Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CUP1990-00002
POOR QUALITY RECORD PLEASE NOTE: The original paper record has been archived and put on microfilm. The following document is a copy of the microfilm record converted back to digital. If you have questions please contact City of Tigard Records Department. LEGIBILITY STRIP- AGRNDA TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER THURSDAY, MAY 24, 1990 - 7:00 P.M. TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OR 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2.1 CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90-0002 VARIANCS VAR 90-0015 MALOMPANS/ON (NPO #5) A request for Conditional Use approval for the exparmion of existing wastewater treatment plant facilities. Applicant also requests Variance appro,v1 to allow a building height of 55 feet wheroms the maximum buildint„ height allowable in Industrial Park zone is 45 feet. ZONE: I-P (IndU,',Iial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of Sh Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTM 281 13BI tax lot 600) 2.2 CONDITIONAL USE CUP 9J-0001 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 90-0004 matom BALLFIELDS (NPO #6) A requesit for Conditional Use approval and a Sensitive Lands permit to allow development of a our eoftbaril field recreational facility in the Tualatin River 100 year floodplain. SONE: R-12 (Regidential, 12 Units/acre) LOCATION: SW 92nd Avenue, adiacent to Cook Park (WCTM 2S1 14A, tax lot 1000) ?OSTPONED 2.3 SENSITIVE LANDS SLR 90-0005 CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90-0003 PGE DURHAM SUBSTATION (NPO #5) A request for Sensitive Lands Review approval for filling in a deaignated floodplain (approximately 2000 cubic yards) and Conditional Use approval to provide for expansion of an existing substation facility located in the Southwestern corner of the Unified Sewerage Agency treatment plant property. ZONE: Io-T) (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southwest corner of USA Treatment Plant Site which is located at the southeastern Corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 138, tax lot 600). 3. OTHER BUSINESS 4. ADJOURNMENT POSTPONED NOVICE: A11 persons desiring a to speak on any item mast sign their namG and note their address on this sheet. (PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME) ITEM/DESCRIPTION: PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AM FULL ADDRESS -- PRDPOr CrfT(EAR OPPONENT I GATNS ) STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard being first duly sworn/affirm, on oath and say: (Please print) That I am a The City of Tigard, Oregon. That I servad NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: v_'That I served NOTICE '..)F DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director ____,Tigard Planning Commission Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice/Notice of Decision) of which is attached (Marked Exhibit "A") was mailed to each named pegono at the address shown on the attach d list Marked exhibit "B" on the jaff: day of 193Z1_, said notice NOTICE OF DECWOA as heritto attached, was posted on an appropriate bulletin board on the _02::day of 1_.-41.M. 19f111._; and dep ited in the United Staten! Mail on the day of ]: 19 postage prepaid. My Commission Expires: rson who delivered to POST OFFICE Subscribed and sworn/affirm to me on the 4; NOThRY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: • It ..." : ' . , • ,1 " ' CITY OF TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER - BY HEARINGS OFFICER 1. Concerning Case Number(s): CUP 90-p2/VAR 90-0015 2. Name of Owner: Unified pammTmgebmgmuL______ Name of Applicant: Same 3. Address lEtLylEtratayet1102 City Hillsboro State OR Zip 97124 4. Address of Proprt;ty: Bomtheastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. Tax Map and Lot No(e).: 281 138 tax lot 600 S. Request: A Conditional Use tgproval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and IpaoE_!.2L.anteffluent. AtTalcant also rgguests Variancm_Aparmalto allow a buildim_rheicatott gLeggibbanthci 45 foot maximum 12teiht_allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I-P (Industrial Perla 6. Action: X Approval is requested Approval with conditions Denial 7. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall, and mailed to: X The applicant and owner(s) x Owners of record within the required distao'ce X The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization X Affected governmental agencies 8. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL DE FINAL ON Jnne 26 1990 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained front the Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall, P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223. O. Appeal:, Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance With 18.32.290(B) and section 18.32.370 Which provides that a Written appeal may be filed within 10 days after notice id given and Sent. The appeal may be submitted on City forms and must be accompanied by the appeal fee ($31g.00) and transcript costs (varies up to a maximum of $800.00). The deadline for filing Of an appeal in 330 p.m. shone 26 1990 10. OUeStionst If you have any questions, please call the city of Tigard Planning bepartment, 639-4171. .0 BEFORE THE HEARINGS OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FOR ) CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THE ) CUP 90 0002 /and/ EXPANSION OF EXISTING WASTEWATER ) VAR 90-0015 TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES; Unified ) Sewerage Agency, applicant The above - entitled matter came before the hearings officer at the regularly scheduled meeting of May 24, 1990, in the Tigard civic Center Town Hall Room, in Tigard, Oregon; and The applicant requests conditional use approval for a major expansion of the existing Durham .advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant and a variance to allow a building height of greater than the 45.foot maximum allowed in the Zone, on property zoned Indus- trial Park, and described as Tax Lot 600, Map 2s1 • Section 1DD, City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon,; and The hearings officer conducted a public hearing on May 24, 1990, at which time testimony, evidence and the planning depart- ment staff report were received; and The hearings officer adopts the findings of fact and concl- si0ns contained in the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A°+ and incorporated by reference herein; and / / / / / /// /// • NOW THEREFORE IT IS HERM ORDMED that CUP 90-0002 and VAR 90-0015 be and here b approved. r/ DATZD this/ f-rune, 1990. HEAR ;s,,oiricER AP ROVED: - Aolatk, /0 "71 SON , • 2 1 • ' 44 • - • 11: fi• ;1. UN/FIED SEWERAGE AGENCY DENNIS LIVELY 150 N. FIRST AVE 4302 HILLSBOROr OR 97124 • • • 1 AGENDA ITEM 241 STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARINGS OFFICER May 24, 1990 - 7:00 PM Tigard City Hall - Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: CONDITIONAL USE CU 90-0002/ VARIANCE VAR 90-0015 REQUEST: A request to allow a major expansion of the existing Durban Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant. The wastewater treatment plant use is classified as a utility, a Conditional Use in the I-P Zone. Also requested is a variance to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowed in the zone. The proposed chemical buildinq is proposed to have a maximum height of 55 feet. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial ZONING DESIGNATION: I-P (Industrial Park) APPLICANT Unified Sewerage Agency 150 N. First Avenue Hillsboro, OR 97124 OWNER; Same ENGINEER: HDR Engineering, Inc. (Tony Etutsch) State 204, 300 Admiral Way Edmonds, WA 98020-4127 LOCATION: Southeast corner of DdrhaM Road and SW 85th Avenue (WCTM 2S1 1DD, Tax Lot 600). 2. BpsilisissollestInformation The Durham wastewater treatment plant Wad constructed in 1976. The silbjec parcel and other adjacent parcels were annexed to the City in 1978. The property is zoned I-4, (Industrial Park). Public utIlities such as the waetewater treatment plant are conditional does in the I-P zone. Minor expanaions of existing conditional tided require administrative review by the Planning Division. Th3 Planning Director approved a minor expansion of the existing plant on March 1, 1989 (CU STAFF REPORT Cu 90-0002 - DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT Pagel 89-01). That proposal involved the construction of a new primar,r clarifier and a raw sludge pumping station at the existing plant on Tax Lot 600. Major modifications to existing conditional uses 7tequire review by the Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer approved a major expansion of the plant on August 3, 1988. That expansion included enlarging the treatment plant across SW 85th Avenue to Tax Lots 1101, � g 1103, and 1200 of map 281 14A. The expansion included construction of a new headworka building and other associated facilities. 3. Vicinit Information Properties to the west of the treatment plant across Std 85th Avenue include ati farm which is not within the City of Tigard; Tigard High School which is within the city in an area zoned R -4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units /acre); and various industrial uses in an area zoned I -P (Industrial Park) along SW 85th Avenue. Properties to the east include Durham Elementary School, several single - family residences, and agricultural land. This area is also zoned I -P. Across Durham Road to the north of the treatment plant are single - family residences and two parcels which have been approved for the development of a 28- unit apartment complex. This area is zoned R -12 (Residential, 12 units /acre). To the south of the treatment plant are the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks, Fenno Creek, and the City of Durham. 4. Site information and Pr ©dal Deticr tian The approximately 60 acre treatment plant site is developed with an office /laboratory building on the northern portion of this uite near the all Boulevard - 85th Avenue /Durham Road intersection with the treatment facilities located further south on the Site. The recently constructed headworka building is located on the west side of SW 85th Avenue. The access road for the Durham Elementary School crosses the northern portion of the property between the laboratory and the treatment plant. The majority of this site is undeveloped, landscaped open area. The applicant requests conditional use Major Modification approval to allow a major expansion of the existing treatment plant facilities. The applicant refers to the proposed expansion as Phase II Of the total plant expansion. Phase I consists of the two projects recent approved and currently Under construction. The proposed expansion intended to increase the treatment plant's capacity as well as provide improved treatment of the wash applicant's . pages through t P Waste flaws The statement describes the proposed improvements in great detail on pag 11. Most of the new facilities would be located to the north and immediately adjacent to the existing treatment plant facilifciee. The proposed digesters, however, would be iodated on the southern portion of the development adjacent to the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and the existing incinerator building. Because of the nature of the wastewater treatment plant operationa, the majority Of the facilities will be located at or below grade. STA 'P REPORT - Cu 00- »0002 = DURHAM xATMENT PLANT Page 2 1F..: �. '+4 �. .. -'. .. - -t... � y w -.. :... s. .�. a "` _... -.. "- - - ,•. _ . }ate .4� c . ' 1 ti '�•'T , •.t. c t„>'�. l mot.- 4 s� s^ t•a:` � �.. s� ?y.:a � •tii -.1' •`3 .}:: W`s' �- 'a t � � � ; -�,r - ;w a■ DDAP .- t. = - ,. • • The applicant also requests a variance to the 45 foot maximum building height standard for the I-P zoning dietrict to allow the propooed chemical building to have a height of 55 feet. 5. homy and NPO Comments The Engineering Divieion has reviewed the proposal and offers the following comments: 1. The applicant hao submitted a detailed project description including anticipated traffic that would be generated by the construction. 2. The previous application for phase I of this project (CU 89-01) requiVed that additional right-of-way be deeded to the State and to waive its right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvemOnt district formed to improve Durham Road. That application found that additional improvements to SW 85th Avenue and SW Durham Road were not required. The Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District has reviewed the proposal and has commented that fire hydrants and access obeli be provided ae required by the Uniform Fire Code. The Tigard Water District, City of Tigard Build/ng Division, and PGE have reviewed the propene' and have offered no commenta or objections. No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Conditional Use Section 18.130.040 of the Code contains the fallowing general approval criteria for a Conditional Use: 1. The site size and dimensions provide: a. Adequate area for the needs of the proposed use; b. Adequate area for aesthetic design treatment to mitigate poosible adverse affecto from the use on surrounding properties and ueee. 2. The charaCteristicd of the site are eUitable for the proposed use considering size, shape, location, topogrephy and natural features. 3. All required public facilities have adequate capacity to serve the proposal. 4. The applicable requirements of the zoning district are met except aa modified by this chapter. STAFF REPORT - CU 90-0002 - DUREAM TREATMENT PLANT Page 3 r 4 ° u, • 5. The supplementarl requirement° set forth in Chapter 18.114 (Signs) and Section 18.120.180 (Appe(val Standarde) Site Development Review if applicable, are met. 6. The use will comply with the applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed expansion of the Durham Wastewater Treatment Plant is consistent with the above criteria. The site provides adequate area for the needs of the existing and proposed waste treatment facilities and associated site improvements; allows adequate area for separation of the proposed expanded treatment plant from adjacent uses so as to minimize noise and possible odor impacts; and allows adequate area for landseeaping and screening to minimize the visual impacts of this quaoi-industrial use on neighboring residential areas. The conceptual landscaping plan shows areas to be planted with screening materials along the site's west and east sides as well as along the access road to the Durham Elementary School. Although it will be neceseary for a more detailed landscaping plan to be submitted prior to approval of the building permit, the conceptual plan indicates that screening will be provided along the north and east sides of the expanded plant. There are no apparent physical obstacles to placement of the proposed expanded treatment plant on the ate. Public facility providers have not commented that their facilities would be unable to nerve the proposed development. Setback, lot coverage, and building height requirements of the I-P zone are all satisfied by the site plan with the exception of the requested variance to allow a 55 foot tall chemical building wherea0 45 feet is the maximum height allowed in the I-4.1 zone. That request is considered below. Existing and proposed site improvements satisfy other applicable community Development Code requirementd. Exist4s trees along SW 85th Avenue and Durham Road provide for appropriate numbers, spacing, and sizes of required street trees as well as screening along that Bide of the treatment plant. Existing trees also satisfy !ode requirements for parking area teems. Adequate access and internal circulation are provided by the existing driveways on the site and the proposed expanded circulation system through the plant. Adequate vision clearance is provided at all driveways/road intersectiona. The treatment plant will be provided with an adequate number of parking spaces based upon tha Code's requitement for the most similar listed industrial use manuCacturing, production, and processing. The parking requirement for that Use type id one parking space per employee of the largest shift. Fifteen new parking spaces would be added to the site adjacent to the proposed chemical buiiing. he applicants state that a Maximum Of 15 new employees are anticipated to be employed at this Site during any 8-hour period. It to not clear, however, whether the existing site improvements satisfy Code reqUirementa for designated handicapped parking spades and secured bicycle rack parking. Code Section 18.106.020(N) requires one appropriately sized and located handicap parking space be provided for every 50 standard parking spaces. Code Section STANT REPORT .= Cu 90-0002 DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT Page 4 Awit.11111 c. t • r - i+`t . .A Y.+ fae y } :;.• a . .!'i. fi ;'r r. .- - lrt. 1 F 4 ♦ . t - T ?` y ` : t • 4 ,-t s's. f:_ab i. k i r i L' • 18.106.020(P) requires; that a minimum of one secured bicycle rack space be provided for every 15 automobile parking spaces. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicants will need to revise the site plan to comply with these standards or else the applicant shall demonstrate that the standards are satisfied by existing site improvements. The proposed expanded use complies with applicable plan policies as follows: 1. Policy 2.1.1 is of the proposal proposal. In opportunity to property owners satisfied because NPO #5 and NPO #6 have been informed and have been given an opportunity to comment on the addition, notice of the public hearing and the comment on the proposal has been sent to nearby and advertised in the Tigard Times. 2. Policies 7.1.2, 7.3.1, 7.4.4, and 7.6.1 are satisfied becauSe the reviewing utility providers have not indicated that existing water and other utilities have inadequate capacity to serve the proposed enlarged wastewater treatment plant. 3. policy 7.7.1 is satisfied because the proposed expanded wastewater treatment plant will provide a necessary public facilities to meet the demands of the rapid growth in Washington County and rIgard. 4. Policy 8.1.1 and 8.1.3 are satisfied because both SW 85th Avenue and SW Durham Road have sufficient right-of-way to accommodate full development of appropriate street improvements. SW 85th Avenue will be improved by the applicants as a condition of prior development application approvals. The improvement of SW Durham Road has been comptitted to by Washington County through the MSTIP II (Major Street Improvement Program), which is scheduled to wicien and improve the road within the next five years. A traffic signal and other intersection improvements are scheduled to be constructed this Spring at the Hall- 85th/Dutham Road interOection. No additional street improvements are warranted by the proposed further expansion of the treatment plant. 5. Policy 11.5.1 iS satisfied becaus e the proposed expanded facilities and associated site improvements satisfy the additional setback and dtetAlfting requirements imposed by this policy. This policy requires that all buildings on industrial land within the NPO #5 area be set back a distance of 50 feet front any property line which abuts a residentially planned area. The policy also requires that the leaat intensive aspects of a proposed use for a site be located in areas which abut adjoining residential areas. The existing and proposed treatment plant facilities are located on the southern portion of the site away frem residentially zoned and developed propertied to the north. Landscaped open Spade is provided on the northern potion of the site abutting these wit:to and the Durham Elementary school: 6. Policy 12.4.1, the lodational criteria for Major impact UtilitieS and facilities such as a wastewater treatment plant, is datitifidd tor the following readons: STAFF REPORT - CU 90-0002 - DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT Page 5 AMOCIMMENIIIIMINUNINIMEEN - There is direct access from the site to arterials: SW Hall Boulevard and SW Perham Road. Traffic from the treatment plant will not be route „hraugh local neighborhood streets, - Expanded plant operations will not cause traffic congestion or dangerous intersections considering tlal capacity of the adjacent roadways and their existing and projected traffic counts. The major excavation planned for the summer of 1990 at the treatment plant site will result in a substantial amount of truck traffic onto Durham Road and possib'y SW Hall Blvd. The applicants have planned the excavation to occur at a time when the adjoining Durham lementary School in not in sesaiun so an to minimize traff, impacts. The applicants should be required to coordinate their unstruction traffic plans with the Oregon State Highway Division and Tigard School District, - There is public transit available to the site on SW Hall Blvd., and SW Durham Road. The proposed expanded treatment plant use is compatible with surrounding uses due to the predominantly industrial nature of adjoining development and the substantial setback of the treatment plant facilities from the residential neighborhood to the north. Landscaping and screening are proposed to be increased on the site in order to mitigate the impacts of lights and noise from the treatment facility. The applicants have provided preliminary erosion control plans that indicate measures intended to reduce dust and mud resulting from construction activities on the site. Construction impacts are anticipated to be minor with the exception of the heavy construction traffic on the adjacent arterial streets. -� The site is of an adequate size to accommodate the proposed expanded wastewater treatment plant use. Potential development is not constrained by existing site conditions such as topography, unique natural features, or a high water table A substantial amount of the site will be left as landscaped buffer and potential future expansion area. Variance Euilding..Height._Limit The proposed chemical storage building is proposed to be 55 feet tall. The maximum building height standard in the x -P zone is 45 feet. However, Section 18.98.020 of the Community Development Code (Building Height Exceptions) allows a maximum height of /5 feet when the building's floor area does not exceed 1.5 times the area of the site; each setback equals at least one-half of the building's height; and the structure does not abut a residential zoning district. The proposal satisfies two of these building height exception standards. The proposed chemical building's floor area would not be anywhere STAFF REPORT .: al 90 -0012 DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT Page 6 close to 1.5 times the area of the site and thus complies with this maximum floor area ratio standard. In addition, the chemical building would be setback substantially more than the proposed height of the building. The wastewater treatment plant site, however, abuts a residential zoning district on the east side, the Durham School property, and on the north across SW Durham Road. For this reason, the proposal does not comply with the standards for a building height exception as described above. A variance to the building height standard has therefore been requested. Section 18.134.050 of the Code contains the following criteria which apply to the building height variance request: 1. The proposed variance will not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code; be in conflict with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan; to any other applicable policies and standards; and to other properties in the Dame zoning district or vicinity. 2. There are special circumstances that exist which are peculiar to the lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances for which the applicant has not control and which are not applicable to other properties in the same zoning district. 3. The use proposed will be the Dame as permitted under this Code and City standards will be maintained to the grettest extent that s r easonably possible, while permitting some economic use of the land. 4. existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms or pars will not be adversely affected any more than would occur if the development were located as specified in the Code. 5. The hardship is not self - unposed and the variance requested is the minimum variance which would eliminate the hardship. The primary intent of the lode's building height and setback qu are tb provide ade c p gusto light and l�pace between building gs, particularly p when different toning districts /Are involved. d. In the present situation, existing buildings on parcels in other zoning districts abutting the site are setback a minimum of 75 feet from the treatment plant Road and S� 85thp Avenuercel'a boundaries: In addition, Durham treatment plant Bite and, properties additional separation between the p operties to the north and weet. In addition, the proposed chemical building would be located 250 feet from the nearest property boundary, the western border of the treatment plant site along SW 85th Avenue. ,. separation of the P g The neighboring buildings from the proposed chemical building should provide adequate apace and light between these building° and thus the P if the requested variance fie approved. ns�.ve Plan would be upheld ®von P P ur .see of the Code and the Com STAFF REPORT . CU 90 -0002 . bUREi TREATMENT PANT Page 1 1 . • • . • • ' • •••• . ' . • ' * • .t• , 7 a' • • The special circumstance which affects the request is, as noted above, the apparent intent of the building height limitation to provide a separation between tall industrial buildings from neighboring buildings not being pertinent because of the large parcel involved and the distance between the proposed building and neighboring buildinge. The intended use of the building involved in the variance request, chemical storage in association with an industrial use, would not be affected by the approval or disapproval of the requested variance but disapproval may make this particular storage use difficult to accomplish because it would necessitate twee of different equipment than intended. The intensity of the development as indicated by the minimal floor area ratio, is consistent with Code standards as well as being compatible with other development in the area. The proposed chemical storage building has been designed as an integral element of the Durham wastewater treatment plant complex with access, circulation, parking and drainage designed to be compatible with the existing development. The requested additional building height In not intended to provide additional employment opportunities on the site and thus should not affect traffic generation and parking needs. The requested additional building height is therefore not anticipated to adveroely affect traffic levels on nearby streets or affect other public facilities or physical or natural syotems. There are no significant natural features on or near the site that would be affected by the proposed variance. The hardship in this cases the inability to utilize the building height exception of the Code to allow the desied height, may have been foreseen by the applicanto but wao not self-impooed. The variance requested io intended to provide the applicants with an opportunity that LO available for many other industrial properties that do not immediately abut residential parcels but which because of their smaller size and location could allow tall:buildings to be located closer to residences than this reqUest would result in. The building height requested is within the limits of the building height exception provieions of the Code, and tints is considered to be a minimal variance which would alleviate the hardship. 0. RECOHMENDAW ION The Planning DivisiOn redoMMend0 APPROVAL Of conditional use CU 90-0002 for ekpanOien Of the Durham AdVanted WadteWater Treatfltent Plant and VAR 90- 0015 to allow a 55 foot tall building where the 144 zone horMally limits building heights to 45 feet. Approval should be subject to the following conditions: THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL HE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE DP A GRADING AND SITEWORK PERMIT: STAFF REPORT - CU 00-0002 - DURNAM TREATMENT PLANT • • • Page a 1,fi • • . • • • • • . • . • .; • - • . . f t,. . 44. 4 •••:• . . . .m. •:,' ' • ,11 ' . 1. If the intended spoils disposal site ie located within the City of Tigard, the applicant shall obtain a fill permit that includes an erosion control plan conforming to "Broeion Control Plane - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Building Division (639-4171). 2. The applicants shall provide documentation that the Oregon State Highway Division and Tigard School District have been apprieed of the plans for routing construction traffic from the eite. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer, Planning Division (639-4171). THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT: 3. A revised landscaping plan shall be submitted which provides additional details on basic types and sizes of planting m.terials to be utilized for screening the expanded facilities from neighboring uses. STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer. 4. An addendum to the site plan shall be submitted demonstrating appropriate numbers and sizes of auto parking spaces, bicycle parking spaces, and designated handicapped parking spaces are to be provided in compliance with Code Section 18.106. The bicycle rack design shall be approved by the Planning Division, STAFF CONTACT: Jerry Offer. APPROVAL SHALL BE VALID IF IMPLEMENTED WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF THE DATE OF FINAL DEC/SION. PREP BY: 474 er APPROVED BY: !With widen ' D ve ;ant Review Planner Senior Planner br/J0:CU9002.ho 4 / . STAFF REPORT - dit 90-0002 a DURHAM TREATMENT PLANT Page 9 • • • • 6A-1' • CITY or TIGARD NAME owlv!IED SEWERAWE AGENCY' ADDRESS 'Al •1$0 N 13T HILLS110P0q O '71,24.- • PURPOSE or PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID PURPOSE OF PAYMENT I t RECiIPT or PAYMENT RECEIPT NO, OHM( AMOUNT CASH. 'AMOUNT PAYMENT DATE. SUODIVISION al•go-aom LAND USE APPL TOTAL AMOUNT PAID - - n6.00 1141.1441...41.4 93- ‘009713 a 386,00 tit3 • ilf6P23/90 AMOUNT PAID ,4■41.1* 41.4■40 • STATE OF OREGON County of Washington City of Tigard AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING depose and say: (Please print) being first duly sworn /affirm, on oath That i am a Vl, l i° 2 X111 for The City of Tigard, Oeegon. That I served NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR: That I served NOTICE OF DECISION FOR: City of Tigard Planning Director Tigard Planning Comrieaion Tigard Hearings Officer Tigard City Council A copy (Public Hearing Notice /Notice of Decision) of which in attached (Marked Exhibit "A ") was mailed to each named perdons at the address shown on the attached list marked exhibit "H" on the — day of 19-12_, said notice NOTICE OF DECISION as hereto, attached, was posted n an appropriate bulletin ule United on the — day of , 1 d States Mail on the �' day , 19 .�= and deposited 0 postage prepaid. • Prepared slot ice /Peaatodor.D,la .i e 114'Y.�1 j•� `�, ;k '' + 00 sworn /affirm to me On the • Ytt777 w a r «i YJ Zo 4 40 3 ti J '100, .34004Va 4`y vy day Of e NOTARY PUBLIC OF OREGON My Commission Expires: P =rson who delivered to POST OFFICE 8U0.0 gibed and sworn /affirm to me on the a w rr i : r s A N " N rr m . s ~ w M/ .? 4.4. bkM/APPIbAVitikti day of Y PUBLIC q +R My Commisdion Expire • , • , • • ..`` L `.,'gf !yam F. �,ti • • • .4 • • .., • . . b. NOTICE OF puBLIq___11.21_RINo • • I NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TIGARD HEARINGS OFFICER, AT A MEETING ON THURSDAY, May 24, 199Q, AT lag PM, IN THE TOWN HALL OP THE TIGARD CIVIC CENTER, 13125 SW HALL BLVD., TIGARD, OREGON, WILL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILE NO: CUP 90-0002/VAR 90-0015 NPO # 5 FILE TITLE: USA Expansion APPLICANT: Unified Sewerage Agency Dennis Lively 150 North First Ave. #302 Hillsboro, OR 97124 OWNER: Same REQUEST: CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90-0002 VARIANCE VAR 90-0015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Use approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance approval to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I-P (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTM 2S1 13B, tax lot 600) (See Map On Reverse Side) THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF CHAPTER 16.32 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL AND AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL. ANY PERSONS HAVING INTEREST IN THIS MATTER MAY ATTEND AND BE HEARD, OR TESTIMONY MAY BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. FAILURE TO RA/SE AN ISSUE IN PERSON OR • Y LETTER PRECLUDES AN APPEAL, AND vAxtung TO SPECIFY THE CRITERION FORM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE OR COMPREHENSIVE Pt'" AT WHICH A COMMENT 18 DIRECTED PRECLUDES AN APPEAL BASED ON THAT CRITERION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Al 636-4171, TIGAND cxTY MAU' 13125 SW HALL BLVD., OR CONTACT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANI ZATION (NPo) # 6. CHAIRPERSON: Ctalo PHONE NUMBER: 639=5621 bkM/CUP90=02.814 t • ' e • . • , , • • hi 16 • r‘ • • • . • • ' . . FINDLAY 2S1138A- 00300 DURKEE, RAMIE D MARY HELEN 7 910 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97223 2S113BA -00401 TIGARD SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 2:J /3157 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD OR 97223 2S113BA- 00600 UNIFIED SE 150 N FIRST HILLSBORO AGENCY OR 97123 2S113BA -00400 ........., ! . ]0 HAMBACH, HAROLD AND MILDRED 7735 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97223 2S113BA- -00500 ............. PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC C 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND OR 97204 n...► 2S112CC -01200 COLLING, CHARLES W AND JOYCE C 10185 SW VIEW TERRACE TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC -01300 ADDINGTON, VALERIA G 8465 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97224 2S112CC -01500 NELSON, RICHARD A & CONSTANCE L JOHNSON, TODD S & JULIE A 16143 SW 146TH TIGARD OR 91223 2S112CC -01800 WAYMIRE, MELVIN G JR 10845 SW DOVER CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S112CC-.01804 BARRETT, GORDON W & MELISSA J 15987 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC- 01400 ........ ....i.i,...i. TAYLOR, BERNDECE I NOW HAYS % COLLING, CHARLES W 9720 SW FREWING TIGARD OR .97223 2811200 -01700 POAGE, WAY° E E AND BLANCH M 8255 SW DURHAM ED TIGARD OR 97224 . 2S112CC- -01801 BOWEN, RICHARD L AND TERESA PO BOX 94 TUALATIN OR 97062 2S112CC -05600 ........., FROME, DENNIS B & KATHLEEN R 8154 SW BOND TIGARD OR 97223 28112C0 01900 t+ COTTER, EDWARD E AND VIOLA C 8065 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC- =05700 HORVAT, ROBERT J JR /RUTH 15910 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2 112CC= -05800 444d ...... ......... EICUUTEN. JERRY 15932 SW 81ST CT TIGARD oR 97224 2S112CC -0 5900 444,44,40444444.4044e4 CARLS?N, MICHAEL D & JULIE M 15954 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 28112dd -06000 w. 4i ir.i.i.i.i4•.iii WATTS, R ONALD DEAN JANE ANN 15976 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 28112d0- 061010 444444444444444444444 CENNEDY, REESE C & RtUTH H 15943 80 81ST CT TIGARD • • ,/ • • :f • 2S112CC‘,06200 INMAN, DAVID S/CHERYL F 15921 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2811380-00300 SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 3P 13137 SW PACIFI TIGARD OR 97123 2S11380-00500 • MOORE, DONALD LESLIE JOAN!( 8170 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97224 2S1111a-,10200 WARD, VERLA JANE 8585 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97223 2S111DD...10400 FLTLCHER, JOHN M/SANDRA L 8550 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S111DD-42300 JOHNSON, RANDALL N & HURD, KRIST 8514 SW AVON TIGARD OR 97224 2811313D..00200 C*444444444•444444444 BARTLETT, E A VIRGINIA 16575 SW UPR BOONES FY RD TIGARD OR 97224 26114A0-01100 WH/TTAKER/DURHAM41ALL PARTNERS 50 AIRPORT PARKWAY SAN o8i" CA Osilo 28114A0-01103 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OR WASHINGTON COUNTY 150 N FIRST ST HILLSBORO OR 97123 28114110-01200 444444 eb 44o . • UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY 50 N isT taLLS8orto OR 97123 2$112CC-06300 JONES, TERRY W & MARY K 15889 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S113B0-00400 CASTILE, JAMES W & AUDREY 9565 SW INEZ TIGARD OR 97062 2S111DD -00201 PIACENTINI, JOHN/LOUISE 119 2540 NE RIVERSIDE WAY PORTLAND OR 97211 28111DD-10300 HOAG, XATHLEEN 8565 SW STRATFORD TIGARD OR '74223 2S111DD-10500 ANDERSON, JON S/WENDY M 8570 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97223 2S113CB-07700 DURHAM, CITY OF PO BOX 23483 TIGARD 28114A6,400100 44 SCHOOL DISTRICT !3J 13137 SW PACIFIC TIGARD OR 97223 R 97223 2S114A0,-.01101 4444441.4444.4.444444 UNIFIED SEWE 'NCY OF WAUNItidtoN 150 N FIRST HILLSBORO OR 97123 10.!.J11 2S114A0-01104 COLUMBIA CABLE OF OREGON ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 14200 SW IghtdAbOOM CT BEAVERTON OR 97005 444 28114A0-61,300 " ' '44'6444 THOMAS, JOHN N SALLY P 16575 SW 88TH AVE TIGARD OR 91223 * • t. r N • 2S114A0- 0130 UNIFIED SEWE 150 N 1ST AVE HILLSBORO GENCY OR 97123 UNIFIED SEWERAGFAGENCY DENNIS LIVELY 150 N. FIRST AVE ##302 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 CRAIG HOPKINS 7430 SW VARNS ST TIGARD , OR 97223 25114A0 02302 THOMAS, aOEN MURRAY AND SALLY PATRICIA 16575 SW 05TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 • d. ya' 1 64 6 6 • a.! Pts fr . LEGIBILITY STRIP � ` r 4t) CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON 92.0.ILIMULUILARELICATIO. CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Box 23397 Tigard) Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 1. GENERAL INFORMATION PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION 85th Avenue TAX MAP AND TAX LOT NO. T2S R1W 110D TL#600 s SITE SIZE Approx. 50.4 acres PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER*Unified ADDRESS 150 N. First Ave. #302 PHONE CITY Hillsboro Oregon ZIP APPLICANT* Uni'!LIecISeWtr_altjkleirL___ ADDRESS Satre PHONE CITY Same ZIP Sa *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a leasee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The owner(s) mist sign this application in the space provided on page two or submit a written authorization with this application. 2. PROPOgAL SUMMArtY The owners of record of the subject property request conditional use approval to allow 5xPansion of existthq wastewater treatment_ facilities and additon of facilities ammonia and phosphorus from plant effluent. . 0736P/23P Revid: 3/88 ko• • .16 • 1 FOR STAFF USE ONLY VAR CASE NO 0 ?Q OTHER -- is- OTHER CASE NO'S: RECEIPT NO. APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: DATE: Application elements sUbmitted: ■111■111•IMIMNfallIMIN111111% (A) Application form (1) (B) Owner's signatUre/written authorization (C) Title transfer instrument (1) (D) Assessor's map (1) (E) Site plan (pre-app.checklist) (F) Applicaint's statement (pre-app. checklist) (/// (G List of property owners and addresses within 250 feet (1) (H) Filing fee (065) aA -few \htviahce. 51-,273- go go DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: am.imitsonsmisaimieummoreminnainimmidli. N.P.O. Number: Hearings Officer Approval Date: Final Approval Date: Planning Engineering - • ••'' ' —" di �• • 4. ry • 3. List any variance, sensitive lands permit, or other land use :actions to be considered as part of this application: variance to 45 ft maximum ,hei hq $ n IP zone, 4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this application. 5. THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request does not violate an deed restrictions that ma attached ..,too or im. posed upon the sub jet roperty B. If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of ' the approval. C. All of the attachments, applicants application, false. D. above statements and the statements in the plot plan, and exhibits transmi t ted herewith, are true; and the so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this may be revolted if it is found that any such statements are The applicant has read the entire contents of the policies and criteria, and understands the or denying the application. DATED this �"i day of the application, including requirements for approving • SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. behalf o f Unified Sew ra a Agenc, ,,,, of Washington County Gary Krahmer, GENERAL MANAG511 (i(SL: pm /0736P) 281811111sliganNIVIIIIMMinallroommumilmanne • • • • P.TLE INSURANCE COMPANY O 71 62 WO POW 11W, diVWF1VANIANTY KNOW ALL MEN (ilf THESE PREANTS, That to grantor paid by .sturte eres Andrew and Harriet A. Saltwick =flat] SeveragsqlratP:4210111.114=0"°""486°n1""afterdided' . # hecoloafter caned fAa outer, doss hereby gundibulonh sell and comer unfn the laid grantee and &mimeo toirs, elloceasore and aid" duo certain real proporty, with the tensments, hereditaments end appurtenance° thrrrunto belonging or aPplthinit3d1 sit- totedinthsCounterd Washington mmiStemeiChtgoe,dennWelseiSekea,ft.erib 11 A tract of land in Section 13, Township 2 South, Range 1 Neat of the Willamette Meridian, 1 Washington County, Oregon, sore particularly described as follows; 1, running thence South 562.3 feet to the Northwest comer of a certain tract conveyed to II Paginning at the Northwest corner of Section 13, Township 2 South, Range I West, and Marion M.Memeell et inc by deed recorded in Book 2:5, page 501; thence Beet along the il North line of said Marvell tract to the West line of a 30-foot roadway, uhich 30-foot ;I roadway is described as being 31 rods East of the West line of amid Seetion 13, thence North along the West tine of said roadway to a point on the North line a said Section 13; thence West 31 Rods to the place of beginning; EXCEPTING THEIBTROA the following 11 described tract; Beginning at the Northeast corner of Section 13; running thence South 1 along amid section line, 262.5 feet; thence Past and parallel to the North line of SectLuj 13, a distance of 356,i feet; thence North parallel to the West line of said Settiee 13,, a distance of 26.:.5 feet to the North line of Section 13: thence Meet to the place of beginning. 1 SUBJICT TO Statutory powers and desegregate of Uuified Sewerage Agency sad riakts of tha is mid to any portion tystviNdiretrniltriTrorlisurima.. To Have and to t same unto t said grantee ee's arid eadded Ammo. And said grantor hereby covenants to and with said grantee and grantee's twin, amovellers end allaitPA dts. i grantor is Malay seised in lee simple of the above granted preroime, Nes mum eel enctumbranate 1 il I arid HIM grantor will Warrant and forever defend the above granted maim and every part and paced dewed Oates. He kw. NI claims and demands of all person' whatsoever, stops Mote claiming under the above daacrilaa4 anousakesosa. The trite and actual consideration paid for this transfer, elated in terms al debate, ie 9 34,000 ., :011owevowifessostoal.eatteieleletietaeoewsiedemstuo.4oshttletv.solhapowesseroyswieboustaaugitestuwasaldelt.elit 1.'""4..astekbwmasa4ies6wSoOWIMW In constniing this deed and where the contest so requires, the eingttlse includes the plural. Os e.t.a° WITNESS &antor's hand this 114 day of .D tteetbc• e ''42.1P4,14464r- STATE OF OREGON, County ol W 1144sit ) Personably appeared the above named Minh* 64 Androw Seltwick ...A4A-kkit a, Harriet A. Selteick -Dtcd...64.. t.itio,ck Aokt ' 'rued ecitnotaistigsci the iotegoing initniment to 6.." iheii" 7,..„,„„....--- (O•••iAL tiao ka...44.5 le we 4.5544 bi 445 5••• law las 45 sowiewi Se is tie itleitit &miss Oatedia* ard asicee nig: Notary Public lot Orogen My commicalost turoins ' •• t ., • ■•61,1. WARRANTY DEE AUDEN SALTWICK et tsit To Oahu simissiwit humcT 326 se Liman St. le•Teen etecogoikanItTtenoi TO COMANY .1 L. . '■1 itAtt CIO cUtidbk tousie y M W,uhtilyeau i al 0 0..X5jaai• ici,,ilitiromi oral' te-08Peer._, ,Rethostiortette We.0000001* e4gei *hernia* °lora.' 64 jade leie i set e..s ineaned Sc, ,toei team% al it•wei. i••••• thee ill l eatueare Of •wl*, we rw lerenee Lielok el itiiiici end reraimad In bash at ierreas Sills igraiisi a istol Cmiii vase haa 514 iimal **aid *MO T4 Dikon0 �l Riti & Eiroves Dekeketei 849 Fe 923 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] A 4 •r • CIRCUE.AT . BR RW acorn Kt_ 6f V B Staff. Revicu �e'r •` '" MEMEN CITY OF TIGARO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OEPARVIENT• PRE -- APPLICATION CHECKLIST 1. APPLICANT PEAM015 2. PROPERTY LOCATION . Add Y e s �,�•„ ......ea.v..o....oao...�+e�n GOO • DESCRIPTION/NECESSARY d PROPOSAL ON NECESSARY APPLICATIONS) Lt 1-- . pate dpa• l 4i ! Tax Map/ ax l n '! a 4. E i cAG blots. e * aohe See edide SactioiA tO 20 Cokes edit ref r rt Existing Adjacent Property north south exist Put R 141; r S c,. 4 004- • west , 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION _ Lier.or, , d 6 ZONING DESIGNA` ON "' F f�.eA'5��.�1 » • .1.-,,,L,,,$,(41.11>) -rp 7: NEIGHBORHOo PLANNING ORGANIZATION NO. CHAIRPERSON. / PHONE Loq Ia '" L1—____ CODE REQUIREMENTS M nia9um lot site / idt front 3� ° corner' . tIA 1.1 side Setbacks: ....•. rear' ...._... --- .. �pecaax sQtbacks streets established areas r . ' atiettiii# klE • .. lower inteins . ty zones :,�. .lands �° , flag lot acc�ess .... .. so structures , zero lot line ... g. . ey �.... .. "Nlaximuda lob ccwerage 1457 Raiff iieua bil a mow • , 4. • • a , • • • • • ' • • • , • , .Special height Limits flag Lot other Density calculatfon Density transition Landscaping: Street Trees Buffer Areas Parking Areas. Visual clearance Parking and loading minimum T. of lot area tA - stral••••■••■••••••••• 1•44144444440140114••••••••••••444044444.4440404440000404444044001440•04044•4404444140414010404•4144414 0440•04;0044401440404004=010•4400•4•••••••••••0440 onwearamo".......o•ori•••••■■••••••■•••••••••••••••sr - r Access and circulation _ 41 4. , Oa • „ ,111e." A. mi .11 11 • Signs 0004,400:044100104004•10700•010141/4404014104241004034040040•000044044000104.04•4000/HIM•1400/414/0071440,4 OMER CONSIDERATIONS (See application checklist for specific items) 1; SensitiVe lands: .floodplaitra dralnasystay 3.2.5% Y*N6fled Wetlands Open space! Historic overlay Street improvementskonne:etiefrithikesaya- • Righfrof-way dedication Ole r SO • ■!..AL Sanitary StMer imprOVement warsiors...mammarmatowar••••••wermwaremases....