DSHW-2024-009053

Deq submit <[e-mail]>
Fwd: Cell #7 @EEI
1 message
Brian Speer <[e-mail]>Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 9:17 AM
To: Deq submit <[e-mail]>
Please file this under the Environmental Energy LLC-Landspreading [sic] facility for now.
Brian Speer
Manager | Solid Waste
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
M: [phone]
P: [phone]
wasteandradiation.utah.gov
Emails to and from this email address may be considered public records and thus subject to Utah GRAMA
requirements.
Statements made in this email do not constitute the official position of the Director of the Division of Waste
Management and Radiation Control. If you desire a statement of the Division Director's position,
please submit a written request to the Director, including copies of documents relevant to your request.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Bret Reynolds <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 2:57 PM
Subject: Cell #7 @EEI
To: Brian Speer <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>, Camille Ericksen <CamilleEricksen@
civcoengineering.com>, Cahoon, Brad R. <[e-mail]>
Brian
Here is the permit submittal for Cell #7@EEI based on the checklist and pervious submittals and approvals for your
review prior to formally submitting it through the portal or email.

If it looks good, can you go on ahead and put it in the portal?

Thanks for all you do. Have a great day, you deserve it.

Bret Reynolds, PE
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Mobile: [phone]
Office: 435-789-5448
11/5/24, 10:01 AM State of Utah Mail - Fwd: Cell #7 @EEI
https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRTmUPPYqoxUuPKPa4ZEFHjBQ-jVVCrhfmXNEZqbd_v7Zh1m/u/0/?ik=adf9d5e615&view=pt&search=all&permt…1/2
1256 W 400 N
Suite 1
PO Box 1758
Vernal Utah 84078

