
This study was performed and findings obtained in substantial conformance with the engineering
practice that exists within the area at the time of our investigation and includes professional
opinions and judgements. We base this report on information derived fi:om data in available
literature and our knowledge of and experience in the local area. This report does not provide a
warranty as to variable subsurface conditions which may exist and applies only to the specific
area that was investigated. In addition, one should recognize that definition and evaluation of
subsurface geologic and hydrogeologic conditions is a difficult and inexact art. Geologists and
hydrogeologists must occasionally make general judgements leading to conclusions with
incomplete knowledge of the geologic history, subsurface conditions and hydraulic
characteristics present. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 12 of 14 September 9,2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Ifl KLEINFELDER
9. REFERENCES
Albright, William, 1997, Application of the HYDRUS-2D Model to Landfill Cover Design in the
State of Nevada, Water Resources Center, Desert Research Institute, Publication No.
41153, prepared for Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division
of Environmental Protection, Solid Waste Branch, Bureau of Waste Management, January,
1997,18 p.
Carsel, R.F., and Parrish, R.S., 198S, Developing Joint Probability Distributions of Soil-Water
Retention Characteristics, Water Resources Research, 24 (5), pp. 755-769.
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates. Inc., 2003, laboratory analysis sheets for Bayview Landfill soil
samples including: Predicted Water Retention Curves (Pressure Head vs. Moisture
Content), Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs. Moisture Content, Relative Hydraulic
Conductivity vs. Pressure Head, Moisture Retention Data (Hanging Column/Pressure
Plate/Thennocouple'Relative Humidity Box), Particle Size Characteristics, Particle Size
Analyses (Dry Sieve, Wet Sieve and Hydrometer), Satijrated Hydraulic Conductivity Tests,
Atterburg Tests, Initial Moistiare Content, Dry Bulk Density, Wet Bulk Density, Calculated
Porosity, and Percent Saturation.
EPA, ]990, A Subtitle D Landfill Application Manual for the Multimedia Exposure Assessment
Model (MultiMed), by Susan Sharp-Hansen, Constance Travers, Paul Hummel, AQUA
TERRA Consultants, Mountain View, Califomia, and Terry Allison, Computer Sciences
Corporation, Athens Georgia, August, 1990; EPA Contract 68-03-3513, Project Monitor
Gerard Laniak.
Giroud, J.P. and R. Bonaparte, 1989. "Leakage Through Liners Constructed with Geomembranes,
Part I," Geomembrane Liners, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 8,1:27-67.
Hart, B., and Lassetter, W., 1999, Numerical Modeling of Heap Leach, Tailings and Waste Rock
Facility Cover Alternatives, In Closure. Remediation & Management of Precious Metals
Heap Leach Facilities, edited by D. Kosich and G, Miller, Center for Environmental
Sciences and Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno.
Kleinfelder, 2003. Source Material Investigation, Soutii Utah Valley Landfill (Bayview Landfill),
July 10,2003, File No, 30268,001.
Mualem, Y., 1976, A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous
media. Water Resources Research, 12(3), 513-522.
Schroeder, P.R., Dozier, T.S.. Zappi, PA., McEnroe, B.M., Sjostrom, J.W., and Peyton, R.L.,
1994, The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model,
Environmental Laboratory, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, MS 39180-6199, with the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory,
HDR;26515.00I/SLC3R082 Page 13 of 14 September 9, 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Ifl KLEINFELDER
Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincirmati,
Ohio, EPA/'600/R-94/168b
Simunek, J.T. Vogel, T. and van Genuchten, M.T., 1992, The SWMS2D code for simulating
•water flow and solute transport in V,vo-dimensional variably saturated media. Version
l.J; Research Report No, 126, U,S. Salinity Laboratory, U.S, Department of Agriculture,
Agriculture Research Station, Riverside, Califomia.
Simunek. J.T. Vogel, T. and van Genuchten, M.T, 1994, The SWMS_2D code for simulating
water flow and solute transport in two-dimensional variably saturated media. Version
Ll; Research Report No. 136, U.S. Salinity Laboratory, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agriculture Research Station, Riverside, Califomia.
Simunek, J.T., and van Genuchten, M.T., 1999, The HYDRUS-2D software package for
simulating water flow and solute transport in tv^o-dimensional variably saturated media.
Version 2.0, U.S. Salinity Laboratory, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture
Research Station, Riverside, Califomia.
van Genuchten, M.T, 1980, A closed form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of
unsaturated soils, Soil Science Society of America Journal 44:892-898.
HDR;26515.001/SLC3R082 Page 14 of 14 September 9. 2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
Ifl KLEINFELDER
T.ABLE 1
Average Precipitation and Five Wettest Years on Record (inches)
Elberta, Utah
xMonth
Jan
• Feb
. Mar
Apr
May
Jun
. Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct.;:
••••Nov'.'/-
Dec:
Sum: ,.
Average .
.81
.84
.99
1.03
1.03
0.73
0.8
0.94
0.72
1.01
0.86
0.81
10.54
/. ;Preclpitatiott(iiich«) i'ciivsfl
.1983
1.24
2.00
2.30
1.32
1,67
0.89
0.82
2.11
1.76
0.57
2.69
1.97
19.34
1982 ;;:
1.12
0.33
1.12
0.41
1.66
0.57
3-67
0.38
5.30
1.46
0.73
0.67
17.42
••''- -Mikm
0.53
1.42
1.66
1.25
0.64
1.75
1.07
0.85
0.54
2.71
0.46
1.40
14.28
^m&^^^:$:
|^^967'^'lv^
3.89
0.23
0.74
0.88
2.52
2.44
2,04
0,15
0.58
0.39
0,94
1,24
14.04
i'S^c^-::r/::B^^:i
Wi:i^^^'''^}-
1,04
0.11
0.88
1.46
1.68
0
0.72
1.27
0
3,96
1.84
0.88
13.84
Date from Utviversiiy of Ulah, Utah Climate Center, Elberta Station
Period ofRecord (1/1/1928 to 12/31/90)
Station: Elberta, Utah
HDR/265I5.OO1/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
September 9, 2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
TABLE 2
Unsaturated Hydraulic Parameters for Bayview LandfiU Samples
Sample-
Name.
BVLF-1
BVLF-2
BVLF-3^
BVLF-4
, -Sample ..
Description
Sandy Silt (MH)
Silty Sand (SM)
Silty Sand (SM)
Silty Sand (SM)
'- "'-:'-^'^W^'^^
Otiier-:^:?;
Red yellow
Olive brown
Olive brown
Red to brown
^•ia5i:e(Sntent^'^^--i-
iSaituration
0,6671
0.4035
0.3846
0.5395
'-•': •:-••*! . ;"„.', ^-
Residuial
0,000
0.000
0.000
0.020
. .Satiiratei*;.
: .Hydraulic
Gbndifctivity
(cm/sec): •
4.1 xlO'^
3,8x10"*
1.3x10-^
1.3 xlO-^
—; CakiidatedV:.:
van Genuchtea.
^rparamet;ersV.^
Alpha
(i/cm)
0.0051
0.0062
0.0071
0.0470
• •n,:''
1.35
1.30
1.27
1.36
Note; These values reported by Daniel B. Stephens and Associates, Inc.
TABLE 3
General Unsaturated Hydraulic Parameters from Literature
^^^^'sliStw;:-/;••.:
:\;i-|«;Loamj; saiid ..•..• -.
*aTS«^#i<f^Ht:\-- :•.•• ; r^Sj'.TfSandy loam--
pSiia^giy-Mmv--^
W^^M>fmi
'^'.•,.»-..'/^!f-,-;':*irX-V''» ;'••' •-'." •
=:.^^^ii§iS^'i.>:;.'
^^-^Ifei^ibam;-.^::"
s^i^tcW:^:
V--'•.=i-'W-3-.'v-.;'i--.--.--- -...-. •
;i;jSiIty;(EIay;Lpam
'''WM^:^''':'
•'•""^-•sSty^iay-.--
Satui^atibh
0.43
0.41
0.41
0.39
0.43
036
0.45
0.41
0.46
0.43
0.38
036
0.045
0.057
0.065
0.100
0.078
0.070
0.067
0.095
0.034
0.089
0.068
0.070
•liSiSaturated 7\
iliyaraiii^^:^
5JS{cm/sec>;X;
83 xlO'^
4.1 xlO-'
1.2x10'^
3.6x10^
2.9x10"*
33x10-^
13x10""
•7.2x10-^
6.9x10-^
1.9x10"^
5.6x10-^
5.6x10"*^
; : '..van Genuchten ,.
'•t-r-\ /V^rvv parametersift^^^i^-^-
?."::;>;Aipfia?:;#:.
0.145
0.124
0.075
0.059
0.036
0.027
0.020
0,019
0.016
0.010
0.008
0.005
i3'."jCri;:;?/.'l'.:-'-: ."7.' .:"-''•-.
•-^;'^r-•.-i•iV.':•-••;•a;- • '•
2,68
2.28
1,89
1,48
1.56
1.23
1.41
131
137
1-23
1.09
1.09
Mote: Source: Carsel and Parrish (1988)
Values are averages of hundreds of samples for each soil type.
HDR/26S15.001/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
September 9,2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
TABLE 4
Summary of Hydraulic Properties used for Prescriptive Cap Simulations
^\p;teg,CpiiteiatSS51
safiiratioii Resiaiial
#Saitiiraite®i 4>yait.GenucB.tett:c'
g^paraiingters>^g
Topsoil 0,41 0.065 1.2x10" 0.075 1.89