•••••smomar•nunsami ii•••woor 4 ■11. Stant Sewer improvements — • g. a Improvebent ftreement - Permit; Bonds;, Fees "O. 0 other agencll Parfaits •••••••■■•■•r4o.■••:........s.:m•lams•••■•••• to, vttoctotom , T AdministraitiVe staff. review . a, NAM etlearkfigitteairket Off icr .m........-........-.............:-‘ -----,----,-,:,--'..-.......'---- . . thiblid At arifi/Plantlinj COtiOiots itht ildmittitratiVite„,,detision tit- a Public Asa thalt. occur . tAtitictottestitay ' tegyt ate, tit cosepigte .iptiltatiott it filed. A 40day appeat per'ied ,faidteat all decitietrtt.it a (osi3P/00220 • a, •', a • • CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST , Staff JO E Date =-10 . . . . . . • •The items on.the checklist below are required for the successful completion of • • . your application submission requirements. ,This checklist identifies what is required to be submitted with your application. This sheet MUST be brought and submitted with all other materials at the time you submit your application. Sao your application for further explanation of these items or call Planning at 639-4171. . . ITEMS TO DE . INCLUDED:, .rtc t0 SPECIFIC (IATERIALS. A) pite.11111forftiowi (No. of copies AC)): I 3 1) Vicinity, Map 2) Site size & dimensions 3) Contour lines(2 ft at o71ax or 5 ft for grades > 1O%) (t.e' 4) , Drainage patterns, courses, and ponds 1 3 5) Locations of natural hazard areas including: a) Floodplain areas b) Slopes in excess of 25% ( 3 c) ' Unstable ground . E 3 d) Areas with high seasonal water table 0) Areas with severe eon erosion potential 'E f). Areas having severely Weak foundation sails ( 3 6) Location of resoUrce areas as shown on the C4AprehensiV4 Map inventory including: a) Wildlife habitats 1 3 b). Wetlands 1 3 7) Other site featUres: a) Rock outcroppings 1 3 b) Trees with 6" + caliper measured 4 feet from ground leVel 8) Location of existing structures and their usee (I?' 9) Location and type of on and off-site noise sources ( 3 10) Location of existing Utilities and easements Eto'Jr- 11) Location of existing dedicated right-of4Jays ( 3 B) giajlktalomLtikinitating (No of copies ar) ): (3 1) The proposed site and surrounding properties tip 2) ContoUr line intervals 1) The location, dimensions and names of all: a) Existing & platted streets & other public Ways' and easements on the site and on adjoining rue properties ,BASIC MATERIALS A) Application form.(1 copy) , 0) Owner'm signature/writtewauthorization C) Title transfer instrument 0) 111330.530r13 map E) Plot or site plan F) Applicant's statement c1,0 Filing foe ($ 13a6 feet P. • APPLIdATION CtiECKLIST Page 1 or „ , isommrsonsc48 4 rit4■ 4.15,41 7h424Ag444001opment.plan shall inciude,a4gra 11r ng4p ,..saute4 3C 11- as h the site . .The4site deVelopment plan proposal shall include: tl) 'Floor plans indicating the square footage Of, all structures proposed for we on-site, and'. elevation drawings of each structure. E) 1.1.hdttavtLagli (NO. Of copies . The landscape plan shall be drawn at the same scale 00 the site analysis plan or a larger. Scale if necessary and shall ihditatet i) Description of the irrigation tote* where applicable ( .1) 10dAtiOn and hdight of fence's; butfeeo and tdreghingt APP1-108TIOM CtitCKLIST — Page 2 G) Traffic enarration.4.4Attimatei,.,,,. tiC roct)1.„.;;;;tttFFic H) Prvlimina rtiti�Wao lot4AfiiiVid usitat,__ j___mma haisdi • (11o... of roopit " 1) • .1 •.l'hes' who' tizi/of, •,„ • 2)1.. :alto,. owner, • a • ,.. • •• •,z 3) ,..a'''`The. gnap',,scale. ., or , • .• •:■tf..$ 4) el DiSCrifitiTitS, • 00'..fea1), inch north (3 0 ndories ": • 3 .s.,0?,Iolagssaisants and Ontiito•the parcel n4?Oli.and within . (3 m t i�a2Oofeet to the inch goOIe i azporrilie t. ' ( 3 • posed.nente190. f.:;.thg4tibd ie. iilovi E 3 3) .iq,, V.'ilnityi nap:,•ShoWing.:,.prOperty'p ' relationship to „,4 ..aerial *xi "colaeator 44 :streets' • • (3 4) ,. limes., ,addrestes and telephOnt,fiUmbers of the owner ,deVeloper, engineer, sUrveyeri, designer, as appiicebiet ) 5) Date of application . • . . ( 3 6) . Boundary lines of tract to be subdivided ( 3 7) flames of adjacent subivision or Moos of recorded owners of adjoining parcels of unsubdivided land , 8) Contour lines related to a City-established bench- mark at 2-foot intervals for 0-10% grades greater than 10 28112CC. -05600 PRONE, DENNIS B & KATHLEEN R 8154 SW BOND TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC -0570 HORVAT, ROBERT J JR /RUTH 15910 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S112CG- .0.5800 EICHTEN, :TERRY J 15932 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 28112CC -06000 WATTS, RONALD DEAN /JANE ANN 15976 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S112CC ..06100 ..........•.....u.... KENNEDY, REESE C & RUTH U 15943 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S112CC•06200 .... INMAAN, DAVID S /CHERYL F 15921 SW 81ST CT T7:4ADD OR 07224 28112CC -06300 44.4 JONES, TERRY W & MARY K 15889 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 972: 4 2811350 -00400 6644 CASTILE, JAMES W & AUDREY 9565 SW INEZ TIGARD OR 97062 2611380 -00500 MOORE, DONALD LESLIE JOAN K 8170 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97224 2511380. -02200 44440044448444444444o EH„RY,RICHARD AND ROSEMARII NELSON, ARTHUR C 2355 LEISURE LANE DUNWOODY GA 30338 2SI11DD- 00201 PIACENTINI, JAHN /LOUISE *19 2540 NE RIVERSIDE WAY PORTLAND OR 97211 2S111DD -10200 ....e+..10••••••4.4444 WARD, VERLA JANE 8585 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97223 25111DD -10300 HOAG, KATHLEEN 8565 SW STRATFORD TIGARD OR 97223 . 4 4 28111DD10400 44,4' FULCHER, JOHN LAS /SANDRA L 8550 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97224 2S11iD0-10500 40444 64444440 ANDERSON, JON S /WENDY M 8570 SW STRATFORD CT TIGARD OR 97223 261.11DD -12300 4414444•0441.044 JOHNSON, Y, tANDALL W & HURD, 1<cRIST 8514 5W AVON TIGARD OR 97224 25113CB47700 4 .. ,. - 4. 4 4 1. 4 4. 4 DURHAM, CITY Or PO $OK 23443 TIGARD 0R 97223 2S113BD -tb 02QQ 410044.44.1,. BARTLETT, E A VIRGINIA 16575 SW UPR BOONES FY RD TI. ,... OR 97224 GARD 28114A0 -00100 ••• SCHOOL DISTRICT 23J 13137 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD OR 97223 2S114A0 -01101 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY 150 N FIRST ST HILLSBORO OR 97123 28114A0 -01104 COLUMBIA CABLE OF OREGON ACCOUNTS PAY1BLE 14200 SW RRIGADOON CT BEAVERTON OR 97005 28114A0- .01300 ..4.6......•4........ THOMAS, JOHN AS SALLY P 16575 SW 85TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 281138A- -00300 DURKEE, RALPH D MARY HELEN 7910 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97223 28113BA -00500 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC C 121 SW SALMON ST PORTLAND OR 97204 2811200- 01300 440444444°° ADDINGTON, VALERIA 0 8465 SW Dui RD TIGARD OR 97224 40.4..4 2811200- 01500 NELSON, RICHARD A & CONSTANCE L JOHNSON, TODD S & JULIE A 16143 SW 146TH TIGARD OR 97223 2S1i200.0i800 WAYMIRE, Z ELVIN G JR 10845 SW DOVER CT TIGARD OR 97224 2811.20 66,01804 C- 01804 s.4444.. "6444444. BARRETT, GORDON r & MELISSA J . ,4444 15981 SW 81ST CT TIGARD OR 97223 2 S114AO -0110 2....a....a. . . ... .. WHITTTAKER /DU M —HALL PARTNERS 50 AIRPORT PA KWWWA,Y SAN JOSE CA 95110 2S114A0- 01103 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OR WASHINGTON COUNTY 150 N FIRST ST HILLSBORO OR 97123 213114A° 01200 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY 150 N 1ST HILLSBORO OR 97123 2S114A0.01302 THOMAS, JOHN MURRAY AND SALLY PATRICIA 16575 SW 85TH AVE TIGARD OR 97223 28113BA -00400 .44•4 HAMBACH, HAROLD AND MILDRED 7735 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC -01200 COLLING, CHARLES W AND JOYCE C 10185 SW VIEW TERRACE TIGARD OR 97223 28112CC -01400 TAYLOR, HERNIECE I NOW HAYMAN COLLING, CHARLES 9720 SW FREWING TIGARD 2811200 -01700 POAGE, WAYNE E AND 8255 SW DURHAM RD TIGARD • W OR 97223 4 r4e4.o BLANCH M OR 97224 2211200 -01801 .._ 4 4444 BOWL' N, RICHARD L AND TER SA PO BOX 94 TUALATIN OR 97062 2S112CC.'05900 4rt RL1SON, MICHAEL D e1 JULIE N 15954 SW Gift 0T TIGARD OR 97224 SEE MAP 28 I I2CD • NE.' V4 NW I/4 SECTION 13 T2S R I W WM, WASHINGTON COUNTY MOON SCALE 6100 liwpvg3or) 411AC. SEE MAP 28 I I2CD IEE MAP IS I 138 AC Goo Art Ag T HALL. t TT !CASS SW mom svATIWO OLD STATE HWY. *111 SEE MAP 29 I 12CC ,---, OLD HWY 217)4 ire.W. 7 DURHAM ,.. Y 'A iikaii-c-77 CI* I Lai 1 , I aoo.' ,, 6li' 4 ``c';5i...1./ COO I I IA$44i'. 40144 IS t. SI 104,10e. g t 600-MI I I I Amok" taw/twirl: I 4 0 g V, i.... API:. .... .... 31 1 I I. 2 ! I I 1411 Jo' LI" to_ 14 f I I it t a. r . ...... ..... NW I/4 SECTION 13 T RI W W.M: WASHINGTON COUNTY ORECON SCALE 191200' • SEE MAP 2S I 1311A 23-78 SEE MAP 28 I 1381:1 • • 0 • 4 • • • • SEE MAP 25 1 110A 23.74 0 "IA700 84 I51310o 15900 36 $6000 37 IOW CANCELLED TAX LOT Nei, t oo, 100, AM LET DO 116100 HAMLET/ 600 CT0 13500 134 13300 10 17200 IRT 1 Ii' 142oo•—+ 9 1300 45 12600 STREET tr00 25 .149100 8 17 I 9200 18 I 9300 3 19' I 9400 3 20 loo 950/ II 11111'4:1'1' a S.W4 AVON STREET I SO SO 00 SO 11900 12V0;,t121O0 12 1 c 2°00 39 4� 41 42 45 45 46 4.49 49 DOW S Ileoo 44 11200 11100 11000 10900 0000 10700 10600 30 37 36 35 34.ri iS Si ie SSA 8TR Al.PORD 3Cdi t.; tit 05008 • ..../.4■•■■••••• Oi- 10100 —26 103 I SEE MAO 251 14A a II ROAD . C XSl&XfiuiMii • itOA ASSESSMENT PURPOSES oNtS, DO NOT kW ON FOR ANY OTHER USE• 0,10 etiAlft• Imml co 114 Si, SI• II SEE MAP 25 I 12CC 2 TIGARD riaDD • ' • .^' `° • ' • ^',.' ^. „ s�``` ' • NN1/4 SNW4 SECTION 13 72S RIW WASHINGTON mmwrY(AmmON ' mm /mw mara~=~••41~=- �(-'`-�-^- iiioo tibo mmo 4soo MOO mmITomomow 7^ U z\ | /\ ~f | W VA i i t Y Hc *�.___~_— • � . . . .. .. ^ '+. - • ` ,, . ^~ . -.' = ^ ,00I TWOS NORIO ,uNnoo NOLONIHSYM AM M I 2 1 N01.1.03S V/1 MN W1 3S NE104 SECTION T2S R!W W.M. WASHINGTON CO NTY OREGON SCALE 1"4001 SEE MAP 25 I IIDC eu�u e�.1on7 \A/yowl, � + DURHAM N• olo NNW SCION, S CHOOL DISTRICT !SJ SEC MAP as I IuAS riir 23a74 001i�'1- eir t; t. t1U 111 /Ili ii+it. n 1te e• I era. 2374 +0A CU 90 =0002 Pg15off'30 � � w P Y• •u NItt S • DATE: LEA. 1990 FROM: Tigard Planning Department RR: CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90 -0015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Use approval for the + expansion of exissating wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous s from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance approval 'so allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I -P Industrial Park) corner of the intersection of S%s1 Durham Road aced SW LOCATION: (WCTM 251 138, tax lot 600) Attached is the Site Plan and app your review. From various departments and applicant's statement for information supplied by P agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation wild, be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the propossa1 in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by miarjA, 1990. You may use the spac e e provided below � attach a separate ett r to return y our comments. If ouareanab unable to � .. he tg&Pieaee phone the staff contact noted be .ow with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. of you have any quesstions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Sox 23397, 13125 SW Zell Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PRONE: 639 -4171. STAFF CONTACT: Jer Of fOr _ ____ -. ...._Y. PLEASE .CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Plea ®e contact of our office. Please refar to the enclo ®ed letter. written Comoaen . e: Name of Person Commenting: Phone Number: bin /CUP 90 -d2 SKM • L. 9110Ti0N LXST FOR 1. NPO NO. 5 (2 copies) fr) fa014-6 2. CITY DEPARTMiRT3- VBuilding Inapector/Brad R. ity Recorder Engineering/Gary A. 3. SPECIAL DISTRICTS fri?ire District (picL-up box bldg.) Tigard Water District 8777 SW Burnham St. Tigard l OR 97223 Metzger Water District 6501 SW Taylors Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 4. AFFECTED JURISDICTIONS Wash. Co. Land Use & Transp. 150 N. First Ave. Hillsboro, OR 97124 Brent Curtis Kevin Martin Joann Rice Scott King Fred Eberle Mike Rorreeon Jim Hendryx City of Beaverton PO Box 4755 Beaverton, OR 97076 State Highway Lee Gunderson PO Box 565 Beaverton, OR 97075 5. SPECIAL AGENCIES vr general Telephone Mike Lutz 12460 SW Main St, Beaverton, OR 97007 ALL APpE2MEE2 410 'IMIWIMO.1110••• CPO NO. Parke & Recreation Board Police Other School Dist. No. 48 (Beavr) Joy Pahl PO Box 200 Beaverton, OR 97075 School District 233' (Tig) 13137 SW Pacific Hwy. Tigard, OR 97223 Dbut.L., Boundary Commission 320 SW Stark Room 530 Hillsboro, OR 97124 METRO ammo owsommorA 4444,,,* • �qS�S WW Natural Gas Ronald D. Polvi, PE, PLS 220 NW Second AVe. Portland, OR 97209 2000 SW 1st Ave. Portland, OR 97201-5398 DLCD (CPA's only) 1175 Court St. NE ' Salem, OR 97310-0590 Other Portland General Electric Brian Moore 14655 SW Old Scholls Ferry Beaverton, OR 91007 fr Metro Area Commdnications Harlan Cook Twin Oaks Technology denter 1815 NW 169th Place S-6020 Beaverton, OR 97006-4886 US West Pete ldon 421 SW Oak St. Portlafidi OR 07204 TI Cablevihion of Oregon, Ind4, Mike Naliodk 3500 SW Bond Portland, OR 97201 • 4- M Han Blvd, ox 23397 'egon 97223 .16 u/k-- A v e 4:6,,,Ng:ft:oft. td.,„:2sillop- e:,:., PI . z,_tou ZNI;e4y4.911N/LOUISE #19 trig 1 / II a • d .^ * ,,,,• ' 3 3/ ' ,,,, •• . 1 - ..,0i9 N .,. UR 4 TO SE DER F Net 1**Pe .,. .... .,.; ta...3 Addressed FORWARD ORDER ON r UNABLE TO FORWARD .‘:t r,11)5,W) : ti. RETURN TO SENDER CUPID- oo6 Z U e7 14- Fkpatns iavt 20112cc -01400 TAYLoR., BERNIEC x NOW NAYMAN coLLXNG, CHARLES W 9720 SW FREwiN0 D.RMAN LAND USE PLANNING • DEVEL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS • PROJECT MANAGEMENT October 30, 1992 Jerry Offer Planning Department City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Sludge Storage at Durham Treatment Plant Dear Jerre: Dennis Lively and f appreciated your taking the time to meet with us on August 23rd to to discuss the USA proposal. Dennis talked with USA General Manager Gary Krahmer following ur meeting. Gary is comfortable that using the existing surge basin (designed g g peak ) g. ., g mixed with to hold raw sews a durrn eak flows d for winter stora a of dewatered spud �rmit for the sawdust constitutes a "minor modification' of the approved conditional use permit We understand that "minor modifications" are processed b y staff through an administrative process without public notice to surrounding property owners. Therefore, please proceed with your review and decision regarding the requested modification of the approved C.iP. Again, let us know if there is additional information that you need to complete your review process, Please direct your letter of decision to: Dennis Lively Division Engineer Unified Sewerage Agency 400 E. Main, Suite 150 Hillsboro, OR 97123 f would appreciate it if you could provide me a copy of the letter for my file. Thank you. Good luck with your new baby! y � D� OREGt�� 6131 NE ALAMEDA + Pc RTLAN i 21s PHONE 5O3/281 5 PAX 603/181,0613 'ca Unwed Sewerage Agency Durham Treatment Plant v Sludge Storage io Description of Request • . g Agency (USA) proposes minor modification of an approved The Unified Sewerage ens.. � USA ro oses a rumor modificatio 'sti�i surge basin conditional use permit for the Durham treatment plant to use an existing g located in the eastern portion of the treatment plant site for winter storage of dewatered sludge mixed with sawdust. Sludge is the nutrient-rich organic product wastewater treatment. . treatment g into uct of wastew merit At USA tr'�Iarous ch Or anic rOd plants, wastewater is first separated isettled solids or sludge, and liquid. p treatment processes are used to stabilize the sludge, destroy harmful bacteria, and minimize odor. Treated sludge from the Forest Grove, Hillsboro and Rock Creek Treatment Plants is applied by USA directly onto agricultural fields from late-Spring through early Fall. Historically, sludge generated at the Durham plant has been incinerated on-site. However, the USA Facilities_ In and Sludge Maw ent Plan both recommend a shift from incineration to beneficial reuse of sludge from the Durham plant. The organic c material in the sludge increases the soil's abilit y to store water and provides des long-lasting nourishment crops. USA has operated a sludge reuse program for twenty- two years. ears. tSA currently has permit approval from DEQ to apply sludge to 9,985 acres of agricultural land in Washington County; sludge volumes in 1991 provided a supply for 850 acres. USA's beneficial reuse of sludge by land application has been successful and federal and state environmental regulations support this approach to sludge management. USA sludge with .. months, as required by DEQ, when wet U mv�es +stud sawdust 'and stores it during The existing sludge mixing and storage field conditions prevent land spreading. Th g g g g site (an outdoor operation) located on Highway 219 south of Hillsboro is permitted on a l basis • required through errnit conditions with DEQ and by the temporary liasi s only. USA is regal g p terms of a federal district court consent decree to site a permanent sludge storage facility by June, 1993. USA p , "decentralized" .. system of winter-time sludge p already to implement a ace... rine stud a sare at the ntral i . k Creek and Durham treatment plants. Improvement y Forest Grove, underway at the Forest Grove plant to accommodate outdoor storage of sludge. Characteristics of the Use Consistent with existing USA sludge management practices, dewatered sludge produced at the Durham treatment plant during the summer period of operations will be taken directly to farm fields for land application, in trucks with a hauling capacity of 15 cubic yards. Dewatered sludge produced during the winter period of operation will be mixed with sawdust (2 parts sawdust /1 part sludge) and stored on -site in the existing surge basin until the summer, when it will then be delivered to land application sites. Sawdust will be brought to the treatment plant for use in preparation of the sludge /sawdust mixture, in semi -truck and trailer combinations with a hauling capacity of 110 cubic yards. Sawdust deliveries are expected during the months of October through May USA proposes to store sawdust in an area between the internal access road and the railroad, south of the surge basin: Low push walls can be constructed to contain the sawdust All sludge mixing and storage activities will be contained on the treatment plant site, with mixer trucks picking up dewatered sludge at the sludge loading station, then picking up two parts sawdust and mixing the material before it is unloaded in the surge basin for winter storage USA currently employs ten individuals at the temporary sludge site south of Hillsboro, USA expects that the sludge reuse program may employ up to 20 individuals by the year 2010, divided between the Durham, Forest Grove and Rock Creek facilities: The sludge reuse program ram s p g � operates 5 days per week (Monday - Friday) for ten months out of the p ry facility p ... days e r week (Monday Saturday from July 1 y The temporary (Monday V c` September 15: Year-round hours operates da s e 6:30 _ i to 0 p.a , . Employment of operation are 30 a,mi 0 5 00 E is typically higher during the summer months; however, much of the employment activities are off -site and associated with the land application of the sludge: III. Impacts of Sludge Storage Operation The pro o s. ed on-site te st o dewatered . . g , .. .. f . ew a:t.: e. re d sludge m_ ix .e; . d with sawdust ._ r. e r esen. i ts a minor modification of the approved conditional use p ermit ' The activity co mpliments the extensive wastewater treatment activities which already occur on this site, With completion of the expansion and improvements of the Durham plant, USA will not need the surge basin for overflow storage of raw sewage during periods of extreme wet weather, The i surge b can put productive use for winter-time sludge storage with very minor ,assn ca e ut to rodu modification (construction of a asphalt There are existing drains in the bottom of ramp . an t surface), i P possible seal of as hal W the surge basins which will collect any water which falls g on the sludge pile and carry it back through the treatment plant: • y 1 a. a. Visual Given the depth and area of the surge basin, USA projects that the sawdust /sludge mixture wi ll not be visible above the grade of the site. Additional landscaping can be planted along the property line to the north of the surge basin and adjacent to the elementary school to rovide a visual screen. The area behind the school is not an active use or play area, and the school does not have any windows along this wall. b. Truck Traffic On -site storage of sludge from the a will involve a modest increase in truck traffic to and fro e site. Nathan Cullen with USA has prepared a memorandum (copy attached) which summarizes the expected truck traffic associated with the sludge storage. As summarized r during the summer months when school traffic in Table 2. g in the truck vo�umes +are higher � ore the seasonal nature of the truck traffic �n the immediate vicinity is minimal. Therefore, minimal conflicts with the school associated with the sludge operation should p traffic. c. Odor, Noise & Air Emissions CH2M Hill prepared a Noise & Odor Emissions Study to present the findings of comprehensive noise and odor sampling performed at USA's temporary sludge storage facility south of Hillsboro. This effort was designed to quantify noise •and odor emissions he existing operation in support of the permitting and predesign of a permanent g P from a i_. ` or facilities. A copy of the CH2M Hill report will be provided to the City of facility Tigard. The following conclusions were drawn from the report: Normal activities during winter or summer months do not appear to produce significant detectable odors offsite. • j_ freshly �' material that has The odor levels seem to be produced i from the disturbed sawdust also been in the stockpile ile for a short period of tune. delivered saw .._ a p . is p Freshly impacts cts because of the has a relatively strong odor but is not expected to cause i p small amount of fresh sawdust on site. The proposed operation is expected to meet all DEQ regulations for noise, The f' g recommendations were made based on the results presented in the repot ollow�n tees d report: All trucks entering and leaving the facility should be covered to eliminate concentrated, mobile odor sources, . 3 t. Continue odor sampling on a semi- annual basis to allow USA to respond to public concerns regarding odor and adapt to any future changes in the operation or regulatory requirements. As described earlier, sludge from the Durham plant is currently incinerated on site under an approved DEQ air contaminant discharge permit. Modifications of the treatment plant operations to reduce phosphates in the plant effluent will increase the volume of on -site sludge. USA requested an increase in the amount of sludge that can be incinerated from 4,366 tons per year to 7,000 tons per year As a result, emission limits for particulate pollution are set at 3 6 tons • per year, an increase of 2.5 tons per year. The DEQ permit p � p Y g phasing sludge 1994. When the beneficial requires USA to begin basin out incineration of slud a in reuse system is in place, the primary sludge incinerator will only be used as a backup unit. 1 , with i.. . increase :.. ,i • .+ a • . will the The, efore even vn the modest i �n truck traffic associated with the operation, g ....ill reduce shift from sludge incineration to beneficial consumption through land, application at this site. particulate emissions (and associated energy consumption for the incinerators) Questions for Tigard Staff What type of land use application is required? What data, plans and narrative are needed? 0 Will public notice of the conditional use permit modification be provided? A Is there an opportunity for a public hearing? What are the applicable fees for review? Any specific landscaping or screening requirements or recommendations? After submittal of a complete application, how much time is typically required for a final local decision? Other issues or questions? 4 MEMO UM DATE: October 12, 1992 ` TO: Mary Dorman COPY: Dennis Lively Dale Richwine FROM: Nathan Cullen SUBJECT: Durham AWWTP Sludge Storage Facility Truck Traffic Truck traffic at the Durham treatment plant will increase if an on -site sludge storage facility g g ity is located there. There will be three types of trucks that will comprise this increase: o Sludge -- Dewatered sludge produced during the summer ]. in trucks period of operations will be taken from the osant directly �,s to farmers' fields for land application disposal, p with a hauling Capacity of 15 cubic yards. o Sludge /Sawdust - - Dewatered sludge produced during the winter period of operation on will be e mixed with ith s awdust and stored o n site until the summer, when it will t enbe del ive red to land �ppl cation sites, using with a hauling capacity o 15 Y ards o Sawdust Sawdust will be brought to the treatment plant for use in preparation 0 the sludge/sawdust "xture, in mixture, semi -truck and trailer combinations with a hauling capacity of 110 cubic yards. The sludge storage facility will have two distinct modes of typically November through ugh April, o eratiox�. In the winter periods typ Y � ... with � g produced (2 the deWatered ,� n the summer . - _.. � . , bar, the sludge site . parts sawdust to part sludge) and stored o., u h octo , that is produced period, typically ... months May thro g transported directly to farmers' fields sawdust during these i _. lud e,� i f e nt�s will be tra s g^ for land app re time, the stored .. ...... s - lalsoibe completely psame removed from the treatment plant mixture will lication disposal. and transported off-site for land app- „ • Delivery of sawdust to the treatment plant will overlap these two operating periods, because a stockpile of sawdust is necessary before the winter storage period begins. Therefore, sawdust deliveries will begin in August and continue through April -- to the end of the winter period of operations. The combination and number of trucks required to operate the sludge storage facility as a result will vary throughout the year. In May, June, and July only sludge and sludge/sawdust trucks will operate. I August, September, and October all three types of trucks will operate. From November through April, only sawdust trucks will operate. Estimates of the average number of trucks required per day for the time periods described are provided in Table 1 for the years 1995 and 2010. Table 1 Average Total Number of Trucks Required Per Day 1995 2010 May- Aug- Nov- May- Aug- Nov- Tr4.2.11.2Z2.9. Dili.... Oct M.Kil. July Oct hpsil sludge 5.6 5.6 0.0 6.7 6.7 0.0 Sludge/Sawdust 13.0 13.0 0.0 15.5 15.5 0.0 Sawdust 0.0 0.9 0.9 _0.0 1.1 1.1 ....................... TOTAL 18.6 19.5 ' 0.9 22.2 23.3 17— The number of trucks required were calculated by dividing the projected quantities of sludge, sludge/sawdust, and sawdust by the capacity of the type of truck. The values for sludge production for the years 1995 and 2010 came from HDR, the Digester raoility design engineer, in a memorandum dated October 18, 1991. The values of sawdust were calculated by multiplying the HDR values for winter sludge production by 2, and the values for the sludge/sawdust mixture by multiplying the same winter sludge a. production number by 3. ta- The numbers of trucks per day in Table 1 are aVerage valueS, and IE g were calculated by dividing the number of truck loads required by the number of operating days available in a given period. In this En as calculation it was assumed that the sludge and sludge/sawdust 0 mixture truckS would operate 6 days per week and the sawdust trucks Lu 5 days per week. It is important to note that the approved Conditional Use Permit (April 1990) for the current construction project already allows for an average of "10 trucks per day for delivery of chemicals and remova] of dewatered sludge° (page 23) upon Completion of the Phase 2 2 facilitieS. This condition is based on year-round transport of e "6 7' aa ,g■ a • • • •.. •• • • 4. dewatered sludge off-site, with only enough on-site storage for 5-day per week rather than 7-day per week operation. Numbers for these trucks, that are already permitted, were calculated by dividing the HDR sludge production numbers for the summer and , winter operating periods by the truck capacity (15 cubic yards) and by the number of days of operation for the period (assuming,5 days per week). Table 2 presents the results of this calculation. The number of trucks already permitted in effect represents a credit against the number of trucks required per day that are presented in Table 1. The Table 2 numbers therafore report the net increase in the average number of trucks per day that will result from operation of an on-site sludge storage facility. The increase comes from 1) bringing sawdust to the plant from August through April in large trucks (110 cubic yards), 2) removing the sawdust (Mixed with sludge) from the site from May through October in Smaller trucks (15 cubic yards), and 3) changing from year-round to seasonal diposal. Table 2 Average Increase in Number of Trucks Required Per Day 1995 2010 May- AUg- Nov- May- Aug- Nov- Truck Type 121X_ Oct AREil July Oct hail Sludge 5.6 5.6 0.0 6.7 6.7 0.0 Sludge/Sawdust 13.0 13.0 0.0 15.5 15.5 0.0 Sawdust 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.1 1.1 Permitted (1) i6 11 iitli iitai (8.0) ilta Ala TOTAL 11.9 12,8 (443) 14.2 15.3 (5.1) (1) Calculated values from the Conditional Use Permit. n 4 a . a • • 4 4. [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] LEGIBILITY STRIP • 2. A narrative addressing the proposed changes as listed in subsection B below. B. The Director shall determine that a major modification (s) has resulted if one or more of the changes listed below have been proposed: 1. A change in lanr use; 2. An increase in dwelling unit density; 3. A ten percent change in the ratio of the different types of dwehi►.g units to the number of unite; 4. A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures; 5. A change in the type and location of acceaawaya and parking areas where off -site traffic would be affected; 6. An increase in the floor area proposed for nonresid antial use by more than 10 percent where previously specified; 7. A reduction of more than 10 percent of the area reserved for common 'open space and /or usable open space; 8. A reduction of specified setback requirements by percent; 9. An elimination of proj at amenities by more than 10 previously specified provided such as: a. Recreational facilities; b. ''Screening; or c. Landscaping provisions; and 10. A 10 percent increase in the approved density; c. Upon the Director determining that the proposed modification to the conditional use plan is a major modification, the applicant shall submit a n w application in accordance with Section 18.130.070 for conditional use approval. Notice of the d cicion shall be provided to the applicant The Director's decision may be appealed by the applicant as provided by Section 18.32.310.A. (Ord. 90.41► Ord. 89 -06; Ord. 83-52.) more than 20 percent where D. Revised 1/17/91 Page 320 4. Limiting the building height, size or lot coverage, or location on the site; 5. Designating the size, number, location, and design of vehicle access points; 6. Requiring street right -of -way to be dedicated and the street to be improved; 7. Requiring landscaping, screening, drainage and surfacing of parking and loading areas 8. Limiting the number, siece, location, height, and lighting of signs; 9. Limiting or setting standards for the location and intensity of outdoor lighting; 10. Requiring berming, screening or landscaping and the establishment of standards for their installation and maintenance; 11. Requiring; and designating the size, height, location, and materials for fences; 12. Requiring the protection and preservation of existing trees, soils, vegetation, watercourses, habitat areas, and drainage areas; 13. Requiring the dedication of sufficient open land area for a greenWay adjoining and within the f loodp lain when land form alterations and development are allowed within the 100 -year f loodplain; and 14. Requiring the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the f loodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian /bicycle pathway plan. and manufactured home subdivisions are . - D. exempt ft one the provis ons of subaeti;tion C above. Manufactured hom e subdivisions ate subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.160, Subdivisions, Manufactured home parks are subject to approval under the provisions of Chapter 18.120, Site Development Review. (Ord. 89 -06; Ord, 87.66; Ord. 84 -39; Ord. 83 -52) 18.130.O5'J Ma, or Modif icati o irtov lane -RListin : Uevel. pm n A. An applicant may request approval of tttodification to an approved plan by 1, Providing the Director With five copies of the proposed modified conditional use plan; and Revised 02/27/89 Page 319 Sludge Storage Facility Noise and Odor Emissions Study Prepared for Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County CVORi35/006.514 .�t�i t c �! Yt �.� ' P' .�.._ t .1�. � i� Y 5.?¢r,.e l.V . f. y�.; 0 0 0 S 4 • CONTENTS 0 Page 0 O 1-1 0 1 Summary O Purpose and Scope 1 -1 O Odor Source Characterization 1-1 • Odor Impacts 1-2 O Noise Source Characterization and Impacts 1 -3 Dersharn Site i ...... i ..... 1 -6 O Midway Site • .. 1 -6 Conclusions and Recommendations • ......:. i . • : 1 -6 IS 2 Odor Source Characterization O Odor Source Characterization Objectives 2-1 0 Sampling and Analytical Methods 2-3 0 Isolation Flux Chamber Sampling . : . . 64 .. i Y 6 6 4 6 6 6 6 2-3 0 0 Hydrogen Sulfide Determination 2 -5 0 Total Hydrocarbons Determination : :.. 3 2 -5 Odor Sampling and Analysis . . . . . • i . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . 4 4 6 6 4 6 2 -6 Ammo nia Sampling and Analysis . . . i . • . . . . . : . : . : . • . . . 2-8 le Emissions Characterization Results . . . i . . i i . 64664 . . . . : . 6. . 3 444 2-8 Emission Rate Calculations : . 6i : . . . . . : . 3 i . . • . . . . . . . . 2 -16 0 Discussion of Results . Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . a, : . . . . . .. . . .: :. 2 -16 O Emission Mechanisirns and Flux Chamber Application ..... 3 i 46 2 -16 O Comparison of Concentration Results Between Sources ....: . . . : 2 -23 O Comparison of Odor and Ammonia Results • 4 6 6 i . : 2-23 Temperature and Process Variations . i . i . . . . . . 3 i 3 . . 3 . . . : . : 2-24 0 Od or Impacts • G .. . 3 Modeling Methodolo gy Y . 66 i 4 64 i 4 4666 6 6 4 i: i: Y 64 64 i. i: i i i :. • i 3-1 • Air Quality Dispersion Model i. 3 . Y Y . 3 3 i 4 4 6 6 6 6 i 4 6 6 4 6 43 i 3-1 Sourcp e Characterization . 4 4 6 : . : . . . i : . . : . . i . . . . 6 4 6 6 6 4 6 6 4 4 3 -1 Emission Rates . . . , . 6 4 6 4 4 6 4 4 1 6 6 4 i 4 4 4 . . : . : . 6 4 6 4 4 0 4 4 6 4 3 -2 Meteorological iCal Data i. i:: i 3 Y i i. i: i. i i: i i i. i :: i..: i i 1 3 3-4 Receptor Grid i 3 . : . . 4 6 4 4 6 6 4 6 6 6 6 4 4 6 6 4 4 4 6 4 6 6 i : 4 6 6 6 6 6 4 6 6 3 -4 Resuly� ts 6 6 6 6 6 Y i i i i . i i i i i : Y i . : . . 6 6 6 . f.. I:. i:. i i: i i Y. i i::: i 3-4 0 zation and Impacts 4 1 - 4�1 4 Noise Source Characterization .. .. i pac M Introduction i . 8 . i i . 4 4 4 : : . . 6 6 4 i 64 66 44 . . 4 f 86 : 4 68 . 4 6 6 i . : i 646 Noise Measurements 64 6 6 4 6 6 6 4 i 64 66 : Y 3 : . . 4 6 0 4 6 4 4 . 6 6 4 4 4 4 6 6 1 6 4 6 4 4-1 Noise Standards . i i i . . 6 4 6 6 . . . i 4 4 6 6 4 6 6 4 6 6 4 8 8 4 6 4 4666 i 64 i: i 6 4 -3 CvoR115/017.51 I S S I CONTENTS (Continued) 0 0 Page 0 0 0 Facility Noise Sources 4-4 • Noise Modeling Via Computer 4 -5 Description of the Model 4 -5 • Calibration of the Model 4-6 • Highway Noise Model , i i 4 -6 • Noise Model Predictions . 4-7 • Dersham Site 64 4 4 -7 • Midway Site 4 -7 Noise Impacts and Mitigation 4 -10 0 Dersham Site 4 -10 Midway Site 4 -10 • • Summary ... i 4-10 0 Appendix A. Field Data and Emission Rate Calculations 49 Appendix B. Laboratory Analytical Reports Appendix C. Measured Noise Spectrum • Appendix D. Noise Source Characteristics 0 0 TABLES 0 2 -1 Sampling Periods and Primary fast Objectives 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 . . . . . . . . Y 2-3 * Y . Y . 2- 10 • 2 -2 Summary of A�mmona Sample Results (ppav) . . . . .,- . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . 2.. 1 1 �' p 2.12 i� 2 -3 Sulxu�rr of Odor Sample Results (D/`I') 1, January 1992 2-5 Odor ant ' � Y • • i � Y . • • i 7 a Sample Results Event * 2 -13 2 -4 Odoi and rnrr►or�Y • Results—Event 2, February 1992 . . . Y Y . . . . 0 Ammonia and Odor Sample Resu 2 13 2 March 1992 . . . . . . . Y . . . . - 2 -6 Ammonia and Odor Sample Results—Event 3, 2 -7 A m m o n i a and Odor Sample Results —Event 4, A p r i l 1992 .. Y . • . • • ..... 2 -14 • 2 -8 Ammonia and Odor Sample Results —Event 5, May 1992 ...... Y . 5 • . . 2 -15 0 2 -9 Summary of Ammonia Emission Rates (pg/mm -m2) i 6 i 64 . + :.. i i .. Y 2-17 • 2-10 Summary of Odor Emission Rates (pg/min m2) : Y . . . . . . ...... . .. i .. - - ry 2 19 • 2 -11 Summary of Emission Rates —Event 1, January 1992 2 -20 2 -12 Summary of Emission Rates—Event 2, February 1992 . 6 , 4 4 i .. Y :..:: • • 2 -13 Summary of E m i s s i o n Rates —Event 3, March 1992 Y . : . . . Y ... "44 4 . . 2 -20 • i _ , April . 2-20 • 2 -14 Summary of Emission Rates.._ Event 4 A r11 1992 ......... + • • • • i .. 2 -15 Summary of Emission Rates- -Event 6, June 1992 .. Y ... i 64 4 6 6 .... Y 2 -21 2 -16 Flux Temperature and Ammonia Results .. i : ...:.... . . . . . . i . Y .. 2 -24 3 -1 Emission Rate Summary . . . . . Y . . : . . Y . . . . . . . . . 6"6i . : : . . Y Y .. : .. 4 4 4 3 -2 3 -3 M o d e l i n g R e s u l t s . . . . i . Y . Y . . . . . Y . i . : : Y . Y .. . . . i . Y Y . Y . . : i . 3-2 . Y 3 -4 3 -2 Source Parameters i . . .. . , . . . , . . .:: . : i . Y . : . . Y . i . . . 1 • CMMR135/017,51 iv 0 0 0 0 • • CONTENTS (Continued) O Page 0 ► 4-1 Source Noise Levels 4-3 4 -2 DEQ Environmental Noise Standards 6444.. • 4-3 ,4 -3 DEQ Octave Band Noise Standards 6 4-4 0 0 to FIGURES 0 O 1 -1 Dersham Site Noise Contours , . • . . • . . . . .. 6 .... • ... • 6 .. :...... . 1 -4 1 -2 Midway Site Noise Contours :: : 0 0 2 -1 Sampling Locations ..: • .. , .. 6 . 6 6. 6 $4 2.2 2 - 0 2 -2 Surface Emission Isolation Fl 6 : uu Chamber 6 . 6 6 6 . • • 6 .. 6 • :. 6 • 6 .... 4 . 2 -4 2 -3 Odor Sampling Assembly 6 6 ...... 2 -4 Ammonia Inapinger T r a i n Sampling Assembly 6•. 6 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6 :. 6•, 6 .:.. 2-9 3-3 3 -1 Source payout 6 6: 6 6: 6 3 -2 ]receptor grid ...... :.: :. 6 : :.: 6 3 -5 4-1 Dersham Site Noise Contours :.: 6 :. 6 • : :. • 6 6 • : :: • . • 6 6 4-8 4 -2 Midway Site Noise Contours : . . 6 . • 6 6 : : 6 • 6 6 6 6 6 6, 6. 4 • 4 64 :: 6: 64 4-9 LEGIBILITY STRIP 0 • • 0 • Section 1 Summary Purpose and Scope • • The purpose of this report is to present the findings of comprehensive noise and odor • sampling performed at Unified Sewerage Agency's (USA) temporary sludge storage • facility. Air emissions sampling was performed by CH2M HILL. Noise sampling was performed by JGL Acoustics, Inc., of Bellevue, Washington. This effort was designed to • quantify noise and odor emissions from the er;Qting operation in support of the permitting • and predesign process of a permanent facility. 0 • • This project was broken into two phases. The April 1992 prelimin ary' emissions study summarized the first sampling event conducted in January 1992. Information presented in • this preliminary report was used to refine the conceptual design requirements for odor and • noise emissions mitigation at the two proposed permanent sites. The information reported • in this final report is based on four additional sampling events conducted over the per • between February and June 1992. Odor and noise modeling were also conducted to characterize site specific impacts on land uses near the proposed Dersham Road and Midway sites. Noise and odor modeling incorporated mitfgat!on measures identified in the preliminary emissions study. • ' 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 ., 40 0 e 1 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 • CVOR.135/01841 0 0 Odor Source Characterization Sampling for hydrogen sulfide., ammonia, total hydrocarbons, and odor was performed using an isolation flux chamber. This method of sample collection allows mass emission rates to be calculated for a fixed unit area of emission source, The mass emission rate can then be applied geometrically to a source of any size of the same material. By using the flux chamber, emissions from the proposed permanent facilities can be accurately estimated using data gathered at the temporary facility. Samples were collected for ammonia and odor in several different locations and types of material, Field instruments were used to measure hydrogen sulfide and total hydrocarbons. hi eddition, blanks were taken to establish background concentrations of the various compounds, Samples were taken from the following media: • Previously stacked material—Sawdust stacked earlier in the season 9 Freshly stacked material—Sawdust and sarnpling was taking place !1 and sludge mixture that had been sludge. mixture stacked the same day ; Freshly disturbed pile— Mixture that had been freshly stacked and then disturbed by removal from the pile with a front -end loader Old disturbed pile—Mixture stacked earlier in the season and then disturbed by removal from the pile with a front -end loader • Rock Creek sludge cake — Freshly unloaded sludge cake from the Rock Creek AWTP Forest Grove sludge cake—Freshly unloaded sludge cake from the Forest Grove ww'1'P • Fresh sawdust–Freshly delivered sawdust containing no sludge ® Broken pile, old material–Similar Similar to old disturbed pile, but taken well inside ty the pile as the material was being hauled away Broken pile, new material -- Similar to freshly disturbed pile, but taken as the material was being hauled away. Loaded material pad – Sample taken directly on the loa ding and tnixing area surface Alternative amendments –Three types of alternative amendme nts being pilot tested, including wheat straw, stored product, and yard debris mixed with sludge The results of the emissions sampling indicated that hydrogen sulfide at the site is not present in significant qti. (Aides for any of the materials sample'. Ammonia emission rates ranged 16,200 micrograms per minute per square meter, with broken pile -new ranged from 129 � g g . ' : materials material being the highest and fresh sawdust being the lowest source For f aite u commonly stored at the site, odor ranged from , n detectable for undisturbed matte up to 4.19 dilution units per minute per square meter for fresh sawdust. Tb alternative amendment test piles had odor emissions rates ranging from 0.78 micrograms per minute per square meter for yard debris to 6.09 for stored product. • • • • 'r • • • 9. • i 9 9 • 0 I 9 • • • 0 0 S I • I I • • Odor impacts Mass emission rates for ammonia and odor generated u,aing the sampling data were input to _ p air quality ... � � diversion odehn . _ ex- -Short Term (ISCST2) air clu �. i - concentrations m the areas around each facility: Modeling Industrial Source oYn l : the EPA-approved sttmate worst ca,e concentrab.o ... ed using building configuration submitted by USA in the April 1992 permit mode to was perfordn ` g .. _. i .. application for the IDenham Road ... site. The building was 700 b y 350 feet and is naturally ventilated with louvers on the roof and partially open sides. The emission rates were CVORt35/018.51 0 0 0 O applied to facilities using sawdust for amendment that were sized for and operating at O 2010 design year sludge quantities. Based on the preliminary results, odor control or • • mechanical ventilation was not included. O Because actual weather data was not readily available near the two proposed sites, the 0 model was run using the EPA's default meteorological conditions for worst -case or O unknown weather data. The permanent facility may wish to consider including a O rneterological station to provide actual weather data for future monitoring. A receptor grid O was laid around the facility out to approximately 1.8 miles from the storage building at ground level. Maximum odor and ammonia concentrations were then computed by the model and were compared to the odor threshold value. The threshold for odor is defined as 1 r" 1., Lion -to- threshold (DM. The detectable threshold for ammonia is approximately O 3 y : J0 pg/rn3• The proposed configuration had predicted maximum odor and ammonia concentrations of 0.66 D/T and 677 pg/m3 immediately adjacent to the building. 0 s1i slightly ed with distance away from the building. This is ► g y hi her than g �oncenirai�ons decreased o emissions report but still well below the threshold. Natural O reported in the preliminary p dilution will serve to further reduce concentrations at the property boundary. 