Cell#7_landfill@EEI APPLICATION.pdf
25430K
11/5/24, 10:01 AM State of Utah Mail - Fwd: Cell #7 @EEI
https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRTmUPPYqoxUuPKPa4ZEFHjBQ-jVVCrhfmXNEZqbd_v7Zh1m/u/0/?ik=adf9d5e615&view=pt&search=all&permt…2/2
Utah Class IIIb Landfill Permit Application Form
PART 1 - GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: PLEASE COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS
1.Application Type ☐New Application ☐Major Modification ☐Facility Expansion
☐Renewal Application ☐Minor Modification
For Permit Renewal Applications, Permitted Facility Expansion Applications, and Permit Modifications, Enter Current Permit Number: Click or tap here to enter text.
2.Facility Name and Location
Legal Name of Facility Cell #7 landfill@EEI
Facility Address (Street or Directions to Facility) Located in Pleasant Valley, approximately 3 miles South of US 40 County Duchesne.
City Click or tap here to enter text. Zip Code Click or tap here to enter text.
Telephone Click or tap here to enter text. Township 4 South Range 2 West Section 18 Quarter Section NE Quarter/Quarter Section SE
Main Gate Latitude: 40°8'5.26" N Longitude: 110°8'53.41" W
3.Facility Owner(s) Information
Name of Facility Owner Environmental Energy Innovations, LLC.Mailing Address PO Box 1389 City Roosevelt State Utah Zip Code 84066 Telephone [phone].Facility Operator(s) Information
Name of Facility Operator Environmental Energy Innovations, LLC.
Mailing Address PO Box 1389
City Rooselvelt State Utah Zip Code 84066 Telephone [phone].Property Owner(s) Information
Name of Property Owner Environmental Energy Innovations, LLC.Mailing Address PO Box 1389City Roosevelt State Utah Zip Code 84066 Telephone [phone].Designated Contact Information
Facility Owner Designated Contact (if different than above)Todd Bro Title Owner Mailing Address PO Box 1389 City Roosevelt State Utah Zip Code 84066 Telephone [phone]Email Address [e-mail] Alternative Telephone (cell phone or other) Click or tap here to enter text.
Facility Operator Designated Contact (if different than above) Click or tap here to enter text. Title Click or tap here to enter text.
Mailing Address Click or tap here to enter text. City Click or tap here to enter text. State Click or tap here to enter text. Zip Code Click or tap here to enter text. Telephone Click or tap here to enter text. Email Address Click or tap here to enter text. Alternative Telephone (cell phone or other) Click or tap here to enter text. Property Owner Contact (if different than above) Click or tap here to enter text. Title Click or tap here to enter text. Mailing Address Click or tap here to enter text.
X
Page 1
City Click or tap here to enter text. State Click or tap here to enter text. Zip Code Click or tap here to enter text. Telephone Click or tap here to enter text. Email Address Click or tap here to enter text. Alternative Telephone (cell phone or other) Click or tap here to enter text. 7.Waste Types 8.Facility Area
☐Solid waste that is exempt from hazardous waste rules underSubsections R315-261-4(b)(4), R315-261-4(b)(5), and R315-261-4(b)(7). (Fly ash waste, bottom ash waste, slag waste, and flue gas emission control waste generated primarily from the combustion of coal or other fossil fuels. Drilling fluids, produced waters, and other wastes associated with the exploration, development, or production ofcrude oil, natural gas or geothermal energy. Solid waste generated from the extraction, beneficiation, and processing of ores and minerals, including coal, phosphate rock, and overburden from themining of uranium ore.)
☐Nonhazardous industrial solid waste not listed in SubsectionR315-261-4(b).
Facility Area:
Disposal Area:
120 acres
10 acres
Design Capacity: 7 Years 343,068 Cubic Yards
480,295 Tons
X
Page 2
PART 2 – APPLICATION CHECKLIST for a CLASS IIIb INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL
2.Permit Requirements for Solid Waste Facilities (R315-310)
2.1 General Contents of a Permit Application for a New Facility or a Facility Seeking Expansion (R315-310-3)
Description of Item Rule(s) Cited Included in Submission Comments / Explanation / Location in Document
Complete Part I - General Information. R315-310-3(1)(a) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See information above
General facility description, plans, and drawings. R315-310-3(1)(b) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2
Legal description of the property and proof of ownership, lease agreement, or other mechanism. R315-310-3(1)(c) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 3
Maps of the proposed facility site, including land use and zoning of the surrounding area. R315-310-3(1)(c)☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 4
Description of waste types to be handled and area served by facility. R315-310-3(1)(d) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 5
Plan of Operation. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.2.1 of this document.)
R315-310-3(1)(e) R315-302-2(2) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.0
Form used to record weights or volumes of waste received. R315-310-3(1)(f) R315-302-2(3)(a)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 figure 1
Owner/Operator inspection schedule and inspection log.
(See detailed requirements in Section 3.2.4 of this document.)
R315-310-3(1)(g) R315-302-2(5)(a) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.3 and tab 8 form 2 for inspection log.
Closure and post-closure care plans required by R315-302-3. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-310-3(1)(h) R315-302-3 ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Financial Assurance Plan.
(See detailed requirements in Section 3.3.4 of this document.)
R315-310-3(1)(j) R315-309 ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 7
Historical and archaeological identification efforts. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.1 of this document.)
R315-310-3(1)(k) R315-302-1(2)(f) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required, been in operation since 2011
Name and address of all owners of the property within 1,000 feet of the proposed facility. R315-310-3(2)(a)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required, been in operation since 2011
Documentation that a notice of intent to apply for a permit for a solid waste facility has been sent to all property owners identified above.
R315-310-3(2)(a)(ii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required, been in operation since 2011
Name of the local government with jurisdiction over the site and the mailing address of that local government office.
R315-310-3(2)(a)(iii) ☐Yes ☐No, explain Duchesne CountyPO Box 346, Duchesne, UT 84021
2.2 Contents of a Permit Application for a New or Expanded Class IIIb Landfill Facility (R315-310-4, R315-310-5)
Description of Item Rule(s) Cited Included in Submission Comments / Explanation / Location in Document
Topographic map of the landfill unit drawn to a scale of 200 feet to the inch containing: 1)Five-foot contour intervalswhere the relief exceeds 20 feetand two-foot contour intervals
where the relief is less than 20
feet;
2)Boundaries of the landfill unit;
3)Ground water monitoring wells;
4)Landfill gas monitoring points;
and
5)Borrow and fill areas.
R315-310-5(2)(a) R315-310-4(2)(a)(i) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See Tab 9
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Page 3
The most recent full size U.S. Geological Survey topographic map, 7-1/2 minute series, if printed, or otherrecent topographic survey ofequivalent detail of the area, showing:1)The waste facility boundary;
2)The property boundary;
3)Surface drainage channels;
4)Existing utilities and structures
within one-fourth mile of the
facility site; and
5)The direction of the prevailing
winds.
R315-310-5(2)(a) R315-310-4(2)(a)(ii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See Tab 9
An engineering report, plans, specifications, and calculations that address: 1)Design and location of run-on
and run-off control systems;
2)Closure and post-closuredesign, construction,maintenance, and land use;3)The area to be served by thefacility; and4)How the facility will meet theIndustrial Solid Wasterequirements of Rule R315-304
(See detailed requirements in
Section 3 of this document.).
R315-310-5(2) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain
#1 - See tab 6 final cover plan.
#2 - See tab 6#3 - See tab 5#4 - See tab 12
A Closure Plan addressing schedule, capacity, a final inspection, and closure costs. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.3.1 of this document.)
R315-310-5(2)(c) R315-310-4(2)(d) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
A Post-Closure Plan addressing, as appropriate: site monitoring of landfill gas, groundwater, and surface water; inspections by landfill owner or operator; maintenance activities to maintain cover and run-on and run-off systems; identification of post-closure costs; changes to record of title; and contact information.
(See detailed requirements is Section 3.3.3 of this document.)
R315-310-5(2)(c) R315-310-4(2)(e) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
3.Industrial Solid Waste Landfill Requirements (R315-304)
3.1 Industrial Landfill Location Standards (R315-304-4)
Description of Item Rule(s) Cited Included in Submission Comments / Explanation / Location in Document
Documentation that the facility is not located within a floodplain, unless a demonstration can be made that the unit will not restrict flow, reduce temporary storage, or result in a washout.
R315-304-4(2)(a)(i) R315-302-1(2)(c)(ii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 10
Documentation that the facility is not located within a wetland, unless the owner demonstrates that: 1)There is no practicablealternative;2)The unit will not violate State orFederal law;
3)The unit will not jeopardize
threatened and endangered
species and associated critical
habitat;
4)There will be no significant
degradation of wetlands; and
R315-304-4(2)(a)(ii) R315-302-1(2)(d) Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2, water map
X
X
X
X
X
X☐
Page 4
5)Appropriate steps have beentaken for no net loss of
wetlands.
Documentation that the lowest level of waste at the facility is located at least ten feet above the historical heigh level of groundwater.
R315-304-4(2)(a)(iii) R315-302-1(2)(e)(i)(B) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Tab 11
Documentation of notice of concurrence, or lack thereof, or joint analysis from State Historic Preservation Office of no adverse effect on any historic properties.
R315-304-4(2)(a)(iv) R315-302-1(2)(f) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required. Been in operation since 2011
Documentation of any exemptions from location standards. R315-304-4(2)(b) R315-302-1(3) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required. Been in operation since 2011
3.2 Industrial Landfill Requirements (R315-304-5)
3.2.1 Plan of Operation
Description of Item Rule(s) Cited Included in Submission Comments / Explanation / Location in Document
Intended schedule of construction. R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(a)☐Yes ☐ No, explain Already constructed since 2011. Will continue to maintain.
Description of solid waste handling procedures. R315-304-5(1)(a) R315-302-2(2)(b) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.2
Inspection and monitoring schedule. R315-304-5(1)(a) R315-302-2(2)(c) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.3
Fire or explosion contingency plan. R315-304-5(1)(a) R315-302-2(2)(d) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.3.3
Fugitive dust control plan. R315-304-5(1)(a) R315-302-2(2)(g) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.3.1
Description of maintenance of installed equipment including leachate and gas collection systems, and groundwater monitoring systems
R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not needed, as there are none installed.
Procedures for excluding the receipt of prohibited hazardous waste or prohibited waste containing PCBs.
R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(j) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.2.
Procedures for controlling disease vectors. R315-304-5(1)(a) R315-302-2(2)(k) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required.
Plan for an alternative waste handling or disposal system during periods when the solid waste facility is not able to dispose of solid waste, including procedures to be followed in case of equipment breakdown
R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(l)See tab 2 section 1.3.4
Closure and Post-Closure Care Plans. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(m)☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Cost estimates and financial assurance. (See detailed requirements in
Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(n) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 7
Landfill operations training plan for site operators R315-304-5(1)(a)R315-302-2(2)(o) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.3.12See tab 14
If managing high liquid wastes, then a High Liquid Waste Management Plan must be included in the Plan of Operations. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.2.7 of this document.)
R315-303-3(2)☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 12
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X☐Yes ☐ No, explain
Page 5
3.2.2. Recordkeeping (to be kept onsite or at an approved location)
Daily operating records documentation containing: 1)Weights or volumes of solid
waste received daily.
2)Documentation of deviations
from the approved plan of
operation.
3)Training and notification
procedures
4)Results from groundwater andgas monitoring that may berequired.5)An inspection log or summary.
R315-304-5(1)(b)R315-302-2(3)(a) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain
#1 - See tab 2 section 1.2.2, section 1.4 and figure 1.See
tab 8 form 1#2 - None#3 - See tab 2 section 1.3.12.See tab 8 form 3.See tab 14
#4 - Not required.#5 - See tab 8 form 2
Documentation of any demonstration made with respect to any location standard or exemption.
R315-304-5(1)(b)R315-302-2(3)(b)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain Been in operation since 2011
Closure and post-closure plans (See detailed requirements in Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-304-5(1)(b)R315-302-2(3)(b)(iii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See Tab 6
Cost estimate and financial assurance documentation.
(See detailed requirements in Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-304-5(1)(b)R315-302-2(3)(b)(iv) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 7
Other information pertaining to operation, maintenance, monitoring, or inspections as may be required by the director.
R315-304-5(1)(b)R315-302-2(3)(b)(vi) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain None required.
3.2.3 Reporting
Plans to submit Annual and Quarterly reports. R315-304-5(1)(c)R315-302-2(4) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.6
3.2.4 Inspections
Plans for Owner or Operator Inspections performed at least quarterly. Copy of schedule and log should be included.
R315-304-5(1)(d)R315-302-2(5) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 "site Monitoring" section
3.2.5. Closure and Post-Closure Care
Applicable general requirements for closure and post-closure care. (See detailed requirements in Section 3.3 of this document.)
R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(2) R315-302-3(3) R315-302-3(4) R315-302-3(5) R315-302-3(6)(a)(iv-vi) R315-302-3(6)(b) R315-302-3(6)(c) R315-302-3(7)(a) R315-304-5(2)(b)
☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 6
3.2.6 Standards for Design
Plans to prohibit the disposal of waste containing free liquids. R315-304-5(3)(a)R315-303-3(1)(b) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 section 1.2
Documentation of facility stormwater run-on controls. R315-304-5(3)(a) R315-303-3(1)(c) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 - section 1.0. See tab 6 cover plan page.
Documentation of facility stormwater runoff collection and treatment. R315-304-5(3)(a)R315-303-3(1)(d) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 2 - section 1.0. See tab 6 cover plan
page.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
x
Page 6
Plans to meet requirements of R315-303-3(7) including:1)Fencing at the property or unitboundary;2)A lockable gate;3)Weighing or estimating tonnageof all incoming waste andrecording in operation record;4)Adequate fire protection tocontrol any fires that may occur;5)Preventing harborage of vectors
in buildings, facilities, and active
areas;
6)Minimizing size of unloading
area and working face;
7)Approach and exit roads of all-
weather construction; and8)Communication, such astelephone and radio, betweenemployees.
R315-304-5(3)(b) R315-303-3(7)(a) R315-303-3(7)(c) R315-303-3(7)(e) R315-303-3(7)(f) R315-303-3(7)(g) R315-303-3(7)(h) R315-303-3(7)(i)
☐Yes ☐No, explain #1, #2, #6 and #7 - See tab 4 site layout#3, #4 - See tab 2 (#3 - 1.2.2, figure 1)(#4 - 1.3.3) #5 - No vectors present.
#8 - See tab 2 section 1.5
3.2.7 High Liquid Waste Management
A High Liquid Waste Management Plan, if applicable, that includes: 1)Waste acceptance criteria
2)Dewatering unit design and
techniques3)Other stabilization or treatmenttechniques; 4)A communication plan to informcustomers of high liquid wasteacceptance criteria
R315-321-4(3)(c) R315-303-3(2)(a)☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 12 and tab 2 - Solids Separator drawing
For a facility that utilizes dewatering, stabilization, or treatment techniques, proof that: 1)A containment system having apermeability of no more than 1 x
10^-7 cm/sec that maintains
integrity under the operation of
heavy equipment will be
installed and maintained for:
unloading areas and structures;
staging areas; and dewatering,
stabilization, and treatment
areas.
2)Leachates derived fromdewatering or stabilization willbe appropriately managed.
R315-321-4(3)(c) R315-303-3(2)(b)☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 13
If required, appropriate engineering reports demonstrating that disposal of dewatered high liquid wastes will not result in unacceptable geotechnical risks or landfill cell failures.
R315-321-4(3)(c) R315-303-3(2)(c)☐Yes ☐ No, explain Not required
3.2.8 Standards for Operation
Evidence demonstrating that the facility will operate according to the standards of maintenance and operation of R315-305-5(2) through (4).
R315-304-5(5)(b) R315-305-5(2-4) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 2 section 1.0 and tab 8
3.3 Closure, Post-Closure, and Financial Assurance
3.3.1 Closure Plan Requirements
Description of Item Rule(s) Cited Included in Submission Comments / Explanation / Location in Document
Closure schedule. R315-310-4-2(d)(i) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 6
Capacity of solid waste facility in volume and tonnage. R315-310-4-2(d)(ii) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 6 final cover plan
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Page 7
Final inspection by regulatory agencies R315-310-4-2(d)(iii)
Identification of closure costs including cost calculations and the funding mechanism. R315-310-4-2(d)(iv) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 7 table 1
Demonstrate that Closure Performance Standard will be met (minimizes need for further maintenance, minimizes threats to human health and environment, and prepares for post-closure).
R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(2) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 6 - Section "Design of Final Cover"
Inclusion of any applicable covering, grading, seeding, landscaping, contouring, and screening information.
R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(3)(a) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 6 - Section "Design of Final Cover"
Projections of time intervals for sequential partial closure, if applicable. R315-304-5(2) R315-302-3(3)(c) ☐Yes ☐No, explain N/A
Projected fund withdrawal intervals for the associated closure costs from the financial assurance instrument.
R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(3)(c) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 7
3.3.2. Final Cover Design (R315-304-5(2)(b), R315-305-5(5)(b))
Must level waste to the extent practicable. R315-304-5(2)(b) R315-305-5(5)(b)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 final cover plan
Cover the waste with a minimum of two feet of soil, including six inches of topsoil.
R315-304-5(2)(b) R315-305-5(5)(b)(ii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Contour surface slopes with a grade that is not less than 2% and side slopes that are not more that 33% (unless construction and erosion control integrity can be demonstrated at steeper slopes).
R315-304-5(2)(b) R315-305-5(5)(b)(iii) R315-303-3(4)(a)(i)(B) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 final cover plan
Seed the cover with grass, other shallow-rooted vegetation, or other native vegetation or cover in another manner approved by the Director to minimize erosion.
R315-304-5(2)(b) R315-305-5(5)(b)(iv) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain
An alternative cover design may be approved if it is documented that the design provides equivalent protection from infiltration and erosion as the design described above.
R315-304-5(2)(b) R315-305-5(5)(b)(v) There is no alternate cover design.
3.3.3 Post-Closure Plan Requirements
Plan that addresses site monitoring. R315-310-4(2)(e)(i) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 "Post Closure Care, Site Monitoring"
Plan that addresses inspections of facility by owner or operator. R315-310-4(2)(e)(ii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Plan that addresses maintenance activities to maintain cover and run-on and run-off systems. R315-310-4(2)(e)(iii) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 "Surface and Ground Water Monitoring"
Identification of post-closure costs, including calculations and the funding mechanism. R315-310-4(2)(e)(iv) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 table 1
Name, address, and telephone number of person or office to contact about facility during post-closure period.
R315-310-4(2)(e)(vi) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 "Post Closure Contact"
Plan to provide post-closure activities for 30 years. R315-304-5(2) R315-302-3(5) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Plan for maintenance of facility structures and monitoring systems. R315-304-5(2) R315-302-3(6)(a)(iv) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
A description of the planned use of the property. R315-304-5(2) R315-302-3(6)(a)(v) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Any additional activities required to protect human health and the environment.
R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(6)(a)(vi) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6
Identification of post-closure cost estimates and the funding mechanism. R315-304-5(2) R315-302-3(6)(c) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 6 table 1
See tab 6
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
☐Yes X☐ No, explain
Page 8
Intervals of projected fund withdrawals from financial assurance instrument. R315-304-5(2)R315-302-3(6)(c) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 7 table 2
3.3.4 Financial Assurance
Closure Costs Third party cost estimate for all materials and activities pertaining to closure including cost of: 1)Obtaining, moving, and placingcover material;2)Final grading of cover material;3)Obtaining, moving, and placing
topsoil;
4) Fertilizing, seeding, mulching;
and
5)Removal of stored materials,
buildings, and equipment.
R315-304-5(6)(a)R315-309-2(3)(a) ☐Yes ☐ No, explain See tab 7 table 1
Post-Closure Costs Third party cost estimate for all materials and applicable activities pertaining to closure including: 1)Any required groundwater
monitoring;
2)Leachate monitoring and
treatment;
3)Gas monitoring; and
4)Cover, stabilization, repair,
erosion control, and reseeding asnecessary.
R315-304-5(6)(a)R315-309-2(3)(b) ☐Yes ☐No, explain See tab 7 table 2
X
X
X
Page 9
TAB 1
GENERAL INFORMATION
REFER TO PART 1
Page 10
TAB 2
PLAN OF OPERATION/DESCRIPTION OF
PROPERTY
Page 11
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
Cell #7 landfill Plan of Operation
Description of Property
The entire EEI property is 140 +/- acres and is operated for the purpose of disposal of E & P RCRA
exempt solid waste. 130 acres of the site are considered active with 10 acres providing parking, office
space and loading/unloading area. The property is fenced, bermed, and divided into 12 cells, each
approximately 10 acres in size. See attached facility layout drawing.
The loading area includes a concrete pad and lined holding ponds that function in separating liquid from
solids arriving on hydro excavators. There are 3 - 400 bbl insulated hot water tanks for dust control and
the occasional cleaning of equipment and concrete surfaces, see attached solid separator drawing for
details.
There is a small office trailer. Small tools are stored in a con-ex located on site. Equipment used on the
site includes Front End Loaders (2), Dump Trucks (2), Backhoe (1), Farm Tractor (1) and miscellaneous
discs, rippers, tillers.
Surface Water
The Bridgeland Quadrangle map shows an intermittent stream located approximately 950 feet
southwest and 528 feet northwest of the project. These stream beds consist of desert shrub vegetation.
There is an irrigation canal 4,488 feet northwest of the project. The streams and canal are at a lower
elevation than the project. See attached water and contour map.
Storm Water
Annual precipitation for the project area is below 10 inches per year. See attached precipitation map.
1.0 OPERATIONS PLAN
1.1 SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION
The 140 =/- acre property has been operated as a bio-remediation land farm since 2011. The
proposed facility is sectioned into 12 10 acre =/- cells plus a 10 acre area for operations, parking,
office, and water tank battery. A 2-to-8-foot berm will surround each cell with slopes no steeper
than 33% to prevent storm water from entering or leaving each cell. Berms are constructed from
existing site soils excavated from the property. A detail of the EEI Facility berm is attached in the
solid separator drawing.
Page 12
To the south, adjacent to the facility will be a waste staging area where waste delivered to the site
will be inspected and treated, if necessary, prior to disposal. Waste that requires treatment will be
processed in a waste concrete holding area designed to protect ground water from possible waste
contamination. Drawing details of the waste staging area are attached see the solid separator
drawing.
At the start of operations, EEI anticipates approximately 70 cubic yards of E & P waste will be
transported to the proposed facility per day. EEI is considering using several different products and
processes to stabilize the waste. Some of the products that may be used for mixing and stabilizing
the waste include but are not limited to sawdust, native soils, lime, potash, or remediated soils from
any of the 11 cells currently not in use receiving waste. EEI may also process the waste to remove
liquids by drying the waste in the concrete storage area. Waste acceptance procedures and quality
control of waste being disposed in the facility are outlined in sections 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 of this report.
Each of the 10-acre cells will be filled to closure capacity one cell at a time.
Once the final process is defined adjustments to the design life of the facility will be made. At this
point the life duration of the facility is defined assuming that half of the waste arriving at the facility
will be mixed with remediated soil and the remaining waste will be processed using other
equipment [mixing, drying] and then placed directly into one of the facilities cells. Waste that will
be mixed with additional material will need to reach a moisture content that is workable. In order
to obtain an estimate for the mixing ratio, a preliminary waste assessment was conducted using
samples of anticipated types of waste and remediated soils that will be disposed of in the EEI facility
under this permit application. During this assessment it was determined that the mixing of
remediated soils with waste when needed will be done at a ratio of approximately 1.5:1
respectively, in order to reach a waste moisture content that will be suitable to be spread on the
site. In other words, for every 1 Cu. Yd. of waste there will be approximately 0.5 Cu. Yds. of
remediated soils added to reach a moisture content that is workable.
Based on waste mixing assumptions described above and assuming waste will be accepted 6 days
per week with a 10% growth rate over the life of the facility up to 50,000 cubic yard per year, the
projected life of the cell #7 is approximately 8 years. However, the projected life may increase or
decrease based on the type of processing and/or mixing methods utilized. A copy of the
spreadsheet used to calculate this estimated life is included in the closure plan. All assumptions
presented in the previous paragraphs were used in the spreadsheet calculations.
1.2. DESCRIPTION OF WASTE HANDLING PROCEEDURES
The following sections describe the general procedures that will be followed under this permit
application for accepting, disposing, recording, and excluding waste at EEI.
1.2.1 General Procedures
All waste will be hauled to EEI using commercial or independently owned trucks. All trucks will enter
at the main gate and check in with the EEI facility office. Every truck load of waste will be inspected
for liquids and inappropriate waste prior to disposal. Waste that appears to be stable, free of liquids,
will be directed to the appropriate cell for placement. Waste that is unstable, has excessive liquid
Page 13
content, will be placed on the concrete pad for further processing. The concrete pad is designed to
separate liquids from solid waste. The liquids drain off into lined holding ponds. Liquids are then
collected and loaded into a vacuum truck and sprayed onto a dry cell.
After the solid waste has been separated from the liquid waste and mixed with other solid materials,
the solid waste will be removed from the concrete pad and then placed in the cell using heavy
equipment or a conveyor system. All waste will then be placed in a uniform layer in the cell.
1.2.2 Waste Shipment Records
The EEI facility operation manager will maintain and store waste shipment records as part of the
daily record of disposal activity. Each truck load of inbound waste will have a load ticket completed
by the truck driver and verified by the EEI facility operating staff. An example of the load ticket is
included below. See Figure 1.
Figure 1
Page 14
1.2.3 Waste Disposal
Waste deposited will be placed in 1 ft. thick lifts and compacted to reach a firm and unyielding
surface to maximize facility capacity. EEI will distribute inbound waste to the cell until the capacity
of the cell has been reached. Closure of the cell will occur at that time and EEI will stop disposing of
waste in this cell.
1.2.4 Plans for Excluding Waste
Non-hazardous waste including E&P waste will be accepted at the EEI facility as allowed as directed
by DWMRC. To ensure that waste meets this requirement, all potential waste generators disposing
of waste at EEI proposed facility must first complete a waste profile assessment to determine the
acceptability of the waste according to this permit application.
Representative samples of each type of waste will be provided to EEI by all generators for testing.
Generators will provide a waste characterization form certifying that it meets the requirements of
disposal from all sources. Generators will be required to inform EEI when composition changes and
then resubmit a waste characterization form with samples.
1.3. WASTE FACILITY INSPECTION AND MONITORING
EEI personnel will inspect the proposed facility to avoid operator error and discharges which may
cause or lead to the release of waste to the environment or to a threat to human health. Facility
inspections will be conducted weekly.
1.3.1 Fugitive Dust Control
As part of the daily operations of the proposed facility, fugitive dust will be monitored, and controls
will be put in place as deemed necessary by the Operations Manager. These sources of dust will be
controlled by watering and proper placement of waste in the facility. EEI staff will be trained in
monitoring opacity and checking the facility for dust control issues. When opacity of the dust
exceeds 20%, watering controls will be affected on the facility haul roads, waste cells, and common
areas.
1.3.2 Plan for Litter Control
EEI does not anticipate accepting waste materials that will cause a wind-blown litter problem. EEI
will complete a daily inspection of the facility and the surrounding area to identify a potential litter
problem. EEI does not anticipate waste that would be considered a disease vector.
1.3.3 Contingency Plan for Fire or Explosion
In the event of a fire or explosion the EEI manager will contact local emergency authorities to
initiate an emergency response. A list of the local responders is provided, see Figure 2.
Page 15
1.3.4 Alternative Waste Handling Plan
In the event of a facility closure due to an emergency or repairs, EEI will make arrangements to have
the waste re-directed to other DWMRC landfills in Duchesne County or the Duchesne County Landfill
located at 20550 W and 2000 S.
1.3.12 General Training Plan (R315-302-2(2)(o)
EEI currently has a training program to educate employees on handling waste and operating existing
equipment at the EEI waste facility as required in R315-302-2[2]. This training program consists of;
New hire safety training is completed by our on-staff safety professional. This classroom course
includes safety training provided by OSHA.
The EEI general manager will complete on the job training in the first week of employment to
include;
-facility safety policy
-emergency procedures and equipment
-fire prevention and control
-spill prevention and control
-personal protection equipment
-waste loading and unloading procedures
-chemical hazards
-threat of exposure
-H2S exposure threat and H2S monitor usage
E&P Waste Handling Training
The EEI operations manager will instruct all employees on proper handling of E&P waste based on
current government regulations:
-overview of E&P waste production and disposal
-identification of E&P waste types
-review of regulations
-prohibited waste
-proper handling and disposal of each waste type
Page 16
-proper recordkeeping of accepted waste
EEI Facility Operations Specific Training
All employees will receive specific training. Including hands-on training from the general manager,
to include;
-overview of the facility design
-waste identification and characterization
-documentation of accepted waste
-facility hazard and safety
-on-site waste loading, transportation, and unloading
-waste sampling
-waste inspection, processing, and testing
-recordkeeping
Facility inspection and general maintenance
-emergency procedures and contingency plan
-spill prevention and containment
All personnel working at EEI will be required to participate in the following;
-weekly tailgate safety meetings
-semiannual review of the permit
-annual refresher training of the above-mentioned training program
1.4. RECORD KEEPING
The general manager will maintain and store on site records of facility activities as required by R315-
302-2[3].
1.4.1 Daily Permanent Record
The general manager will record the following data daily and maintain the data in a permanent file;
-waste shipment records as described in section 1.2.2.
-estimated weight in tons and volume in cu. yds. of E&P waste received per day
Page 17
-estimated weight in tons and volume in cu. yds. of E&P waste requiring treatment prior to
disposal in the facility
-the estimated weight in tons and volume in cu. yds. of material added to treat the waste and
the total weight and volume of treated waste
-number of trucks delivering
-type of E&P waste received
-deviations from the DWMRC approved operations plan
-staff training records
1.4.2 Other Records
The general manager will also include the following data in a permanent record;
-closure and post closure care plans and activities
-cost estimates and financial assurance documentation
-inspections as mentioned in section 1.3 will be recorded and records maintained.
1.5. Communication
All employees will communicate via cell phones.
1.6. Reporting
Quarterly and Annual reports will be submitted.

