§ 21750. SWRCB - Waste Management Unit (Unit) Characteristics and Attributes to be Described in the ROWD. [C15: s2595 & s2547(a) // T14: s17777, s18260, s18263, & s18264]
(a) Identify Potential Impairment -Dischargers shall provide in the report of waste discharge ("ROWD", including any such report integrated into a Joint Technical Document (JTD), pursuant to s21585) an analysis describing how the ground and surface water could affect the Unit and how the Unit, including how any waste, if it escapes from the Unit, could affect the beneficial uses of ground water bodies (including, but not limited to, any aquifers underlying the facility) and surface water bodies. The RWQCB shall use this information to determine the suitability of the Unit with respect to ground water protection and avoidance of geologic hazards and to demonstrate that the Unit meets the classification criteria set forth in Article 3, Subchapter 2, Chapter 3, Subdivision 1 of this division (s20240 et seq.).
(b) Support Proposed Classification -Dischargers shall provide the data required by this section regarding the physical characteristics of the Unit and the surrounding region in order to demonstrate suitability for the appropriate Unit classification. The ROWD shall present this information in understandable written, tabular, and graphic format, as appropriate, and this information shall be at a level of detail appropriate to support the RWQCB's approving the Unit's proposed classification. Maps, plans, diagrams, and other graphics shall be prepared to appropriate scale and each shall include a legend identifying the information presented. All sources of data shall be identified.
(c) Restate, Where Appropriate -If a report submitted by a discharger refers to another source, the relevant information from that source shall be restated in the report. If the source is not generally available, the relevant portion(s) of the source shall be included verbatim in the report as an appendix.
(1) Topographic Map -A map of the Unit and its surrounding region within one mile of the perimeter of the Unit, showing elevation contours, natural ground slopes, drainage patterns, and other topographic features.
(2) Floodplain -Identification of whether the facility is located within a 100-year floodplain. This identification must indicate the source of data for such determination and include a copy of the relevant Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood map, if used, or the calculations and maps used where a FEMA map is not available. The submittal shall also identify the 100-year floodplain and any other special flooding factors (e.g. wave action) which must be considered in designing, constructing, operating, or maintaining the facility to withstand washout from a 100-year flood. Dischargers having facilities located in the 100-year floodplain shall provide the following information:
(A) engineering analysis to indicate the various hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces expected to result at the site as consequence of a 100-year flood;
(B) structural or other engineering studies showing the design of Units and flood protection devices (e.g., floodwalls, dikes) at the facility and how these will prevent washout; and
(C) landfills accepting municipal solid waste shall demonstrate that:
1.for Class II landfills, the Unit meets the flooding requirements of s20250(c); or
2.for Class III landfills, the Unit meets the requirements of s20260(c).
(e) Climatology -Dischargers shall calculate required climatologic values for Units from measurements made at a nearby climatologically similar station. In addition to the required calculations for each Unit, dischargers shall provide the source data from which such values were calculated, together with the name, location, and period of record of the measuring station.
(1) Isohyetal Map -A map showing isohyetal contours for the proposed Unit and its surrounding region within ten miles of the facility perimeter, based on data provided by the National Weather Service or other recognized federal, state, local, or private agencies.
(2) Precipitation -Estimated maximum and minimum annual precipitation at the proposed Unit.
(3) Design Storm -Maximum expected 24-hour precipitation for the Unit's design storm [i.e., for storm conditions specified as design criteria for the particular class of Unit as prescribed in Table 4.1 of Article 4, Subchapter 2, Chapter 3, Subdivision 1 of this division].
(4) Evapotranspiration -Estimated mean, minimum, and maximum evaporation, with the months of occurrence of maximum and minimum evaporation, for the Unit.
(5) Runoff Volume/Pattern -Projected volume and pattern of runoff for the Unit including peak stream discharges associated with the storm conditions specified as design criteria for the particular class of Unit, as prescribed in Table 4.1 of Article 4, Subchapter 2, Chapter 3, Subdivision 1 of this division.
(6) Wind Rose -An estimated wind rose for the Unit showing wind direction, velocity, and percentage of time for the indicated direction.
(1) Map and Cross-Sections -A comprehensive geologic map and geologic cross-sections of the Unit showing lithology and structural features. Cross-sections shall be indexed to the geologic map and shall be located to best portray geologic features relevant to discharge operations.
