Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
"[tt. ;"' " '9SSContents
1.0 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-11.2 Purpose and Statement of Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-21.3 Pertinent Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-3
2.0 Basis of Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12.1 Contaminated Material Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12.2 North Field and Polishing Basin Cap Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1
2.2.1 Material Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-12.2.2 HELP Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-22.2.3 Earthwork Balance/Manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-32.2.4 Storm Drainage and Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-32.2.5 Gas Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-52.2.6 Anchor Trench . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
2.3 Floating Cover Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-52.3.1 Material Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-52.3.2 Storm Drainage Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-62.3.3 Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-72.3.4 Gas Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-72.3.5 Anchor Trench Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7
2.4 Wastewater Treatment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-82.4.1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-8
2.4.1.1 Characterization of Impoundment Waters . . . . . . . . 2-82.4.1.2 Discharge Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-82.4.1.3 Hydraulic Design Basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9
2.4.2 ROD Treatment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-92.4.2.1 Group 1 Impoundment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-92.4.2.1 Group 2 Impoundment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-92.4.2.2 Group 3 Impoundment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-10
2.4.3 Proposed Treatment System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-102.4.3.1 Group 1 and 2 Impoundments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-102.4.3.2 Group 3 Impoundment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-132.4.3.3 Qualifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-13
2.5 Miscellaneous Design Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-132.5.1 Decontaminate Selected Site Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-132.5.2 Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-132.5.3 Miscellaneous Structure Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-142.5.4 Fencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-142.5.5 Sludge Manipulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-142.5.6 Topsoil and Seeding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14
2.6 Required Construction Sequencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-152.7 Subcontracting Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15
Mid-America Tanning Site T/-I 1 46108.131-07Basil of Design - 10O% Submlttal 1 C_-1 July 1988
2.8 Associated Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15
3.0 Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
Appendices
Appendix A Statement of WorkAppendix B CalculationsAppendix C Construction Cost EstimateAppendix D Construction Schedule
Table
Table 2-1 Summary of 1997 and 1998 Sampling Results . . . . . . . . . . 2-10
M!d-Aimrica Tanning SiteBasis of Design -100% Submrtlal TC-2 46108.131-07
July199B
1.0 Background
BLACK & VEATCH Special Projects Corp. (BVSPC), under a Response ActionContract (RAC), was tasked to perform remedial design (RD) activities to supportU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region VII in their efforts toremediate the Mid-America Tanning site in Woodbury County, Iowa.
BVSPC design activities are being carried out under EPA Contract No. 68-W5-0004, Work Assignment No. 022-RDN-077M. This document, with others, issubmitted in fulfillment of Subtask 8.2 of the Statement of Work, and provides thebasis of design for the tasks performed in preparing plans, specifications, costestimates, schedules, and the associated plans and other documents required toaccomplish the Remedial Action.
1.1 Project DescriptionThe Mid-America Tanning site is located approximately 4 miles south of Sergeant
Bluff, Iowa, and occupies 98.7 acres in Woodbury County, Iowa. The site is a formerhide tannery which operated from 1969 to 1989. The site consists of a main hideprocessing building, a maintenance building, a wastewater treatment plant, a polishingbasin, a west aeration lagoon, an east aeration lagoon, a north field, and a south field.In 1973, the plant began using a chrome tanning process that generated chromiumwastes that have been deposited throughout the site in buildings, soils, andimpoundment areas. Site investigations indicated the presence of chromiumcontamination in the groundwater and throughout the site including an unlined burialtrench, impoundment basins, soil areas adjacent to the impoundments, and wherewastes were land farmed. In addition, when the facility ceased operations in 1989,there was an estimated 5,000 gallons of chromium tanning solution on site along with525 gallons of sulfuric acid that was used in the tanning process.
The contaminated source areas pose a threat through direct contact and throughmigration into the surrounding groundwater which is the primary drinking watersource for approximately 850 individuals who live in a 3-mile radius of the site. Inaddition, there is potential for the sources to further contaminate an adjacent wetlandarea which is the home to the piping plover Charadrius metados, an endangeredspecies (USEPA, 1997).
On December 29,1989, USEPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO)to U.S. Tanning, a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP), to conduct a removal action
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submlttal 1-1 July 1998
and perform a remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS). U.S. Tanning wasunable to comply with the UAO and, because of imminent health threats, USEPAinitiated a fund-lead removal action in 1990. USEPA completed a removal actiondirected toward immediate site stabilization measures and included excavation andstockpiling of contaminated sludge from the on-site burial trench, containment andtreatment of chromium tanning solutions, containment and neutralization of sulfuricacids, and cursory decontamination of the buildings. USEPA completed the RI/FSin 1990 and issued a Record of Decision (ROD) calling for in-situ stabilization ofcontaminated wastes followed by installation of a soil cap. USEPA completed theremedial design (RD) in 1993. During the RD, data became available indicating thatthe impoundment areas were emitting hydrogen sulfide gas at concentrations thatwere considered an imminent health threat. Site conditions had deteriorated due tovandalism by trespassers and areas of the site had been recontaminated. In 1994,USEPA issued an Administrative Order to Foxley Cattle Company, a PRP, toperform a second removal action to address concerns from both the immediatehydrogen sulfide threat as well as recontamination of the buildings. The removalaction performed by Foxley was completed in 1995 and consisted of decontaminatingbuildings, removal and disposal of drummed wastes, and securing the site buildingsand man-holes (USEPA, 1997).
In response to the new data regarding the hydrogen sulfide emissions, USEPAin 1996 revised the remedy for this site and issued an amended ROD. The amendedremedy will dewater and treat the impoundment areas (estimated 13.7 million gallonsof contaminated water) and then cover the contaminated soil/sludge (estimated95,500 cubic yards) with an impenetrable soil/clay or geosynthetic gap.
1.2 Purpose and Statement of WorkThe purpose of this work assignment is to perform Remedial Design activities for
the Mid-America Tanning site in accordance with all applicable regulations andguidance including, but not limited to, OSWER Directive 9242.3-08, dated 8-93(Remedial Design and Remedial Action Handbook) and OSWER Directive 9355.0-4A, dated 6-86 (Superfund Remedial Design and Remedial Action Guidance). TheEPA Statement of Work for this Remedial Design, dated May 14, 1997, is includedherein as Appendix A. BVSPC signed the Work Assignment Form for this projecton May 14, 1997. A work assignment scoping meeting was held on May 22, 1997,and an initial site visit was conducted on June 4, 1997.
Mid-America Tanning S«e 4610B.131-O7Basis of Design - 100% Submttal 1-2 July 1898
1.3 Pertinent DocumentsPrimary source documents utilized in the development of this Remedial Design
include the following.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1991, Remedial Investigation Report, Mid-AmericaTanning Site, prepared for USEPA, July 1991.
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 1993, Remedial Design, Mid-America Tanning Site,prepared for USEPA, September 1993.
USEPA 1991, Record of Decision Mid-America Tanning Co. Site Sergeant Bluff,Iowa, September 1991.
USEPA 1992, Field Sampling Trip Report for the Mid-America Tanning Site,November 12, 1992.
USEPA 1996, Amendment to the Record of Decision for the Mid-America TanningCo. Superfund Site, Woodbwy County, Iowa, July 1996.
USEPA 1997, Statement of Work for Mid-America Tanning, Remedial Design,BVSPC WA #022-RDN-077M.
Documents produced by BVSPC to-date in the preparation of this RemedialDesign include the following.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Work Plan, Volumes 1 and 2, Fund-Lead Support, Mid-America Tanning Site Remedial Design, Woodbury County,Iowa, June 13, 1997.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Memorandum, Mid-AmericaTanning Site, Revised Data Gaps Memorandum, June 25, 1997.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Supplemental Investigation FieldSampling Plan, Mid-America Tanning, Sioux City, Iowa, August 15, 1997.
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-O7Bails of Design-100% Submlttal 1-3 July 1998
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Quality Assurance Project Plan,Mid-America Tanning, Sioux City, Iowa, August 15, 1997.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Health & Safety Plan, Mid-AmericaTanning Site, Woodbury County, Iowa, June, 1997.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Memorandum, Mid-AmericaTanning Site, Existing RD Document Evaluation, June 19, 1997.
Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., 1997, Memorandum, Mid-AmericaTanning, Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements, June 25, 1997.
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-O7Bute ol Design - 100% Submlttal 1-4 ju|y 199a
2.0 Basis of Design
Major work elements of the proposed Remedial Action include excavation,stabilization, and relocation of contaminated soil, sediment, and sludge materials;coverage of those materials with multi-media landfill cap structures; treatment ofwastewaters located in several site impoundments; installation of floating geosyntheticcovers on two existing site lagoons; decontamination of selected site facilities; and theconstruction and installation of other appurtenant site features.
2.1 Contaminated Material ExcavationAfter the first lift of contaminated materials has been excavated, two different
approaches for remediation of those areas may be utilized. Either the exposed soilsurface may be backfilled with 12 inches of clean backfill to finish the site, oralternatively, the soil samples may be collected and analyzed to determine ifcontamination is below required action levels. Through a budgetary cost analysis,sampling and analysis has been determined to be less expensive than backfilling.
The Subcontract Documents will require confirmatory soil sampling and analysisof exposed soil surfaces in areas of contaminated soil materials. This on-site samplingand analysis is anticipated to be performed primarily by X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF)methods.
The horizontal limits of contaminated material excavation will be based on workpreviously completed by EPA as described in the documents listed in Paragraph 1.3,and as potentially modified by future BVSPC field sampling.
2.2 North Field and Polishing Basin Cap Design2.2.7 Material Selection
The barrier layer in the required cap design may either be high densitypolyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane or locally available soil borrow. Based on abudgetary cost analysis, the geomembrane has been selected due to its lesser overallcost.
The Record of Decision (ROD) describes two required cap structures as "soilcap" and "soil-clay cap". At EPA direction, a single cap structure is included in theseSubcontract Documents, It is in functional conformance with the cap structuresrequired by the ROD and the Amendment to the ROD, differing only in the use ofHDPE geomembrane as a barrier layer rather than clay, and in the inclusion of
Mid-America Tanning Site 48108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submitlal 2-1 July 1998
geotextile fabric layers for separation and cushioning between layers.Required fill material for this project will be imported exclusively from off-site
sources. While it is possible that some on-site borrow sources could be developed,that is not recommended. Because of this site's characteristics, borrow should not beused (and assumed clean) without the benefit of costly verification testing. Further,several of the likely locations of borrow pits on-site are in potential wetland areas andtherefore represent an additional regulatory constraints.
Aggregate to be used as vent material will also be supplied from off-site, and willbe specified to serve its intended purpose of gas transmission. Topsoil will also beimported from off-site sources.
2.2.2 HELP ModelWater balance analyses were performed for the cap structure. The analysis was
conducted using the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model,version 3.05. The model uses precipitation, runoff, evaportranspiration, and changesin water storage to determine infiltration. The model analyzes a twenty year durationto assess the cap design.
Synthetic climatic data (precipitation, temperature, solar radiation) is containedin the HELP model. The data for Des Moines, Iowa, was selected.
Geotextile fabric layers located within the multi-media cap design do notsignificantly effect the model, due to their lack of lateral water carrying capacity.Thus, they are not represented as layers in either model.
The typical cross section for the cap structure, from top to bottom, is listedbelow.
Layer No. Thickness Material
1 4 inches Topsoil
2 8 inches Fill material
3 0.06 inch (60 mil) HOPE geomembrane
4 6 inches Vent material
A runoff curve number of 81.2 was generated by the HELP model for this cap.Design criteria included a slope of 2.0 per cent, slope length of 140 feet, a soil texturenumber of 10, and a vegetative cover number of 4. A soil texture number of 10
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-07Basis o( Design - 100% Submitted 2-2 July 1998
corresponds to silty clay while a vegetative number of 4 is representative of a goodstand of grass.
Results of the water balance indicate that cap design meets project requirements.
2.2.3 Earthwork Balance/ManipulationThe excavation of all contaminated soils on-site will remove an initial lift of 12
inches in thickness. Since it is prudent to assume some area of the exposed soilsurfaces will require a second round of sampling and confirmatory analysis, it hasbeen assumed that 25 percent of the excavated area will be re-excavated anadditional 6 inches prior to resampling and analysis. Excavation substantially in excessof this amount is considered unlikely, due primarily to the relative lack of mobility ofchromium in soil.
In regards to the destination of each quantity of contaminated soils, note thatonly North Field contaminated materials including the stockpiled soils will be placedin the North Field Containment Cell. The Polishing Basin Containment Cell willcontain excavation from the Miscellaneous Soil Areas, and all excavation from thePolishing Basin.
To determine the final required volume for both containment cells, the rawexcavation volume has been increased by the addition of an estimated 4 percent (byvolume) of lime for stabilization, and then reduced by 10 percent (by volume) toaccount for shrinkage.
Materials contaminated by excavation operations are assumed to be negligibleand are, therefore, not included in the total material balance.
All soil and aggregate materials for cap construction will be imported from off-site sources.
2.2.4 Storm Drainage and Erosion ControlStorm drainage design and erosion control, for the majority of this project site,
can be accommodated by the use of prudently selected grades and careful locationof proposed structures. Grades ranging from 2 to 6 percent on the top of capstructures will need no further erosion control than a healthy stand of grass. Withthe limited length of erosion slopes on containment caps, no further erosion controlis necessary. Due to the topography of the project site and the proposed structures,storm drainage run-on is not an issue for this work. Storm drainage considerationsfor the floating covers is described in Paragraph 2.2.
Mid-America Tanning Site 4€108.131-07Basis of Design * 100% Submitlal 2s°J July 1998
2.2.5 Gas ManagementA specific volumetric rate of gas generation from these contaminated soils is not
available. However, due to the potential for some volume of long-term gasgeneration, a route for the escape of this gas must be included in the cap design.
Each multi-media cap structure incorporates a 6 inch thick vent layer locatedbeneath the HDPE barrier layer that is designed to transmit gas to local high pointson the containment cell. The vent material will be specified as a washed aggregate(zero fines) in order to insure the material's ability to transmit gas. Furthermore, thevent layer will be underlain by a geotextile fabric selected to prevent fines in thewaste materials from migrating into and clogging the vent layer over the long term.
Individual vent structures will be installed at each local high point and selectedother points on the containment cell. As shown on the drawings, these vents will bedesigned in an "upside down J" configuration. The "J" pipe will be made of HDPEmaterial to match the geomembrane material and thereby allow for convenientwelding of the two elements. A concrete collar around the pipe supports thestructure. The inclusion of a 60 mil HDPE "rub sheet" at the base of the pipe helpsmaintain separation between the pipe and the functional layers below.
2.2.6 Anchor TrenchDue to the relatively flat slopes involved in the cap, structural and installation
stresses on the geomembrane are insignificant over the area. With this layout, nospecific structural stresses are anticipated, due to the relatively flat grades of most ofthe proposed cap structures. Geomembrane over short 3:1 slopes should not needintermediate anchor trenches, since selective panel layout (panels arrangedlongitudinal to the fall line) can avoid significant structural stresses on thegeomembrane. Without significant structural stresses, the anchor trench configurationis based on prior engineering experience.
2.3 Floating Cover Design2.3.1 Material Selection
Due to the nature of the sludge underlying the covers, to the exposed conditionof the covers, to regulatory requirements demanding HDPE, and to the regulatorycommunity's familiarity with HDPE, the selected floating cover material is 60 milHDPE. Advantages associated with HDPE include excellent chemical resistance,good seaming technology, and relatively low cost. Negatives include low-friction
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% SubmWal 2-4 July 1998
surfaces, stress crack sensitivity, seam workmanship is critical, and a high thermalexpansion/contraction capability.
Low-friction surfaces are a negative when structural stresses are carried andtransferred by the geomembrane. In this installation, there are no significantstructural stresses. Further, the low-friction surfaces are not a significantdisadvantage, given the lack of foot traffic anticipated on the installed geomembrane.The possibility of stress cracks can be minimized by a geometric design layout thatavoids areas of stress concentrations, along with specifications that allow only highlyexperienced installers to be utilized. Good seam workmanship is also insured by thissame specification requirement. Finally, this geomembrane is specified in white tominimize the expansion/contraction characteristics of the cover due to temperaturechanges.
2.3.2 Storm Drainage DesignMost floating reservoir covers currently in use serve in industrial or commercial
process applications. Consequently, they fill and empty frequently throughout theiruseful lives. Because of this movement, storm drainage design is a difficult andcritical issue.
In this case, however, the only anticipated cover movement is due to long-termgas generation and the corresponding potential reduction in total volume of sludgebelow the cover. No cyclical filling and emptying of the pond is anticipated.Therefore, storm drainage design for this installation is significantly simplified.
These floating covers will be designed to have a permanent "pool" at least 8inches in depth on the surface. A concrete outlet structure will be constructed alongthe berm in each lagoon. The structure is made up of a concrete box serving as anoverflow weir, a 30 inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe, and a concrete flared endsection with appropriate erosion control. The overflow weir is sized to providesufficient hydraulic capacity to directly pass storm events in excess of the 100 yeardischarge without overtopping the existing berm elevation. The open top design ofthe weir is also desirable because of the minimized possibility for floating trash anddebris (leaves, small wind-blown branches, ice, etc.) to clog the structure and reducethe structure's designed carrying capacity. The presence of the permanent pool alsooffers some protection for the cover from sun and other weather-related impacts,from animals, and from vandals, as well as offering some general improvement inaesthetics.