Page 18
Page 19
Sec. 18 Sec. 17
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y

L
A
Y
O
U
T
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T4S, R2W,
U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
SITE LAYOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
CELL 6
CELL 5
CELL 4 CELL 3
CELL 2
CELL 1
CELL 12
CELL 8
CELL 9 CELL 10
CELL 11
*ENTRYGATE
Page 20
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1256 W. 400 S. STE. 1, P.O. Box 1758, Vernal, Utah 84078 ####
Contours ####
####ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PR
O
J
E
C
T
Page 21
40

M
I
L

H
D
P
E
60

M
I
L

H
D
P
E
4"
D
I
A

P
V
C

P
I
P
E
200

M
I
L

G
E
O
N
E
T
BO
O
T
/
P
E
N
E
T
R
A
T
I
O
N

P
E
R

M
F
G
.
RE
M
O
V
A
B
L
E
/
L
O
C
K
A
B
L
E

C
A
P
PO
N
D

L
I
N
E
R
/
L
E
A
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

D
E
T
A
I
L
NO
T

T
O

S
C
A
L
E
@ 0
.
5
%

M
I
N
12
"

D
I
A

A
D
S

P
I
P
E

S
U
M
P
3'
BO
R
E

T
H
R
O
U
G
H

E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G

G
R
O
U
N
D
IN
S
T
A
L
L

P
I
P
E
,

G
R
O
U
T

H
O
L
E
BA
C
K

F
I
L
L

A
R
O
U
N
D

S
U
M
P
CO
M
P
A
C
T

T
O

9
5
%

M
D
D

W
/

1
2
"

M
A
X

L
I
F
T
S
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
EX
C
A
V
A
T
E

T
O

L
E
A
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
.
BA
C
K
F
I
L
L

A
N
D

C
O
M
P
A
C
T

A
R
O
U
N
D

S
U
M
P
.
EX
C
A
V
A
T
I
O
N

D
E
P
T
H

W
I
L
L

V
A
R
Y

U
P

T
O

1
0
+

F
E
E
T
.
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
40

M
I
L

H
D
P
E
60

M
I
L

H
D
P
E
20
0

M
I
L

G
E
O
N
E
T
SA
N
D

B
A
G
PO
U
R

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

B
A
S
E
TR
E
N
C
H

A
N
D

B
A
C
K
F
I
L
L
AC
C
O
R
D
I
N
G

T
O

M
F
G
.
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1256 W. 400 S. STE. 1, P.O. Box 1758, Vernal, Utah 84078
Lo
c
a
t
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

N
E

1
/
4

o
f

S
e
c
t
i
o
n

1
8
,

T
4
S
,

R
2
W
,
U.
S
.
B
.
&
M
.
DU
C
H
E
S
N
E

C
O
U
N
T
Y
,

U
T
A
H
SO
L
I
D
S

S
E
P
A
R
A
T
O
R
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L
EN
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
12
8
'
34'
15'
18'
12
'
-
8
"
48'
40'
10'
20'
5'
5'
27
'
A
A
B
B
C C
PL
A
N

V
I
E
W
1"
=

1
0
'
TR
E
N
C
H

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
FL
O
O
R

D
R
A
I
N
SL
O
P
E

6
:
1

M
A
X
SLO
P
E

6
:
1

M
A
X
SLO
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
SL
O
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
LE
A
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
LE
A
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
EL
E
V

9
2
ELE
V

1
0
0
ELE
V

9
2
2%

M
A
X
1%

M
A
X
48
'
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G

S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D

A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
Page 22
5'
3:1
3:1
CO
M
P
A
C
T

B
E
R
M
TO

9
0
%

M
D
D
BE
R
M

D
E
T
A
I
L
2'-
4
'
NO
T

T
O

S
C
A
L
E
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1256 W. 400 S. STE. 1, P.O. Box 1758, Vernal, Utah 84078
Lo
c
a
t
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

N
E

1
/
4

o
f

S
e
c
t
i
o
n

1
8
,

T
4
S
,

R
2
W
,
U.
S
.
B
.
&
M
.
DU
C
H
E
S
N
E

C
O
U
N
T
Y
,

U
T
A
H
SO
L
I
D
S

S
E
P
A
R
A
T
O
R
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L
EN
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
3'
3'3'
64'
64
'
2'
40'
78
'
15
'
15
'
2'-
6
"
SE
C
T
I
O
N

A
-
A
1"
=

1
0
'
40
'
8'
SE
C
T
I
O
N

C
-
C
1"
=

1
0
'
SE
C
T
I
O
N

B
-
B
1"
=

1
0
'
TR
E
N
C
H

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
DO
U
B
L
E

L
I
N
E
R

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
SLO
P
E

6
:
1

M
A
X
SL
O
P
E

6
:
1

M
A
X
2'-
6
"
1'-
1
1
14"
8"
8"
7"
9"
30
"
23
"
31"
#4

R
E
B
A
R
#4

R
E
B
A
R

@

2
4
"

O
.
C
.
24"
#4

R
E
B
A
R

@

2
4
"

O
.
C
.