ClayCap(l) 0.36 0.070 5.6x10'' 0.005 1.09
Clay Cap(2) 0.43 0,089 1.9x10 5 0,010 1,23
Clay Cap(3) 0.36 0.070 33 xlO"-0.027 1.23
Fill material 0.43 0.045 83x10" 0,145 2-68
HDR/26515.001/SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
September 9, 2003
Ifl KLEINFELDER
TABLE 5
Summary of Model Results
Scieiaairio
rAimuatlnfilti-aitfon. Rate; foc
r^?.; ^^iSw^ft!esii^ar5f^*K^^^
^?j:fem/year)fj\t;(IMches/yeaF)j^
"Average-Annual Jnfiltr^tioiii
^ijRate for 5,normaEyeary.«5:
^H' (cm/yeary'^'^;(incl i^t^^
Prescriptive Caps
Presc-1
Sandy Loam (28")
Silty Clay cap (18")
Sand'* (37,5")
6.49
to
13.85
2.56
to
5.45
4,14 1,63
Presc -2
Sandy Loam (28")
Silty Clay Loam cap (18")
Sand* (37.5")
6.84
to
18.12
2,69
to
7,13
4.65 1.83
Presc -3
Sandy Loam (28")
Sandy Clay cap (18")
Sand* (37,5")
7.22
to
17,78
2.84
to
7,00
4.53 1.78
Evaporative Cap
BV-1
Sandy Loam (2")
Sample Tl-D (32")
Sand* (51")
9.9
to
19.65
3-9
to
7.74
6.55 2.58
BV-2
Sandy Loam (2")
Sample T2-Da (32")
Sand* (51")
3.63
to
7.07
1.43
to
2.78
2.63 1.04
BV-3
Sandy Loam (2")
Sample T2-Db (32")
Sand* (51")
6.23
to
12.17
2.45
to
4.79
4.12 1.62
BV^
Sandy Loam (2")
Sample T5-D (32")
Sand*(51")
8.78
to
19.99
3.46
to
7.S7
5.88 231
* "Sand" layer simulates the porous waste materials in the landfill.
HDRy26515.001 /SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
September 9,2003
f0091r-
'W.
%r-
..'l^;'^.;, ''i/'lf
Vt,.- I
-v/"
^'-OOJl
'^• '\.
CMo
^ CM
I
^1--
l--\
•'~(J-*- L' II
^It-' 4;
,> ^:::-ov >.r "^—•-, A
""'"•» •^''i'--
1!=,-*
H
•I' ,
II
" J-
J •1
8
z
Q
\-
UJ
Ul
UL
o
CM Ul
o
o o
173
UJ _)
< z
9 UJ fe
z [r o>
UJ z Q
ri ^ UJ
-J !5 OT .. S m > < z . tr
S UJ to o
UJ 5 CD t
CD O D Q.
a.
(N
O
o
n a
Ul
Q:
D
o
o
o
= Z
ro =
0.
<
z o
< u o
Ol
t
D>
.c -S S >>
-' X nf ,
j= o -C-
O Q-S c
Q:
LU
Q
_l
LU
U-
UJ
S
3 Z
LEGEND
BVLF-3 8) Appraxlmale Soil Sample Location
0 25Cr 500-
Approximate Scale: r = 600'
KLEINFELDER
Projod Number 26515.001
SLC3dl55.(lwg
Bayview Meteoric Infiltration Study
Approximately 5.6 Miles North of Elberta
Elberta. Utah
SOIL SAIVIPLE LOCATION MAP
FIGURE
2
March 13,2003
Ms. Renee ZoUjnger
Kleinfelder
2677 East Parley's Way
Salt Lake Citj-, UT 84109-1617
[phone]
;i
'"V
Dear Ms. Zollinger:
Enclosed is the final report for the Kleinfelder (Bayview LF) job #26515.001. Please review this
report and provide any coranients as samples will be held for a maximum of 30 days. After 30
days samples will be retumed or disposed of in an appropriate manner.
All testing results were evaluated subjectively for cottsistency and reasonableness, and the results
appear to be reasonably representative ofthe material tested. However, DBS&A does not
assume any responsibility fox interpretations or analyses based on the data enclosed, nor can we
guarantee that these data are fully representative of the undisturbed materials at tlie field site. We
recommend that careful evaluation of these laboratory results be made for your particular
application.
We are pleased to provide this ser\-ice to Kleinfelder and look forward to future laboratory
testing on other projects. If you have any questions about the enclosed data, please do nol
hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
DANIEL B. STEPHENS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Jaiiiel O'Dowd
Enclosure
L.\L.^I'W;il)l nu.l.'; oc Llcinlcl.lcr.IJi.'vic.i LRCnvci Lcllenloc
Daniel B. Stephens <t Asiocialcs, Inc.
602O Academy NE, Suit* 100 505-82J-9400
Alhiiquerc)ue. NM 87109 FAX 50S-822-8B77
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Summary of Tests Performed
Laboratory
Sample Number
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUM
Initial Sol)
Properties'
(0, Pd. *)
X
X
X
X
Saturated
Hydraulic
Conductivity^
CH
X
X
X
X
FH
|i.<oisture
Characteristics'"
HC
X
^
X
X
PP
X
X
X
X
TH WP
X
X
X
X
RH
X
X
X
X
Unaaturaled
Hydraulic
Conductivity
X
X
X
X
Particle
Size'
DS WS _H
Effective
Porosity
Particle
Density
Air
Pemieability
1/3, 15 Bar
Poinls and
Water Holding
Capacity
Atterberg
Limits
Proctor
Compaction
' 6 =
^ CH
' HC
' DS
ln(tial moisture content, pd = Dry tjulk density, ^ = Calculated pofosity
= Constant head, FH = falling head
= Hanging colurno, PP = Pressure plale, TH = Thermocouple psychromeler, WP = Water activity meter, RH "= Relative humidity box
= Dry sieve, WS = Wet sieve, H = Hydrometer
D an iel B. Slcpliens £ A ssociatcs , Inc.
Summary of Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
Sampie Number
Ksat
(cm/sec)
4.1 E-05
3.8E-06
1.3E-05
1.3E-03
Method of Analysis
Constant Head Falling Head
X
X
X
X
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUF-4
"1
D an ie I B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Summary of Initial ^Aoistur& Content, Dry Buik Density
Wet Bulk Density and Calculated Porosity
Initial Moisture Content Dry Bulk Wet Bulk Calculated
Sample Number
Gravimetric
(%. g/g)
35.0
18.6
13.4
17.1
Volumetric
(%, cm'/cm^)
29.3
27.2
21.2
21.7
Density
(g/cm^)
. 0.84
1.46
1.58
1.27
Density
(g/cm")
1.13
1.74
1.79
1.49
Porosit
(%)
68.4
44.7
40.4
52.0
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUF-4
Daniel B. Stephens &. Associates, Inc.
' )
Summary of Moisture Characteristics
of the Initial Drainage Curve
Sampie Number
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
LJ BLUF^
Pressure Head
(-cm water)
0
21
49
150
510
16623
851293
0
21
49
150
510
7445
851293
0
21
49
"150
510
17541
851293
0
10
43
80
510
9892
851293
Moisture Conte
(%, cm^/cm^)
66.9
65.6
63.4
60.4
43.4
15.3
2.5
40.1
39.6
38.0
37.3
25.2
14.1
2.7
38.2
37.8
36.3
34.4
24.6
11.7
2.5
54.6
48.3
41.7
30.8
18.5
8.1
2.9
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Summary of Calculated Unsaturated Hydraulic Properties
Sample Number
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUF^
a (cm"')
0.0051
0.0062
0.0071
0.0470
N (dimensionless)
1.3508
1.2957
1.2714
1.3613
e,
o'.oooo
0.0000
0.0000
0.0200
e.
0.6671
0.4035
0.3&46
0.5395
'1
1
i.J
o
Raw Laboratory Data
) and Graphical Plots
i
i f
: )
Daniel B. Stephetts & Associates, Inc.
Summary of Initial Moisture Content, Dry Bulk Density
Wet Bulk Density and Calculated Porosity
Initial Moisture Content Dry Bulk Wet Bulk Calculated
''
'•
-''"-
.t
Sample Number
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
• BLUF^
Gravimetric
(%. g/g)
35.0
18.6
13.4
17.1
Volumetric
(% cm^/cm^)
29.3
27.2
21.2
21.7
Density
(g/cm^)
0.84
1.46
1.58
1.27
Density
(g/cm^)
1.13
1.74
1.79
1-49
Porosity
(%)
68.4
44.7
40.4
52.0
Daniel B . Sie p h efts & A si o ci at cs, Jnc.
Data for Initial Moisture Content,
Bulk Density, Porosity, and Percent Saturation
•^i
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number. WR03.0035.00
Sample Number. BLUF-1
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Test Date: 2-Feb-03
Field weight* of sample (g).- 98.15
Tare weight, ring (g).' 36.57
Tare weight, cap/plate/epoxy (g); 0.00
Dry weight of sampie (g).' 45.63
Sampfe volume {err?): 54.44
Assumed particle density: 2.65
Initial Volumetric Moisture Content (% vol): 29.3
Initial Gravimetric Moisture Content (% g/g); 35.0
Dry bulk density (glcrr?): 0.84
Wet bulk density (QICVT?): 1.13
Calculated Porosity (% vol): 68.4
Percent Saturation: 42.9
Comments:
* WeigUt including tares
Laboratory analysis by: Wl. Devine
Data entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
f '
il
TT
n'
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Data for Initial Moisture Content,
Bulk Density, Porosity, and Percent Saturation
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number. WR03.0035.00
Sample Number: BLUF-2
Ring Number. NA
• Depth: NA
Test Date: 2-Feb-03
Field weight* of sample (g): 122.60
Tare weight, ring (g): 34.07
Tare weight, cap/p/afe/epoxy (g): 0.00
Dry weight of sample (g): 74.67
Sample volume (cm^): 50.99
Assumed particle density: 2.65
o Initial Volumetric Moisture Content (% vol): 27.2
Initial Gravimetric Moisture Content (% g/g): 18.6
Dry bulk density {g/cm^; 1.46
Wet bulk density (g/cm^): 1.74
Calculated Porosity (% vol): 44.7
Percent Saturation: 60.8
Comments:
' Weight including tares
I 4
Laboratory analysis by: M. Devine
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Data for Initial Moisture Content,
Bulk Density, Porosity, and Percent Saturation
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number. WR03.0035.D0
Sample Numben BLUF-3