0 0 O Noise Source Characterization and Impacts 0 O Noise sampling at the temporary storage facility was performed simultaneously with the initial odor sampling, equipment ' included . tractor/spreader The ui ment measured included font -end loaders, laded nrsiseat various O rigs, sludge trucks, and sawdust delivery trucks. Measurements inc O frequencies from 63 to 8,000 Hz. The noise spectrum was then converted to an A- weighted O noise level, and median [L(50)] and mnnuirn [L(1)] noise levels at 50 feet from each 0 source were computed. L(50) values, representing the noise level exceeded 50 percent of the time, ranged from O 64 dBA for an (noise level unloading sludge truck to 77 dBA for the tractor /spreader units. L(1) values el exceeded 1 _.: percent of the time) averaged about 6 dBA higher than L(50) values, This information was input to a computerized noise model, which calculates noise O contours around a given set of sources. The proposed sites were modeled Sludge handling equipment was operated only Outing the day. Actual topography, proposed site landscaping Impacts from and berms, and standard meteorological conditions were used for each site. highway noise were modeled using the FHA highway noise model STAMINA 2.0. 0 Noise contours for both configurations s .... ig e . z _. �- -dBA acre shown in Figures 1 1 and 1-2. The 55 p daytime g mission limits set by D 3Q for contour line represents resents the da ► e A -wen hied. noise emission facilities does not have pure used at the proposed p The equipment u band noise standards for specific tonal onastrial facilities. si components, therefore, DEQ's octave band nois c impulsive c p '� frequencies q pare not ex ected to govern this facility, p - -�5 dBA Figure 1 -1 Dershem Site Noise Contours USA SLUDGE STORAGE FAC1LtTY LEGislurt STRIP ........9.e.....**04600410011410•00.**00.00004011:1981411009,... 1 Inch =1,064) Fool Figure 1-2 Midway Site Noise Contours USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY Dersham Site The facility and highway L(50) noise contours for the Dersham site are shown in .Fig- ure 1 -1. The traffic noise levels exceed the projected facility noise levels at all locations, without exception. This is primarily due to the relatively high traffic volumes on the Sunset Highway, even in the midday off -peak hour. The dip in the contours on the north side of the storage building reflects the full- height north wall of the storage facility. In addition, delivery truck access to the north side of the building has been eliminated to minimize noise radiation to the residences to the north. Midway Site Figure 1 -2 presents the facility and highway L(50) noise contours for the Midway site. Note that the 55 -dBA contour is almost entirely within a 500 -foot radius of the center of the storage building. All points outside the 55 -dBA contour are in compliance with DEQ noise regulations. The highway noise contours in Figure 1 -2 generally follow Highway 219 In almost all locations, the existing traffic noise level exceeds the projected noise level from the proposed storage facility. The only exception is the small crosshatched area just east of the storage building that lies within the site boundaries. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the initial results of the noise and odor sampling efforts conducted to date, the following conclusions are drawn: Normal activities during winter or summer months do not appear to produce significant detectable odors offsite. be produced from the freshly `+ that disturbed material t stockpile period Freshly delivered ® the rle for a short eriod of trrrle. The odor levels seem to i . has been in t 1cp sawdust also has a relatively strong odor but is not expected to cause impacts saw because of the character and small amount of fresh sawdust on site, Noise mitigation measurements incorporated in the proposed facilities effec- tively reduce noise impacts on nearby land uses. Ambient highway noise exceeds off -site noise generated by the proposed facilities in all cases. The proposed facilities are expected to meet all DEQ regulations for noise: CVOR135ro18.51 1-6 0 0 0 0 0 �! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • LEGIBILITY STRIP 1 • • • 0 0 The following recommendations are made based on the results presented in this report: 0 d All material delivered to the site should be contained within the building to allow odors to be diluted by the natural building ventilation system. 0 0 ® All trucks entering and leaving the facility should be covered to eliminate • concentrated, mobile odor sources. Install a meteorological data collection system at the permanent site to collect actual weather data to be used in future odor monitoring and impact evalua- • tion. 0 0 0 0 0 • 9 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 • • 0 0 0 0 0 .► Continue odor sampling on a semiannual basis to allow USA to respond to public concerns regarding odor and adapt to any future changes in the opera- tion or regulatory requirements, Odor monitoring and impact characterization should build on the methods and information presented herein. 9., .. 0 0 00 '0.00.0.00.0 000._ .0 #0''41 04,09• 00 . 00 axa 0 S 0 0 0 O Section 2 O Odor Source Characterization 0 0 During the period of January through June 1992, CH2M HILL conducted five 1- to 2 -day O sampling events at the USA Hillsboro temporary sludge storage facility. The purpose of the study was to quantify odor emissions from the existing USA temporary sludge storage site and then use . the data to estimate the emissions for two potential permanent facilities. O This section explains the odor source characterization objectives, the sampling and analyti- cal methodologies, and the results of the odor emission study. 0 O Odor Source Characterization Objectives 0 The objectives of the study are as follows: O Identify the sources with the highest, moderate, and lowest emissions. • Determine emissions with respect to seasonal variations. e Quantify emissions during the summer season and during land application !► activities. 0 Five sampling events, Phases 1 through 5, were conducted over a 6 -month period to dem- it onstrate these objectives. Data from individual sources from all five phases can be reviewed to rank the highest to lowest emitting sources. The variability between months is VP indicative of the seasonal variations. Data collected during Phases 1 through 4 reflect 0 normal activities, and data collected during Phase 5 represent emissions during land O application activities in the summer season. was then input into a dispersion . The data 3. Table 2 -1 lists these sampling model to estimate offsite impacts as explained in Section periods along with the primary test objectives for each phase. 0 Figure 2 -1 shows the location of the materials sampled at the site, The following materials were sampled over the course of the sampling events: S Phases 1 f hrough 5— Previously stacked material and freshly disturbed pile 0 s Phases 1 through 4 —Rock Creek sludge cake 0 Phase 1—Freshly stacked material, old disturbed pile, and Forest Grove sludge ec e 0 0 O cVoRi151004,51 Phase 4 —Fresh sawdust 2 -1 LEGEND Fish h Old Freshly stacked material, freshly disturbed pile, broken pile MIN material .1 Previously stacked material, old disturbed pile, broken pile -- old material .1 Amendment pile, fresh sawdust Loaded pad material Other Sources Sampled: • Rock Creek sludge cake freshly unloaded • Forest Grove sludge cake freshly unloaded • Alternative Amendment — Wheat straw, stored product, yard debris Figure Sampling Locations USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY 0 • 0 0 S S • S S 0 0 • S S • S S S S 0 • S S S S 0 0 S • • Phase 5 (land application)–A broken pile of old material, a broken pile of new material, loaded pad material, and alternative amendments including wheat straw, stored product, and yard debris Sampling and Analytical Methods At each sampling location, samples were collected Lim a surface emission isolation flux chamber for odor and ammonia, Using direct readout instruments on the flux chamber sample line, hydrogen sulfide was measured during Phases 1 and 5, and total hydrocarbons were measured during Phase 13 These data were collected as supplemental information and were not used for dispersion modeling, A description of each of the sampling and analyti- cal methods follows, • Isolation Flux Chamber Sampling 0 0 • 0 • The surface emission isolation flux chamber (flux chamber) sampling technique directly measures the emission rates of airborne compounds over material surfaces, The enclosure device, referred to as a flux chamber, is used to sample gaseous emissions from a defined surface area. The chamber is an acrylic, dome.toppeci, stainless steel cylinder designed to penetrate the sampling surface to about a 2.5-inch depth. The chamber has an exposed surface area of 0,13 m2 and an approximate volume of 03032 in33 Figure 2-2 shows a diagram of the flux chamber. • The procedures for flux chamber sampling were conducted according to the EPA guidance document, Meastiternent of Gaseous EmissiOn Rates frcon Land Surfaces Using an EtnissiOn • Isolation MX Chamber, February 1986, Following this procedure, clean, dry sweep air is S CVOR 35/004451 2-3 Table 24 Sampling Periods and Primary Test Objectives — .. Phase — 4.. ..., ...,....—.___ Sampling Date(s) ......._____ Primary Test Objective 1 January 6-7, 1992 Initial comprehensive odor assessment during normal site activity MIFebruary IIMIMarch 11, 1992 12, 1992 Monthly odor trends during normal site activity Monthly odor trends during normal site activity April 15, 1992 Monthly odor trends during normal site activity June 1-2, 1992 Cemprehensive odor assessment during summer land application activity 1=======morwr Sampling and Analytical Methods At each sampling location, samples were collected Lim a surface emission isolation flux chamber for odor and ammonia, Using direct readout instruments on the flux chamber sample line, hydrogen sulfide was measured during Phases 1 and 5, and total hydrocarbons were measured during Phase 13 These data were collected as supplemental information and were not used for dispersion modeling, A description of each of the sampling and analyti- cal methods follows, • Isolation Flux Chamber Sampling 0 0 • 0 • The surface emission isolation flux chamber (flux chamber) sampling technique directly measures the emission rates of airborne compounds over material surfaces, The enclosure device, referred to as a flux chamber, is used to sample gaseous emissions from a defined surface area. The chamber is an acrylic, dome.toppeci, stainless steel cylinder designed to penetrate the sampling surface to about a 2.5-inch depth. The chamber has an exposed surface area of 0,13 m2 and an approximate volume of 03032 in33 Figure 2-2 shows a diagram of the flux chamber. • The procedures for flux chamber sampling were conducted according to the EPA guidance document, Meastiternent of Gaseous EmissiOn Rates frcon Land Surfaces Using an EtnissiOn • Isolation MX Chamber, February 1986, Following this procedure, clean, dry sweep air is S CVOR 35/004451 2-3 'ct Temperature Syringe/Canister Readout Sampling Port Thermocouple Inlet Pressure Release Outlet Line Cut away to snag w sweep air inlet line and the outlet line Figure Surface Erelsslon Isolation Flux Chamber USA SLUDGE sTc1RAGE FACILITY • to • added to the chamber at a fixed, controlled rate, in this case, 5 liters per minute. After conditions within the chamber have reached steady state conditions, which is generally • 25 to 30 minutes, samples are collected from a specific location inside the chamber. The samples are analyzed for either odor or ammonia concentration. The emission rate for a compound can be calculated using the concentration result, the chamber dimensions, and the sweep air flow rate in the following equation: • • (ci)(o • • • • 40 40 • Where: ER = Emission rate of compound i (pg/m2min) CI = Measured concentration of species i (ppmv converted to pg/1) Q = Air flow rate (1/min) A = Exposed surface area (m2) • The flux chamber was rinsed with deionized water and wiped dry before each use. The • chamber residence time (t) is a function of chamber volume (V) and air flow rate (Q). The CO quotient of volume and flow rate (VA? = t) is the theoretical residence time Three to four • residence times are normally needed to establish steady-state conditions in the chamber, at • which time representative sampling can occur. For a sweep air flow of 5 liters/minute, T = • 6,4 minutes, or 4T = 25,6 minutes. Por all samples, the flux chamber was flushed for • 25 minutes before sample collection began. Hydrogen Sulfide Determination • • 0 Hydrogen sulfide measurements were collected from the flux chamber using a real time instrument, the Jerome Model 631X (see photo next page) during Phase 1 and Phase 5. The instrument uses a gold film sensor and has an operating range of 0.001 to 50 ppm, Onsite measurements of the concentrations of a quality control check sample for hydrogen sulfide confirmed that the instrument responded accurately. • Total Hydrocarbons Determination • 41) • A Foxboro Model 128 organic vapor analyzer (OVA) was used to measure total hydro- carbon emissions from the flux chamber during Phase 1. The OVA gives real time readings in the field using a flame ionization detector. This instrument was calibrated in the field with a methane standard. • • t1/t.51 2-5 Odor Sampling and Analysis Odor gas samples were collected in Tedlar bags placed inside a decompression chamber. The sample was drawn into the bag as a vacuum was created by a pump connected to the From left to right: an organic vapor analyzer (OVA), an isolation flux chamber, and a Jerome meter, used for emissions sampling, decompression chamber, The sample did not come into contact with the pump, preventing any chance for contamination, Figure 2-3 shows the odor sampling apparatus, For the Phase 1 sampling event, the blank samples collected in the field for odor were 16 dilution-to-threshold units (D/T) and 35 D/T, which exceeded many of the low level sample results, A new technique was used in the laboratory to prepurge the bags with carbon-filtered air to remove any background odors in the bags before sampling, Using this technique, the subsequent blank res!Ilts for Phases 2 through 4 were 5 D/T, <3 D/T, and 6 D/T4 All sample bags for Phases 2 through 5 were then prepurged before sample collec- tion to obtain the lowest possible background odor level in the sample bag. After odor samples were collected from the flux chamber into the Tedlar bags, the samples were shipped to an independent lab for analysis by an odor panel, This four- to eight member panel, selected from a pool of trained participants, analyzed the samples for odor, clioa 3S/oo4.51 2-6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 • 0 0 • • • • I • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • EVACUATION • BUCKET 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 • rPOLYETHYLENE TUBING TO FLUX SAMPLE LINE 2 11 3 Figure 2-3 Odor Sampling Assembly USA sLUIDGE ST0RAGE FACiiire • ,2 LEGIE1U' Y STRIP Or Potential panel members were screened for odor onsitivities. Neither those with super- sensitivities nor those with insensitivities to odors were selected for the panel. Instead, the panel members were chosen so that they represent the average population. The odor determination is made using the ASTM E679 forced-choice triangle olfactometer. The sample is diluted in a series of six dilutions from 7- to 1,700-parts odor free air to 1-part sample using the dynamic dilution olfactometer. For analysis, the panelist is presented with three identical sniff ports, two of which provide a streain of odor free air, one providing a given dilution of the odor sample. The panelist first sniffs the sample at nondetectable odor threshold levels and then continually sniffs the sample concentration as it is gradually strengthened. Each time, the panelist is forced to identify one of the three ports that is more odorous than the other two ports. The analysis continues until all panelists have consistently distinguished the odorous stimuli from the odor free blanks. The odor concentration in D/T is calculated to be the geometric mean of the individual panelist's odor threshold levels. This result represent the dilution ratio of clean air to sample at which 50 percent of the panelists detect the presence of the odor. Ammonia Sampling and Analysis Gas samples for ammonia were collected from the flux chamber into a sampling train consisting of three glass midget irnpingers, These impingers are commonly used to extract vaporous ammonia into a liquid phase for analysis. The first two impiniers cointained approximately 10 nil of 0.1 N sulfuric acid and the last impinger was dry to eliminate any moisture carryover to the pump. The pump was connected to the last impinger to draw the sample gas through the sampling train, A dry gas meter measured the volume of gas collected during the sampling period, Figure 2-4 shows the impinger sampling train component, The sampling procedure followed Method 405 specified in Methods of Air Sampling and Analysis, 3rd edition (J.P, Lodge, editor, 1989), The recovered liquid irnpinger samples were analyzed by EPA Method 3503, which uses an electrode for the ammonia. determination. Emissions Characterization Results The results of the source emissions characterization are presented in this section. Data sheets with field information and emission rate calculations are included in Appendix A. Laboratory analytical reports are included in Appendix B, A summary of the concentration results is presented for ammonia in Table 2-2 and for odor in Table 2-3, Tables 2-4 through 2-8 show the detailed odor and arrunonia results collected during each phase, The odor values are reported in the ratio of dilution-to-threshold levels (D/T) The odor character was also described by the odor panel and is reported, The odor intensity was reported whenever sample results were high enough to allow an intensity to be determined; Phase 1 odor results were too low for an intensity determination. C"VoRi 361004,5 I 2-8 • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • 0 • 0 • • 0 0 • • • • 0 • 0 0 0 • • • • • • 0 0 • 0 40 Sample Irminger H2SO4 Rotometer Dry Test Meter Vent Needle Valve Ice Bath Figure 24 Ammonia Qmpinger Train Sampling Assembly USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY Table 24 Summary of Ammonia. Sample Results (ppmv) - ,,... _......_......_.,, -,....,......, ................... __. r. -..,,,,,... .......,* ....... .....-4,. ..... ..- . ..., ...-,... —,... . . ......-...,-,.......,.._....., ,--1..-......,,.......= ... Locat Event 3 4 Method Blank 0.0082 -- 0.216 0.162' 0.0622 1,20 1.84 6.52') Freshly Disturbed Pile 7.65 8.87 54.3 0.319c 183d Old Disturbed Pile 48.0 ...... _..... ........ Rock Creek Sludge Cake 56.1 0.108' 117 77.4 — Forest Grove Shad e Cake _ ..11=1.• Fresh Sawdust — 4.71d rtn, ....... ...... — 65.4 — _ 597 114 _ 114 390 Yard Debris/ Slud e — 66.7 'Value reported is the average of 2 sample results (0,229 ppm and 0,0945 ppmv) collected from 2 separate locations on the pnviously stacked material, bValue reported is the average of 2 sample results (7.88 ppmv and 5,15 ppmv) collected from 2 separate locations on the freshly stacked aterial, clialue is much lower than the rest of the data set for the laterial and is believed to be suspect. Value was used for odor impact modeling (see Table 34), Measurements were not collected where a dash ("—") is reported. • Previously Stacked Material Freshly Stacked Material . New Matenal 1 1 CVOR i 9/0553 Table 2 -3 Summary of Odor Sample Results (D/T) Location Event 1 2 3 4 Method Blank 16 5 <3 6' --- Previously Stacked Material <16a 9 10 4 10d Freshly Stacked Material 24b _ -- --- -~ Freshly Disturbed Pile 34 30 92d 52 48 Old Disturbed Pile 8 - Rock Creek Slud a Cake 19 42d 18 !9 Forest Grove Slud a Cake 3 --- -w-= Fresh Sawdust --- ........ 184. Broken Pile - ,. — 47 - Old Material Broken Pile— New Material Loaded Material Pad -- 20 Wheat Straw/ Slade — -- -- 112 Stored Product/Slud e — 158 Yard debris/ Slud e - and <16 D%"1+ D/an Value reported is the average of 2 sample results (<16 'p . bValue reported is the average of 2 sample results (34 D/T and 13 DR), 'Value reported is a field blank result. d Valae was used for odor impact modeling (see Table 3 -1): Measurements were not collected where a dash (" --_") is reported cVorti9,ro56.51 Table 2.4 Odor and Ammonia Sample Results Event: 1, January 1992 Ammonia Ammonia Odor. (PPmv) (4mz) (D/T) Method Blank Odor Character' 625 16 Light Plastic Odor Field Blank 0.18 nn8/ld 35 Earthy /Grassy Previously Stacked 0.229 162 <16 Light Plastic Material 1 Odor Previously Stacked Material 2 0.0945 <16 Light Plastic Odom Freshly Stacked Material 1 Freshly Stacked Material 2 3,650 Freshly Disturbed 7.65 Pile Old Disturbed Pile 48.0 5,420 34 Grassy/Earthy 13 Grassy/Earthy 34 Grassy/Earthy E uthy /Grassy/ Ammonia Rock Creek Sludge Cake 39,700 Forest Grave Sludge Cake 16,800 ■ The method blank result, 16 D/'I', was subtracted from the sample results to obtains the values reported in this column. Blank subtracted results falling below zero are reported as <16 D I'a No blank subtraction was performed for the field blank value reported. bOdor intensity was not evaluated for these samples because of the difficulty in measuring intensity on samples with such low odor concentrations. `flack and odor associated with the Tefilar bag. P . IPmB 4Impinger liquid phase concentration. This value was subtracted from the sample le ` er liquid phase it silts before calculating the gas phase concentrations'reported in this column. hlcasurements were not collected where a dash (u_W) is reported. • to cvOR.t9i' 51'.si .. 0-1, ..... ..,........,..... ........ ..... .... .... ..,.....-- .L. , . ., —. , Table 2-S Ammonia and Odor Sample Results—Event 2, February 1992 n, •—f, , ..—. . ,....— —7— — ,._ ....__, Location __ ,_,,, Ammonia (ppmv) ... ..., --....., r -.--- Ammonia (Wm') Odor (D/T)' Odor Character Odor Intensity at Tenfold Dilution' Method Blank 0.221 156 5 None None Field Blank 1 031 m 5 None None Field Blank 2 4 None None Previously Stacked Material 0.0622 44.1 9 Earthy/ Grass /Rotten LO Freshly Disturbed Pile 8.87 6,280 30 Grassy/Rotten 2.1 Rock Creek Sludge 0.108d 76.6 42 Ammonia/ Earth /Grass 2.0 "The method blank result, in this column. No blank 'Odor intensity, as rated clinpinger liquid phase results before calculating dValtre is much lower None = No describable Measurements were not 5 DA', was subtracted from the sample results to obtain the values reported subtraction was performed for the field blank values reported. on the n-butanol intensity scale (1-8). concentration. This value was subtracted turn the impinger liquid phase the gas phase concentrations reported in this column. than the rest of the data set and is believed to be suspect. odor. collected where a dash ("—‘) is reported. Table 2-6 Ammonia and Odor Sample Results—Event 3, March 1992 Location Method Blank Field Blank Previously Stacked Material Freshly Disturbed Pile Odor Intensity Ammonia Ammonia Odor Odor at Tenfold (Pinny) (11g/m3) (D/T) Character Dilution' 0.216 1 153 I None None <0.05 m L20 1 847 543 1 38,400 Earthy/Dirt O Rock Citek Sludge 117 82,600 1 it. • 'Odor intensity, as rated on the n-butanol intensity scale, (1-8), • blinpinger liquid phase concentration. • . Islone = No describable odor. ea Measurements were not collected where a dash ("—H) is reporte,d. Rock Crtek Sludge Grassy/Earthy/ I 235 Urine I cvoRts058,S1 Table 2-7 Ammonia and Odor Sample Results—Event 4, April 1992 Lineation Field Blank Ammonia (PP1110 Ammonia (igine) Odor' (D/T) Odor Character Odor Intensity at Tenfold Dilution') None None Previously Stacked Material Freshly Disturbed Pile Fresh Sawdust 'The field blank result, 6 D/T, was subtracted from the sample results to obtain the values reported in this column. bOdor intensity, as Wed on the n-butanol intensity scale (1-8). clmpinger liquid phase concentraticon1 dValue is much lower than the rest of the data set and is believed to be suspect. Measurements were not collected where a dash ('--11) is reported. CVOR191(69,51 • • 0 0 • 0 0 • 0 S S e 0 • S 0 S S • flO S e • • • ' • • • • 0 0 0 • • 0 0 Table 2 -8 +4,x Ammonia and Odor Sample June �es�alts- --Evemt 5, uOe 1992 Location Field Blank Ammonia (Ppmv) Ammonia (P1/0 Odor (I) Odor Character Previously Stacked Material 0.618 10 None Freshly Disturbed Pile Broken Pile- New Material Loaded Material Pad Wheat Straw /Sludge Stored Product/ Sludge 130,000 46,300 423,000 81,100 80,400 276,000 Ammonia/ Urine/Fecal Yard Debris /Sludge 66,7 474200 "Odor intensity, as rated on the n- butanol intensity scale (1 -8). 'Itn in er liquid phase concentration. This value was subtracted from the sample impinges liquid phase � liquid concentration. � p results before calculating the gas p hase concentrations reported in this column. None = No describable odor. Measurements were not collected where a dash ("— ") is reported, Ciidt1420641 Meld blanks were collected for ammonia to establish background levels. A field blank for ammonia is a sample of the 0.1 N sulfuric acid solution that has been rinsed through a clean impinger assembly in the field environment. Low -level liquid phase concentrations were measured ranging from <0.05 mg/1 to 0.71 mg/1 in the field blanks. For each phase, the field blank result was considered to represent background levels of ammonia, and it was subtracted from impinger liquid phase concentrations (mg/1) prior to calculation of gas phase concentrations (ppmv). Method blanks were also collected for ammonia for two phases. To collect a method blank, zero air is flushed through the flux chamber while it is sealed on a clean Teflon pad. The low results, 0.0082 ppmv and 0.216 ppmv, show very low background levels of ammonia. These low levels do not indicate any contamination problems and are negligible with respect to the sample results. A field blank was also collected for odor. Additionally, method blanks were collected to establish zero baseline levels. The field blank consisted of zero air charged directly into a Tedlar bag in the field, and the method blank consisted of zero air flushed through the flux chamber, which was sealed on a Teflon pad. During Phase 1, the odor result was 16 D/T for the method blank and 35 D/T for the field blank. The higher field blank value of 35 D/T was suspect, and further blank samples collected in future efforts showed much lower results of <3 D/T to 6 D/T. The lower blank results obtained are likely to be the result of the adoption of a prepurging procedure for the sample bags. Emission Rate Calculations Table 2 -9 shows a summary of the calculated emission rates for ammonia and Table 2-10 shows a summary of odor emission rates. These values are the input emission rates for the dispersion model discussed in Section 3, One odor unit (D/T) is considered to be 1 Ilg/m' to calculate an odor emission rate for input to the dispersion model, and the model output is then converted back to the D/T odor unit. Tables 2 -11 through 2 -15 show the emission rates per event in units of pg/min -rn2 and g/s-rn2. Discussion of Results In order to understand the sample results better, a brief discussion is presented below describing emission mechanisms and flux chamber application, A detailed discussion then follows to compare the results between sources, clnipare the odor and ammonia results, and evaluate the results with respect to temperature variations and site activities, Emission Mechanisms and Flux Chamber Application Volatile compounds may be emitted from material surfaces by either of two different mech- anisms: diffusion or evaporation. Evaporation is the dominant emission mechanism CVOR 35034,5 2 -16 S • S ro • S • • • • • • S • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 0 • • • • 0 • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • Location Previoust Stacked Material Freshl Stacked Material Freshl Disturbed Pile Old Disturbed Pile Rock Creek Slud he Cake Forest Grove Stud e Cake Fresh Sawdust Broken Pile—Old Material Broken Pile—New Material Event 3 32.4 Loaded Material Pad„ Wheat Straw /Stud e 16,200 10,600 1,830 'Result is the average of 2 values: 6.17pg/minrrr.2 and 2.55µg/minm2. bResult is the aver age of 2 values: 214pg/minnm2 and 140pg/minin2+ 'Value is much lower than the rest of the data set for this material and is believed to be suspect. Meacureinents were not collected where a dash (es—t' ) is reported, cVOR t42/09H.51 Event 3 y. Previously Stacked Material Freshly Stacked Material Freshly Disturb ,u Old Disturbed Pile Rock Creek Sludge Cake Forest Grove Sludge Cake Fresh Sawdust Broken Pile—Old Material Broken Pile—New Material Loaded Material Pad Wheat Straw/Sludge Stored Product/Sludge ND = Nondetectable, 'Result is the average of 2 values: 1,31pg/min-rte and 0.5014/min-tnle Measurements were not collected where a dash ("—") is reported. 4.33 cVoa1421399,5i Ammonia (pg/m►in-m2) Ammonia (O/O•me) Odor (Ng/min-ma) Odor (gh -n') • • • • • • • • • • • • so Previously Stacked Material 1 Previously Stacked Material 2 Freshly Stacked Material 1 Freshly Stacked Material 2 2.18E -08 0.50 8.33E -09 Freshly Disturbed Pile Old Disturbed Pile 2 Rock Creek Sludge Cake Forest Grove Sludge Cali: 2.17E -05 2.55E -05 1.06E -05 2.18E -08 5.13E -09 1.22E -08 1.92E -09 ND Nondeteetable. CVOItI4 lio041 Table 2-12 Summary of Emission Rates -- Event 2, February 1992 • Location Ammonia (ppg/esmin -n12) Previously Stacked Material Freshly Disturbed Pile 1.71 Rock Creek Sludge Ammonia (g/apm) 2.85E -08 4.11E -06 4.92E -08 Odor (pg/min -nun) 0.35 1.2 1.6 ���, Odor (g s -rre) 5.8E -09 1.9E -08 2.7E -08 Location jAAmmonia Ammonia (W/s -'1,1 2) Odor (0.11112) Previously Stacked Material 5.41E -07 6.38E -09 Freshly Disturbed Pile 2.51E-05 6.01E -08 Rock Creek Sludge 3,120 5.21E -05 0.681 1.1.3E-08 Table 2.14 Summary of Emission Rates—Event 4, April 1992 Location Ammonia dlrgli iin -m) Ammonia (0 .0) Previously Sacked Material 8.25E -07 Odor (igmf °zn2) 0.152 Odor (g/s °te) 2.54E -09 Freshly Disturbed Pile 3.40E -08 Rock Creek Sludge Fresh SaWdust 3.56E -05 2.15E -06 0.740 1.23E -08 6.98E -08 cvo tt42/toi.5i 0 • • • 0 • 0 0 • • 0 0 • 0 • 0 • • 0 • 0 • 0 0 0 0 • • 0 • 0 0 0 • Table 2.1S Summary of Emission Rates—Event 5, June 1992 Location Ammonia (gIs• n2) Odor (lighnin.m2) Odor (Ws m2) Previously Stacked Material 2.83E -07 0388 6.46E -09 Freshly Disturbed Pile 5,050 8.41E -05 3.11E -08 Broken Pile --Old Material 2.99E -05 3.04E -08 Broken Pile—New Material 5.11E -08 Loaded Material Pad Wheat Straw /Sludge 0.775 1.29E -08 5.18E -05 7.22E-08 Stored Product/ Sludge 1.77E -04 1.01E -07 Yard Debris /Sludge CVOR142 /102,3 3.05E -05 0.776 LEGIBILITY STRIP whenever recent applications of a volatile compound have been applied to the material surface or whenever the material has been disturbed. Diffusion is the dominant emission mechanism for an "equilibrated" or homogeneous surface that has been exposed to air for a period of time. In evaporation, a fresh layer of the compound of interest (in this case, ammonia or odor) is exposed and quickly volatilizes from the material surface. The rate of volatilization depends on many factors, some of which include the amount of compound present and the elapsed time after the material has been disturbedJ. The emission rate due to evaporation decreases over time until the fresh material is depleted. Deeper levels of material emit compounds at a much slower rate due to increasing resistance with depth. Sources sampled in this study that emit on the basis of evaporation are: The freshly disturbed pile • The old disturbed pile • The old and new broken piles The Rock Creek sludge cake The Forest Grove sludge cake It is important to note that the rate of evaporation decreases over time To obtain comparable results, a standardized flux chamber sampling procedure was used. The disturbed material sources were collected using a front-end loader. The first load was made up of material that had been exposed to air for a long period, This load was discarded and a second load that was embedded deeper in the pile was remove d and placed on by the ground aced o for sampling. The dimensions of the load were approximately 5 feet by 4 feet y 10 inches .. p p material by chamber within depth, ,The center portion of the material was encapsulated b the flux Char was then approximately 5 minutes of the front-end loader delivery. The chamber �' equilibrated over 25 minutes, as required in the sampling protocol, before samples were collected. This procedure gave a consistent measurement that roughly approximates the maximum initial emissions. emission p process, whereby is a longer p y the compound of interest slowly passes from the source material to fresh clean air sweeping over the surface. The compound will continue to pass from the source to the clean a • air until it is c t �t ...y p nt, The continue i .. mbient air u . . this �.���,, e spent, rate of diffusion occurs at a stable, constant rate, Source emissions in this study that occur by diffusion are from: Previously stacked material Freshly stacked material Sawdust Loaded pad material Alternative amendment piles (wheat straw, stored product; and yard debris) The flux chamber ... .i ig., with air e... y simulate e is designed with a clean sweep air flow rate to actu . � s ; conditions for the diffusion process to continue, while measurements of emissions are collected. eVOF 135/04,61 2.22 • 3 0 0 • • 0 0 0 so S S S • • I to S S 8 • S I I I • to • S S S S • d • • • 0 • • Diffusion and evaporation are both dependent upon these variables: the material type, • chemical properties, moisture in the emitting material, and temperature. For this sampling 0 study, the most significant variable is temperature variation. The temperature can increase 0 in the flux chamber in just a few hours depending on the amount of sunlight warming • gases in the plexiglass dome (greenhouse gas effect). Ambient temperature variations were • also noted over the course of a sampling day. Variations of temperature are interpreted • with the data in the temperature and process variations section that follows. Comparison of Concentration Results Between Sources • • During normal site activities, the most concentrated ammonia emitting source was the Rock k cake (56 to 117 ppmv), The next highest ammonia concentrations were note Creek sludge disturbed pile (48 pnnv) and the Forest Grove sludge cake (24 ppmv). Lower • in the old P P � my • levels of ammonia were measured in the freshly stacked material (6 pp ) and in the ppmv with one higher level measured during 3 at � freshly disturbed pile (8 to 9 pp .g. the previously dais{ Phase • 54 ppmv). The sawdust also had very low ammonia levels (5 ppmv), and p y 0 stacked material had very trace levels of ammonia (0.06 to 2 ppmv). • • Similarly, during normal activities, odor was measured at very low levels (4 to 10 D/T) for • the previously stacked materials Low odor concentrations were also measured for the freshly stacked material (13 to 34 Dm, the old disturbed pile (8 D/T), and the Forest Grove ' 4udge cake (3 D/T). Of the freshly disturbed pile odor measurements, one value, 92 D, . , measured during Phase 3 was higher than the other phase results ranging from 30 to 52 D/1': The Rock Creek sludge cake was consistently low in odor concentrations at 18 to 19 D/T except for one higher result, 42 D/T, collected during Phase 2: The sawdust had the highest odor concentration, 108 D/`T, of all of these sources. et 0 0 • g pile of the new material had Of the additional sources measured Burin Phase 5, fife, broken mixture had an t the highest ammonia concentration; ppmv, stored product/sludge 60�J rnv a sfio • ammonia concentration of 390 ppmv, and the loaded pad material and the wheat straw/ sludge mixture had the same ammonia concentration, 114 ppmv. The lowest ammonia "- • values were mea ppmv, and the old broken pile, • cured for the yard debris /sludge mixture; 67 pp P • 65 ppmv. For odor measurements on the additional. sources characterize in Phase the stored 0 d .. 5, 0 product/sludge mixture had the highest value, 1581)/T, followed by the wheat straw /sludge ex 0 producs g mixture at 112 Di The new broken pile i /T, A lower odor • lowest odor - - 112 odor concentration was . measured for the old broken pile, and the lowes � r levels were col- value, 47 17� was at 1��cted on the loaded pad material, 20 l)/T, and the yard debris /sludge mixture, 20 D Comparison of Odor and Ammonia Results The Most ammonia sample results were below • 50 ppmv. he value, threshold for ammonia is disturbed pile (48 ppmv), the freshly disturbed pile this value P ( PP Exceptions included the old . . cake (56 to 117 ppmv), the old broken pile 0 (54 to 183 ppmv), the Rock Creek sludge ( PP 0 cVOlt13531 2 -23 (62 ppmv), the new broken pile (843 ppmv), the loaded pad material (115 ppmv), the wheat straw /sludge mixture (114 ppmv), the stored ' roduct /sludge mixture (390 ppmv), and the yard debris /sludge mixture (67 ppmv). In all cases, the odor results exceeded the D/T that would be expected if the odor were only due to these ammonia concentrations. The most common odor descriptors were earthy and grassy, and only occasionally were other charac- teristics reported, such as ammonia and urine . No correlation appears to exist between the ammonia and the odor results. Temperature and Process Variations One objective of the monthly sampling was to determine any variations in the emission strength with respect to seasonal differences. Because of the mild climate in Hillsboro, seasonal variations are not apparent in the data Instead, however, the data can be reviewed with respect to variations in the flux chamber temperature throughout ear % samp ling day. Three sources were measured over multiple phases: the previously stacked material, the freshly disturbed pile, and the Rock Creek sludge. The results for these sources over each phase can hence be compared, No trends were noted in the odor data, nor in the consis- tently low level previously stacked material ammonk. data. Table 2 -16 presents the temperatures along with the ammonia concentration results mea- sured during flux chamber sampling. The temperature measurements were collected for the gases encapsulated by the dome and will depend on the ambient temperature, the soil sur- face temperature, and the amount of warming t the gases by the sun (greenhouse gas effects). Table 246 Flux Temperature and Ammonia Results Phase Freshly Disturbed Pile Rock Creek Sludge Cake Ammonia (Ppm) 54.3 0,319' 183 Temperature Ammonia ( °C) (ppmv) 19 19 42 49 Tempera. titre ( °C) 77,4 'Data is suspect. Measurements Were not collected where a dash i i is reported. c ♦ oa i 35 V 4.Y 1 2 -24 iiegiefeemr S • S 0 0 I�f 4, 4, 0 4 S 4, S • • 0 • to • to to S S S • • • 4, • 4, too S • 0 • • 0 • For good agreement the freshly disturbed pile, very � greement (7.6 and 8.9 ppmv) is observed for the • ammonia results collected at the same temperature, 19 °C, and increasing levels, 54 ppmv • and 183 ppmv, of ammonia were measured at increasing temperatures, 42°C and 49 °C • respectively. For the Rock Creek sludge cake, the ammonia results increase as the temper ature increases with the Phase 3 results being the highest ammonia result, 117 ppmv, at the highest temperature, 37 °C. • While the odor measurements appear to represent a complex mixture that is not accounted • for by the ammonia results compared to the ammonia odor threshold, the relative ratio of • the emissions of odor and ammonia are similar, usually within a factor of 2, for the addi- tional sources tested in Phase 5. Sources that emitted ammonia also generally had detectable odor emissions. This comparison only makes the point that, for the sources mea- • sured, the amount of vaporous emissions (consisting of odorous species and ammonia) were similar. 0 S • 0 0 0 • 0 CVbat35i004.5i 2 -25 N■rsewill,..ret.." • 0 • 0 1 :• Section 3 Odor Impacts • } 0 This section summarizes an investigation of odor levels emitted from two proposed sludge storage facilities currently undergoing the development permit process in Washington County, Oregon. A dispersion modeling analysis was completed which predicted O groundlevel concentrations of odor and ammonia outside the facility. These modeling results are also summarized. • lb • Modeling Methodology r . 0 Air Quality Dispersion Model • quality p. � l predict _. i. O The ISCST2 air uali dispersion moan was used to redact odor levels outside th�e�s�h [USEPA, User's Grade for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC2) Dispersion Model, , O 1992]. ISCST2 is an EPA- approved steady state Gaussian plume dispersion model used to predict pollutant concentrations downwind of a variety of sources. Version 92062 of O ISCST2 contained in the User's Network for Applied Modeling of Air Pollutants (UNAMAP) was used O The ISCST2 model was run using the rural- and simple- terrain modes. Building wake O effects were analyzed using the revised Schulman-Scire downwash algorithm (included in ISCST2). Model inputs o ` p f i direction-specific building parameters were evaluated , using 0 Bowman Environmental Engineering's GEP program (BEE, GEP Stack Analysts Program — User`s Guide, 1989)• 0 O Source Characterization Modeling . assumed a 320- by 700 -foot surface area to account for traffic lanes and the mixing area, O where product isn't stored: The building has nine louvered vents on each side (each 10 feet 41 .._ high and 20 feet wide) :..... top of the building. Each vent was modeled as a it -40 near the g. ' located t ' n downwash effects in modeling, The effecj stack source to ensure consideration of building � .meter of a circle with an area. o 40 Live diameter for eacii source was calculated based on the diameter O equal to the vent: Table 3tl 1 summarizes the odor sampling results used to generate source • l_ The source parameters modeled for each source �,. • parameters for the model. p are shown in ammeters a g '. .,.. - ... ` .. ..... j. �g ` � + n of the building • Table 3 -2 Source layout '.s shown in Figure 3 1 A complete description � 1 2 report, _. proposed . ., : y is given in the April 99 � � and .site layout for +the.... �ersham Road facilit i r i Request for d Special Use Permit Dersharn Road Site Sludge Storage Facility, 0 0 16' cvbRi S/ 5,si 3 -1 Table 34 Emission Rate Summary Material Odor. (Dtr) Previously Stacked Material 10 Freshly Disturbed Pile 92 Rock Creek Sludge Cake 42 Fresh Sawdust 108 4.71 2 aSee Table 2-3 for summary of odor sample results for each material. Da . dilution- to-threshold, bSee Table 2-2 for summary of ammonia sample results for each material. ppmv =- parts per million by volume. 'Based on approximately 224,000 square feet of occupied storage space in a 252,000-square-foot building. Ammoniab Facility Percent ofc Table 3-2 Source Parameters Diameter (m) Height (m) 14.86 Velocity (m) Temp (°F) 0,001 Emission Rate Odor (g/s) Ammonia (g/s) 8.2x104 8.4x104 Ernission Rates Both odor and ammonia were modeled, The emission rates shown in Table 3-2 were derived from a sampling program performed at the site from January through June 1992 (described in Section 2), Sampling was conducted at storage sites for previously stacked and freshly stacked material, disturbed piles of fresh and old material, sawdust piles, and fresh sludge from the Forest Grove and Rock Creek facilities. Air exchange of the building was assumed to be caused by temperature gradient only and was calculated using Chapter 23, Equation 19 in 1989 ASHRAE Handbook: Pundamentals, Emission rates were determined by dividing the calculated volumetric now rate by the number of sources; and then multiplying by the worst-case concentrations derived from the sampling, CVORIWM31 • 41 ego • ;111 go 41) 41 • 0 • • Building Emission Soumo,Typical 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 X X , X X X X X X X X X X xxx 4 5 6 NOTE: Building geometry similar for both proposed sites. Figure 3-1 Source Layout USA SLUDGE_ STORAGE FACILITY For purposes of modeling, the source emission rates were assumed constant for all hours of the day. For modeling odor, the modeling protocol was designed to directly determine odor units. The sampling results were mathematically manipulated before input to the model to yield output in odor units. Meteorological Data The model war run using the default meteorological conditions of the EPA model PTPLU, which assumes 49 hours of meteorological combinations of windspeed and atmospheric stability. These 49 hours were then used at 36 wind directions, every 10 degrees from 0 through 360 degrees. Receptor Grid ISCST2 was used to evaluate odors at discrete receptors located along a 3- kilometer (1.8-mile) by 3- kilometer rectangular grid centered on the facility. Receptors were spaced every 100 meters (328 feet) out to a distance of 500 meters (1,640 feet) in each direction, then spaced every 500 meters out to 3 kilometers. Receptors located within the facility were removed. All receptors were evaluated at ground level and assumed to be the same elevation as the site. The receptor grid is illustrated in Figure 3 -2. Results The ISCST2 model results are summarized in Table 3 -3. Both odor and ammonia were well below their respective rc;cognit on threshold based on the model results. This is primarily due to the low source Strength and the immediate dilution of building air with fresh air as it exits. Table 33 Modeling Results Compound Odor` Ammonia Threshold (pigm3) Maximum Outside Concentration (Pell?) 0.661 677 aThe modeling protocol was set up to determine odor units directly through the model. All odor values are untless numbers. One odor unit 1 ptgf rn3. cvoxi3sibos4 3 -4 -3500 3500 2500 1500• 1500 - 3500-, - 225di3!;. -1500 -5000 500 1500 2500 3500 e 0• 6: 0 0! 