Laserfiche WebLink
+7 <br />The authors believe that the risk for chemical clogging in tlie landfill gas coliection layer shouldbe similar to thart in ttre leak detection systemJ.-Witer yapor with-in ths landfill gas that is <br />colleeted by the landfill gas collection layer will often cdndense, resqltinf in ftqui] which is <br />referred to as condeusate. This condensate often has similpr characteristics [o UnAnll lealhate; <br />therefore, the authors. recommend using a range similar to ttre LDS (Leakag{ Detection Systemi <br />range of n"l to 1.5, since the layer will have a level of expdsure to teactrate dimilar to that,of theI"DS" In the absence o,f available information, the design$r is urged to ch$ose a consenrative <br />'Ihe GSE Drainage Etesign Manual <br />vah.re (i.e., 1.5). <br />T'able 4.4 Chemical <br />Chapter 4 - Design And Concapts <br />leduction <br />ve layer of the <br />judgo the risk of <br />mds using values <br />(see Table 4.4). <br />I ologging in the <br />helshe anticipates <br />The aul;hors <br />1.1 to 1.3, siince <br />In the absenoe of <br />in the waste <br />4,3.3 Biologic:al Cloggtng Reduction Factor, kFss <br />The biologicat cllogging reduction factor accounts fon the re$uction of flow irf ttre geonet due tothe growth of biologjc,al organisms such.as fi.rngi or algae, or root p*n"d.tiotithrough theoverlying soil" GRI-GC8 recommends using values in thl rung" of t"e to 3.5 for bioiogicalclogging in the ;final cover system (see Table 4.4), The aulhorJconsider th{ upper end ,rtl thisrange to constitute a eondition whereby improper design of the cover allows [ooi putt"trati'n tooccur" coordination.is required wirh a ptant bioloiist irnd the cg;;;;F;"i d;G;;;';; <br />understand how prolific and how deep roots may devilop. The reduotion frttor for biJlogioal <br />-. The designer should evaluate the soils he/she anticipates using in the pr <br />linor system and the-materials antiaipated in the ovellying wastq in ordirvrv *J1116 YvqDlv, Ilt <br />chemical ologginrg of the primary leachate collection layer. GRI-CC83*il-^.-^-^^^3! l Aa^.!n n^---r-- -r- t I . <br />ln the range of 1.5 to 2.0 for chemical ologging in the leachlte collection sye <br />values at the,lou,er end of the range should be used for munfcipal solid waste <br />Gzu-GCg rer:ommends using values in the range of l.i to 1.5 for chenl <br />Ieakage detectiorr layer (see Table 4,4). The designer should evaluate the soi <br />using in the protr:otive layer of the liner system and the typibal materials anti <br />sheam, in order tio evaluate the risk of chemicat ologging, <br />- <br />clogging should then represent anticipated design conditionsl <br />GRI-GC8 does not provide explicit recommendations for selecting u fiotogical clog;ging <br />i:*gtj.:3":::T::lfilllt,sas collegfon layer. { c"gmnalisoq to the oir,., $n"tl*s aescliuei <br />in GRtr-GCE can nonetheless be rnade" The authors believe tliat the rist for Uioiogical ologgirrg inthe landfill gas collection layer should be similar to the leakage detEotion <br />recommend using a range similar to that in the leakage deteg.tion layer range <br />the layer's level of exposure to leachate will be simllar to ihat of the LDS. <br />available infonnation, the designer is urged to choose a consJrvative value (i.t <br />Page 4-15 <br />lue (i.el, 1.3).