HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 1996-1999: Correspondence, Solid Waste Coord. reports to TB Wf'AJ
MAY'-07-99 11 :07 FROM: iD A364667S PAGE 1/3
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this tax is intended for the"named
raclppients only., It may contain prMleged and•confidenttal
matter: if you,have received thl>�fax in errpr,please notify
QV us imme latl�ly .ay I! collect ,telephone call to (5�6).
and 364,8800 and return the original to the sender by matt.
We will reimburse you far rstelpe. Do not disclose the
0 Bart�lucci contents to anyone. Thank•you,
dh CONSULTING ENGINEERS '
334 Crossways Park Drive,Woodoury,'New York, 11797-2015
516.364.9590 • Fax.516.364-9045
D&B FAX NO; (6 16) 364-9.045 DATE: 14'7. 43
COMPANY NAME : �014ww
ATTENTION: I Ov"40' 1
FAX NO.: ,1
FROM: t `ye' Cog
S1.118JECT JOB#:
No. OF PAGES:
(including cover sheet)
MESSAGE:
THANK YOU:
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSVLOCH A6SOCIATES,P.C:
MAY-07-99 11 :08 FROM: ID*3649675 PACE 2/3
- DISCUSSION DRAFT-
May
RAFT-May 7, 1999
James Bunchuck, Solid Waste Coordinator
Town of Southold
Town Hall
Main Street
Southold,NY 11971
Re: Landfill Closure
Meeting of April 30, 1999
D&B No. 1314-132
Dear Jim:
Following up on our meeting of April 30, 1999; presented below is a list of items -which we
understand the Town will attempt to complete in support of closure efforts:
1. Obtain details on existing irrigation water supply well for abandonment purposes. The.
information required includes well diameter and screen depth-intervals (i.e., screen top
and bottom). The Town will arrange for installation of a new irrigation well on the
northern portion of the property beyond the cap limits.
2. Contact property owners of parcels bordering the landfill regarding construction.
easements. Up to.60 feet.will be required by the contractor in areas where the limits of
waste:abut the property boundary. A map identifying these areas is attached.
3. Clear, level and provide for access to the landfill from.the right-of-way to Cox Lane and
arrange for removal of adjacent property owner's equipment .The right-of-way will be
used for-laydown and access during construction:
4. Clear and grub the area to be-capped including all fence lines:
5. Select site for 55,000-gallon scavenger waste storage tank: During the April 30th
meeting, siting the tank on the landfill in the area of the former lagoons was discussed.
The lagoons are presently being backfilled with a well compacted material, and therefore,:
this part of the landfill represents a potentially,stable location for the tank. Due to limited
space at the landfill after capping and in the area of the Collection Center, in particular if
the planned improvements and expansion are implemented, no other options have been
identified: If accepted by the Town,construction of the tank could.bo included in the
landfill closure construction bid package, It should be noted that permits may required
for construction of the tank.
MAY-07-99 11 : 08 FROM:D ID*3648675 PACE 3/3
James Bunchuck, Solid Waste Coordinator Page'Two
Town of Southold
Town Hall
May 7, 1999
6. Contact electric power company to arrange for meeting at site to.,discuss power line
heights, working. in the area of the power.lines, and interfacing with power*line tower
foundations and cap construction.
7. Contact Cutchogue Fire Department regarding relocating siren off of area to be capped.
8. Complete excavation and relocation of waste outside the. limits of the cap at Recharge
Basin No. 2(northwest basin)(see Closure Plan Drawing 3).
9.- Complete excavation and relocation of waste outside the limits of the cap at location-
northwest of Collection Center(see Closure Plan Drawing 3).
10. Complete demolition and removal of structures on west side of Recharge Basin No. 1.
(southwest basin), including removal of underground storage tank.
Tf:you:have any questions,regarding:this letter or require additional information or assistance, please
do not hesitate to.contact Dave Glass or me:
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher,P.E.
Vice President .
TFM/DSG/ld
Attachment
cc: Supervisor Jean W. Cochran(Town of Southold)
Council person John M. Romanelli (Town of Southold)
Council Person Alice L Hussie(Towyn of Southold)
David Glass (D&B)
Curtis Velsor(D&B)
♦]314gTM99-12,LTK(KO5)
FEB--04-99 10:09 FROM: • ID: 0649045 PACE 1/3
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this tax is intended for the named
recipients only. It may contain priWeged and confidential
matter. 9 you have received this fax in error,please notify
Dvirka lus immediately by a collect telephone call to (516)
and 364-9890 and return the original to the sander by mail.