Mid-America Tanning SHe 46106.131-07Baals of Design - 100% Submlttal 2~5 July 1998
Most floating cover installations require a sump pump located in a geomembranetrench on the cover's surface to discharge storm flow. This weir design effectivelyprecludes the need for routine storm water pumping and the associated electricalpower hardware, construction costs, and continuing operation and maintenancerequirements.
2.3.3 InstallationFloating covers are typically fabricated on-site to be pulled into place over the
open reservoir, and anchored. The fabrication may take place at the manufacturer'sfacilities, with the completed cover shipped to the job site. Or, the fabrication maytake place at the job site in an open area adjacent to the reservoir, with roll stockshipped to the job site.
The floating covers will be installed with sufficient "slack" and other designfeatures to accommodate the estimated long-term settlement of the underlying sludge.
2.3.4 Gas ManagementA specific volumetric rate of gas generation from these lagoons is not available.
However, due to the potential for some volume of long-term gas generation by thedecomposition of the existing sludges, a route for the escape of this gas must beincluded in the floating cover design. Vents will be included over the full surfacearea of the floating covers on 25 foot by 25 foot grid pattern. These vents will bedesigned in an "upside down J" configuration. The "J" pipe will be made of HDPEmaterial to match the floating cover material and thereby allow for convenientwelding of the two elements. The "J" pipe will be configured to extend through thepermanent pool on the cover, and will be supported by foam floats, as required, forstability.
Vents along the perimeter of each lagoon are also required to release gas to theatmosphere from gas that collects and rises along the top of the existing berms.These simple vents are comprised of HDPE pipe sections, split longitudinally andwelded to the liner, that cover small holes in the liner that allow gas to escape.
2.3.5 Anchor Trench DesignAn anchor trench provides secure anchorage for the perimeter of the floating
cover. For this application, a concrete anchor will be utilized. It stability is designedbased on the yield strength of the 60 mil HDPE membrane utilized.
M!d-Anwrlca Tanning Site 48108.131-07Basis of Design • 100% Submlttal 2-6 July 1998
2.4 Wastewater Treatment System2.4.7 General2.4.1.1 Characterization of Impoundment Waters. The characterization datafor the liquid contents of each of the impoundments (Appendix B, Table 1) collectedby others in 1993. It is likely that the characteristics will have changed (potentiallysignificantly) since that time due to factors including biological activity,oxidation/reduction reactions, and precipitation/evaporation. Interactions with thesediments in the impoundments also will have contributed to changes in thecharacteristics. In addition to the parameters for which data were collected in 1993,the impoundments were resampled to add filtered BOD, filtered and unfiltered COD,and filtered Cr(T) to the supplemental data collection. Potential diurnal shifts in pHdue to algal activity should also be monitored.
2.4.1.2 Discharge Limits. The discharge limits for the treated effluent (AppendixB, Table 1) include two water quality based parameters « TDS and ammonia, withreference to the Iowa Administrative Code, Chapter 61 (IAC-61).
IAC-61 states that, 'Total dissolved solids shall not exceed 750 mg/L in any lakeor impoundment...." The TDS of the water in each of the impoundment groupsexceeds 750 mg/L. It is unclear from reading IAC-61 where the 750 mg/L waterquality criterion for TDS will be measured. No mechanism for TDS reduction(especially TDS attributable to sodium and chloride ions) is included in either thetreatment system proposed in the ROD (Section 2.4.2) or the treatment systemproposed in this document (Section 2.4.3).
The acute and chronic criteria for ammonia in IAC-61 are variable, based ontemperature and pH considerations. For example, the acute criterion at 20 degreesC and pH 8.6 is 2.7 mg/L. The acute criterion would apply in the zone of initialdilution; however, it also states in IAC-61 that for the ammonia criteria, "No mixingzone or zone of initial dilution will be allowed for waters designated as lakes orwetlands." Oxbow Lake could not be found listed in the "Lakes Index" of IAC-61.With respect to ammonia, it is further stated in IAC-61 that, "The use of a diffuserdevice to promote rapid mixing of an effluent in a receiving stream will be consideredon a case-by-case basis with its usage as a means for dischargers to comply with anacute numerical criterion." In summary, the impact of these regulations on thetreated discharge to Oxbow Lake requires clarification by State authorities. In theextreme, the regulations could impose the need for nearly complete removal of
Mid-America Tanning Site 48108.131-O7Basis of Design - 100% Submiflal 2'7 July 1998
ammonia from the impoundment group waters. The 1997 and 1998 supplementalsampling events indicate there is little ammonia left in the surface water and themixing issue should not be a concern.
The NPDES Requirement for Cr(+6) is listed as "--" in Table 1. It is assumedthat there is no specific discharge limit for Cr(+6) and that no treatment for Cr(+6)is required.
2.4.1.3 Hydraulic Design Basis. For the purpose of this review, the hydraulicdesign basis for the treatment system was assumed to be a maximum flow of 50 gpm(72,000 gpd).
2.4.2 ROD Treatment System2.4.2.1 Group 1 Impoundment. Group 1 Impoundment consists of the vesselsassociated with the wastewater treatment system for the former tannery operations -- primary clarifier, aeration tank, and final clarifier, comprising a total volume ofapproximately 329,000 gallons. Under the ROD, no treatment is planned for thewater in these vessels, because the 1993 characterization data were less than thedischarge requirements. The "weighted average" pH for this water in 1993 was pH8.7 and the maximum value was pH 10.3. The "weighted average" value isapproaching the discharge requirement maximum of pH 9 and suggests that therewere some number of data points in excess of pH 8.7. (The use of averages forlogarithmic pH data must be done in the appropriate mathematical manner to bevalid. It is unclear from the information at hand how the averages were calculatedor how the values were "weighted".)
2.4.2.7 Group 2 Impoundment. Group 2 Impoundment consists of the east andwest aeration lagoons, comprising a total volume of approximately 2,780,000 gallons.Based on the 1993 characterization data, the Group 2 Impoundment water requirestreatment for TSS, Cr(T), oil and grease (O&G), and BOD to achieve the dischargerequirements.
In the ROD, adjustment to between pH 8.5 and pH 9 followed by filtration isproposed to effect removal of TSS, Cr(T), and O&G. The treatment proposed in theROD is as follows:
• Initial adjustment to pH 8.5 to pH 9.• Direct filtration for TSS values of 127 to 259 mg/L (1993 data).• In-line addition of coagulant aids.
Mid-America Tanning SHe 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submlttal 2-O July 1998
• The O&G will be captured by the filter.• Carbon adsorption is proposed to effect removal of BOD to achieve the
discharge limit of <43.2 mg/L from starting values of 492 to 516 mg/L (1993data).
2.4.2.2 Group 3 Impoundment. Group 3 Impoundment consists of the polishingbasin, originally reported to have a total volume of approximately 12,220,000 gallonsis now dry. Based on the 1993 characterization data, the Group 3 Impoundmentwater required treatment for pH and TSS to achieve the discharge requirements.
2.4.3 Proposed Treatment SystemA different treatment system is proposed based on concerns that the ROD
treatment system will not be able to consistently achieve the required discharge limitsand/or will present operational difficulties. Therefore, the treatment conceptdescribed in the following paragraphs is proposed.
2.4.3.1 Group 1 and 2 Impoundments. Based on the recent sampling eventbiological treatment alone will satisfy the discharge criteria. Treatment for chromiumwill no longer be required. Treatment will be required for BOD. Oil and grease arewithin discharge limits as an average, but some samples revealed individual samplesabove the threshold. Therefore, based on these findings, biological treatment is thebest alternative. Biological treatment offers the advantage of positive BOD removal,oil and grease are biological degraded which using the ROD treatment processes wasnot assured. Results of the sampling efforts can be found in Data Validation Reportssubmitted to USEPA. A summary of the results can be found in attached Table 2-1.
The treatment system will be comprised of processes to support biologicaltreatment of the impoundment liquids. The processes will include a dewatering step,solids removal step, biological treatment step, sludge removal/recycle step, and adischarge system. Following is a description of each of the proposed process steps.
The dewatering step will consist of removal of the liquid from the impoundmentand transfer of the liquid to the treatment system. The subcontractor will be directedto not disturb the impoundment bottom except to form a pumping sump(s) and shallremove only liquid that naturally flows to the sump locations. This should limit highcontaminant concentrations that may come from the sludge. Mechanical or otherdewatering means will not be required for full removal of the liquid from the surface
Mid-America Tanning SHe 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 10O% Submitlal 2-9 Jufy 1998
Table 2-1Summary of 1997 and 1998 Sampling Results
P2.8CO H
— 2.8,3* wgf
VOLUME, GAL.
PH
TSS, mg/1
Cr(T), ng/L(unfiltered)
BOD, |i.g/L(unfiltered)
O&G, mg/1
BOD, mg/1 (filtered)
COD, mg/1 (filtered)
COD jjig/L(unfiltered)
T,°C
TDS, mg/1
NH3, mg/1
Impoundment
Group 1:Clarifiers & Aeration Tank
Range WeightedAverage
330,000
8.1-9.0
12-43
10-21
11-133
3-5
13-133
2-277
2-321
-
—
~
9.0
43
21
133
5
133
121
113
5
1,900
ND
Group 2:East Aeration Lagoon
Range WeightedAverage
335,000
6.6-8.1
9.1-55
11.4-664
65-444
7-20
29-405
282-351
284-455
-
--
-
7.8
31
292
285
11
240
313
373
5
8,900
ND
Group 2:West Aeration Lagoon
Range WeightedAverage
2,450,000
8.1-8.2
100-1,080
285-394
465-1,180
4-16
393-990
462-874
633-1,050
~
-
--
8.1
351
330
654
10
579
647
814
5
19,000
814
NPDESRequirement
-
6-9
<63
<970
-
<19
<43.2
-
-
<32.2(90°F)*
*
ND Non Detected.* NOTE: Refer to Chapter 61 of the Iowa Administrative Code, "Water Quality Standards".
of the impoundments. It is anticipated that a floating pump suction will be utilizedto dewater the bulk of the liquid and a make shift sump or screened pipe section setin the sludge to dewater the bottom part of the impoundment.
The solids removal step's primary purpose is to remove the majority of the solidsthat are retrained in the lagoon/basin liquid removal process. This step will serve toprotect the aeration tank from excessive non-biological solids loading. A settling tankwill be required to remove and transfer solids from the liquid stream and transferthese solids back to the impoundment on a daily basis. Polymer may be necessaryto enhance the solids removal efficiency. Flowrate indication will be provided forflowrate adjustment and chemical addition rates. It is anticipated that a cone bottomsettling tank (10 diameter, 10' tall) and a solids removal pump (10 to 20 gpm) willbe required.
The biological treatment step's primary purpose is to reduce the contaminantconcentrations below the allowable discharge limits. The biological system will bedesigned with aeration volume of approximately 100,000 gallons and aeration supplyair of approximately 250 cfm to treat a minimum of 100 mg/1 BOD5 per day. Thisloading rate assumes 120 days of treatment time is allowed. It is assumed that 3tanker truck loads (18,000 gallons) of seed sludge for the treatment system will beadded to the aeration tank. The more the seed sludge added, the shorter the startupand treatment time. This seed sludge should be available from a local POTW.Nutrients such as phosphorous and alkalinity will be added as necessary to sustain thebiological population. These nutrients can be added as fertilizer in granular formdirectly into the aeration tank. Alkalinity must also be provided in the form ofcaustic which is assumed to be approximately 240 pounds/day.
The sludge removal/recycle step's primary purpose is to remove the sludge andsolids that are entrained in the biological step discharge to meet dischargerequirements. A settling tank will be employed to remove and transfer solids fromthe liquid stream and transfer them back to the impoundment/aeration tank. Thesludge pump will be used primarily to return sludge to the aeration tank and will besized to recycle from 50 to 100 percent of the influent flowrate. Periodically(probably daily) the recycle sludge flow will be directed to the impoundment for ashort time to waste sludge to keep the solids concentration at the proper level.Polymer will be added as necessary to enhance the solids removal efficiency.
The treatment plant discharge system will consist of a surge tank, discharge pumpand discharge line and will serve to convey treatment plant effluent to the outfall.
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submittal 2-11 July 1998
Depending on the geometry of the equipment provided, the surge tank and dischargepump may be bypassed if gravity flow to the outfall can be attained. The surge tankand discharge pump will be necessary for times when recycle flow to the front of theplant is needed. It is anticipated that if a 4" discharge line is used, the discharge willnot have to be pumped to the outfall. On occasion, the discharge will have to bedirected to the headworks of the plant and the discharge pumping system will benecessary for this purpose.
2.4.3.2 Group 3 Impoundment. There is no water remaining in thisimpoundment so treatment will not be required.
2.4.3.3 Qualifiers. The treatment concepts presented herein are based on bestengineering judgments based on recent water characterization data. Furthermore,treatment requirements relating to TDS are unclear pending clarification of theinterpretation of applicable parts of IAC-61 by the regulatory agencies.
2.5 Miscellaneous Design Features2.5.1 Decontam/nate Selected Site Features
Steam cleaning of selected walls in the Hide Processing Building, of the interiorof the Filter Press Building, and of interior of the Miscellaneous Structures will berequired by the specifications. The precise limits of required steam cleaning in theHide Processing Building were determined during the field data collection trip.Steam cleaning will be by high pressure steam. Clean up criteria will be visualinspection, as determined by the Contractor. Sand blasting will be mentioned as anoptional acceptable method in the specifications, but will not be required in the basecontract. If determined to be necessary by a lack of progress through steam cleaningonly, sand blasting will be added by Change Order. Steam cleaning effluent anddecontamination fluids will be treated in the Wastewater Treatment System.
2.5.2 Demo/ft/onDemolition of existing features on this project is primarily limited to the Lagoon
area. Specifically, the small building located on the east bank of the East Lagoon willbe removed, since it's location interferes with the floating cover anchor trench andchain link fence alignment. Also, much of the existing asphalt access road leading upto this building along the lagoon berm will be removed. Finally, several features in
Mid-Am«rica Twining Site 46108.131-07Basis of Design-100% SubmrttaJ 2-12 July 1998
TABLE 1
Facility Name: US Tanning C*., loc.Permit Number: 9700100
NPDES'l Monif orin* and Reoortiac ReaaireniMil*
(a) Sampfea and measurements taken shall be icpictentative of the volume and nature of the monitored wastewater.
(b) Analytical aiid ranging methods u specified in 40 CFR Part 136 or Table VII of Chapter 63 of the rules, or other methods approved in writing by thedepartment, shall be utilized.
(c) Chapter 63 of the rales provides you with further explanation of your monitoring requirements.
(d) You are required to report all data including calculated results needed to determine compliance with the limitations contained in this permit. Thisincludes daily maximum* and minimum*, 30-day averages and 7-day averages for all parameters that have concentration (rag/I) and man (Ibs/day)limits. Also, flow data shall be reported in million gallons per day (MOD).
(e) Results of all monitoring shall be recorded on forma provided by the department, and submitted to the dtpartiucut by the fifteenth day following theclose of the reporting period Your reporting period is on a monthly basis, ending on the last day of each month.
OutfallNumber801801801801801801801801801801801801801801801801
Wastewtter ParameterFlowFlowBiochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODS)TP_,_| I*., m • .lit CM|!J|»Total suspended solidsTotal Suspended SolidsAmmonia Nitrogen (N)Ammonia Nitrogen (N)PH (Minimum - Maximum)PH (Minimum • Maximum)Chromium. Total (As CR)Oil and GreaseScttleable SolidsTcmpcntiiTBT ^^cnipcfviircTotal Dissolved Solids
SampleFrequency7/Wcek7/Weck3/Wcek3/Wcek3/Wcck3/Week3/Weck3 /Week3/Wcck3/WcekI/MonthI/MonthS/Week3/Weck3/WcckI/Week
SampleType24 Hr. Total24 Hr. TotalCalculatedCalculatedCalculatedCalculatedCalculatedCalculatedGrabGrabCalculatedCalculatedGrabGrabGrabGrab
Monitoring LocationRaw WasteFinal EffluentRaw WasteFinal EffluentRaw WasteFinal EffluentFinal EffluentRaw WasteRaw WasteFinal EffluentFinal EffluentFinal EffluentFinal EffluentRaw WasteFinal EffluentFinal Effluent
and around both lagoons will be removed, including small water control boxes, valves,walkways, and timber piles. The demolition debris from these features will be placedin the bottom of the Aeration Basin prior to backfilling.
2.5.3 Miscellaneous Structure BackfillThe Miscellaneous Structures, including both Clarifiers and the Wet Well will be
backfilled after emptying and decontamination. Note that the Aeration Basin willalso be decontaminated and backfilled, but not until its use as a SBR tank has beenfulfilled. Prior to backfilling the Aeration Basin and both Clarifiers, their floors willbe broken or otherwise penetrated. This will allow stormwater to percolate throughthese structures, and help avoid the creation of marsh land in each tank.
2.5.4 FencingFencing will be provided on-site^wily around the East and West Lagoons in order
to prevent access by the general public. The fence will be 7 foot high chain linkfencing with three strands of barbed wire on outriggers. One pedestrian gate will belocated near each outlet structure, for a total of two, and two vehicular gates will belocated to provide access to each lagoon.
2.5.5 Sludge ManipulationDisturbance of the sludge in the East and West Lagoons will be avoided to the
maximum degree possible. However, some limited sludge manipulation at thislocation will be unavoidable, in order that several items located in or around thelagoons may be demolished and/or removed, including timber piles in the EastLagoon, and several minor water control or monitoring structures in both lagoons.