(2) Materials -A description of natural geologic materials in and underlying the location of both the Unit and its surroundings, including identification of each rock's type, relative age, distribution and dimension features, physical characteristics, special physical or chemical features (e.g., alteration other than weathering), distribution, the extent of any weathered zones, susceptibility to natural surface/near-surface processes, and all other pertinent lithologic data, all in accordance with current industry-wide practice [e.g., California Division of Mines and Geology's (CDMG's) Note 44 Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geologic Reports (April, 1986)].
(3) Geologic Structure -A description of the natural geologic structure of materials underlying the location of the Unit and its surroundings, including: the attitude of bedding (if any); thickness of beds (if any); the location, attitude, and condition (tight, open, clay- or gypsum-filled, etc.) of any fractures; the nature, type (anticlinal, synclinal, etc.) and orientation of any folds; the location (surface and subsurface), age, type of surface displacement, attitude, and nature [e.g., aperture, amount of brecciation, degree of alteration and type of alteration products (tight, gouge-filled, etc.)] of any faults; and all other pertinent, related structural data, (all of the foregoing) in accordance with current industry-wide practices [e.g., CDMG's Note 42 "Guidelines to Geologic/Seismic Reports" (May, 1986), and CDMG Note 49 "Guidelines for Evaluating the Hazard of Surface Fault Rupture" (May, 1986)].
(4) Engineering and Chemical Properties -The results of a testing and estimation program, carried out by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist, as needed to formulate and support detailed site design criteria, including:
(A) determination of engineering and chemical properties of geologic materials underlying and surrounding the Unit, and of the Unit's containment structure components (i.e., liner, LCRS, and final cover components);
(B) determination, or estimation, of the engineering and chemical properties of the waste and other layers placed, or to be placed, within the Unit.
(5) Stability Analysis -A stability analysis, including a determination of the expected peak ground acceleration at the Unit associated with the maximum credible earthquake (for Class II waste management units) or the maximum probable earthquake (for Class III landfills). This stability analysis shall be included as part of the ROWD (or JTD) for the proposed Unit, and an updated stability analysis (if the original analysis no longer reflects the conditions at the Unit) shall be included as part of the final closure and post-closure maintenance plan. The methodology used in the stability analysis shall consider regional and local seismic conditions and faulting. Data and procedures shall be consistent with current practice and shall be based on an identified procedure or publication. The stability analyses shall include modifications to allow for site-specific surface and subsurface conditions. The peak ground acceleration so determined shall be the stability and factors of safety for all embankments, cut slopes, and associated landfills during the design life of the unit. For landfills and for waste piles and surface impoundments closed as landfills, final cover slopes shall be designed in compliance with the slope requirements of s21090.
(A) The stability analysis shall ensure the integrity of the Unit, including its foundation, final slopes, and containment systems under both static and dynamic conditions throughout the Unit's life, closure period, and post-closure maintenance period. The stability analysis shall include:
1.the method used to calculate the factors of safety (e.g., Bishop's modified method of slices, Fellinius circle method, etc.);
2.the name of any computer program used to determine the factors of safety; and
3.a description of the various assumptions used in the stability analyses (height of fill, slope-and-bench configuration, etc.).
(B) The stability analysis shall address all portions of the Unit and its immediate surroundings that are located in areas subject to liquefaction or unstable areas with poor foundation conditions, as identified either in the ROWD or in the Seismic Safety Element of the County General Plan, and shall address all portions of the Unit that incorporate geomembranes as part of the Unit foundation or containment system (including the final cover).