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Test Date: 2-Feb-03
Field weight* of sample (g).
Tare weight, ring (g)
Tare weight, cap/piate/epoxy (g)
156.11
41.93
O.OO
Dry weight of sample (g): 100.70
Sample volume (cm^): 63.72
Assumed particle density: 2.65
Initial Volumetric Moisture Content {% vol): 21.2
Initial Gravimetric Moisture Content {% g/g): 13.4
Dry bulk density (g/cm^): 1.58
Wet bulk density (g/cm^: 1.79
Calculated Porosity (% vol): 40.4
Percent Saturation: 52.4
Comments:
* Weight including tares
Laboratory anaJysis by: Wl. Devine
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Data for Initial Moisture Content,
Bulk Density, Porosity, and Percent Saturation
;i
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035,00
Sample Number BLUF-4
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Test Date: 2-Feb-03
Field weight' of sample (g)
7ans weight, ring (g)
Tare weight, cap/plate/epoxy <g)
126.63
39.39
0.00
Dry weight of sample (g): 76.24
Sample volume (cm^): 59.97
Assumed particle density: 2.65
o Initial Volumetric Moisture Content (% vol): 21.7
Initial Gravimetric Moisture Content (% g/g): 17.1
Dry bulk density (g/cm^: 1.27
Wet bulk density (glcm^- 1.49
Calculated Porosity {% vol): 52.0
Percent Saturation: 41.7
I
V..J
o
Comments:
* Weight including tares
Laboratory analysis by: M. Devine
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
D anicl B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Summary of Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity Tests
Sample Number
Ksat
(cm/sec)
Method of Analysis
Constant Head Falling Head
2
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUF-4
4.1 E-05
3.8E-D6
1.3E-05
1.3E-03
X
X
X
X
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Constant Head Method
Job name: Kleinfelder
Job number WR03.0035.00
Sample number. BLUF-1
Ring number. NA
Deptfi; NA
Type of water used: TAP
Collection vessel tare (g): 11.81
Sample length (cm): 2.97
Sample diameter (cm): 4.84
Sample x-sectionaf ansa (cm^): 18.36
fy
Date
Temp Head Q-Hare Q Elapsed Ksat Ksat@20°C
Tinie (°C) (cm) (g) (cm^) time (sec) (cm/sec) (cm/sec)
Test#1:
26-Feb-03
26-Feb-03
Test #2:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
Test #3:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
12:50.43
13:00:04
'
08:53:42
09:11:51
10:45:38
10:59:48
18.5 12.8
18.5
18.5
12.8
12.8
13.6
15.2
14.4
1.8
3.4
2.6
561 4.0E-O5 4.1E-05
1089 3.9e-05 4.0E-05
850 3.9E-05 4.0E-05
Average Ksat (cm/sec): 4.1 E-05
Comments:
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Constant Head Mettiotd
Job name: Kleinfelder
Job number WR03.0035.00
Sample number BLUF-2
Ring number NA
Depth: NA
Type of water used: TAP
Collection vessel tare ig): 11.81
Sample length (cm): 2.77
Sample diameter (cm): 4.84
Sample x-sectionaf area (cm^): 18.42
r
V
Date Time
Temp Head Q-»-Tare Q Elapsed Ksat Ksiat@20°C
CO {cm) (g) (cm^) time (sec) (cm/sec) (cm/sec)
Test#1:
27-Feb-03 08:54:06
27-Feb-03 09:12:45
18.5 14.6 12.3 0.4 1119 4.1 E-06 4.3E-06
Test #2:
27-Feb-03 10:45:11
27-Feb-03 12:26:06
18.5 14.6 13.9 Z1 6055 3.6E-06 3.7E-^6
Test # 3:
28-Feb-03 10:07:39
2B-Feb.03 10:29:22
18.0 14.6 12.2 0.4 1303 3.4E-06 3.5E-06
Comments:
Average Ksat (cm/sec): 3.8E-06
Laboratory analysis by: D. G'Dowd
Data entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens &. Associates, Inc.
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Constant Head Method
Job name: Kleinfelder
Job number WR03.0035.00
Sample number BLUF-3
Ring number NA
Depffj: NA
Type of water used: TAP
Collection vessel tare (g): 10.71
Sample length (cm): 3.41
Sample diameter (cm): 4.88
Sample x-sectional area (cm^): 18.67
f'V
I J-
'T
: 1.
" "3
)
Date
Test#1:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
Test #2:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
Test# 3:
28-Feb-03
28-Feb-03
Time
.08:54:12
09:12:17
10:45:48
12:23:41
10:05:05
10:26:10
Temp
CO
18.5
18.5
18.0
Head Q + Tare Q Elapsed Ksat Ksat@20°C
(cm) (g) (cm^) time (sec) (cm/sec) (cm/sec)
13.2 11.7 1.0 1085 1.2E-05 1.3E-05
13.2 15.8 5.1 5873 1.2E-05 1.2E-05
13.2 11.9 1.2 1265 1.3E-05 1.3E-05
Average Ksat (cm/sec): 1.3E-05
Comments:
i\
Laboraiory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens A Associates, Inc.
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity
Constant Head Method
Job n.ame: Kleinfelder
Job number WR03.0035.00
Sample number BLUF-4
Ring number NA
Depth: NA
Type of water used: TAP
Collection vessel tare (g): 11.93
Sample length (cm): 3.22
Sample diameter (cm): 4.87
Sample x-sectional area (cm^): 18.64
Date
Temp Head Q-i-Tare Q Elapsed Ksat Ksat@20''C
Time (°C) (cm) (9) (cm) time (sec) (cm/sec) (cm/sec)
Test#1:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
Test #2:
27-Feb-03
27-Feb-03
Test #3:
28-Feb-03
28-Feb-03
08:54:23
09:10:02
10:44.50
10:58:17
10:04:07
10:15:02
18.5
18.5
6.8
6.8
18.0 6.8
59.7 47.7
53.6 41.7
43.0 31.1
939 1.3E-03 1.3E-03
807 1.3E-03 1.3E-03
655 1.2E-03 1.3E-03
Comments:
Average Ksat (cm/sec): 1.3E-03
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens i£ Associates, Inc.
Summary of Moisture Characteristics
ofthe Initial Drainage Curve
rr
-
• |»
r-
B -
. i
V
i
.—'
1
1 1
J
^
..:',
Sample Number
BLUF-1
.
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
~
BLUF-4
Pressure Head
(-cm water)
0
21
49
150
510
16623
851293
0
21
49
150
510
7445
851293
0
21
49
150
510
17541
851293
0
10
43
80
510
9892'
851293
Moisture Content
(%, cm^/cm^)
66.9
65.6
63.4
60.4
43.4
15.3
2.5
40.1
39.6
38.0
37.3
25.2
14.1
2.7
38.2
37.8
36.3
34.4
24.6
11.7
2.5
54.6
48.3
41.7
30.8
18.5
8.1
2.9
Dattiel B. Stephens <t Associates, Inc.
Summary of Calculated Unsaturated Hydraulic Properties
Sample Number
BLUF-1
BLUF-2
BLUF-3
BLUF-4
a (cm"')
0.0051
0.0062
0.0071
0.0470
N (dimensionless)
1.3508
1.2957
1.2714
1.3613
Or
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0200
6s
0.6671
0.4035
0.3846
0.5395
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Hanging Column/Pressure Platefrhermocouple
(Main Drainagfe Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-1
Ring Number NA
Depff?: NA
Dry wt. of sample (g): 45.63
Tare vrt., screen & damp (g): 25.32
Tans ivf., ring (g): 36.57
Tare wt, epoxy (g): 0.00
Sample volume (cm^): 54.44
Saturated weight'at 0 cm tension (g): 143.92
Volume ofwafer^ in saturated sample (cm*): 36.40
Saturated moisture content (% vol): 66.86
Sample bulk density (g/cm^): 0.84
•1 i
Hanging column:
Pressure plate:
Date/Time
28-Feb-03 /14:00
03-Mar-O3 /12:30
05-Mar-03/15:30
07-Mar-03/15.00
10-Mar-03/13:00
Weigtit*
(9)
143.92
143.25
142.04
140.38
131.13
Matric
Potential
(-cm water)
0.00
21.00
49.00
150.00
509.90
Moisture
Content^
(% vol)
66.86
65.63
63.41
60.36
43.37
Comments:
* Weight Including tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 glen?
. 1
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Water Activity Meter/Relative Humidity Box
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-1
Ring Numtier NA
Depth: NA
1
Dry weight* of water activity meter sample (g): 134.62
Tare ive/g/jf,/ar (g): 113.64
Sample bulk density (g/cm'): 0.84
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
IVafer Acf/wfy Meter 26-Feb-03/13:30 138.68 16622.7 15.28
Dry weight* of relative humidity box sample (g): 65.04
Tare weight (g): 40.93
*\-Sample bulk density (g/cm ); 0.84
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
Relative humidity box: O3-Mar-03 /12:30 65.75 851293 2.46
Comments:
* Weight inducjing tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 glen?
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa enfened by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
t;.'
D an iel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
1.E-^06
1.E+05 :
1.E+04
a
E o
"g 1.E+03
o
X
3
m
o
a
I.E-t-02
1.E+01 -
1.E+00
<i
Water Retention Data Points
Sample Number BLUF-1
-
-
:
-
X
-
•
••
'
i-i i
• i :
•
i i i i •
• Hanging c»1umn
* Pressure plate
• Thermocxiuple
•Water aclivity meter
XRhbox
•
•
-^ • . W-r-
-
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens «t Associates, Inc.
Predicted Water Retention Curve and Data Points
Sample Numben BLUF-1
I.E-t-06
"t
].
1.E+05 -
1.E+04
a
a
?
E u
"g 1.E-f03
0)
I
CD
CA «
a)
D-
1.E+02
1,E+01
1.E+00
10
: x\ ; : .; ; : . i
Ur
. .
,
-
L
- 1
1
1
'
1
•