The surface of the sludge in the West Lagoon is anticipated to be reasonably flat,as it currently exists. However, the existing surface of the sludge in the East Lagoonis anticipated to slope, (a three foot drop from west to east). Therefore, selectedconstruction wastes and borrow material will be deposited in the unwatered lagoon.
2.5.6 Topsoil and SeedingTopsoil and seeding will be required as shown on the plans. The selected seed
mix will be tailored to the local climate, and will represent a field mix (rather thana lawn mix) appropriate for the anticipated operational needs and level ofmaintenance required.
Mid-America Tanning Site 111 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submctlal 2-13 July 1998
2.6 Required Construction SequencingConstruction sequencing requirements for this project will have primarily to do
with the coordination of Subcontracts Nos. 1 and 2. Generally, the only criticalconnections between the two subcontracts is in regards to unwatering surfaceimpoundments under Subcontract No. 2, and the subsequent work items contingenton that unwatering performed under Subcontract No. 1. Since the finalizedsequencing requirements are anticipated to be brief, they will be added to thedrawings. Other minor sequencing requirements may involve earthwork volumes,task durations, seasonal issues, and equipment and material lead times.
The estimated construction schedule is included in Appendix D. Note that thecritical path for this project involves the unwatering and treatment of water from thePolishing Basin, and subsequent excavation and placement of Polishing Basinsediments. These two tasks must be completed in a timely fashion, in order toprovide a uniform work effort throughout a single construction season's duration.
2.7 Subcontracting ConceptBVSPC has prepared two subcontracts for the execution of the Remedial Action.
One subcontract has been prepared for issuance directly to a small businessenterprise. It will include decontamination of selected buildings and structures, watertransfer from selected site impoundments to the Polishing Basin, and the installationof security fencing on-site. The other subcontract will be open to all bidders, and willinclude all other work to be performed in the Remedial Action.
The selected split of work tasks has been made due to the minimal ties inschedule for the selected work tasks, and the general ease with which thesesubcontracts can consequently be administered.
The specific elements included in each subcontract are included in Section 3.0.
2.8 Associated PlansSeveral plans will be associated with this Remedial Design, for use either
concurrently with the Remedial Action, or for use throughout the life of the finishedfacility.
Plans for use during the Remedial Design include a Construction QualityAssurance Plan, a Contingency Plan and a Health and Safety Plan.
Plans for use throughout the life of the facility include a Groundwater MonitoringPlan and a Surveillance and Maintenance Plan.
Mid-America Tanning Site >•» 1/I 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 1OO% Submittal Z~14 July 1898
3.0 Subcontract Documents
The Subcontract Documents have been prepared to accomplish the Work withtwo Subcontracts, as documented in Paragraph 2.7. The source of site plans shownin the Construction Drawings and the basis of design is a topographic surveyconducted by EPA Region VII staff in 1991. Other Limited topographic datapertinent to the Subcontract Documents was obtained during the data collection tripto the site. BVSPC drawings have been prepared utilizing Intergraph Microstationsoftware. Bid documents and technical specifications are based on BVSPC in-housestandard formats, tailored to this specific project and EPA contracting standards andrequirements.
The individual elements of both Subcontract No. 1 and Subcontract No. 2, assubmitted, are listed below.
Subcontract No. 1
Invitation to BidInstructions to Bidders
Bid FormAttachment 1 - Representations and Certifications Regarding
Subcontractor StatusAttachment 2 - Lower Tier Subcontractor ListingAttachment 3 - Experience and Safety QuestionnaireAttachment 4 - Certification of Training, Medical, and Safety RequirementsAttachment 5 - Small and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Utilization
Subcontract AgreementAttachment A - Scope of WorkAttachment B - Subcontract Sum and Terms of Payment for Unit Price
SubcontractsAttachment C - Prime Contract ClausesAttachment D - Insurance RequirementsAttachment E - General Terms and ConditionsAttachment F - Special Conditions
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-O7Basis of Design - 10O% Submitted 3-1 July1998
Attachment G - Safety and Health RequirementsAttachment H - Construction Health and Safety Program
Wage RatesExhibit A - Duties, Responsibilities and Limits of Authority of Resident
Project Representative
Technical Specifications01015 Project Requirements01018 Drawings01025 Measurement and Payment01070 Abbreviations01300 Submittals01400 Quality Control01500 Temporary Facilities02050 Demolition02055 Construction Waste02200 Earthwork02700 Geosynthetics03301 Concrete15000 Water Treatment and Disposal
Construction DrawingsDwg G-l Cover SheetDwg C-l Demolition PlanDwg C-2 Contaminated Materials Removal PlanDwg C-3 Grading PlanDwg C-4 Polishing Basin Containment CellDwg C-5 North Field Containment CellDwg C-6 Floating Cover PlanDwg C-7 Floating Cover Sections and DetailsDwg C-8 Miscellaneous Details IDwg C-9 Miscellaneous Details IIDwg M-l Schematic Wastewater Yard Piping PlanDwg M-2 Wastewater Treatment System Flow Diagrams
Mid-America Tanning Sit« 46108.131-07Basis of Design -100% Submittal 3-2 July 1098
Subcontract No. 2
Invitation to BidInstructions to Bidders
Bid FormAttachment 1 - Representations and Certifications Regarding Subcontractor
StatusAttachment 2 - Lower Tier Subcontractor ListingAttachment 3 - Experience and Safety QuestionnaireAttachment 4 - Certification of Training, Medical, and Safety Requirements
Subcontract AgreementAttachment A - Scope of WorkAttachment B - Subcontract Sum and Terms of Payment for Unit Price
SubcontractsAttachment C - Prime Contract ClausesAttachment D - Insurance RequirementsAttachment E - General Terms and ConditionsAttachment F - Special ConditionsAttachment G - Safety and Health RequirementsAttachment H - Construction Health and Safety Program
Wage RatesExhibit A - Duties, Responsibilities and Limits of Authority of Resident
Project Representative
Technical Specifications01015 Project Requirements01018 Drawings01025 Measurement and Payment01070 Abbreviations01300 Submittals01400 Quality Control01500 Temporary Facilities
Mid-America Tanning Site 48108.131-07Basis of Design-100% Submlttal 3-3 July 1998
02055 Construction Waste02382 Chain Link Fencing
Construction DrawingsDwg G-l Cover SheetDwg C-l Site PlanDwg C-2 Chain Link Fencing
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-O7Basis of Design -100% Submittal 3-4 July 1998
3.0 Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule
The construction cost estimate is based on the estimated quantities of work,labor, materials, and equipment required as described herein. The estimate andschedule are based on 40 hour work weeks for all items except the water treatmentsystem, which is anticipated to operate (but not necessarily be attended) twenty fourhours a day, seven days a week. The Construction Cost Estimate is included hereinin Appendix C.
The Construction Schedule for this project is included in Appendix D. Theschedule anticipates a job duration of eight months, and currently assumes a Noticeto Proceed of March 16, 1999.
Mid-America Tanning Site 46108.131-07Basis of Design - 100% Submlttal 3~1 July 1998
Appendices
APPENDIX ASTATEMENT OF WORK
STATEMENT OF WORK FORMid America Tanning
Remedial Design
WA# 022-RDN-077M
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Mid America Tanning site occupies 98.7 acres in Woodbury County, Iowaapproximately 4 miles south of Sergeant Bluff. The site is a former hide tannery whichoperated from 1969 to 1989. In 1973, the plant began using a chrome tanning process whichgenerated chromium wastes which are deposited throughout the site in buildings, soils andimpoundment areas. In addition to the chromium waste, the impoundment areas aregenerating hydrogen sulfide gas due to anaerobic degradation of the wastes. Site investigationsindicated significant levels of chromium contamination in the groundwater and throughout thesite including an unlined burial trench, impoundment basins, soil areas adjacent to theimpoundments and where wastes were land farmed. In addition when the facility ceasedoperations in 1989, there was an estimated 5,000 gallons of chromium tanning solution on sitealong with 525 gallons of sulfuric acid used in the tanning process. The contaminated sourceareas pose a threat through direct contact and through migration into the surroundinggroundwater which is the primary drinking water source for approximately 850 individualswho live in the surrounding 3 miles of the site. In addition, there is potential for the source tofurther contaminate an adjacent wetland area which is the home to the piping plover, anendangered species.
On 12/29/89 EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to U.S. Tanning, aPotentially Responsible Party (PRP), to conduct a removal action and perform an remedialinvestigation/feasibility study (RI/FS). U.S. Tanning was unable to comply with the UAO andbecause of imminent health threats, EPA initiated a fund-lead removal action in 1990. EPAcompleted a removal action directed toward immediate site stabilization measures and includedexcavation and stockpiling of contaminated sludge from the on-site burial trench, containmentand treatment of chromium tanning solutions, containment and neutralization of sulfuric acids,and cursory decontamination of the buildings. EPA completed the RI/FS in 1990 and issued aRecord of Decision (ROD) calling for in-situ stabilization of contaminated wastes followed byinstallation of a soil cap. EPA completed a Remedial Design (RD) in 1993. During the RD,data became available indicating that the impoundment areas were emitting hydrogen sulfidegas at concentrations that were considered an imminent health threat. Site conditions haddeteriorated due to vandalism by trespassers and areas of the site had been recontaminated. In1994, EPA issued an Administrative Order to Foxley Cattle Company, a PRP, to perform asecond removal action to address concerns from both the immediate hydrogen sulfide threat aswell as recontamination of the buildings. The removal action performed by Foxley wascompleted in 1995 and consisted of decontaminating buildings, removal and disposal ofdrummed wastes, and securing the site buildings and man-holes.
Mid America Taming RD 1 BVSP WA#022-RDN-077M
In response to the new data regarding the hydrogen sulfide emissions, EPA in 1996revised the remedy for this site and issued an amended ROD. The amended remedy willdewater and treat the impoundment areas (13.7 million gallons of contaminated water) andthen cover the contaminated soil/sludge (95,500 cubic yards) with an impenetrable soil/clay orgeosynthetic cap.
II. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
Because the EPA amended the remedy at this site, portions of the existing RemedialDesign are no longer applicable. The objective of this work assignment is to revise andsupplement the existing Remedial Design as necessary to address changes made to the remedyat the site. To the degree possible and applicable, the existing RD shall be utilized.
ID. GENERAL
This is a TERM FORM work assignment requiring the Contractor to devote a specifiedlevel of effort hours for the approved tasks. If the Remedial Design is not accomplishedwithin the scope of this work assignment, a new "Term" may be issued, requiring theContractor to continue the work for an additional period of performance. The contractor willnot expend LOE hours nor incur additional cost for the additional term prior to receiving theContracting Officer's written approval.
In conducting this work assignment EPA expects the contractor to propose the mostappropriate and cost-effective procedures and methodologies using accepted engineeringpractices and controls. Throughout the performance on this work assignment, the Contractorwill be responsible for performing services and providing products using the most cost-efficient mix of qualified personnel applicable to meet the needs of the work assignment. Thetechnical volume of the work plan should include the personnel assigned to the project, resumeand respective duties associated with the work assignment.
IV. WORK ASSIGNMENT TASKS
The Remedial Design stage includes the development of the actual design of theselected remedy. The contractor shall furnish personnel, services, materials and equipmentrequired to prepare detailed plans, drawings and specifications for Remedial Actions. Allactivities shall be in conformance with the remedy selected and set forth in the Record ofDecision (ROD), amended ROD and any other guidance or action documents relevant to thesite. The following work breakdown structure shall be used for project scoping, scheduling,technical, cost tracking and reporting.
TASK1 PROJECT PLANNING AND SUPPORT
This task includes work efforts related to project initiation, management and support.
Mid America Tanning RD 2 BVSP WA0022-RDN-077M
Activities required under this task include:
1.1 The contractor shall attend scoping meeting with EPA to discuss the workassignment.
1.2 The contractor shall conduct a site visit to familiarize themselves with the sitelogistics and current site conditions. It is anticipated that some expedited fieldsampling will be required, and the site visit should be used to help assess thelogistics and planning needed to implement the field effort. The timing of thesite visit will be coordinated with the WAM who will plan to visit the siteconcurrently.
1.3 Develop and submit a work plan. The work plan will be submitted in twovolumes. Volume 1 will contain a discussion of how the contractor willperform the tasks assigned, planning assumptions, staff assigned with theirresponsibilities by task, an organizational chart, timelines and deliverables.Volume 1 will contain no CBI. Volume 2 will contain cost data and will beconsidered CBI. Schedules and supporting detail should be provided in Volume2 sufficient for EPA to evaluate the cost proposal for the project.
1.4 Based on EPA's review of the work plan, the contractor may be called upon toparticipate in negotiations with EPA of the work plan and to revise the workplan as a result of these negotiations or comments made regarding the workplan.
1.5 The contractor shall provide a conflict of interest disclosure regarding the site.The potentially responsible parties at this site are listed in Attachment A to theSOW.
1.6 The contractor shall evaluate existing data and documents as directed by EPA toinclude the RI/FS, original ROD, amended ROD, RD, and 1992 field tripreport. Other site information is available in the site files and may be madeavailable to the contractor as necessary. The contractor shall evaluate theexisting data and identify any data gaps that may exist that will need to be filledin order to perform the remedial design.
1.7 The contractor shall prepare a Field Sampling Plan (FSP) that describes thenumber, type, and locations of samples and type of analyses required and themethod that will be used to collect them.
1.8 The contractor shall prepare a site-specific Quality Assurance Project Plan(QAPP) in accordance with EPA QA/R-5. The plan shall describe the dataquality objectives and the measures necessary to achieve them. The contractor
Mid America Tanning RD 3 BVSP WA*022-RDN-077M
shall use existing site QAPPs (attached) to the degree possible and applicable.
1.9 The contractor shall prepare a site specific Health and Safety Plan (HSP)consistent with 29 CFR 1910.120 (1)(1) and (1)(2). The contractor shall useexisting site HSPs (attached) to the degree possible and applicable.
1.10 The contractor shall perform site specific project management including:
• Establishment and maintenance of necessary work assignment files.• Perform contract administration functions associated with this work
assignment.• Provide monthly reporting and invoices.• Monitor costs and performance.• Coordinate staffing and other support activities to perform the work
assignment tasks in accordance with the SOW.• Attend necessary work assignment specific meetings.
TASK 2 COMMUNITY RELATIONS
NA
TASK 3 DATA ACQUISITION
This task includes work efforts to collect environmental data in support of the RemedialDesign activities. The results of this effort as well as previous studies shall be used to definecontaminant levels, other physical/chemical properties, and volume. Much of the site hasalready been characterized and the data provided in the RI/FS. Some additional field data mayneed to be acquired to verify that site conditions remain the same and/or to re-evaluate and/orre-define the size and volume of the capped areas. Activities required under this task include:
3.1 The contractor shall perform all activities related toMobilization/Demobilization for field events.
3.2 The contractor shall perform monitoring well installation and well developmentif the existing wells are deemed insufficient to gather the necessary groundwaterdata. During the evaluation of existing data (Task 1.6), the contractor shallassess whether the location of the existing groundwater monitoring well systemis sufficient to evaluate the extent of groundwater contamination and any futureaction with regards to groundwater action. If it is deemed insufficient, thecontractor will be responsible for installation of additional GW monitoringwells. If existing wells are adequate, then the contractor shall be responsiblefor assessing their current condition and redevelopment of them as necessary
Mid America Taming RD 4 BVSP WAJ022-RDN-077M
prior to sampling.
3.3 The contractor shall perform environmental sampling of the ground water forboth total and dissolved metals. The exact extent of sampling will bedetermined in the FSP and QAPP prepared in Task 1.8 and 1.9. However, it isassumed that each of the existing 18 monitoring wells will be sampled.
The contractor shall perform soil sampling for hexavalent chromium analysis.The contractor should assume at least 10 soil samples for hexavalent chromiummay be taken to confirm the presence of hexavalent chromium in variouslocations throughout the site.
The contractor shall collect representative samples from the 1300 cubic yards oftrench material for TCLP chromium analysis.
Note: The contractor needs to be aware that the impoundment areas are emittinghydrogen sulfide gas and they will need to include this in any personal airmonitoring at the site. During the RI/FS, monitoring of H2S did not exceed 2ppm; however, subsequent data collected during a November 1992 fieldsampling trip indicate concentrations as high as 628 ppm over the polishingbasin.
3.4 The contractor shall dispose of investigation derived waste and other wastegenerated on site in accordance with Local, State and Federal Regulations.
TASK 4 SAMPLE ANALYSIS
This task includes the analysis of environmental and waste samples and is exclusive tothe performance of sample analyses and the production of analytical data. Activities requiredunder this task include:
4.1 Analysis of samples and production of analytical data results in accordance withapplicable QAPPs prepared for the site activities under investigation. It isanticipated that sample analysis will be required as follows:
Trench material: TCLP chromium
Groundwater: Total and Dissolved metals
Soil Samples: Hexavalent chromium
TASK 5 ANALYTICAL SUPPORT AND DATA VALIDATION
Mid America Tanning RD 5 BVSP WA1022-RDN-077M
This task includes work efforts involved in scheduling, coordination, tracking, andoversight of analyses as well as the validation of the analytical data produced. Activitiesrequired under this task include:
5.1 The contractor shall collect, prepare, and ship environmental samples inaccordance with the Field Sampling Plan.
5.2 The contractor shall perform quality assurance activities necessary to monitortheir subcontractor's performance of analytical activities and ensure that theanalytical results are of a quality useable for their intended purpose.
5.3 The contractor shall perform all necessary sample management activitiesincluding chain-of-custody and information management.