B
D
#4
R
E
B
A
R
#4
R
E
B
A
R

@

2
4
"

O
.
C
.
316
" P
L
A
T
E

S
T
E
E
L

P
I
P
E

C
O
V
E
R

F
A
B
R
I
C
A
T
E
D
WIT
H

H
A
N
D
L
E

T
O

C
O
V
E
R

P
I
P
E

E
X
I
T
6"
H
D
P
E

P
I
P
E

W
I
T
H

W
E
L
D
E
D

F
L
A
N
G
E
PO
U
R
E
D

F
L
U
S
H

I
N
T
O

W
A
L
L
6"
H
D
P
E

P
I
P
E

W
I
T
H

W
E
L
D
E
D

F
L
A
N
G
E
GR
O
U
N
D

T
O

B
E

F
L
U
S
H

W
I
T
H

F
L
O
O
R
PO
U
R
E
D

F
L
U
S
H

I
N
T
O

W
A
L
L
SLO
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
SL
O
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
SL
O
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
SLO
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
SLO
P
E

1
.
5
:
1

M
A
X
LE
A
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
LEA
K

D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
TR
E
N
C
H

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
TR
E
N
C
H

S
E
E

D
E
T
A
I
L
ELE
V

9
2
ELE
V

9
2
EL
E
V

9
2
ELE
V

1
0
0
EL
E
V

1
0
0
EL
E
V

1
0
0
EL
E
V

1
0
0
EL
E
V

1
0
0
2%

M
A
X
RU
N

L
I
N
E
R

U
N
D
E
R

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
9" U
N
T
R
E
A
T
E
D

B
A
S
E

C
O
U
R
S
E
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D

T
O

9
5
%

M
D
D
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
9"
U
N
T
R
E
A
T
E
D

B
A
S
E

C
O
U
R
S
E
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D

T
O

9
5
%

M
D
D
9"
U
N
T
R
E
A
T
E
D

B
A
S
E

C
O
U
R
S
E
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D

T
O

9
5
%

M
D
D
9"
U
N
T
R
E
A
T
E
D

B
A
S
E

C
O
U
R
S
E
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D

T
O

9
5
%

M
D
D
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
UN
D
I
S
T
U
R
B
E
D

S
O
I
L
1
2
DE
T
A
I
L

1
DE
T
A
I
L

2
ALL

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

T
O

B
E

4
0
0
0

P
S
I

2
8

D
A
Y

S
T
R
E
N
G
T
H
514"
12
"
1"
#5
R
E
B
A
R

@

1
2
"

O
.
C
.

B
D
24
"

M
I
N

#
5

R
E
B
A
R

D
O
W
E
L

@
12
"

O
.
C
.

D
R
I
L
L

A
N
D

E
P
O
X
Y

1
2
"
MIN
.

I
N
T
O

E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
1%

M
A
X
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G

S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D

A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
Page 23
TAB 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Page 24
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
Cell #7 landfill @EEI Legal Description
The EEI landfill project is located in Pleasant Valley, approximately 3 miles South of US 40, in
Section 18, Township 4 South, Range 2 West. The attached plats show the boundaries and
legal descriptions of the property. The attached warranty deeds provides the proof of
ownership.
Cell #7 is a trapezoid-shaped cell located along the southern border of the entire facility property. The
northern border of the cell is nearly parallel to the southern border of the facility. The distance from the
northern border to the southern border of the cell ranges from 250 to 290 yards. The eastern border of
the cell is 240 yards west of the eastern border of the property. The western border of the cell is 440
yards east of the western border of the property. The distance between the eastern and western
borders is 255 yards.
Cell 7 Perimeter distances: North side, 275 yards; East side, 247 yards; South side, 290; West side, 288
yards
Cell 7 Acreage: 13.9 acres
Cell 7 Corner latitudes, longitudes: Northwest 40°08'14'' N 110°08'50''W; Northeast 40°08'17'' N
110°08'40''W; Southeast 40°08'10'' N 110°08'40''W; Southwest 40°08'05'' N 110°08'50''W
*All distances, sizes, and locations are approximate
Page 25
Sec. 18 Sec. 17
T4S, R2W, U.S.B.&M.
Remainder
Fence Line
16.0'
8.
6
'
25.2'
17.9'
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N

M
A
P
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18,
T4S, R2W, U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
LOCATION MAP
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
PROJECT INFORMATION
Owner/Operator: Environmental Energy Innovations
Engineer:
P.O. Box 1389
Roosevelt, Utah 84066
801-599-7213
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
1256 W. 400 S. Suite 1
Vernal, Utah 84078
435-789-5448
CELL
#7
*
ENTRY
GATE
CELL#6
CELL#5
CELL#4
CELL#1
CELL#2
CELL
#3
CELL#9
CELL#8
CELL#10
CELL#11
CELL#12
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Farm and Home Tide
Inc.#8573
Tax Id No.
Mail Tax Notice to Grantee at;
POBox 1389
Roosevelt.Utah 84066
QUIT CLAIM DEED
Limited Liability Company
ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY INNOVATIONS,
LLC,A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
Grantor(s)
with its principal office at Roosevelt,Utah 84066
hereby QUIT-CLAIM To:
Recorder's Use Only
Znt AA'dGBl flk A639 Pq £5Date:a3-FEB-e01S 9:35:00011
Fee:$14.0tj Check
Filed Bys CBMCAROLYNEMftDSEN,RecorderDUCHESNECOUNTYCORPORATIONFor:FflRii &HOME TITLE
ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY INNOVATIONS,LLC,a Nevada Limited Liability
Company,
Grantee(s)
of Roosevelt,Utah 84066
For the sum of-—TEN and other good and valuable consideration
the following described tract of land in DUCHESNE County.State of Utah:
DOLLARS,
See Exhibit "A"attached hereto.
The members or designated agents who sign this deed hereby certify that this deed and thetransferrepresentedtherebyisthefreeanavoluntaryactanddeed of the limited liabilitycompany,by authority of statute,its articles or organization or its operating agreement,for theusesandpurposesthereinmentioned,and on oath state that they are authorized to execute this
instrument.
In witness whereof,the grantor has caused its name to be hereunto affixed by its members or
designated agents this /7 day of February,2012.
Environmental Energy Innovations,LLC,a
Utah Limited Liability Company
Marie L.Murray,Manager
STATE OF UTAH }
ss.
COUNTY OF DUCHESNE }
On the !'Day of February A.D.2012,Personally appeared before me Mark L.
Murray ,known to me to be member(s)or designated agent(s)of the limited liability company
that executed this instrument and acknowledged to the same to be the^ree and voluntary act and
deed of the limited liability company,by authority of statute,its articles of organization or itsoperatingagreement,for the uses and purposes therein mentioned,and on oath stated that he isauthorizedtoexecutethisinstrumentandinfactexecutedthisinstrumentonbehalfofthe limitedliabilitycompany.
Residing in:PO^cs
My commission expires:
CX
1 \
Notary Public
WALTBURDETTE
NOTARY PUBLIC •STATE of UTAH
COMMISSION NO.577399
COMM.EXP.01/28/2013
Page 35
tnt 44£Gai 6k A063S Pg
Exhibit "A"
TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH,RANGE 2 WEST,UINTAH SPECIAL BASE AND MERIDIAN
SECTION 18:The Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter;The South half of the Northwest
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter.
ALSO:
Beginning at the center Quarter corner of Section 18,Township 4 South,Range 2 West,Uintah
Special Base and Meridian;thence South 0°43'29"East 421.75 feet;thence North 76°14'41"East
1354.43 feet;thence North 0o42'14"West 127.68 feet;thence South 88°46'52 West 1319.63 feet
to the point of beginning.
Page 36
TAB 4FACILITY MAPS
Page 37
Page 38
Sec. 18 Sec. 17
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
FA
C
I
L
I
T
Y

L
A
Y
O
U
T
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T4S, R2W,
U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
SITE LAYOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
CELL 6
CELL 5
CELL 4 CELL 3
CELL 2
CELL 1
CELL 12
CELL 8
CELL 9 CELL 10
CELL 11
*ENTRYGATE
Page 39
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
ZO
N
I
N
G

M
A
P
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
GREEN - AGRICULTURE
BROWN - TRIBAL
PURPLE - INDUSTRIAL
RED - COMMERCIAL
YELLOW - BLM
PROJECT
LOCATION
CELL #7
Page 40
TAB 5
WASTE TYPES
Page 41
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Civil Engineering Consultants
PO Box 1758 * 1256 W 400 S, Suite 1
Vernal, Utah 84078
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
Cell #7 landfill Description of Waste
Non-hazardous waste from oil field exploration and production (E and P) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC) related to automotive and industrial operations related to oil field work will be
accepted at the EEI facility as allowed as directed by DWMRC. To ensure that waste meets this
requirement, all potential waste generators disposing of waste at EEI proposed facility must first
complete a waste profile assessment to determine the acceptability of the waste according to this
permit application.
The area served by the facility includes the following:
• West boundary – Wasatch Front
• East boundary - Colorado Border
• North boundary - Wyoming border
• South boundary - Book Cliffs
Phone [phone] * Fax [phone] Email: [e-mail]
Page 42
TAB 6
POST CLOSURE & CLOSURE PLAN
Page 43
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
Cell #7 landfill @EEI CLOSURE DESIGN PLAN
Introduction
At the end of the life of Cell #7 of the Environmental Energy Innovations, LLC (EEI) facility the cell will
be closed according to R315-302. The following is a brief plan for closure of the cell and is subject to
amendment if conditions and circumstances justify an amendment.
Closure Procedures
The following procedures will be followed:
1.Notify the Executive Secretary of intent to close 60 days prior receipt of final material.
2.Commence closure procedures within 30 days of receipt of final material. Closure activities will be
completed within 180 days of commencement of closure activities.
3.Within 90 days of completion of closure activities, submit a copy of the closure plan and certificate
that closure has been performed per the closure plan. These must be stamped and signed by a State
of Utah Licensed Professional Engineer.
Closure Schedule
Sixty days prior to the expected final receipt of waste for Cell #7, EEI will notify the division of their
intent to begin closure operations of the cell. EEI will begin the closure operations after the final
receipt of waste is obtained. It is anticipated that each closure operation will take place over an
anticipated duration of 90 to 120 days. During this period, the EEI facility cell will be graded, covered,
and surveyed. As-built plans will be generated for reference for the final inspection by the division.
Design of Final Cover
The final cover will consist of two soil layers meeting the requirements of R315-303-3(5). The first layer
will consist of at least 18 inches of compacted soil, or equivalent, with a permeability of 1 x 10-5 cm/sec
or less, or equivalent with surface slopes grades not less than 2% and the side slopes grades not more
than 33%.
The second layer will consist of at least six inches of soil capable of sustaining vegetative growth and
seeded with grass, other shallow rooted vegetation, or other native vegetation.
Markers or other benchmarks shall be installed in any final earthen cover to indicate the thickness of the
final cover.
Page 44
Capacity of EEI Facility
Based on the assumption of half the waste being mixed with additional material, the estimated capacity
of cell #7 up to the final cover is approximately 343,000 cubic yards of waste plus mixing material. This
calculation accounts for an estimated dry density of 135 lb./cu-ft for the mixing material.
A table with the projected life at 10 percent growth rate, capped at 50,000 cubic yards of waste plus
mixing material per year, for the EEI facility is provided in Table 1 below. The growth rate is defined as
the number of trucks delivered to the site on an average daily basis. It will take eight years for the cell
#7 to be completed at the expected growth rate. With an increase in the growth rate, the life of cell #7
of the EEI facility will be reduced.
Growth
Waste Delivered
to Site per Day
(cuyd)
Onsite Material
Mixed with Waste
(cuyd)
Total Material to be Spread on Site (cuyd)
Year
Cell
Volume
(cuyd)
Day
(cuyd)
Week
(cuyd)
Year
(cuyd)
Cumulative
(cuyd)
0.1 70.00 35.00 105.00 630.00 33000 33000 1
0.1 77.00 38.50 115.50 693.00 36000 69000 2
0.1 84.70 42.35 127.05 762.30 40000 109000 3
0.1 93.17 46.59 139.76 838.53 44000 153000 4
0.1 102.49 51.24 153.73 922.38 48000 201000 5
0.1 112.74 56.37 169.10 1014.62 50000 251000 6
124.01 62.00 186.01 1116.08 50000 301000 7
136.41 68.21 204.62 1227.69 50000 351000 8 343000
Table 1: EEI Cell #7 Growth Rate / Life Expectancy
Final Inspection
After the completion of the final cover, the final inspection of cell #7 will be conducted by officials
from DWMRC. EEI will notify the division of the anticipated date of completion and plan for
scheduling the inspection.
POST CLOSURE CARE
Immediately after the completion of construction for the final cover of cell #7, the post closure care
plan will be implemented. As required in R315-302-3(5) the post closure care activities will take place
for 30 years or as long as the Director determines is necessary for the facility or unit to become
stabilized and to protect human health and the environment. A licensed engineer with the state of
Utah will direct the post-closure care of the facility and will provide EEI with recommendations to
properly maintain the EEI facility and prevent any release of harmful substances. The engineer will also
provide the division with documentation if he determines that the site is safe to reduce or discontinue
site monitoring prior to the end of the 30-year period.
During the post closure period the following activities will take place:
Site Monitoring: EEI personnel will be on site weekly to monitor activities at the proposed EEI facility
and restrict access to Cell #7. Access to the Cell #7 will be restricted with fencing and gates. Signs will
be posted advising of the potential dangers associated with cell #7. Only authorized personnel of EEI
Page 45
will have access to cell #7 site.
Markers or other benchmarks installed as part of the closure plan will be observed during each quarterly
inspection and the earthen cover shall be raised to the appropriate thickness as necessary. Erosion
channels deeper than 10% of the total cover thickness shall be repaired as soon as possible following
their discovery.
On a quarterly basis the EEI facility cover will be inspected to check for rutting and depressions that
could result in rapid erosion. If rutting or depressions in the cover are identified, they will be repaired
by grading and seeding the surface. Slopes of the final cover will also be inspected and maintained. EEI
will ensure that a 2% slope will be maintained on the top of the cover and a 3:1 slope will be
maintained around the perimeter of the cell.
Run-off water from the final cover will be directed into the existing drainages to the north and west of
the cell. EEI will on a Quarterly basis inspect the run-off collection system and ensure that they are
properly diverting water into the existing storm water drainages. Repairs will be made as needed.
Surface and Ground Water Monitoring: No samples of surface waters will be collected because there
are no observed streams, springs, or other surface waters at the site of the proposed EEI facility.
Ground water will not be sampled as the test holes taken did not encounter groundwater.
Record of Title, Land Use, Zoning
The Duchesne County Recorder will be notified during the final closure period of the entire facility.
The county recorder will be provided with documentation and plats of the location of the disposal site.
Notification of the closure, and location of the EEI facility will also be sent to the county recorder and
zoning changes will be made if necessary. Documentation of the history of the EEI facility permanently
appended to the title of record and land use restrictions will be put in place.
Post Closure Contacts
The point of contact during the post closure care period for this facility is Todd Bro. His contact
information is provided below:
Todd Bro
P.O. Box 1389 Roosevelt Utah 84066
Telephone: [phone]
Page 46
2.00
%
2.
0
0
%
2.00
%
3.0:13.0:1
10
.
0
:
1
2.
0
0
%
3.
0
:
1
3.0
:
1
10.00%
1:3.0
0
1:
3
.
0
0
2.00%2.00%
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
FI
N
A
L

