Laserfiche WebLink
-5— <br />Foothill Sanitary Landfill <br />Module LF -2 - Liner Performance Demonstration <br />San Joaquin County <br />Section 3.5 — Potential for Impact of Groundwater by LFG <br />The report states that the liner system will be the primary means to contain and control landfill gas from <br />reaching groundwater. As mentioned before, trace amounts of VOCs have been detected at the site. The <br />the attributes of the liner system to contain and control landfill gas and the <br />County should discuss <br />likelihood that gas may migrate through the modeled 1 cm hole. <br />The Report states that the County conducts a routine LFG program at the landfill. It includes three <br />shallow monitoring probes located around the existing waste footprint and at no time has combustible <br />gas been detected in these probes. The County must elaborate on how many LFG probes will be <br />installed to monitor the new modules and supporting rationale.Provide eected the vaon whether zone aother <br />' landfill gases, other than combustible, have been monitored and <br />site. <br />"The first step will be to remove the pressure from the landfill liner by venting or <br />The Report states that, <br />collecting LFG from the leachate collection system• Further actions will be taken based on an <br />engineering evaluation of the situation." Please address what type of landfillghe o eratinhase control system will <br />e <br />incorporated into the design of Module LF -2 for capturing landfill gas during p g P <br />inactive phase. <br />Section 4.2 — Leachate Parameter <br />le.27:Sectign 20310(c)=specifies that containment- structures ra e t d dation =The performance <br />demonstration report compares the modeled attenuated constituent concentrations to drinking water <br />Maximum Contaminant Levels for the inorganic constituents chloride and barium to demonstrate that <br />the liner design will prevent degradation of groundwater. However, the results of the performance <br />demonstration modeling need to be compared with background concentrations and/or Water Quality <br />Protection Standards of the constituents of concern. <br />' Section 4.3.2 — Leakage Zone <br />For a one centimeter hole a 10=foot by 10 -foot polygon was used. Please provide an explanation of why <br />this size polygon was chosen. To be more conservative and possibly more realistic with regards to <br />' preferred pathways, we recommend that a 1 -foot by 1 -foot polygon be modeled. <br />Section 4.3.4 —Model Simulation Period throughthe modeled 12 inch interim layer <br />We are concerned that additional infiltration will be occurring <br />cover (HELP model) over the life of the entire landfill (multiple modules). Most of the rainfall,in the <br />valley comes in large storm events rather than slow rainfall over time. These storms erode the cover and <br />expose the waste to infiltration on the steep side -slopes. We propose that the interim cover be thicker <br />than 12 inches in order to minimize infiltration throughout the lifetime of the facility. This cover <br />material may be excavated upon final waste disposal to reach final elevation/capacity. We expect that <br />additional soil cover i.e., 2,-3, or 4 feet) may aid in the settlementicompaction of the waste over time <br />and possibly provide additional landfill space at the end of the landfill's life. Alternative interim cover <br />materials maybe acceptable. Title 27, Section 20705 (b)' <br />Minimize Percolation states that, "Interim <br />cover over wastes discharged to a landfill shall be designed and constructed to minimize percolation of <br />liquids through wastes." <br />