5.4 The contractor shall perform data validation of the sample results including adetermination of whether the data are defensible, produced in accordance withthe QAPP and FSP, and useable for their intended purposes. A report outliningthe data validation process and conclusions of the data useability shall beprovided.
TASK 6 DATA EVALUATION
This task includes work efforts related to the analysis of data for incorporation into thedesign effort. Activities required under this task include:
6.1 The contractor shall determine the quality of the data and itsuseability/limitations including an assessment of the precision, accuracy andcompleteness as compared to the Data Quality Objectives of the project.
6.2 The contractor shall compile, reduce and tabulate the data and provide acomparison of any new data acquired during the design with historical data.
TASK 7 TREATABILITY STUDY/PILOT TEST REPORT
A treatability study has already been performed. The contractor should review theexisting treatability study (attached) and incorporate findings which are still relevant andappropriate into the remedial design revisions.
TASK 8 PRELIMINARY DESIGN
This task includes work efforts related to the preparation of the preliminary design. AnRD already exists for this site. The activities required under this work assignment and
Mid America Tanning RD 6 BVSP WA4022-RDN-077M
specifically this task will be limited to revising those portions of the existing RD that need tobe revised and adding those new portions that were not included in the original RD, but whichwill now need to be addressed in order to implement the remedy as amended. Activitiesrequired under this task include:
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
TASK 9
NA
The contractor shall evaluate existing RD drawings and identify those drawingsand specifications that need to be revised or added.
The contractor shall provide new preliminary drawings and specifications basedon those that are identified as necessary in task 8.1 above.
The contractor shall provide a preliminary cost estimate (4-50% and -30%accuracy) to complete the remedy.
The contractor shall detail how all Applicable or Relevant and AppropriateRequirements (ARARs) will be met. Of concern, is whether RCRA subtitle Cand/or Iowa Solid Waste Landfill regulations will be met for the waste left inthe northeast field without a leachate collection system being installed.
EQUIPMENT/SERVICES/UTILmES
TASK 10 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN
This includes work efforts related to the preparation of the intermediate design. Again,an RD already exists for this site. This task will only be applicable to those portions of thedesign which need to be updated or added. Activities required under this task include:
10.1 The contractor shall update the construction schedule in the original RD.
10.2 The contractor shall continue work on defining specifications and producingintermediate drawings necessary to implement the remedy.
10.4 The contractor shall submit a basis of design report.
TASK 11 PRE-FINAL/FINAL DESIGN
This task includes work efforts related to the preparation of the pre-fmal design.Activities required under this task include
11.1 The contractor shall develop subcontract award documents.t
Mid America Tanning RD 7 BVSP WAW22-RDN-077M
11.2 The contractor shall develop pre-final design specifications and drawings.The contractor shall incorporate any EPA comments into the designspecifications and drawings and prepare final design report containing allspecifications and drawings.
11.3 The contractor shall hold a pre-final briefing for EPA to discuss the design.
11.4 The contractor shall revise/update the intermediate cost estimate (+15 % and -10% accuracy).
11.5 The contractor shall conduct a bidability and constructability review.
11.6 The contractor shall update/revise the project delivery strategy.
TASK 12 POST REMEDIAL DESIGN SUPPORT
The contractor shall solicit the procurement, evaluate offers received and inform theEPA Contracting Officer of the best qualified/cost effective offer. (Award of the contract willbe pan of the Remedial Action work assignment.) Activities required under this task include:
12.1 The contractor shall perform all prebid activities such as duplication anddistibution of contract documents; advertising/soliciting bids; issuing addenda;prebid meetings; resolution of bidder inquiries; on-site visits; compilation ofcontract documents; and solicitation of bids/offers and repackagedocumentation.
12.2 The contractor shall perform necessary pre-award activities to include receipt ofbids; determination of responsive and responsible bidders; bid tabulation; bidanalysis; receipt of follow-up items from lowest responsible bidder; review ofEEO, MBE requirements, SDB subcontracting plans, etc...; reference checksand request for subcontract consent from EPA.
12.3 The contractor shall update/revise existing plans which are attachments to theexisting RD. These plans include the groundwater monitoring plan;surveillance and maintenance plan; construction quality assurance plan;sampling and analysis plan; permitting plan; contingency plan; and health &safety plan.
TASK 13 WORK ASSIGNMENT CLOSE OUT
This task includes efforts related to work assignment closeout. Activities required
Mid America Tanning RD 8 BVSP WA4Q22-RDN-077M
under this task include:
13.1 Upon notification by EPA, the contractor shall begin all internal proceduresnecessary to closeout the work assignment including any file duplication,distribution, storage or archiving per the contract requirements.
13.2 The contractor shall return documents identified to EPA or other documentrepositories as directed.
13.3 The contractor shall prepare a Work Assignment Completion Report (WACR)in accordance with the contract and using the specified Regional format.
V. WA PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
Present - 12/30/97
VI. SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES/MILESTONES
TASK
1.3
1.51.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
5.4
6.2
DELIVERABLE
Work planCOIData Gaps memo
FSP
QAPP
HSPMonthly reports/invoices
Data validation report
Data evaluation report
DUE DATE
per contractper contract6 weeks days after WAissuance
6 weeks after WA
6 weeks after WA6 weeks after WA
issuance
issuance
issuance
per contract21 days followinganalytical results
30 days followinganalytical results
receipt of
receipt of
Mid America Tanning RD BVSP WAJK022-RDN-OT7M
8.1
8.2
8.38.4
10.1
10.2
10.3
11.1
11.2
11.2
11.4
11.5
11.6
12.1
12.2
12.3
13.3
RD Drawing/Specification Evaluationreport
Preliminary drawings/specifications
Preliminary RA cost estimate
ARARs discussion
Construction Schedule updateIntermediate drawings/specifications
Design Basis Report
Subcontract award documentsPre-final design specifications/drawings
Final design report
Revised/updated construction cost estimate
Bidability/constructability review
Update/revised project delivery strategy
Prebid ActivitiesPreaward Activities
Update/revise plans
WACR
6 weeks after WA issuance
10 weeks after WA issuanceconcurrent with 8.2
concurrent with 8. 1
14 weeks after WA issuanceconcurrent with 10. 1concurrent with 10.1
on or before 10/30/97
18 weeks after WA issuance
4 weeks after receipt ofEPAs comments on pre-finaldesign
concurrent with 11.2
concurrent with 11.2concurrent with 11.2On or before 11/30/97
On or before 12/30/97
concurrent with 11.2
per PEB schedule
VII. PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
The contractor's deliverables will be inspected by the government for acceptability.Unacceptable deliverables will be returned to the contractor with comments and directions fornecessary corrections or rework which may be applicable.
In addition, the contractor's performance shall be evaluated by the Agency in order todetermine the amount of performance fee which should be provided to the contractor forperformance of the work assignment. The amount of fee will be predicated upon diegovernment's subjective evaluation of the contractor's ability to perform this work assignment.
Performance fee may be provided, at the Agency's discretion, to the contractor at theend of this work assignment. Of prime consideration in the performance of this work
Mid America Tanning RD 10 BVSP WA*022-RDN-077M
assignment is the contractor's ability to perform the RD activities within the required scheduleand costs. Performance fee will only be provided if the contractor is rated "exceedsexpectations" or "outstanding" on the work assignment.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
The following is the acceptance criteria for the deliverables under this workassignment.
TASK
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
DELIVERABLE
Work plan
COIData Gaps memo
FSP
QAPP
HSP
Monthly reports/invoices
CRITERIAThorough, complete,covering all relevant itemscontained in the SOW and inaccordance with the SOWdirections.
per contract requirementsThorough, complete andsubmitted on scheduleThorough, completetechnically defensibleapproach to conducting fieldactivities and submitted ontime such that field activitiesremain on schedule.Developed in accordancewith EPA QA/R-5 and allregional QA guidance andsubmitted on schedule toallow field activities toproceed.
In accordance with 29 CFR1910.120
per contract requirements
Mid America Tanning RD 11 BVSP WAI022-RDN-077M
5.4 Data validation report Application of soundtechnical and analyticaljudgement to evaluate data.Report should be thoroughand accurate.
6.2 Data evaluation report Thorough and accurateevaluation of data includingsound technical basis forrecommendations orconclusions.
8.1 RD Drawing/Specification Evaluationreport
In accordance with Agencyguidance on performingRemedial Designs and usingsound engineeringjudgement, practices,procedures and controls.
8.2 Preliminary drawings/specifications Same as 8.1
8.3 Preliminary RA cost estimate Based on good engineeringjudgement and practices.Accurate to the levelsindicated in the SOW.
8.4 ARARs discussion Accurate analysis ofapplicability of ARARs.
10.1 Construction Schedule update Thorough and accurate10.2 Intermediate drawings/specifications Same as 8.110.3 Design Basis Report Same as 8.1
11.1 Subcontract award documents Accurately incorporatedesign elements into theSOW to implement theremedy. Prepare subcontractdocuments in accordancewith applicable procurementregulations, FAR, andEPAAR and in a manner thatwould affect the award of acost effective subcontract.
Mid America Tanning RD 12 BVSP WA/TO22-RDN-077M
11.2
11.2
11.4
11.5
11.6
12.1
12.2
12.3
13.3
Pre-final design specifications/drawings
Final design reportRevised/updated construction cost estimate
Bidability/constructability review
Update/revised project delivery strategyPrebid Activities
Preaward Activities
Update/revise plans
WACR
Same as 8.1
Same as 8.1
Based on good engineeringjudgement and practices.Accurate to the levelsindicated in the SOW.Same as 8.1
Same as 8. 1Same as 1 1 . 1
Same as 1 1 . 1
Same as 8.1
Thorough, accurate andcomplete
IX. EPA CONTACTS
Work Assignment Manager (WAM): Debi Morey551-7593
Project Officer (PO): Debi Morey551-7593
Contracting Officer (CO): Lowell Toole551-7639
Mid America Tanning RD 13 BVSP WA/K022-RDN-077M
Attachment APRP List
Foxley Cattle Company
Andrew Hain
U.S. Tanning Company, Inc.
Ying Cheong Leather (USA), Inc.
Mid America Tanning RD " BVSP WA*022-RDNX»77M
APPENDIX BCALCULATIONS
BLACK ftVEATCH
Owner
Plont
Computed By
Unit Dote 19
Project M«
Tltle ^
Rie No. Verified By
Dote
Page
• Jf-
19
of
~Tb VS
4"
Vi-
ft 66
^'-t t OSO
/(, 900
2.o3. i 'O i
"or-
ii 'so 2.Q ^B^"
on .so
REVISED. SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,
BLACKVEATCH
Owner
Ptant- Unit
Computed By
Dote
Project No.
TitleHie No. Verified By .
Dote —L
Poge
19.
LUO
101/5r
LJ
E
oo
m
oa.
(.00
^l'-UAy 2g,000<-J
117, 017-SO
REVISED. SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED.— — - — - —- . — —,—^,-» n .
U) 3 m 0 5 o I ;s o
PG
N-1
72B
Sp
AC
E
t\ - x
~
*N "01 " *
t
0
ft.„
e7\3 R*
8.
0
T\ r>
» 9 --* _ I *
M^
6 6 r I I
k?
t o
a-O>*
>
<OD ss ft n
0
A
IJ
S f
* &
• " I • I
A IO •xi
a
BLACK &VEATCH
OwnerFMont \\r. Unit
Computed By
Dote
Project
Title
File No.IA t>< i
Verified By _
Dote —I——p"0* J
19
.of_J2_
LUo£COX
LJ
o0
CDCN
OQ.
e. n
rill
~7C> A "°'
l«4D (.10
x ''
,x"io xiUr
2/>0 cv
B, 1^5 Of
o i o * f < ; e > c 15" r
OP-
CY
^X)e^ :*>
r>r->«c-e-n ciiorocrr\cn »wn \/r»in PAIDil MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,
LEGENDS«7ffU-61*
JACOBSENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSNORTH FIELD AREA/NORTH ENDMID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS. IOWA
DRAWN BY:
DJKCHEOCOBY:
TJ
DATE:
09/20/93DATE:
09/20/93
JACOBS PROJECT
12-D255-00
ARCS
FKMMENO
1
/ / / / ,
\% 0 50
Apprexnw* Seal* In F«M
JE JACOBSENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
LEGENDS-701
U-611
SZU* VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSNORTH FIELD AREA/SOUTH END
XS£ MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS. IOWA
DRAWN BY
DJKCHEOCOBY:
TJ
DATE
09/20/93DATE
09/20/93
JACOBS PROJECTNO
12-D255-00
ARCS
FIGURE
2
LEGENDS«23*U«20T
JE JACOBSENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
S£U» VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSAREA 1-2-3-4 (SEE CONST. DWG. 6)
SSS, MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA
DRAWN BY:
DJK
OCCNEDIY:TJ
OA1E:
09/2CV93OATS.
09/20/93
JACOBS PROJECT
12-D255-00
ARCS
nouns NO
3
X \
JE JACOBS ENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSAREA 5-6-7-8-9-10 (SEE CONST. DWO. 6)MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS. IOWA
DRAWN BY
DJKCHICKED BT
TJ
DATE:
09/20/93DATE:
09/20/93
JACOBS PROJECT NO
I2-D255-00FOURS NO
ARCS
LEGENDS«2TU-23'
JE JACOBS ENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSAREA 11.24-25-26 (SEE CONST. DWO. 6)MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA
DRAWN BY:
DJKCHECKED BY:
TJ
DATE:
09/2(V93DATE:
09/2(V93
JACOBS PROJECT NO
12-D255-00FOURENO
ARCS
JACOBSENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSAREA 12-13-23-24 (SEE CONST. DWG. 6)MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS. IOWA
DRAWN BY
DTKQCOCDBY
TJ
DATE:
09/2CV93DATE:
09/20/93
JACOBS PROJECT
12-D255-00
ARCS
FOUR
JACOBSENGINEERINGGROUP INC.
SSxo. VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONSArea 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22-23 e.&»«.D-g.t>
MID-AMERICA TANNINGCEDAR RAPIDS. IOWA
DRAWN IY:
DJKCHECKED iY:
TJ
DATE:
09/20/93DATE:
09/20/93
JACOM PROJECT
12-D255-00
ARCS
FKMMENO
* 0 20
Approximate Seal* m F*«
JE JACOBS ENGINEGROUP INC.
LEGENDS = I5'U»I3'
BRING££»«,, VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONS
AREA 27-28-29-30 (SEE CONST. DWG. 6)I"cJ»T£ MID-AMERICA TANNING
*-»r-r* • » » • % » M.«^n *«-»4tr A
DMWMBY
DJKCHECKED BY:
DATE
09/20/93DATE:
nn r%/\ m-*
JACOBS PROJECT NO
I2-D255-OW
ARCS
FIGURE MO
8
BLACK &VEATCH
Owner
Plant _ UnitComputed By
Date , 19
Project No.
Title
File No. Verified By
Date ___
Page___19.
.of.
4Us
J
\
"EL-ft- ,
* 5
rtO.
I HA.
I IV(L J
/oiJt
C-
Tc =lc/|
t » S"
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,iwrmi rn awn ruTTD RY THE RESPONSIBLE INOMOUAL.
BLACK ttVEATCH
Owner MAT"
Wont Unit
Computed By
Dote ————— 19
Project No.Title
Rl« No. Verified By
Dote 19 .
O
£(/)
V)X
LdtCE
OQ
CDN
OL
<-o£\R- PASS
* 5.4
-a2."?"
" j
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED.rn AND n*TFD BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
BLACK &VEATCH
Owner
Plant _
M/VrUnit
Computed By
19
Project No..Title ____
File No.
-"-*>
Verified By
Date _
Page _
19
of.
O<Q_CO
COX
oa
mCM
OD-
rf1 60
r
3?
3.o
- pp - P.3.0 -
1440
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,rn awn nairn RY THF RFSPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
BLACK &VEATCH
Owner
Plant _ Unit
Computed By _
Date */l4 19
Project No.
Title
File No. Verified By
Date ___
Poge__£
19
.of.
LUO<Q_CO
LJ
E5S
Ozo
m<N
oo_
T,
* ZOOO PS I
CT
~oe-TT-
IT" '4-.p
=- 4 '
P»- ^
6^)' <•>{
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,INITIALED. AND DATED BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
U
M
BLACK &VEATCH
Owner
Plant _ Unit
Computed By
Date ___1 19
Project No..
Title ____
File No. Verified By
Date _
Poge of.
LUO<Q_
c/2X
LdH:Of
oQ
m
OCL
ft i a
(ll"/4)'-
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED,INITIALED, AND DATED BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
BLACK &VEATCH
Owner
Unit
Computed By
Date _____ 19.
Project No..
Title ____
File No. Verified By
19.
Page .of.
O
Q_LO
l/>
Of
Oa
COtS
oa.
<3 A cv\i~-~*
f (&-<*e(e r-£&(.
'Tvv
,ol3 -
I,S' (,&*>} - . ,^3
REVISED, SUPERSEDED, AND VOID CALCULATIONS MUST BE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED.INfTIALED. AND DATED BY THE RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL.
**************
****************
HYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF LANDFILL PERFORMANCEHELP MODEL VERSION 3.05 (30 MARCH 1996)DEVELOPED BY ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORYUSAE WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION
FOR USEPA RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
*******************************
PRECIPITATION DATA FILE:TEMPERATURE DATA FILE:SOLAR RADIATION DATA FILE:EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA:SOIL AND DESIGN DATA FILE:OUTPUT DATA FILE:
C:\HELP3\MAT_PRE3.D4C:\HELP3\MAT_TEM3.D7C:\HELP3\MAT_RAD3.D13C:\HELP3\MAT_EVP3.Dl1C:\HELP3\MATS$D3A.D10C:\HELP3\MAT_OUT7.OUT
TIME: 8:58 DATE: 7/15/1998
TITLE: Mid America Tanning North Field
NOTE: INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE LAYERS AND SNOW WATER WERECOMPUTED AS NEARLY STEADY-STATE VALUES BY THE PROGRAM.