/•
- i \ i ;
• : Nv! i
H Hanging c»lumn
A Pressure plate
• Thertnotxrtjpie
• Water activity meter
X Rh box
Predicted curve
1—
1
—
1
— 1

iiiii
i : ; : : :
!::••• j '-'-.' '.
!::!•• 1 . . ' .
- —-^ F : i 1 1 T r 1 -r- :—.^ -r • : . ', ; 1 1 : 1—
•
v i :
:^:
-i 1
•
1, i .,-,—.—1
20 30 40 50 60 70
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
80
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Number BLUF-1
I.E-t-00
1.E-01
1.E-02 :
I 'i
t • ,
y ..
r
- )
f
\
>
u
D T3
C
o
O
o
3 a
•D
>.
J.
a
>
9
1.E-03
1.E-04
1.E-05
Q: 1.E-05
1.E-07
1.E-08
1.E-09
Moisture Content (7o,cm /cm )
Daniel B. Stephens tt Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Numben BLUF-1
1.E+00
1.E-01
\ -a 1.E-06
1.E-11
1.E-12
)
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pres:sure Head
Sample Number. BLUF-1
1.E+00
1.E-09
,r
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1,E•^00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E•^03 1.E-^04 1.E+05 1.E+G6
Pressure Head (-cm v/ater)
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sampie Number BLUF-1
I.E-fOO
1.E-01 .
i!
I
L 1.E-11
1.E-12
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E-I-00 1.E-4-01 1.E-H02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E-<-05 1.E+06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
I J.
D aniel B. Stephens <£ Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Hanging Column/Pressure Plate/Themiocouple
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-2
Ring Number NA
Deptfj: NA
Drywt. of sample (g): 74.67
Tare wt, screen & clamp (g): 25.33
Tans wt., ring (g): 34.07
TatB wt., epoxy (g): 0.00
Sample volume (cm'): 50.99
:]
Saturated weight* at 0 cm tension (g): 154.52
Vo/umeofwafer^ in saturated sampfe (cm): 20.45
Saturated moisture content (% vol): 40.11
Sample bulk density (g/cxT?): 1.46
Matric
Weight* Potential
Date/Time (g) (-cm water)
• ) Corriments:
* Weight including tares
^ Assumed density ot water is 1.0 glcrr?
Moisture
Content^
(% vol)
Hanging column:
Pressure plate:
28-Feb-03/14:00
03-Mar-03/12:30
05-Mar-03/15:30
07-Mar-03 /15:00
10-Mar-03/13.00
154.52
154.24
153.47
153.07
146.94
0.00
21.00
49.00
150.00
509.90
40.11
39.56
38.05
37.26
25.24
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Data entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Water Activity AAeterlRelative Humidity Box
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-2
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Dry we/gf7t* of water act/wfy meter sampte (g): 154.86
Tare weigfjf, jar (g); 121.47
Sample bulk density (glcm^): 1.46
'\.
Dale/Time
Weight*
(9)
Matric
Potential
IVaferActivify Meter 27-Feb-03/10:00 158.08 7444.5
Moisture
Content'^'
(-cm water) (% vol)
14.12
• )
Dry weight* of relative humidity box sample (g): 71.00
Tare we/gfjf (g): 42.11
Sample bulk-density {glcrr?): 1.46
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
Relative humidity box: 03-Mar-03 /12:30 , 71.53 851293
Comments:
' Weight including tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 glar?
2.73
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Data entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Water Retention Data Points
Sampie Numben BLUF-2
1.E+06
f
xi
1.E-(-05
1.E+04 -
tt
?
E o
1
"S 1.E-<-03
o
I
o
3
tn
i. a
1.E-I-02 -
1.E+01
1.E+00 '
: X • : ; • ;
1 1
'
I
t
l
t
i
• l-)anging column
A Pressure plate
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
XRhbox
•
i • • :
•i
^—. ,- : i 1 , , —j 1 ; 1 1 , •—. .. 1 r^
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm"')
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Predicted Water Retention Curve and Data Points
Sample Numben BLUF-2
^.l--^UtD -T
1.E+05 :
1.E+04 :
5
?
E
y
1
"S 1.E-^03 -
0)
X
a
0)
lA
£ a
1.E+02 -
1.E+01 -
1.E+00
\| 1 i 1
\ 1 1
\*
-
• Hanging column
A Pressure plale
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
X Rh box
Predicted curve
A \. ;
\ •
Mil
J
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm'/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
• Sampfe Number BLUF-2
1.E+00
1.E-01
-->.
) 1
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Numben BLUF-2
1 .E-HOO
1.E-01
1.E-02
1.E-03
0)
E
1.E-04 .
1.E-05 J
o
3
TJ 1. r
0
o
u
••§ .1
E-06
E-07
-a
1.E-03 4
1.E-09
1.E-10
1.E-11
1.E-12 1-.
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Numben BLUF-2
1.E+00
• ) I
1.E-08
1.E-09
1.E-03 1.E-02 I.E^OI 1.E-1-00 I.E-i-01 I.E-t-02 I.E-i-03 1.E-»-04 I.E-i-05 1.E+05
Pressure Head (-cm water)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Number BLUF-2
I.E-t-OO
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E•^00 1.E-^01 1.E+02 1.E+03 1.E+04 1.E+05 I.E-t-06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Hanging Column/Pressure Plate/Thermocouple
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-3
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Dry wL of sample (g); 100.70
Tare wt. screen & clamp (g): 25.48
Tare wt., ring (g): 41.93
Tare wt., epoxy (g): 0.00
Sample volume {or?): 63.72
3
1
o
Saturated weight* at 0 cm tension (g): 192.47
Volume of water^ in saturated sample {cn?): 24.36
Saturated moisture content (% vol): 38.23
Sample bulk density (g/cm'): 1,58
Hanging column:
Pressure plate:
Date/Time
28-Feb-03/14:00
03-Mar-03/12:30
05-Mar-03/15:30
07-Mar-03/15:00
10-Mar-03/13:00
Weight* '
(9)
192.47
192.17
191.27
190.00
183.80
Matric
Potential
(-cm water)
0.00
21.00
49.00
150.00
509.90
Moisture
Content^
(% vol)
38.23 •
37.76
36.34
34.35
24.62
Comments:
* Weight including tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 glen?
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
L..
Daniel B. Stephens £. Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Water Activity Meter/Relative Humidity Box
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-3
Fiing Number NA
Depth: NA
:)
H:
Dry weigfjf* of wafer acfn/Sy meter samp/e (g): 141.82
Tare weight, jar (g): 111.56
Sample bulk density {Qlcrc?): 1.58
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
Water Activity Meter 27-Feb-03 / 09:50 144.06 17540.6 11.70
Dry weight* of relative humidity box sample (g): 85.94
Tare weight (g): 40.78
Sample bulk density {glcrr?): 1.58
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
Relative humidity box: 03-Mar-03 /12:30 86.67 851293 2.53
Comments:
' Weight including tares
^ Assumed density of waler is 1.0 glcrr?
Laboratory analysis by: 0. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Water Retention Data Points
Sample Number BLUF-3
i.n-t-uo T
I.E-t-05 -.
1.E-1-04 :
<D
t
E o
1
•g I.E-I-03 -
0)
I
2
3
(ff
(0
ffl
1-
a
I.E-t-02
1.E-f01
1 .E-HOO
X ; i i : i .
i •
L... ..; ...; i i i
1 1
• Hanging column
A Pressure plale
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
XRhbox
i A i i
[ml
• i
; : i [ , [
A- .-.-. i '•• .,,!,, , .J ^ .-i--^ .^^
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (7o,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens <fe Associates, Inc.
;i
L,
t/
Predicted Water Retention Curve and Data Points
Samp/eWumber BLUF-3
10
1.E+05 :
1.E-t-04 -
a
£
o
1
"S 1.E+03-
ffl
I
ffl
3
m
0)
(D
%.
a
1.E+02 :
1.E+01
I.E-HOO
^\
K*
:
j i
i i
• Hanging column
A Pressure plate
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
X Rhbox
Predicted curve
AS.
hi ;
-i—,—•—I ,—-.—1—•—I
;. ;
20 30 40
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
50 60
r' •
r -
^ j
I
• )
1
Daniel B. Stephens i Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Number BLUF-3
LE-t-OO ,
1.E-01 4
1.E-09
Moisture Content (%,cm /cm )
Daniel B. Stephens JL Associates, Inc.
;i
I.E-t-OO
1 .E-01
1.E-02 --
1.E-03
1.E-04 J
1
• )
1.E-12
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Number BLUF-3
Moisture Content (7o,cm /cm )
.-i
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Number BLUF-3
I.E-t-OO
1.E-01 -.-
1.E-02 :
^ 1.E-03
o
3
TJ
0 1.E-04
O
3
n
">. 1.E-05
o
JS
ID
0^ 1.E-05
1.E-07
1.E-08
1.E-09
! ; : "--.v^ .' ; : ;
1.E-03 1.E-02 1,E-01 I.E-t-OO 1.E-f01 1.E-i-02 I.E-t-03 I.E-i-04 I.E-i-05 1.E-t-06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
Daniels. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
1.E+00
1.E-D1-4
1.E-02
1.E-03
1.E-12
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Number BLUF-3
•'i\ 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 I.E+OO I.E-t-01 I.E-t-02 1.Et-03 1.E-H04 1.E-+05 1.E+06
Pressure Head {-cm water)
Daniel B. Stephens <t Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Hanging Column/Pressure Piate/Thermocouple
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Wame: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sampte Number BLUF-4
Ring Number NA
Depth: NA
Dry wt. of sampfe (g): 76.24
Tare wt., screen & clamp (g): 25.84
Tare wi.. ring (g): 39.39
Tare wt., epoxy (g): 0.00
Sampte volume {or?): 59.97
I
' \
• )
Saturated Vi/eight* at 0 cm tension (g): 174.24
Volume ofwater'^ in saturated sample {cn?): 32.77
Safurafecf moisture content {% vol): 54.64
Sample bulk density (g/cm'): 1.27
Hanging column:
Pressure plate:
Date/Time
28-Feb-03 /14:00
03-Mar-03/12:30
05-Mar-03/15:30
07-Mar-03/15:00
10-Mar-03/13:00
Weight*
(9)
174.24
170.46
166.48
159.94
152.54
Matric
Potential
(-cm water)
0.00
10.00
43.00
80.00
509.90
Moisture
Content^
(% vol)
54.64
48.34
41.70
30.80
18.46
Comments:
' Weight including tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 glcsr?
.'•
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Dan ie I B. Stephens A Associates, Inc.
Moisture Retention Data
Water Activity Meter/Relative HumicJity Box
(Main Drainage Curve)
Job Name: Kleinfelder
Job Number WR03.0035.00
Sample Number BLUF-4
Ring Number NA
DepOt: NA
.J
'1 I
Dry weight* of water activity meter sample (g): 140.98
Tare weight, jar {g): 116.07
Sample bulk density {glen?): 1.27
Date/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Contenf"
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
WaferAct/v/fy Meter 28-Feb-03/10:30 142.56 9892.1 8.06
' )
Dry weight* of relative humidity box sample (g): 71.69
Tare weight (g); 44.95
Sample bulk density {gtcn?): 1.27
Dale/Time
Matric Moisture
Weight* Potential Content^
(g) (-cm water) (% vol)
Relative humidity box: 03-Mar-03 /12:30 72.31 851293 2.93
Comments:
* Weight including tares
^ Assumed density of water is 1.0 gfar?
Laboratory analysis by: D. O'Dowd
Dafa entered by: D. O'Dowd
Checked by: D. O'Dowd
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Water Retention Data Points
Sample Numben BLUF-4
1.E4-06
I.E-t-05
I.E-t-04
n
E o
"S I.E-^03
o
X
3
0)
(0
a
I.E-t-02
1.E+01
.^.
1.E-I-00 -!
0
: X i ; i ; ;
iiiii
i i i i
:
m Hanging column
A Pressure plate
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
XRhbox
——
1
—
1
—
1 1
.
1
.
1
1
1
1 1
1
L
I
I
I
I
•
I
'. -. '- ' -
i
4
10 20 30 40
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
50 60
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Predicted Water Retention Curve and Data Points
Sample Number BLUF-4
I.E-t-06
l.E-t-05
I.E-I-04
?
E o
I
"S I.E-i-03
o
X
3