C
O
V
E
R

P
L
A
N
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
VOLUME:
343,068 CUYDS.
SURFACE AREA:
BOTTOM - 8.5 ACRES
TOP - 3.7 ACRES
ACCESS ROAD
ACCESS ROAD
BERM
WASTE PILE
BERM
6" CLAY SOIL
6" TOPSOIL
WASTE PILE
PLAN VIEW
CROSS SECTION WITH ACCESS ROAD
Page 47
TAB 7
FINANCIAL
ASSURANCE
Page 48
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Civil Engineering Consultants
PO Box 1758 * 1256 W 400 S, Suite 1
Vernal, Utah 84078
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
CELL #7 FINANCIAL ASSURANCE
This section of the permit describes compliance with Subsection R315-309, Financial Assurance of
the Administrative Rules for Solid Waste Permitting and Management. Closure cost estimates
consider the most expensive option during the period obtained from an independent contractor
and are based on third party personnel performing closure and post closure care.
The EEI team complies with financial assurance test requirements for private entities based on
putting cash into a Trust Fund sufficient to meet WMRC’s financial assurance requirements.
Phone [phone] * Fax [phone] Email: [e-mail]
Page 49
ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH
CLOSURE COSTS
The EEI facility is planned to close each cell as the waste reaches the final design grade. The closure cost
for the EEI facility is based on the cost of the placement and grading of 18 inches of compacted soil, or
equivalent, with a permeability of 1x10-5 cm/sec or less, or equivalent placed upon the final lifts and a
6-inch topsoil layer and seeding of topsoil. Closure cost estimates were obtained from an independent
contractor.
Upon closure of all cells the parking area, office spaces, and loading and unloading facilities will be removed
and the area graded, topsoil layer added and seeding of topsoil to provide a natural looking surface. The
cost of doing this work is estimated at $20,000.
The closure cost of cell 7 is $1,055,000 as shown in Table 1.
Closure Cost for Cell 7
Task Description Total Cost Details
Closure Cost
Per Cell
Letter of Notification of Closure $2,000 Letter to DWMRC and County
Cover and Topsoil Material $1,020,000 Seeding/Mulching $8,000
Contingency $25,000
Total Cost Per Cell $1,055,000
Table 1 Closure Costs
POST CLOSURE CARE COSTS
Post closure care of inactive sections of the EEI facility will consist of maintaining the integrity of the final
and vegetative covers. Any areas subject to erosion will be corrected and appropriate measures will be
implemented to identify and eliminate the run-on source. No active or technical devices are proposed
for at the EEI facility. Best management practices will be implemented to minimize infiltration and
assure the integrity of the run-on/run-off system. An evaluation of the system will be made during the
quarterly inspections and corrective measures if any will be implemented. All run-on and run-off from
events smaller than the 25-year storm will be controlled through drainage design.
Post closure care costs are estimated by the cost of maintaining the previously described activities for a
30-year period. The estimated cost of the post closure care tasks is approximately $31,000 for cell 7 as
shown in Table 2.
Page 50
Task Description Unit Cost Hours per year Unit Type Years Total Units Total Cost 28 years Details
Inspections
Quarterly 1st 2 years; $30 4 hours 2 8 $240
Semiannually for 28 years $30 2 hours 28 56 $1,680
Ground Water Testing Not required as investigations have revealed there is no ground water present near the site
Report
Quarterly 1st 2 years; $30 4 hours 2 8 $240
Semiannually for 28 years $30 2 hours 28 56 $1,680
Subtotal for 30
years $3,840
Maintenance Replacing topsoil 1 $24,000 Assumes 10% will need to be replaced
Reseeding 1 $1,000 Assumes 10% will need to be replaced
Subtotal for 30 years $28,840
Contingency $2,900 (10%)
Post Closure
Cost cell 7 $31,740
Table 2 Post Closure Care Costs
Post Cost for EEI Facility
Page 51
TAB 8
FORMS
Page 52
WASTE GENERATOR TICKET Truck WATER REMOVED MIXING SOIL MIXING SOIL MIXING SOIL
NAME #Number Solid Liquid Waste Tons BBLS ADDED CU YDS.CUBIC YDS.Tons ADDED CU. YDS.CU. YDS.Tons ADDED CU. YDS.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DAILY TOTALS:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DRILL CUTTINGSBarrels CONTAM. SOIL
EEI DAILY PERMANENT RECORD OF INBOUND WASTE SHIPMENTS
INVOICE DATE:
FORM 1
Pa
g
e

|
10

Page 53
DATE DUST water LITTER DIRT POND FENCING CONCRETE HOLDING COMPACTION MIXING
CONTROL applied CONTROL BERMS LEAK GATES PAD PONDS CONDITION #7 SOIL
opacity %yes/no OK or OK or DETECTION OK or OK or % of OK or AVAILABLE
#bbls CORRECT CORRECT MONITORS CORRECT CORRECT FULL CORRECT CU. YDS.
DRY/WET
Comments
EEI - WEEKLY FACILITY INSPECTIONS
Date:
PERFORMED BY:
FORM 2
Page |
1
1

Page 54
EEI - EMPOLYEE TRAINING CHECK LIST
Date:
TAIL-GATE
EMPLOYEE NEW HIRE NEW OSHA POLICY &FACILITY WMRC EQUIPMENT SEMI-ANNUAL SEMI-ANNUAL EMPLOYEE
NAME SIGNATURE HIRE TRAINING SAFETY DESIGN PERMIT OPERATION &RE-TRAINING RE-TRAINING END
INITIALS/ DATE DATE MANUAL OVERVIEW OVERVIEW MAINTENANCE 1ST HALF 2ND HALF WEEKLY DATE
5 STEPS FOR NEW HIRE TRAINING 2 RETRAINING PER YEAR
FORM 3
Pa
g
e

|
12

Page 55
TAB 9
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
Page 56
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
Co
n
t
o
u
r
s
##
#
#
##
#
#
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
CELL # 7
FILL AREA
STAGING AREA
00 200'400'
BORROW AREA
(TYPICAL)
Page 57
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
PR
E
V
A
I
L
I
N
G

W
I
N
D

D
A
T
A
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT LOCATION
Page 58
TAB 10
PRECIPITATION DATA
Page 59
Page 60
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1256 W. 400 S. STE. 1, P.O. Box 1758, Vernal, Utah 84078 ####
WATER MAP
ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY INNOVATIONS
####
####
PR
O
J
E
C
T

A
R
E
A
0.
1

M
I
L
E
S
0.
8
5

M
I
L
E
S
0.1
8

M
I
L
E
S
IN
T
E
R
M
E
D
I
A
T
E
ST
R
E
A
M
Page 61
CIVCO Engineering, Inc.
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1256 W. 400 S. STE. 1, P.O. Box 1758, Vernal, Utah 84078 ####
PRECIPITATION DATA
ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY INNOVATIONS
####
####
PR
O
J
E
C
T
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
TAB 11
GROUND WATER
ANALYSIS
Page 67

ENVIRONMENT ENERGY INNOVATIONS
PLEASANT VALLEY, UTAH

Ground Water Analysis
A subsurface investigation was performed on the project site. Below is the resulting analysis of
the well bore samples.

The attached map shows the locations of the drill holes. Each hole was bored to a depth of 50
feet.
Borehole # 1: 0’-10’: light buff colored sandy silt, colluvium.
10’-15’: tan clay.
15’-20’: sandy gravel. 25’-35’: light reddish brown clayey silt, Uinta Formation. 35’-52’: purplish brown silty clay, Uinta Formation. *No water encountered in BH-1.
Borehole # 2: 0’-10’: light buff silty sand, colluvium. 10’-25’: pale greenish sandy gravel. 25’-35’: grayish sandstone.
35’-50’: greenish gray shale.
*No water encountered in BH-2. Bedrock at 25 feet. Borehole # 3: 0’-10’: buff colored sandy silt, colluvium.
10’-15’: greenish brown sandy gravel w/ 1mm-3cm sized clasts.
15’-30’: light brown clayey/silty shale. 30’-50’: blue green clayey/silty shale. *No water encountered in BH-3. Bedrock at 15 feet.
Borehole # 4:
0’-10’: light buff sandy silt, colluvium. 10’-25’: tan sandy gravel w/ 1mm-3cm clasts. 25’-30’: tan siltstone. 30’-40’: blue green silty shale.
40’-50’: blue green clay.
*No water encountered in BH-4. Bedrock at 25 feet.
Page 68
Borehole # 5:
0’-10’: light buff silty gravel, colluvium.
10’-20’: tan sandy gravel. 20’-30’: grayish brown siltstone. 30’-40’: pale green silty shale. 40’-50’: blue green shale.
*No water encountered in BH-5. Bedrock at 25 feet.
Borehole # 6: 0’-10’: light buff colored silt, colluvium. 10’-20’: whitish tan sandy gravel.
20’-30’: blue green sandy silt.
30’-50’: purplish green shale. *No water encountered in BH-6. Bedrock at 30 feet. Borehole # 7:
0” – 8” Lt brn-buff silt and sand with some minor components of clay.
0’ – 10’ Clay with minor amounts of silt and sand.
10’ – 20’ Clay brn-gry.
20’ – 30’ Clay with minor amounts of sand.
30’ – 40’ Clay dk brn-drk gry.
40’ – 50’ Clay drk gry-drk brn with minor amounts of ls pebbles and rock shards.
*No water encountered in BH-7. .

Borehole # 8:
0” – 8” Lt brn-buff silt and sand with some minor components of clay.
0’ – 10’ Clay with minor amounts of buff silt and sand.
10’ – 20’ Clay brn-gry-drk brn.
20 ‘ – 30’ Clay with minor amounts of sand.
30’ – 40’ Clay dk brn-drk gry.
40’ – 50’ Clay drk gry-drk brn with a minor amount of blue shale, very limey.
*No water encountered in BH-8.

Borehole # 9:
0” – 8” Lt brn-buff silt and sand with some minor components of clay.
0’ – 10’ Clay lt brn-brn.
10’ – 20’ Clay brn-gry-drk brn with minor pebbles of drk gry shale.
20’ – 30’ Clay with minor amounts of sand, very fine.
30’ – 40’ Clay drk brn-drk gry.
40’ – 50’ Clay drk gry-drk brn.
*No water encountered in BH-9.
Page 69
Page 70
Sec. 18 Sec. 17
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
SO
I
L

M
A
P
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T4S, R2W,
U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
SOIL
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
TAB 12
HIGH WET WASTE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Page 77
R315-302-2 [2] [b]

Two different processes must occur upon waste delivery at EEI.