(C) The stability analysis shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist. Except as otherwise provided in ¶(f)(5)(D), the report must indicate a factor of safety for the critical slope of at least 1.5 under dynamic conditions. Regardless of the analysis method used, the stability analysis report shall include at least the following elements:
1.report preparation shall be in accordance with CDMG Note Number 42, "Guidelines for Geologic/Seismic Reports," May 1986, and CDMG Note Number 44, "Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geologic Reports," April 1986, [both available from the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 801 K Street, MS14-34, Sacramento, CA 95814-3532, phone 916-445-5716] which are both incorporated by reference, and shall include the following seismicity elements:
a.a review of earthquakes during historic times;
b.location of active major faults; and
c.surface investigation of the site and surrounding area;
2.the location of the critical slope and other slopes analyzed to determine the critical slope shall be shown in map view;
3.calculations used to determine the critical slope;
4.a profile of the critical slope geometry showing the various layers including the proposed fill surface, final cover, mitigation berms, lifts or cells of waste, fluid levels, or any feature that may serve to reduce the stability of the slope or may represent a potential failure surface; and the proposed ground surface, soil or rock layers and structural features;
5.the engineering properties of the refuse and other layers making up the site, shall be analyzed when determining the critical slope. These properties shall include a site-specific assessment of the strength parameters, the unit weight and, if using ¶(f)(5)(D), the shear wave velocity of each of these layers;
6.an assessment of the engineering properties of the underlying foundation materials under both static and dynamic conditions based on field and laboratory tests as determined necessary by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist;
7.the maximum expected horizontal acceleration in rock at the site determined for the design earthquake for the Unit under s20370 [i.e., for Class II Units, the maximum credible earthquake (MCE), and for Class III Units, at least the maximum probable earthquake (MPE)], as supported by data and analysis. For Class III landfills, the maximum expected acceleration in rock from the MCE can be used instead of the MPE;
8.seismic shaking parameters other than acceleration shall also be included in any assessment of dynamic slope stability. These parameters shall include at least earthquake magnitude and duration;
9.documentation of any peer-reviewed reduction factor for acceleration applied to attenuate the acceleration through the soil column or fill materials; and
10.documentation, as part of the dynamic stability determination, of any peer-reviewed amplification factor used for acceleration in loose saturated soils, if the Unit is located in an area subject to liquefaction, poor foundation conditions, or seismic amplification.
(D) In lieu of achieving a factor of safety of 1.5 under dynamic conditions, pursuant to ¶(f)(5)(C), the discharger can utilize a more rigorous analytical method that provides a quantified estimate of the magnitude of movement. In this case, the report shall demonstrate that this amount of movement can be accommodated without jeopardizing the integrity of the Unit's foundation or the structures which control leachate, surface drainage, erosion, or gas.
(7) Fault Identification & Proximity -Dischargers who own or operate new Class II Units [including expansions (of new or existing Units) built after November 27, 1984] shall identify any known Holocene fault within 200 feet of the facility (including any portions of such a fault underlying the Unit) in accordance with a procedure approved by the RWQCB. Dischargers who own or operate new Class III landfills [including expansions (of new or existing) landfills] shall identify any known Holocene fault underlying the landfill according to a procedure approved by the RWQCB. After July 18, 1997, dischargers required to submit a slope stability report, under ¶(f)(5), shall provide a review of historical seismicity within a 100 km (62 mile) radius of the facility, including the name of the fault, type of faulting, activity on the fault, design event for the fault (for Class II Units, the fault's MCE, for Class III Units, the fault's MPE), distance from the facility, the expected ground motions (horizontal and vertical) at the facility resulting from the fault's design event, the expected duration of strong motion at the site resulting from the fault's design event, and an estimation of the cumulative duration of strong motion from aftershocks.
(1) General -An evaluation of the water-bearing characteristics of the natural geologic materials identified under ¶(f)(2)including determination of hydraulic conductivity, delineation of all ground water zones and basic data used to determine the above.
(2) Hydraulic Conductivity -An evaluation of the in-place hydraulic conductivity of soils immediately underlying the Unit. This evaluation shall include:
(A) hydraulic conductivity data, in tabular form, for selected locations within the perimeter of the Unit;
(B) a map of the unit showing test locations where these hydraulic conductivity data were obtained; and
(C) an evaluation of the test procedures and rationale used to obtain these hydraulic conductivity data.
(3) Flow Direction(s) -An evaluation of the perennial direction(s) of ground water movement within the uppermost ground water zone(s) within one mile of the waste management facility's perimeter.
(4) Capillary Rise -Estimates of the height to which water rises due to capillary forces above the uppermost ground water zone(s) beneath and within one mile of the waste management facility perimeter. These estimates shall include an evaluation of the methods and rationale used in their development.
(5) Springs -A map showing the location of all springs within the waste management facility and within one mile of its perimeter. The map shall be accompanied by tabular data indicating the flow and the mineral quality of the water from each spring.