LAYER
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 10
4.00 INCHES0.3980 VOL/VOL0.2440 VOL/VOL0.1360 VOL/VOL
THICKNESSPOROSITYFIELD CAPACITYWILTING POINTINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.3686 VOL/VOLEFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.119999997000E-03 CM/SEC
NOTE: SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY IS MULTIPLIED BY 4FOR ROOT CHANNELS IN TOP HALF OF EVAPORATIVE ZONE.
63
LAYER
TYPE 2 - LATERAL DRAINAGE LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 7
THICKNESS = 8.00 INCHESPOROSITY = 0.4730 VOL/VOLFIELD CAPACITY = 0.2220 VOL/VOLWILTING POINT = 0.1040 VOL/VOLINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.2608 VOL/VOLEFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.520000001000E-03 CM/SECSLOPE = 6.50 PERCENTDRAINAGE LENGTH = 170.0 FEET
LAYER 3
TYPE 4 - FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE LINERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 35
0.06 INCHES0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL
= 0.199999996000E-12 CM/SEC0.50 HOLES/ACRE1.00 HOLES/ACRE
= 6 - W/ GEOTEXTILE0.300000 CM*CM/SEC
THICKNESSPOROSITYFIELD CAPACITYWILTING POINTINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENTEFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.FML PINHOLE DENSITYFML INSTALLATION DEFECTSFML PLACEMENT QUALITYGEOTEXTILE TRANSMISSIVITY
LAYER 4
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 21
THICKNESSPOROSITYFIELD CAPACITYWILTING POINTINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =
6.00 INCHES0.3970 VOL/VOL0.0320 VOL/VOL0.0130 VOL/VOL0.0465 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.300000012000 CM/SEC
GENERAL DESIGN AND EVAPORATIVE ZONE DATA
NOTE: SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER WAS COMPUTED FROM DEFAULTSOIL DATA BASE USING SOIL TEXTURE #10 WITH AGOOD STAND OF GRASS, A SURFACE SLOPE OF 2.%AND A SLOPE LENGTH OF 140. FEET.
SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERFRACTION OF AREA ALLOWING RUNOFFAREA PROJECTED ON HORIZONTAL PLANEEVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTHINITIAL WATER IN EVAPORATIVE ZONEUPPER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGELOWER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGEINITIAL SNOW WATERINITIAL WATER IN LAYER MATERIALSTOTAL INITIAL WATERTOTAL SUBSURFACE INFLOW
81.10100.0
1.25012.0351
560376376
0.0003.8393.8390.00
PERCENTACRESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHES/YEAR
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND WEATHER DATA
NOTE: EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA WAS OBTAINED FROMDBS MOINES IOWA
STATION LATITUDEMAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEXSTART OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTHAVERAGE ANNUAL WIND SPEEDAVERAGE 1ST QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 2ND QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 3RD QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 4TH QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
41.53 DEGREES3.50112291
12.0 INCHES10.90 MPH70.00 %64.00 %69.00 %70.00 %
NOTE:
JAN/JUL
1.013.22
PRECIPITATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USINGCOEFFICIENTS FOR DBS MOINES IOWA
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (INCHES)
FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
1.124.11
2.203.09
3.212.16
3.961.52
4.181.05
NOTE: TEMPERATURE DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USINGCOEFFICIENTS FOR DBS MOINES IOWA
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES FAHRENHEIT)
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
18.607 6 . 7 0
24.5073.90
35.1065.10
50.5054.20
62.1038.60
71.6025.70
NOTE: SOLAR RADIATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR DBS MOINES IOWAAND STATION LATITUDE = 41.53 DEGREES
r***************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
*****************************************
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
FOR YEAR 1
INCHES
27.68
1.098
25.609
0.3979
0.568511
0.9783
0.567233
0.006
4.283
4.289
0.000
0.000
0.0016
r**************V
r***************
FOR YEAR 2
INCHES
34.99
5.204
28.872
0.8703
1.281860
CU. FEET
125598.008
4982.783
116202.797
1805.693
2579.621
2573.822
25.592
19434.846
19460.437
0.000
0.000
7.322
r*************
r*************
CU. FEET
158767.078
23613.027
131007.555
3949.133
5816.441
PERCENT
100.00
3.97
92.52
1.44
2.05
2.05
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.01
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
14.87
82.52
2.49
3.66
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3 2.1118
PERC. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************i
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2 ' _.
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
1.258449
-1,219
4.289
3.038
0.000
0.031
0.0042
t**************i
(r******* * *-* * * * * i
FOR YEAR 3
INCHES
34.21
3.489
28.457
0.6016
0.863963
1.4720
0.846864
0.8Q8
3.038
3.650
o.osr0.227
0.0085
5710.210
-5531.863
19460.437
13785.685
0.000
142.890
19.017
ir*************i
Ir**************
CU. FEET
155227.859
15830.256
129121.875
2729.668
3920.232
3842.647
3664.787
13785.685
16563.346
142.890
1030.017
38.620
3.60
-3.48
—
0.00
0.09
0.01
***********
t*-********
PERCENT ~
100.00
10.20
83.18
1.76
2.53
2.48
2.36
0.09
0.66
0.02
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************!
***************************************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
INCHES
28.04
2.343
25.613
0.2374
0.341577
0.5801
0.427111
-0.592
3.650
3.286
0.227
0.000
0.0115
»r**************i
k**************i
FOR YEAR 5
INCHES
35.30
2.081
30.633
0.8550
1.255829
2.0838
1.179346
0.539
3.286
3.669
CU. FEET
127231.523
10630.748
116217.648
1077.226
1549.907
1938.018
-2684.435
16563.346
14908.928
1030.017
0.000
52.315
************
************
CU. FEET
160173.781
9443.130
138997.578
3879.637
5698.323
5351.281
2444.465
14908.928
16647.117
PERCENT
100.00
8.36
91.34
0.85
1.22
1.52
-2.11
0.81
0.00
0.04
*************
*************
PERCENT
100.00
5.90
86.78
2.42
3.56
3.34
1.53
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************:
***************************************:
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************^
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
0.000
0.156
0.0127
**************!
***************
FOR YEAR 6
INCHES
30.70
0.367
30.311
0.4103
0.580212
1.0009
0.582714
-0.973
3.669
2.839
0.156
0.013
0.0013
Ir*************^
Ir**************
FOR YEAR 7
INCHES
26.38
1.959
22.392
0.000
706.275
57.687
***************
***************
CU. FEET
139301.250
1666.777
137537.656
1861.814
2632.710
2644.066
-4415.096
16647.117
12880.319
706.275
57.978
6.029
tr**************
t**************
CU. FEET
119699.273
8888.785
101604.883
0.00 -
0.44
0.04
**********
-V
***********
PERCENT
100.00 ~
1.20
98.73
1.34
1.89
1.90
-3.17
0.51
0.04
0.00
**********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
7.43
84.88
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC
AVG.
PERC
. /LEAKAGE
HEAD ON
. /LEAKAGE
THROUGH LAYER 3
TOP OF LAYER 3
THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL
SOIL
SNOW
SNOW
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
ANNUAL WATER
******
******
*********
*********
START OF YEAR
END OF YEAR
START OF YEAR
END OF YEAR
BUDGET
*******
*******
BALANCE
:*****************l
*******************
ANNUAL TOTALS
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
2.
3.
0.
0.
0.
******
3598
510206
8729
489051
169
839
834
013
187
0106
**********
1632
2315
2219
5306
12880
17394
57
849
47
********
.403
.060
.069
.142
.319
.971
.978
.468
.987
******
1
1
1
4
0
0
0
*****
.36
.93
.85
.43
.05
.71
.04
******
****************************************
FOR YEAR 8
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC
AVG.
PERC
. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
HEAD ON TOP OF
. /LEAKAGE
LAYER 3
THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL
SOIL
SNOW
SNOW
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
START
END OF
START
END OF
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET
OF YEAR
YEAR
OF YEAR
YEAR
BALANCE
29.
1.
26.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
3.
3.
0.
1.
0.
65
304
634
6415
928287
5520
995113
075
834
040
187
055
0001
CU. FEET
134536
5918
120853
2910
4212
4515
338
17394
13794
849
4787
0
.859
.643
.500
.728
.101
.327
.229
.971
.715
.468
.953
.438
PERCENT
100
4
89
2
3
3
0
0
3
0
.00
.40
.83
.16
.13
.36
.25
.63
.56
.00
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
36
3
29
0
1
2
1
0
3
4
1
0
0
.34
.715
.738
.9065
.314193
.2102
.252531
.687
.040
.783
.055
.000
.0403
CU. FEET
164892
16857
134937
4113
5963
5683
3118
13794
21700
4787
0
182
.766
.758
.078
.402
.152
.360
.187
.715
.855
.953
.000
.992
PERCENT
100
10
81
2
3
3
1
2
0
0
.00
.22
.83
.49 -
.62
.45
.89
.90
.00
.11
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
28.39
1.278
25.667
0.5395
0.772840
1.3121
0.782870
10
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE 0.123
CU. FEET
128819.648
5797.630
116462.875
2447.964
3506.760
3552.271
558.865
PERCENT
100.00
4.50
90.41
1.90
2.72
2.76
0.43
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
********************************!
********************************!
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
*********************************
*********************************
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
4.783
4.700
0.000
0.206
0.0000
**********************
**********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 11
INCHES
29.97
0.874
29.231
2 0.9691
1.409688
2.3599
1.470033
-2.578
4.700
2.328
0.206
0.000
0.0033
r*********************
r*********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 12
INCHES
27.81
21700.855
21325.322
0.000
934.396
0.040
**************
**************
CU. FEET
135988.891
3965.666
132637.703
4397.365
6396.460
6670.275
-11697.274
21325.322
10562.445
934.396
0.000
15.166
**************
**************
CU. FEET
126187.867
0.00
0.73
0.00
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
2.92
97.54
3.23
4.70
4.91
-8.60
0.69
0.00
0.01
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
3.420
22.896
0.1272
0.179434
0.3122
0.221343
1.139
2.328
2.964
0.000
0.502
0.0071
15516.197
103890.930
577.385
814.180
1004.342
5166.900
10562.445
13449.568
0.000
2279.777
32.112
12.30
82.33
0.46
0.65
0.80
4.09
0.00
1.81
0.03
r********-.
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR 13
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
INCHES
24.83
1.045
22.651
0.1864
0.266137
0.4533
0.217858
0.722
2.964
3.900
0.502
0.288
CU. FEET
112666.125
4743.129
102777.125
845.924
1207.598
988.530
3274.556
13449.568
17697.557
2279.777
1306.344
PERCENT
100.00
4.21
91.22
0.75
1.07
0.88
2.91
2.02
1.16
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
********************:
0.0081 36.860
:***:
0.03
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
****************************************
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
FOR YEAR 14
INCHES
29.64
1.763
25.990
0.4375
0.627712
1.0653
0.549284
0.898
3.900
4.905
0.288
0.181
0.0028
****************
1:***************
FOR YEAR 15
INCHES
26.97
2.543
22.397
0.9566
1.391263
CU. FEET
134491.500
8000.283
117927.773
1985.222
2848.244
2492.375
4073.363
17697.557
22254.742
1306.344
822.522
12.492
t*************
**************
CU. FEET
122376.391
11539.096
101628.258
4340.668
6312.857
PERCENT
100.00
5.95
87.68
1.48
2.12
1.85
3.03
0.97
0.61
0.01
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
9.43
83.05
3.55
5.16
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
2
1
-0
4
4
0
0
0
.3301
.394465
.325
.905
.304
.181
.457
.0032
6327
-1473
22254
19528
822
2074
14
.387
.683
.742
.602
.522
.980
.667
5
-1
0
1
0
.17
.20
.67 _
.70
.01 ~
******************************************************************************
***************************************^
ANNUAL TOTALS
(r****
FOR
**********!
YEAR 16
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
26
1
24
0
0
1
0
-1
4
2
0
0
0
.53
.783
.719
.5194
.735153
.2620
.823593
.321
.304
.870
.457
.570
.0064
**************
CU. FEET
120379
8090
112160
2356
3335
3737
-5993
19528
13021
2074
2588
28
.891
.808
.492
.575
.755
.054
.919
.602
.122
.980
.541
.881
***********
PERCENT
100
6
93
1
2
3
-4
1
2
0
.00
.72
.17
.96
.77
.10
.98
.72
.15
.02
r******************************
******************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************•)
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
FOR YEAR 17
INCHES
30.18
1.437
27.369
0.2264
0.321370
0.5532
0.342622
0.796
2.870
3.349
0.570
0.887
0.0094
****************
****************
FOR YEAR 18
INCHES
31.19
1.159
29.563
0.4152
0.604137
1.0041
0.611261
-0.570
3.349
3.666
CU. FEET
136941.750
6519.995
124186.797
1027.258
1458.217
1554.645
3610.570
13021.122
15195.460
2588.541
4024.773
42.475
*************
*************
CU. FEET
141524.641
5257.027
134144.156
1883.811
2741.271
2773.598
-2585.741
15195.460
16634.492
PERCENT
100.00
4.76
90.69
0.75
1.06
1.14
2.64
1.89
2.94
0.03
************
************
PERCENT
100.00
3.71
94.79
1.33
1.94
1.96
-1.83
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
********************************•!
********************************1
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
*********************************
*********************************
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
0.887
0.000
0.0114
**********************
**********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 19
INCHES
25.35
1.284
22.923
2 0.6297
0.915835
1.5327
0.898582
-0.393
3.666
3.168
0.000
0.105
0.0077
**********************
**********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 20
INCHES
37.81
6.826
28.144
4024.773
0.000
51.787
**************
**************
CU. FEET
115025.633
5825.654
104013.680
2857.431
4155.602
4077.314
-1783.207
16634.492
14373.641
0.000
477.644
34.766
**************
**************
CU. FEET
171562.906
30974.969
127705.492
2.84
0.00
0.04
***********
**********^
PERCENT
100.00
5.06
90.43
2.48
3.61
3.54
-1.55
0.00
0.42
0.03
•jcie-jcidcieitiricic +
PERCENT
100.00
18.05
74.44
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
0.4952
0.703967
1.2033
0.600967
1.731
3.168
5.004
0.105
0.000
0.0118
2246.896
3194.251
2726.890
7855.132
14373.641
22706.416
477.644
0.000
53.521
1.31
1.86
1.59
4.58
0.28
0.00
0.03
*******************************************************************************
AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 20
PRECIPITATION
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
RUNOFF
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
JAN/JUL
0.773.35
0.381.84
0.0560.045
0.0800.173
0.5483.401
0.1451.733
FEB/AUG
0.974.18
0.481.85
0.3470.065
0.3880.131
0.4373.136
0.1251.173
MAR/SEP
2.403.15
1.131.42
1.1370.043
0.9430.089
1.0283.107
0.5330.805
APR/OCT
2.672.01
1.341.38
0.2530.010
0.8090.039
2.8002.058
0.7550.800
MAY/ NO V
3.891.42
1.840.88
0.1210.004
0.3150.014
3.9630.849
1.0830.341
JUN/DEC
4.191.09
1.900.55
0.1200.048
0.2400.112
4.6040.558
1.6040.170
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.02420.0093
0.02160.0175
THROUGH LAYER
0.03470.0132
0.03020.0249
THROUGH LAYER
0.04140.0335
0.03550.0232
0.01700.0191
0.01510.0267
3
0.02480.0275
0.02160.0387
4
0.02970.0193
0.02180.0170
AVERAGES OF MONTHLY AVERAGED
DAILY AVERAGE HEAD
AVERAGES
STD. DEVIATIONS
ON TOP OF LAYER
0.68800.2665
0.60930.5027
3
0.54100.5473
0.48180.7675
0.04750.0493
0.05680.0665
0.06920.0712
0.08350.0977
0.04750.0545
0.05970.0724
0.10430.0429
0.06650.0618
0.15010.0616
0.09940.0897
0.11720.0682
0.09700.0826
0.08540.0508
0.06880.0742
0.12340.0738
0.10230.1110
0.12850.0642
0.09570.1045
0.03650.0530
0.0590~0.0598
0.05320.0759-
0.08760.0859
••r
0.0958-0.0759
0.09090.0944
DAILY HEADS (INCHES)
1.36231.4609
1.62701.9693
3.09411.2319
1.96471.7719
2.44811.5058
1.96752.1965
1.08091.5235
1.74361.7174
r*************************************
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 20
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTEDFROM LAYER 2
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGHLAYER 3
INCHES
30.10 ( 3.792)
2.249 ( 1.5931)
26.491 ( 2.8274)
0.53913 ( 0.26216)
0.77861 ( 0.38580)
CU. FEET
136569.7
10203.12
120200.78
2446.310
3532.937
PERCENT
100.00
7.471
88.014
1.79125
2.58691
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP 1.313 ( 0.638)
OF LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH 0.77556 ( 0.38101) 3519.124 2.57680LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE 0.036 ( 1.0460) 163.58 0.120
PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS
(INCHES)
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
MAXIMUM HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
LOCATION OF MAXIMUM HEAD IN LAYER 2(DISTANCE FROM DRAIN)
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
SNOW WATER
3
1
0
0
11
18
37
0
1
.73
.767
.01366
.021728
.899
.445
.7 FEET
.021353
.56
(CU. FT.)