DRY Waste
Dry waste delivered in side dumps, dump trailers, and belly dumps is considered dry waste
generally with a moisture content ranging from 5% to 35%. These inbound loads are dry
enough not to leak out of the trailers used for transport.

EEI personnel checks with the drivers as the first step toward determining if the waste is
non- hazardous and meets our permit requirements. Most explanations describe a spill
cleanup, or drill cuttings along with the source location such as a well lease number,
pipeline name, tank battery and the generator. The operator will physically inspect the
waste looking for characteristics that support our decision to accept the load.

If satisfied the load is dumped onto the dry unloading area where our operator can test
moisture content with a meter to determine the soil mixing necessary to reduce the
moisture content to 25%-35%. This calculation is based on the operator’s best guess but is
checked by the manager after the soil mixing [done by front end loaders] is complete.
Additional soil is often required to reach the 25%-35% threshold. When the manager is
satisfied with the moisture content of the material, the waste material is loaded and
delivered to cell #7 for spreading and compacting. Compacting is done by a tractor pulled
spreader.

WET Waste
Wet waste is delivered in super suckers or vacuum tanks and are 40% - 50% water. Each
super sucker’s vacuum tank is 40 bbl – 60 bbl capacity with the allowable fill at 80%.
Therefore, each average load’s water content is:
Ave. total load = 40 bbl. [50 bbl X 80%]
Ave. water content = 20 bbl [50% X 40 bbl]
Ave. daily estimated water delivered by super sucker, based on actual load counts
from 9/20/23 – 11/4/23 = 179 bbl/day.

Page 78
In addition to super sucker loads we receive loads on 110 bbl trailers occasionally. Adding
the two together increases the average estimated daily water delivery to 200 bbl/day.

Super Suckers are hydro excavators and offer a technology that sucks up liquid mixtures of
oil field waste including tank bottom clean outs, pipeline clean outs, drilling rig clean outs,
etc. These loads require an unloading site designed to separate water from solids and to
confine the water in holding ponds until EEI can deliver it to cell #7. EEI’s unloading site is
a concrete pad designed by engineers to utilize gravity to drain water off the solids portion
of the load and hold the water while capturing the solids on the slightly sloping concrete
pad. [See engineer’s design]. EEI can unload two trucks at one time.

Our operator’s first step is to ask the delivery driver what type of waste he has to unload
and to identify the well site origin. Our operator cannot physically inspect the load until the
driver backs onto the pad and engages his pressure pump and opens his valves to release
the load onto the pad. At this point EEI has to rely on the waste profile assessment
provided by the waste generator and the driver’s verbal representation to make the
determination that the load is in fact non-hazardous waste meeting the requirements of a
class IIIb permit.

Now the challenge becomes drying the wet solid waste down to a moisture content of 25%-
35%. This is accomplished by 2 processes.

1. The first process is the material is off loaded on to a sloping concrete slab where
continual gravity induced force drains the water out of the solids and allowing it time
to trickle down the concrete pad and into the holding ponds. This can take 1-2 days
for each 24 hours of unloading wet super sucker loads.

2. After the water has drained sufficiently, the EEI operators deliver soil from any of the
11 inactive cells to the concrete pad to start the mixing process by front end
loaders. Testing for moisture content is based on visual indications. When the
manager gets a moisture reading of 25%-35% the waste material and mixing soil is
released for spreading on cell #7. EEI employs an implement which thoroughly
mixes as it spreads waste in approximately 2” lifts. The waste that is spread is dusty
in 1-2 hours.

Page 79
The holding capacity of the wastewater ponds is 8000 bbl. when empty. The ponds are
usually ½ full providing approx. 4000 bbl capacity on any given day to handle the
occasional high-volume day.
The final process for disposal of WET waste is emptying the water from the holding ponds
and spreading the water on cell #7 in a way that does not threaten ground water through
runoff or absorption. Our process was approved by permit modification from UDOGM in
2022 and is as follows.

EEI loads the water in a vacuum truck with a suction/ pressure pump and delivers to
cell #7 where the operator will set the delivery volume low enough that the pressure
induced spray wets only ¼ “ – ½” of the surface soil without delivering enough water
to create a puddle. This volume of water evaporates quickly allowing dust to form,
usually within 1 hour. Cell #7 is approximately 10 acres or 435600 SQ. FT. It takes
3230 bbl of water to cover cell #7 1/2“ deep. At our current rate of 1400 bbls per
week EEI would spread ½ “ approx. twice per month.

Page 80
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
UN
L
O
A
D
I
N
G

A
N
D

O
F
F
I
C
E

A
R
E
A

L
A
Y
O
U
T
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T4S, R2W,
U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
UNLOADING & OFFICE LAYOUT
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
FRONT GATE
LATITUDE: 40° 8'5.26"N
LONGITUDE: 110° 8'53.41"W
Page 81
TAB 13
PERMEABILITY
REPORT
Page 82
www.snowshoeco.com
ground. level. solutions.
June 5, 2024
CIVCO Engineering, Inc. 1256
West 400 South Ste 1
Vernal, Utah 84078
Attention: Bret Reynolds, PE
Email: [e-mail]
Subject: Geotechnical Services (Revised Letter)
Pad Subgrade Permeability and Bearing Capacity Evaluation
Approx. 40.135548°, -110.148151°
Duchesne County, Utah
SNOWSHOE Project No. 24037
Snowshoe Engineering Company (SNOWSHOE) was asked to perform a subsurface
investigation at an existing unloading pad to collect samples for laboratory testing and
to evaluate the subgrade materials (upper 10 feet adjacent the pad) potential bearing
capacity.
SNOWSHOE was also asked (after the initial scope of work was developed) to review
documents by the client and provide our professional opinion concerning the potential
that contaminated water (originating from material delivered to the site) could seep
into underlying subsurface water in facility areas used for staging and dewatering
activities.
CURRENT PAD USE
The existing concrete pad is used to unload imported material (soil). The material is
then removed from the pad using front-end loaders or other similar equipment and
processed in nearby areas.
PROVIDED DOCUMENTS
SNOWSHOE was provided documents by the client (Civco Engineering, Inc.) in an email
delivered on May 17, 2024. The documents are provided in the Appendix and include:
Soil Report - NRCS
Ground Water Analysis (Includes Boring Logs) - Civco Engineering, Inc.
Soil Map (Includes Bore Hole Locations) - Civco Engineering, Inc.
Page 83
P A D S U B G R A D E P E R M E A B I L I T Y A N D B E A R I N G C A P A C I T Y E V A L U A T I O N
C I V C O E N G I N E R I N G , I N C .
S N O W S H O E P R O J E C T N O . 2 4 0 3 7 P a g e | 2

ground. level. solutions.
GEOLOGICAL SETTING
Geological mapping (Duchesne and Kings Peak Quadrangles, Bruce Bryant) indicates
surface soils in the area likely consist of the following:

Glacial Outwash of Pre-Bull Lake Age (Pleistocene)
Poorly sorted gravel and sand in terraces graded to pre-Bull Lake moraines.

The mapping also indicates near surface or at surface bedrock in the area likely consist
of the following:

Upper Member of the Uinta Formation (Eocene)
Gray mudstone and a few thin beds of sandstone and limestone. Dominantly
alluvial in origin but contains some lacustrine beds.

FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
SNOWSHOE conducted subsurface exploration at the site on May 17, 2024. A CME 75
geotechnical drill rig was used to drill two borings at the locations indicated on Figure 1.
The borings were advanced using hollow stem augers (HSA). Samples were obtained
using a split-spoon sampler.

The subsurface conditions encountered in the borings consisted of varying depths of fill
overlying lean clay with varying amounts of sand.

Subsurface water was not encountered within the depths of our borings. Subsurface
water depths will vary over time and with fluctuating surface water conditions.

Boring logs illustrating the subsurface conditions encountered are provided on Figure 2
with material descriptions and legend provided on Figure 3.

LABORATORY TESTING
Full laboratory test results are provided with this letter on Table 1 and in the Appendix.
A summary of the laboratory results for the two samples tested for hydraulic
conductivity are as follows:

Boring B2 @ 4 ½’
 Classification: Lean Clay (CL)
 Water content: 9%
 Dry Unit Weight: 90 pcf
 Minus No. 200 Sieve (Silt/Clay): 71%
 Liquid Limit: 26%
 Plasticity Index (PI): 12
 Hydraulic Conductivity: Average K b : = 7.8E‐05 cm/sec

Page 84
P A D S U B G R A D E P E R M E A B I L I T Y A N D B E A R I N G C A P A C I T Y E V A L U A T I O N
C I V C O E N G I N E R I N G , I N C .
S N O W S H O E P R O J E C T N O . 2 4 0 3 7 P a g e | 3

ground. level. solutions.
Boring B2 @ 8 ½’
 Classification: Lean Clay (CL)
 Water content: 12%
 Dry Unit Weight: 102 pcf
 Minus No. 200 Sieve (Silt/Clay): 72%
 Liquid Limit: 34%
 Plasticity Index (PI): 22
 Hydraulic Conductivity: Average K b : 1.3E‐06 cm/sec

CONCLUSIONS AND PROFESSIONAL OPINION
Bearing Capacity
Based on our field investigation and laboratory test results, an ultimate bearing
capacity of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) could be assumed at typical shallow
foundation depths at the locations investigated.

The suitability of the slab to support heavy equipment is highly dependent on the slab
thickness, reinforcement and subgrade preparation.

Surface Water Seepage - Concrete Pad Dewatering Areas
We understand that dewatering procedures initially take place on the concrete pad at
the facility. A concrete pad in good condition would restrict seepage of fluids from
the surface to the underlying soil more effectively than a soil having a permeability of
1E-07 cm/sec.

Surface Water Seepage – Other Staging and Dewatering Areas
We also understand material having varying levels of saturation is subsequently moved
to other areas at the site.

Based on the provided documents, 12 borings were drilled on August 23, 2013 at the
site. According to our interpretation of the boring logs, the subsurface soil consisted
generally of clay, silt, sand and gravel. Bedrock was encountered below the soil in
some of the borings according to the logs including Boring Borhole #1 which is the
closest boring to the unloading and dewatering concrete pad. It is possible that
deeper layers in other borings identified as soil are in fact bedrock.

The logs also indicate that no subsurface water was observed in the upper 50 feet of
any of the 12 borings.

Our opinion is based on the above information and the following assumptions made
after review of the provided documents:

a) the provided logs are accurate,
b) our interpretation of the logs is accurate,
c) the subsurface water observations reported in the logs are accurate and,
d) conditions are the same now as reported in 2013.

Page 85
F I G U R E 1 - E X P L O R A T I O N L O C A T I O N S
g r o u n d . l e v e l . s o l u t i o n s .
E N G I N E E R I N G
S N O W S H O E
W W W . S N O W S H O E C O . C O M
B - 1 B - 2
B M
NORTH-NTS-
Page 86
g r o u n d . l e v e l . s o l u t i o n s .
F I G U R E 2 - E X P L O R A T I O N L O G
E N G I N E E R I N G
S N O W S H O E
W W W . S N O W S H O E C O . C O M
Page 87
F I G U R E 3 - D E S C R I P T S , L E G E N D A N D N O T E S
E N G I N E E R I N G
S N O W S H O E
W W W . S N O W S H O E C O . C O M
g r o u n d . l e v e l . s o l u t i o n s .
Page 88
E N G I N E E R I N G
S N O W S H O E
W W W . S N O W S H O E C O . C O M
g r o u n d . l e v e l . s o l u t i o n s .
T A B L E 1 - L A B O R A T O R Y T E S T R E S U L T S Page 89
P A D S U B G R A D E P E R M E A B I L I T Y A N D B E A R I N G C A P A C I T Y E V A L U A T I O N
C I V C O E N G I N E R I N G , I N C .
S N O W S H O E P R O J E C T N O . 2 4 0 3 7

ground. level. solutions.