0+ • • 0 e 9 • Receptor Gr d Point •= o, a • • • ® e s o r • • 0, 0- e 0 e 300••00333a•0 e 0 0 0 0 oose•osooeseo 000eo•eoes•oo e000eso*0000e 00000000.0000 080080 0003330 00•0o011o•se•s o•oee• o•••••• 0080000000000 000000000.000 •0000080006000 0- 0' 0- 0` 0 500003000000 * 0 0 0 e 0 s s= • • •- 0 0 0 0 e 0 • 0 e Figure 3 -2 Receptor Grid USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY s • Section 4 • Noise Source Characterization and Impacts 0 • Introduction This section presents the findings of an environmental noise emission study relating to the proposed permanent USA sludge storage facility in Washington County. The purpose of the study was to develop noise emission contours for the two proposed sites to aid the pre- • design and permitting process. In addition to developing noise contours, the study also • addressed noise mitigation alternatives for each option, 0 • The general approach to the noise characterization is as follows: 0 L Conduct noise measurements at the existing temporally storage facility south of • Hillsboro, Oregon, to obtain an accurate estimate of the noise emission character- • istics from each of the noise sources associated with the facility. • 2, Evaluate the existing characteristics of each proposed permanent site (topography • and existing noise sources). • 3. Input the source level and frequency data for all project related noise sources and for • nearby highways into a computer noise model to calculate the noise level contours • for each proposed site • 4. Evaluate noise mitigation measures for each site. 0 • Noise Measurements • The first step in the evaluation process was to conduct noise measurements in and around • the existing storage facility to determine the level and character of the noise radiating from • each of the noise sources. The noise measurements were conducted on January 6, 1992. • The noise generating equipment measured at the existing facility included a front-end • loader, two tractor/trailers (equipped with spreaders), a sludge delivery truck, and a sawdust delivery truck, The front-end loader was used to mix the sludge with the amendment and • load the mixture into the trailers. The tractor/trailers were used to spread the mixture onto the storage pile, • • All noise measurements were made with a Bruel & ICjaer Model 2230 precision integrating • sound level meter, which was calibrated immediately prior to the measurements with a • Brad & Kjaer Model 4230 portable acoustic calibrator. All data was recorded on a Teac • 1W-110T digital audio tape recorder for post-measurement frequency analysis, 0 • • cvoat35/007.11 4-1 41, r • A Brunel & Kjaer Model 2230 precision integrating sound level meter, used for noise sampling. Table 4-1 presents a summary of the measured A-weighted noise level' at a distance of 50 feet from each of the noise sources. The column labelled L(50) is the median sound level (Lei, 50 percent of the time the sound level is above this value and 50 percent of the time it is below this value), The column labelled L(1) shows the sound level that is exceeded 1 percent of the time, The L(1) value is very close to the maximum sound level emitted by the source at that distance, The measured noise spectrum for each noise source is presented graphically in Appendix Co This data was obtained by analyzing the tape recorded data for each source. This process is necessary to get the source sound levels in a format acceptable for the computer noise model, IThe A-weighted decibel levet (dBA) most closely corresponds to loudness as perceived by the human ear, It is used almost exclusively in describing exterior environmental noise levels. .m • • Table 4-1 • Source Noise Levels • (dBA @ 50 feet) • Noise Source • • 9 77 0 9 64 0 • 70 O Noise Standards O The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) regulates noise emissions O throughout the state, The noise control regulations are found in Chapter 340, Oregon Administrative Rules (amended April 1983). These regulations limit allowable noise levels from commercial and industrial facilities to the noise standards cited in Table 4-2, • Table 4-2 • DEQ Environmental Noise Standards 0 50 dBA • 55 dBA Front-end Loader Tractor/Spreader Sludge Truck L(50) 74 L(1) 84 80 76 71 76 75 Sludge Truck (dump) Sawdust Truck Sawdust Truck (dump) L(50) L(10) Daytime Hours 55 dBA 60 dBA Nighttime Hours L(10) Daytime hours are defined as 7:00 a,m, to 10:00 p.m, and nighttime hours are defined as 10:00 p,m, to 700 aem, • In addition to the A-weighted noise level standards shown in Table 4-2, the State noise • standards may also limit the octave band sound levels from commercial and industrial noise sources. These standards are presented in Table 4-'3, Note that the allowable octave band sound levels are to be measured in tmweighted decibels (dB), not dBA. 0 • cvort 35toots i 00 St LEGIBI STRIA The octave band noise standards are not routinely applied, but in special circumstances they can be applied at the discretion of the director of DEQ. The purpose of having octave band noise standards results from the fact that the A-weighted level of sound does not always correlate well with community acceptance (i.e., it is possible to have a situation where the A-weighted noise standards are met but a significant noise problem still exists). It is a well-known fact that sounds that are impulsive (such as blasting or gun fire) or sounds with audible tonal components (such as some types of mechanical equipment) are more annoying than broad band sounds like the sound of falling water. In fact, the DEQ standard requires noise sources with pure tone components to be at least 10 dB lower than the values shown in Table 4-3, Table 4.3 DEQ Octave Band Noise Standards Octave Band 31 Hz 63 Hz 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1,000 Hz Daytime Hours 68 dB 49 dB 2,000 Hz 4,000 Hz 8,000 Hz 46 dB 40 dB 43 dB 37 dB 40 dB 34 dB Daytime hours are defined as 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and nighttime hours are defined as 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f0 6 1 • 0 0 0 Fortunately, the noise sources associated with the existing sludge storage operations and the noise sources associatcd with the proposed facilities do not contain impulsive or pure tone component, As a result, the criteria shown in Table 4-2 are expected to govern with this 0 project. 40 0 Facility Noise Sources 0 With the exception of the sludge and amendment delivery trucks, all noise sources 0 associated with the storage facility operations will be inside the storage building: The • 0 CltOlti35/001.11 4-4 0 0 oi e • 0 The proposed project allows for daily truck delivery of sludge and amendment during the daytime hours of the winter months. Two front-end loaders will be used to distribute the sludge and the amendment inside the building. It will then be mixed and stacked inside the building using four tractor /spreaders. During summer it the mixed sludge will be , Durin the s ®mm at months, trans... orted to the end loaded onto delivery trucks (inside the building) so p user. The primary source of noise from the proposed facility will be the noise radi ating from th e front -end loaders and tractor /spreaders inside the building. This noise will be nearly continuous throughout the day, Some of this noise will be absorbed inside the storage O building, but a significant portion will be radiated into the surrounding community via the 40 open upper er walls. Noise from the delive i trucks will also be a factor in the total noise a Y delivery radiation from the facility. The delive truck noise is not as dominant as the mixing/loading operations because the delivery trucks will be moving at a fairly low engine ® speed, and also because the trucks are intermittent, • • Noise Modeling Via Computer • • Tne noise source level and frequency data collected on each individual noise source was input into a computer noise prediction model. The purpose of modeling the noise sources hi the plant is to enable the evaluation of plant noise in the surrounding community under a variety of scenarios. Description of the Model The facility noise prediction model is a three - dimensional computer model of the proposed facility. The model implementation is site- specific in that the local highways and concrete walls of the storage building extend 15 feet above the building floor on all sides. The upper walls are open on all sides for ventilation. The only exception is the Dersham site where the north wall of the building will be totally enclosed (from the floor to the roof) as a noise mitigation measure for the residences to the north. 0 i the program, There their _. effective currently topography .are, incorporated into am, are 16 noise sources source locaton identified in the model. , source .. The source n e in defined ch of the eight primary octave bands; plus g P Y P. coordinates, Source level � as crest factor, adjustment, and percentage of the time the _ _.. of the noise source P g . A printout o characteristics used model tou is operational. . _ ....... , various other attributes s J once china in each mode equipment P implementation is provided in Appendix D. Each implementation of the model assumes ...._... , , _ .. end loaders, and four s that there are two front different locations for each front -end load � p front-end um err, l�or simplicity, we have assumed that each . front -end loader will be operating at full power 23 percent of the time at each of four tom- . lions, This means that each front -end loader will be at full power 92 percent of the total the luring the remaining 8 percent of the time (2 percent at each location); the front-end cvniti351007,6 4 -5 LEG STRIP loaders will be at idle, which is 10 dBA quieter than full power. All of the other sources are assumed to be at fixed locations operating at full power 80 percent of the time except for the sludge and amendment dumping operations, which occur 25 percent of the time. In addition to the onsite noise sources, the computer model also includes noise radiated by the trucks delivering sludge and amendment to the facility. We have assumed a conservative maximum of 20 delivery trucks per hour in this analysis. The model assumes the trucks to be travelling at 10 mph while on the site and on the access road. The facility noise model calculates the sound propagation losses from each source to each receiver independently, then sums the contribution from all sources at each receiver to get the total sound level from the facility at each receiver location. The model takes into consideration various environmental factors such as temperature, wndspeed and direction, and relative humidity. The model also evaluates the attenuation effects of acoustical shielding from the buildings on the site or from topographical features. Calibration of the Model The computer noise prediction model has been calibrated at several wastewater treatment plants including the West Point Treatment Plant in Seattle, Washington, the Willow Lake g Treatment Plant in Salem, Oregon, and the Post Point Treatment Plant in Bellingham, Washington. Highway Noise Model An estimate of the existing ambient nois e in the local com munities muniiies surrou noin g the two proposed sites was obtained using the FHWA highway noi e model STAMINA 2.0, This program has the capability to predict highway noise levels, given the highway configuration, local topography, and traffc data (vehicle counts, speed, percentage of trucks, etc.). This program is used routinely by most state and federal agencies when an accurate prediction of traffic noise levels is required. The traffic noise analysis in the community surrounding the Dersham site considered traffic on the Sunset Highway (including all ramps to Dersham Road), Dersham Road, and Mountaindale Road. T . .. y `p noise levels were computed for the middy off-peak eak hour in Traffic no order to examine the worst case scenario. Peak hour traffic noise was not considered because peak hour traffic noise levels will be hi .. , . noise levels, and the traf- fic than midday fic noise will be more likely o mask ,nor cover up noise radiating from the storage facility. y P g The traffic noise analysis in the community surrounding the Midway site considered only traffic on Highway 210. T `g y Traffic noise levels were computed for the midday off-peak hoar, defined as 65 percent of the peak hour traffic volume. All traffic was assumed to be moving at the posted speed limit. ovo. Rt3S/00'Y:S1. 4-6 • 0 0 1 0 0 or 0 0 0 0 1 0 A 0 0 0 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 The actual highway traffic volume flow rates, vehicle speeds, and roadway configurations that were used for each site are included in Appendix D. • Noise Model Predictions ® Figures 4-1 and 4 -2 present the predicted highway and facility L(50) noise contours applicable to daytime operation for each site. Note that the facility contours completely circle the plant, whereas the highway noise contours do not. 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 Dersham Site The facility and highway L(50) noise contours for the Dersham site are shown in Fig- ', ire 4 -1 Note in this case that the traffic noise levels exceed the projected facility noise levels at all locations, without exception. 'This, of course, is primarily due to the relatively 0 high traffic volumes on the Sunset Highway, even in the midday off -peak hour. Also note the shape of the facility noise contours, The dip in the contours on the north side of the storage building reflects the fact that the north wall of the storage facility is totally 40 enelosed4 In addition, delivery truck access to the north side of the building has been ® eliminated in an effort to minimize noise radiation to the residence to the north: Midway Site g presents Ii ;ty highway noise contours for the Midway site. Figure 4-2 re the fa Dili and lu hwa . �L(SO) _ a 500 -foot radius of the center of the seats t almost entirely within is. Note that the j 55 -dB contour outside the 55 -dBA contour are in compliance with DEQ noise storage buildings All points g facility .. � • It is regulations. The 50 d�A and 45 -dBA facile contours are also shown for referent►e- Ij interesting to note that the contours are not symmetrical, due primarily to the changing topography, highway noise contours in Figure 4 -2 generally follow Highway 219... that, in The ..... � + .. Note � almost all locations, the existing traffic noise level. exceeds the projected noise level from the proposed storage facility. The only _ exception is the small crosshatched area just east of J. Wilding. i.lding. Thisyis the only area (outside the immediate vicinity of the storage s � storage bu g only esto building) where the plant noise is expected to exceed the existing ambient noise, We have l?' g lotted the L(50) noise contours on Figures 4-1 and 4-2 as opposed to the L(1) or L(10) contours because the L(50) will be the most significant noise metric when compared against DEQ requirements at a particular site. The model results show that the predicted L(1) values are consistently between 8 and 10 dBA above the predicted L(50) values. However, the DEQ requirements show that the L(1) values can be 'up to 10 dBA above the ( any . will exceed DEQ L 50) value. Consequently, at an location, the L(50) noise level words, if the L 50 requirements well before the L(1) or L(10) noise levels. In other , ( ) contours are within DEQ requirements, the L(1) and L(10) contours will be too. cV0Iti35 71.51 4-7 LEGIBILITY STRIP �-- 50 dB 55 dBA. thve.tia Rost 431—. Acocstic:9, Figs 4 -1 Denham Site Noise Contours USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY h 4 s.. e a e o a s e . o t ® so s- o ® e s ®. Ef ® s. 4t o, o e t s e , s e f' s e st * o ts * * * * 0 . 4 50 dBA 55 dBA Amain mod. noise :Iron ;the iaciiity exceeds ambient: noise from traffic Figure 4 -2 Midway Site Noise Contours USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY LEGIBILITY STRIP Noise Impacts and Mitigation Dersham Site There will be virtually no noise impact from this project if it is located at the Dersham site. This is because the projected noise levels are in compliance with DEQ requirements (except a very small portion of property on the east side of Deieham Road across from the site). More importantly, the noise from the facility will be well below the ambient noise level from existing traffic on the Sunset Highway and loNi streets at all locations. The • ' e the totally noise mitigation measures already incorporated into the project design (i.., y enclosed north wall and the elimination of truck traffic on the north side of the building) significantly reduce impacts on the property owners to the north, Earth berms and new foliage may be added for visual screening, but they are not necessary for noise abatement. Midway Site The noise impact of this project (if located at the Midway site) will be minimal: The proposed facility will exceed DEQ noise level requirements on adjacent properties within the 55 -dBA noise contour: However, most of these areas are situated such that the facility noise level will be less than the existing traffic noise levels. s small This true for all. properties s property _. to the east of the storage building except a piece of grope ty g g (which is part of the pro- posed site). No noise mitigation measures above those already incorporated into the pro- posed facility design are recommended. Summary This study has identified and documented es of environmental noise that will . er►tec th facility. �cThe stud... has also determined the .. with the proposed sludge storage y that would be generated from the facility at each of be associate wit ,� two proposed level of the noise g p p ed sites: The results g show that the proposed facility will meet DEQ noise level requirements at all locations g r eater than 500 feet from the center of the storage building at each of the two . OC sites. In addition, the results show that noise from existing traffic on local highways will, in general, exceed the noise from the proposed facility at nearly all locations. .. Noise mitigation measures have already been included in the design of the proposed igatio facility. These measures include: L Constructing 15- foot -high concrete walls to form the entire perimeter of the storage building cVUR135/007:5! 440 • • • e i to • • • s • • • • • • • • • fit+ • • • fit 0 2. Eliminating all outside amendment storage and locating all loading and mixing • equipment inside the storage building 0 O 3. Providing a totally enclosed wall (extending from the floor to the roof structure) on • the north side of the storage building at the Dersham site • • 4. Eliminating the delivery truck access to the north side of the storage building at the dli Dersham site • No additional noise mitigation measures are recommended. • • In summary, the level and character of the noise associated with the proposed facility are not expected to create an adverse noise impact at ether site. All operations will occur and O during the day when noise from other ambient sources, like traffic on nearby highvvays, will mask the noise from the project. cvont3stoa t 44.1 LEGIBILITY STRIP ' l 9i .- 000.0. 0-000. ® 0 0000 0 ' .®0.0 0. 0-4_ 0000 -0.. LEGIBILITY STRIP } LEGIBILITY STRIP ... -.. .. V OIL . ... . &I . . . ta .. 1...1- . . . -. . • ' . . .... - " - ZEE USA SAMPLING PHASE 1 SUMMARY OF EMISSION RATES 4.n.....a....*.........■•■■■■■.................. LOCATION ODOR ODOR ODOR ODOR AMMONIA AMMONIA DTI UG/M3 UG/IVIIN-M2 G/S-M2 UG/MIN-M2 G/S-M2 ...._ OId ammendrnent sludge 1 ND ND 6.17 ..-... 1,03E-07 OId ammendment slud e 2 ND ND 2.55 4.25E-08 Fresh arnmendment sludge 1 34 34 1.31. 2.18E-08 214 3.57E-06 Fresh ammendmont sludge 2 13 13 0.50 . 8.33E-09 140 2.34E-06 Fresh ammendrnent disturbed de 34 34 1.31 2.18E-08 207 3.45E-06 Forest Grove sludge, fresh load 3 3 0,12 1.92E-09 639 1.06E-05 Rock Creek Sludge, fresh load 19 19 0.73 1.22E-Q8 1528 2.55E-05 OId ammeridment disturbed silo 8 8 0.31. 5.13E-09 1304 2.17E-05 lEi • • • • , , 0 , , • . • LEGIBILITY STRIP- . GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (0GM) Serial No. DGM Correction Factor Flux Chamber Area Flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure Initial Final Time • 1122 1140 1200 USA -1-1-MB-N 1/6/92 ON SITE METHOD BLANK, FLUX CHAMBER WITH TEFLON PAD MM/FUG NH3 M6 BOX 473 1.003 0.130 m2 5.000 ....1/inin 29.835 in Ha armosmentemurossramormumarril VIVIOMMONNI0011MOMPININNIMIllell DGM Reading (ft3) 359.666 360.450 361.600 Start Tims 1122 Stop Time 1200 Total Gas VoluMe 1.934 ftS Average) Flux Temperature 11,8 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume Impinger 1 „ 35.2 mi Final Liquid Sample Volume • Impinger ml Impinge 1 Sample Result 0.19 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result 11110/1 Field Malik Value 0.18 ffigil Forrniulti Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 ghtiol Standard D VOIUITIO (GI 68°C) 1.99 scf or 56.3 Gas Sample ResUit 6,25 Ug/m3 or 8.82E-03 ppmv Emission Plate 0.240 ugimin-102 or 4.00E-09 gis-m2 Flux Chamber Temp. ( C) 11.8 Wsszawawm./...troomssworarafeewaseta e • • 0 S S 0 • S S S 0 S • 0 • • 0 • • • . • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE • • e • Initial • • Final 0 0 • • • 0 • 15 • in 0 IA 0 0 ..A • • • • • Sample ID: USA-1-3-114-0AS1 Date: 1/6/92 Location: OLD AMMENDED SLUDGE, SE CORNER Sampler's Initials: MM/RSG Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 4.960 I/min Barometric Pressure 29.835 in Hg Time 1342 1351 1402 DGM Reading (ft3) 361.791 362.350 363.100 Start Time 1342 Stop Time 1402 Total Gas Volume 1.309 ftl, Average Flux Temperature 10.8 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 34.4 IMpinger 1 San ple Result. 0,36 mg/I leripinor 2 Semple ResUlt mg/I Field Blank Valtitt 0.18 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter ON. 17.03 ml ml g/rnol Standard Dry Obi Volurne (@680C) tef Or 38.27 Gas Sample ResUlt 1 61 .78 uoini3 or 2.29E-01 pprnv Emission Rate 6.173 Ughnin-m2 or 1.03E-07 g/-m2 Flux Chamber Temp. 4 °CI 10.8 ormosommomoriktr. doommoramr GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID:. USA-1-5-N-OAS2 • Date: 1/6/92 Location: OLD AMMENDED SLUDGE, SE CORNER 2 Sampler's Initials: MM/RSG Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Aux Chamber Row Rate 4.950 I/min Barometric Pressure 29.835 in Hg Tire DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) Initial 1514 363.694 1521 364,100 Final 1536 366,000 Start TIMO 1514 Stop Time 1536 Total Gas Volume 1.406 ft3 Atiorago Flux Temperature 9,9 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume inipitigiir 1 34,5 Find Liquid Sample Volume • litiriOlfigot 2 Itnatir 1 Signplio Rtiatilt 0,26„ Mg/I IMpinger 2 Sample RgisUlt iirigil Field Clank Value 0,18 , MO/1 Fortntila Wol(ght of Gas POtOttioide 17,03 Gas Sample Rest* 66,93 Ugim3 or 9,45E-02 ppipt emission Rate 2,549 ugimin-m2 or 4,25E-08 gie-rn2 0 0 .0. GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR At EMISSION RATE • Sample ID: USA-1-7-N-FAS1 • Date: 1/6/92 Location: FRESH AMMENDED SLUDGE 1, SW CORNER Sampler's Initials: RSG/MIM • Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 • DGM Correction Factor 1.003 • Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 • Flux Chamber Flow Rote 4.995 l/min • Barometric Premium 29.835 in Hg 0 . (1) Time DGM Reading (ft3) • Initial —........................., 1641 365.289 1651 365.900 • 1659 — ................................................... 366.425 0 ' 0 • Final 1701 ........................--.----....... 366,550 0 • • Start Titna 1641 0) Stop Time 1701 .4,....4 . 0 . Total Gas Volume 1.261 ft3 • Average Flux Temperature 8,5 °C • • ,.• 3 • Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinge!' 1 35.4 Mi • Final Liquid Sample VOIUMe a Impinges • Impinger 1 Sample Result 6,04 mg/I 3 !winger 2 Sample Restilt • ing/1 Field Bank V&uo 0,18 Ing/I FormUla Weight of Gas Paratnetter 17.03 gimoi FAUX Chamber Temp. (°C) 7,5 9 • Standard Dry Gas 08°C) 1,318 scf • or 37,17 • Gas San ple Result 5580,87 iig/M3 • or 7.88E+00 Opirviti Emission Bate 214,434 tigimin.m2 Or 3.57546 gis-M2 410 •-• • LEGIBILITY-STRIP GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-1-9-N-FAS2 Date: 1/7/92 Location: FRESH AMMENDED SLUDGE 2, NW CORNER Sampler's Initials: RSG/MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.000 1/min Barometric Pressure 30.13 in Hg Time DM Reading (ft3) Initial 900 366.955 910 7.650 Final amosmownrumnresnormennememwonsseans motworasommomostrommonsnsurosommonre ormarugamossaworeemeammomen 920 368.250 irawommsomarernromenormaroommorromrat Sera Start Time 900 Stop TIIITIO 920 Total GliS Volume 1.295 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 3.13 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 1 20t7 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume impInger 2 15.2 ml IMpinger 1 Sample Result 6.91 mgil ImpInger 2 Sample Result 0,45 rngil Field Blank Value,. 0.18 regil • Flux Chamber Temp. i°C) 3.4 3 rworsamestaistiramianveme _ Formula weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 g/mol Standard tlitv Gas 0C1 1.388 6 sat fillii•■■■VillibilMAMIt,..01INSIC,M111.10■110406i 39.30 Gas Seimple Result . 3649:37 tigini3 ppmv Emission Rate 14O360 ug/min-m2 Or • 0 S 0 S S S S 0 S I S 0 S S 0 S • S • !" v ; *.s .,'.• ' GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-1-11-N-FDP Date: 1/7/92 Location: FRESH DISTURBED PILE FROM WEST SIDE Sampler's Initials: RSG/MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor .003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 4.960 l/min Barometric Pressure 30.13 in Hg Time DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 1047 368.705 16,5 1058 _,.. 369.400 18,9 1106 369.900 21.6 Start Time Stop Time. Total Gas Volume Average Flux Temperature 19 °C A Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 1 35.2 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impingar 2 Impirtger 1 Sample Resu 637 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result mgfl Field Blank Value Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 Standard Dry Gas Volume (' 68°C) 1.420 or 40.21 Emission Rate 206,759 Ugirnin,M2 or 3.45E-06 g/a-m2 4 w • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-1-13-N-FG Date: 1m92 Location: FOREST GROVE FRESH LOAD Sampler's Initials: RSG/MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 4.956 limin Barometric Pressure 30.13 in Hg Initial Final Time 1150 1200 AMMO anommanomosomonmprosnmomemagominomonomaxeme ememnsmosammierma.lamms•ammotwarrowmart 1210 DGM 'needing (ft3) 370.592 371.270 ommommeassumemwomosoommorms oulionsmormonsamormammossom1/41, 371.900 Flux Chamber Temp. 1°C) 24.1 24.3 woordnimormum•••■■•■•4,..0.1.• •••••••••■•••••mmoommoom•••■• ottomansampowenuarimio. emonsemoakommoom. •••••■••masmosamoot imetmearomeareame. osmosovemasteroomnorramorommof •••••••••ae Start Time :50 Stop Time 1210 Total Gas Volume 1.308 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 24,2 OC Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 21348 .m1 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 2 12,2 mi Impinger 1 Sample ResUit 22.9 mgil 2 lmpinger 2 Sample Result 0.94 mgil Field Blank Value 0.18 mgil • Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 .gimal Standard Dry Gas Volume ( (;) 680C) 1,302 i set Isiniminmosmommomminw•rannomoseti or 3688_J Gas Sample Result 16760,54 ughh3 ..ia=44•44si Or 2,37E+ 01 mirt/ Emission Rate 638.963 ughtiltkii2 of 1;06E-05 ght.en2 S • S • oto S 0 0 S S S • tri • • • 0 S S • S S S S S S • S S S • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-1-15-N-RSC Date: 1/7/92 Location: ROCK CREEK SLUDGE, FRESH LOAD Sampler's Initials: RSG/MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (0GM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction rector 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.000 I/min Barometric Pressure 30,13 in Hg Time DGM Reading (ft3) 1440 372.527 1452 Flux Chamber Temp. (°C9 23.4 Start Time 1440 Stop Time 1500 Total Gas Volume 1.293 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 22.75 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume Impinger 1 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 Impinger 1 Sample Result 40.5 mg/I Impinge'. 2 Sample Result mg/I • Field Blank Value i0.18 mg/I • isailnwirmamorroo Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 4P 4P Standard Dry Gas Voluma 68°C) or 36:64 • Gas Sample itasult 39727.98 ilig/tra • or 5.61E+01 poinv 0 Emission Rate 1527.999 utiiminaml or 2,55E-05 gisam2 ' • ^. . ..•%; GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-1-17-N-ODP Date: 1/7/92 Location: OLD DISTURBED PILE, SE CORNER Sampler's Initials: RSG/MM Gas Parameter: NH3 yoe■■•••,.... Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 ••■••■••■•otwaolagmempo■ramminNo, ■i.nereampas DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 4.986 1/mm Barometric Pressure 30.13 in Hg Time DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 1550 374.296 18.5 ...sawlemosulyalumiesuagsmoswomot 1607 375.350 .0■111.0•01.0•IMMISNIS.00 alnIniftmolamonrcomonialow 375,918 Start Time 1550 Stop Time 1615 Total Gas Volume 1.622 Average Flux Temperature ...4_1E15 cC Fine! Llciult Sample Volume Impinger I 7,2 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 ml Impinge,' I Sample Result 42,8 Irminger 2 Sample Result mg/I Field Blank Value 0.18 regil Formula Weight of Gat Parameter 17.03 Standard Dry Gas Volume (€) 68°C) 1.647 scf or 46,63 I Emission Rate 1304.073 ug/Min-m2 or 2,17E-05 gis-m2 LEGIBILITY STRIP "., • 4, .•'••••• ' ' •, Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: Pump Flow Rate Flux Chamber Area Flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure USA-2-21-N-RCS-1,2 2/11/92 FRESH LOAD ROCK CREEK SL GE NH3 ALPHA 1545 anciTor first 2 min Ales 2259 1886 _.(j .866 ipm for firstImiq 0.130 5.013 29,73 in Hg Time 1137 1139 DGM Readirvi (ft3) 2259 S', ...2252S.112p2ad_ 1545 Start Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) Start Time 1137 Stop Time 1211 Total Gas Volume 1,797 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 24.5 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 Impinger 1 Sample Result 0,84 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result 0.85 mg/I Field Blank Value 0.71 mg/I FonnUla Weight of Gas Parameter i7O3 gin Standard Dry Gas Volume (@ 68°C) t759 sef or 49.80 Gas Sample ResUlt 76,63 Ug/m3 or 1,08E-01 ppmv Emission Rate 2,955 ug/rnin-m2 or 4,92E-08 g/s-rn2 4 111111119111Y/Mit Sample ID: USA-2-23-N-OAS Date: 2/11/92 Location: OLD AMMENDMENT SLUDGE Sampler's Initials: MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGIVi tlorrection Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5,045 I/min Barometric Pressure 29.73 in Hg Initial Final Time 1358 1358 1415 1422 DGM Reading (ft3) 881,725 384.000 Start Thine 1358 Stop Time 1422 Total Gas Volume 3A06 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 31,03333 °C 385.131 Final Liquid Sample Volume - impingeri 31.4 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume impinger 2 ml Impingeri Sample Result 0.84 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result mg/i Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 32 31.8 29,3 Field Blank Value 0,71 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 g/tnol Standard Di y Gas Volume (@ 68°C) 3.271 scf or 92,64 I Gas Sample Result 44,06 ug/m3 or 6,22E-02 ppmv Emission • Rate 1.710. ..,ughtilri,m2 Or 2,85E-08 g/s-tn2 S S 0 0 0 S S 0 S S S S S S S S S S • S S S S S S • S S S 0 S • S S S "r"). • ■•• • • Sample ID: USA-2-25-N-FDP Date: 2./11/92 • Location: FRESH DISTURBED PILE Sampler's Initials: MM Gas Parameter: NH3 Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 0 0 0 0 • initial S Final S 0 40 S DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0,130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.099 limin Barometric Pressure 29.73 in Hg lime 1515 1520 1532 Illnini..11111M1111.11110/1■11111110MMISIONINYI1011111111.. 1552 DOS Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 18.7 18.9 19.2 388.088 388.110 Start Time 1515 Stop Time 1552 Total Gas Volume 3,03 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 18,9 °C 391.118 • Final Liquid Sample Volume • Impinger 1 24.3 ml • Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 2 ml S S S 0 • Formula Weight of Gas Parameter S 0 S S0> (I) • 0 I S Impinge!' 'I Sample Result 22,9 mgil Impinge,* 2 Sample Result mg/I Field Blank Value 0,71 trig/I (it 17.03 01•011111M•100111•2711110111011ROMMIMMI Ono! Standard Dry Gas Volume (CO 68°C) 3,031 sof or 85,82 I Gas Sample Result 6282.86 ugion3 or, 8,87E+00 ppmv Emission Plate 246,433 Lig/Min.m2 or 4,11E-06 gis-M2 • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-2-1-MB-N Date: 2/10/92 Location: Laboratory CVO/Method Blank Sampler's Initials: RJG Gas Parameter: Ammonia Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 475 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 rn2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.008 l/min Barometric Pressure 29.73 in Hg Start Time 700 Stop Time 719 Total Gas Volume 1,73 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 7.4 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 Sample Result Impinger 2 Sample Result Impinger 1 362 ml Impinger Field Blank Value 0 Formula Weight Of Gas Parameter. 17.03 gimol Standard Dry Gas Volume (44) 68°C),.. 1.802 scf or 51.01 I Gas StiMpla Ratuit .156,11 .uoim3 or, 2.21E-01. oomy Emission Rat(' „ 6.014 ,uoimio-m2 or 1,00E-07 oft-m2 ft 9 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • 0 • Initial • 0 0 0 • Final 0 0 0 0 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE 0 0 • 0 0 1 0 0 0 e e 0 0 • • 1 • Sample ID: USA-3-29-N-FDP-1 ,2 Date: 3/12/92 Location: FDP Sampler's Initials:RJG Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.095 l/min Barometric Pressure 30.04 in Hg Time 1048 IIMINNIAM111.1.111001111011110.10•MINIMMILVINVIIROM81001116M 1100 OIMINE•NONIMINIMIVIIINNOMIMI0111•1111MMIMNIFVONIONINIIMMIM imaionousinomemommloggilovevivarmirm.v....siv 1113 DGM Reading (ft3) 394.143 395.101 Start Time 1048 Stop Time 1113 Total Gas Volume 2,438 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 42,1 ("C AsIonori .,,monworlimelomasormi 11111M•00.10•11.1110010■VMVIVI 390.581 Final Liquid Sample Volurne - Impinger 1 60 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume Impinger 2 55 ml Impinges 1 Sample Result 48,6 m0/1 Impinges 2 Sample Result 0,98 ,rngil Field Blank Value 0 mgil Formula Weight of Gas Parameter _ 17,03 girnol Standard Dry Gas Volume (4) 68 C) 2,283 scf or 64,65 Gat Sample ResUlt 88420.64 uglm3 or 5,43E+01 ppnrw Emission Rate 1505,790_1ughnin-m2 or 2,51E-05 gis-M2 Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 41.4 4? 42,8 0 0 ',rn -'•w' GAS SAIVMPLING DATA SHEET AND OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE 1 0 Sample ID USA -3.3 1 -N -OAS 0 Date: 3/12/92 limio,f ianoset Location: OLD AMENDMENT SLUDGE 0 Sampler's Initials. RJG 0 Gast Parameter: AMMONIA 0 Dry Gas Meter (DGIIMI) Serial No.: 4?3 �„�.,, t `r DGM Correction Factor 1.003 0 '9 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flom Rate 4.975 I /min 0 Barometric Pressure 30.04 in Hg • Time DGM Reading ift3) Flux Chamber Temp. I °CI 0 ; Initial 1213 397.389 33,4 1218 3S167050 a.,.... 34.2 0 1230 .399,220 36.4 woo..ennr.rommormasatam. ID tifb Final 12:32 400.265 38.2 0 Ffh :i Start Time 1213 Stop Time 1232 Total Gas Volume 2.8766 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 35 55 °C . 0 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 40 ml 0 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 0_ ml lmpinger 1 Sample Result 1.65 rnflll I;pin � er 2 Sample Result 0 mglI r Field Blank Value 0 mg /I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 g/mol Standard Dry Gap Volume I@ 68°C) _ . 2.750 scf or __.77:08' _. M Gas Sampr'e Result 847.43 , Ugln3 or 1.20E+00 pprnv Emission Rate 32,431 uglrnin -rn2 or..5,41 E -07 . gill -m2 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: DGM Correction Factor Flux Chamber Area Flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure USA-3-33-N-RCS 3/12/92 RCS Fin AMMONIA 473 1.003 .9.130 m2 4.915 limin 30.04 in Hg DGM Reading (ft3) 401.385 402.422 403.730 Flux Chamber Temp. OM 36.4 Start Time 1353 Stop Time 1416 Total Gas Volume 2.841 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 36.625 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 1 44 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 Inipinger 1 Sample Result 144 M0/1 Impinger 2 Sample Result._ , 0 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter • Standard Dry Gas Volturno (0 58°0) . 2,701 . tot or 76,67 1 Emission Rate 3124,512 ugitnin-M2 Of 5,215.05 (05,412 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CI ALCUIATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-3-35-N-P13 Date: 3112/92 Location: TEFLON PAD - BLANK Sampler's Initials: NG Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 472 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 9.13o rn2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 4.841 lirnin Barometric Pressure 30.04 in Hg Time DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chanribier Temp. OM rr e 405.371 37.2 emalsesserawssa. IVORNAMO.N..M 406.720 37.4 mormonwamona.041., prosurearrammers MIIMIMMIIIIMMIIIIIIIMMINI ..11111MIMMIMMIN •■■•■■•11,10.11=1061111111.111• 111018101111/110MUMIONISINUR •INMINOW....001•01.1INKIRMIO WAINAMMIMMIMMItild 1•410.1.1.11..1101=01•011•011.100•WIMINIMer 408.329 37.5 —...................—.................. Start Time 1620 Stop Time 1641 Total Gas Volume 2.958 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 37.36667 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 53 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 0 ml Impinger 1 Sample Result 0,23 nngil Impinger 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I Field Blank Value 0 rngil Formula Weight of Gas Parameter Standard Dry Gas Volume (6) 68°C) 2.812 scf or 79.63 Gas Sample Result 153.07 ugim3 or 2,16E-01 ppm Emission Rate 5./00 ....„ Lightiriam2 Or 9,50E-08 gitiarra '4z'O • • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: DGM Correction Factor Flux Chamber Area Flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure USA-4-39-N-OAS 4/15/92 OLD AMENDMENT PILE RJG AMMONIA 473 1.003 0.130 m2 4.948 I/min 29.97 in Hg Time 1042 1048 1053 DGM Reading (ft3) 410.070 411.080 411.680 412.500 413.050 20.9 Start Time 1042 Stop Time 1102 Total Gas Volume 2.98 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 20.82 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 35,7 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume • Impinger 2 0 ml Impinger 1 Sample Result 3,08 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I Field Blank Value 0 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 gimol Gas Sample Result 1300,59 ug/m3 or 1,84E + 00 ppmv GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Initial Final Sample ID: , Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: DGM Correction Factor Flux Chamber Area Aux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure Time 1147 1153 1202 USA-4-41-N-FDP-1 2 4/15/92 FRESHLY DISTURBED PILE RJG AMMONIA 473 1.003 0.130 m2 5.098 I/min 29.97 in Hg 1207 DGM Reading (ft3) 416.371 417.400 418.730 419.539 Start Time 1147 Stop Time 1207 Total Gas Volume 3.168 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 25,2 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Wiping& 1 31.7 Final Liquid Sample Volume Impinger 2 28.4 Irnpinger 1 Sample Result 0.63 mgil Irnpinger 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I mi mi Field Blank Value 0 M0/1 Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 ,g/mol Standard Dry Gas Volume 0.§) 68°C) 3.127 , sof or 88.56 I Got SOMplo Result 225.51 ugirtr3 or 3,ipe.oi. own/ Emission Rate 8,844 Ughnin-m2 or 1.47E-07 cr/s-M2 • Flux Chamber Temp. OM 23.9 24.1 25.7 4.4 27.1 9 9 • • • 9 • • 9 9 • • 9 9 9 • 9 • • • 9 9 1 • • • 9 • 9 9 9 9 9 • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE fp) 40 40 40 40 40 • Initial (0 0 • Final to • 0 0 • 0 • 0 0 0 Sample ID: USA-4-45-N-RCS Date: 4/15/92 Location: ROCK CREEK SLUDGE Sampler's Initials: RJG Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 MIX Chamber Area 0.130 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.066 Barometric Pressure 29.97 allomm.inrow Time 1258 WOMINIMMIO 1303 1308 itroramemorniosor 1318 m2 ilimin in Hg DGM Reading (ft3) 422.114 422.820 423.590 425.093 Start Time 1258 Stop Thine 1318 Total Gas Volume 2.979. ft3 Average Flux Temperature 30.675 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinges 1 25.9 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 0 mi bripinger 1 Sample Result 173 IMpinger 2 Sample Result 0 mgli Field Blank Vaud mg/I Formula Weight Of Gas ParaMetor 17.03 Flux Chamber Temp, (°C) • 31 30.7 30.6 30.4 g/rnol Standard Dry Gas VoiLims ((§) 68°C) 2.888 .scf or 81.77 Gat Sample 54793.35 Ugirra • o 7.74E+01 ppinv Emission Rate 2135.255 Ugimin-M2 or 3,56E-05 /s m2 /11.1.1111111111•11 aornoserenurnmovamoolo • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-4-47-N-FSD Date: 4/15/92 Location: FRESH SAWDUST Sampler's Initials: RJG Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.041 limin Barometric Pressure 29.97 in Hg vomiauswarnam Time DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) Initial 1400 427.295 33.3 Final •:' ' .6_ 1407 428.135 33.4 1412 428.920 35.1 offmossot 1420 430.100 38.6 Start Time 1400.. Stop Time 1420 Total Gas Volume 2.805 ft3 Average Aux TemperatUre 35,1 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impineer 1 30,8 ml Final Liquid Sample Volume - Irminger 2 0 mi Irminger 1 Sample Result 8,21 mgil Irminger 2 Sample Result 0 mgil Field Blank Value 0 mgil Form'!" Weight of Gas IP'arameter 17,03 girnol Standard by Gas Volume ((i) 68°C) 2.680 sof or 75.89 Gas SttirtVio fl�sLilt 3331 ,88„ .Ught3 Of 4.71E +00 pow • JO • • 0 0 4) 0 0 to • 0 0 0 • • Emission Rate 129,200 UgiMin.rri2 or 2.15E-06 gis-m2 0 • 1,, • • • ff , . s-I'lsEIN0n3 0 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE • • • Sample ID: USA-5-49-N-FDP ;... Date: 6/1/92 Location: FRESHLY DISTURBED PILE (FOP) Sampler's Initials: NO/LAS Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 e • Time Initial, 1235 • • Final • 0 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.056 I /min Barometric Pressure 30,09 in Hg • • • • • • 0 0 • • • o • 1240 1248 1256. 1304,,,,_ Start Time Stop Time Total Gas Volume Average Flux Temperature Final Liquid Sample Volume - Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinges 1 Sample Reath Impinges 2 Sample Result DGM Reading Itt3) 452,110 452,510 453,100 orownesocsosummorrenorrommeuromoriewrom 453,730 454,37 0 1235 1304 2,26 tt3 49,475 . ®C Irnpinger 1 In pinger 2 -, 0 mi 168 mg /I 0 mg /l Field Blank Value 0 , 3 3 mg /I Flux Chamber Temp. ( °C) 49.4 46.6 Formula Weight of Gas Parameter ;,,,_,, 7,03 g /mol Standard Dory Gas Volume `ED 68°C) 2,07. $cf or 58,66 Gas Sample Resrilt 129/72. ugli3 or 1.83E+02 ppmv Emission Rate .. 5047,142 uglmin -m2 or . 8,41E-05 ., g /s -r2 53,4 49,5 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Seri& DGM Correction Factor Flux Chamber Area Flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure USA-5-51-N-BPN 6/1/92 BROKEN PILE - NEW RJG/LAS AMMONIA 473 0.130 m2 4.984 I/min 30.09 In Hg Initial Time • 1424 1431 1439 1446 DGM Reading ift3) 457.391 457.850 458.610 459.180 459.820 45.6 Start Time Stop Time Total Gas Volume Average Flux Temperature 1424 1453 /429 ft3 44,1 °C i'• Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 49.3 Final Liquid Sample Volume • Impinger 2 0 Impinger 1 Sample Result 550 mg/I Impinge,' 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I Field Blank Value Formula Weight of Ga Standard Dry Gat Volum 0,33 mg/I a Parameter 17.03 e (0 68°C) /264 ugina3 PPITok _ LEGIBL STRIP- . . : 0 0 GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-5-53-N-BP0-1,2 Date: 6/1/92 Location: BROKEN PILE - OLD Sampler's Initials: FUG/LAS Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.039 I/min Barometric Pressure 30,09 in Hg nurramos.....monnossorw.c1 • Time DGM Reading (ft3) • Initial - 461.110 • IINNICMONIC.K.......... 1613 461.740 • 1617 46208O • 1628 463.000 0 Final 0 • 0 0 • • 0 0 • 0 0 0 1 1633 • : • Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 43.9 43,7 43.5 •IMMINIMIKINIIMINNIMINIIISOMINUMMIVAIIMOIXONOM.11•1•1•101 — 43,5 463,400— 43.6 Start Time 1603 Stop Time 1633 • Total Gas Volume 2.29 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 43.64 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 42,9 ml Final Liquid Sarnple Volume - Irminger 2 32,9 mi limping& 1 Sample Result 65.4 mgil Impinger 2 Sample Result 0.63 ing/I Field Blank Value 0,33 mail Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 g/mol Standard Dry Gas Volume 09 68°C) 2.138 scf or 60,53 Gas Sample ResUlt 462/9,82 ug/m3 or 6,54E+01 pprnv • Ernistion Rate 179:3,877 „tigionin.M2 • Or 2.995.05 ght,M2 • . . GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: U55 -N- NIP Date: 6/1/92 Location: LOADED MATERIAL PAD Sampler's Initials: RJG/LAS Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 rn Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.039 I /min Barometric Pressure 30.09 in Hg Initial Time 1745 1753. 1759 1807 DGM Reading (ft3) 464.080 464.620 465.180 465.810 _. 466.491 31.4_ Start Time Stop Time Total Gas Volume Average Flux Temperature Final Liquid Sample Volume - Immpinger 1 43.3 mi Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinge!' 2 0 ini Impinger 1 Sample Result, 124 mg /l Impinger 2 Sample Result 0 mg /i • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • Form.le Wmight of Gay Pararneter 1.7.03 (0rno Standard Dry Gas Volume ( 68°C) 2.333. scf Gas Sample Result 61056.24 ug /m3 or 11 4E + 02 ppmv+ Emisaion Rate 3141.865 , ug %rain -m2 or 5.24E4)5_ . g /s -rdr2 _ _ . LEGIs1L f y STRIP • • • ' • • • . . • . GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Sample ID: USA-5-57-N-OAS Date: 6/2/92 Location: OLD AMENDMENT SLUDGE (OAS) Sampler's Initials: RJG/LAS 40 Gas Parameter: AMMONIA Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No 473 40 DGM Correction Factor 1,003 40 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 • Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5.039 limin • Barometric Pressure 30.16 in Hg • • Time DGM Reading (ft3) • Initial 1010 467.123 • 1017 468.100 1025 468.780 • • Asnermonosestroworawnalonfflomummts....mar •• • Final 1031 469.205 wernommoserrarraimmawnesmoarmeors, 40 • Start Time 1010 • Stop Time 1031 Total Gas Volume 2.082 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 35.175 °C • Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 47.7 mi • Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 0 ml 40 • • • Impinger 1 Sample Result 0,85 mg/I Impinge,' 2 Sample Result 0 mgil Field Blank Value 0.33 Mgil IINIMIIMMINIM.M....1 0 40 Formula Weight Of Gas Parameter 17403 g/mol 0 el Standard Dry Gas Volume (€) 68°C) 2,001 scf • or 56467 I 0 • Get Sample Result , 437,65 Ug/M3 • Or 6,18E-01 oprinv Flux Chamber Temp. ( C) 34.9 " 34.6 35.5 35.7 0 • Emission Rate 16,964 Ugimin-m2 • or. 2,83E-07 gie-m2 • • • I • LEGIBILITY STRIP_ :.