16924.
8016.
61.
98.
96.
7073.
875
1138
97333
59031
88802
1787
MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
0.4480
0.1147
*** Maximum heads are computed using McEnroe's equations. ***
Reference: Maximum Saturated Depth over Landfill Linerby Bruce M. McEnroe, University of KansasASCE Journal of Environmental EngineeringVol. 119, No. 2, March 1993, pp. 262-270.
:***
FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END OF YEAR 20
LAYER
1
2
3
4
SNOW WATER
(INCHES)
1.1768
3.0436
0.0000
0.3397
0.000
(VOL/VOL)
0.2942
0.3805
0.0000
0.0566
r*******************
******************
HYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF LANDFILL PERFORMANCEHELP MODEL VERSION 3.05 (30 MARCH 1996)DEVELOPED BY ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORYUSAE WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION
FOR USEPA RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
:*********!
:*******
r**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
I **
r*******
PRECIPITATION DATA FILE:TEMPERATURE DATA FILE:SOLAR RADIATION DATA FILE:EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA:SOIL AND DESIGN DATA FILE:OUTPUT DATA FILE:
C:\HELP3\MAT_PRE5.D4C:\HELP3\MAT_TEM5.D7C:\HELP3\MAT_SOL5.D13C:\HELP3\MAT_EVP5.D11C:\HELP3\MATS$D6.D10C:\HELP3\MAT_OUT6.OUT
TIME: 8:26 DATE: 7/15/1998
TITLE: Mid America Tanning Polishing Basin
*********!
NOTE: INITIAL MOISTURE CONTENT OF THE LAYERS AND SNOW WATER WERECOMPUTED AS NEARLY STEADY-STATE VALUES BY THE PROGRAM.
LAYER
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 10
THICKNESS = 4.00 INCHESPOROSITY = 0.3980 VOL/VOLFIELD CAPACITY = 0.2440 VOL/VOLWILTING POINT = 0.1360 VOL/VOLINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.3711 VOL/VOLEFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.119999997000E-03 CM/SEC
NOTE: SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY IS MULTIPLIED BY 3FOR ROOT CHANNELS IN TOP HALF OF EVAPORATIVE ZONE.
63
LAYER
TYPE 2 - LATERAL DRAINAGE LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 7
THICKNESS = 8.00 INCHESPOROSITY = 0.4730 VOL/VOLFIELD CAPACITY = 0.2220 VOL/VOLWILTING POINT = 0.1040 VOL/VOLINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT = 0.2606 VOL/VOLEFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND. = 0.520000001000E-03 CM/SECSLOPE = 4.00 PERCENTDRAINAGE LENGTH = 170.0 FEET
LAYER 3
TYPE 4 - FLEXIBLEMATERIAL TEXTURE
THICKNESSPOROSITYFIELD CAPACITYWILTING POINTINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.FML PINHOLE DENSITYFML INSTALLATION DEFECTSFML PLACEMENT QUALITYGEOTEXTILE TRANSMISSIVITY
MEMBRANE LINERNUMBER 35
0.06 INCHES0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL0.0000 VOL/VOL
199999996000E-12 CM/SEC0.50 HOLES/ACRE1.00 HOLES/ACRE
6 - W/ GEOTEXTILE0.300000 CM*CM/SEC
= 0
LAYER
TYPE 1 - VERTICAL PERCOLATION LAYERMATERIAL TEXTURE NUMBER 21
THICKNESSPOROSITYFIELD CAPACITYWILTING POINTINITIAL SOIL WATER CONTENT =
6.00 INCHES0.3970 VOL/VOL0.0320 VOL/VOL0.0130 VOL/VOL0.0459 VOL/VOL
EFFECTIVE SAT. HYD. COND.= 0.300000012000 CM/SEC
GENERAL DESIGN AND EVAPORATIVE ZONE DATA
NOTE: SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER WAS COMPUTED FROM DEFAULTSOIL DATA BASE USING SOIL TEXTURE #10 WITH AGOOD STAND OF GRASS, A SURFACE SLOPE OF 4.%AND A SLOPE LENGTH OF 440. FEET.
SCS RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERFRACTION OF AREA ALLOWING RUNOFFAREA PROJECTED ON HORIZONTAL PLANEEVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTHINITIAL WATER IN EVAPORATIVE ZONEUPPER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGELOWER LIMIT OF EVAPORATIVE STORAGEINITIAL SNOW WATERINITIAL WATER IN LAYER MATERIALSTOTAL INITIAL WATERTOTAL SUBSURFACE INFLOW
80.30100.03.560
12.03.5695.3761.3760.0003.8453.8450.00
PERCENTACRESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHESINCHES/YEAR
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION AND WEATHER DATA
NOTE: EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA WAS OBTAINED FROMDBS MOINES IOWA
STATION LATITUDEMAXIMUM LEAF AREA INDEXSTART OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)END OF GROWING SEASON (JULIAN DATE)EVAPORATIVE ZONE DEPTHAVERAGE ANNUAL WIND SPEEDAVERAGE 1ST QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 2ND QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 3RD QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITYAVERAGE 4TH QUARTER RELATIVE HUMIDITY
41.53 DEGREES2.50112291
12.0 INCHES10.90 MPH70.00 %64.00 %69.00 %70.00 %
NOTE:
JAN/JUL
1.013.22
PRECIPITATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USINGCOEFFICIENTS FOR DES MOINES IOWA
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (INCHES)
FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV
1.124.11
2.203.09
3.212.16
3.961.52
JUN/DEC
4.181.05
NOTE: TEMPERATURE DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USINGCOEFFICIENTS FOR DES MOINES IOWA
NORMAL MEAN MONTHLY TEMPERATURE (DEGREES FAHRENHEIT)
JAN/JUL FEB/AUG MAR/SEP APR/OCT MAY/NOV JUN/DEC
18.607 6 . 7 0
24 .5073.90
35.1065.10
50.5054 .20
62.1038.60
71.6025.70
NOTE: SOLAR RADIATION DATA WAS SYNTHETICALLY GENERATED USING
COEFFICIENTS FOR DBS MOINES IOWAAND STATION LATITUDE = 41.53 DEGREES
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
****************************************
****************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
FOR YEAR 1
INCHES
27.68
1.096
25.719
0.2603
0.603456
1.0361
0.600361
0.003
4.289
4.292
0.000
0.000
0.0016
IT***************
t***************
FOR YEAR 2
INCHES
34.99
5.183
29.173
0.5631
1.370726
CU. FEET
357703.125
14162.571
332356.625
3363.198
7798.341
7758.344
41.489
55419.664
55461.152
0.000
0.000
20.894
t****** *******
r*************
CU. FEET
452168.625
66976.039
376993.312
7276.416
17713.621
PERCENT
100.00
3.96
92.91
0.94
2.18
2.17
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
14.81
83.37
1.61
3.92
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3 2.2487
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************!
***************************************1
ANNUAL TOTALS
1
-1
4
2
0
0
0
IT****
Ir****
FOR
.342111
.275
.292
.985
.000
.031
.0042
**********:
**********•>
YEAR 3
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
34
3
28
0
0
1
0
0
2
3
0
0
0
.21
.392
.762
.3950
.917287
.5666
.903002
.750
.985
.539
.031
.227
.0085
17343
-16475
55461
38579
0
406
54
********
Ir*******
.838
.158
.152
.047
.000
.951
.182
******
******
CU. FEET
442088
43828
371690
5103
11853
11669
9687
38579
45739
406
2933
110
.906
.324
.031
.976
.912
.318
.172
.047
.680
.951
.488
.086
3
-3
0
0
0
*****
*****
.84
.64
.00
.09
.01
*****
*****
PERCENT
100
9
84
1
2
2
2
0
0
0
.00
.91
.08
.15
.68
.64
.19
.09
.66
.02
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************•,
***************************************i
ANNUAL TOTALS
28
2
25
0
0
0
0
-0
3
3
0
0
0
*****
*****
.04
.318
.677
.1476
.341455
.5847
.446665
.561
.539
.205
.227
.000
.0115
**********!
**********1
CU. FEET
362355
29956
331819
1908
4412
5772
-7250
45739
41423
2933
0
149
IT*******
********
.375
.557
.500
.039
.549
.164
.034
.680
.133
.488
.000
.122
******
******
PERCENT
100.
8.
91.
0.
1.
1.
-2.
0.
0.
0.
******
******
00
27
57
53
22
59
00
81
00
04
*****
*****
FOR YEAR 5
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
35
2
30
0
1
2
1
0
3
3
.30
.349
.707
.5287
.277978
.1161
.182503
.520
.205
.570
CU. FEET
456174
30352
396825
6832
16515
15281
6719
41423
46130
.906
.828
.437
.026
.053
.249
.014
.133
.676
PERCENT
100.
6.
86.
1.
3.
3.
1.
00
65
99
50
62
35
47
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************•>
***************************************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************!
***************************************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
0.000
0.156
0.0127
***************
***************
FOR YEAR 6
INCHES
30.70
0.335
30.306
0.2691
0.616045
1.0636
0.614799
-0.826
3.570
2.886
0.156
0.013
0.0013
***************
***************
FOR YEAR 7
INCHES
26.38
1.920
22.526
0.000
2011.472
164.353
**************!
**************!
CU. FEET
396729.937
4332.933
391634.156
3477.504
7961.024
7944.930
-10676.685
46130.676
37300.340
2011.472
165.121
17.104
**************!
**************1
CU. FEET
340903.531
24808.443
291096.344
0.00
0.44
0.04
it*********
***********
PERCENT
100.00 -1.09
98.72
0.88
2.01
-
2.00
-2.69
0.51
0.04
0.00
**********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
7.28
85.39
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC
AVG.
PERC
. /LEAKAGE
HEAD ON
. /LEAKAGE
THROUGH LAYER 3
TOP OF LAYER 3
THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL
SOIL
SNOW
SNOW
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
ANNUAL WATER
START OF YEAR
END OF YEAR
START OF YEAR
END OF YEAR
BUDGET BALANCE
0
0
0
0
12
3
0
0
0
.2395
.550014
.9429
.532623
.152
.886
.864
.013
.187
.0106
3094
7107
6882
14884
37300
49930
165
2419
136
.612
.725
.986
.581
.340
.762
.121
.284
.559
0
2
2
4
0
0
0
.91
.08
.02
.37
.05
.71
.04
*******************************************************************************
***************************************^
ANNUAL TOTALS
(r****
FOR
**********i
YEAR 8
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC
AVG.
PERC
. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
HEAD ON TOP OF
. /LEAKAGE
LAYER 3
THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL
SOIL
SNOW
SNOW
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
WATER AT
START
END OF
START
END OF
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET
*r*****:*****************
OF YEAR
YEAR
OF YEAR
YEAR
BALANCE
******************
29
1
26
0
0
1
1
-0
3
2
0
1
0
r****
.65
.362
.826
.4202
.989977
.6573
.064418
.023
.864
.973
.187
.055
.0001
***********
**************
CU. FEET
383160
17598
346667
5429
12793
13755
-291
49930
38422
2419
13636
1
t*******
.969
.217
.500
.862
.279
.264
.074
.762
.879
.284
.090
.192
******
***********
PERCENT
100
4
90
1
3
3
-0
0
3
0
*****
.00
.59
.48
.42
.34
.59
.08
.63
.56
.00
******
**************************************** r**********************'
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR 9
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
36.
3.
29.
0.
1.
2.
1.
0.
2.
4.
1.
0.
0.
34
648
776
6057
433230
4029
363599
906
973
934
055
000
0403
CU. FEET
469614
47141
384794
7827
18521
17621
11707
38422
63766
13636
0
521
.594
.801
.625
.458
.340
.512
.854
.879
.824
.090
.000
.319
PERCENT
100
10
81
1
3
3
2
2
0
0
.00
.04 _
.94
.67 ""
.94
.75 _
.49
.90
.00
.11
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
28.39
1.322
25.829
0.3839
0.891005
1.5152
0.902043
10
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE -0.047
CU. FEET
366878.344
17080.234
333782.094
4961.365
11514.278
11656.919
-602.266
PERCENT
100.00
4.66
90.98
1.35
3.14
3.18
-0.16
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
4.934
4.682
0.000
0.206
0.0000
63766
60503
0
2661
0
.824
.398
.000
.161
.009
0.00
0.73
0.00
:***************
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR 11
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
29.
0.
29.
0.
1.
2.
1.
-2.
4.
2.
0.
0.
0.
97
866
400
6237
479444
4819
537516
460
682
428
206
000
0033
CU. FEET
387296
11185
379925
8059
19118
19869
-31786
60503
31378
2661
0
43
.375
.381
.312
.637
.557
.012
.174
.398
.385
.161
.000
.190
PERCENT
100.
2.
98.
2.
4.
5.
-8.
0.
0.
0.
00
89
10
08
94
13
21
69
00
01
*******************************************************************************
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
27.81
12
PRECIPITATION
CU. FEET
359383.031
PERCENT
100.00
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
3.426
23.014
0.0909
0.207376
0.3601
0.249392
1.023
2.428
2.948
0.000
0.502
0.0071
44272.906
297405.375
1174.349
2679.880
3222.843
13216.034
31378.385
38101.613
0.000
6492.804
91.511
12.32
82.75
0.33
0.75
0.90
3.68
0.00
1.81
0.03
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR
INCHES
24.83
1.026
22.688
0.1323
0.306066
0.5220
0.258840
0.717
2.948
3.880
0.502
13
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR 0.288
CU. FEET
320873.125
13256.390
293192.656
1709.753
3955.226
3344.943
9264.296
38101.613
50138.246
6492.804
3720.468
PERCENT
100.00
4.13
91.37
0.53
1.23
1.04
2.89
2.02
1.16
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
********************************
********************************
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
*********************************
*********************************
ANNUAL
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
0.0081
***********************
***********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 14
INCHES
29.64
1.753
26.191
2 0.2570
0.597729
1.0139
0.520099
0.916
3.880
4.902
0.288
0.181
0.0027
***********************
***********************
TOTALS FOR YEAR 15
INCHES
26.97
2.456
22.577
2 0.6200
1.471151
105.061
*************
*************
CU. FEET
383031.812
22656.951
338465.437
3320.569
7724.333
6721.137
11832.330
50138.246
63348.500
3720.468
2342.544
35.353
*************
*************
CU. FEET
348527.937
31738.385
291758.781
8012.269
19011.395
0.03
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
5.92
88.36
0.87
2.02
1.75
3.09
0.97
0.61
0.01
***********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
9.11
83.71
2.30
5.45
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************i
***************************************-I
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
2.4602
1.473754
-0.160
4.902
4.466
0.181
0.457
0.0032
lr**************i
***************i
FOR YEAR 16
INCHES
26.53
1.784
24.732
0.3860
0.886483
1.5208
0.972525
-1.350
4.466
3.002
0.457
0.570
0.0064
19045.031
-2068.393
63348.500
57713.109
2342.544
5909.543
41.873
»r*************
**************
CU. FEET
342841.906
23051.867
319603.437
4988.181
11455.845
12567.752
-17451.596
57713.109
38798.891
5909.543
7372.164
82.247
-
5.46
-0.59 ~
0.67 _
1.70
0.01
***********~
PERCENT
100.00
6.72
93.22
1.45
3.34
3.67
-5.09
1.72
2.15
0.02
ANNUAL TOTALS FOR YEAR 17
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************i
***************************************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
30
1
27
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
it****
*****
FOR
.18
.389
.754
.1444
.333821
.5730
.357923
.525
.002
.211
.570
.887
.0094
**********!
**********!
YEAR 18
INCHES
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
31
1
29
0
0
0
0
-0
3
3
.19
.079
.890
.2452
.578398
.9674
.585889
.621
.211
.477
CU. FEET
390010
17949
358660
1865
4313
4625
6788
38798
41497
7372
11462
120
********
********
.062
.422
.250
.412
.896
.365
.680
.891
.184
.164
.553
.930
******
******
CU. FEET
403062
13941
386262
3168
7474
7571
-8029
41497
44930
.187
.501
.875
.301
.524
.325
.130
.184
.605
PERCENT
100.
4.
91.
0.
1.
1.
1.
1.
2.
0.
******
******
00
60
96
48
11
19
74
89
94
03
*****
*****
PERCENT
100.
3.
95.
0.
1.
1.
-1.
00
46
83
79
85
88
99
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************!
