Laserfiche WebLink
For the prescriptive analyses presented herein, though the soils were assumed to <br />yield similar performance under prescriptive and alternative cover conditions, the <br />vegetation was assumed to be limited to the 1 -foot thick vegetative layer. <br />4.3.4.5 Root Length <br />As shown in Table 3, variations in the cumulative root length (within a 2 -meter <br />square area) do not significantly alter the performance of the cover system. As a <br />result, this is not considered a sensitive parameter. A conservative 100 -meter root <br />length was selected for subsequent long-term analysis. <br />4.3.4.6 Root Flow Resistance <br />As shown in Table 3, slight variations in root flow resistance yielded insignificant <br />changes in cumulative system performance. As a result, this is not considered a <br />sensitive parameter and a root flow resistance of 1.0 was assigned for the long- <br />term analyses presented herein. <br />4.4 MODELING RESULTS <br />Modeling the performance of the low hydraulic conductivity barrier layer of a prescriptive <br />cover system constructed in an and and semi -arid climate is particularly difficult because <br />environmental stresses (desiccation and settlement cracking) are likely to degrade the <br />hydraulic properties of the low hydraulic conductivity barrier layer over the long term. <br />Consequently, modeling results based on unstressed initial material properties will not be <br />realistic. In fact, academic investigations indicate that the saturated hydraulic <br />conductivity of a prescriptive cover system in a semi -arid to and climate can degrade by <br />two to three orders of magnitude within a period of a few years (Dr. Craig Benson, <br />personal communication). A similar condition is noted in the test results presented herein <br />where the initial remolded saturated hydraulic conductivity of the clayey on-site soils is <br />typically in the range of '10-7 to 10"8 cm/s but the conductivity of in-place interim cover <br />soils (which exhibit otherwise similar characteristics) is on the order of 10-s to 10-6 cm/s. <br />Though perhaps the most important threat to cover performance, there is no methodology <br />available to describe the degradation process in a way that would be realistic for input <br />into an unsaturated flow analysis. In order to accommodate this difficulty, moisture flux <br />modeling was performed based on material characteristics that are degraded in a fashion <br />similar to that observed at the FSL. That is by degrading the hydraulic conductivity to <br />about 3x10 cm/s and using the soil suction data associated with these weathered soils. <br />K <br />Modeling of a prescriptive final cover for the FSL was conducted using LEACHM in <br />order to allow for performance comparison to the alternative final cover. It should be <br />noted that since the proposed cover will be constructed to a prescriptive standard and is <br />In <br />C.-UOOS.0082XFOR WARD/ForwerdCOVER.DOC17/13/ZOOS <br />Geologic Associates <br />