� GAS SAMPLING DATA sHEFr AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Initial Final Sample ID: Date: Location: Sampler's Initials: Gas Parameter: Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: DGM Correction Factor nun Chamber Area flux Chamber Flow Rate Barometric Pressure Time 1119 1131 USA-5-59-N-CWS-1,2 6/2/92 COMPOST WHEAT STRAW RJG/LAS AMMONIA 473 1.003 0.130 m2 5.031 limin 30.16 in Hg 1137, asearomortsummousemooma. 1143 DGM Reading (ft3) 469.721 470.890 471.410 amagossommorawommomommosemeolausassommorsoo• Isamsramossawoornom Start Time 1119 Stop Time 1143 Total Gas Volume 2,129 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 44.4 °C 471.850 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 1 53.8 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 34.8 ml ml • • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 0 Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 42.3 44.3 45.3 Mammon loosommor .11■1111111113111.011•111■611001.001101.11111••■•11.10•111WIIIIV 45.7 Impinger 1 Sample Result 84.1 mgil Impinger 2 Sample Result 0.80 mg/I Field Blank Value 0,33 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17.03 g/mol Standard Dry Gas Volume (@ 68°C) 1.987 scf or 56.27 Gas Sample penult 80381.41 ug/m3 or 1.14E+02 pprnv Emission Rate or 5.1 8E05 git-m 2 • S • 0 S • • S • • • S • S • S S 0 S S , ....,,, • ..,, • ' s • : 1 • • • • • • S • S • GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULAT;ON OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Initial Sample ID: USA-5-61-N-CSP Date: 6/2/92 Location: COMPOST , STORED PRODUCT (CSP) Sampler's Initials: RJG/LAS Gas Parameter: AMMONIA o Dry Gas Meter (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DM( Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5,008 I/min Barometric Pressure 30.16 in Hg txamounnormmuresammwaravai rum Time 1226 1233 1240 1248 DGM Reading (ft3) Flux Chamber Temp. (°C) 472327 43.6 473.340 44.3 473.860 44.8 sousweeratemsor imassamft emitrasmoremnroaffrosawsrm. 11IIIMMI111.1.11INOMMIM Start Time 1226 Stop Time 1248 Total Gas Volume 1.978 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 44.525 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 ramesmexes■ imorronrwroorirrommt..... . moon 474.705 45.4 56.0 0 ml ml Impinger I Sample Result 258 mg/I Impinge 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I Field Blank Value 0.33 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 01101 Standard Dry Gas Volume 68°C) 1,846 scf or 52.26 Gas Sample Result 276111 ugirn3 or 3,90E+02 pprmt Emission Rate 10636.64 ugimin-m2 or 1,77E-04 gis-m2 AWBEEMEMEMISSIMEMIERINEEMEMMItie INNOMIIIIIMBOW=w1 a GAS SAMPLING DATA SHEET AND CALCULATION OF RESULTS FOR AN EMISSION RATE Initial Final Sample ID: USA-5-65-N-CYD Date: 6/2/92 Location: COMPOST-YARD DEBRIS Sampler's Initials: RJG/LAS Gas Parameter: AMMONIA m Dry Gas Dilater (DGM) Serial No.: 473 DGM Correction Factor 1.003 Flux Chamber Area 0.130 m2 Flux Chamber Flow Rate 5,041 l/mm Barometric Pressure 30.16 in Hg awatawatursonsrsowaver .kaemegaerw....momennow..... Time 1344 1348 1356 1402 1411 DGM Reading (ft3) 476.472 476.840 477.510 478.080 478.830 Start Time 1344 Stop Time 1411 Total Gas Volume 2.358 ft3 Average Flux Temperature 53.76 °C Final Liquid Sample Volume Impinger 1 Final Liquid Sample Volume - Impinger 2 Impinger 1 Sample Result 60.3 mg/I Impinger 2 Sample Result 0 mg/I 47.7 0 ml ml Flux Chamber Temp. ("C) 52.8 53.1 53.6 - 54.7 54.6 Field Blank Value 0,33 mg/I Formula Weight of Gas Parameter 17,03 gimol Standard Dry Ces Volume (0 68°C) 2,138 sof or 60,54 Gas Sample Result 47250.46 Ugh14 or 6,67E+01 ppmv Emission Rate Or. 3.05E-05 . giiturti2 a a a S S to S a 0 a a to a a a a S a • a a to • a a S a a a S • El 0 0 S 00.04110000009.900.0000.0.0.000000000.0000•0006.000.0004110-. 40 40 U.S.A. ep Tracy Cork° CH2M HILL/CVO • Melissa McAfee, CH2M HILL/SEA 40 40 • Sample Descriptions Water Reference No.: 3374 40 Date Received: January 9, 1992 • Date Analyzed: January 10, 1992 40 40 40 ES&2191111L USA-1-1-MB (3374-1) 0.19 • 4USA-1-3-N-OAS1 (3374-2) 0.36 • "USA-1-5-N-OAS2 (3374-3) 0.26 • Vir/IMS11-N-FASI (3374-4) 6.04 ,40 USA-1-9-N-FAS2-1 (3374-5) 6.91 4USA-1-9-N-FAS2-2 (3374-6) 0.45 ,40 vUSA-1-11-N-FDP (3374-7) 6.37 • -"pSA-1-13-N-41G-1 (3374-8) 22.9 • 421SA-1-13-N-FG-2 (3374-9) 0.94 • pSA1-15N-RSC (3374-10) 40.5 • 1-17-N-ODP (3374-11) 42.8 USA-1-19-N-FB (3374-12) 0.18 1 1 . 40 , 10 fk 40 40 40 y E. Cook • R.B. Laboratory Operations Manager 40 • 40 40 40 • CH2M HILL 40 , • „ Applied Science & Technology Corvallis Laboratory Date: January 13, 1992 Project No.: MX32613.130:10 Page 1 of 1 Nitrogen, forms as N Ammoial_ggLi Msalmaal 35.2 34.4 34.5 35.4 3.4 15.2 35.2 26.8 12.2 36.1 37.2 33.5 All tests are performed in accordance with current . . Environmental Protection Agency guidelines as published in the Federal ge ister. Samples will be retained for 30 days unless otherw se requested. l'he information shown on this sheet is test data only and no interpretation is intended or implied. CONotils Office 23bO NW, Walnut Blvd, AO. Bog 428, Conialk Oregon 97339 501162.4271 , • GU @_to QUALITY ANALYTICS CHAIN OF CUSTODY` RECORD PROJECT NUMBER sit - _C,k PROJECT NAME . " CLIENT ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER %� FOR LAB USE ONLY 3-74-i 1 CLIENT NAME , . f S tABt ANALYSES REQUESTED t q� Z _ Oi z.i. j.... ' .4 L A B I PROJECT MANAGER ---r.. )�, Cv ' k � COPY f me i 9 55a -. PROJECT NO. ACK - VERIRED REQUESTED COMP. D TE 1 A - /q2 SDWA NPDES QUOTE iJS STA. NO. DATE C 0 M P' = S O I L DESCRIPTIONS NO. OF SAMP 12, PG OF REMARKS E. riii 1 C Erd MI II s 1111111111 EMI 11111r01111111 ril III Ism 111111- 111111111 ®Em ®111111� El= = fo 1 ♦ ` 'Sf J ' - aid 1 —11/4)— V5 r--,,t,,, a tuber re (eit131 a. ...).. la.. - I 7 1 , A IS e- MINI I/ '.4 - A i - it - , --- • A).- i 5 i e irintaill. Imam Mania 11111111111111111111111 IIIMIIIIIIIHIIIME11111 MINE iiii ir ) a l ri iet &lye< - /ea , 1 0 4 1 %if � 64 _ . , imrdomi A t e , ( 4 - - 1 - 1 3 - it) --F C.1--- - .2, 1111 Mill MIME 12.- 1 al 11111 ® MEM IIII� • SAMPLED B AND TITLE AS ii 4 �? . J ' ' yP� R LINQ IS i ED D z T _ E HAZWRAP a4 ar REUNQdISHED B :: ,ATEJ 1. E COC ICE A �E� TEMP RECE s RELINQUISHED BY: - DATE/TIME GUST SEA Ph SAMPLE COND. RECEIVE n BY LAB- - . _ _1 t 1' •it i , DATE/Ti E 1- - c SAMPLE SHIPPED VIA UPS BUS FED-EX HAND OTHER AIR BILLS - _ REMARKS ENTERED COC INTO MS REVIE6. e...e i• sooeoto t••se at coo 410 ®t e. ...... *sue S • 0 40 0 • S&E S • S 40 40 Mr. Tracey cork 40 CH2MHILL 40 2300 NW Walnut Blvd. 40 Corvallis, OR 97330 40 RE: OS&E Project No 0179-44-00 40 Odor Sample Analysis - January 9, 1992 40 • Dear NW. Cork: 0 40 This letter presents the results of the recent odor analyses performed by Odor Science & Engineering, Inc. (DS&E). Air samples were obtained as 40 part of the USA Odor Project by CHMH1LL staff on January 6th and 7th, • 1992. The samples were shipped via overnight air service to OS&E/s • Olfactory Laboratory in Hartford, CT for sensory odor analysis. A total 40 of 10 samples (2 liter bags) arrived under chain of custody on January 9, O 1992. Upon arrival, the samples were quantified in terms of dilution-to-. threshold (D/T) ratio in accordance with AS% Method No. E-679 by a O trained and screened odor panel. Because of the small sample volume (1-2 • liters), it was neceSsary to perform the analyses with an abbreviated odor • panel of 4 participants. We sugqrst that any future odor samples be • collected in 10-12 liter Tedlartfigs to enable odor evaluation by a full • odor panel (typically 8 members). Also, as I mentioned to you in our • telephone discussion although it was "after the fact" for this round of sampling, we generally like to analyze odor samples the same day that they O are taken if possible, but definitely within 24 hours. OS&E rernardh has • shown that some odor samples (especially those containing nitmgen based • compounds and sulfur compounds) can deteriorate badly causing erroneously • low odor measurements. 40 The rlesults of the odor panel t are presented in 'Viable 1. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to CH MM. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding these results. , January 13, 1991 • 0. AAA: *knee & Engineering, inc. \ 1,) Ci...W.'` . 07 Fishfry Street, Hartford, CT 06120 (203) 527-9089 s S S • • sincerely, ODOR SCIERCE & ENGINEERING, INC. S S • Martha A. 0/Brien • Mariager of Field Operations • cc: melissa McAfee - CH 4P LEI Bel ievue • Table 1. P.bs of Odor Panel Tests Conducted 1/9/92 Sample 1.D. 01/06/92 12 :08 01/06/92 14 :05 01/06/92 15:40 01/06/92 17 :05 01/07/92 09 :25 01/07/92 11 :10 01/07/92 11 :50 01/07/92 15 :00 01/07/92 16:05 01/07/92 16 :25 USA-1 -2 SA4-4 --0S1 USAr -1.- 6- 0 -OAS2 USA4- 8-0-F1 USA-I 10- -0EFS2 USA-- 1-12- 0-FDP US1-1 --14 -0 -ice USA- °1p -16 -0 RSC USA- 1-- 18-- 0-ODP U r1y- 20 -0 -FB Odor Level Odor Character (D/T) 16 Light plastic (bag) odor 13 Light plastic (bag) odor 16 Light plastic (bag) odor 50 Grassy/ Earthy 29 Grassy/Earthy 50 Grassy ,,,may 19 why /Dirt 35 Earthy /G 24 Earthy/Grassy/Mb 35 why /Grassy : t1 /3 3L/ 3 • • • • • • • 0 0 • • • 0 0 • • • • 0 0 0 LEGS8IIJ t'YST . • • • 0 0 0 • • • • oib 0 t" • • • MUM Engineers MEM Planners Economists MEM Scientists OfiNIPPLL. U.S.A. Tracy Cork, CH2M HILL/CVO Melissa McAfee, CH2M HILL/SEA Sample Description: Water Reference No.: 3507 Date Received: February 18, 1992 Date Analyzed: February 20, 1992 Applied Science & Technology Corvallis Laboratory Date: February 240 1992 Project No.: MX32613.30.10 Page 1 of 1 Nitrogen, forms as EglIgALIAL Ammonial_aga. USA-2-19-N-F (3507-1) USA-2-21-N-RCS-1 (3507-2) USA-2-21-N-RCS-2 (3507-3) USA-2-23-N-OAS (3507-4) USA-2-1,41B-N (3507-5) USA-2-25-N-FDP (3507-6) 0.71 0.84 0085 0.84 0.22 22.9 Volume* ml 9.6 14.6 13.7 31.4 36.2 24.3 All tests are performed in accordance with current EnvironMental Protection Agency gUidelines as published in the Federal Re later. Samples will be retained for 30 days unless otherw se requeSted. The information shown on this sheet is test data only and no interpretation is intended 2 or plied. 2 44,- e11y E. Cook Laboratory Operationa Manager CNN HILL cMIlls Ottidd 300 tW Walnut M. PA lidie 42a caverilit oitgon 97339 501M/427.1 • 4 1 QUALITY AWALYTIcS CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD BP(I T t�HMflER PROJECT NAME CLIENT NAME CLIENT ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER FOR LAB USE ONLY ANALYSES REQUESTED PROJECT NO. PROJECT MANAGER o REQUES D' COMP:. ATE I qZ- COPYTO Orlattige SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS VERIFIED QUOTE# Su � (fiE<iuv�nG¢R315 � -- 1� q 21 -AYR,- � AU a ai ni -F.4IjiiIIi; aa- DU , II 2 -i -AN , AU 4-2_:c2,- ,-7.1kk MU 111111111111MINIMIMI , . wip iIi1 o. yr a i r. fail REMARKS RECEIVED' 8Y D -/ . ME DATE/TIME REUNQUISHED B REUNQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME ICE ANA REa 1EMP GUST SEAL Ph SAMPLE COND. AIR BILL# REMARKS ALt. e / 0 S&E a • Mr . Tracey Cork 41*I2MHTLL 2300 Nt4 Wairait Blvd. CA Corvallis, OR 97330 40 40 RE: O$&E Project No. 0179,*.00 40 Odor Sample AnalysiS - February 12, 1092 40 Dear Mt, Cork: • This letter presents the results of the recent odor (Analytes performed by • Odor Science & P�eeth, Inc. (OS&), Air samples were obtained as • part of the USA Cdor Project by CH4HILL staff on February 110 1992, 40 The samples were shipped via avern ght air Darvide to CS&E's Olfactory Laboratory ih Hartford, CT for Sensory analysis. Six (6) samples arrived under chain of custody on aanuary 12, 1992. Upon arrival the Samples were • Vantified in terMs of dilUtionAo-threthold (p/T) ratio (ARIMMethod No • E-679) and odor intensity (P0SIMMethod No. V-544) by a trained and • ,:lrend odor panel of (8) neWbers. The odor panelists views chosen from • ,:)s&Ets pool of panelists from the Hartford area who actively paetcipate in onving olfactory researdh and represent an average to above aVerage sensitivity range When dompared to a large population. The results of the odor panel tests are preSented in Table 1. We appreciate the opportunity to be of continUA serVide to CI- 16 Please feel free to call me if yoU have any questions concerning these 1-.1 J. .4r. Z it„) tr.. 1.14 4 1** • 1,1411 Vebruary 13, 1992 Odor Science 8: Engineering, Inc. 57 Fishfry Street, Hartiorci, CT 06120 (203) 527.9089 • tio • • • • • 0 • Sincerely, ODOR Sawa: & EbtanesERING, Martha P6, O'Brien Manager of Viola Operationt cc: Melissa MCAfee ts/sEA . • " • , .11 LEGIBILITY STRIP - Table 1. Results o4 Odor Panel Pasts February 12, 1992 OATS � t t M SAMPLE 1.0, 0008 L VEL )DGR CHARACTER 000R INTENSITY' a 1d QR I1.0 4 2/i0/92 0700 USAw2w2 +ME1.0 �a r (JSh•2w2Qw041 S 2/11!92 FlN lnrthy� /grdso 2'0 /11/92 1Z5') t1Sq•2`22,0,RcS b7° 3 �e 2111/92 1425 USA •2Lo0•0AS 14 Earthy /grasti /rotten 1.0 :: Gross /�'�xte+n 2.1 'S�5 USA-2,261040P f ~ 2/11/92 1600 USA w 2 w 28'0 -F2 4 0) ` .far intensity to rated on the n•t tarot tntens ty st+`4 r1j0? 0' 4 r,c -icscrlbabte Odor • 0 • e 4 0 ' i 0 0 • it • 0 0 0 0 • e 0 0 0 fib • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • • 0 • 0 0 • • • 0 • 0 • 9111011M Engineers Planners Economists Scientists U.S.A. Tracy Cork, CH2M HILL/C1/0 Melissa McAfee, CH2M HILL/SEA Sample Description: Water Reference No.: 3626 Date Received: March 13, 1992 Date Analyzed: April 1, 1992 • a 0 USA- 3- 29- N-FDP -1 (36261) USA -3.2' r-P -2 (3626 -2) USA- 3 -31 -N -CAS (3626-3) .0 USA- 3 -33-N -RCS (3626 -4) USA -3. X35 -N -PB (3626 -5) USA- 3 -37 -N RB (3626 -6) • • 0 0 • 0 • • • • • 0 fe • • • Indicates "less than". Applied Sciences Chemistry Laboratory Date: April 9, 1992 Project No.: PDX32613.B0.10 Page 1 of 1 Nitrogen, forms as N Ammonizkaaga 48.6 0.98 1.65 144 0.23 <0.05 Ystaintaal 50 55 40 44 53 47 All tests are performed in accordance with current Environmental Protection Agency guidelines as published iin the Egdrailiclistroc, Samples will be retained for 30 days unless otherwise requested. The information shown on this sheet is test data only and no interpretation is intended or implied. R.L. Kelly E. Cook Laboratory Operations Manager GH2M HILL Caivoliis Office 000 N +W, Walnut 61 tf,, P.O. bad* C liff , beogon 0130 503.752.4271 • 11ILL QUALIIYANALYTICS CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD 1 P PR • JECT NUMBER CLIENT NAME PROJECT MANAGER I , 6:ie;1( REQUESTED: COMP, DATE 3/ PROJECT NAME COPY TO: e. STA NO DATE SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS' SOWN NPDES RCRA OTHER 0 0 0 G S ORO M A 1 SAMPLE DESCRIPTIONS' TIME P B : L 9 3m a PA ELI f7 to VS Mrs UM MEM I I �Np (12 CHARACTERS) tit °3 -il -i --r'p' -I` 5R 3-zg-Ai - I?L FM -3 -SI L R C D ITZ • DAT pmt DATE/TI ' E CLIENTADDRE;S'AND PHONE NUMBER 1 0 ANALYSES REQUESTED C 0 T A R S A FOR LAB USE ONLY LAB# LAS# PROJECT NO. ACK: FERIRED QUOTE# _ BS NO. OF SAMP PG OF Maill11111111111111U11111111111111161111 irmartimmililimi 11111111111 111111111111 REUNQUISHED BY DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME RECENED SY: RECEIVED BY 4'rr J :1c DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY DATE /TIME REMARKS HAZWRAP NEESA Y QC LEVEL 1 2 CoC ANA REQ CUST SEAL SAMPLE COND. ICE TEMP Ph DATE/TIME REMARKS SAMPLE SHIPPED VIA UPS BUS FED-EX HAND OTHER AIR BILL# ENTERED man $MAC COC DNILWFfl firiAR-17-9 2 TUE 12 :09 osegE 203 Z27 3399 to 0 0 • March 17, 1992 • Mr. iltacey Cork • ai2M HILL • 2300 NW Walnut Boulevard Cervalis, OR 97330 • re: USA Odor Study • os&E Project No. 0201-W-00 • • Dear Mr. Cork: P.02 Odor Science & Engineering, Inc. 57 Fishfry Street, Hartford, CT 06120 (203) 527-9089 Fax (203) 527.3399 This letter presmts the results of the recent odor analysis performed by • Odor Science & Dagineering, Inc. (CEEM as part of the CH2M MILL-USA Odor • Study. samples were taken by CHM HILL staff on March 12, 1992 and sent via • overnight delivery to OS&Ws olfactory laboratory in Hartford, cr for • sensory analysis by a trained and screened odor panel. FoUr =vies arrived in 12L Teller bags under chain of custody on March 13, 1992. The samples were analyzed by dynamic dilution olfactometry in accordance with • ASV Method E-679. A panel of 8 members wae Used. The results of the • odor analysis are she in Table 1. Please feel free to call me if you have any question concerning these results. AS always, we appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service to CH2M HILL. 0 • sincerely, • Odor Scienoe & Engineering, Inc. • Martha A. O'Brien • Manager of Field Operations cc: Rod Gravley ffitz Ivo 0 0 0 0 • Calitathia, Oiltkot I 55 060i Rigd, Sulto San 'Mateo, CA 94402 .(41 A) 345,8664 MAR-17-92 TUE 1.2 :12 OStriE 203 :527 3399 Table 1. ftsults of Odor Panel Tests: Marc h 13, 1992 Date Time Sanple L. Odor Odor Concentration Character EYTa Odor, Intensite at 10 fold dilution 3/12/92 11:00 Um-3-30-04pp 3/12/92 12:35 USA-3-32-0-0AS 3/12/92 1425 USA-3-34-0-MS 92 earthy/dirt 10 grassy/earthy 3.8 grassy/earthy/ urine 3/12/92 16:00 USA-3-36-0-PB <3 enswatowai 3.5 1.23 2.75 a) D/T es dilution-to-threshold b) odor intensity as rated on the n-buitanol intensity scale (1-8) (-) es no detectable odor 03 • • - - 0 0 • • (10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 • 0 0 • _ -_- .......0......•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••41.04190 ... __ . . .rt,.. ..- LEGIBILITY STRIP _. .... - - Engineers Planners Economists Scientists Applied Sciences Chemistry Laboratory Date: April 20, 1992 Project No.: PDX32f 13.130.10 Page 1 of 1 O U.S.A. Tracy Cork, CH2M HILL/CVO O Melissa McAfee, CH2M HILL /SEA 0 • Sample Description: Water O Reference No.: 3761 O Date Received: April 16, 1992 O Date Analyzed: April 17, 1992 ® Nitrogen, forms as N : , iL YAIIMg...Mi 0 pie �.�. O USAn4 - 39 r N r QAS (3761 -1) 3.08 35.7 • USA -4- 41- N -FDP -1 (3761 -.2) 0.63 31.7 O 1 SA- 4- 41- N -FDP -2 (3761 -3) <0.25 28.4 USA- 4 -43 -N- (3761 -4) 35.0 � � 0.25 35 USA-4-45-N-RCS (3761-5) 173 25.9 0 USA- 4- 47 -N -FSD (3761 -6) 8.21 30.8 0 ® < Indicates "less titan ". 0 ® performed in accordance with current Environmental Protection Agency • • acco Ail tests are perform guidelines as published in the askalltaiates. Samples will be retained for 30 days unless otherwise requested. The information shown on this sheet is test data only and no interpretatiou 13 intended or implied. R. 0 0 0 belly E. Cook Laboratory Orations Manager CH2M HILL Corvollls ditto MOO NW, Wolnut sfvd, tj,C7. 8a d21 Coival11 Oretioii 97839 5aa.75 d27i • orsafirilu- QUALITYANALYTICS c HAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD PROJECTNUMBER tOplx PROXT NAME K(e_ (-1REFK 0 F C 0 T CUENTADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER L.: A B . - - FOR LAB USE ONLY LAB # --1--- CLIENT NAME. ' 15 i i LAB# - , - ANALYSES REQU STED . PROJECT NO. PROJECT MANAGER COPY TO: 6c-:Teltin.t4 ACK VERIFIED REQUESTED COMP. DATE 4/•- Z 0 3 61 Z SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS 1" QUOTE# SDWA NPDES RCRA OTHER N NO. OF SAMP PG • STA NO. DATE TIME C 0 M P G R A B $ 0 1 R . S ' -Z SAMPLE DESCRIPTIONS -Z (12 CHARACTERS) REMARKS 0/44 It.; ' -• C.:4-Z.. In IMEMIE111113 fpg IMIREIIICII '6 EN ini CI Lily - CA4 i NM az, - -if --ri-Fre-i i u-MIII 1111 III ( 4- 4 -11-111-Fae-Z i 121M1111.11111 u_ -q--45 -N - c Et I 112=111111111111111 IIII Mill itcl '1 5 -' 11.1111 rso qii51 1 84 EV 111 1,1.5A-4-Lig ii --tt5 inium 1.0. it N4 -4-q1 PI -F5r) III 1-"Mil milliiil No 1111 1111 imi rffil III MN 111 W11.111111111111 MIMI IIII MIMI 1 7 am- -1,1- L BY ' D IRE 1t iLd DATEaME . REUNQUISHED BY DATE/TIME q . I It 146eL). HAZWRAP NEESA If N QC L 9,./2 3 RECEIV 011 Mi DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME COC 1------ ICE liktp ANA REQ i TEMP RECEIVED BY DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME CUST SEAL ick-C) Ph SAMPLE COND. RECEIVED Y LAB: UrA(011r t DATE/TIME SAMPLE SHIPPED VIA UPS BUS FED-EX ,ID OTHER AIR BILL# REMARKS ENTERED COC INTO LIMS REVIEWED • •• • • V' 1..•••••• •■•.. •■••■•■■•■• REV 6/89 FORM 340 • LEGIBILITY STRIP • • • • 0 • e 0 S • S to e S S • e 0 to to • • • 0 S • 41 4 A April 20, 1992 Mr. Tracey Cork CH2M HILL 2300 NW Walnut Blvd. Corvallis, OR 97339 Odor Science & Engineering, Inc. RE: OS&E Project No. 0201-M-00 Odor Sample Analysis - April 16, 1992 USA Rock Creek 57 Fishfry Street, Hartford, CT 06120 (203) 527-9089 Fax: (203) 527-3399 Dear M. Cork: This letter presents the results of the recent odor analyses performed by for Science & Engineering, Inc. (OS&E). Air samples were obtained as part of the USA (Rock Creek) Odor Project by CH2M HILL staff on April 15, 1992. The samples were shipped via overnigFit air service to OS&E's Olfactory Laboratory in Hartford, CF for sensory analysis. Five (5) samples arrived under chain of custody on April 16, 1992. Upon arrival the samples were quantified in terms of dilution-to-threshold (1110/T) ratio (ASIM Method No E-679) and intensity WWI Method No. E-544) by a trained and screened odor panel. The odor panelists were chosen from OS&E's pool of panelists from the Hartford area who actively participate in ongoing research and represent an average to above average sensitivity when compared to a large population. The results of the odor panel tests are presented in the We appreciate the opportunity to be of continued service Please feel free to call me if you have any questions co results. Sincerely, ODOR SCIENCE & ENG1NEMRiNG, INC. Martha A. O'Brien Manager of Field Operations attached table. to alp Him, warning these Calitontia Mee: 155 govt Road., .Suito 30048ttit Mitie0i CA 94402 (415) 345.8664 Table 1. Results of Odor Panel Tests: April 16, 1992 4/15/92 4/15/92 4/15/92 4/15/92 4/15/92 11:05 12:11 12:45 13:20 14:29 USA-4-40-0-OAS USA-4-42-0-FDP USA-4-44-0-RB USA-4-46-0-RCS USA-4-48-0-FSO 10 solvent 58 garbage/NH3 25 earthy/grass/INH3 2.2 114 sour/earthy/solvent 3.75 a) per = dilution-to-threshold b) odor intensity as rated on the n-butanol intensity scale (1-8) (-) = no describable odor 0.0.0S04004101100000000000•00.100060000.0000.00000900000000 QZ.IF900ISEIVOA3 . , 1 • . , • . ' : • S S • S • S S• • 0 S S • S S • I • • • • S S S 11. ca ...11 0 0 0 S 0 ' Engineers Planners Economists M1111111111 Scientists MACILL U.S.A. Tracy Cork, C142M HILL/CVO Rod Gravley, CH2M HILL/C1/0 Sample Description: Water Reference No.: 3903 Date Rec5ived: June 3, 1992 Date Analyzed: June 11, 1992 Sarnitedik, 549NFDP (3903-1) 551NBPN (3903-2) 553NBP01 (3903-3) 553NBP02 (3903-4) 555NLMP (3903-5) 557N0AS (3903-6) 559NCWS1 (3903-7) 559NCWS2 (3903-8) 561NCSP (3903-9) 563t (3903-10) 565NCYD (3903-11) Applied Sciences Chemistry Laboratory Date: June 11, 1992 Project No,: PDX32613.B0.10 Page 1 of 1 Nitrogen, forms as N mmanig....ifiga Yslumgaal 168 550 65.4 0.63 124 0.85 84.1 0.80 258 0.33 60.3 45.4 49.3 42.9 32.9 43.3 47.7 53.8 34.8 56.0 38,9 47.7 AU tests are performed in accordance With current Environmental Protection Agency guidelines as published in the Eelleagegilest Samples will be retained for 30 days unless otherwise requested. The information shown on this sheet is test data only and no interpreta.tion is intended or implied. Kelly E. Cook Laboratory Operations Manager ,112M HILL Cottiallti Ottlde 2Stt NW WdhUt5kd.. P.C. Lk* 46, �ii. citegth 97330 601.0614271 a.tuttui Y ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES' L_! ! Lam: L_t - L_!: L' + CHAIN _OF CUSTC.I.., (" RECORD AND AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SERVICES SHADED AREA – FOR LAB USE ONLY Lab It' Lab 2t: t Odor. Kit Request. t� ANALYSES REQUESTED Requested ample! : Data: Sampling, Requirements SDWA. HPDES RCRA OTHER. E` CI ❑' CLIENT SAMPLE ID (9 CHARACTERS) o is REt A i\ LAS I LAB 2 ID caved: I Received: Sy: emassa.sign aaapxsn'a.raa) Ralnquished By COC Rec - Ana Reg t/ TELIP''—" Crust Seal Racelved By Date/Time, ShippedVla UPS BUSS Fed -Eat Shipping e r Wo° Authoddzcd By "um sign and peat Ramat Remarks: ?s(ruCtIOns and 'Agreement? - Fwwtrlslana on Reverse Side DISTRIBUTION: ORIG INAL -LAB, Yellow LAB. Pink - Client • MA • • of • • • • • e • • • Jtine 4, 1992 Odor Science & Engineering, Inc. 57 Fishfry Street, Hartford, CT 06120 (203) 527-9089 Fax: (203) 527 -3399 Mr. Tracey Cork • CH2M HILL 2300 NW Walnut Blvd. • Corvallis, OR 97339 • RE USA Odor Sample Analysis - June 2, 1992 OS &E Project No. 0201 -M-00 • • • Dear Tracey: • • • • • • ei • ., • • 0 • • • We appreciate the o oe�`11uni to be of continued service to CH2M HILL Please feel • pP � pP .� a. call me if you have any questions concerning these results. • free to car y any This letter presents the results of the recent odor analyses performed by Odor Science Engineering, Inc. (OS&E). Air samples were obtained as part of the USA odor project by CH21vI HILL, staff on June 1st and 2nd, 1992. The samples were shipped via overni ght air service to OS&E's Olfactory Laboratory in Hartford, CT for sensory analysis. Eight (8) samples arrived under chain of custody on June 3, 1992. Upon p r quantified . - ° (,...) (ASTM of dilution to threshold l�/� ratio AST arrival the samples were in terms d No. � -a44 by a trained and screened o ) Y Method No. l�•679) and intensity (ASTM Meth panelists from the odor panel. The odor panelists were chosen from OS&E's pool of p Hartford area who actively participate in ongoing research and represent an average to above average sensitivity when compared to a large population. The results of the odor pane! tests are presented in the attached table. • • • • • • • • • 1 Sincerely, ODOR SCIENCE & !ENGINEERING, G, INC. Martha A. O'Brien Manager of Field Operations California Off ices 155 iovet Rudd, Suite 300; San Mateo; CA 94402 (415) 345.8664 • ; • Table 1. Results of Odor Panel Tests: June 3,1992 Odor Concentration Mil)a Odor Character 6/1/92 6/1/92 6/1/92 6/2/92 6/2/92 6/2/92 6/2/92 sso C4D 20 NH3/urine/earthy Gram/earthy 11:40 5600 CWS NH urine a) D/T dilution.to-threshold b) odor itrtnsity as rated on the n-butanol intensity scaI (1.8) (-) no desaibable odor *; • • • • • • • e • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • 1 0 • • • • • • 0 1 • 0 • , • USA Sludge Storage Facility Figure C-1 Front Loader Noise Source Spectrum 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) ..s..1450) at 50 feet 1t 90 80 70 60 c2 50 40 30 63 USA Sludge Storage Facility Figure C-2 Tractor/Spreader Noise Source Spectrum 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) 411., L(50) at 40 feet 8000 S S • S • S S • to • S S S S S • S S S S S 0 S 0 S 0 S 0 • ,• USA Sludge Storage Facility Figure C-3 Sludge Truck (dump) Noise Source Spectrum • • • • • • • • • • • 60 • 00- ci) 50 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Octave Band Center Frequency (Hz) L(50) at 50 feet USA Sludge Storage Facility Figure C-4 Sawdust Truck (dump) Noise Source Spectrum 0.1 • " " 63 125 250 590 1000 2000 4000 8000 Octave Band Center Frequency (H) ,./1. L(50) at 70 feet • • • • • • if if • • • eo • • • ■ I r w , , • • if if 40 if 63 if if if if if Sound Pres3ure Level (dB) 100 90 80 70 60 50 USA Sludge Storag Facility Figure C-5 Delivery Truck Noise Source Spectrum (@ 10 mph) 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Octave Band Center Frequency (Fl) ..L(50) at 25 feet 8000 • oRt3sio06.71�10 ►: . ...•,.-.. .. . ...- • .•... *..l..l .S,O,, ,9,••• •••. , 30- Jun -92 01:35:11: PM USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY: Midway ° Site (Sumner Day) Bldg: NS scale Topo: NS scale 10 f t /div 50 ftfdiv Source Stationary Source Coordinates tlu±er Source Group #1 1 Front Loader #1A. 29004 4880.0 198_0 a Front Loader #13 3010.0. 4880-0 1984 3 Front Loader #1C 290E1.0 4770.0 1984 4 Front Loader #10 3010.0 4770..0 198.0 5 Front Loader #2k 2900.0. 4690.0: 198-'.0 6 Front Loader #28 3010.0 46904 19&0' T Front Loader #20 2900.0 45804 1984 8 Front Loader #28 3010.0; 4580.0'- 1.98.0 9-i Tractor/Spreader 1 2930.0 4840.0 1984 10 Tractor /Spreader a 3000.0 4840.0 198.0 It Tractor /Spreader 3 2930'.0 46404 198.0 12 Tractor /Spreader 4 3000.0 4640.0 198.0 13 Sludge Truck Dump, 2980..0 47204 200.0 14 Sast Truck DurcE 2940.0 4720.0: 2004 15 AdMint HVAC Unit 2820.04 4640.0: 2064 16, Shop, 2856.0 4680.0 196.0, IT Spare 4050.0 40504 200.0 18 Spare 4050.0 4050.0 200.0 Moving Sources- 1 Delivery Trucks Total source speed Trips htcft) (mgh) 20 10: 10 trips per Leg period "rte 50` 50 50 50' 50 50 50 50 40 40 40 40` 50 70 10: 10 10: 10 E0 Scale:- 10 ftfdiv EW Sca a 50 ft /div &A3 "r "' ft 74.0! 74..0: 74.0 74.0; 74.0 74.0 74.0 74.0 79.6 79.6 79.6 79.6 63.7 673 73_4 6.9 6.9 6.9` Octave bands SPL 3 63 125 250 79.0 72.0 63.0 79.0 72.0 63.0 79.0 72.0 63.0 79.0 72.0 63.0 79_0' 72.0 63.0 79.0 72.0 63.0 79.0: 72.0 63.0 79.0; 72.0 63.0 70.0 78.0 71.0 70.0 78.0• 71.0 70.0 78.0 71.0 70.0 78.0 71.0 70.0 72.0 55.0 59.3 70.0: 67.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 0.0 0.0- 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Leg period 60 minutes 70 % Rel. Hun. wind = 0 mph from 175 deg. (0 deg. is from the east) temp., = 70 deg F c = 1128.44 ft /sec Criteria: (1 -day,. 2 =night 1 "r" feet Crest Idle % Full 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Factor Adjust Power % Idle 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 72.0 66.0' 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 66.0 .0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 71.0! 75.0 74.0 71.0 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 71.0 75.0 74.0 71.0 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 71.0 75.0 74.0 71.0 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 71.0 75.0 74.0 71.0 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 56.0. 59.0 57.0 53.0 40.0 7 -5 25% 25% 66.0 62.0 58.0 50.0 45.0 5 -10 25% 25% 70.0 70.0 65.0 60.0 50.0 3 0 100% 0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 100% 0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 100% 0% 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 100% 0% d$A:3- Octave band SPL 3 "r" 'feet Crest "r" *Ira ft 62.5 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Factor Subpath 25 75.T 82 77' 70 69 71 70 65 57 6 0 USA SLUDGE STORAGE FACILITY: Dershmo Site (Sumner Day) Leg period 60 minutes 70 % Rel. Hum.-. 30- Jt� -92 0 from 175 d=g- (0 deg. is from the east] 04:01:33` AN Bldg: E15 scale: 10 ft/de Eli Scale: 10 fildiv° �irtt3 = � _ c � 1128.44 ft/sec Topo: NS scale � 50 ft/die Eli: Scale 50 ft/die temp_ Criteria (1=dayy,: tight 1 Crest Idle % Futt Source Stationary Source Coordinates d8& 2` Octave band SPL. 2 "r" feet Number Source- Group; #1 X Y 1 "r" "r' ft 63 125 250 500 0 1000 220 0 4000 55.0 Factor Adjust Power Powe2err % Idle 1 Front Loader= #1A 2904.0 2601.0= 212.0; 50 74.0 79.0 72.0 2 Franc Loader_ #iB': 2885_0` 2538.0 212`_0 50 74.1 74.0' 1722.0 63.9 66.0 72A 6fs.0' 60.Q 55.9- 10 -10 23X 2X 3 Front Loader. #1C 3043.0 256300 212_0 50 74.0: 79.0 4 Front Loader #10 3038_0'= 2497.0': 212.0 50 74.0 79.0 72.0 63.0 66.0' 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0 10 -10 23% 2% 5 Front Loader #2A 2860 .0' 2425.0; 212.0:. 50 74.0 79.� 72.0 $3.0 66=0 72.0 66.0 60.0 55.0: 10 -10 23% 2% 6 Front Loader #28 3000..0: 2381 -.0' 212.0 50 74.0 74 ?'Front Loader #2C 2837.0 2351.0 212.0 50 74.0' �.Q 72.0 63 fl 66.0! 72.0'. 66.0 60.0 55.o 10 -10 23% 2% 8 Front Loader. #2D; 2975.0 2312.0: 212.0 50 74.0 9;Tractor /Spreader 1 2913.0 2656.0 212.0 40 79.6 70.0 78.0 71.0 71.0 75.0 74.0 71.0 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 10 Tractor /Spresder° 2 3075.0` 2625.0 212.0' 40 79.6 70.0 78. 11 Tractor /Spreader 3 2825.0 2290.0' 212`..0` 40 79.6 70.0 78.0 ` 71.0 75.0 74.0 71.0' 65.0 3 -10 80% 20% 12 Tractor /Spreader 4 2980.0 2238.0 212.0 40 79.6 70.0 78 .0 71.0 13' Sludge; Truck Dump= 2450''.0 2455_0 - 214..0: 50 63_7` 7C.0 70.0 67'.0 66.0 62.0: 58.0' 50.0 45.0 5 -10 25X 25% 14 Sawdust Trunk Dump 2955.0 2460.0 214.0: 70 67:3 59. 15: Admin: HVAC Unit 3150.0: 2525_0: 225.0 10 f3.4` 60.0 65.0' 70.0 0.fl 0.0 0.0 65.0 5.0 60.0 .0 50.0 0.0 3 0 100% 0% 16 Shop: 3100.0 2475.0' 215.0 10 6.9 17 Spare. 4050 .0 = 4050.0? 200.0 10 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 3 0 100% 18 Spare 4050.0 4050.0 200.0 10 6_9! 0_0 0.0 0.0: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 100% 0% Moving Total source sped d8k 2': Octave band SPL a "r" feet Crest Sources Trips* ht(ft) - (mph) "r" "r" ft 62.5 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Factor Subpath 1 Delivery Trucks 20 10 10' 25 75.7 82 77 70 69 71 70 65 57 6 0 1 trips per Les; period FM Noise; Model Rte Date:; 06/30/92 10:12 P8 Project:: USA Sludge Storage Facility Conditions Dershaa Site Hour: Midday Offpeak 1 Off Peak. Ad just nt: Factor, OF INPUT- DATk 92.7% 1.6x 5.3X: Roadway Coordinates Speed grade Distance 3ersey Ba ► ► =rier �lilegQSt Tots! t#edicaa Heavy Segment x y z (%1 (feet) L Side R Sick (miles) Vehicles Cars Trucks Trucks (mph) Sunset tiny- (ti5) 8000 -10550 188, 0.00: 1 3889 1178 188. 0.0%: 4676 0 0 0.89 546 506 9 31 55 2 231.1; 2044 188 0.0%. 1800. 0' 0- 1.23 468 434 7 27 55 3 -3312 5000 188 0.0%, 6353- 0 0 2.43 476 441 8' 27 55 S z set Hwy (ES): -3312 5000` 188' 0.00 1 2400; 1889 188. 0`.0%- 6504 0 0 1.23 333 - 309 5 19 55 18 55 2 3889` 1088 188: 0'.0%: 1691 0 0 2.55 331 9 5 19 55 3: 8000 - 1050 188' 0.0% 4634 0 Dersham : Road 2889 755 206- 0.00 .00 66 62 2 a 50 1 3022 1:189`, 207 0 °.2%: 454- 0 0 0 2 3215 1910 207` 0.0S1 746 0 0 0.23 105 92 5 8 50 3 3500 3088': 208• 0.1% 1212 0 0 0.46. 147 131 5 11 50 • 15 50 4 3644 3689 208 0.0X. 618= a 0 0.57 85 65 5" 10 50 5 3955 5000 208_ 0.0X• 1347 0: 0 0.83' 82 68 3684 208- 0.00 ilout�taindale 3354 0 0 0.34 47 45 1 5356= 3233 208 0107.`, 1772 1326/Dersham 3889- 117$- 188 0 0 0 0..19 78 73 2 3 30 1 3215 19i.0 207 11.9x. 0 1 50 Dersha€ UB26- E826/Dersham Dershaat/EB26: 3215 1910- 207 0.00 40 1 2311 2044. 188 -2..1X': 914 0 0 0_17 18 17' 0 1 24001 1889` 188 0.00 : 1' 1- 3022 1189 207 2.0% 936 0- 0 0.18 21 19 1 30 3022 1,189- 207' 0 0. 2: 3 40 1' 3889 1088 188 -2.27 873 0 FIB IA; Noise: NodeL Run- Date: 06/30/92 10:41. P) Off Peak Adjustment Project USA. Sludge, Storage Facility Adjust, n Conditions Miday° Site 0r65. IC Hour Midday Offpeak 1` INPUT DATA. 92.0% 3.0% 5.0% Roadway Coordinates: grade Distance Jersey Barrier Nile+,past Total Medium Heavy Speed Sit x y i (%) (feet) L Side R: Side (miles) Vehicles Cars Trucks. Trucks 00) Hwy 219 2625 7125 140: 1 2594 5813" 150 0.8% 1312 0 0 0.25 263 242 8 13 55 2 25011 5188 173 3.6 %. 632 0 0 0.37 263 242 8 13 55 3 2656 4844- 186 3.4% 377 0 0 0.44 263 242 8 4- 2656 3875 196 1.0%. 969 0 0 0.62'; 263 242 8 13 55 5 265T 2594. 195 - 0.:1 %. 1281 0 0 0.87 263 242 8 13 55 8 13 55 6; 5250 25011 189 -0.2% 2595 0 0 1.36 263 242 8 13 55 7 6500 1062: 183 -0` -1% 1906 . ' t UNIFIED SEWE tP GE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY DURHAM AWWTP CONDITIONAL USE PERAIIIT APRIL 1 990 v _ r 1 1 1 1 1 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION APRIL 1990 BACKGROUND The Unified Sewerage Agency's Durham Wastewater Treatment Plant is nominally rated at 17 mgd and provides chemical and biological treatment and filtration of wastewater prior to discharge to the Tualatin River. Sludges from the treatment process are incinerated. When sewage flows exceed 40 mgd, the excess flow cannot be treated. To accommodate flows greater than 40 mgd, USA is constructing additional raw sewage pumping capacity, new raw sewage screening and grit removal facilities, a third primary clarifier and piping and controls to process the excess flows through an existing 4.6 mg storage basin. These additions are known as the Phase I improvements and are expected to be complete in 1991. Phase I improvements were approved by the City of Tigard in 1988. Other improvements are needed to provide for increased capacity, to reduce ammonia and phosphorus concentrations in the plant effluent, and to resolve critical reliability problems associated with the existing facilities. These additions will be referred to as the Phase II improvements. The increased capacity and reliability improvements are more critical to the plant performance than are the improvements that will reduce ammonia and phosphorus and will be placed on a more accelerated schedule. The specific components to be included in Phase IIA and IIB are listed below: 11114,..g_LLA..imn_ALAtarovne 1. Aeration Basin Influent Flow Split Box. 2 Primary Clarifier effluent pipelines to the Aeration Basin Influent Flow Split Box and to the Aeration Basins. 3 Aeration Basin, return sludge pumping, waste activated sludge pumping, scum pumping, and Secondary Clarifier. 4, Tunnel extension from existing tunnel to new return activated sludge (RAS) pumping station, 5, Remove existing RAS inclined screw pumps and replace with horizontal, centrifugal pumps, 6, Blowers for Aeration Batin, 7. Chemical Clarifier Influent Flow Control Structure. 8 Chemical Clarifier No 3 Without collector mechanisms or effluent launders To be provided in Phase IIB). 9. Chlorine Contact Basins. - 1 - • , : .;• „ ' ,"' ' 1 1 1 1 1 10. Chlorine injector-mixer for new Chlorine Contact Basin. 11. Chlorinator to feed injector-mixer. 12. Effluent Filters, backwash pumps, and surface wash pumps. 13. Filtered Effluent Ciearwell for backwash supply. 14. Reuse Pumping Station. 15. Excess Flow Pumping Station. 16. Modifications to the excess flow basin effluent pipe to divert the flow to the Excess Flow Pumping Station. 11. Effluent piping and Dechlorination Structures with dechlorination injector-mixer equipment. 18. Modification of the outfall diffuser. 19. Related electrical and instrumentation. EtAacutalueAttamta 1. Add primary influent pipeline to new Primary Clarifier No, 4. 2, Primary Clarifier No 4 and add one primary sludge pump to the existing Sludge Pumping Station (Constructed in Phase I). 3. Add primary effluent pipeline to Aeration Basin Influent Flow Split Box. 4. Modification of existing Aeration Basins to provide biological nutrient removal. 5. Add chemical injector-mixer equipment at Chemical Clarifier Flow Control Structure. 6. Extend channels from Phase II A Chemical Clarifier Flow Control Structure to Chemical Clarifiers. 7. Modify Chemical Clarifiers to include flocculation zone, tube-type clarification in the second half of the clarifier) and new sludge collectors, 8. Add equipment to Chemical Clarifier No. 3 (Constructed in Phase IIA), 9, Modify the ecarbonation basins and the existing chlorine contact basins to provide chlorination and aeration prior to filtration. 10. Revise the filter controls for the existing Filters, 11, Add the sodium bisUlfite injector-mixer in the Phase II A Dechlorination Structures, - . .."_ - • , - • • . - . • . LEGIBILsry STRIP- t I 12, Increase the sludge processing capacity by providing sludge digestion and liquid /solid haul to agriculture land. 13. Add pumps and piping to Reuse Pumping Station. 14. Chemical Building. 15: Thickening Centrifuges at the Solids Process Building. 16. Site work, paving and repaving of plant drives and landscaping. 17. Related electrical and instrumentation, PLANT LAYOUT AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS The area for expansion of the open grassed area to the p the Durham Plant is north of the existing process units, This area is the obvious one for new facilities and provides symmetry of process units. The new Filters are expanded to the north of the existing Filters, filter allowing extension of influent channels, effluent piping and other common i. piping. he plant outfall ` to 105 m d with gravity flow. This will be T has adequate capacity for up g 9 �° adequate for the Phase se II facilities. Should more capacity be needed, a relief sewer will be required for the extra flow. All sl edge handling and processes will remain in the vicinity of the existing Incinerator Building. Digesters have been selected for future sludge processing, and will be located east of, and near, the Incinerator Building, The Chemical Building will be located northwest of the Phase 11 Aeration Basins. All chemicals will be delivered by truck to the Chemical Building: The driveway for the chemical trucks will be a continuous drive through the Chemical Building and return to the main plan t road near the Water Quality Control Lab. tier haul trucks n Building, The building Solids For anaerobic digestion, the sludge hail licks w�i1 drive Benin Process Building into an enclosed :..