***************************************!
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC . /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC. /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
***************************************^
***************************************v
ANNUAL TOTALS
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
0.887
0.000
0.0114
»r**************l
***************•>
FOR YEAR 19
INCHES
25.35
1.225
23.078
0.3764
0.887280
1.4939
0.869606
-0.207
3.477
3.164
0.000
0.105
0.0077
Ir**************^
****************
FOR YEAR 20
INCHES
37.81
7.100
28.127
11462.553
0.000
147.313
**************
**************
CU. FEET
327593.000
15834.851
298233.125
4864.315
11466.145
11237.740
-2676.103
44930.605
40894.172
0.000
1360.331
99.074
**************
**************
CU. FEET
488611.125
91747.773
363473.531
2.84
0.00
0.04
•k if * * * it * * * it TI-
'k'ic'ie'jcif'te'je'iticic'*"
PERCENT
100.00
4.83
91.04
1.48 ~
3.50
3.43
-0.82
0.00
0.42
0.03
**********
***********
PERCENT
100.00
18.78
74.39
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVG. HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
PERC./LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE
SOIL WATER AT START OF YEAR
SOIL WATER AT END OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT START OF YEAR
SNOW WATER AT END OF YEAR
ANNUAL WATER BUDGET BALANCE
0.3086
0.719239
1.2211
0.618218
1.645
3.164
4.915
0.105
0.000
0.0118
3988.217
9294.582
7989.109
21260.176
40894.172
63514.680
1360.331
0.000
152.316
0.82
1.90
1.64
4.35
0.28
0.00
0.03
:*****:
:*******•*******
AVERAGE MONTHLY VALUES IN INCHES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 20
PRECIPITATION
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
RUNOFF
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
E VAPOTRANS P I RAT I ON
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
JAN/JUL
0.773.35
0.381.84
0.0560.042
0.0780.166
0.5473.435
0.1461.752
FEB/AUG
0.974.18
0.481.85
0.3470.056
0.3860.115
0.4363.193
0.1251.215
MAR/SEP
2.403.15
1.131.42
1.1430.039
0.9420.089
1.0403.038
0.5520.779
APR/OCT
2.672.01
1.341.38
0.2530.008
0.8120.033
2.8302.121
0.7580.802
MAY/NOV
3.891.42
1.840.88
0.1300.003
0.3180.011
3.6900.899
1.1210.360
JUN/DEC
4.191.09
1.900.55
0.1270.048
0.2450.113
4.8400.569
1.5350.173
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE
TOTALS
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.01570.0060
0.01420.0109
THROUGH LAYER
0.03640.0138
0.03220.0251
THROUGH LAYER
0.04230.0391
0.03680.0254
0.01150.0120
0.01020.0171
3
0.02700.0281
0.02360.0402
4
0.03120.0204
0.02370.0176
AVERAGES OF MONTHLY AVERAGED
DAILY AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER
AVERAGES
STD. DEVIATIONS
0.72550.2800
0.65030.5075
3
0.59370.5591
0.52760.8001
0.03000.0292
0.03630.0396
0.07130.0688
0.08740.0951
0.05100.0534
0.06320.0709
0.06360.0297
0.04060.0407
0.14900.0694
0.10010.0963
0.11700.0748
0.09790.0880
0.05610.0322
0.04190.0478
0.13240.0766
0.10240.1184
0.12950.0701
0.09140.1132
0.03100.0327
0.0384~0.0373
0.07400.0760.
0.09570.0872
0.1156-0.0755
0.10140.0959
DAILY HEADS (INCHES)
1.40231.4123
1.69931.9199
3.07151.3884
1.98081.9016
2.62721.5582
1.97502.3266
1.50621.5246
1.87941.7379
****************
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTALS & (STD. DEVIATIONS) FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 20
INCHES CU. FEET PERCENT
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
LATERAL DRAINAGE COLLECTEDFROM LAYER 2
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGHLAYER 3
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP
30.10 ( 3.792)
2.251 ( 1.6322)
26.638 ( 2.8430)
0.34987 ( 0.16961)
0.82291 ( 0.40938)
1.387 ( 0.676)
388950.4
29093.67
344232.03
4521.272
10634.274
100.00
7.480
88.503
1.16243
2.73409
OF LAYER 3
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH 0.81979 ( 0.40345) 10594.038 2.72375LAYER 4
CHANGE IN WATER STORAGE 0.031 ( 1.0077) 404.75 0.104
PEAK DAILY VALUES FOR YEARS 1 THROUGH 20
PRECIPITATION
RUNOFF
DRAINAGE COLLECTED FROM LAYER 2
PERCOLATION/LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 3
AVERAGE HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
MAXIMUM HEAD ON TOP OF LAYER 3
LOCATION OF MAXIMUM HEAD IN LAYER 2(DISTANCE FROM DRAIN)
PERCOLATION /LEAKAGE THROUGH LAYER 4
SNOW WATER
(INCHES)
3.73
1.764
0.00781
0.021765
11.916
17.076
48.0 FEET
0.021618
1.56
(CU. FT.)
48202.043
22792.7363
100.97242
281.27090
279.36911
20144.4121
MAXIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
MINIMUM VEG. SOIL WATER (VOL/VOL)
0.4480
0.1147
*** Maximum heads are computed using McEnroe's equations. ***
Reference: Maximum Saturated Depth over Landfill Linerby Bruce M. McEnroe, University of KansasASCE Journal of Environmental EngineeringVol. 119, No. 2, March 1993, pp. 262-270.
FINAL WATER STORAGE AT END
LAYER (INCHES)
1 1
2 2
3 0
4 0
SNOW WATER 0
.1849
.9481
.0000
.3379
.000
it****************************
OF YEAR 20
(VOL/VOL)
0.
0.
0.
0.
2962
3685
0000
0563
******************************************************************************
APPENDIX CCONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
[PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
IDATE: JULY 20, 1998
iBASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
__ CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
__ OTHER (Specify) ______
BID ITEM 1 - MOBILIZATIONIBID ITEM 2 - DEMOLITION (LAGOON AREA)BID ITEM 3 - SLUDGE TRANSFERBID ITEM 4 - E. LAGOON OUTLET STRUCT.BID ITEM 5 - W. LAGOON OUTLET STRUCT.BID ITEM 6 - E LAGOON FLOATING COVERBID ITEM 7 - W. LAGOON FLOATING COVERIBID ITEM 8 - SLUDGE TRANSFER FROM
IMISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURESBID ITEM 9 - DECON MISC. STRUCTURESIBID ITEM 10 - ABANDON MISC. STRUCTURES|BID ITEM 11 - STABIL. TESTING (N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 12 - CONTAM. MAT. EXCAV.
(N. FIELD)BID ITEM 13 - UME FOR STABIL (N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 14 - GEOTEXTILE FABRIC (N. FIELD)BID ITEM 15 - HDPE FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE
LINER (N FIELD)
BID ITEM 16 - CAP VENTS (N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 17 - VENT MATERIALS ( N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 18 - BACKFILL ( N FIELD)BID ITEM 19 - WATER TREATMENT & DISP.
BID ITEM 20 - STABILIZATION TESTING(POLISHING BASIN)
|BID ITEM 21 - CONTAM. MAT. EXCAVATION(POLISHING BASIN)
JBID ITEM 22 - LIME FOR STABILIZATION
(POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM 23 - GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
(POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM 24 - HDPE FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE
LINER (POLISHING BASIN)BID ITEM 25 - CAP VENTS(POLISHING BASIN)
IBID ITEM 26 - VENT MAT (POLISHING BASIN)IBID ITEM 27 - BACKFILL (POLISHING BASIN).BID ITEM 28 - BACKFILL MISC. SOILSIBID ITEM 29 - TOPSOILIBID ITEM 30 - SEEDING
TOTAL SUBCONTRACT 1
tESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT (CHECKED BY:
Quantity
No.Units
UnitMeas
FROMSHT
1.01.01.01.01.01.01.0
LSLSLS
Labor Cost , Equipment cost [_ Material Cost
PerUnit
LS !LSLSLS
850.0 :CYi
1.0 LS
1.0 ,LS1.0 |LS
10192.0
661000.0
16997.0
51574.0
5.0
CY
LBS
SY
SF
EA
955 0 CY
8865 0 CY
3200000 GAL
1.0 LS
25342.0
1643000.0
42901.0
130165.0
5.0
2352.0
8665.0
2361.0
5550.010.45
CY
LBS
SY
SF
EA
CY
CY
CYCY
AC
1
. ;
Total PerUnit
i
Total Per
"
|i
|
Unit
TOTAL UNIT
COST PRICE
$50,00000
$17,570.81
$39.58500$16.55287
: $16,01347
$244,12500
$244,12500
$25 OO
$108,12186
; $4,99960
i
i
1
$5,00000
$1078
$003
$271
$0.75
$594.50
$2975
$1378
SO 19
$5,00000
$1078
$003
$2.71
$0.75
$59450
$2974
$1378
$1378
$1378
$2.841 97
i
I
TOTAL
W/
MARKUP
$50,000
$17,571
$39.585
$16,553
$16,013
$244,125 j
$244,125
$21.249
$108,122
$5,000
$5.000
$109.879
$19.169
$46.090
$38,887
$2.973
$28.411
$119,370
$608,000
$5,000
$273,296
$47,647
$116,329
$98,145
$2,973
$69.937
$119,370
$32,532
$76.461
$29,699
$2,611.509
SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE [DATE : JULY 20, 1998
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF. ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 1 - MOBILIZATION
TOTAL THIS SHEET
Quantity
NoUnits
1.0
UnitMeas
LS
Labor Cost _
PerUnit
Total
$0$0$0$0SO$0$0$0$0SOSO$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0SOSOSOSOSO$0$0SO$0SO$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0so$0$0
$0
Equipment cost
PerUnit
Total
$0
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
CODE A (No Design Commplele)
CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
OTHER (Specify) :
CHECKED BY:
Material Cost [
PerUnit
TOTAL
COST
TOTAL TOTAL
W/O W/ !
MARKUP ; MARKUP
$0$0 ! $0$0 ! $0$0$0$0SO$0$0$0
$0$0|$0
so
SO$0$0$0
$50,000
$0$0 : $0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0so$0$0$0$0$0
! soso$0$0$0$0
so$0$0$0$0$0SO$0
>
$0soso$0SO$0sososo
$0
SO$0$0$0
$0 $0$0$0so$0
$0SO
$0
so$0so
so ; soso$0
$0$0$0$0
$0so$0$0$0$0
|
I
1
soj so $50,000
SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE DATE: JULY 20, 1998
IPROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1
LOCATION: WOODBUHY COUNTY, IOWA __ _____________
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT... ..... summary
BID ITEM 2 - DEMOLITION (LAOOON AREA)
CUT & CAP 8" DIA C.I. PIPES
REMOVE 6' PVC PIPE
REMOVE 6" PVC PIPE
REMOVE 9' DIA. C.I. PIPE
REMOVE 3' DIA. HOPE PIPE
REMOVE 2 1/2- RGS CONDUITREMOVE PROCESS VALVE 3 1/2'REMOVE 3 1/2" HOPE PIPE
REMOVE 12' DIA. CMP CULVERTREMOVE 12' DIA WOOD POLESREMOVE 16W X 25'L X 201 TALL BLDG & EQUIP.
REMOVE 3' X 4' CONC. PAD
REMOVE BELOW GRADE CMU BOX 5' X 5' X 21
REMOVE 6' X 61 CONC. PAD
REMOVE BELOW GRADE CONC. BOX 6' X 3' X 5'
REMOVE WOODEN WALKWAY
REMOVE 6' X 3' CONC. PAD
REMOVE 3' DIA VERT. PIPES W/ FLOATS
REMOVE BELOW GRADE CONC. BOX 6' X 3' X 6'
REMOVE 4' DIA. PIPE
REMOVE HANDRAIL 3' H.REMOVE TRUSSREMOVE HANDRAIL 3' H.
REMOVE TRUSS
LOAD & HAUL DEBRIS
TOTAL BID ITEM 2
BID ITEM 3 - SLUDGE TRANSFER
(LAGOON AREA)
LOAD & HAUL
SPREAD DUMP MATERIAL
TOTAL BID ITEM 3
BID ITEM 4 - E. LAGOON OUTLET STRUCT.
INSTALL PZ 22 SHEET PILE
EXCAVATION - BACKHOE
BACKFILL & COMPACTION
EXCAVATION - HAND
FORMWORK
4 X 4 - W4.0 X W 4.0 WWF
CONCRETE
30' RCP PIPE CLASS III
FLARED END
SUBTOTAL BID ITEM 4
— - - - - - — - -
Ou
No.Units^
4.02S.O
3.0
85.0
7.0
13.0
1.0
25.0
30.0
7.0
8000 0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
60.0
2.0
21.0
1.0
4.0
790.0
45.0
235.0
40.0
1.0
5000.0
5000.0
2.0
81.0
20.0
4.0
202.8120.0
40.0
33.0
1.0
antity
UnitMeas
EALF
LF
LF
LF
LFEALF
LFEA
CFEA
EA
EA
EA
LF
EA
EA
EA
LF
LFLFLFLF
LOT
CY
CY
TON
CY
CY
CY
SF
SF
CY
LF
EA
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COIU-OT
_ La
PerUnit
20.0
5.0
5.0
bwCost
Total
$80
$125
$15
8.2 $697
1.7 $121.6 $21
10.0 1 $101.7
3.0
25.0
0.2
10.0
130.0
20.0
350.0
10.0
10.0
20.0
300.0
1.8
1.0
10.0
1.010.0
2000.0
1.0
0.3
156.0
3.0
5.0
40.0
3.0
0.2
25.0
15.0
133.3
$41
$90
$175
$1,200
$10
$260
$20
$350
$600
$20
$420
$300
$7
$790$450
$235
$400
$2,000
$0
$8,328
$0
$0
$0
$4.900
$1,500
$0
$0
$6,400
$0
$0
$309
$243
$100
$160
$608
$24
$1.000
$495
$133
$3,073
Equ
PerUnit
pmentcost
Total
$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0
$0
i.oo: $3010.00 $70
0.11 $880
4.00 '' $4
50.00 $100
8 00 $8
150.00 $150
5.00 $300
4.00 $8
250 $53
100.00 $100
$0
050 $395
500 $225
050: $118
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
OTHER (Specify)
CHECKED BY:
Malarial CostTOTAL TOTAL
Per TOTAL W/O W/Unit COST ; MARKUP MARKUP
$0$0to$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
I $o|! $o:
0.05 $400
to$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0$0
$0
500 $200 | , $0
750.00 $750 j $0
$0
$3,390
333
0.85
177.00
500
2.00
5.00
6.50
57.53
$0
$0
$400
$0
$0 $0to $0
$16,650 $0
$4,250 ' $0
$o; $0
$12,118 $17,571
$0 SO
$20,900 | $0 $27,300 $39,585
$0 tO
to ; to$350! 75000 $1.485
$405 $0
$40
$0
$0
*o;$0
1.75 $355
$0 0.32 $38
$200 ; 75 00 $3,001
$215 25 00 $825
$58 650.00 $650
$1,267 $6,354
'
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1. _ . . . . .
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
HEF.
BUILCHNGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 4 - (CONTINUED)SUBTOTAL FROM SHEET61 CRUSHED STONE BEDDING12' RIPRAPREMOVABLE HANDRAILMANHOLE STEP8- GRANLAR FILL MATERIAL
FILL CONCRETE
TOTAL BID ITEM 4
BID ITEM S - W. LAGOON OUTLET STRUCT.SAME AS BID ITEM 4 LESS-30' RCP PIPE CLASS III
TOTAL BID ITEM 5
BID ITEM 6 - E. LAGOON FLOATING COVERINSTALL FLOATING SYNTHETIC CAP
BID ITEM 7 - W. LAGOON FLOATING COVERINSTALL FLOATING SYNTHETIC CAP
[ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT
Quantity
No.Units
1.61.8
13.03.01.2
1.0
-a.o
65625.0
65625.0
UnitMeas
CYCYLFEACYCY
LF
SF
SF
Labor Cost
MHPer Tola)
_Unit MH
4.015.010.06.04.0
50.0
$3,073
$7
$27
$130
$18
$5
$52
$0
$0
$3,311
$0
$0
150
$0
($120)
SO
$3,191
$0
$0
$0
$0
toto$0$0
$0
$0
$0$0
$0
$0
$0$0
$0
$0
$0
$0$0$0
$0
$0
$0
to$0
$0
$0
to
Equipment cost
Per
SHEET OF
DATE: JULY 20, 1998
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
__ CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
OTHER (Srjecifv)
CHECKED BY:
Material Cost I
TOTAL TOTAL
Total Per : TOTALUnit
1.5020.00
1.00
1.50
$1,267S3
$36
$13so$2
SO
toto
$1.320
$0
6.50
toto
($52)
SO
$1,268
Unit 4 COST
15.0030.0018.00
12.00
15.00
6000
$6,354
$27
$53
$234
S36
$18
S62
W/O W/
MARKUP ; MARKUP
SO
SOI
$6,784 $11.416 $16,553
SO! i
2500
SO
$0
$0
($200) |$0
$6,584 $11,044SO
SO SO
$0
so; to
to$0
SO
SO
SO
SO
3.72 $244,125
SO
SO
SO
SOtotoso$0
$0
$0
so$0
so$0
$0
$0
sotototototo
SO
$0
SO
$0
$0
$16,013
$244,125 ;
$0
: SO
SO
SO
SO
3.72 $244,125
SO
$0
$0
$0
$244,125
SO
SO
I SO$0
WI
SO$0
$0
$0
SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ;DATE : JULY 20, 1998
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ BASIS FOR ESTIMATE__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA __ CODE B (Preliminary design)
i _ X_ CODE C (Final design)
ARCHITECT FNRINFFR- Rl ACK A VFATHH OTHER (SoeciM
REF.
