My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_2006_4
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
9999
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440005
>
Archived Reports
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_2006_4
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2020 3:53:24 PM
Creation date
7/3/2020 10:51:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
2006_4
RECORD_ID
PR0440005
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004516
FACILITY_NAME
FORWARD DISPOSAL SITE
STREET_NUMBER
9999
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
20106001-3, 5
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
9999 AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4433_PR0440005_9999 AUSTIN_2006_4.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
554
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r� <br />u <br />STATIC AND SEISMIC STABILITY ANALYSIS <br />WMU FU -06 FORWARD LANDFILL <br />PROBLEM: <br />Assess the static and seismic stability of the refuse over the base and side slope lining system for WNW <br />FU -06 at the Forward, Inc. Landfill. <br />GIVEN: <br />These calculations have been previously performed for the prior WMUs at the site and they have been <br />found to have a satisfactory factor of safety and seismic deformation. The analysis for WMU FU -06 is <br />similar to WMUs FU -03, ART -03, FU -04, FU -05, and various other WMUs at the site. <br />1. According to the site development and final grading plans for the site, the maximum planned elevation <br />of refuse for the landfill is 170 ft MSL with 3:1 slopes and 20 ft wide benches every 50 vertical feet. <br />The 170 ft elevation may only be achieved if waste placement occurs in adjacent waste management <br />units. <br />2. The planned maximum elevation of refuse in WMU FU -06, prior to the development of adjacent <br />waste management units, is 150 ft MSL. This elevation is based on 3:1 slopes on the south, east and <br />west. The north slope is filled against an existing refuse slope. <br />3. Development is planned to the east of WMU FU -06. The east -facing slope of WMU FU -06 is <br />therefore temporary. Waste placement in the adjacent cell to be constructed to the east of WMU FU - <br />06 will buttress the east facing WMU FU -06 slope. <br />STABILITY ANALYSIS SECTIONS AND CRITERIA: <br />1. The critical cross section for the stability analysis is under the maximum filling configuration (refuse <br />fill elevation 170 ft) in the N -S direction. <br />2. The acceptable static factor of safety is 1.5 for permanent slopes. For interim slopes, a static factor of <br />safety of 1.2 to 1.3 is acceptable. <br />3. For seismic analyses, acceptable deformations are less than 1 -foot. <br />SUMMARY OF STABILITY ANALYSIS RESULTS <br />The minimum factor of safety under the Forward Landfill maximum fill configuration (refuse elev. <br />170 ft) is 1.7. The critical failure surface extends from approximately the crest of refuse, through the <br />refuse mass, and then along the base (cuhion geotextile/HDPE) and slope liner. Failure surfaces <br />extending along the base liner and through the northern interface liner slope were also searched but <br />found to be less critical. From the seismic analysis, the anticipated amount of deformation is less than <br />1 -inch. <br />2. The minimum factor of safety for the southern portion of WMU FU -06 under the planned maximum <br />fill configuration (refuse elev. 150 ft) is 1.6. The critical failure surface extends from approximately <br />the crest of refuse, through the refuse mass, and then along the base liner. Both the base liner <br />interfaces (clay/HDPE and cushion geotextile/HDPE) were analyzed but the cushion geotextile/HDPE <br />condition was found to be more critical. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.