• Loading for sludge loading, Once Sludg trailers Lot be two lanes wide to permit positioning g 9 e loaded, the tractors will pull at the loaded trailer v� through the building and out past the Thickeners and exit at the main plant Upon ton of the I B construction; all existing and new plant will be replaced with as U ods wmlpl a Phase I asphalt road base and surface: roads p P Landscageo All landscaping Phase II B Landscaping will include caping V�rol1 be constructed in redesign of the irrigation system, fencing, barriers and berms, and plantings. Landscaping will be designed for low maintenance, using ground cover, mowing strips at lawn boundaries, non- deciduous trees and shrubbery, boundary with the ubproposed improvements A new securely fence along � e north of the proposed use neighborhood. will be selected during design consistent Concepts unde r e. r consider ation include co ated chain link fence; vertical square -tube metal posts at closely spaced intervals and precast concrete wall, LE !B STRIP Drainage The large lawn area on the north boundary of the existing plant will be used by the new and future facilities, This area currently drains to the open gap between the Filters and the Excess Flow Basin, but the new facilities will block this gap. All drainage in and around the Phase II facilities and the open, reserved area for future facilities will be drained to storm collection inlets and piped to natural drainage, PRIMARY CLARIFIER A new Primary Clarifier No. 4 will be constructed as part of the Phase II B improvements, The construction of the clarifier will be identical to the existing primary clarifiers. The outlet launder of Primary Clarifier No 4 will be covered to contain odors. The containment will be piped to the 20" odor control collection pipe provided under Phase I. AERATION BASINS A new Aeration Basin will be constructed during Phase II A and will be similar to the existing basins; however, because it will be designed to allow biological nutrient removal (BNR), there will be some interior differences, The Aeration Basin will b partitioned into 7 zones. The basin may be operated in three (or more) modes. Two of the modes are used to enhance nutrient removal. The third mode is intended to be used during the winter and is a completely-mixed activated sludge mode. The existing Aeration Basins will be modified during Phase II B to provide BNR. The aeration basin channels will be covered with aluminum grating, and will be aerated to maintain aerobic conditions and solids in suspension, CHEMICAL CLARIFIERS A new Chemical Clarifier No. 3 will be constructed during Phase II A, Equipment for this clarifier will be installed during Phase II B at the same time as new equipment is installed in the existing Chemical Clarifiers. SECONDARY CLARIFIER A new Secondary Clarifier will be constructed during Phase /I A. The clarifier will be a peripheral weir, center feed type. The sludge collection will be the tow-bro suction-type, A walkway will extend from the RAS pumping station area across the neW clarifier to the opposite side, The walkway will provide access to the center mechanism and will support the flocculation well, NPW spray header, and chlorine solution line Used to reduce growths in the launder, RAS PUMPING STATIONS The Return. Activated Sludge. (RAS) Pumping Station constructed in Phase II A will be located In the area :between the new Secondary ,Oarifier and the new Aeatiors Basin A tunnel will be extended frokthe_OAS_Pumpinotation to the existing' plant facilities to proVide access:, The RAS Pumping Station will be designed to accommodate the future 4th Aeration Basin and 4th Secondary C1 a1fie. - 4. The tunnel area will be ventilated, heated and lighted. Skylights are provided for natural lighting in the tunnel. Between the existing Aeration Basin No. 2 and the new Aeration Basin No. 3, and in the new tunnel, an area will be enlarged to house a new Electrical Substation and Motor Control Center. REVISIONS TO EXISTING RAS PU4P10 STATION AND BLOWERS The existing inclined screw RAS pumps, will be replaced with horizontal, centrifugal pumps during Phase II A construction. The tunnel extension from the existing tunnel to the new RAS Pumping Station will require removal of the . existing high strength aeration basins. The construction of the tunnel extension will be combined with an expansion of the tunnel area in the vicinity of the blowers to accommodate the new RAS pumps. CHLORINE CONTACT BASINS the existing recarbonation basins and the existing Chlorine Contact Basins will be modified to be used fol ";owing the Chemical Clarifiers, or to be used by bypassing ahead of the Chemical Clarifiers. Chlorine mixer - injectors will l be installed in the tainlet chamber of each + Chlorine Contact Basin. The basin will be aeritedConta t Basin solids in to raise the oxygen level. The Chlorine keep will be s��spension and t yg baffled to increase the actual detention time in the basin. REUSE PUMPING STATION one II B. The pumps will be installed in the Reuse Pumping 5 m t ion during Phase 1 mgd The Reuse Pumping Station will consist of mgd pumps and pump. The discharge of the pumping station will be metered with two meters. One meter will meter on -site reuse water and the second will meter off site water use. Each pump will be sized for the stated capacity at 90 psi. �` . On site use of reuse water will require pressure reJucing valves to SO psi. increases to 80 psi, Pumps will be actuated by pressure. When the ue drops below 95 psi, the pressure additional pumps will be actuated. When pumps will drop off until only one 1 mgd pump is running: The 1 mgd pump will run continuously. The Reuse Pumping Station will also house the backwash and surface wash pumps for the Effluent Filters. EFFLUENT FILTERS Nine Effluent Filters will be provided to supplement with the existing Filters, The Filters will be dual media (sand and anthracite) g gravel overlay on Leopold filter bottoms. s, the Filters During operation Phase II A facilities, ilters will match the rate, the secondary treatment plant plus e . The .. filter rate will from y_ excess tloi is no Upstream surge a or vary rapidly during this operation since there p 9 I equalization. Whenever a Filter is removed from operation, the rate change on the remaining filters must accommodate the removal and return of filters being backwashed. FILTER CLEARWELL The Filter Clearwell will be used for chlorine contact and for post aeration. The Filter Clearwell will serve as a supply for filter backwash, filter surface wash, and NPW supply. The clearwell is sized to permit backwash of 2 Filters without incoming supply. Foam control sprays will be placed in the overflow structure. The Filter Clearwell will be aerated as part of the post oxygen augmentation. Coarse bubble diffusers will be used. CHEMICAL BUILDING The Chemical Building will be constructed during Phase II B. The building will be a concrete building, similar to the Headworks Building constructed during Phase I. The Chemical Building will provide storage and delivery of alum, lime, polymer and sodium bisulfite to the treatment process. Alum Alum will be delivered by tank ki trucks having pneumatic unloading equipment. The trucks will connect their twses to quick-coupling alum unloading lines at the face of the alum storage rocvL One unloading pipe and coupling will be provided for each alum storage tank. Each alum storage tank will store 30,000 gallons of alum, or about 5 tanker loads of alum. A total of 7 storage tanks will be provided. Lime will be delivered by trucks having pneumatic oloading equipment. Trucks are provided with 15 psi, 750 cfm compressors for unloading. Each lime storage silo will be provided with a 4" unloading line using 5 feet radius bends, steel pipe and quick coupling connectionli at the unloading station. Each lime silo will be 12 feet in diameter and 26 feet high, above the cone section. Each silo will hold 15 tons of lime. Two silos will be equipped with the bag filters for nleaning the exhaust air, and the feeders and slakers. The two future silos will be installed, but will not be equipped. Installation of future silos in the building would require demolition of portions of the building to install them. 1 Polymer will be delivered in 3000 pound "tough-tanks ° using fork lift unloading or monorail unloading. The liquid polymer will be transferred to the mixing-dilution-aging tanks using an automatic system that mixes and blends polymer emulsion. Two units will be provided to feed to the two 8000 gallon holding tanks. Sodium Bisulfite Sodium bisulfite will be delivered and stored in liquid form. The tanker trucks will connect hoses to quick coupling unloading lines, similar to the H■ ' -6- .1 6 - alum facilities. Individual unloading pipes and couplings will be provided for each sodium bisulfite storage tank. Each storage tank will store 6,000 gallons of sodium bisulfite, or one tanker load. A total of three storage tanks will be provided. The sodium bisulfite will be paced to a combination of flow rate measured by the effluent flow meters and the chlorine residual measured on the effluent. ANAEROBIC DIGESTION Sol cis xesms„ ild„ (Existing at this time) All primary sludge from the existing and new facilities will be conveyed to one of the three Thickeners. All of 4he waste activated sludge from the existing and new facilities will b,' conveyed to another one of the three Thickeners. Scum from the primaries and from the secondary clarifiers will be pumped to the scum concentrator. Sludge from the Thickeners will be pumped to the Thickening Centrifuges using new progressing cavity pumps having VFD's. The Thickener sludge piping will be modified for the revised function. Each sludge e Thickener will be provided with two 150 gpm progressing cavit y pumps, The Centrifuge room will be sound attenuated. Digested sludge will be pumped to the existing Dewatering Centrifuges. The only modification to this system is to change the alignment of the conveyor belt from the dewatered sludge storage to discharge to trucks on the east side of the building. An access way will be provided between the Sludge Loading Building and the existing Solids Process Building. Anaerobic pgesters Three of the four new Anaerobic Digesters will be hexagonal concrete tanks with slow speed, turbine mixers. The fourth digester, hexagonal in shape, will be a s1ndge and gas storage tank. Although it will only serve as storage, the fourth digester will be designed as a secondary digester with a floating, gas - holder, cover. Sludge will be recirculated continuously through a heat exchanger. The return sludge will discharge above the sludge surface to assist in controlling scum, One heat exchanger will be provided for each state hotiwaterrboilere heat exchanger will be tube and shell type with _ p . One gas fired boiler will be provided. The boiler will be fired using digester gas and natural gas . as a back, up, . A heat balance for the digester indicates will . that excess gas will be available. from j engine . _i ui 1 di n and Centri feu es. The ergize A 350 kw, naturally aspirated, eng n Building will be installed to eng the electrical load from the Digest g g u generator will be provided with a synchronizer and will feed into the motor control center with adequate other load being subfed from the motor control center to use the load. The control room will be sound attenuated. The engine will be water cooled. The engine heat will be exchanged to heat the e digester- A the hot water system in order to recover �idd engine heat to heat the d waste � ra► will be provided if there t.dpmas . heat radiator will be p n t gas burner wi n standby the waste e he iges er does is lest all of the waste head. A a g p than total demand for the gas. The waste gas burner will be provided with a secondary c mbustion chamber to more efficiently burn the gas. The digester control room and electrical room will be provided with skylights. All masonry walls will be painted. All concrete walls will be sealed, but not painted. Si udge Lo j ncq_Oaa i ding, The Sludge Loading Building will be a 32 feet by 120 feet drive through structure for loading and storing dewatered, digested sludge. The structure will be a concrete structure. The exhaust air from the Sludge Loading Building will be odor controlled using a packed tower scrubber. The chemicals for the scrubber will be chlorine solution and sodium hydroxide. The odor scrubber and sodium hydroxide will be installed in the Sludge Loading Building. HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING The structures constructed for Phase 11 A will be ventilated to provide 6 air chan9es per hour and will be heated to 50° F when the outside air temperature is 23° F. During the summer, the ventilation air will limit temperature rise to 10° F above ambient air temperature. A preliminary sizing of air handling units and heating units for Phase II A are shown on Table 1. All air handling units will take suction from grated inlets with drains. No air hoods will be used The discharge from the outlets will be in a similar manner. 1 HEATING, VENTILATING TABLE AIR CONDITIONING PHASE II A RAS PUMPING STATION Air HaOi q.. its _,,,_Hf at i n Unit__. Intake AHU Exhaust @ Blowers Exhaust @ MCC room Exhaust @ RAS station Exhaust @ Meter station FILTER GALLERY & REUSE P.S. Intake AHU Winter Intake AHU Summer j30000 cfm 11,000 cfm r Winter 30 sq ft Exhaust Louver �d�nter Exhaust Louver Summer 54 sq ft 44,000 cfm 1,200,000 Btu /hr' ;0,000 cfm 2,000 cfm 2,000 cfm 100000 cfm Natural Gas fired furnace„ 2700000 Btu /hr' , The Chemical Building will be heated to 700 F when the outside temperature is 23° F. Heating for the mini-lab and electrical control room will be provided with a gas-fired furnaces located in the mechanical room. Each chemical feed room will be ventilated separately. The inlet air will be preheated using a gas-fired duct heater. The sodium bisulfite storage and feed rooms will be exhausted using a scrubber system. Each space will be ventilated to provide 6 air changes per hour during the summer and 3 air changes per hour during the winter. The exhaust from the lime storage and bag filter room will be filtered. The digester control room veil be heated to 500 F with hot water from the boiler. Hot water duct hetteers will preheat the inlet air. The digester control rtom ventilation will be ventilated to provide 6 air changes minimum and higher as required to minimize the heat rise in the building to less than 15° F. The Sludge Loading Station will be heated with infra red heaters to keep the sludge conveyor and odor control unit warm. The ventilation of the building will provide 6 air changes per hour. The exhaust air will be odor controlled. The HVAC for the Solids Process Building will be modified slightly to exhaust the thickened sludge hoppers to the Slud9e Loading Building odor control unit. No other change is identified. • A preliminary sizing of air handling units and heating units for Phase II B are shown on Table 2. TABLE 2 HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING PHASE II B CHEMICAL BUILDING Alum Storage Room Lime Storage Room Polymer Room Sodium Bisulfite Storage Room Sodium Bisulfite Feed Room and Control SOLIDS LOADING BUILDING iiiir-114.01-1M-llnitg. ligittiaa_kita Summer - 11000 cfm Winter - 5500 cfm 310,000 Btu/hr Summer - 7000 cfm Winter - 3500 cfm 2100000 Btu/hr Summer - 2500 cfm Winter - 1250 cfm 68,000 Btu/hr Exhaust - 3000 cfm Winter - 1000 600000 Btu/hr Exhaust - 3000 cfm Winter - 200 cfm 12,000 Btu/hr 400 cfm 30,000 Btu/hr Infra-rnd htrs ELECTRICAL Electrical and controls for Phase II A are listed on Table 3. A new substation and motor control will be required for the new blowers and RAS pumps. New motor control center will be provided at the Reuse Pumping Station. The controls for the blowers and RAS pumps and the filters and backwash pumps will be performed by adding new I/O in existing programmable logic controllers. Electrical and controls for Phase II B are listed on Table 4. All new electrical devices will be controlled from existing motor control centers except the Chemical Building, Digesters, and the Centrifuges. The Chemical Building MCC will be fed from the new substation constructed in Phase II A. The Digester MCC and the Centrifuges will be subfed from the existing substation in the Solids Process Bui,uing. Walking areas will be lighted with pathway lights to provide safe walkway access, and will be low intensity, unobtrusive fixtures. 10 TABLE 3 PHASE 11 A -ELECTRICAL LOADS AND CONTROLS E ui ment No. Size HP Volts EXISTING BLOWER AND RAS PUMP AREA Blower 3 4200 scfm 350 BFV 3 16" 1/x On-Off Modulate to maintain header pressure Vary speed to maintain set point flow NEW RAS PUMPING RAS Pumps 2 MLSS Pump UCT Pump WAS Pumps V STATION 7.5 mgd Scum Pump Sump Pumps Dewtr Pump HVAC BFV 18.7 mgd 9.5 mgd 250 gpm 50 gpm 50 gpm 4 mgd 460 Vary speed to maintain set point flow 460 On-Off 460 On-Off 460 Vary speed to maintain set point flow On-off on pit level On-off on Sump level On-off, LWCO 460 460 460 460 FILTER BUILDING Cl, Mixer 1 BFV 1 2000 ppd 18" Bckwsh Pmp 2 19600 gpm Sfc Wsh PMp 2 600 gpm Fltr In BFV 5 30" Fltr out BFV 5 20" Bckwsh BFV 5 30" Mstr Bwh BFV 2 30" Wt Bwh BFV 5 36" Srf Wsh BFV 5 6" Sump PUmps 2 50 qpm HVAC 3 460 On-Off 1/x 460 Modulate to maintain Set point flow 250 460 On Backwash control 30 460 On Backwash control 1/k 460 On Backwash control 1/x 460 On Backwash control 1/x 460 On Backwash control 1/x 460 On Backwash control 1/x 460 On Backwash control 1/k 460 On Backwash control 2 460 On-Off on sump level TABLE 4 PHASE II B -ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL LOADS AND CONTROLS ti"7,!?.monr NEW PRIMARY CLARIFIER to 4 RaW Sludge Pump 1 200 gpm 5 Program & Cycle Time Collector Drive 1 - 1 On -Off, Torque limit 40" BFV 1 - 1/x ModUlate to maintain level REVISIONS TO EXISTING AERATION t1LSS Pump 2 18.7 mgd UCT Pump 2 9.5 mgd Mixers 18 REVISIONS TO EXISTING Flocculators 15 Sludge Pumps 9 Collector Drive 6 Chemical Injectors 5 SO, Injectors 2 AERATION BASIN No. 3 20" 1/X Modulate to maintain set point flow CHEMICAL CLARIFIERS 5 On-off, 75 gpm 5 On-off, 1 On -off, 2000 ppd 2 On -off 1000 ppd 2 On-off CHEMICAL BUILDING Elevator Lime in Vibrator Lime Feeder Lime Slaker Alum Feed Pumps Alum Peed Pumps Polymer Mixer Polymer Blending System 2 1000 gph Pumps 2 273 gph Poly met Feed Pumps 3 56 gph ak Feeders 4 475 ppd scrubber 1 Hoist 1 3 -ton 2 1 -ton - On -off HVAC 10 Package controls 1/X Timer control Pace with flow Interlock with Pace With flow Pace with flow On -off feeder DIGESTERS (Anaerobic Digestion Mixers 3 - Plug Valves Recirc Pumps Hot Water Pumps Boilers Sump Pumps Compressors Dig.Sludge Pumps HVAC Package controls Pace with flow Pace with flow Pace With flow -C1, resid. tart on leak detection On -Of fHoist Alternative) 30 On -off 3 - Timer control 5 150 gpm 3 On -off 3 150 gpm 2 OnWoff 2 3x10'btu /hr 6 Package control 2 50 gpm 1 Level contol 2 200 cfni 7,5 Gas volume & boiler need 2 125 gpm 7,5 On- -off, remote from centrif - - SLUDGE LOADING (Anaerobic Digestion Alternative) Garage Doors 4 12 x 14 Remote control odor Control 1 8000 cfm 30 On -off HVAC AUDITIONS TO SOLIDS PROCESSING 8t1ILDINd (Anaerobic Digestion Alt Thickening Centrifu.ges Thickened sludge Pumps Dilute sludge Pumps 3 225 gpm 3 100 gpm 6 150 gpm 160 On -off, package control 5 VFD, Level control 748 V 'D l remote on-off (Incineration Alt) Package controls Incinerator controls ADDITIONS To SOLIDS (PROCESSING ButtDING Incinerator components - 564 Sludge cake pumps 3 75 gpm PUgMill 2 MISCELLANEOUS HPA Compressors Alum Transfer Pumps 2 25 Remote on -off 2 Remote on -off. 1 1 '0 A. SITE CONDITIONS I. A vicinity map showing streets and access points, pedestrian and bicycle pathways, transit stops and utility locations; A vicinity map is provided on Figure 1, page 14 of this report, Existing access points along 85th Avenue are identified on Sheet 2. No direct access from the plant site to Durham Road exists or is proposed. Walkways currently exist along 85th Avenue, Durham Road, and the Durham Grade School access road, north of the proposed improvements. No transit stops are known to exist along Durham Road or 85th Avenue. Existing public utilities currently identified are shown on Sheets 1 and 2. 2. The site size and its dimensions; The site to be impacted by this project is shown on Sheet 3. Assessor maps identify the parcel under one tax lot number as follows: T2S R1W 11DD600 Physical dimensions of the site are shown on Sheet 3. Total area is approximately 50.4 acres. 3. Contour lines at 2-foot intervals for grades 0-10% and less and 5-foot intervals for grades over 10 percent; Contour lines at 1-foot intervals are shown on Sheets 1 and 2 at the subject property and on adjacent lands. The general topography of the site is gently sloping from northwest to southeast. Elevations are based on U.S.G.S. datum. 4. The general location of drainage patterns; No well defined drainage exists on the site. surface drainage follows topography in a northwest to southeast direction to the Fenno Creek drainage area. Phase I improvements, located west of 85th Avenue, drain south within the new storm drainage system constructed in Phase 1 to the Tualatin River drainage area, 5. The general location of natural hazard areas, including (A) Floodplain areas (100,yeat floodplain and flooding); The subject property it not located within the Tualatin River floodplain area. The identified floodplain elevation of 126.0 is shown on Sheet 2. (B) Slopes in excess of 25%; The subject property doe t not have slopes in excess of 25%. The predominate slopes Oh the subject property are less than 4 percent. (C) Unstable ground (areas subject to slumping, earth slides or movement); - 13 - •, LOWER BOONES FERRY RD SW HALL BLVD CARMAN DR DURHAM AWWTP FACILITIES bURIIAM AWWTP PHASE 1 EXPANSION VICINITY MAP FIGURE 1 No unstable ground conditions have been identified on -site. A copy of the soils report is included in Appendix A. (D) Areas having a high seasonal water table within 0 -24 inches of the surface for three or more weeks of the year; No areas of high seasonal water table have been identified on the site. A copy of the soils report for this project is included in Appendix A. (E) Areas having a severe soil erosion potential; No areas of severe soil erosion have been identified on the site. A copy of soils report for this project is included in Appendix A. (F) Areas having severe weak foundation soils; No areas having severe woak foundation soils have been identified on the site. A copy of the soils report for this project is included in Appendix A. 6, The general location of natural resource areas as shown on the Comprehensive Plan map inventory data; No known natural resource areas such as wildlife habitats or wetlands exist on the subject property. Drainageways and wetlands existing south of the ;subject property and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of- way will not be impacted by this project. 7. The general location of site features, including (A) Rock outcroppings, No rock outcroppings were identified property. A tifed on the subject property copy of soils report for this project is included in Appendix A. Trees with 6" caliper or greater measuring 4 ft from ground level; Clearing and grubbing limits for the proposed improvements are on Sheet 4. Clearing for ... held the Cl ears hg and grubbing limits construction el d to a y area for a minimum; while permuting sufficient improvements Several trees now existing within the plant boundary will need to be removed. Any tree removal which occurs during Phase II construction will be mitigated by planting of trees on the subject property g clean -up and restoration of the site. The location of existing structures on the site and proposed use of those structures; Existing structures on the subject property are identified on Sheets 1 and 2 All structures identified will remain. This project proposes to modify some existing structures and add new facilities. Please refer to earlier discussion. 9. The location and type of noise sources on-site or on adjoining property such as traffic ways, mechanical equipment or noise producing land uses; The existing Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (Durham AWWTP) is located to the out(' of the proposed improvements. Noise sources at the Durham AWWTP are limited. The Durham Grade School is located to the northeast of the proposed improvements. To the west light industrial activities are being conducted. To the northwest is the High School athletic fields. The lands lying south of the subject property are currently undeveloped. North of the proposed improvements is Durham Road with residential development located to its north. Noise levels at the proposed improvements will be controlled to no more than 85 dBA inside the building and 65 dBA outside the building. A listing of anticipated mechanical equipment to be installed in Phase II construction is included earlier in this report. 10. Location of existing utilities and easements; Existing public utilities are shown on Sheet 1 and 2. Public utilities which cross the site on easements are also identified on Sheet 1 and 2. 11. Location of existing dedicated right-of-Ways; Rights-of-way of 85th Avenue and Durham Road are shown on Sheet 1 and 2. B. SITE PLAN 1. The proposed site and surrounding properties; The proposed site is identified on Sheet 3 together with surrounding properties. Improvements to the subject property are identified on Sheet 4, 2. Contour intervals; See previous response, item A.(3). New contours are shown on Sheet 4. Only minor modfications to existing contours are anticipated. 3, The location, dimensions and names of all; (A) Existing Streets; Existing streets in the area of subject property aioe shown on Sheets 1 and 2. The subject property accesses the dedicated right- of-way of 85th Avenue. Sheets 1 and 2 indicate current existing street conditions along the easterly boundary of the subject property after completion of Phase 1 improvements. (B) Proposed streets; No new public streets will be required to provide service to the subject property and the proposed improvements. Access from and to the Phase 11 facilities will be to existing access points on 85th Avenue. 1 1 e (C) Alternative routes of dead end streets; No dead end streets are proposed, nor are any streets proposed for future extension across the subject property. 4. The location and dimension of: (A) The entrances and exits on the site; A new 30 foot main access to the existing Durham AWWTP was constructed at the southerly end of the improved 85th Avenue during Phase 1 construction. The existing entry way at the north end of the Durham AWWTP on 85th Avenue was also modified during Phase 1 construction, No new access points to either 85th Avenue or Durham Road are proposed as part of this project (Phase II construction). (B) The parking and circulation areas; Current employees of the Durham AWWTP utilize parking facilities in front of the administration building on the east side of 85th Avenue. As part of this project, new parking spaces will be d�ves ®a�tici anticipated aotatal of 20 new em employees. At full operation, .p employees will be required with a maximum of 15 new employees at the site during any 8 hour period. (C) Loading and services areas; Two primary loading areas will be constructed during Phase 11. At the Chemical Building, alum, lime, polymer and sodium bisulfate will be delivered by truck and stored in the building for use in the treatment process. At the Sludge Loading Building., digested and dewatered sludge will be loaded into trucks for hauling and disposal off -site. All unloading and loading at both the Chemical Building and Sludge Loading Building will be performed inside the respective structures. The on -site access roadways will allow for continuous drive through at both buildings. It is anticipated that the delivery and removal of materials for Phase 11 facilities will generate . . an average of 10 additional truck trips per day at the Durham AWWTP. Al' l equipment installed i n Phase II construction can be serviced at Ad .g o.�. at its respective location, No new Administration Building Building located Wort wes of new Service Buildings will be constructed during Phase II. (D) Pedestrian and bicycle circulation; constructed from the existing Adn� n i Administration wide sidewalk wa s As part of Phase I construction, an 8 f const on Building to 85th r Avenue and north on 85th Avenue to the northerly p lant entrance. A 3 ft wide sidewalk was constructed along the Durham Grade School access road to the north of Phase I Improvements from the grade school to 85th Avenue and north on Avenue to Durham Road. 17 1 1 A wi, (E) Outdoor common areas; Expansion of the Durham AWWTP will occur in the open grassed area to the north of the existing process units. The site was acquired by the Unified Sewerage Agency for just such purpose. Phase II facilities will reduce to amount of area currently being utilized by the public. Area bet yen the Durham Grade School access road and Durham Road will be left undeveloped in this Phase of construction. (F) Above ground utilities; Electrical power and communication - electrical service and communication facilities will be extended underground from the existing facilities at the Durham AWWTP to the new facilities. The existing ovr. lead power lines along 85th Avenue will remain. (G) UndergrounL, J,cil ities; Potable water - new 2 -inch connection to e` i st ng 8 -inch water line in 85th Avenue. Backflow prevention device to be installed in accordance with Utility Standards. Natural gas - new 2 -inch service from existing natural gas main on the east side of 85th Avenue. Fire protection - new 6 -inch fire protection service from 8.inch water line in 85th Avenue. nieservice to Phase II facilities offsite - will be required to provide Stows sewers - no new off -site storm sewers are anticipated to be needed to provide service to Phase II facilities, Roof drains from new facilities urei proposed in on-site Phase a to II will drainage econr;ected to existing g facilities located adjacent to the site: Irrigation water - All irrigation water need fr. r the existing and new Durham AWWTP facilities will be providid from treated effluent facilities on -site. 5. The location, dimension and setback distances of all: (A) Existing structures, improvements and utilities which are: (1) Located within 25 feet of the site and are on adjoining property; Existing �h��t�u�eandOn�sitAl�nd .�,�ructu adjoining property are structures located within 25 feet of the subject property are setback greater than 75 feet from centerline ©f the adjacent . nrs�t��. new facilities prop osedthis n p roJect�i l l be setback greater than 75 feet from the centerline of 85th Avenue. 18 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (B) (ii) To remain on -site; All existing facilities are to remain on -site and are identified on Sheets 1 and 2. This project proposes to modify some existing facilities and add new facilities. Proposed structures, improvements and utilities on the site; The proposed facilities are shown on Sheet 4. All new structures will be setback a minimum of 75 feet from centerline of the new 85th Avenue improvements. 6. Storm drainage facilities and analysis of downstream conditions; The Durham AWWTP lies at the low end of the drainage basin. All storm drainage facilities have been installed in accordance with past requirements. The proposed facilities will not require additions or modifications to existing public drainage improvements. 7. Sanitary sewer facilities; No new utility lines will be constructed as part of this project within the 85th Avenue right -of -way. Only those connections to the existing utility lines as identified in item 4 (F) and (G) will be required. 8. The location of areas to be landscaped; Landscape features include low growth ground cover, deciduous and evergreen trees and grass planting. A conceptual landscapivi plan for the new facilities is shown in Appendix B. The current landscaping scheme will be maintained. All landscaping will be irrigated by underground sprinklers using non potable water from the Durham AWWTP. 9, The location and type of outdoor lighting considering crime prevention techniques; i the Durham AWWTP, will be Outdoor lighting, subject p ro ert existing In i eneral , the facilities will be P . P.. ... general, for safety. All lighting will be low intensity using decorative fixtures. 10. The location of mailboxes; No mailboxes will be installed or relocated as part of this project. 11. The location of all structures and their orientation; The location and orientation of all structures are shown on Sheets 1 and 2, and Sheet 4. 12. Existing or proposed sewer reimbursement agreements; No sewer reimbursement agreement is needed for this project. 19 1 1 1 1 1 C. GRADING PLAN 1. The site development plan shall include a grading plan at the same scale as the site analysis drawings and shall contain the following information: a. Requirements in Sections 18.130.080 and 18.130.090 of this Chapter; Requirements as set forth in the above paragraphs are described in the previous text. The Unified Sewerage Agency will issue a separate contract for excavation of Phase II A facilities. It is anticipated that this contract will be awarded in July 1990: A proposed excavation plan drawing is shown on Sheet 5. In conjunction with this excavation plan, an erosion control plan, for the Phase II construction has been developed as shown on Sheet 6, b. The location and extent to which grading will take place indicating general contour lines, slope ratios and slope stabilization proposals; Location and extent of final grading to be included in this project is identified on Sheet 4. Interim grading is identified on Sheet 5. In those areas where the slope of the final surface is 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or greater, the slope will be protected from erosion with a biaxially oriented net while grass surfacing becomes established. While construction is in progress, exposed excavation slopes and stockpiled materials will be protected from erosion. Sheet 6 and identify interim measures to be taken during construction. c. A statement from a registered engineer supported by factual data substantiating the validity of the slope stabili zation proposals; and that all problems will be mitigated and how they will be mitigated A copy of soils report for this project is included in Appendix A. d: validity of sanitary sewer and storm drainage service proposals; All sanitary sewer needs will be handled on -site: No new sanitary sewers off -site are required. All storm drainage needs will be handled on -site, Roof drains and roadway catchbasins will be connected to existing storm drainage facilities. During excavation work... � i Phase don IS��et erosion �control facilities cavat will be provided as identified , , e, That all problems will be mitigated and how they wi l be mitigated; Refer to discussion as contained elsewhere in this report. -20- 1 1 1 1 1 1 !I 1 1 D. ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS 1. The square footage of all structures proposed for use on -site; The Phase II construction includes the following facilities with the approximate square footage indicated. Floor plans can be provided upon request. PHASE II FACILITIES Structure Primary Clarifier' Aeration Basin' Chemical Clarifier' Secondary Clarifier' WAS /RAS Pumping Station' Tunnel Area Chlorine Contact Basin' Reuse Pumping Station' Excess Flow Pumping Station' Backwash Pumping Station' Effluent Filters' Filter Clearwell' Chemical Building Sludge Loading Building Anaerobic Digestion Electrical Substation' ,pro . "t a p Footage 12,9002 14,400' 19,000' 17,7002 10,000 8,000 12,400' 600 900 700 10,0002 500' 10,000 3,600 18,0002 2,000 Facilities constructed below ground level. Water filled Structure. 2. Preliminary elevation drawings of each structure; LL As footnoted above, only the Chemical Building, Sludge Loading Building and the Anaerobic Digestion complex will extend above existing ground level The remaining structures will be at existing ground level and . currently the site. Where walls structures do appear present on of these strusimilar e to those above ground level , some architectural treatment will be required to blend the new facilities in with the existing facilities. Figure 3 and 4 p rovide a preliminary iminary eleva drawing for the Chemical Building and; Figure 5 and 6 the Anaerobic Digestion complex The Sl udg e Loading u will be located i�een the existing Solids Handling Building �nhe new Anaerobi c Digestion complex Will be similar in appearance to the existing Solids Handling Building. 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ANIMMENIREIIIIIMIESURWAIEVIENEENIUMININImmilmommow E. LANDSCAPING PLAN 1. The general location of fences, buffers and screenings; Security fences will be added to the existing fencing. Buffer areas adjacent to the Durham Grade School are currently planned. Screenings, using both deciduous and evergreen trees is currently anticipated adjacent to the property boundaries and along the Durham Grade School access road. The Durham AWWTP has been located at this site since 1974. 2. The general location of play areas and common open spaces; No new play areas or common open areas will be added with this project. 3. The general location of existing and proposed plant materials; The area of the site to be impacted by this project is currently only grassed. A conceptual landscaping plan for the new facilities is shown in Appendix B. The current landscaping scheme will be maintained. 4. Location of underground sprinkler heads where applicable; Underground sprinklers will be installed for all landscaping. 5. The landscape plan shall include a narrative which addresses soil conditions; and erosion control measures that will be used; Soil conditions are described in the soils report incorporated in Appendix A. Erosion control measures are described in a previous section of this report. F. SIGN DRAWINGS No new signs are anticipated, Any new signs will comply with requirements of Chapter 18,114 of the City Code. G. TRAFFIC GENERATION ESTIMATE 1, During construction; The Phase II improvements, as described earlier in this report, will take approximately 30 months to complete. The initial construction for Phase IIA will begin as early as July 1990, with the excavation of approximately 80,000 cubic yards of material to prepare for building construction. This initial contract is anticipated to be completed within 45 days after notice to proceed is issued. During this period, a total of up to 180 trucks per day will be entering and exiting the site, It is currently anticipated that all excavated materials from this initial construction will be hauled off-site, No designated site will be specified for disposal of this material. The contractor will be allowed to utilize any permitted site for such disposal. Construction of facilities for Phase IIA is scheduled to begin in September/October 1990. Some additional excavation will initially be required at job startup, approximately 10,000 cubic yards. The remainder • 22 - 1 1 of the excavation for Phase IIA work will occur over the two year construction period, approximately 10,000 cubic yards. During the construction of Phase IIA facilities, truck traffic for importing and exporting of materials will fluctuate with an estimated 80 trucks per day. An estimated 60 to 70 people will be employed at the site for construction of Phase IIA facilities. In removal of the bulk excavation for Phase IIA, a paved parking lot for all employees of Phase II (both A and 8) will be developed. The parking lot will be located north of the proposed improvements and south of the Durham Grade School access road. Also, during this work, haul/access roads to Phase IIA construction will be built, and a wheel wash facility will be constructed at the haul/ access road entry to the plant access road (see Sheet 5 and 6). Construction of Phase IIB facilities is anticipated to begin in May/June 1991. Additional excavation work is anticipated to be minimal (less than 10,000 cubic yards) during the entire construction period. Construction truck traffic for importing and exporting of materials for Phase 116 work may reach 80 trucks per day as will occur in Phase IIA. An estimated 60 to 70 additional people will be employed at the site for construction of Phase IIB facilities. 2. During operation; Upon completion of Phase 11 facilities (September 1993), truck traffic will increase on the average of 10 trucks per day for delivery of chemicals and removal of dewatered sludge. Up to 30 trucks per 24 hour day are estimated during peak operating conditions. Approximately 20 more people Will be employed at the Durham AWWTP upon completion of Phase 11 construction, A maximum of 15 new employees are expected to be at the site during any 8 hour period, 23 [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECANICAL ENGINEERING REPORT DURHAM AWVVTP SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT DURHAM AWW11P PHASEII A DURHAM OREGON PREPARED FOR: HDR ENGINEERING, INC. 0.5056 JANUARY 1990 RITTENHOUSE-ZEMAN' & ASSOCIATES, INC, Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants negmAikinm 441A. RZA Ey. RITTENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES. INC. Ge'jteehnical & Envirnnnnental Consultants 7409 S.W. Tech Center Drive Suite 135 Portland. Oregon 97223-8024 (503) 639 -3400 r FAX (503) 620.7892 January 15, 1990 0.5056 HDR Engineering, Inc. 12700 Hillcrest Road Suite 125 Dallas, Texas 75230.2096 Attn: Mr. Henry Genies SUBJECT: SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND GEOTECHNICAL. ENGINEERING REPORT DURHAM AWWTP PHASE II -A DURHAM, OREGON Dear Mr, Avery: In accordance with your request, we have completed our study on the subject project. Authorization to proceed with this study was granted by you on October 30, 1989, In general, the site appears to be suitable for the proposed additions to the Durham plant subject to the recommendations provided in this report. Topsoil stripping depths will be less than one to one and one -half feet in most areas of the site The existing fill upon which the plant is built and the underlying native soils will provide adequate foundation and pavement support. We hope this report satisfies your current needs. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, RITrENHOUSE -ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. R. Warren Kreger, Geologic Associate w��r Sti e: .rye., 970 .p ,�` Terry N. Craven, P. E, I,1 E • 0 LU HOR Engineering, Inc. ,January 15, 1990 0-5056 Page 1 9.0 SUM fV@ RY The site is suitable for the proposed construction. Key design Items are summarized below and are discussed in greater detail in the following sections of this report= o Most of the site is overlain by five to 15 feet of compacted fills composed of native sandy silts and fine sands. Native soils underlying the fill consist of cleaner sands layered with silty sands and minor gravels, Refer to Section 4.2.2. Shallow perched groundwater was not encountered during our subsurface investigation, however, previous on -site explorations . encountered perched zones throughout the site. Piezometers were installed in two of the exploration boreholes to monitor groundwater occurrences. Based on the current construction excavations, even during dry summer weather, water should be expected in any excavations deeper than about 10 feet= Oue to the somewhat high soil permeability, dewatering could be difficult. Refer to Section 4.2.3. New fills should be compacted to the following relative compactions based upon AASHTO T -180: Subgrade - 92% Section 5.1.2 Native Structural Fill • 92% Section 5.3 Granular Structural Fill - 95%, Section 0.3 Landscape Fill - 65%, Section 5.3 Tank or Wail Backfill - 90% to 92 %, Section 5.6 Buliding foundations that will be installed on compacted soil may be designed for 2500 psf footings underlain by one foot of compacted crushed rock may be designed 3500 psf. Refer to Section 5.5. Floor slabs may be placed on compacted native soil with a minimum six inches of crushed rock base course. Refer to Section 5.3. Temporary excavation slopes may be cut at about 1 H :1 V, but some local variations may occur. Refer to Section 5.9. i HDR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0 -5056 Page 2 The preceding summary is intended for introductory and reference use. A complete reading of this report is necessary for a thorough understanding of the conditions or limitations affecting the use of this information. Design should be based on the complete recommendations contained in the main body of this report, 2.0 iNTROD=1IQfd This report presents the ,results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering study for the proposed Durham Advanced Waste Water Treatment Plant (AWWTP), Phase l0A, The proposed facility additions and locations of the subsurface explorations are presented on the attached Site Plan, Plate 1. The purpose of our study was to establish general subsurface conditions at the site on which to base our conclusions and recommendations for foundation design and construction considerations, The scope of work consisted of literature and past report research, surface and subsurface explorations, and geotechnical engineering analysis, This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of HDR Engineering, ince, their client and their agents, for specific application to this project, in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. 3. mg,0 M CR1PT„!N The project site is located south of Durham Road at S.W. (15th Ave, in Durham, Oregon, Phase Ii -A of the project will involve construction or renovation of Anaerobic Digesters, Filtration systems, Aeration Basins, Final Clarifiers, and a Chemical Feed building, Also included in the project, is the installation of utility and water lines, and possibly new access drives. The new filters, clarifiers, and aeration basins will have lower floor and /or footing elevations of 15 to 20 feet below existing grades, and some of the utility lines and piping may be deeper than 20 feet, It is expected that other facilities will be established near existing grades, items of concern are allowable bearing capacity, retaining structures, drainage, excavation, and control of Water during construct on, 4,0 B,..RFA F .Np 4,1 Extpl r l n Tis niq ee Our subsurface exploration consisted of drilling seven borings to depths of 21,5 to 36,5 feet in depth, with a trailer- mounted auger drill rig, All explorations were `observed by a geologist from our flan who logged 0 -5056 Page 3 conditions encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Exploration logs for this study and several from the previous study can be found in the Appendix. Exploration boreboles were placed at or near the locations that you requested, 4,2 bite �ndition X4.2.1 Surface - The locations of the new facilities are mostly within the confines of the existing AWWTP and as such, will probably be founded on compacted fills, consisting of reworked native soils. The proposed Anaerobic Digesters appear to be situated in an area currently occupied by a grove of large fir trees that does not appear to have been significantly filled, Topsoil in this area may approach one and one -half feet in thickness, and maybe thicker in isolated pockets, The proposed Final Clarifier, Aeration Basin and Chemical Feed Building are to be constructed in the area referred to as the "Golf Course, to the north of the existing facilities. This area has an underground permanent irrigation system, and the near - surface soil in this area is moist to wet most of the year Deeper stripping may be required here to remove soft or wet, muddy areas. 4.2.2 Sub. u� riac - As noted previously, the bulk of the existing site facilities are underlain by about five to 15 feet of sandy silt fill, presumably emplaced during original construction, The fills appeared to consist of relatively well-compacted (stiff to very stiff to medium dense), reworked native soil, Although it may exist In places, our subsurface explorations encountered no residual topsoil below the fill, Some organic debris was noted at the surface near boring C -3, and traces of organics could be observed in C -3 samples several feet deep. The netive soils consist of to medium dense to dense, interbedded fine to medium - ,,aired sand and silts with occasional layers of gravelly sand, The sands are typically more silty near the ground surface (or just below the fill) and grade. cleaner with depth, Any resulting settlements due to new filling or application of foundation doads should be rapid and uniform, L2I We only encountered free groundwater in C•2 at 35 feet below existing grade, However, several of our previous onosite borings had perched water irr the sand layers wl' "`` ensiate Into a seasonal groundwater levels 1 lezorneters were installed In C.4 and C -5, oven though no water was observed during drilling, Considering past experience with deep excavation on this site we expect that during extremely Wet winters the groundwater may rise to within a few feet of existing grade, and during the driest months It may drop LEGIBILITY STRIP 1 8 HDR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0.5056 Page 4 below 20 feet. As discussed above, the "Golf Course" area is heavily irrigated during the summer months and it is likely that this source of water contributes to that found as perched subsurface water in or above above silty layers. Excavation and construction within groundwater are discussed later in this report. 5,(101161,,_ MOlV_AMENDATION$ 5.1 Site Pteggration We have provided recommendations for both wet weather and dry weather construction. Because the near surface soils consist of moisture - sensitive silts, if possible, it is recommended that the site be prepared during relatively dry weather. let1 Site Stripping Prior to beginning construction, all areas of the site that will receive building or pavement elements should be stripped of topsoil, roots, and any non- engineered surface fill Minimum stripping depths may range from six - inches in areas of existing facilities, to one and one -half to two feet or more in the "Golf Course" area in order to remove any non- engineered fills and thick topsoil Existing fills, as discussed in Section 4,2,2, consist of generally good quality material, and do not appear to be underlain by topsoil, but may contain occasional debrief. After stripping, we recommend that the resulting exposed surface be observed by a representative from our office, and any areas of soft soil or unsuitable fill should be overexcavated. 