BUILDING
PROJECT.... ... summary
BID ITEM 8 - SLUDGE TRANSFER FROM
MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES
LOAD & HAUL
iSRREAD DUMP MATERIAL
REMOVE SLUDGE BY VACUUM TRUCK
TOTAL BID ITEM 8
BID ITEM 8 - DECON. MISC. STRUCTURES
BID ITEM 10 - ABANDON MISC. STRUCTURES
BREAKOUT FLOOR SLABS
FILL AND COMPACT
TOTAL THIS SHEET
- - - - - - - - - -
Quantity
No.Units
250.02SO.O600.0
54607.0
2.0
8250.0
UnitMeas
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT 'CHECKED BY:
Labor Cost
PerUrit
CYCY
CY
SF
DAYS
CY
0.98
0.30
513
Total
Equipment cost j Material CostTOTAL TOTAL
Per Total Per TOTAL j W/O W/Unit Unit ; COST MARKUP , MARKUP
' i
$0$245
$75
$3,078
$0
j $3.398
500.0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0$0$0SOSOso$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$1,000soSO$0soSOSOSOsoSOSOSOsoSO
$7,796
$0 ! SO3 33 ! $833 $00 85 ; $213 $0
17.02 $10,212 $0
$0 $0
$11,257 i $0
$0 $0
$0 SO
$0 , $0$0 , SOso so$0 SOSO 1.98 $108,122$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0SO $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 ; $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 ' $0
816.00 $1,632 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 ! SO$0 SO$0 $0$0 SOso so$0 SO
$14,655 i $21,249
$108,122
$3,448 ; $5,000
|
SO SO:. . _ . _ . _ . . . . . . . . _ _ I
$24,145 $108,122 !
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
OF
IDATE: JULY 20,1998
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1 BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA _ __ CODE B (Preliminary design) :
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
LBID ITEM 11 - STABIL. TESTING (N. FIELD)OWANCE
Qu
NoUnits
1.0
BID ITEM 12 - CONTAM. MAT. EXCAV.(N. FIELD)
EXCAVATE - HYDRAULIC EXCAVATOR
HAUL
GRADING - DOZER
TESTING
TOTAL BID ITEM 12
BID ITEM 13 - LJME FOR STABIL (N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 14 - QEOTEXT1LE FABRIC (N. FIELD)
TOTAL THIS SHEET ________
10192.0
10192.0
10192.0
10192.0
15.0
...........
antity
UnnMeas
LOT
_x_c01
ODE C (Final
HER (Specify
design)
1
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COIU.OT CHECKED BY: j
__ . U
PerUnit
j
CY
CY
CY
CY
EA
LBS
16997.0 SY
Sor Cost
TotalMH
$0$0$0$0$0$0
toSO$0to
0.71.30.2
O.OS
$0
$0
$0
so$6.625
$13,250
S2.038
tO
SO
toS21.913
tototototototototototototototo
$850
totototo$0totototo
Equ
PerUnit
xnentcost
Total
SOSOSOSO
Mat
PerUnit
arial CostTOTAL
TOTAL W/OCOST ! MARKUP
SO
SO
SO
SOso so$o soiSO; j So:
; sosotoso
0.90
4.00
0.26
sososo
S9.173
$40,768
$2,650
SO
SO
to$52,591
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
sosososoSO
; *°SO
0.02
soso
$340
soSOsoso$0sosososo
SO
TOTAL
W/
MARKUP
$5,000
soso i
i *° i
85.00
SOSOsosoSO
soS1.275
soSO
0.02
$1,275 S75.779
SO
$13,220
SO
SO
SO
$0
SO
soSOSO
$109,879 |
! i$13,220 $19,169
ijI
SO
$0
so
1.80
soso
$30.595
$0
sososo$0
$31,786; $46.090
SO
SOsoso
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SHEET OF
DATE: JULY 20, 1998
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1 BASIS FOR ESTIMATECODE A (No Design Commplete)
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA _ _ _ _ _ , __ CODE B (Preliminary design)_X_ CODE C (Final design)
AR^HITFfrr FNRINFFH- Rl AHK A VFATCH OTHER (Soecifv)
REF.
BUILDING
PROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 15 - HOPE FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE
LINER (N. RELO)60MIL HOPE LINER
BID ITEM 18 - CAP VENTS (N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 17 - VENT MATERIALS ( N. FIELD)
BID ITEM 18 • BACKFILL ( N. FIELD)
TOTAL THIS SHEET
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT CHECKED BY:
.. ____ __._._Quantity
NoUnits
5157«.0
5.0
9SS.O
86650
UnitMeas
SF
EA
CY
CY
__ _ Labof Cost
PerUnit
0.1
50.0
4.0
3.0
Total
$0$5,157
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$250$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$3,820
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$25,995
$0
$0
$0
$0$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0$0$0
$35,222
Equipment cost Material Cost
PerUnit
0.02
1.50
1.50
; TOTAL TOTAL
Total Per TOTAL : W/O W/Unit COST MARKUP ; MARKUP
$0 $0$1,031 0.40 $20,630 $26.819 $38,887
$0 ! $0 ;
$0 $0j$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0
$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0j 300.00 $1,500 $2,050 $2,973
$0 : $0$0 $0$0 : $0
$0 ' SO$0 $0;
$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0$0 $0
$1,433 1500 $14,325 $19,594 $28.411
$0 ; $0$0 $0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0;
$12,998! 500 $43,325 $82,324 $119,370
$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0
$0;
$0$0$0$0$0$0; i
$0
$0 i$0$0
$0 : $0$0 $0 i
$15,461 $79,780 !
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
SHEET OF
DATE : JULY 20, 1998
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
CODE A (No Design Commplete)
__ CODE B (Preliminary design)
! X _ CODE C (Final design)
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH OTHER (Soecifv)
REF
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 19 - WATER TREATMENT & WSP.
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COIU.OT CHECKED BY:
Quantity
No.Units
3200000
UnitMeas
GAL
j
TOTAL THIS SHEET
i
. _ _ [ . .
Labor Cost
PerUnit
Total
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0so$0so$0SOsoSOSO
$0
Equipment cost
Per TotalUnit
soSO$0SO$0$0$0$0$0
! so
Material CostTOTAL TOTAL
Per TOTAL W/O W/Unit
0.19
COST MARKUP I MARKUP1 'i
$608,000$0$0SO$0$0SO$0so;so
sol sosososoSOso$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
so$0$0$0SO
seoa.ooo;i
$0$0$0 :$0$0$0$0
$0 $0so$0$0$0$0SO$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
| $0$0SO$0$0
. .. »
$0; $0
SO$0$0$0SOso ;SO: ! ''
$0$0$0SO$0soso$0$0
'
SOJ$0$0SO
$608,000 $608,000
' SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE .DATE : JULY 20, 1998
PROJECT: MID -AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1 , BASIS FOR ESTIMATECODE A (No Design Commplete)
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA __ CODE B (Preliminary design)_X_ CODE C (Final design)
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH OTHER (Specify)
HEF. _ . _ . . . _ _ .
BUILDINGPROJECT ....... summary
BID ITEM 20 • STABILIZATION TESTING
(POUSHNQ BASIN)
ALLOWANCE
BID ITEM 21 - CONTAM. MAT. EXCAVATION
(POLISHING BASIN)
EXCAVATE - HYDRAULIC EXCAVATORHAUL
GRADING - DOZERTESTING
TOTAL BID ITEM 12
BID ITEM 22 - UME FOR STABILIZATION(POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM 23 - QEOTEXT1LE FABRIC(POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM 24 - HDPE FLEXIBLE MEMBRANE
UNER (POLISHING BASIN)
TOTAL THIS SHEET
_._ .._ . ._ .. .
Quantity
NoUnits
1.0
25342.025342.0
25342.0
25342.0
38.0
42901.0
UnitMeas
LOT
CYCYCYCYEA
1 RCLUo
SY
SF
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT .CHECKED BY:
Labor Cost
Per TotalUnit 1
i $0! SO' SO
SO
0.7
1.3
0.2
005
0.1
sososososo$0$0$0$0$0
$16,472$32.945
$5,068
$0
$0
$0
$54,485
$0
$0tn*u$0
$0$0$0SO$0$0$0$0
Equipment cost
Per Total
Unit |
SO$0$0so$0so$0
i so$0$0$0$0$0$0
0.90 $22,808
Material Cost
Per : TOTAL
Unit COST
! $0
SO
$0$0
: $0
$0
TOTAL | TOTAL
w/o ! vwMARKUP | MARKUP
$5,000
i
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
w ',4.00 $101,368 $0
026 $6,589! $0 !
$0] 85.00 $3,230
$0 $0
$0 $0
$130,765 i $3,230 $188,480 $273,296
$0 $0 i
$0 $0$0 0.02 $32,860$0 $0$0i $0$0 $0$0 $0$0$0$0SOso
$2,145 002 $858
$0
$0sososo$0sosoSO
$13,017$0$0
$0
so$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0n no Co RTIU.U£ »c,OUO
$0$0
$264,991
SO$0$0$0$0
180 $77.222
$0$0
*qn QKJ) &47 fid 7*-Jt,OWJ 9*',W*I
$80,227; $116,329I
i$0$0$0:$0$0$0
$00.40 $52,066
$0$0
$168,608
$67,686 $96,145
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 1
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
SHEET OF
DATE: JULY 20, 1998
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
CODE A (No Design Commplete)
CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH OTHER (Soecifv)
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
—— - — - ————— _ . . . _ . . _ . _ ... _ _ . . , . . —————
BID ITEM 25 - CAP VENTS
(POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM W - VENT MAT. (POUSHINO BASIN)
BID ITEM 27 - BACKFILL (POLISHING BASIN)
BID ITEM 26 - BACKFILL MISC. SOILS
IESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT JCHECKED BY:
Quantity
No.Units
5.0
2352.0
8665.0
2361.0
BID ITEM 29 - TOPSCHL
BIO ITEM 30- SEEDING
5550.0
10.5
UnitMeas
EA
CY
CY
Labor Cost
PerUnit
Total
—— -• - — - -- -
$050.0 $250
$0SO$0
i *°4.0 $9,408
3.0
CY
CY
AC
SOso$0$0$0
$25,995
$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
3.0 $7,083
$0
SO
SO
so$0
3.0
300.0
$0$0$0$0
$16,650
$0$0$0$0SOSOsoso$0
$3,135$0$0$0
Equipment cost
PerUnit
Total
Material Cost 'TOTAL
Per TOTAL ! W/OUnit COST : MARKUP
i$0 $0$0 300.00 $1,500 $2,050$0$0
: soso
$0$0$0$0
1.50 $3,528 15.00 $35,280
SO$0
1.50
$0$0$0
$12,998
$0
$0$0$0
| $0: $0
5.00
$0$0$0
$43.325$0$0
TOTAL
W/
MARKUP
$2,973
i|j :
i$48,233 ' $69,937
| I
$82,324 $119.370
$0| $0
$0 i $0SO1 $0$0 $0$0 ! $0$0 $0
1.50 $3,542 5.00 $11,805 $22,436
SO
$0
SO
$0$0
1.50
$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0soso
$8,325 500
$0|$0
$0$0$0$0
$27,750$0$0
$0 $0
$32,532
I
$52,732 i $76,461
II
$0 $0$0$0$0
i *°
315.00$0
$3.292$0$0
$0! $0
1200.00
$0
$0$0
$0$12.540
$0$0$0
$20,482 S29.699
I
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 2
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF. ___ __
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 1 - MOBILIZATION
BID ITEM 2 - UNWATER EAST LAGOONBID ITEM 3 - UNWATER WEST LAGOON - DELETED
BID ITEM 4 - UNWATER MISC. STRUCTURES
BID ITEM 5 - DECON. FILTER PRESS BLDG.BID ITEM 6 - RELOCATE FILTER PRESSESBID ITEM 7 - DECON. HIDE PROCESS BLDG.
BID ITEM 8 - CHAINUNK FENCING
Ouan
No.Units
FROMSHT
1.02144264.0
0.0
1530000.0
1.0
1.0
4000.0
1S60.0
i t y _ _
UnitMeas
LSGALGALGAL
LS
LSSF
LF
TOTAL SUBCONTRACT 2
ESTIMATOR: ML
La
PerUnit
xx Cost
Total
Equ
PerUnit
pment cost
Total
|
DATE : JULY 20, 1998
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No De
CODE B (Prelim
_X_ CODE C (Final
__ OTHER (Specify
CHECKED BY: DS
Mat
PerUnit
1
erial Cost
TOTAL
COST
SHEET OF
sign Commplete)
nary design)
design)
1
TOTAL
UNIT i W/
PRICE : MARKUP
|
$12,50000
10021
ERRSO 021
$11,15340
$3,366.90
$231
$21.63
$12.500
$45,675
$0
$31,973
$11.153
$3.367
$9.239
$33,742
$147,649
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 2
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY. IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 1 - MOBILIZATION
TOTAL THIS SHEET
[ESTIMATOR: ML
Quantity
No.Units
1.0
UnitMeas
LS
Labor Cost
PerUnit
Total
$0$0SO$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0$0$0$0$0$0
: $0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0$0soso$0$0
$0$0$0SO$0$0$0soso$0
so$0$0$0$0
$0
.. Ep
PerUnit
SHEET
,DATE: JULY 20, 1998
Equipment cost
3T
lit
Total
$0SO$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
$0
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
CODE A (No Design Commplete)
CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
OTHER (Suecifv)
CHECKED BY: DSi
Material Cost ;i TOTAL TOTAL
Per I TOTAL ; W/O W/Unit ! COST MARKUP MARKUP
i
$0$0so$0$0$0
• $12,500 1
soso!$0sol
$0 $0$0 $0$0 ; SO
so soso$0$0$0$0$0$0
soso
$0$0
$0$0$0
j
$0$0so$0
$0 $0$0 $0$0$0$0SO$0$0$0
: so$0so$0
$0$0$0$0$0so$0$0$0
$0$0$0$0$0
so$0$0
I
so$0$0
1 $0$0so
-_._ __«°
$0so$0$0SO$0$0$0
$0 $12,500
SHEET OF
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE JDATE : JULY 20, 1998
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 2 ___
LOCATION: WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
BID ITEM 2 - UNWATER EAST LAGOON
PUMPING 8HRS PER DAY W/ 2 4' PUMPS
HAULING
TOTAL BID ITEM 2
ID ITEM 3 • UNWATER WEST LAQOON - DELETE!
PUMPING 8HRS PER DAY W/ 2 4' PUMPS
HAULING
TOTAL BID ITEM 3
BID ITEM 4 - UNWATER MISC. STRUCTURES
PUMPING 8HRS PER DAY VW 2 4' PUMPS
HAULING
TOTAL BID ITEM 4
BID ITEM 5 - DECON. RLTER PRESS BLDQ.
LOAD & HAUL
SPREAD DUMP MATERIAL
STEAM CLEAN & DISPOSE OF EFFLUENT
TOTAL BID ITEM 5
BID ITEM 8 - RELOCATE FILTER PRESSES
DISCONNECT, RIG , AND LOAD PRESSES
CRANE
TRUCK
TOTAL BID ITEM 6
BID ITEM 7 - DECON. HIDE PROCESS BLDQ.
LOAD & HAUL
SPREAD DUMP MATERIAL
STEAM CLEAN & DISPOSE OF EFFLUENT
TOTAL BID ITEM 7
_ ESTIMATOR: LML__ . _ _ _ . _ .
Quantity
No.Units
10.010.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
7.0
200.0
200.0
5.0
1.01.0
1.0
200.0
200.0
4.0
Unit
Meas
GALDAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
CY
CY
DAY
DAY
DAY
DAY
CYCY
DAY
Labor Cost
PerUnit
600.01150.0
600.0
1150.0
600.0
1150.0
1.0
0.3
600.0
672.0
1.0
0.3
600.0
Total
$6.000$11,500
$17,500
$0
$0
$0
$4,200
$8,050
$12,250
$196
$60
$3,000
$3.256
$672
$672
$196
$60
$2.400
$2,656
Equipment cost
PerUnit
Total
15000 $1,5OO1250 00 $12,5OO
$14,000
150 00 $0
1250 00 $0
BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
__ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)OTHER (SrjeciM
CHECKED BY: DS
Material Cost
Per TOTAL
Unit COST
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0 $0
j
TOTAL TOTALW/O W/
MARKUP MARKUP
$31,500 $45.675
$0 $0
15000 $1,050 : $0
125000 $8,750, $0|1 $9,800 ; $0
333 $666 $0
$22,050 $31.973
085 | $170 $0
32000
1500.00
150.00
333
0.85
320.00
$1,600 40000 $2,000
$2.436 $2.000 $7,692 $11,153
;
i
$1,500; $0
$150
$1,650
$666
$170
$0
$0
$0
$1,280 400.00 $1,600
$2,116 $1,600
$2,322 $3,367
$6,372 1 $9,239
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PROJECT: MID - AMERICA TANNING, CONTRACT 2
LOCATION: WOODBURYCOUNP(\LOWA
ARCHITECT ENGINEER: BLACK & VEATCH
REF.
BUILDINGPROJECT........ summary
- -- -- -- - — — —————
BID ITEM 8 - FENCING
CHAINUNK FENCE 6FT.
GATES
TOTAL BID ITEM 8
Quantity
No.Units
1560.01.0
UnitMeas
LFEA
ESTIMATOR: KEN. COILLOT
Labor CostMHPer
Unit
3.0
150.0
TotalMH
$4.680
$150
$4,830
SO
*0
SOSOso
E
PerUnit
0.
SHEET OF
:DATE: JULY 20,1998
(BASIS FOR ESTIMATE
; __ CODE A (No Design Commplete)
j __ CODE B (Preliminary design)
_X_ CODE C (Final design)
__ OTHER (Specify) _______
I
Equipment cost
Total
CHECKED BY:
Material Cost
$780$0
$780
PerUnit
11.00
50000
$0
$0
$0
$0SOso
TOTAL
COST
$17.160
$500
$17,660
SO
sososoSojSOJ
TOTALVWO
MARKUP
TOTAL
W/
MARKUP
$23,270 $33,742 |
APPENDIX DCONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