APPENDIX

Page 90
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Duchesne Area, Utah, Parts
of Duchesne, Utah, and
Wasatch Counties
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
February 10, 2023
Page 91
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
Page 92
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Page 93
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Duchesne Area, Utah, Parts of Duchesne, Utah, and Wasatch Counties......14
24—Blackston loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes.................................................14
27—Boreham loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes..................................................15
38—Cadrina, extremely stony-Casmos-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 40
percent slopes.......................................................................................16
62—Crustown-Motto complex, 0 to 25 percent slopes................................19
94—Greybull-Utaline-Badland complex, 4 to 40 percent slopes.................21
123—Kilroy loam, 1 to 8 percent slopes......................................................24
129—Leeko loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes.....................................................25
153—Motto-Muff-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 25 percent slopes...............27
173—Pariette gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes..........................30
243—Turzo-Umbo complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes.....................................31
285—Water.................................................................................................33
APC—Grunnell-Pariette-Persayo complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes............34
FaB—Rairdent clay loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes.........................................37
References............................................................................................................39
4
Page 94
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
Page 95
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
Page 96
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Page 97
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
Page 98
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
44
4
1
0
0
0
44
4
1
6
0
0
44
4
2
2
0
0
44
4
2
8
0
0
44
4
3
4
0
0
44
4
4
0
0
0
44
4
4
6
0
0
44
4
5
2
0
0
44
4
5
8
0
0
44
4
1
0
0
0
44
4
1
6
0
0
44
4
2
2
0
0
44
4
2
8
0
0
44
4
3
4
0
0
44
4
4
0
0
0
44
4
4
6
0
0
44
4
5
2
0
0
44
4
5
8
0
0
571000 571600 572200 572800 573400 574000 574600
571000 571600 572200 572800 573400 574000 574600
40° 9' 37'' N
11
0
°

1
0
'

2
'
'

W
40° 9' 37'' N
11
0
°

7
'

2
2
'
'

W
40° 6' 54'' N
11
0
°

1
0
'

2
'
'

W
40° 6' 54'' N
11
0
°

7
'

2
2
'
'

W
N
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84
0 1000 2000 4000 6000Feet
0 350 700 1400 2100Meters
Map Scale: 1:24,400 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Page 99
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Duchesne Area, Utah, Parts of Duchesne,
Utah, and Wasatch Counties
Survey Area Data: Version 9, Aug 25, 2022
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jun 22, 2021—Sep 4,
2021
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Page 100
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
24 Blackston loam, 0 to 6 percent
slopes
62.1 2.5%
27 Boreham loam, 0 to 4 percent
slopes
16.6 0.7%
38 Cadrina, extremely stony-
Casmos-Rock outcrop
complex, 2 to 40 percent
slopes
15.7 0.6%
62 Crustown-Motto complex, 0 to
25 percent slopes
38.6 1.6%
94 Greybull-Utaline-Badland
complex, 4 to 40 percent
slopes
338.0 13.6%
123 Kilroy loam, 1 to 8 percent
slopes
329.4 13.3%
129 Leeko loam, 0 to 4 percent
slopes
1,269.8 51.2%
153 Motto-Muff-Rock outcrop
complex, 2 to 25 percent
slopes
183.6 7.4%
173 Pariette gravelly sandy loam, 2
to 8 percent slopes
91.5 3.7%
243 Turzo-Umbo complex, 0 to 2
percent slopes
65.7 2.7%
285 Water 2.7 0.1%
APC Grunnell-Pariette-Persayo
complex, 2 to 15 percent
slopes
52.5 2.1%
FaB Rairdent clay loam, 0 to 8
percent slopes
13.1 0.5%
Totals for Area of Interest 2,479.3 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
Page 101
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Page 102
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Page 103
Duchesne Area, Utah, Parts of Duchesne, Utah, and Wasatch Counties
24—Blackston loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1tzvn
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,710 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Blackston and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Blackston
Setting
Landform:Fan remnants, outwash terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Concave, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from limestone, sandstone, shale and/or
quartzite
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam
Bk1 - 8 to 19 inches: loam
Bk2 - 19 to 28 inches: gravelly loam
2Bk3 - 28 to 36 inches: extremely cobbly loam
3Bk4 - 36 to 44 inches: extremely cobbly sandy loam
3C - 44 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.71 to 2.13 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:40 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Page 104
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Nolava
Percent of map unit:8 percent
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Turzo, clay loam
Percent of map unit:7 percent
Landform:Drainageways
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Concave
Ecological site:R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
27—Boreham loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1vbcb
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,870 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Boreham and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Boreham
Setting
Landform:Paleoterraces, fan remnants, strath terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear, concave
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Parent material:Loamy alluvium over loamy-skeletal alluvium derived from
sandstone, limestone, shale, and quartzite
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 13 inches: loam
Bk1 - 13 to 26 inches: loam
Bk2 - 26 to 49 inches: loam
2Bk3 - 49 to 60 inches: very gravelly sandy loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
Page 105
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.71 to 2.13 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:40 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:1 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3c
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blackston
Percent of map unit:8 percent
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Crib
Percent of map unit:7 percent
Landform:Strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY212UT - Semidesert Loam (Wyoming Big Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
38—Cadrina, extremely stony-Casmos-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 40
percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1vbcg
Elevation: 4,590 to 6,360 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Custom Soil Resource Report
16
Page 106
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Cadrina, extremely stony, and similar soils:40 percent
Casmos and similar soils:30 percent
Rock outcrop:15 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Cadrina, Extremely Stony
Setting
Landform:Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium and/or colluvium over residuum weathered from
sandstone and shale
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: extremely stony loam
Bk - 2 to 15 inches: extremely stony loam
R - 15 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 25 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders:5.0 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:5 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.01 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:1 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:7.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Casmos
Setting
Landform:Hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Page 107
Parent material:Slope alluvium and/or colluvium over residuum weathered from
sandstone, shale and/or siltstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: very channery loam
C - 2 to 6 inches: channery loam
R - 6 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 40 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:5 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.01 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:3 percent
Maximum salinity:Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Rock Outcrop
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Pariette, gravelly sandy loam
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Fan remnants, strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Concave, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Ecological site:R034BY109UT - Desert Loamy Clay (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Motto
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Structural benches, hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Ecological site:R034BY117UT - Desert Shallow Clay (Mat Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
18
Page 108
Muff
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Strath terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Casmos, very channery loam
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY121UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Jenrid
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Other vegetative classification:Alkali Flat (Black Greasewood) (034XY006UT_1)
Hydric soil rating: No
62—Crustown-Motto complex, 0 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1tzw4
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,510 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Crustown and similar soils:50 percent
Motto and similar soils:35 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Crustown
Setting
Landform:Hills
Custom Soil Resource Report
19
Page 109
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Eolian deposits over residuum derived from calcareous sandstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: sand
C - 5 to 16 inches: loamy sand
Cr - 16 to 22 inches: bedrock
R - 22 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:10 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock; 20 to 40 inches
to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.00 to 0.28 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 7s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY112UT - Desert Sand (Fourwing Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Motto
Setting
Landform:Structural benches, hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium over residuum weathered from sandstone and
shale
Typical profile
E - 0 to 2 inches: very flaggy loam
Btkn - 2 to 12 inches: clay loam
Bkn - 12 to 14 inches: clay loam
2C - 14 to 17 inches: extremely channery clay loam
2R - 17 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:1 to 4 inches to natric; 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.07 in/hr)
Custom Soil Resource Report
20
Page 110
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:60.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY117UT - Desert Shallow Clay (Mat Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Cadrina, extremely stony loam
Percent of map unit:8 percent
Landform:Structural benches, hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Ecological site:R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit:7 percent
Landform:Cliffs, erosion remnants, escarpments, ledges
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
94—Greybull-Utaline-Badland complex, 4 to 40 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1v01x
Elevation: 4,660 to 6,060 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Greybull and similar soils:40 percent
Utaline and similar soils:35 percent
Badland:15 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
21
Page 111
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Greybull
Setting
Landform:Alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Colluvium and/or slope alluvium over residuum weathered from
shale
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: very cobbly sandy loam
C - 2 to 35 inches: clay loam
Cr - 35 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:15 to 40 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 39 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.00 to 0.28 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Slightly saline to strongly saline (4.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 4.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY121UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Utaline
Setting
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium derived from sandstone, limestone, shale, and
quartzite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 3 inches: very gravelly sandy loam
Bw - 3 to 7 inches: very gravelly loam
Bk - 7 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:4 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Custom Soil Resource Report
22
Page 112
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.71 to 2.13 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:40 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:1 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Badland
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Leebench
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Motto
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Structural benches, hills
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Ecological site:R034BY117UT - Desert Shallow Clay (Mat Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Endoaquolls
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Scarps
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Concave
Ecological site:R034BY021UT - Wet Fresh Streambank (Willow)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Muff
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Hills, intermontane basins
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Custom Soil Resource Report
23
Page 113
Hydric soil rating: No
123—Kilroy loam, 1 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1vbbl
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,810 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Kilroy and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Kilroy
Setting
Landform:Fan remnants, strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Concave, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from sandstone, shale, limestone, and quartzite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 4 inches: loam
Bw - 4 to 16 inches: clay loam
Bk - 16 to 41 inches: gravelly loam
2BCk - 41 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:1 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.21
to 0.71 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4w
Custom Soil Resource Report
24
Page 114
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Leebench
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Fan remnants, strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Concave, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Uffens, loam
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Other vegetative classification:Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley Saltbush)
(034XY101UT_2)
Hydric soil rating: No
Blackston
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
129—Leeko loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1v01v
Elevation: 4,790 to 5,580 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Leeko and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Custom Soil Resource Report
25
Page 115
Description of Leeko
Setting
Landform:Strath terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from sandstone, limestone, shale, and quartzite
Typical profile
E - 0 to 2 inches: loam
Btn - 2 to 7 inches: clay loam
Btkn - 7 to 16 inches: clay loam
Bk - 16 to 56 inches: clay loam
2Bky - 56 to 60 inches: very cobbly clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:1 to 5 inches to natric
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.07 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:40 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:10 percent
Maximum salinity:Moderately saline to strongly saline (8.0 to 16.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:40.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 7s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blackston
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Shotnick
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY115UT - Desert Sandy Loam (Indian Ricegrass)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
26
Page 116
Nakoy
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY115UT - Desert Sandy Loam (Indian Ricegrass)
Hydric soil rating: No
Muff, gravelly sandy loam
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Hills, structural benches
Down-slope shape:Convex, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Ecological site:R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
153—Motto-Muff-Rock outcrop complex, 2 to 25 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2ppts
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,580 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Motto and similar soils:40 percent
Muff and similar soils:35 percent
Rock outcrop:15 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Motto
Setting
Landform:Structural benches, hills
Landform position (three-dimensional):Side slope
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium over residuum derived from shale and sandstone
Typical profile
E - 0 to 2 inches: very flaggy loam
Btkn - 2 to 12 inches: clay loam
Bk - 12 to 14 inches: clay loam
2C - 14 to 17 inches: extremely channery clay loam
2R - 17 to 60 inches: bedrock
Custom Soil Resource Report
27
Page 117
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:1 to 4 inches to natric; 10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.07 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:5 percent
Maximum salinity:Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:60.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY117UT - Desert Shallow Clay (Mat Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Muff
Setting
Landform:Strath terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Slope alluvium over residuum derived from shale
Typical profile
A1 - 0 to 2 inches: gravelly sandy loam
A2 - 2 to 7 inches: sandy loam
Btn - 7 to 14 inches: sandy clay loam
C - 14 to 29 inches: clay loam
Cr - 29 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:5 to 8 inches to natric; 20 to 39 inches to paralithic
bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Very low to moderately
low (0.00 to 0.07 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:3 percent
Maximum salinity:Slightly saline to moderately saline (4.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:40.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.7 inches)
Custom Soil Resource Report
28
Page 118
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 7s
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY101UT - Desert Alkali Bench (Castlevalley saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Rock Outcrop
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Montwel, clay loam
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Hillslopes
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY121UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Cadrina, extremely channery loam
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Hillslopes
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY121UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Jenrid
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Hydric soil rating: No
Crustown
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Structural benches
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY112UT - Desert Sand (Fourwing Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Uffens, sandy loam
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Other vegetative classification:Alkali Flat (Black Greasewood) (034XY006UT_1)
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
29
Page 119
173—Pariette gravelly sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1vbbx
Elevation: 4,660 to 5,900 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Pariette and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Pariette
Setting
Landform:Fan remnants, strath terraces
Down-slope shape:Concave, linear
Across-slope shape:Convex, linear
Parent material:Alluvium and/or residuum weathered from sandstone and shale
Typical profile
A - 0 to 3 inches: gravelly sandy loam
Bk1 - 3 to 10 inches: gravelly sandy loam
Bk2 - 10 to 17 inches: cobbly loam
Bk3 - 17 to 22 inches: gravelly loam
Cr - 22 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 31 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.00 to 0.28 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:30 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:2 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.5 to 3.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:15.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 2.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4c
Custom Soil Resource Report
30
Page 120
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Motto
Percent of map unit:8 percent
Landform:Structural benches
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY117UT - Desert Shallow Clay (Mat Saltbush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Cadrina, extremely stony loam
Percent of map unit:7 percent
Landform:Hills
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
243—Turzo-Umbo complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1v00z
Elevation: 4,590 to 5,610 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Turzo and similar soils:65 percent
Umbo and similar soils:20 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Turzo
Setting
Landform:Alluvial flats, stream terraces, fan remnants
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread, talf
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear, concave
Parent material:Alluvium derived from sandstone and shale and/or quartzite
and/or limestone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 9 inches: clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
31
Page 121
Bw - 9 to 32 inches: clay loam
C - 32 to 60 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.21
to 0.71 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:2 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:13.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3c
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Umbo
Setting
Landform:Alluvial flats
Landform position (three-dimensional):Base slope, tread, talf
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Alluvium derived from limestone, sandstone, and shale and/or
quartzite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 10 inches: clay loam
C1 - 10 to 52 inches: clay loam
C2 - 52 to 60 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.21
to 0.71 in/hr)
Depth to water table:About 42 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:2 percent
Maximum salinity:Very slightly saline to moderately saline (2.0 to 8.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 11.1 inches)
Custom Soil Resource Report
32
Page 122
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3c
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY024UT - Wet Saline Meadow (Inland saltgrass)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Wyasket, rarely flooded
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Flood plains, drainageways, depressions
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread, talf
Down-slope shape:Linear, concave
Across-slope shape:Concave
Ecological site:R034BY002UT - Alkali Bottom (Alkali sacaton)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Turzo, loam
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, fan remnants, alluvial fans, alluvial flats
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread, talf
Down-slope shape:Linear, concave
Across-slope shape:Concave, convex, linear
Ecological site:R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Other vegetative classification:Alkali Flat (Black Greasewood) (034XY006UT_1)
Hydric soil rating: No
Ioka
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform:Alluvial flats, fan remnants, alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional):Tread, talf
Down-slope shape:Linear, concave
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Ecological site:R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Jenrid
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Alluvial flats
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Hydric soil rating: No
285—Water
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1v07q
Custom Soil Resource Report
33
Page 123
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 12 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 49 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 140 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Water:90 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Water
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: Unranked
Minor Components
Fluvaquents
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Flood plains
Other vegetative classification:Present Plant Community (034XYPC1UT)
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Riverwash
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Flood plains
Hydric soil rating: No
APC—Grunnell-Pariette-Persayo complex, 2 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2lhjh
Elevation: 5,020 to 6,410 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Grunnell and similar soils:45 percent
Pariette and similar soils:30 percent
Persayo and similar soils:15 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Grunnell
Setting
Landform:Hills
Custom Soil Resource Report
34
Page 124
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Colluvium and/or slope alluvium derived from sedimentary rock
over residuum weathered from sandstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 3 inches: channery sandy clay loam
AB - 3 to 6 inches: gravelly loam
Bk - 6 to 12 inches: silty clay loam
R - 12 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:10 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.01 to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:47 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:2 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:8.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 1.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 7c
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Ecological site: R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Pariette
Setting
Landform:Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope, footslope
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium derived from sedimentary rock over residuum
weathered from shale or siltstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 2 to 6 inches: sandy clay loam
Bk1 - 6 to 13 inches: loam
Bk2 - 13 to 27 inches: silty clay loam
Bk3 - 27 to 35 inches: clay loam
BCky - 35 to 39 inches: parachannery loam
Cr - 39 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 15 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
35
Page 125
Depth to restrictive feature:20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.00 to 0.28 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:50 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:4 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (1.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:10.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7c
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY106UT - Desert Loam (Shadscale)
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Persayo
Setting
Landform:Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope
Down-slope shape:Convex
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Slope alluvium derived from sedimentary rock over residuum
weathered from shale and siltstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: channery loam
C - 2 to 4 inches: channery loam
Cr - 4 to 60 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope:2 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:3 to 11 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Low to moderately high
(0.00 to 0.28 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:20 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:4 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:3.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Very low (about 0.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydrologic Soil Group: D
Custom Soil Resource Report
36
Page 126
Ecological site: R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Cadrina
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Hills
Landform position (two-dimensional):Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):Interfluve, side slope
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Ecological site:R034BY118UT - Desert Shallow Loam (Black Sagebrush)
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Cliffs, erosion remnants, ledges
Down-slope shape:Linear, convex
Across-slope shape:Linear, convex
Hydric soil rating: No
FaB—Rairdent clay loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1v4lp
Elevation: 5,020 to 5,540 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 5 to 8 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 47 degrees F
Frost-free period: 110 to 125 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Rairdent and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rairdent
Setting
Landform:Fan remnants
Down-slope shape:Concave
Across-slope shape:Convex
Parent material:Gypsiferous alluvium derived from sedimentary rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 2 inches: clay loam
Bk - 2 to 13 inches: clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
37
Page 127
Bky1 - 13 to 28 inches: loam
Bky2 - 28 to 39 inches: clay loam
By - 39 to 55 inches: loam
BCy - 55 to 60 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately low to
moderately high (0.07 to 0.21 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:18 percent
Gypsum, maximum content:30 percent
Maximum salinity:Slightly saline to moderately saline (5.0 to 14.0 mmhos/cm)
Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum:15.0
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 4c
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R034BY006UT - Alkali Flat (Greasewood)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Moderately sodic soils under greasewood
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Wet soils, wiregrass, saltgrass
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Clayey soils, mod deep to shale
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Mod deep loamy soils, over shale
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
38
Page 128
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
39
Page 129
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
40
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Sec. 18 Sec. 17
CI
V
C
O