(0
(0
o
I.E-t-02
1.E-t-01
1.E+00 •!
10 20 30
11
;\
^
•
.! •. , , ,
\ ! :
-i 1— r 1 -c- ; [ 1 —1 1
• Hanging column
A Pressure plate
• Thermocouple
• Water activity meter
X Rhbox
Predicted curve
m\.
•
: 1 -. i ^—IB-I ^
40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Number BLUF-4
I.E-t-OO
1.E-01
2
• \
I
H
H
1.E-09 4
Moisture Content ("/o.cm'/cm )
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Numben BLUF-4
1.E-I-00
1.E-01 =
...J:
1
1.E-11
10 20 30 40 50 60
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^}
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
P|ot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Numben BLUF-4
\
.]
1 .1
I.E-t-OO
1.E-01 :
1.E-02
1.E-03
o
3
T3
O 1.E-04
O
o
"3
a
t.
> 1.E-05
>
_M
0)
^ 1.E-06
1.E-07
1.E-08 :
1.E-09
:
;
ill i \ • ^
lili Ml
i^
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 I.E-t-OO I.E-i-01 I.E-^02 1.E-t-03 I.E-t-04 I.E-i-05 1.E-h06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Numben BLUF-4
I.E-t-OO
1.E-01 .
J
1.E-12
iJ 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 I.E-t-OO 1.E-t-01 I.E-t-02 1.E-f03 I.E-i-04 I.E-i-05 1.E-t-06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
o
I
L:
Laboratory Tests
and Methods
Daniel B. Stephens i Associates, Inc.
: )
Methods
Dry Bulk Density:
MoisUife Content
Ksat
ASTWD 4531-91
ASTM D 22tS-92
Calculated Porosity Klute, A 1986. Porosty. Chp.18-2.1, pp. 444-445, in A. Klute (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis,
American Sociely of Agronomy, Madison, Wl
Constant Head: ASTM D 2434-68 (93)
Hanging Column Method Klute, A. 1985. Porosty. Chp.26, in A, Klute (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis,
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI
Pressure Plate Method ASTM D 2325-65 (94)
Water Potential Method Dane, H. Jacob and G. Clark Topp. 2002. Chp.3. pp. 663-665. in J. H. Dane and G. C. Topp (ed.),
Methods of Sof Analysis, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wl
Relative Humidity Box Klute, A. 1986. Porosty. Chp.26. In A. Klute (ed), Methods of Soil Analysis.
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wl
Calc. Kunsat Soil Sd. Soc. Am. J. 1980 44:892-898
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
1.E+06
1.E-K15 -
I.E-t-04 -
o
a
E o
"S 1-E+03
o
X
3
(A n o
1.E-I-02
I.E-I-01
I.E-t-OO
<>
Predicted Water Retention Curve and Data Points
Sample Number BLUF-4
10
-
•
•
J
J
1
\ i i i .'
• Hanging column
A Pressure plate
• Theimocouple •
• Water activity meter
X Rhbox
Predicted curve
20 30 40
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
50 60
D aniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relati've Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Numben BLUF-4
I.E-t-OO ^
1.E-01
1
A
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm'')
Daniel B. Stephens <£ Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Moisture Content
Sample Numben BLUF-4
I.E-t-OO
1.E-01
1.E-02 4
1.E-03 .
«]
E
o
>»
^.»
*>
•3
U
3 •n c o O
li
3 a
t.
•a
X
1.E-04
1.E-05 .
1.E-06
u
Moisture Content (%,cm^/cm^)
Daniels. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Relative Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Numben BLUF-4
1.E-V00
1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 I.E-t-OO I.E-i-01 I.E-t-02 I.E-t-03 I.E-^04 1.E-t-05 I.E-i-05
Pressure Head {-cm water)
Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc.
Plot of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Pressure Head
Sample Numben BLUF-4
1.E+00
1.E-01
<r
1.E-12
•i I
I- J 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 I.E-t-OO I.E-f-01 1.E-t-02 I.E-i-03 I.E-t-04 l.E-t-05 1.E+06
Pressure Head (-cm water)
Bayview Landfiii
Frost Depth Calculation
. Elberta, Utah NOAA Data
1951 -1980
Dry Density 94
Moisture Content 13
Freezing Index (degree day) 880
Mean Annual Air Temperature (deg F) 50.3
Vo (deg F) 24.6
Vs(degF) 7.0
Length ol Analysis Freezing Period (day) 125
Latent Heat of Fustion 'L" CBty/ff^S) 1752.3
Volumetric Heat "C" (Btu/ft/degF) 25.145
Thennal Conductivity of Soil (Btum'^2/hr/degF/in) 0.6
Alpha (Vo/Vs) 3.5
Fusion Parameter "mu' 0.10
=free2ing index/length of freezing
Correction Coefficient 'lamtxia* 0.62
=C*VsA.
chart
z= Lambda * ((48'F)/(L7k))'S).5
z = 2.36 feet
z = 28.3 inches
UtiOT H •^ "2-<D — '^O '-^cX^,
state a'nd Station Name
Utah
BRYCE CANYON NP HDQ
CAPITOL REEF NATL MON
CEDAR CITY FAA AP
COTTONWOOD WEIR //
COVE FORT //
DEER CREEK DAM
DESERET
DESERT EXP RANGE
DUGWAY
ECHO DAM
ELBERTA
EPHRAIM SORENSENS FLD
ESCALANTE
FAIRFIELD
FARMINGTON USU FLD STA
FERRON
FILLMORE
FORT DUCHESNE
GARFIELD
GR_EEN RIVER AVN
HANKSVILLE
HEBER
HIAWATHA
JENSEN
KANAB
LAKETOWN
LAVERKIN
LEVAN
LOA
LOGAN UTAH STATE UNIV
MANTI
MEXiCAN HAT
MILFORD WSO
MOAB 4 NW
Air Freezing Index- USA Method (Base 32° Fahrenheit)
station
Number •
421006
• 421171
_421267_
421759
421792
422057
422101
422116
422257
422385
422418
422578
422592
422696
42272S
42279B
42282a
422996
423097
"42341B
423611"
423809
423896
424342
424S0B
424856
"424968
425065
425148
425166
425402
425582
425554
Lat.
(De9. -
Mln.)
Long.
(D.g. •
Mln.)
Elev.
IftttI
N3739
N3817
N3742
N4037
N3836
N4024
N3917
N3836
N4Q11
N4058
N3957
N3921
N3746
N4Q16
N4101
N30O5
N3857
N4017
N4043
N3900
N3822
N4031
N3929
N4022
N3703
N4149
N3712
N3933
N3824
N4145
N3915
N3709
N3826
W11210
W11115
W11306
W11147
W11235
W11132
W11239
W11345
W11256
W11126
\N^^^57
W11135
W11136
W11205
W11154
W1110B
W11219
W10952
W11212
W11010
W11043
W11125
W11101
W10921
Wil 232
W11119
W11316
W11152
W11139
W11149
W11138
W10952
W11301
7915
5500
5620
4950
5980
5270
4585
5252
4340
5500
4690
5560
5810
4876
4340
5925
5160
4990
4310
4070
4308
5580
7230
4720
4985
5988
3200
5300
7045
4785
5740
4270
5028
425733 N3a36 W10936 3965
Mean
Anniral
Temp.
(»F)
53.6
47.8
43.5
49.2
49.0
51.4
47.0
49.4
46.6
51.2
47.7
51.2
44.7
45.2
45.4
54.6
42.0
58.6
47.6
66.6
Air Freezing Index Return Periods (°F-Days) & Associated Probabilities (%)
1.1-
Year
(10V.)
1.2
Year
(20%)
2
Year
(60%)
2.S
Year
(50%)
3.3
Year
irov.)
6
Year
(B0%)
10
Year
(90%)
20
Year
(95%)
25
Year
(9«%)
50
Year
(98%)
100
Year
(99%)
606
60
80
50
158
464
168
136
114
379
113
297
114
271
76
318
79
627
68
180
122
414
405
570
13
523
175
397
225
214
15
149
36
743
100
125
80
231
614
249
212
178
498
177
405
173
375
123
428
127
846
109
274
194
644
521
782
24
678
254
513
322
297
35
226
1010
217
248
165
407
936
453
416
344
753
347
560
324
614
253
670
257
1332
223
516
390
822
760
1261
59
1001
20
445
754
5S4
485
118
68
420
1090
263
293_
198
468
1039
524
491
405
1173
317
345
235
537
1150
605
578
833
410
730
378
692
302
748
306
1489
266
603
463
910
834
1419
73
1102
26
511
830
634
547
159
176
489
222
475
920
482
616
440
779
360
833
363
1661
316
702
548
1005
914
1592
91
1211
33
584
911
722
616
212
568
278
1270
387
411
283
621
1281
705
686
562
1023
572
923
516
883
432
935
435
1866
379
826
655
1117
1007
1798
115
1338
44
674
1005
829
696
269
666
1399
493
509
355
743
1464
850
849
1503
590
596
420
847
1814
976
693
1165
708
1071
629
1032
543
1077
544
2153
475
1008
817
1273
1134
2091
152
1514
61
804
1136
984
815
422
355
•811
992
1532
620
622
439
878
1658
1014
607
1282
828
1195
728
1156
641
1195
640
2392
560
1167
961
1401
1238
2336
188
1657
78
915
1242
1116
914
558
936
1035
842
1313
864
1231
1615
708
699
497
968
1783
1123
1162
1689
791
721
"551'
1050
1895
1223
943
I' 969
757
1192
671
1229
670
2462
586
1214
1004
1438
1268
2408
199
1699
83
948
1273
1155
943
602
478 595
974
831
1335
843
1297
760
1328
756
2662
663
1354
1132
1543
1354
2614
232
1817
100
1044
1360
1288
1026
740
1084
743
1280
1037
T555^i
1068
T,Pt^ K. IS<
1428
923
1392
842
1416
J37_
2841
734
1482
1252
1638
1429
2B00
263
1921
116
1131
1438
1371
1101
880
1185
850
Footnotes:
* Probability of occurrence less than indicatad probability (Value=0)
" No Freezing Index Values Recorded during 1951-80 period (Value=0) 79 Prepared by NOAA - Nalional Climatic Data Center
X
^
V
% o
I
•J
-> ( o-
i
^
I
Q-I
Lij|
h
0
u.
i
CM
le KLEINFELDER
An ejnp/c>>'ce Qanitd company
July 31, 2003
File No.: 30268.001
Mr. Terry Wamer
HDR Engineering, Inc.
3995 South 700 East, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84107
Subject: Source Material Investigation
South Utali VaUey Landfill (Baj-view LandFiIl)
Utah County, Utah
Dear Mr. Wamer:
In conjunction with KJeinfelder's report dated July I, 2003, we are providing tlie following
information to summarize the findings of our report.
Identification of Suitable Material
Based on laboratory testing and modeling, as presented in Kleinfelder's Meteoric Water Infiltration
Study, one of the predominant soils at Bay\'iew LandfiU has been identified as an acceptable
material for the CeU 1 protective cap. This soil is classified as a silty sand (SM) to sandy silt (ML),
and is generally olive brown in color. Based on numerous tests performed on this proposed
capping material, this material can generally be characterized by the following grain-sizes:
Sieve Size
No. 4 (1/4 inch)
No. 40
No. 60
No. 200
Percent Passing
95 - 100%
70-100%
60-95%
30-70%
Other materials present at the site differ significantly from this gradation criteria and are generally
easy to screen out based on field logging and gradation tests.
Location of Suitable Material
The proposed suitable cap material was found in the stockpile north of Cell 1 and in the floor ofthe
excavation for Cell 2. In the Uiree borings drilled in the stockpile north of Cell 1, we found one 5-
foot thick layer in B-3, and a few other pockets of material tlial did not meet these specifications.
We investigated the materials immediately below the stockpile north of Cell 1 and beneath the
dune sand south of Cell 2 and found only^some pockets of material suitable for construction ofthe
protective cap layer in those locations.
HDR/30268.001/SLC3L290 Page 1 of 2 July 31,2003
Cop>Tigiit 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
KLEINFELDER 2G77 East iVleys Vvay, Salt Lake City, UT 841Q'.M017 ^80•.! 4n6-6"<.0 180',) .>6b-6TaS fax
Two test pits excavated within Cell 2 contained 6 to 7 feet ofthe suitable cap material.
We recommend tliat lenses or pockets encountered within the stockpile or under Cell 2 that do not
fall within the gradation criteria identified above be excluded fi'oin use in tiie protective cap layer
unless further testing and analysis is performed to evaluate their suitability.
Kleinfelder appreciates this opportunity to assist you. If you have any questions regarding this
report please do not hesitate to contact us at [phone].
Respectfiilly,
KLEINFELDER, INC.
Renee Zollinger, P.G.
Senior Geologist
Scott Davis, P.E,
Geotechnical Division Manager
cc: Mike Oden, HDR Engineering
Richard Henry, South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
HDR/3026S.OOi/SLC3L290 Page2of2 July 31,2003
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
KLEINFELDER 2677 East Parley's Way, SaltLake City, UT 34109-1617 (SOU 46C--f'7f,o (H01) 466-6788 fax
SIEVE ANALYSIS
GRAVEL
coarse rine
SAND