5.1.2 DrY We her C�nstriaction = Seasonal wetting, drying, freezing, and thawing can substantially loosen the near- surface soils, After stripping and excavating to final grades, but before any new fill is installed, we recommend that all building, pavement and till areas be scarified to a depth of at least eight inches. The scarified soil should be aerated as necessary and then compacted to at least 92% relative compaction (AASHTO T =1 do). We recommend that we be retained to observe this operation, Even during dry weather it is possible that some areas of the subgrade will become soft or will pump, particularly in cut areas. Soft or wet areas that cannot be effectively dried and compacted should be prepared in accordance with Section 6.1 ,30 Wet Weather Construct on, •3 W.. e8thiir Haiattic - During wet weather, When adequate moisture control cannot be obtained or in areas softened by prolonged standing water or seeping groundwater, a granular working blanket may 1 be installed to support construction equipment and provide a firm base on which to place subsequent fills, floor slabs and pavements. Commonly the working blanket consists of a bank run gravel or pit run quarry t\ HOR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0 -5055 Page 5 rock (six inch to eight inch maximum size with no more than 5% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve). We recommend that we be consulted to approve the material before installation. The working blanket should be installed on a stripped subgrade in a single lift with trucks end - dumping off an advancing pad of granular fill It should be possible to strip the site with the careful operation of crawler - mounted equipment. However, during prolonged wet weather, operation of this type of equipment may cause excessive subgrade disturbance and final stripping may have to be accomplished with a large backhoe or similar equipment, working from the advancing pad of fill. After installation, the working blanket should be compacted by a minimum of four complete passes with a moderately heavy steel drum or grid roller, The working blanket must provide a firm base for subsequent fill installation and compaction, it has been our experience that 12 to 18 inches of working pad is normally required, depending on the gradation and angularity of the working pad material, This assumes that the material is placed on a relatively undisturbed subgrade in accordance with the preceding recommendations, and that it is not subjected to frequent heavy construction traffics A very conscientious contractor may be able to prepare the site with track - mounted equipment without resulting in major subgrade disturbance. However, since it will not be possible to scarify and compact the surface during wet weather, and since much of the area consists of old fills, we nevertheless recommend a minimum 12 inch granular working pad be installed in all areas where scarification and compaction is not accomplished, if settlement or cracking is a concern, including floor slab area', 5,2 Proof-roIlino F=ollowing subgrade preparation and prior to fill placement or base course installation, we recommend that the subgrade be proof -rolled with a fully- loaded 10 to 12 yard dump truck, This pertains to all pavement and fill areas Any areas that pump, weave or appear soft and muddy should be scarified and dried or overexcavated and backfilled with compacted granular fill, If a sfghificaht len mh of time passes between completion of fill placement and corNmencetnent of construction operations, or if significant traffic has been routed across the site, we recommend that the site be similarly proof - rolled again before final placement of base rock or asphalt, , A:04 • . # 1 1 1 • HDR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990. 0-5056 Page 6 5.3 Fills Any fills on this project should be installed on a subgrade that has been prepared In accordance with the recommendations in the previous sections of this report. Fills should be installed in horizontal lifts not exceeding about eight inches in thickness, and should be compacted to at least 92% relative compaction (AASHTO T-180) for native soils, and 95% relative compaction for imported granular materials and the upper eight inches of pavement subgrade. This criteria may be reduced to 85% in landscaping or planter areas. During dry weather, structural fills may consist of virtually any relatively well-graded soil that is free c debris and organic matter and that can be compacted to the preceding specifications. The non-organic existing fills encountered at this site (excluding topsoil) would generally be adequate for reuse as compacted fill. If wood, debris or topsoil are encountered they should be removed prior to filling. Native silty sands and sands would also make adequate dry weather fill. In order to achieve adequate compaction during wet weather, we recommend that fills consist of well-graded granular soils (sand or sand and gravel) that do not contain more than 5% material by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. In addition, It Is usually desirable to limit this material to a maximum six to eight inches in diameter for future ease in the installation of utilities. jjAreaieftiements The native soils at this site (underlying the existing engineered fill areas) are generally medium dense to dense in consistency and exhibit low to moderate compressibility, Settlements below moderately loaded structures (net areal pressure of 500 psf) or below fills less that five feet in thickness should not exceed one- half inch, and settlements should occur fairly rapidly, Net areal pressure of a facility is the total weight of a facility, divided by the aera of its footprint, and reduced by the weight of the soil excevated to prepare the .4# site for the facility, if fills thicker than about five feet above existing grades are proposed, or If net areal pressures will exceed 500 psf, we should be contacted for additional recommendations, For a 'previous phase of this project we reCOMMended that foundations be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 2500 psf, Subsequently we were asked if this pressure is aultratonseNative“, Allowable foundation loads depend on many fattots, including the footing embedment and the sell condition below the footingi Afthis site, footing eMbedmentt may vary MO two feet to 20 feet, FOotleigS may bear on existing fills, new engineered fib, native silts Or native sands, For this wide variety of conditions It IS possible that HEM Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0 -5056 Page 7 individual footings could be designed for pressures ranging from 2,500 psf to over 5,000 psf or more, depending on specific conditions at the footing location. Because of the wide range of soli conditions that are likely to be encountered, we recommend that, for lightly loaded structures, foundations be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 2500 psf, This applies to foundations that are a minimum of 12 inches wide and 18 inches below finished grade, and be founded on firm soil. These pressures apply to dead plus frequent live load and may be increased by one -third for wind or seismic loading conditions. For conventional construction (wall loads less than 5,000 pounds per lineal foot (pif) and column loads less than 100 kips), settlements should be less than one inch, The factor for resistance against sliding in the native soils is 0.4: a passive pressure of 200 pcf equivalent fluid (including a factor of safety) can also be used to compute resistance to sliding, if the building loads are substantially higher than those noted, we should be contacted for additional recommendations, If there are specific areas where higher bearing pressures could result in substantial savings, we would be happy to review these areas on a case -by -case basis. If footings of the proposed facilities are to be placed behind retaining wails closer than indicated in the figure below, we should be contacted for further design recommendations, ye# reo ;e etair ng 1Nalie This section pertains to walls that meet the following criteria: • 1 Walls will be installed by sloping excavation sides and backfiiling in accordance with Section 5,6+3, Adequate subsurface drainage will be provided behind walls in accordance with Section &s.4.; or proposed below grade walls should be built as structurally reinforced boxes to resist hydrostatic uplift. 0-5056 Page 8 5 6,1 Restrained Walls - Restrained walls are any wails that are prevented from rotation during backfiliing, Most buried basement walls or foundation walls are restrained by a floor slab or roof and fall into the category of restrained walls. We recommend that restrained walls be designed for the pressures shown below. Sackfiil Slope Equivalent Fluid Pressure iaorizn IVertica Level 40 3H IV 60 2H :IV 100 These pressures represent our best estimates of actual pressures that may develop and do not contain a factor of safety. These pressures are assumed to act horizontally (normal to the wail). This is based on the assumption that friction between the wail and backfill will be prevented by drainage membranes or impervious wail coatings, 5.5.2 iVon-flestreined waifs - Non - restrained wails have no restraint at the top and are free to rotate about their base. Lateral movement at the top may be up to .005 times the wail height, Most cantilever retaining walls fall Into this category, We recommend that non - restrained walls be designed for the pressures shown herein. Backfiil Slope Equivalent Fluid Pressure Qnt,,l Nerticai._19 - Level 30 3H --IV 50 2H,IV 90 These pressures represent our best estimate of actual pressures that may develop and do not contain a factor of safety, If backfill Is in direct contact with the wall, these forces can be assumed to act at a downward inclination of 20° from horizontal, which will increase the wail stability, If friction is prevented by dr inage mem .raves or water proofing membranes, then the forces should be assumed to act horizontally. LEGIBILITY STIP _ N N 1 HDR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0-5056 Page 9 5.6.3 Retaininq_ail F3ackffii - Backfill behind retaining walls should consist of free - draining granular material. To minimize pressures on basement wails, we recommend the use of crushed rock backfill (conforming to OSHD Standard Specification 703.08), Use of other material could Increase wall pressures, Overcornpaction of this fill can greatly increase lateral soil pressures. We recommend that this fill be compacted to between 90% and 92% relative compaction (AASHTO T -180 or ASTM D- 1557), In addition, we recommend that all fill within about five feet of retaining walls, be compacted with lightweight, hand - operated equipment. 5,6.E Retaining Wall Drainage - Although the permanent groundwater table Is located at depth, It is possible that near surface seams of perched water may develop. We recommend that all basement and retaining walls be provided with adequate drainage, All drains should be protected by a filter fabric to preient Internal soil erosion and potential clogging, A typical detail for normally backfiiled walls Is presented on Figure 5.64, We would be happy to work with you in developing alternate details, if desired. All drains should be sloped to drain by gravity or should be collected In a sump and pumped to a storm sewer or other positive outlet. Water from downspouts, and surface water should be independently collected and routed to a storm sewer, This water must not be allowed to enter the subsurface drainage system. :7 ubsurface Drainage As noted previously, winter groundwater levels can get quite high in this area and downward percolating water has a tendency to perch on silt layers, Several of the proposed facilities will be founded significantly below exterior grade, necessitating extensive foundation, under -slab and wall drainage to resist hydrostatic uplift, In general, the foundation and under-slab drains Should consist of a four- or six -Inch perforated pipe packed In drain rock, with a filter fabric envelope around the rock to allow free passage of water without allowing soil to wash in and clog the rock and /or pipe. A nonwoven filter fabric conforming to OSMD specifications would be sufficient for this purpose. We recommend that below -grade walls should be applied with a waterproofing treatment and covered with a drain board product, Similar to Enka -drain or r lira- drain, A typical detail for wall and under -stab drains is attached as Figure 5.6.4, It should be anticipated that during the life of the proposed development, periodic draining and cleaning of the deep basins will be necessary, If the facilities are drained for service at a time when the static groundwater level in the area Is above the bottom of the basins, serious damage may reeuit: We 12 inehe% min, eineh (Almelo Perforated PVC Pipe Filler fabric Fibreteti 150 or Equal Open Graded Crushed Rack l0ine ,1 min lP t i titaTtir' ?i `... & h Manlier J Pereioroted PVC Pipe Filler Nixie libretti 150 Cr Eve' Open Graded trained Rock TYPICAL DRAIN DETAILS FIGURE 5.6.4 Gc fe�ch:�ir�l e'o /Lvils 8t73G` e M &riu. • 8,-is „� fe'sierlrirt, dr y *on 97005 1 r 1 MDR Engineering, Inc. January 15, 1990 0-5056 Page 10 recommend that prior to draining the deeper basins, it should be determined that the static groundwater level Is below that of the bottom of the basins. Permanent Piezometers could be installed near the deeper basins if this is a concern !1 =loot �l, b The proposed floor slab in the Chemical Peed building and possibly others may be subject to heavy floor loads, and may well be trafficked by fork -lift trucks. We would be happy to assist in the design of an appropriate floor slab section If provided with loading details. As a minimum we recommend that floor slab areas be compacted in accordance with Section 5.1.3. In addition we recommend installing a minimum of six inches of compacted (95 %, AASHTO T-130) crushed rock below floor slab areas: If heavy floor loads are anticipated, 12 inches of crushed rock may be necessary. To minimize potential offsets at joints, it is usually desirable that all joints be either keyed or doweled. 5.9 'ie lo®rar eliooe f and U4liitiee The native soils r` his site can stand at near vertical slopes for some period of time, but may collapse suddenly and wit. tout warning, especially if seepage Is present. Also, excavations below the water table can create a quicksand condition. For these reasons we recommend that any slope greater than four feet in height be shored, or sloped at least 1H :1V. if seepage is present, flatter slopes may be necessary. If any excavations are made below the water table, the contractor should be prepared for dewatering4 Both the shoring system and dewatering system should be contractor- designed items. We understand that foundation and utility installation in the proposed filter area, and possibly elsewhere on- site, will be in the range of 25 top feet in depth, Review of provided as -built drawings Indicates that the existing Nor2 Secondary Chemical Clarifier foundation is at elevation 134: the existing 48 inch filter effluent pipeline and concrete encasement is founded at elevation 123, r r 1 HOR Engineering, inc. January 15, 1990 0 -5056 Page 11 If the proposed filtration system features a similar 48 inch encased filter effluent pipeline at an elevation at or below that of the existing effluent pipeline, a slope of approximately 1 H :1 V will result between existing foundation elements and the excavation for the effluent pipeline and concrete encasement as shown below, If the slope from the bottom of the existing No.2 Secondary Chemical Clarifier foundation to the bottom of the encased pipeline exceeds 1H:1V, or if seepage or th- static water table is above elevation 123 in this area, we recommend that the existing footing along the proposed installation be underpinned, We should be contacted for further recommendations pertaining to shoring and underpinning if it appears necessary, Figure 5.9 Exterior Grade ELISE DIVING FOUNDATION TEMPORARY SLOPE 1 El. *% 12 '�`' �'` I ` `� 16 " Filler Eftiuimnt Pipeline Ail of our explorations were advanced with a light weight auger type drill rig, No significant obstructions were encountered in any of our explorations (depths up to 36,5 feet), however, boring 0-4 contained cobble sized rocks that became dislodged from the sidewall and partially filled the borehole, As discussed in Section 4,2,3, piezometers were installed in borings designated C-4 and Cry, to 20 feet and 26 feet respectively, Although no groundwater was noted at the time of drilling, the pielometers can be monitored throughout the winter to provide additional water level information, lot FU: Ufl _ Eo' EcHNICAL SEA yi S The recommendations contained in this report are based on inforrnatiori gathered during our field and laboratory study, and on design information provided by HDR Engineering, Ind, We have not yet received a final copy of the plans for this project, We recommend that we be provided an opportunity to review the final VIIi1111111111111r, plans and specifications when they become available. This will allow us to determine whether any change in concept may have affected the validity of our recommendations, and whether our recommendations have been correctly interpreted. In order to correlate preliminary soil data with the actual soil conditions encountered during construction and to check for construction conformance to our report, we also recorymend that we be retained for construction observation of stripping, grading, compaction, foundation excavations and other soils related portions of this project, Respectfully submitted, RITTENHOUSE.ZEMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Terry N. Craven, P.E. '144-SE Z4 046 *Wow WAS, 6141 =II LIGIdfrert\ inliNeitenlIMMNINI1 O. • a / APPROXIMATE BORING DURHAM AWWTP PHASE II-A LOCATION Fon TH1s sTtioY, / APPROXIMATE EORING ® ei3 A00110 XIMAit BORING. LOOAT1ON POR OnEVIOUS $TUDY: Ety AVM AS0C1ATES, ISC, LIZA .0, 1,,....±L0_,...60... RITTEN11011StaZEUAN & Oootechtileal twat:Mini* bate t4Oil iiitgo 800&0 cietus Dritt ---- -- Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Otittiti Mt00.1 waeggilhal" tdale APPROX.,' ie : 200` 4. lift 64,14141 Ata. 1/4 \ I 14 6 LIGIdfrert\ inliNeitenlIMMNINI1 O. • a / APPROXIMATE BORING DURHAM AWWTP PHASE II-A LOCATION Fon TH1s sTtioY, / APPROXIMATE EORING ® ei3 A00110 XIMAit BORING. LOOAT1ON POR OnEVIOUS $TUDY: Ety AVM AS0C1ATES, ISC, LIZA .0, 1,,....±L0_,...60... RITTEN11011StaZEUAN & Oootechtileal twat:Mini* bate t4Oil iiitgo 800&0 cietus Dritt ---- -- Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Otittiti Mt00.1 waeggilhal" tdale APPROX.,' ie : 200` S NUA PENETRATION RESISTANCE A, Blows per foot(140 lb. harnmer/3 As 10 20 30 40 Medium Stiff, moist medium brown Topsoil grading to medium stiff to stiff, moist to damp, medium brown, Silt to sandy Silt, fill, 44401004...• • ....:••••41400.000 •0444.010.44401.40 .40,404.01,40,40 4.,1.4.0.4.44104444.4 Stiff, damp, medium brown, fine sandy Silt to silty fine-grained Sand, fill, -Grading to Sand. Stiff to med. dense, damp to moist, medium brown sandy Silt to silty Fine-grained Sand, Compacted Fill, Dense Lo hard, damp, medium brown to gray brown, Sand to sandy gravelly Silt in layers. Medium dense, damp, medium brown to gray brown, silty, fine-grained Sand layered with gravelly, silty Sand. / .1110.:r11 .1 0110. 14100 01 it, 0 4 1 4.1401 tif 44 ...t.4.• 604 40; • 04104110.4 0 4 0 .1'404+4 11 0 414 044,4464 44 a • .. . . '.. • I I I I I 1 • 4414+4 4 fl •I 4 .444.1.4 .... ••• .1.44 i••• l• • "it,. oat: 41.46,14.1 I. 114614. .“1,. . a iil .4..4..1.... 1.1%.1.1.41/4 Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown, very coarse grained Sand to fine pebble Gravel layered sandy Silt, 30 Bottom of borehole at 30,5 feet. 014.01 .41. OM,MIMIMS11,41210 ■11011110.1004,14 11.1111V+ 0.1101t.. 0110.4.1....111{ .11.0 *IV 0,04 ...t ••11 01.4 . . • ■• • •• . 404 4.44.••••••44.4■441•4 4.41r 0 41 0:04 00 t4 .1 41i.44 0404,0 '1.1.040. • .4 oft 014 44i44, •44i i1•14 444 44 6.0 40000 14. 0 It 414,14 I I, 4.411.44.; irit 04,441. 4. 4,0.44 04444 ..• tt tootti.... 1 • .04.4.4 0404 044 I, .44 •100144.14. 444 64 L. '1•••4•14 1 • g.ir ipill ipOori MCIEW2 SOmPier fib. undisturbed einipler 6 it content Sample not ii.triwa L4botatoty/themieti htionietet tp Alittberi Watet kC titttitatioir Stolle lleturil voter toislent -, Misfit limit USA DURHAM ANLICT.P. 0-5056 izz A AITTENHOUsEozeHAN & ASSOC. ceartCHNIcAL CONSULTANTS 8.9110 CiAMIS &'/W Iivitetorati, afit 0005 siioW BORING NO. SOIL DESCRIPTION C-2 E1.1 +/- 140 Medium Stiff, moist medium brown Topsoil Transition to stiff med. brown Silt, some tree roots at 2,5 feet, grading to gravelly sandy Silt at 3.5 feet. Stiff to very stiff, damp, medium reddish brown Silt, Fill. Stiff to medt dense. damp, medium brown sandy Silt layered with silty fine- grained Sand, Compacted Fill. Stiff to medium dense, damp, medium brown to gray brown, sandy Silt to silty fine grained Sand, layered with cleaner Sand. Dense, damp, medium brown to gray brown, silty Sand to silty fine grained gravel. Medium dense► damp. medium gray brown, silty gravelly Sand, layered with silty Sand. Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown, silty gravelly Sand, layered with silty Sand. Groundwater at 35 feet. Bottom of borehole at 36.5 feet. 40 a. I S N'AR' PENETRATION RESISTANCE ® Blows per loot(140 Ib. hammer /3 10 20 30 40 .0.44 11 44:44.; 444.041.. 4.10 444..0 44 .4.4, . 00.410.1.0.4.0. h 1441 1 { r • .. 4040 i . .. .04,.0.... s.0.:. Of 1144 .1.t..r.. 4444 . .. • 1«. 40441. •.. 04 . • «.f..y.. sir,.. •.♦ :.Y r... r • 4w. 00. 44.40 0.. 4,..46....E .. .10100 :101•11. .14.141..{.00: 00 404•40.}0:4::4.,40 040.14 0 0.,.l.it. 4 s„ 1 4 lilt 414401110.4440/066 410010461.466•111 .01600,60...t.04446. 4111,110010 O.Ify 4.4.014 44.044 41. • .41.. •4440 .... 16.0.1. 1:4. }. r 0 Y..04i. Y 1 1 r.. I ; . 44.40000.0110 444104t0 14010:.44.044:.. . ..10.4.0.•.. . 1.....40... 04:4.L.. 4441•. 404•4 .. • ♦.»../.... ..',40.'4 :11 ,. .44.4.i10le... .....04..0 . O 4.:. 0 .::.. , 0. .44 440. 14044 ..400..:., 10..101 04.44.010 4604. 4.0.10 iO4.444 I ..............., 0040.:4.4..4,0 ....1404:4.4.« y»! 110. : : •/ •f• ♦1• 1 -1 A1.14• 11.1 /4./ 4.1. . 1 1 . 014.04144:0441,. 04404 041. 40400 1 .,., l t4 A. t -4444 �. {MIT Ill ►4 .�.0 ,1 /..14,. «.1. .0410.0i104:400 . 4:0. 4.104 j .114.10+ Yi.14{04 i i f{ , •0 00 44 , 44. 1.. 11 44 1� 1,1... 44. I 40 01.440•0444044. .1.14140t 44 4100 i 0.0..1.4:01... 44 4.if1;44.14. .•11. •∎ 1w.• 14 r i 'tot.* j..i. I 1 1 1 1 'IP'�"S' 1 �... . 0...44.....0 00..0441440 •nY .f. 44:44, 41 4.04{4+04.1' 4441EIEE!E ..,...0..1..01 404 1044.4.1.1r 1{.4 ..�i..,•. .�p, ., .. ..1...}.•. ...1.4.iw144.1•4 ,:M. 1 ...T... .t. . 1 ! I 1 •44•14.4.,0 ..r •.. I.1r 40._4 :4414•. }01414040, y.. 11.0 4.0 µ10:.01I •.014 •.. W,f.11 4 4...1} 144•4 1 .....41 1 .. .10.140 .0 :44 tioa ..404. ...1.:r./..�A6 01, •44.14.6.014464 0.601:..1.;0..04 r t t t t 40 ,. . .04.01404.044. 040 -t .1101+. u40 �. 11.140 ..�. .1.: _l �.t 40.4 X41 l014..:.r. ..41.0II.4Lwy:. 01..1 14, 1..1.40 t : , 0 1 } T404W1•10. 010 N. r, 0.41 4,00 • 044 0: }4_.'010 041.410401.401. 0 •4!4.�4�1 »llt 01.p. oi.fi•w1.j....�01 ..4.1« 0.4 .T«. • 1... ..t..w M. 144:0 ,01 40 ..04•...4.,.1. ::1. 0414010 of 1.4.t. } t of. 44: •1.44:.r:0 Ta. 0101t: 444 4 .100 440•44.104 ,�.. .. 1,, Y1 44 41 , U. L....•■4 11+.. 1011.1.001100 ..L 4041:. 0 4... r1 . + ir i..t 14 1 v.. 14.0. .w}.. 1444} ..4• .. ... 0.1 4444} .. t , ,F t ./........1.4. .2.. . O,..1.f.I1Y •4001.4.11.1.4 .46.14664:1. 404444 !. }... ! r.w4.4...r... 144. ,. t 41 . .444:4 ... 444 4.. -}.. 1 4...L t 444 4 .iii.toloo vol. t4w 64.. t,t.. t ft it 14410 0041444 00140 0.1.04.140103 0010 1 1.0.01. t, t t It c 1...4.1 i.w ...}w } w «..., , f .... i, .. },.. 1 441 .1.t j. L j •. 1} ;,1 01-0-104.4. {{0.10 1;44 440104144 1 1..;i+ u:,.0i. 641.4►4 044441 011{.1104 , 141444.. 4,4,.,.. t...,.. 1 -.. I,. 1...t ,.t.... Nr..i0 11410• i�.. 1. } 1 1 ./. • .1 .0•..1x.4. 4111t 1. .i••« t t.. S 0� O.D, split Spoon iitimpler ,a" 01q.,undisturbed sampler "Crab tinmdle Interval e lAbarstery; /chemical snaly+aia 2 40443001 ter lip LEXF11,0 p Sampler pushed It moisture content Sam lc not resovcr ' 1letrr level lfuct ialion Stall* aster le el 4•• Liquid limit Atterbelt limiLi: Natural v6ter cement flexile limit • .}ir0l...i4Y{. i r 1141.1.. 4 :i 111 4 f1::: 7.:•.. .4W.{NYl.{..4i, i lwr...y4,..,N� � USA DURHAM Al 111.T:P 0-5056 Rz A idIOEOTE HNICAL CONSUTANTS eo i S+ lid CIORt i timfre (S• dil massalatieasisitheity 11 WOMMEMEIMMINVIsillifflairds BORING NO. S AN 0 PENETRATION RESISTANCE A Blows per foo1(140 ib, 10 20 30 ...sartnivammatinamsmat Medium Stiff moisl medium brown Topsoil 1 1 1 1 . I 4444460010 04104 44444:0414444.9-4414,.. • •■•004416;414 40404010444:6440404 Stiff damp, medium rusty brown, sandy clayey Silt, Variable fill with trace organics. 64.1•44.10404460 4 46.404144.1.04 4. harnmer/3 40 0046 400 4 44661 if 64444 4•44. Stiff to med, dense, damp, medium brown sandy Silt. layered with silty fine-grained Sand, Compacted Fill, Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown, medium grained Sand, layered with fine- grained , gravelly Sand. Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown, fine-grained gravelly Sand layered with stiff, med, brown sandy Silt, Medium dense to stiff, damp, medium gray brown silty Sand lavered with Silt Bottom of borehole at 26.5 feet ▪ ..,141 1 , 4 , 34 40.4 I 4444•4 014. 06 44.6•04 904414044404 40;6444•4404.10444• t 6 I 4044 4.410 04 614•414401044646.4 444 4601 0444 440,100444 44:04410. 4060 4% 01. .41444440•4444104 ' • • 4041 0 66.01 46446.44764441444!444 *"t,"' 1400 10100 464444.440444 4.66 4444 44 11460 44;4,: • '00, 0 _ 44 4440441404 ,00, 44 •46■4 4114,414.411441.4.4 41444.4,1 4.4 •641441414 Jt 41.4. L4,4 46 4: MU.. 144111 4L4i4i. . 01. 411•411. j. .j. I. .j. 1 41.40.4h4406,440 44,440,44..440•14 i 1 : . .,_+41... .,..i. • ..4..1..1.. ...r .....,.. ....i.... 4104410101 14+0 0, ,40,400 441.14641444106,t 44 II. II il lir • 4444441144944 • 0 41•4440.6147 101404 44446464414i lo • 4.644141146 44410446444 .104 444 444 04111.44144 4441441144444 1. II , I 1 I I I 1 I ■0464 404 .4 4 .4400014 00.0 4.44141016:44440464 0444 • 11;4 4 •64414441.404 0440 144;044444416041044 0444.4.4644•44 0.44 t• 4.0104 464646441,404•406.104 400404 of 444,4444444441i446 44444 41441 I 6444.•44 1444i041 014464 10,141411404 14 40•641 40444141 I • 404. t440•4 1464.1044600•04 of+4001.40+04 .114 1,140.164610 4101 46.0 44 4444 44.44 14 0404444 44444 144464.4 4444 44. 64 .46 4:4.4 .***4 14446•441444* 446t46 144461044164 ;$444 :00:6 04446 41+40414401044410 4.4+ ;■••■ to 4406 044444114461004441664 .44* 660:014 • 1•44 41404 64 0. 16644 4•••••••••••••••••4 t I I 06•4444601,4 6444 *4 44 j .4j4 4.444. 4•44.4.1.44. 6114 44141 41440 ;6 461444 04146 4446.44 ie. 044644 44 to 4444 440:444;404404.4 040 rt4 0 10 41n .■44444460•441414441144 „10414 41444, 0444+0 44740. 4414044 6,44 4.4 46 1 itin 2.0r iplii *XXI Oler 1.46(-64° 0.b. undisturbed sampler Crib torn* interval Ubordiorthheinierii Pie:cinder iip Mabel% Witt p temple', pushed 6, It • timpli tectricred tater level nittitiillith titk *Met led ID A RITTENNOUSE-ZENAN & ASSOC. " " CEOTeCHNicAL CONSULTANTS 8050 S.W. COMAS d/Nde 13tAfreRTON, 97oo5 (50J) $40,410, 1 1 • SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NO. C--4 El. 150 wasimmoompossmovilmormines■ • . 8" Asphalt, gravelly silt. Stiff to med. dense, damp, medium brown sandy Silt layered with silty fine-grained Sand, Compacted Fill. 15 Trace to some gravels Stiff, darnp, medium brown sandy Sill to silty Sand in layers, some large pebble to cobble sized gravels, Fill, 20,m 1111 Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown, fine-grained gravelly Sand layered with stiff, med. brown sandy Sill to silty Sand, Drilled to 30 feet, hole sloughed to 20 feet when auger was withdrawn, Larger pebbles and cobbles fell down hole from 12-15 ft, si:pm Bottom of borehole at 30 feet 1.111 40 ... , • , S AWARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE E A mows per fbot(140 lb. hammer/3 10 20 30 40 40140,44. • .4.44.4114. .... 44 .1:”.• • • . • • 441 000.. 4400140• , $ .000.0.000.40. i 100410 , ■ . .... .4•44 44.444.4.4 3.14 4• 11.44.14110.11 411. • Mr .10.1. 1. .114141f.i.41•14 4 41.1 4011.40 44. 1.4.40i. 4.... [1,... •444.444,441444.f. '..41.044.4ii t 41,44.14411.1.1.1 41444.11.1.414114. t 1444.4 4.4 44. 146144.1.4414 44.. 444. 11..1.4. I I j • 1 ow ....ill.... 1 1 • • 0., .4.. ..1.41.1.11 .11.4.1.41411 .1.1.1i 1.1141.444.1. 4.14 4. :et+. 44444.11.41141.4.44. 4.1411 1111...■ 414.40144i44114. 1..14144 14144 4411.44 oh+. .1.. I...1W 040 4.0 4.. 01040 •4 4. 64. 011±71.:110 .100.10-i4.: I .1.4411. 4% 41 .4410144.6...f. .14 I. .0 • 4.41.4444.44444;.444 • 4441..i.441 111 141.41. i4 0.11.401.1414.11.1 .1 t 444 01. .4. We: .• .4" .1 0 • 444. ,4.4.41 .41. 4. 4441.• WI. 441014.0 4. 4144144.4 10140 • 0.0 10+140- .q.1041 .00. 0.44.4.10.4404.0 01044 .4.44.44 .44 LEGE611:1 Zo' an. :Olt *on sampler p Sampler pushed Z rnalsturt eintent undisituttied Umpkr Grab airriptt Spit reetiverd Liboratiory/thernitei Water feed litleitiatiOn llquid Wit Mitchell IMA: `' 'Natural utter kiiiied SZ"e" stolid inlet level 3501155MENEVERISI • 1 4air. ai 44tr 46.41.4.4 4444 4.4I 4.4.44.44L.F. 1 : ..44 444..4 444 4.11440144.14. 444.4 4. .41i. .44.44.444. 14. .404 .... ■ 1 . 14.4.44....... ..........e. ..1.4.3.... r•i0.1. ii,63. t ' I ..4.411.. it 4.44 ..1..i.4.4.644. ...1,...L...L.L. ..1,,,..'i.,..:,..i.. .44.14 14 Iker ........ W... , . „ USA DURHAM A.W,W.ToP, 0-5056 vor7 A RI TTENHOLISE'ZEMAN & ASSOC. 11' " GeOTECHNICAL CONsULYANTs 8050 S. W. ORROS Ornir BeAPERIN, OR. .0705 0441,,,,wwwwimmummumay=-Zilniimemm, • to ND ,R► PENETRATION RESISTANCE ,® Eloise per foot(140 lb. horrtmer /3 10 20 30 40 •. 4.... :.a,1 .1.4..!..,.1. ...010..1..., . . 11. • Stiff, damp, medium rusty brown Silt to sandy Silt layered with silty fine - grained Sand, Compacted Fillf' • ..1:...i1Na:. `tedium dense, damp, medium brown silty fine- grained Sand, Compacted Fill: Medium dense, damp, medium brown, silty, fine - grained sand to sand: ..b W.1.11 , - b1.1• :.1. »0f1 :«,01 :1..•1.1.::11 », •.•1_r.•blb .1.._ 010..» 0110_:.1:L1.11ON /NN .�. � :�1� 1 i I .11113116 to.. 1.441.1•111.60 Dense damp, medium gray brown medium- grained Sand, ..1,..1 .1410, ....,1...464.0 .11»11. 1.10 +111 •.. 1. 1111tl:1» Bottom of borehole at 2615 feet :1..11111i0 1i:+. •. _ .i... . f1�1.1 :10111..1.1. 1o;'.∎ 1 41 .4106 .1 . .::.:110111,.. ..... f f...!.1. I 1 6. 1 .1 .1.4. :1.1. +11. 1f1aa«l1 •11...111. 1LE •r♦ j i 1004 1 `f 4NIwMIS1» 41.1 Y 0 i ,1 1 i. i�i.+1H4 .cJ.N11 »1.11.+ 11:1.rL..: N :1a •.111..11.....1.0 0000 _. ..rdait . 0 000, 0000 Z the 010, hill spoon eampleN LECIE" p Sampler pushed 11 3.0"0,b. undisturbed 'sampler it moisture content C crab Sample interval $ Sample not recoecred �1�ILaboratory /cbcmicai '.a;1 Water leifel IlucdGetion analysis 1Z ;title water Wei Milometer Illi 1_,,•.,,_„11 liquid 'knit Atierttrd liniila; Natural water t i tent ._. _ Plaaticiimi( RITTENIi0USE'ZEI AN & ASSOc GEOiECNNICAL d6NSULTANtS 0450 5. W. Ci/ rn.'s OR/14- 6tAtit ,RreW. OR 97005 (sd;Xj �'Id -9114 40 SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NO. C-6 EL. 4. 159 Soft, moist, (Irk brown Topsoil. 4...414 0.1.40.404.4.1 44444444 .40.44.4444 4444 444..40. • 444444 • 44 O. •••••00. Stiff, damp, medium to dark brown Silt to fine-grained sandy Silt layered with silty Sand, Compacted Fill. Nledium dense, damp, medium brown to gray brown silty Sand to Sand, Compacted Fill, Medium dense, damp, medium brown, fine to medium grained sand layered with silty Sand. Medium dense, damp, medium gray brown coarse-grained sand layered with silty Sand, Bottom of borehole at 26.5 feet LEGEND 0.b, pL 60411 *Wet p 3,04 0,b, widialutboit eampitt 8 X tooiatute what Celt mp1e in(,,) # te*ile not tecotiod lebokitOryMitiOlcil kW*, Sitild water toil htionietk 104--1" U• limit Altobot goid MII • t■otoil viler c�Mflt SAN A PENETRATION RESISTANCE A Blows per too* 40 lb. hommer/3 10 20 30 40 4444 • 4 0 4. ••••• 4 s a 66. 4.6 66.61 4. ....• 4. '44 4.4 0 • a. 6'6..6;6 6.66.14 • .4.. 66 .1 O.. •16 44.1664, 664. • 6. 6. ,,, 44.11.44 661 6.4 44. 4.44.1.44 .14•4 al 1 . 166.4.1.11661.4 6.1.44,66.{.6 otio 41 41.16 4.4 ..16.6.16 14.44 .64. 6 4.414 466 lo 614 i0+ 44. 4.4 1.4 at ao . .11.4.144 41.1 {144644 44.6 14,1114 6,4 44 ■ 666. 4.1.1. 6 166 . 611 .44 4.6.6.61646.■ .41 10. N. ••••14444410f14 414 I 14 . 1410.44.444t 4 4. 44140.. ....1.1444: 44. 4.1414. 4 46.0.44 4444 1...44. ..;614i64144 4. • 4.6 161•4.1 .4.. 414 la. 1 1•44..t 11.4. •41.44 44..1.04 •4144.1111.4i. 484.4444444i441.6a 14.14...4141.4.4 .444141 44 1..41 $ I . • .... 1.4.4. 44.4. afro .41.41011 .... .4144.4.1.4.4.40, 4+11014 ..... 4..• 444.1.14 4.r. 4.1.401. ..l. ........,1.41i. 44+4,..... 44.1.014.444.?...7 .4.4.4..... . ' .. ■ I t 1 4 t t . 44.40.41..L.444. 4-1•441/0.1. 10 041 4.)1•14 11. .41.41. •..1.4..14.4. 16 614 •4444.4 i•04. • .44.4 4.1.644,44 44.444.4,414 .61. 4.6446 ..i..1,4.444.44.4 USA DURHAM AIN,TY: .0-5056 ip A RITTENOWSE,ZENAN & AMC, 4-14-1 dayrEdHNIcAL CONSULTANTS 8051; cyOrnis °RIVE stAkERroat 970,5 (50),) eid-s/I/ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 sm. ••••• .173 • • :a = BORING NO. SOIL DESCRIPTION C77 EL. +/- 164 Soft, moist, dark brown Topsoil and silt, ....ma .44 64. 0 6.44.4.0.4 ...... .....11.1114.04■60.4 0.06 4.4■41.1 Medium stiff, damp, medium to dark brown Silt to sandy Silt layered with silty Sand, Compacted Fill, Loose to medium dense, damp, medium gray brown silty Sand layered with sandy Silt. Compacted Fill, ...I 0 0.... I. ■ ..0 .0: ....I.. .0 ... . 4. 44.44.4.0 Medium dense, damp to moist, medium gray brown, medium to coarse grained Sand to silty Sand. Bottom of borehole at 21,5 feet 40 • ••' AN•ARk PENETRATION RESISTANCE , 1316ws pet foot(140 lb, hammer/3 10 20 30 40 4400 114.0.1 0.40 46 4 41 a aer 1. 4 14.14146,14• .....a. .41140 11. .4041014k. 6 4. 611ii. 6.4 .14. al.. 016 144f 0 04.10. 011.0 14.0;4. •64. 6 1 1 .•16.41.4 . 7 ., 1.. .4,,. 44464.1.: 4.1.4 1014•1141.144 1 1 1 .4.4.4i.644.406 1 .444.■ 44,646 .4 441..1. . 4.111644.40144. . U. • ..4.1.4 $ 1 2,04 ot, toot boo sampler 246EN° p 0,1141,fitfitititliid • Gilt) Semple Interval lAboretory/chemleal aniy Pieionietti. tip Ligniti limit Attertieit Mita: Situral *Mee content PIO* tImil tindOlitit trititient Sample not recnvertsi Watet level tlUettlatIon Static water level USA DURHAM AIN,T,P, .0-5056. li ,7 A TrEiiii1OUgE-zE1AM & ASSOC. cEotEcHNIcAL coNsULtANTs 8050 s.H &PREIS Ot/t 861frefOTON, die .97005 (I11)) • • SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NUMBER B-3 Asphalt baserock Very stiff to stiff, damp, medium brown sandy silt and gravel. (fill) STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE A 111 *MP plpr 1444040 n. b,emere/• drop) 10 20 00 ... ..40 ..� .ii. •4i••4 .1•i41.• •.i..,.+'1...41•i •1..p. .1,..1..,.1.. 1 1 . 1 11 . 1. .. 1 r • 1 1 1 �N •. w.••.,.w1 •.1 /• .r•••.1r 1 1 1... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • �•Y4. •01.1.4 •�•x •tell••••:/. • 11.•1•1•1• ..1.4L1 iii. `•.i. ••;• ..4.4.. .w,w;..�..1 .1..i4�i•1.• ..ir..1,w• 1 ;•♦ .1..Fii. p. 1 / 1 b. Medium dense, damp, medium brown clean said with layers of sandy silt. i •1 1 1 Grades to coarse grained sand and fine gravels, Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feet. 44;•+04•44• i,i 0 I:1 ; .. . / i. 0..+004:14 i46 • :41••••0 . 1 11 4•;011 1 1 ••/.. 4 14; ,• •••:•••••••••; . •• •• • • •• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 1 • n. • • . • . • , SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NUMBER B- 4 Loose to medium dense, damp, medium brown sand, silty sand. and layers of sandy silt. Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feet. 4o `:•"••;`, „,* LtGtNb tee O. inttist Apserii ii: toir itosatitiviped painspiss. 3.6* i.D. thebersai Ottgale i.D. task twinalit d drat, *mart/ Liliserotoribetbilatotli P 6 % tti 06*i lei isgaioli40 4900 UP iviot • ; 1: STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE A mg. ptip reoloo ibiliEnter/3r drop) 1V O iO 40 • • • • a l o•- eli400* ` .:••l4•411 • t•eto• .1.441./s6 s tt. • • • • ..4" , it.. • • 6 • tls14.•o1p...411• :rt.: .... •+Io: .o+pIt 11 4t .*44*; . v.4lt: •1.4 4 •.4•.• . vt. v, 1t 6•.1o: ..•••o: /1• v•1* 1 • 1 1 6 1461444. •01•1111•4•63•• .i. - i..1.4...i.i..i.i........H.+. .4.44.4. • 1 • 1 •■••••?*.0.•• : I : . 140414•46 4•4...1.4.. toto,•44.o....4.. 401111 4101 •••.•01110•• 116.0* evVlavol•• . : . : : : : 4.1.4,4.4..1.4.4. • ; ; ; 444414. ot4.44.4.4.• 0.66 •111. 000000 . iv. : : . 4.4.4 ; 11111* o Vo o 01•16 1 : : ■ 6.66 1•••••••••• 1.1.1••••••••■•• •to.• •go• •• 1Hro1 sloi•P•41 .11.9.1.• t : t •••••••••••• •01,........• ...,. ••••■ .06. •••••••••••••••• , 111 t totgs• oat • •Toop1tleor oakesio•••••11 1,j_ j ••..,•• •••!•••1 . m • .. 6660 11.1 1 0000 r.1..r• ..r •10.1.116./. • .... 66.0 .1411 ••.•••■• .14•1•4•1e• . • • . .1.1.1••■••1••• to. 1110 otletlet•p• vvlitt•t•ii. .1.4•4..4. vett+ .1.4.1..,....• •1111rvis •401•4.• •14.4.. 1011 •e1. vt....tetviv,t t• ••oettl..446, .•61.1.• •■••i+6+.64.•• : ' : I • .011 at.t.telovt. vttit..1...e.. 14411414Y •4404•4••• . : :11.0:irl o it 11 ;tr.. 4 1 0000 1'1' v'il11.6: .: .:. a 4 • i , . .•4 44.• 44.: • t • 8 V.V. ..1".:-rre +I4 t:H .4:a . 0o•:•• 1 .110 ,,4•,, •+•t o 1 oo : o 1":. 1• ,1•o•4•o • ■ 4 14 . . . . •i.•t1.•.•4olte144•.11.461 .•4, i4 l :41 • • il • •1•••rty •• .i..t..„..t• o . ,..s...• iej•iii+40 1 r/ • ••!..r.r.,,,,, raiort •. .7..1•4.....i..,..1.1., •.; ...4.- ......14..,.• •+' •j•ti•• •4•1•1441.11 .. : 1 1 I 1 1 1 . .....r....r• o 1 oo r"..1., *4444440 444.144 1 ..r.1.• •,... ..r......r..... 44•••••••111146 41444 o i 44.14,4111 14.111•1•44.tio 0.14.ivitt •••■••44•4••••• 6 • • .144. 414.• vtia4tv. t. 4++.1.. SA •4•4•4“ •••i•tiii•inii.00 • • • 68 1011 ...•••••••■•;i• .4414#4.. ' • : :' • • 8 6 1111 4••••••iimi 01404.01.4 iii•le•Loi••■ vie:o•iiir!aili • • • aloe 411.4.4411. vIvIvetve•tv •■■••1441, 41 . I • • • • i • iailp44*.e. '1 ' • it 1.1.• •114! i ilia o a o Oilti , • ! e4*Ae4.:44 •1:ii.laili, Iiiii•leikiii 1,14.1•41.1e• . • , il!..14.1. • 44.44. Iii41.1. LILA. : : iiiiiii4ii •t•41•4•11.3•• 1•464144141 oho:4144:o : 1 : • 64.:••■•••• .14.1441.4•1 14Iiiiiita. 4.1.1.1. 1 • • ; 1 • 44,0■4416.0•1 lill4.1■••••• .: t • . •r•,•4..... iti•j4:1•1011 • ti.444 . ei•:•• ii.ti• . • .. : ••siort•r• elje . . 1 ., .141. 40.1••••;• • ea ' 44•0111 * . , . . .. •./...tr , •1•• •1104,641iijo. •66.6 Iittiti•lii44 olootaio•t•a o_,. i . atitati V16 •1;•••••••0140 ,‘ 4 • as• •.1•44.4.4'.. . ; ;.i 1111111■60. t Itdlibolloi V••• Voiliiiii461•4tV 1110114.1611V .:4444.11iii 4 1 ol4+1•1 11414141141, 1.11.141.1•44• •111444.1.1 V411+0404:111 ieillOi+11116 i+••■•••••11. eatiiileoltio4. .44;■••■••••11■1 64•414111•1116 .:. 's 44.1. 44.:01144,11 4.1O o Hoito • : : •4•44.1■4444 .0•4414i4iii .4141.141.41 4 1 1 ••••■•••■•4 14•11.440•40 .111.1t.:6140.1 ...1144.•••• .1,1. • l i f i v 1 114.114:4•Iil li• ' 1•10.11• diii1404,.... • : t • •4041:144•104 .410eaii•i• 0,1•1 •••■•••••••• 014 11.1. • I 4 6444414e 4.444144 •••• •41414,14,1 •••• 4 1 .41 1r et1 o. 141•41: jvii:iii 4,141.1.1.• 9 a e a .1.• o ii oo aale itt; • eloviti v *._;• 1 _.,. .r.i•rt.••:.,r, i *•• ii•,1,141 .i..t...1..t. 1 • 1 1 iiiiittle ,..„: , al... ..1..tiiiiitefi • • i•jvii . i , .To 1 ........i... * 64,.....4. ,...._ ,_, • , •■:..1..v.i. ,...ii..... .1141:.•••••41. • 1 ! .. iiiiitit4,1,ki ., •1.1•1tior• ....r.1..r. il 14.114. .. • I . OpiLit.th I .plittrilal ..4,.....r.... 444.1.11.41 ■ . i .. 4E4+1' it6•4•41:41.4 1..i-...t. ■•••• ••••••■• 1 , . a , r t . a •413444;4 ••• 614.1•••••4 ,.. i. t ...1,:.: •• ••••••,evo. a VilliolutvLiiiii• 4•4•11.1444. ittioki•iti.• • •. •• •11 iiiiiiii:144 iiiip.14.4•• ot.eiveLaiv ., • t, a 4 , • 1 1• 0 .4• iii•■••■14iiiii imilrlii•Li La . xiii4:1411., .t . . • : o o 44• 4v• I4•li O1•.1• a4•a rs•,. 1 a a i • i T i i i l i i V : 1 4 . i V i i 1 1 : : t 4 , V l i 2 t s 1 oiliiivoileielit • t ... : 44a V 4 . i • 1 4 1 . 1 44.4,vt4 164.11.:Irve• . . . t . .••1:•t 4 1 . i•441•414t; iviiipiiiii4j, t . . • i1e • r 4•4 .884.14.• . . t • e11 : , •i• 6 4• i o :r 1 itiVoitiiri• 4.4.1444 „1 . . , 44.444 1+41446 .141.11•4VO 81•44.•••64 • . • t il 1.44.14.• ij.wili•iiige 44/61tilitiviti: : 6 • 47:4•••48iveiii 4 j 4 .,.. • it. •44•:••••1•••• iiLaii••••■■4•: : I 6 • iii.0•4•44••• 8 .,. , 8 8 43.1•11,144/01 •130•4•4•410 iill•iii:6444 • 6 6 6 ' .'" ' "1:14i , i•LiviiiLliii t 1 • • •■•1". , . ...1••4•4. jai 6 iiii“.•••+.408, : j a ',.ii:44•••;ile lati4+144 4.4.14.1..1 ; •ii••• ;., i ''" oi•ali• iii+•••••■itiiii . iiiiimitei 44.: ' 814.684184.• . . ialoilliii: iiii*ii ie oligialiiiiii• oj•Vili84.444. , ., • .„I, 44.,:,,,H., ••p.1•.4.•• ViiiiLiiiiitti ii4.464,4, .,,s 8,6 ija•Liliiitali: iiitii•ritifii ..4,4.44:4■■ ..„•,,I, 1 . • „, • 0-4472 Durharri S.T,P, RirrAW4491/SE-4ZAtai ota difalletittsf, hve, dntati MAO k tin* tu MAIO • ■' SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NUMBER 8 -5 Stiff. damp to moist medium brown sandy silt with some sand, and gravel (fill). STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE A Mews per ft41(1441 1 . w4v /32- dray) 10 20 30 40 444.'.q.4'., •.'4.,44.1. 4.4144.. •; 4 1..'.. .4_4..4,, 414414 1494 4./.• •._. 14 4•14./4. 41..\41. Mi 141. ♦ •1.. 4 441.{441.. •.1.:.44•{.4 4 1i.•�Y.�.. .. •;•. •4. '.. 1 •,• 1, 4661 6116 . 1 1. 6 1 I 6144.4. gr4 • •4•• 4▪ .441 Wm 40 4 1 4 I 1 Medium dense .damp to moist, medium brown sand, silty sand. and some small gravels in layers. •4644444• / . " 4444 4 t.l Nl till 44014444 6;../•4./ .•:• s .;• /14./441.6 • 1 •r.•i.4Y•441 .j.41.i14�4 1;•44 414.44 .4' 44(•4414 ,.1 .4`..44444•=.4 41.4.:.• 4 1 • /_.1 6_444 1....•.. Some perched groundwater above silt layers, Bottom of borehole at 41,5 feet, LEGEIN oui wool marnbler ace tied. malikrearati o : s.ai i;o. v®e.. ei mss�pi.x► '9.b" 9•D. ien4i esaiPifir twit �a s uti iatar>iwi is 6Eratarr/ +imiWfi roes rria 0-4472 Durham S3.pa �s i��j/a) r+yi a i4 (rrddh oao SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NUMBER B-6 STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE A vors twit to4A(140 1114 tittnalwriXr drop) 10 20 , 30 40 11444444e Stiff to very stiff, damp, medium reddish brown silt (fill). •i.1••0• 460444 •0441144,4 • +444.. 14141 40111 loo. .114 _ I 464/•• 40104464 44441 •11 464 it* •o. • 1M Medium dense,to dense, light to medium brown, damp, silty sand, and sand in layers. 40•• 4j1.1•••• •••1.1o• 444•4• 6100 6+0144161100 joss othoploi Bottom of borehole at 21.5 feet. •44444•4 4414.4444441• . 144.44:44 +vitt. ooldidoisto *6; 1 : 414;44.4ii. is is .4411. sis,. • 4•41414•14 J. • 44 44.4 416 4•46•4•11„ 'T1 1' 4+++.1.4 • I ; • .44441.1104404 4.4.444.1.444. 4.1414444o itiLliosel.4.144 6+441444 4+441soi4o 4.444freljois 4•441444.44. •••• • 11 • 01+4* 4+4++4411 4606144 ois.itiaklii ▪ 41.1 .4:1116 •416* 4114,11.•il •Ial LEGEND I• LO bO *Pk imenriphio p �r �,b. anwiatesmiledi rnA�jMi i.o. easiolia# 11..4 • Li,. "Ohio' ostapio itrik.minepie inity.m1 BlITLYNOUSZ-ZERIA,N ASTOCZ425: iHC kanteirl ditiV amo tidos, tki*dis 00e40 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 40 SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NUMBER B-7 Stiff, damp to moist, medium brown sandy silt to silty sand, layered (Fill • Medium dense, moist to wet, medium brown sand layered with silty sand. Bottom of borehole at 21,5 feet, • STANDARD PENETRATION RESISTANCE A gluts per 401(140 b. k,/3Q .0.6) 10 20 30 40 .4.4414,440. •4.••40.4• •÷4.•1•4•4 •••reia++. mot444•144*• ••■••14.4.1.. ••144•••14.1•• •••;••1..j.••1••• • :4i +++kir. 40.144.4, • 1.1;. 1.4 4 I .4.4.1.04•04. . • . .444• ent41.41.144 4 0 •0:0441•41:.• •ti.1441 0,410444 4,1000.1.4. O 6 o 6 . ! 40.404.41, . 4.4.4.4. . II I 6 6 8 0 4 • 1•44.4. • :■44.144;44• .1.4461.14 6 I . . r . 011 .41.4 106 4:44:414• .14 4? 4 46 • .11.44•4• 1 4.44.444 40411.• i.. 4 4..444 444; 4104 g • 4 ft.414116 aLetio:4* 1 • 1*11 „ 44441414 4. 441.414 1 44. 4.1414. . ; • LEdV4t) to iveit eittioesi 61110444o araipia. 644 0,6. ingisikatioi4ed 0 Jjj 6.64 E�. iiiskieritil &m yki 4M ileVier4411 ?„;t1 ti•toi ievesi liter IOW 1 1.b. Wig mempler d 6001. toisiaroiii #11, 4.4.4 Vona' it.i6kate...746....thei • 0-4472 Durham S4TIP. RIPTAWYO7SE-ZI2410 AVOW= ING: Crivieckstrof duntsilissis mW3' ig alms iviro snown'ao. Chrov VMS ' • • . . •, . • • • • , , • 1,0, • • • ••',• 4. • •• ^1, 1 y CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING PLAN DURHAM AINWTP [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] LEGIBILITY STRIP- July 22, 1998 Nathan Cullen Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County 155 North First Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, OR 97124 Dear Mr. Cullen: criY OF TIG OREGON This letter is in response to your request for Minor Modification approval to expand the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility on SW 85th Avenue. You have requested approval to construct two process basins for treatment of domestic wastewater. This property is zoned , - in which the present use • of the site is listed as a i . site Park (I P) ; . l Use approval in 1900 (CUP 90-0002 and Conditional Use, The site received original Conditions pp CUP 90- 0003), The Tigard Community Development Code Chapter 18.130, Conditional Use, provides that a modification to an approved conditional use may be a major or a minor modification. Major modifications are processed as a new conditional use application. Section 18, 130.050(8) states that the Director shall determine that a major modification(s) will result if one (1) or more of the following changes are proposed: 1. A change in land use. i. ... g : f , p change x. 3 1'he use is currentl a sevwera a treatment Ian and no in use is proposed as part of the modification. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 2. An increase in dwelling unit density, No dwelling units are existing or propose therefore, this criterion does not apply. 3. A ten percent change in the ratio of the different types of dwelling units to the number of units. No dwelling units are existing or proposed; therefore, this criterion does not apply. 4. A change in the increase type- of commercial • : proposed . s industrial �tructure� The . r nteirceam or industna a similar type to modification would increase facility capacity by adding two structures of yp those existing in the site No change in the type of structures is proposed; therefore, a Major Modification is not triggered by this criterion, g n of acceasways and parking areas where e 5. �ff�l A Change in the type and location re traffic would be affected. The ,proposed modification wi ll not require any change to parking areas or accessways, 'Therefore, this criterion does not apply= the proposed - . for a non-residential use by More than '10 V. 4 • Boor area � � mint Code An increase in specified. The Tigard Community Develop p t where previously sp g y e�cen i all floors, of Section 1 8 28' O3o defines .. n would .... , gross horizontal area of � `• . efines� floor area as the gros of two (2) additional ui i . j proposed .. modification would involve construction f ( ) building. The m 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (5013) 6394171 TDD (503) 684 -2772 Pa eicif2 • o O 1'• • wastewater process 'basins. No increase in building floor area is proposed; therefore, this criterion does nct apply. A reduction of more than 10 percent of the area reserved for common open apace and or usable owl space. There is no open space located on the site. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 8. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20 percent. The proposed new structures will be constructed entirely within the buildable area of the site. No reduction of any required setbacks will be required. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 9. An elimination of project amenities by More than ten percent where previously specified, such as: a. Recpeational facilities; b. Screening; or c. Landscaping p removal of grass from the footprint provisions. The propo� ©d Modification will require reran areas: The proposal w�l! not reduce the existing formal landscaping which Will continue accent landscaping standard. Therefore, a Maier comply with the required 15 p P Modification is not triggered by this criterion. 10. A 10 percent increase in the approved density. This proposal is for expansion of a sewerage treatment facility and does not include residential development. Therefore, this criterion does not apply: This is determined to be a minor modification request ' ification to an approved conditional use. Pursuant to Section 18,130.060,0., the Director's designee has determined, based on the above findings, : it does not violate any code � °n iS not a major modification. that the proposed modifiti major coon is therefore approved. provisions: The proposed minor modification THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: t A building permit must be obtained for the proposed expansion: Please provide a copy ca this letter when applying for permits. There is a fee for the required permits. Please contact the Development Services Division for information on current fees, you need additional If y . i nal information or have any questions, please fee free to call me at (503) 6394171 ext: 315. Sincerely, 1 M. J. Roberts Associate Planner 1 :kcerptlmjti into sa ado° c: r 1998 Planning correspondence file CUP 940 -0002 and CUP 90 -0003 Lend use files Page 2 of 6t. 40 ea-P fo—toO4 c,L rkod '742,-7/ UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY July 10, 1998 Ms. Julia Hadjuk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Conditional Use Permit Modification Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Ms. Hadjuk: This $100 review fee is provided for the materials submitted on July 8, 1998 regarding Minor Modification of the Conditional Use Permit for the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant. With submission of this payment, you should have all necessary components to complete your review, If additional information is required, please call me at (503) 648-8621, Sincerely, L1tOIL(JL Nathan Cullen Project Manager 165 North Mrs' Avenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, Oregon 07124 Phone: 603/6484621 FAX 603/640-3626 . . , • • UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY July 6, 1998 Ms. Julia Hadjuk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Conditional Use Permit Modification Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Ms, Hadjuk: We are providing this letter along with two sets of architectural elevations, site and landscape plans to support a Minor Modification to the Condition Use Permit for the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility, 16580 SW 85th Avenue, Tigard, Oregon 97224, The modification is required for the construction of two process basins to expand the existing treatment capacity at the facility. As shown in the attached plans, the proposed modifications include construction of two at-grade structures to be used for treatment of domestic wastewater, Construction will occur immediately north of existing, similar structures in an area that is currently a grassy field, Grass will be restored up to the edge uf the new structures once construction is completed. No new parking NM be provided, and access to the facility will not be modified, No new floor space or occupied areas are proposed, The proposed facilities will not encroach on any required setbacks. We have reviewed the criteria in Section 18.130.050(B) of the Tigard Development Code, and believe this construction does not invoke any of the code criteria, Detailed responses to each of the criteria are provided below, 1. A change in land Use The proposed change involves construction of one new aeration basin and one new secondary clarifier at the treatment facility, These new facilities will augment the treatment capacity currently provided by three existing aeration basins and three secondary clarifiers, The new units will be almost identical in nature to those constructed during the previous plant expansion in 1990. 155 North First AVenue, Suite 270, MS 10 Hillsboro, Oregon 91124 Phone: 503/648-8621 PAX: 503/640-3525 • Durham Facility CUP Modification Application July 6, 1998 2. An increase in dwelling unit density. No dwelling units are proposed. 3. A ten percent change in the ratio of the different types of dwelling units to number of units. This is not a residential use, therefore the standard is not applicable. 4. A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures. No occupancy type structures are proposed, therefore this criteria is not applicable, 5,, A change in the type and location of accessways and parking areas where off- site traffic would be affected. This proposal does not include revisions to existing driveway locations, therefore off -site traffic would not be affected, 6. At: ; to in the floor area proposed for non - residential use by more than ten IN. previously - . y specified. This where rediousl s This pro osal does not include an. increase in floor area, therefore this criteria is proposal any not applicable 7. A reduction of more than ten percent of the area reserved for common open space and /or usable open space. p There is no area reserved for common open space, therefore this criteria is not applicable, 8. A reduction of specified setback requirements by more than 20 percent. The expansion would not encroach onto minimum required setbacks, 9. An elimination of project amenities by more than ten percent where previously specified such as: a, recreational facilities; b. screening; provisions. .. c. landscaping , t reduce recreational facilities or screening, The p proposed facilities would no The r proposed area for c nstruction is a g ....rasY sy field, and no p reviously specified landscaping provisions or other amenities are affected, 10. A ten percent increase in the approved density, The proposed facilities do not change existing project density, The Durham facility is facing severe capacity limitations, so construction of these two processes is critical to the continued successful operation of the plant, In order to meet the needs of the facility, excavation for the new structures must be completed this Durham Facility CUP Modification Application July 6, 1998 summer. We urgently request your prompt review of this matter. If you have any questions regarding this request for a Minor Modification to the Conditional Use Permit for the Durham facility, please call me at (503) 648 -8621. Sincerely, Nathan Cullen Project Manager [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] NEW E ECA LEA/677I 4se a /73:5' EL 1 WEST ELEVATIO SCALE. Ile= 0.1 IL le.65' 5440.97-1/ F/Niffiff (rr, ALL ELEVAT/cyte) zefir" •RECESS. .5Moorii SOUTH ELEVATI SCALE. 1/8*. EL /4640- a) EL /58:5' ' t ichtION eeRADE NORTH ELEVAT 10 =Au. ye% e-o" 4-cer 4=a- 4.fer( - Ea LEA/a Vig .1...,11.11111111•11t t dlimmia-wilimi. !.r. =NM I 3-14". RECESS.. ‘007N RAI.crif FA/15,41 aettaE FAST ELEVATIO1 SCALE. Vie.. ATOCHS WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO EXISTING DURHAM AWWTP P PHASE. II A EXPANSION Et /' .d': s=o' s =o° a =o• eto` a =D' LL 13..5. EL /Me' doe- -err sif00771 f/ilfl (7YP'ALL ELCK47741A&O MriZhettiO F/ /.fii(7 ' 4r Et ,477a /J) ,h CIfY OF 1IUAR) RECFAJ1 O AYMEN1 [ i UNIFIND OtEWERAGLr AGENCY I ADDkC68 1.5ti N Prktn AvL Era!" 3$o mrs. HILLSBORO OR: 744- PURPOSV O} PAYMN1 LAND unt; APPL AMOUNI PAID 1 00, WA RECEW1 t98—a07PIA CHECK Amuumr too,ora CRP,DT1 LiARD 4 0000 HNIAGk,:. o 0,00 CH AMUUNT o 0,00 PAY11EN1 DATE WI 10/90 PIMPOW CO PAYMEM1 murnrIc r r .UN 1 CUNDIJ x OWL UOtt TOTAL mom MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Dennis Lively, USA Mary Dorman FROM: ,?er ®Offer, Development Review Planner DATE: November 4, 1992 SUBJECT: Unified Sewerage Agency Sludge Storage USA has submitted plans for conversion of an existing storm surge basin at the Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant to use as a storage basin for dewatered sewage sludge mixed with sawdust. The narrative and basic site plan for this proposal was submitted on October 23, 1992 and is being considered as a modification to Conditional Use Permit application CUP 90 --0002 which approved a major expansion to the existing treatment plant. The proposal would provide for dewatered sludge asphalt surfaced storm p . p existing asph sawdus and to be stored in the two exist surge basins on the eastern p ortion of the USA site south of Durham mixture would be stored in the basin School. The sludge/sawdust . r d be made to allow of f primarily in the winter months until it could be transported sate.M' Minor changers to the surge basins Mi easier truck and tractor access into the basins. The basins are already underlain by drainage pipes to c�1lect later draining from the stored sludge. The drainage pipes cx..4. this water back into the plant's treatment processes. Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant site is a zoned IhP ( Industrial Park). Utility uses Ouch Mai the treatment plant w zoning district The existing are conditional uses in the I P z��. g treatment plant use and the existing site improvements have previously approved conditional use for this site The been a roved as a condi _ . City of Ti and's Land Use Hearings Officer approved a major r expansion of the Durham Treatment Plant's operations on June 12, 1990 (CUP 90- 0002). Tigard Community � Development Code Chapter 18. 130 (Conditional Use) requires the i review lan approval of modifications to existing Code Section 18.130.050 p criteria for conditional uses proposed modification i to anitexist ria determining whether a prop existing constitutes a major modification ®t ` n require an existing i major modification w uld development co io conditional use... A m �qua. a public before the hearings officer If a proposed modification i • on is hearing _ - , .. � : , .. � ®. it is classified s if �i.ed fas a minor not found to be a major modification, n, modification to an existing conditional use development and may be reviewed by the Planning Division with not ice of the decision to be provided to the applicant and the property owner. The proposed improvements are clearly not a major modification to an existing development, as reviewed against the criteria of Section 18.130.030.E (attached). No change in land use is proposed. Residential dwelling units and residential densities are clearly not at issue with this proposal. There would be no change in type of an industrial structure, simply changes in how existing structures are used involving minimal physical changes in the structures. Existing accessways, parking areas, structure setbacks, open space, landscaping and screening would not be affected. Therefore, the proposed changes are found to be a minor modification to an existing development (Code 18.130.030.C). Minor modifications may be approved or approved subject to conditions by the Planning Division as long as the plans will not violate any Code provision (Code 18.230.040.C). The Planning Division has reviewed USA's plan submittal with regard to consistency with applicable Code standards. The proposed changes would not violate setback standards, building height standards, maximum site coverage, or minimum landscaped area standards of the I-P zoning district. The proposal would not affect existing parking, accessways, or landscaping; nor would the proposed changes require additional vehicular parking, access, landscaping or screening. Th Planning Division has determined that the proposal therefore would not violate any applicable Code provisions. The plans are therefore approved as a Conditional Use winor modification. A Building Permit must be obtained prior to modifying any existing structures. This decision is valid for eighteen months from the date of issuance. Notice of this decision is being sent to the applicant and owner as required by the Community Development Code. This decision may be appealed within 10 days of issuance as provided by Code Section 18.32.310.A or may be called up for review within that period by the City Council. Please call me if you have questions. • RECO' 'ED PLANNING MAI 0 3 1991 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY Mr. Rihard Bewersdorff City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard OR 97223 Re: Durham Facility Expansion Conditional Use Permit 90 0002/Variance VAR 90--0015 Dear Mr. Bewersdorff: Enclosed is a package showing compliance with Conditional Use Permit 90-0002. This package contains the folloWing: Site Layout Plan (Sheet 5) Paving Plans (Sheets 105 and 106) Land8caping Plans (Sheets 15 through 158) Memorandum to USA from HDR Engineering listing proposed Signs Grading Plan 1 (Sheet 112) and Grading Plan 2 (Sheet 113) 101 fr /he only change from the proposed site plan that was originally p!ry,:ri'submitted is the relocation of the RV Station and addition of an 11 NI' iassociated roadway. This new roadway produces one additional 14intersection with SW 85th Avenue. The relocated RV Station and roadway /will make it more convenient for local RV owners to use this facility. V" I: • I By having their own driveway, they will be able to utilize the facility after hours, as well as minimizing potential conflictS between RV's and our truck traffic. Also, please note that the location of the required bicycle racks are not currently shown on the drawings. These will be incorporated into the Landscaping/Irrigation contract. Detail 9/158 illustrates our proposed rack. We plan to add at least two racks to the site, one near the Chemical Feed Building, and one near the Service Building. , Berms are being provided as shown in the conceptual landscaping plan submitted with our application. Specific grading plans are enclosed. With rezpect to the Agency comment from the Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District, fire hydrants and access is being provided in accordance with their recommendations, and as required by the Uniform Fire Code, 156 North First Avenue, Suite 270 Phone: 603/648-862i Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX: 508/640.3526 M�. Richard Bewersdorff, City of Tigard May 1, 1991 Page Two Regarding the variance for the height of the Chemical Feed Building, this building will be constructed within the limits shown in our application. With respect to the disposal of excess spoils, we anticipate that there will not be any excess spoils. Most of our on-site materials will be utilized for construction of the perimeter (screening) berms. During the bidding period tJSA will provide copies of the construction documents to the Oregon State Highway Division and the Tigard School District to ensure that', our plans meet their requirements regarding construction traffiv, control. Detailed plans of all facilities and roads will also be submitted to you when we go to bid. We anticipate the following schedule: Bid the Chemical Expansion Phase: Mid May, 1991 Constructions August 1991 - September 1993 Landscaping /Irrigation Construction: October 1993 July 1994 If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, Dennis Lively Division Engines Facilities /eb Enclosures c: Bruce Willey, HDR Division of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE Salem, OR 97310 Phone: 378 -3059 378 -3805 RECEIVED PLANNING MAY 21 1990 UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORS 196.800 TO 196.990 TO PERFORM THE OPERATIONS DESCRIBED IN T E A A ED '' IF " A'P ICA .ON, JE. T TO T IE SP T C DTTTONS 1. This permit does not authorize trespass on the lands of others. The permit holder shall obtain all necessary access permits or rights - of-way before entering lands owned by another. 2 This permit does not authorize any work that is not in compliance with local zoning or other local, state, or federal regulation pertaining to the operations authorized by this permit. The permit holder is responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals and permits before proceeding under this permit. 3. All work done under this permit must comply with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 340; Standards of Quality for Public Waters of Oregon. Specific water quality provisions for this project are set forth on Attachment A. 4. vi of ate ons of the terms and conditions of this permit are subject to administrative and/or legal action which may result in revocation of the permit or damages. The permit holder is responsiblofor donethe atc activities sit. of all � or under this contractors or other operators involved in work permit. 5. A copy of the permit shall be available at the work site whenever operations authorized by the permit are being conducted. p all duly authorized representatives of 6, Employees of the D�vis�on of State Lands and a l to the project area at all reasonable for the purpose times eforr th p p eor shall be permitted access of inspecting work performed under this permit. h objects to the conditions of this permit ermitamay this a 7. Any permit holder who ob = hearing from the Director, in writing, within 10 days of "s permit was issued. NOTICE: If removal is from state- owned submerged and submersible land, the applicant Ea-comply with leasing and royalty provisions of ORS 274.530. If the project g o state-owned submerged or submersible creation of new lands by filling on s lands, your must comply with ORS 274 905 - 274 940. This permit does not relieve the lands, ermittee of an Obligation to secure appropriate ,a Division of State permittee obligation leases from th Lands, to conduct activities on state-owned submerged or submersible lands. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in civil or criminal liability. For more nformation about, these requirements, please contact the Division of State Lands, Waterway Leasing Office, 378 -3805. Martha 0. Pagel, Director Oregon Division of State Lands Mai i 18', 1990 ATTACHMENT A Special Conditions for Material Removal/Fill Permit No. 5645 1. This permit authorizes the removal of up to 130 cubic yards of material and the backfill of up to 130 cubic yards of material in Section 15, T2S, R1W (Tualatin River) to extend an 8-inch sewer line as outlined in the attached permit application, map and drawings. 2. Work in the waterway shall be done so as to minimize turbidity increases in the water that would degrade water quality and damage aquatic life. Turbidity shall not exceed 10% above natural stream turbiditier), except as allowed by OAR 340-41. 3. Care shall be taken to prevent any petroleum products, chemicals, or other deleterious materials from entering the water. 4. The operation shall be conducted beHnd a temporary berm where active flowing water is involved to isolate the operation from the free flowing stream. 5. Waste materials and spoils shall be placed above the bankline in an approved upland disposal site and not in any wetland areas. 6. There shall be no operation of equipment in the active flowing stream between October 1 and June 1. 7. Only clean, erosion resistant rock from an upland source shal1 be used as riprap. No broken concrete or asphalt shall be used. 8. At project's completion, the project area shall be returned (as close as possible) to its original itours. 9. Removal of existing woody vegetation shall be minimal and limited to the construction corridor. 10. Areas of streambank disturbance not covered by riprap shall be seeded or planted with grass and/or legumes, and native shrubs and trees. Grass seed mixture for wooded areas shall be as follows: 20% Fawn Fescue, 30% Perennial Rye, 15% Orchard Grass, 20% Dutch White Clover, 5% Timothy, 10% Big Trefoil. 11. The Division of State Lands retains the authority to temporarily halt or modify the project in case of excessive turbidity or damage to natural resources. Aidiv1( OIDIT APPLICATION FOR PERMIT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS STATE OF OREGON, DIVISION OF STATE LANDS NUMB Department of the Army permits for propoeed work in or affecting navigable vateve of the United States, the discharge of dredged me fill material into those mittens, and the tranoport of dredged waterlog for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters are authorised by Section 10 of the River and 'Harbor Act of 1699, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, and Section 103 of the Marine Protection Mad* and Sanotuariee Act of 1972, respectiveiy, ---AND---permits for that part of those project activitieo uhich includes the removal or fill in the uatervays of Oregon of rock, Brevet, eitL, 4a4 etc). arc cuthorised by the State of Oregon under 0.1t.S. $41.605 to 541.693.•--TVI5 APPLICATION MEL MEET TEE REQUIREMENTS Of WO AGENCIES. Name of Waterway Section Estivated Starting Date of Project JUIN', NAME 07 Aniawr Unified pews_Lar_.1.--Ic Address .150 DI . ilat_MeY111 City, State, Zip Code b Area Area Phone: Work &me AUTHORIZED streettinsoR PROJECE PROPERTY OWNER IF arffER . Aoptitemar see attached 11-t Address City, State, tip Cote ,... Are Oh ne 0 rk HOW e ,Atta a %d order to tkodita tha otocaaaidg of -h t - appticatiod, the DUUtWoU t c y Name of 2S1 15A. T.L. if's 1800,1801,1900 410bdiviaion Lot Block it and/or counts, -tmeht, uhinh has total Priediction *Vet the ptoposed project, hme been contacted: Addresd: Phone Number: APPROVALS it CERTIPICATLONS aintiaA for ot already obtained from othar agencies (Oederal, interstate, itate, cotinty, identification 0 pliittaLAEptication bate o_p_es_Asvid city, arta) for ady of the proposed projeete described in this application: 11±df.9LAISEWLY. Washington County Dept. of Land U8e & Transportation City of Tigard DTILALAPoroital DeVelopment Application Type I/ Sensitive Land Permit i •r tise any agency denied approval for the activity described herein or for any other activity directly rotated to t t CI Yes aft If yes, pleas* explain in Remarks. ADJOINING PROPERTY ON TUE WATERWAY: Give names, addressee, and phone numbers of oakum+ andfor occupants. Attached list of property owners ?EASE EXPLAIN IM AIL your plane to restore the area to tts natural condition. Construction will be restricted to a 30 -foot wide maximum working easement to . ima. • �, the loss ©f trees. Replacement trees will be planted and the area � res .;fed with grass seed. The area will be returned to its original contours as close as possible. REFORMATION FOR p ELL OR RE VAL: sand 130 cubic yards for the toted •prOj act. FILL WILL 'INVOLVE ;,, ,.r......., cubic yards .annusety, .._. -= . Kock [? Gravel sand � .$itt� 0 Clay � Organic LtiPrap 0 er:t. cubic yards annually, and 130 „cubic yards for the total prod ��n/AL WLLL. INVOLVE �._ ( Send E3 Sttt � 0 Rock Gravel i . , Clay ,,.....�..., -..- act.feLae for key tdd use (private, RIDE IN DETAIL T PROPOSED Acti flTY - --tta primary purpose and afttondary p r ose if �nnyem nt iius draasriv t ESC use--- type of vessel* using fatuity f reiel' tie of stt�acturneal and nse� tyi' uMne�.t and co�npae►ittan ol�. and that source type covet an type of conveyance and manner of extt;a►ctton of any fit's or real- -the h Y and didpoeatt sites for any fill or rexaoveaa (If ' additional ,space !,e seeded, Use plain eYheaet of paper.) 8-inch line up a drainageway to sere Construction consists of extending an an area according to the sewer master p lan ®uthoYieiaa the a►et4'vitime dncdaefbad lherea t �eaCf. iesuchas App id het** if es dd for as tarn a or Permits o to t ticetityn t�.c�ition, „ ®nc� thA�t. to the beet ®f try nosrlledge a ba+1.. �aei,tinar pith the infdr�tion oonts+inaad 1n alit app ee®aiai the aai�hgerfty+ td gig® t�►+ F�pod® inFacrcktilaat fe tree, �:oieCee end eicetitrwtey Y fviicithair cetlCi.fy t , t I dettvttiede Signature of Applicen or Authorteed Agent t C O provi d ed in i . . a ddsotvet: in iiY winn e x within the jlrfedl etion m� any dape r f nt b of the e U nited et ed knowingly vtttfut9y £etefflee . e materiel feet ore/Ikea any false a Or 0 4 iarr aay Mee 4 . C4MCt neefi ba tined eat more than *400400 or imprisoned lennrd not more t n l m years, or both,' LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS: ___EE9.2111Y Owner Baricevic, Vlado 5815 SW Patton Road Portland, OZegort 97221 Pleming, Alvy SI.Kathleen 16280 SW 113th Tigard, Oregon 97223 2S1 15AA City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon ')7223 639-4171 tt. • •• • 25' io2g ►.T1"c '�► (mot✓ i i 1•�rrtta. • is ii° ." 'th r" • phr Lam,. oPO hi Uli°1 5025000m N. 47'30" 51 g000m t 415'22'30" Nvawtow- aaolooltAt. sUwvsvx nssroni, VI ' tNW., 'ass MILE Heavy.duty M diuni'duty G;1;•; t `U r ' . ROAD CLASSIFICATI N''� r,e...«. Light•duty 122 °45' Interstate Route fg$ r�ofi #� N p r~ QUSrtNfA 22092 C QUADRANGLE LOCATION pe■isions shown in purple compiled by Gecilogical Survey from aerial bhotographs taken 1J81 and ether sources t�won irr,tt hold ONO:. CUttuU t: )84 x . .I flt 1YfIIA+i 'iitnAS 13EAV8PTit NI 01R80i tiE/4 or AVi RTON 15' ou %DRANDLI 45122- D7- Tt-O24 1961 PHOTOREVISED '1964 tiNIA 14/4 IV . tERIEG Vdax < • •:• • , • SURFACE RESTORATION AS SPECIFIED MOUND EXCESS NATIVE MATERIAL OVER TRENCH TO ALLOW FOR SETTLEMENT' UNDISTURBED EARTH 6 • 4 o • e * • 4 . * * • * • 0 ..,, COMPACTED •IN °I 3/44_ 0 CRUSI18) 'ROCK .. . s — * • 0 • • * a o II . , * 4 • • i • 'ow • . .44, 4. • '4 . • E. . I a a e at 4 i I' 4. 44 • 0 a . •• • • . 4, • • i . . '''' • • . 1 ip • . d a. a .., 4 • 4 . 14.i' . 4 II ,44 • • •Jo • ,4 .4 ;V , • 4 • 4 IP 4 • • 4 • 4 4 4 4 • a • • ' • • . • • II . i • • • ■ A„ „ it • • _,_ i • • ft..'" ' or • 4 .• 4 a ' • • • 4 • • - • UNDISTURBED EARTH NATI%' MATERIAL 3/4" -0 CRUSHED ROCK 3/4"-0 PIPE BEDDING 4" MIN. FOR PIPE SMALLER THAN IQ" 6" MIN. FOR PIPE le AND LARGER TRENCH BACKF LL DETAILS [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] • TO �r ram FI 4 990 PRAM: Tigard Planning Department RE: CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90 -0015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Us. approval for the e: pan , iota of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variances approval to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Induatrial Park zone. ZONES I -P Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTM 281 13B, tax ]Lot 600) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various dents and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the propoa 1 in th near future. If you wish to count on this application, we n r comments by s 19. you may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. Lf a ratdal _ 1�0,,, ®BPPa 1 y_, 't. ... Ada pleases phone the ' etaf f contact not . d below with your comments and confirm your 9 you any regarding oaxa�ent�a in writing ss soon as possible. If �u ba'n'e ann e�aeatio this matter, coat of the Tigard Planning Departm ant, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHON : 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: „ Jerr7 ®ffsr PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed th . proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written enta s.. Name of Person C entin. Phone Ntunber: ,�...... ..�. bill /G'�DF 90 -®2 BI moo maim MAY 2219O 4 To YI�ip1�eYS� tl�Y�s Ir Y �elO1 iO�Y�✓ Mat a= DATE: FROM Tigard Manning Department : CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90-0015 USA SPANS /ON rya #5 A Conditional Caro approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance approval to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maxim building height allowable in Ynduetr6°ial Pare zone. ZONE: I-P (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intermecotion of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. MTN 281 13B, tax let 600) Attached is the Site Tian and applicant's atatement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, was need your comments by 1990. You may the apace provided ��r attach separate letter to return your comments. t- o _ au�n�le o ra� a ®t please phone the staff contact noted below with your cents and confirm your comments in writing am soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Sox 23397, 13125 SW Ball Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639 -4171 STAFF CONTACT: LPar me_af for CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it Please contact of our Office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments: Name of Pardon C Phone Number: a bkm /cti 90-02.S El MOVED PUNNING MAY 171990 REQUEST Nalft COMMIES RECEI VWn DATE: _HALAL.2929 . ' : Tigard Planning Department CONDITIONAL USE CLAP 90-0002 VARIANCE VAR 90-8015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Uwe approval for th . expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphotous from plant effluent. Applicant aleo requests Variance approval to allow a building height of greater than th a 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I-P Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham- Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WC= 281 138, tax lot 600) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant • s statement for your review. From information supplied by varioum departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be r ndered on th proposal in the pear future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your 'comments by $av 14, 1990. You may use the space provided below or attach a ®oparate letter to return your commente. , fr u srr una idad o i m P b a aabO d t pleases phones the staff contact noted below with your cants and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact they Tigard Planning Department, PD Sox 23397, 131°`k SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PROM 639 -4171. STAFF CONTACT: o7or :®f feat PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and havan no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to than enclosed letter. a4uu w Lidie 7111 311kAdmi A9, %k 5i2 Name of Pereon Comm► nt lg: Phone Number __021±A/ bk /CUI. 90-02. BM • TO: Jerry Offer PROM: Greg Berry MEMORANDUM CITY OP TIGARD OREGON RE: CUP 90-0002, VAR 90-0015 - USA EXPANSION • May 14, 1990 mNsElEtkiang Th. applicant propooes to expand the Durham Waote Water Treatment facility to reduce amonia and phosporous from plan affluent. The variance would permit a building hAaht greater than 45 feet. Etegent: 1. The applicant has submitted a detailed project description including anticipated traffic that would be generated by the construction. 2. The previous application for phase 1 of this project (CU 89-01) required that additional right-of'-way be deeded to the State and to waive its right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvement district formed to improve Durham Road. That application found that additional improvemente to 8W 85th Avenue and S Durham Road were not required. Recommendations: The applicant shall obtain a fill permit that include an erosion control plan conforming to "Erosion Control Piano - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." STAPP CONTACT: Brad Reaot, Building Division (639- 4171) APPROVED: Randall R. Wooley0 City migine dj/GB:cup90 02.GB 'ENGINEERING dOMEENTS WE) 90-0002, Vhh 90-0015 usk EXPAMION PAGE I 11, • • , .' • • • ' . • • IMORANDUNE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON' TO: Jerry Offer May 17, 1990 FRO: Greg Berry RE: CUP 90-0002, VAR 90-0015 - USA EXPANSION The applicant proposes to expand the Durham Waste Water Treatment facility to reduce amonia and phosporous from plan affluent. The variance would permit a building height greater than 45 feet. ginglmmmo 1. The applicant has submitted a detailed project description including anticipated traffic that would be generated by the construction. 2. The previous application for phase X of this project (CU 89-01) requir4d that additional right-of-way be deeded to the State and to waive its right to oppose or remonstrate against a future local improvement district formed to improve Durham Road. That application found that additional improvements to SW 85th Avenue and SW Durham Road were not required. actsamEaftagimg: The applicant shall obtain a fill permit that includes an erosion control plan conforming to "Erosion Control Plans - Technical Guidance Handbook, November 1989." STAFF CONTACT: Brad Roast, Building Divimion (639- 4111). APPROVED: Randall R. Wooley, city gngineer dj/GB:cup90-02.08 ENGINEERING COMMENTS -■ CUP 90-43002, VAR 90,-0015 o- USA EXPANSION PAGE 1 • • M1 • o TO: REQUEST COMENTS FR0h Tigard Planning Department f DATE: _May 4. 1990 RE: CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90 -0015 USA EXPANSION NPO t5 A Conditional Use approval for than expansion of eziaating wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requcste Variance approval. to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Induastrial Park zone. ZONE: I-P (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Ditches Road and SW SSth Avenue. (WOTM 281 138, tax lot 600) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's state information supplied by varioue departments an information available to our staff, a report prepared and a decigion will be rendered on the If you wish to cent on thus ' application, we >z 1990. You may use the apace provided below OA return your comments. von arse uneiil a to resr phone the staff contact noted below with your comments in writing as soon as possible. If yo* this matter, cdhtact t'h f Tigard Planning Depart Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639 -4171. STAFF CONTACT: PLEASE =MX THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: irmironsuentri mrsoommoommoso otamonmorne TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE & RESCUE AND BEAVIERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT GENE BQWCHVLL Deputy Fire Marshal/ Plans Exm finer 503. 526.2502 FAX 526.2536 4755 S.W, Griffith Drive • Beaverton, Oregon 970tz We have reviewed th proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed lett -r. Written ntea ,.. N ame of Per3on %Q aria g s _ Phante Numbers bk /CUP 90-02.8KM r • MOE= FOR =MOM M TOE U.�Qr�cL' r FROM: Tigard Planning Department DATE t _ May►_ 4,3 9i REs CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90 -0015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Use approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance :.pproval to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I -P (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTN 2S1 13B, tax lot 600) Attached is the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments by f 1990. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to resiaond by the above date please phone the staff contact noted below with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding his matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639 -4171. STAFF CONTACT : d7'ern__Off er PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: X twommotimiorimmoomo We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Witten Comments: Name of Person Commenting: Phone Numbers 639.-1554 bkm /CDP 90-02 BRM minis ra or 10E110 Pititrh' g MAY 8 1990 it } LEGIBILITY STRIP TO: FROM: Tigard Planning Department RTh CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90-0002 VARIANCE VAR 90 -0015 USA EXPANSION NPO #5 A Conditional Use approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities aAd addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorous from plant effluent. Aeplioant also requests Variance approval to allow a building height of ga.`eater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I -P `Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTH 251 13!, tans lot 600) DATE: Attached Ls the Site Flan and applicant's statement for your review. From information supplied by vagarious departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared rendered on the proposal in the near future. fe ouw wish to comment on�this application, we need your me by v 14,. If Y 1990. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to ,. ; 1 aab , e o res d b the abo°�an date. please return your comments. ' ' �I.....,i . _....■..._ -� your phone the etaats contact eaoted below with your oa have comments questions confirm regarding comments in writing as soon as possible. If y any this matter, contact the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 23397, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639 -4171. �7 ®ir,r Gaff® STAFF C JNTFyCT: .�.,. �.. ��yRNI■ �IXII PEE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: i We have reviewed the propol3al and have no objections to it. Please Contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Comments:. Name of Person Commenting: Phone Number: b]szaa /CUP 90 --02 It • LEGIBILITY STRIP TO: FROM: Tigard Planning Department RE: CONDITIONAL USE CUP 90 -0002 VARIANCE VAR 90-0015 USA EXPANSION *5 A Conditional Use approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment faciliti a and addition of facilities to reduce mania and phosphorous from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance approval to allow a building height of greater than the 4E foot maximums building height alrlowable in Industrial Park zone. fps I-P r of the intersection of Induaaetriai Park) � LOCATIOA: 5th Avenue. WCT� 2S1�3ss tax lot 600) SW Durham Road t REQUEST COMIXTB DATE s '1{ L„ 19�. �.,,— Attached Le the Site Plan and applicant's statement for your review. w. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other recommendation will be inforrt�atioaca available to our staff, a report prog� ®a�. in the near features re ad and a decision will be rendered If you wish to comment on this application, we need your comments 4' �• below or attach a separate letter to 19'9R�. leaaagaa the space pro�►id�d return your comments. o as a 1/4► to rem arnd Fbt�.. the , p You may u®® phone the staff contact noted below with your ,comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon an passible. If you have any questions regarding this matt r, contact _ -- the Tigard Planning Department, PO Box 233970 13125 SW �l:; Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223. PHONE: 639-4171. STAFF CONTACT: p dear PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Flange contact of our office. ONOMMIAWANNIMNIO Please refer to the enclosed letter. Written Ccmamentaa s .�..m ,.a -.., • NaMo of Person Commenting: Phone Numbers bkt /C TP 90.0 . B • .90 mom Pi MAY 9 1990 • �i 4 '7'O. as -� - ;, �+_•� r •2 . — LEGIBILITY PRMSAL DESCRIPTION FILE NO: CU 90-0002 VAR 90-0015 FILE TITLE: TREATMENT PLANT UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OWNER: SAME DENNIS LIVELY 150 NORTH FIRST AVENUE #302 HILLSBORO, OR 97124 APPLICANT: REQUEST: Applicant requests Conditional Use approval for the expansion of existing wastewater treatment facilities and addition of facilities to reduce ammonia and phosphorus from plant effluent. Applicant also requests Variance approval to allow a building height of greater than the 45 foot maximum building height allowable in Industrial Park zone. ZONE: I-P (Industrial Park) LOCATION: Southeastern corner of the intersection of SW Durham Road and SW 85th Avenue. (WCTM 201 13B, tax lot 600) ZONING DESIGNATION: I-P (Industrial Park) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Light Industrial NPO NO: #5 CHAIRPERSON: Craig Hopkins PHONE: 639-r,023 STAFF DECISION PLANNING COMMISSION • X HEARINGS OFFICER CITY COUNCIL ia••■•■■ DATE DATE DATE TIME TIME TIME X REQUEST FOR COMMENTS (ee attached list) RETURN 13Y _Aalaa ATTACHMENTS: X VICINITY j LANDSCAPING PLAN X NARRATIVE , ARCHITECTURAL PLAN X SITE PLAN STAFF CONTACT PERSON: aerry Offer PREPARE FOR PLANNER APPROVAL: X ADVERTISEMENT - TIMES _/_/ OREGONIAN / X NOTICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE MAILED /--*/ LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATION /_/_ NOTICE TO BLCb - ATTACHMENTS: UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY April 27, 1990 Jerry Offer Development Review Planner City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Conditional Use Application Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility Dear Jerry: On behalf of the Unified Sewerage Agency of Washington County (USA), please find enclosed the following application elements in support of the Agency's request for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance to construct an expansion of the wastewater treatment process facilities on property currently owned by USA lying ncth of our current Durham Wastewater Treatment Facility. 1. Application Forms 1 copy 2. Owner's Signature: On application form 3 Title Transfer instruments 1 copy of property deed 4. Assessor's Maps 1 copy each of 2S1W 11DD, 12CC, 13B, 13BA, 13BD, 13CB and 14A with the "Subject Property" shown. The 250 foot notification boundary has been added to each assessor map. 5. Site Plan: 1 copy of out Application Checklist with modifications incorporated to reflect changes Required copies i . la�caLionhmade q tied Agency since our initial preapp ... - meeting. .. copies are enclosed pet the Application Checklist. 6 Applicant's Statement: Stan. Cements from Our consultant, HDR Engineering, Inc., and t, i nts are included in heir subconsultant the "Supplemental Information" enclosed 7. List of property owners and addresses within 250 feet: Not required. See Item 4 above for notification boundary. 8. Filing Fee Our check in the amount of $386.00 is in process as we discussed and will take 10 days to 2 weeks. 1990) North First Avenue, Suite 270 55 Iy /v acaa r .. - st1�cc F4iohe :603/848 8621 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX 503/640-3526 LR■ pt gp EG B STRIP • Jerry Offer, City of Tigard April 27, 1990 Page Two • The site information, site development plan, grading plan, architectural drawings `preliminary) and landscaping plan have been incorporated into our Site Drawings and Supplemental Information. Twenty (20) copies of this information is submitted with this application for your review. We thank you for your attention to this matter. Should you have questions, please feel free to contact me at 6,48-8621. Sincerely, Dennis Lively Division Engineer ?acilities /eb Enclosures LEGIBI S ii RI December 29 1988 Bruce R. Willey CWC - HD12 Engineering Suite 204 300 Admiral Way Edmonds, WA 98020 -4127 CITYOF TG4 OREGON Dear. Mr. Willey: 1 have reviewed the site plan for adding a primary clarifer to the Unified Sewerage Agency's Durham AWWTP. We have determined that this addition would be classified as a minor modification to an existing conditional use as specified under Tigard Community Development Code Sections 18.130.050 and 18.130.060. We do not find that the modifications would meet the criteria for ,a major modification since 1) the proposed structures are of the same type as structures which currently exist at the plant, and 2) the addition would constitute a less than 10 percent addition to the structures on the site. As a minor modification to an existing use the City will process the proposal as an administrative review to assure that the proposal complies with Community Development Code standards. As you ikcnow a new conditional use or a y P �' major modification to an existing conditional use would require public hearing. I have attached a Conditional Use application form for you to complete to initiate the administrative review. You will need to submits 1) a completed application form with signed authorization by the property owners; 2) a copy of the deed for the property; 3) 10 copies of the site plan; 4) a brief narrative that describes the proposed addition; and 5) an 80 application fee. You will also need to provide us with a list of property owners located within 250 feet of the USA plant for notification purposes. 1 have enclosed notification assessor's maps indicating properties within 250 feet of the site. The review of the proposal should be completed within approximately four weeks of our acceptance of a completed application. The City will issue an administrative decision report to the property owner, applicant, and neighbors within 250 feet of the property. A ten day appeal period follows the issuance of the administrative decision. Please contact Keith Liden of the Planning Division if you have any questions. Sincerely, rry fe r Aasistant Planner Enclosures 8108D c: Dennis Lively, USA Mike Mathews, USA 13125 S -i t ' V �'�'ox k417, ` ig'H ;'b V 97223 (503) 639 -4171- ----- H D R • CWC -HDR Suite 204 Telephone: An HDR Engineering, lno. 300 Admiral Way 208 774.1947 Company Edmonds, Washington 98020 -4127 November 7, 1988 Mr. Jerry Offer Assistant Planner City of Tigard 13125 S, W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 NOV 141988 CITY GE TIGARD PLANNING DEPT. Res Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant Conditional Use Permit Dear Mr, Offer: Enclosed is a site plan showing the location of the new primary clarifier being designed for the Durham Plant. The clarifier will be a low -level structure, similar to the existing primary clarifiers, The Raw Sludge Pumping Station and flow split structure will also be low -level structures whose roof elevation will be at the same height as the clarifier walls, We have just begun design on this structure, so more detailed drawings are not yet available, Please let me know if yogi need additional information. Sincerely, CWC -HDR, Inc, //14/' Bruce It Willey BRW :ct cc Dennis Lively; USA Mike Mathews, USA Tony Krutsch, CVVC -HDR enc, ONAVENTURE LN . . ' [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing] [Page Too Large for OCR Processing]