(6) Water Quality -An evaluation, supported by water quality analyses, of the quality of water known to exist under or within one mile of the waste management facility's perimeter, including all data necessary to establish the water quality protection standard (Water Standard) for the Unit, under s20390.
(7) Background -A tabulation of background water quality for all applicable Monitoring Parameters and indicator parameters identified for each applicable monitoring program under ss 20420-20435 and for all Constituent of Concern (COCs) identified under s20395.
(A) Background water quality for an indicator parameter, Monitoring Parameter or COC in ground water shall be based on data from quarterly sampling of wells upgradient from the Unit for one year. These analyses shall:
1.account for measurement errors in sampling and analysis; and
2.account for seasonal fluctuations in background water quality, if such fluctuations are expected to affect the concentration of the waste constituent.
(B) In case an evaluation monitoring program is initiated prior to fulfilling the requirements of ¶(g)(7)(A), the discharger shall, where feasible, establish background water quality based on a combination of all background data then available -including (1) all background data so far taken to satisfy ¶(g)(7)(A), (2) all background data obtained during accelerated sampling efforts under s20425(b), and (3) all appropriate water quality data from before WDRs were issued -in lieu of the one-year monitoring program under ¶(g)(7)(A).
(C) Background water quality of ground water shall be based on sampling of wells that are not upgradient from the Unit only where:
1.hydrogeologic conditions do not allow the determination of the upgradient direction; or
2.sampling at other wells will provide a representative indication of background water quality.
(D) In developing the data base used to determine a background value for each indicator parameter or waste constituent in ground water, the discharger shall take a minimum of one sample from each well used to determine background. A minimum of four samples shall be taken from the entire system used to determine background water quality, each time the system is sampled. In a case where there is only one background well, the four measurements per quarter shall be obtained by taking four independent samples, pursuant to s20415(e)(12)(B), and conducting separate analyses for each such sample.
(h) Land and Water Use.
(1) Well Map -A map showing the locations of all water wells, oil wells, and geothermal wells within the facility boundary and showing the locations of all such wells within one mile outside of the facility boundary.
(2) Well Owner -Name and address of the owner of each well indicated in ¶(h)(1).
(3) Well Information -Well information, where available, for each water well indicated in ¶(h)(1) including, but not limited to:
(A) total depth of well;
(B) diameter of casing at ground surface and at total depth;
(C) type of well construction (cable-tool, rotary, etc.);
(D) depth and type of perforations;
(E) name and address of well driller;
(F) year of well construction;
(G) use of well (agricultural, domestic, stock watering, etc.);
(H) depth and type of seals;
(I) lithologic, geophysical, and other types of well logs, if available; and
(J) water levels, pump tests, water quality, and other well data, if available.
(4) Land Use -Current land use within one mile of the perimeter of the Unit, including:
(A) types of land use (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational, etc.);
(B) types of crops;
(C) types of livestock; and
(D) number and location of dwelling units.
(5) G.W. Use -Current and estimated future use of ground water within one mile of the facility perimeter.
(i) Preliminary Closure Plan -For any proposed Unit (including a proposed lateral expansion of a Unit's RWQCB-Permitted Area) and for any Unit not yet required to undergo final closure, the ROWD shall contain a preliminary closure and post-closure maintenance plan, under s21769, containing a generalized cost estimate for closure costs and for annualized post-closure costs, supported by sufficient detail to validate the plausibility of the estimate. For any Unit (or portion thereof, in the case of a landfill undergoing complete final closure of a portion of the Unit) that is closing (or that is required to close), the ROWD shall be amended to contain a final closure plan, under s21769, containing sufficient detail for the RWQCB to validate that the closed Unit will meet all applicable SWRCB-promulgated closure-related requirements of this title, and containing an updated, itemized closure cost estimate.(1. New section filed 6-18-97; operative 7-18-97 (Register 97, No. 25).)
Note: Authority cited: Section 1058, Water Code. Reference: Sections 13172 and 13267, Water Code; and Section 43103, Public Resources Code.
Disclaimer: Although Lawrina works hard to ensure the information on this page is accurate and timely, we take no responsibility for deviations from the official text. Section 21750 SWRCB - Waste Management Unit (Unit) Characteristics and Attributes to be Described in the ROWD. [C15: s2595 & s2547(a) // T14: s17777, s18260, s18263, & s18264] may have been updated since our last review. Please refer to official resources for the most accurate information.