Laserfiche WebLink
Benjamin Escotto [EH] <br />From: Robert McClellon [EH] <br />Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 3:55 PM <br />To: Benjamin Escotto [EH] <br />Subject: FW: Foothill LF Preliminary Plans <br />Attachments: 2015 FH Clo-PostClo Tablet RevJan20l7.pdf, 2015 FH Clo-PostClo Tablet <br />RevJan20l7.pdf, TableOfContents-Rev1an2017.pdf, 2015-01-20 Foothill Seismic <br />Analysis.pdf, 2017-02-03 JTD_Fig06 PrelimFinalContours Fig 06.pdf; JTD-Fig06A Future <br />ET cover tie in.pdf <br />Follow Up Flag: Follow up <br />Flag Status: Flagged <br />From: Bahadori, Taj [mailto:tbahadori@sjgov.org] <br />Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 8:40 AM <br />To: Wochnick, Michael@ Ca I Recycle <br />Cc: Robert McClellon [EH]; 'Howard.Hold@waterboards.ca.gov'; Otsubo, David @Ca I Recycle; Taylor, Kevin@Ca I Recycle; <br />Nordstrom-Lamkin, Dia ne@Ca I Recycle; 'Karl, Christi ne@Cal Recycle'; DelFrate, Todd@Waterboards; Chandra, Joyesh; <br />Acevedo, Juan; Carroll, Michael <br />Subject: RE: Foothill LF Preliminary Plans <br />Dear Michael, <br />Based on our telephone conversation of January 25, 2017; regarding the below email, San Joaquin County is submitting <br />the following: <br />1. Revised Plans: <br />Attached, please find revised Figure 6 showing: <br />a. Evapo-transpirative (ET) closure cap placed in 2006, <br />b. Footprint of Module "I" beneath the final closure contours. <br />Also attached is new Figure 6A showing the tie-in between existing partial ET closure cover and the final ET <br />closure cover. A short discussion of this tie-in is included in that Figure. This new figure is referenced in the <br />revised Table of Contents, also attached. No other design changes, such as slopes and closure timing, have been <br />made. <br />2. Final Cover Design: <br />San Joaquin County continues to plan for closure with an ET cap, a minimum 4.5 feet thick in accordance with <br />the approved ET cap demonstration project. The JTD submitted in July 2015 assumed that of the lower one foot <br />of the 1.5 -foot intermediate cover in place at the time of closure could be incorporated into the ET closure cap, <br />and that the County would apply an additional 3.5 feet of ET. However, in response to your comment, our cost <br />estimate now assumes that none of the existing intermediate soil would be used as ET cap, and that the County <br />will apply 4.5 feet of additional soil for the ET closure cap. This change is reflected in the cost estimates (Tables <br />1 and 2 attached). <br />3. Final Cover Stability: Seismic Analysis Report Attached. <br />