E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
,

I
n
c
.
Te
l
e
p
h
o
n
e
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
5
4
4
8

F
a
x
:

(
4
3
5
)

7
8
9
-
4
4
8
5

12
5
6

W
.

4
0
0

S
.

S
T
E
.

1
,

P
.
O
.

B
o
x

1
7
5
8
,

V
e
r
n
a
l
,

U
t
a
h

8
4
0
7
8
##
#
#
SO
I
L

M
A
P
EN
V
I
R
O
N
M
E
N
T
A
L

E
N
E
R
G
Y

I
N
N
O
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
##
#
#
##
#
#
Located in the NE 1/4 of Section 18, T4S, R2W,
U.S.B.&M.
DUCHESNE COUNTY, UTAH
SOIL
ENVIRONMENTAL
ENERGY INNOVATIONS
Page 134
Hydraulic Conductivity of Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible
Wall Permeameter,Method C (ASTM D5084)© IGES 2005, 2024
Project:Boring No.:
No:Sample:
Location:Depth:
Date:Sample Description:
By:Sample Type:
Initial (o) Final (f)
Sample height,H (in)2.319 2.286
Sample diameter,D (in)1.911 1.859 Gs 2.7 Assumed
Sample length,L (cm)5.890 5.805 Cell No.2
Sample area,A (cm^2)18.505 17.519 Station No.2
Sample volume,V (cm^3)109.00 101.70 Permeant liquid used
Wt. rings + wet soil (g)925.43 189.61 Total backpressure (psi)35
Wt. rings (g)756.50 0.00 Effective horiz. consolidation stress (psi)5
Total unit wt.,(pcf)96.8 116.4 Effective vert. consolidation stress (psi)5
Wet soil + tare (g)146.86 189.61 Initial (o) Final (f)
Dry soil + tare (g)145.23 155.40 B value 0.90 0.96
Tare (g)126.51 0.00 External Burette (cm
3)19.60 33.20
Weight of solids,W s (g) 155.40 155.40 Cell Pressure (psi)0.0 40.0
Water content,(%)8.71 22.02 Backpressure bottom (psi)35.0
Dry unit wt,d (pcf) 89.0 95.4 Backpressure top (psi)35.0
Void ratio, e, for assumed Gs 0.89 0.59 System volume coefficient (cm
3/psi)0.158
Saturation (%), for assumed Gs 26.3 100 a System volume change (cm
3)6.30
Net sample volume change (cm
3)7.30
Bottom burette ground length,l b (cm) 82.85
a Saturation set to 100% for phase calculations Top burette ground length,l t (cm) 83.1
b K corrected to 20°C Burette area,a (cm2)0.197
Conversion, reading to cm head (cm/rd) 5.076
Start Date and Time:5/24/24 9:40
Elapsed h 1 h 2 K Temp Visc. Ratio K b
time (sec)(cm) (cm) (cm/sec) (°C)R T (cm/sec)
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________Z:\PROJECTS\M02458_Snowshoe_Eng\029_Pad_Subgrade_Permeability_&_BC\[KBPFRHv1.xlsx]2
9.28
Top Burette
(cm3)
10.0060.0
9.28
8.66
43.30
0.91 7.7E 05
0.91 7.6E 05
8.6E 05
8.5E 05
8.4E 05
Snowshoe Engineering
M02458 029 (24037)
Pad Subgrade Permeability & BC
B 2
4.5'
1.32
31.58 26.91
8.12
7.66 8.7E 05
Average K b (cm/sec)
50.51
8.66
Bottom Burette
(cm3)
1.85
7.8E 05
8.12
60.0
5/24/2023
PW
0.70
De aired tap water
43.30
Brown clay with sand
Undisturbed
2.31
1.85
0.00
0.70
1.32
60.0
60.0
37.01
37.01 31.58 0.91 7.8E 05
0.91 7.9E 05
Page 135
Hydraulic Conductivity of Saturated Porous Materials Using a Flexible
Wall Permeameter,Method C (ASTM D5084)© IGES 2005, 2024
Project:Boring No.:
No:Sample:
Location:Depth:
Date:Sample Description:
By:Sample Type:
Initial (o) Final (f)
Sample height,H (in)2.244 2.219
Sample diameter,D (in)1.881 1.843 Gs 2.7 Assumed
Sample length,L (cm)5.700 5.635 Cell No.4
Sample area,A (cm^2)17.928 17.212 Station No.4
Sample volume,V (cm^3)102.19 96.99 Permeant liquid used
Wt. rings + wet soil (g)964.61 220.58 Total backpressure (psi)35
Wt. rings (g)756.50 0.00 Effective horiz. consolidation stress (psi)5
Total unit wt.,(pcf)127.1 142.0 Effective vert. consolidation stress (psi)5
Wet soil + tare (g)389.12 220.58 Initial (o) Final (f)
Dry soil + tare (g)370.85 186.27 B value 0.74 0.96
Tare (g)215.02 0.00 External Burette (cm
3)19.10 30.50
Weight of solids,W s (g) 186.27 186.27 Cell Pressure (psi)0.0 40.0
Water content,(%)11.72 18.42 Backpressure bottom (psi)35.0
Dry unit wt,d (pcf) 113.8 119.9 Backpressure top (psi)35.0
Void ratio, e, for assumed Gs 0.48 0.50 System volume coefficient (cm
3/psi)0.155
Saturation (%), for assumed Gs 65.8 100 a System volume change (cm
3)6.21
Net sample volume change (cm
3)5.19
Bottom burette ground length,l b (cm) 82.90
a Saturation set to 100% for phase calculations Top burette ground length,l t (cm) 82.8
b K corrected to 20°C Burette area,a (cm2)0.197
Conversion, reading to cm head (cm/rd) 5.076
Start Date and Time:5/24/24 9:34
Elapsed h 1 h 2 K Temp Visc. Ratio K b
time (sec)(cm) (cm) (cm/sec) (°C)R T (cm/sec)
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
24.3
Entered by:___________
Reviewed:___________Z:\PROJECTS\M02458_Snowshoe_Eng\029_Pad_Subgrade_Permeability_&_BC\[KBPFRHv1.xlsx]3
Snowshoe Engineering B 2
M02458 029 (24037)
Pad Subgrade Permeability & BC 8.5'
Average K b (cm/sec)1.3E 06
Bottom Burette
(cm3)
Top Burette
(cm3)
360.0 0.24 9.66
5/24/2023 Brown clay with sand
PW Undisturbed
De aired tap water
0.31 9.60 47.92 47.26 1.2E 06 0.90 1.1E 06
0.39 9.52
360.0 0.39 9.52 46.45 45.68 1.5E 06 0.90
0.90 1.4E 06360.0 0.31 9.60 47.26 46.45 1.6E 06
0.46 9.44
360.0 0.46 9.44 45.68
1.3E 06
0.53 9.38 45.02 1.3E 06 0.90 1.2E 06
Page 136
TAB 14
EEI EMPLOYEE &
SAFETY MANUAL
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141