coarse mtdiun Tine
HYDROMETER
SILT CLAY
1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4
I ^ .1
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
#10 #16 #30 #60 #100 #200
1 0.1
GRAIN SIZE (mm)
Symbol
•
CD
Sample Depth (ft) USCS Soil Description USCS
Ciassirication
,J
Si
m KLEINFELDER
PROJECT NO.
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
FIGURE
B-1
• 1
0
0
;]
J
HPI KLEINFELDER
APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO USE
Meteoric Water Infiltration Study
South Utah Valley Landfill CBayview Landfill)
Utah Countv, Utah
Report originally prepared for HDR Engineerins, Inc.
File Number: 26515.001 ReportDate: September 9. 2003
KLEINFELDER, INC.
849 West LeVoy Drive, Suite 200
Taylorsville, UT 84123
[phone]
[phone]
To Whom It May Concem:
Applicant understands and agrees that (he above-referenced report for the subject site is a copyrighted
document, that Kleinfelder, Inc. is the copyrighl owner and that unauthorized use or copying of the report
for the subject site is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of Kleinfelder, Inc.
Applicant understands that Kleinfelder, Inc. may wjtlihold such pemtission at its sole discretion, or grant
permission upon such terms and conditions as il deems acceptable.
By signing below, the Rching Parties agree to the same terms and conditions as Kleinfelder's
original client, including any limitations of liability' or indcniait>- obligations. Tbe original ser^ice$
agreement may be obtained from the original client identified above or from Kleinfelder, upon
request.
To be Completed bv Applicant
'. • '•" - - '^•- " ••' .By:"-"
(company name) (Print Name)
(address)
(city, state, zip)
Title:
Date:
(Sipiaiure)
(telephone) (FAX)
By:
. To be Completed bv Kleinfelder. Inc.
Approved for reuse with applicant agreeirig to above terms and concurrence by
original client. Additional fees are estimated at $ -'' _.
Disapproved, report needs to be updated.
• Date:
Kleinfelder, Inc.
RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO KLEINFELDER
HDR/265 ] 5.001 /SLC3R082
Copyright 2003 Kleinfelder, Inc.
September 9, 2003
i
)
APPENDIX N
Attachment N-1
Addendum to Closure Cap Equivalency Report
KLEINFELDER
February 9,2004 - _
File No.: 26515.001
FEB } 0 200^
Mr. Terry Wamer
HDR Engineering, Inc.
3995 South 700 East, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, Utah 84107
Subject: Estimate of Realistic Infiltration Rates
South Utah Valley Landfill (Bayview LandfiU)
Utah County, Utah
Dear Terry,
I have reviewed the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste (DSHW) Request for
Additional Infonnation dated November 12, 2003. I also attended a meeting at DSHW with you
on December 9, 2003. This letter addresses the questions raised by DSHW in Item No. 3 (2"^
bullet) ofthe Request for Additional Information.
DSHW QUESTION
The DSHW requested that we provide evidence that the proposed evaporative cap will perform
£is well as an actual cap that Stephen Dwyer tested and found exhibited a leakage rate less than
3 mm/year.
This question is addressed below.
EVIDENCE THAT PROPOSED CAP MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARD
WTien the modeling study was performed last year, no performance standard existed for
evaporative caps. Under DSHW guidance, our modeling study (Kleinfelder, 2003') showed that
the proposed evaporative cap out-performs the prescriptive cap under normal and worst-case
weather conditions. However, all modeling was performed on a comparative basis (prescriptive
versus evaporative). Our study did not include developing an estimate of "real" infiltration rates
under site conditions.
Since we performed the required modeling, DSHW has begun to consider using an infiltration
rate of 3 mm/year as a performance standard for evaporative caps. I assume DSHW will enforce
this standard under normal weather conditions (possibly including realistic/historical worst case
weather), since the standard appears to be based on actual field test cases conducted under real
weather pattems, as well as modeling performed using normal climate conditions.
' Kleinfelder, 2003. Meteoric Waier Infiliralion Study, Soulh Uitih Valley Landfill, September 9, 2003, File No. SLC3R082.
State of Utah-DERR.'40079.001 ,'SLC4L022 Page 1 of 4 February 9,2004
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Jnc.
KLEINFELDER 849 WW Levoy Drive, Taylorsville, UT S412.^-2.S44 '301)261-3336 i80ll 26[-3305 fax
I have looked at the studies of "real" infiltration rates suggested by DSHW, compared these
studies to our modeling study, and have concluded that the proposed evaporative cap at Bayview
Landfill will meet the performance standard being considered by DSHW for the following
reasons:
All studies 1 reviewed demonstrated that the evaporative caps out-perform
prescriptive caps. This information is in agreement with our modeling study,
where, under identical worst-case (conservative) assumptions, the proposed
evaporative cap allowed less infiltration than the prescriptive cap.
This result is summarized below.
Prescriptive Cap
Evaporative Cap
Range of Infiltration Rates
Normal Climate
41.4 to 46.5 mm/yr
26.3 to 41.2 mnvyr
Hypothetical Worst Case Rainfall
138.5 to] 81.2 mm/yr
70.7 to 121.7 mm/yr
Field studies performed by Stephen Dwyer (Dwyer, 2000 ) quoted "real"
(observed) prescriptive cap infiltration rates that average 4.82 mm/year compared
to "real" evaporative cap infiltration rales that average 0.19 mm/year. The
observed (Dwyer) and modeled prescriptive (Kleinfelder) caps should have
similar rates, but the rates measured in the field differ from our modeled rates by
an order of magnitude because: our model omitted the mitigating effects of plant
transpiration; our modeled rates are based on conser\'ative choices for cell size,
boundary types, initial saturation, etc., used in "building" the numerical model;
our modei used hypothetical high rainfall (greater than observed in historical
records) to evaluate worst case perfoimance; and our modeled "normal" rainfall is
approximately 3 times higher than actual rainfall in the Dwyer study.
If our conservative assumptions increased the modeled prescriptive cap
infiltration rate by an order of magnitude over Dwyer's results, they probably also
increased our evaporative cap infiltration rates by an order of magnitude.
Therefore, it appears that under more realistic assumptions, our modeled
infiltration rates for the evaporative cap would have been around 2 to 4 mm/year.
The studies we reviewed consistently demonstrate that, in practice, evaporative
caps allow about 10 times less moisture to infiltrate than do prescripti^'e caps. We
made one modeling assumption on our evaporative cap that "overruled" the
model's predication for producing that result. We added a 2-inch hypothetical
"topsoil" layer to the top of the modeled evaporative cap that allowed excess
water storage in an attempt to simulate a loosened ground surface produced by
wind erosion. In our experience, adding a loose, organic topsoil significantly
Dwyer, el a!., 2000, H-'aler Balance Dalajrum ihe Allernalive Landfill Co\'er Demonslration.
State of Utah-DERR7'40079.001/SLC4L022 Page 2 of 4
Copyright 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc.
KLEINFELDER 84y West Lo\w\ Drive, T,i\ior.s\ ilje, DT 8412.3-2544 ',8011 261-3j3r, 8Q1 2f)l-330f) lax
Febniarv 9. 2004
increases the infiltration rate predicted by the model. Our approach in the
modeling study was to add a conservative "worst-case" condition to the
evaporative cap and compare it to the prescriptive cap. Even under this worst-
case assumption, the evaporative cap allowed less infiltration than the prescriptive
cap. In reality, we do not obser\'e a 2-inch, loose, organic topsoil developing in
the area around Bayview Landfill and do not expect the cap to develop a
permanent layer comparable to the modeled topsoil layer.
Based on the results of the other studies I reviewed, especially Dwyer's work, I
believe this hypothetical "topsoil effect" we included produced unrealistically
high infiltration rates for the evaporative cap. Removing this topsoil from the
model would decrease the modeled infiltration rate significantly, and would result
in predicted performance that better matches the observed performance in
Dwyer's study.
4. Several studies 1 reviewed (Mackey, 2002^ Foriina, 2003'*; Zomberg, 2003^; and
Thompson, 2003^), described the composition and texture of evaporative cap
material that either met the 3 mm/year performance standard or exceeded the
Subtitle C prescriptive cap performance. Accepted cap thicknesses range from 20
to 48 inches and, when specified at all, fines comprised at least 28 to 50 percent of
the soil material. These soils and cap thicknesses are very similar to the Bayview
Landfill proposed evaporative cap, and were applied in similar climatic settings
(Montana, Colorado, and Califomia).
CONCLUSION
For the four reasons discussed above, ] believe the proposed evaporative cap at Bayview Landfill
will perform better than the prescriptive cap described in the Solid Waste Rules will perform as
well as the other evaporative caps being documented in the literatures and will meet the 3
xnmi''ycaT performance criteria under the same conditions that other evaporative caps meet that
criteria.
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions drawn above are based on the study modeling performed by Kleinfelder and the
information available in cited literature. These conclusions are subject to limitations on the
current accepted understanding of unsaturated flow processes and the limited field tests that have
been perfonned and documented to date. No warranty, express or implied, is made.
' Mackey, et al., 200.1 HCRA Equivalent Cover Demomslrniion Projecl, Rocky Mountain Arsenal.
•* Foriina, Ron, 2003. The Approval Process fi>r an Aliernaiiw Final Cover Sysiemforthe Denver Arapahoe Disposal Site,
Colorado.
' Zomberg, Jorge, 2003. Operaiirig Industries, Inc., Superfiind Landfill.
' Thompson, Rick, 2003, Mr. M. Landfill, Ahemative Cover, Fergas County, Montana.
State of Utah-DERR'40079.001/SLC4L022 Page 3 of 4 February 9,2004
Cop\Tight 2004 Kleinfelder. Inc.
KLEINFELDER S49 Wvit le\-o\ Drive, T.ivlors\ jl)e, L'T 8412.3-254^ iSDI: 261-3336 :801 • 261-3306 fax
i
I appreciate this opportunity to assist you. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have questions
or need additional information.
Sincerely,
KLEINFELDER, INC.
Renee Zollinger, R.G.
Regional Manager
cc. Mike Oden, HDR Engineering, Inc.
Dick Sprague, HDR Engineering, Inc.
Richard Henry, South Utah Valley Landfill
State of Uiah-DERR'40079.001/SLC4L022 Page 4 of 4 Febraary 9,2004
Copmght 2004 Kleinfelder, Inc.
KLFlSiPELDER 849 West Le\o\ Dii\(j Tavlorsville, LT 8412 3-2544 .801' 261 -3336 ,801 • 201-3306 fax
APPENDIX W – FINANCIAL ASSURANCE PLAN
(Financial mechanisms are in Appendix C - Annual Report)

January 24, 2017

Scott Anderson, Director
Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
288 North 1460 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880

Re: Financial Assurance Plan, Bayview Landfill

Dear Mr. Anderson:

The Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) purchased the
Bayview Landfill from South Utah Valley Solid Waste District (SUVSWD) on or
about October 12, 2016 and transfer of the permit to operate a Class I Landfill has
been requested.

This letter is intended to provide the financial assurance plan as required under
UACR315-309-2(1) for operation of the Bayview Landfill by NUERA. Current
estimates of closure and post closure care costs have been prepared consistent with
the requirements of UACR315-309-2(3) and are attached to this letter as
Attachment A and summarized as follows:

Cost Estimate for Landfill Closure
Cell 1
Closed
Cell 2 – Stage 1 $ 671,272
Cell 2 – Stage 2 $ 771,962
Total Closure Costs $1,443,234

Post-Closure Care Costs $1,224,000

Total Closure and Post-Closure Costs $2,667,234

Financial Assurance Mechanisms

NUERA, in accordance with (UAC) R315-309-3(4), intends to provide financial
assurance for the period ending December 31, 2017 by a combination of
mechanisms that together meet the $2,667,234 requirements of subsection (UAC)
R315-309-1(1).
2

The financial assurance mechanisms chosen by the District are:

Local Government Financial Test $ 839,790
Trust Fund $1,827,444
Total Closure and Post-Closure Assurance $2,667,234

(UAC) R315-309-8 Local Government Financial Test

NUERA intends to provide $1,021,104 in closure and post-closure financial assurance through the
Local Government Financial Test. Supporting financial information including current statement of net
assets and approved tentative budget for 2017 are included in attachment B to this letter.

The Local Government Test requires:

• (UAC) R315-309-8(2)(a)
NUERA has no outstanding, rated general obligation bonds.

• (UAC) R315-309-8(2)(b)
NUERA has no outstanding general obligation bonds, therefore must meet the following financial
ratios
(i) The ratio of cash plus marketable securities to total expenditures is greater than or equal
to 0.05

Projected Fiscal Year ended December 31, 2016
Cash + Marketable Securities $2,706,298
Total Expenditures $5,791,742

Ratio of cash plus marketable securities to total expenditures is 0.46

(ii) The ratio of annual debt service to total expenditures less than or equal to 0.20. NUERA
currently has no annual debt service, therefore the ratio is zero.

• (UAC) R315-309-8(2)(c)
NUERA’s financial statements will be prepared in conformity with Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles for governments and will have its financial statements audited by an
independent certified public accountant beginning with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016.
The audited financial statement will be available no later than June 30, 2017 as required by Utah
Code (UAC) 11-13-529.

• (UAC) R315-309-8(2)(d)
NUERA will place a reference to the closure and post-closure costs in each audited financial
report beginning with the financial report for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2016. All
subsequent comprehensive annual financial reports during the time in which closure and post-
closure care costs are assured through the financial test will include a reference to the closure and
post-closure care costs assured through the financial test. The reference to the closure and post
closure care cost will include:

(i) the nature and source of the closure and post-closure care requirements
(ii) the reported liability at the balance sheet date
(iii) the estimated total closure and post-closure care costs remaining to be recognized
(iv) the percentage of landfill capacity used to date
(v) the estimated landfill life in years
3

• (UAC) R315-309-8(3)
NUERA is eligible to assure closure and post-closure care costs through the financial test as it
meets the following requirements.

(a) NUERA is currently not in default on any outstanding general obligation bonds, and
(b) NUERA does not have any outstanding general obligation bonds rated lower than Baa
as issued by Moody’s or BBB as issued by Standard and Poor’s, and
(c) Has not operated at a deficit equal to 5%, or more, of the total annual revenue in each of
the past two fiscal years; and
(d) Has not received an adverse opinion, disclaimer of opinion, or other qualified opinion
from the independent certified public accountant, or appropriate state agency auditing its
financial statement.

• (UAC) R315-309-8(4)
NUERA will submit the following documents with the audited financial report for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2016 on or before June 30, 2017.

(a) A letter signed by NUERA’s CFO that (i) lists all current cost estimates covered by a
financial test; and (ii) provides evidence and certifies that the local government meets
the requirements of Subsections R315-309-8(2) and R315-309-8(6).
(b) NUERA’s independently audited year-end financial statements or the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2016 including the opinion of the auditor who will be a certified public
accountant (CPA).
(c) A report to NUERA from the CPA stating the procedures performed and the findings
relative to (i) the requirements of R315-309-8-(2)(c) and R315-309-8(3)(c) and (d) and
the financial ratio is required by R315-309-8(2)(b).
(d) A copy of the comprehensive annual financial report used to comply with R315-309-
8(2)(d).

• (UAC) R315-309-8(6)
NUERA does not assure other environmental obligations through a financial test and may assure
closure, post-closure, and corrective action costs that equal up to 43% of the local government’s
total annual revenue.

NUERA had a total revenue of $6,250,000 for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2016. NUERA
has currently budgeted revenues of $1,953,000 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017,
therefore, the maximum allowable assurance by the local government financial test will be
$839,790. The Bayview Landfill has a long operating history and will continue to receive all of
the waste from SUVSWD as well as additional waste from North Pointe Solid Waste Special
Service District (North Pointe). This waste stream, and the associated revenue, is very stable.

(UAC) R315-309-4 Trust Fund

NUERA will established a trust fund held at the Utah Public Treasurers’ Investment Fund (PTIF)
which has been accepted by the Utah Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste meeting the
requirements of (UAC) R315-309-4 in the amount of $1,827,444.

Compliance Schedule

As an existing facility, NUERA is hereby requests the Director establish a compliance schedule to
have the financial assurance mechanism in place and affective in accordance with (UAC) R315-309-
1(3)(a) as follows.
4

For the Local Government Test mechanism, because NUERA is a new entity, an audited financial
statement may not be available until June 2017, we request an effective date of July 15, 2017.

For the Trust Fund, NUERA requests to make four equal annual payments into a restricted Trust Fund
held at the Utah Public Treasurers’ Investment Fund (PTIF) account of $456,861 as allowed under
(UAC) R315-309-4(3)(a). The Bayview Landfill Class I Permit #9420R2 expires on April 30, 2020.
This payment schedule will ensure the availability of sufficient funds are available within the current
permit term. The first payment will be made upon release of funds currently held in the Trust Fund
established by SUVSWD for assurance of the Bayview Landfill.

We look forward to scheduling a meeting at your earliest convenience to discuss this issue in detail.
In the meantime, if you have any questions or require additional information please feel free to contact
me at [phone].

Sincerely,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency

Nathan Rich, Secretary
Operations and Management Committee

Attachments
APPENDIX X – PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS / PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

June 30, 2023

Jacob Family Ranch, LLC
914 E 300 N
Orem, Ut 84097-5098

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

June 30, 2023

Corporation of the Presiding Bishop
Of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
PO Box 511196
Salt Lake City, Ut 84151-1196

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

June 30, 2023

NVR
50 S Main Street
Pleasant Grove, Ut 84062-2630

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

June 30, 2023

Utah Trust Lands Administration
675 E 500 S, Ste 500
Salt Lake City, Ut 84102-2813

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

June 30, 2023

Steadman Brothers Investments, LLC
PO Box 754
Draper, Ut 84020-0754

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

June 30, 2023

Utah Department of Transportation
4501 S 2700 W
Salt Lake City, Ut 84119-5977

RE: Notice of Intent to apply for permit - Bayview Landfill

To Whom this May Concern,

Northern Utah Environmental Resource Agency (NUERA) currently operates a Class I
Landfill (Bayview Landfill) under permit #9420R3 from the Utah Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). The Bayview Landfill has served Utah
County since 1990 when the facility started taking waste from the cities of Provo,
Salem, Spanish Fork, Springville, Mapleton, and Goshen, Utah.

Bayview Landfill currently operates on land leased from State of Utah School and
Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA). In order to continue to provide solid
waste disposal services, NUERA has leased additional land from SITLA. The addition of
the new SITLA property will allow Bayview Landfill to reconfigure the landfill operations
that will result in additional waste capacity.

State of Utah Solid Waste Rules, specifically Section R315-310-3(2)(ii) have requirements
to notify property owners within 1,000 feet of the proposed or expanding landfill that
an application has been made to the Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. According
to public records, you own property that is within 1,000 feet of the Bayview Landfill.

If you have any questions regarding the modifications to Bayview Landfill or would like
to discuss the landfill operations further, please contact me at the following telephone
number [phone].

Respectfully submitted,

Mark Lamoreaux
Landfill Manager
Bayview Landfill

APPENDIX Y – OCTOBER 2009 APPLICATION (TABLE of CONTENTS)
by HDR ENGINEERING

gLC)C)C^.o\\o5
Application
for a Permit to Operate a
Class I Landfill
SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill
Permit Application
Prepared for
Bayview Landfill
South Utah Valley Solid Waste District
SpringviUe, Utah
Prepared by
HDR Engineering, Inc.
3995 South 700 East, Suite 100
Salt Lake City, UT 84107
October 23, 2009
SUVSWD Bayview Landflll
Class I Landfill Permit Application
Table of Contents
Part 1: General Information 1
Part 2: General Report 2-1
2.1 Facility Description 2-1
2.1.1 General 2-1
2.1.2 Area Served 2-2
2.1.3 Waste Types 2-2
2.1.4 Landfill Development 2-3
2.2 Solid Waste Management Plan 2-4
2.3 Legal Description 2-5
2.4 Operations Plan 2-5
2.5 Financial Assurance Plan 2-5
2.5.1 Cost Estimate for Closure and Post-Closure Care 2-5
2.5.2 Proposed Financial Assurance Mechanism 2-6
2.6 Closure Plan 2-6
2.6.1 Final Cover Installation 2-7
2.6.2 Site Capacity 2-8
2.6.3 Closure Schedule and Funding 2-8
2.7 Post-Closure Care Plan 2-9
2.7.1 Monitoring and Maintenance 2-9
2.7.2 Land Title, Land Use, and Zoning Restrictions 2-11
2.7.3 Post Closure Costs 2-11
2.8 References 2-11
Part 3: Technical and Engineering Report 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.1.1 Facility Maps and Draw^ings 3-1
3.2 Geohydrological Evaluation 3-2
3.2.1 General 3-2
3.2.2 Geology 3-3
3.2.3 Hydrology 3-4
3.3 Engineering Report 3-7
3.3.1 Location Standards 3-7
3.3.2 Engineering Design 3-11
3.4 Composting 3-18
3.5 References 3-19
March 2009 SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill Permit Application
Part 4: Figures
Figure 1. USGS Topographic Map of Bayview Landfill and Vicinity
Figure 2. USGS Topographic Map of Bayview Landfill
Figure 3. Cell 2 Existing Contours
Figure 4. Earthquake Distribution Map
Figure 5. Planned and Existing Landfill Facilities
Figure 6. Cell 2 Final Contours
Figure 7. Cell 2 Liner/Excavation Contours
Figure 8. Cell 2 Typical Cross Sections
Figure 9. Cell 2 - Stage 1 & 2 Liner/Excavation Contours
Figure 10. Liner Details
Figure 1L Cell 2 Leachate Collection System and Liner Details
Figure 12. Cell 2 Leachate Collection System, Sump Plan, and Section Details
Figure 13. CeU 2 Leachate Collection System Details
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Cell 2 Master Plan (2009)
Special Use Lease Agreement
Cost Breakdown for Closure/Post-Closure
Engineering Drawings
Boring Logs
District's Groundwater Quality Report
Appendix G: Utah Hydrologic Data Report No. 50
Appendix H: Lineament Study
Inspection Forms
Seismic Analysis
Leachate Generation Calculations
Stormwater/Evaporation Pond
Runon-Runoff Calculations
Closure Cap Equivalency
Appendix O: Construction Quality Assurance Plan
Appendix P: Cell 2 Geosynthetic Analysis
Appendix Q: Conceptual Gas Extraction System
Appendix R: Permanent Compost Operations Plan
Appendix S: Landfill Operations Plan
Appendix T: Cell 1 Closure Certification
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Appendix F:
Appendix I:
Appendix J:
Appendix K:
Appendix L:
Appendix M:
Appendix N:
March 2009 SUVSWD Bayview Class I Landfill Permit Application