We win reimburse you for postage. Do not disclose the
Bartilucc! contents to anyone. Thank you.
d1bOONSAXTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 9 Fax 516-3649046
D&B FAX NO: (516) 364-9045 DATE:
COMPANY NAME :
ATTENTION:
FAX NO.: 15�4 "705-7(o
FROM: lit-Vii
G�®SUYG
SUBJECT: AWJOB#:
NO. OF PAGES:
5
Qnduud"cover sheet)
MESSAGE:
lI�iY1+ 1� r
THANK YOU:
A DIVISION of WILLIAM F COSULICN ASSOCIATES,P.C.
i�F.B-04-99 10 :06 FROM: • ID: 516*9045 PAGE 2/3
-DRAFT-
Ernest Lampro,Jr. February 2, 1999
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid &Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40—SUNY
Stony Brook,New 'York 11971
Re- Southold Landfill
Final Closure Plan
D&B No. 1314-FI
Dear Mr. Lampro:
On behalf of the Town of Southold we are responding to your letter dated January 11, 1999
regarding the Final Closure Plan. Your comments and corresponding responses are presented
below.
N'Y'SD)EC Comment No. 1: The Final Closure Plan on page 8-4 was modified to add that
condensate from wells outside the limits of waste would be collected for proper disposal. This
implies that condensate from wells inside the Iimits of waste would not be collected (ie., drained
back down the well as specified in the Draft Closure Plan). The Plan must have the condensate
from all the wells collected.
Response to Comment No. 1: Condensate from gas collection wells, if installed, will be
collected for proper off-site transport and disposal, regardless of the location of the wells from
which condensate is collected.
NYSDEC Comment No. 2: On page 3-6, the Final Closure Plan. states that at the end of the
work day, exposed waste would be covered by six-inches of daily cover (general fill). The
November 18 D&B response to Department comments stated that six-inches of soil would be
used to cover any exposed waste at day's end.
Response to Comment No. 2: General fill, which may consist of soil and/or alternate materials
approved by the NYSDEC such as glass sand, will be used to cover exposed waste at the end of
each day.
FEV-04-99 10 : 09 FROM: • 1003649045 PAGE 3/3
Ernest Lampro,Jr. Page Two
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid &Hazardous Materials,Region Orae
February 2, 1999
NYSDEC Comment No. 3: This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill
Closure State Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation
relating to all revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The Town must add
to the closure plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and
maintained and the frequency with which it is to be submitted.
Response to Comment No. 3:
The Town will be submitting a separate response to this comment.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, PE
Vice President
TFM/DSG/bl
Cc: Jean Cochran,Supervisor,Town of Southold
Alice Hussie,Town of Southold
James Bunchuck,Town of Southold
David Glass,Dvirka and Bartilucci
♦1314f FM99.05.UR
.,JAN-26-99 09:04 FROM: • ID: 064SO4S PACE 1/15
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this fax is intended for the named
recipients only, It may contain privileged and confidential
matter. If you have received this fax In error,please notify
DVirka
us immediately by a collect telephone call to (516)
and 364-9890 and return the original to the sender by mail.
f� p We will reimburse you for postage. Do not disclose the
v Banti l 1t�'c! contents to anyone. Thank-you.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 4, Fax:5165-364-9045
D&B FAX NO: (516) 364-9045 DATE:
COMPANY NAME , 4vk A�
ATTENTION: Jim pv�4�
FAX NO.: 7�6,74M
FROM: UAW, Q��
SUBJECT:
J06#:
NO. OF PAGES:
(including cover sheet)
MESSAGE:
ALA� � vtly Y�Vi�VY
G4p*"
tYl U� 1,1,rEAM OJA
c �
V&
tv Sc,u
04
THANK YOU:
A VIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES.P.C.
' JAN-46-99 09:05 FROM: • ID: 0649045 PAGE 2/15
-DRAFr-
January 26, 1999
Ernest Lampro,Jr.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid& Hazardous Materials,Region One
Building 40—SUNY
Stony Brook,New Fork 11971
Re: Southold Landfill
Filling of Former Scavenger Waste Lagoons and
Scrap Metal Recovery
D&B No. 1314-F2
Dear Mr.Lampro:
On behalf of the Town of Southold we are writing to inform you that the Town intends to begin tilling in
the former scavenger waste lagoons at the landfill. The glass sand being provided to the Town by ATaste
Management as approved by NYSDEC will be used. The.filling will be conducted in accordance with the
recommendations presented in the enclosed compaction test report prepared by 'Tectonic Engineering
Consultants(TEC).
The existing (unburied) construction and demolition (C&D) material at the Iandfill also will be used in
conjunction with the glass sand to fill the lagoons. Recommendations, prepared by TEC, for use of the
C&D in filling in the lagoons will be followed. TEC's recommendations are presented in the enclosed
letter dated January 22, 1999.
In addition, the Town intends to begun recovering the metal scrap buried in the northwest corner of the
landfill. The operation will involve excavating and screening the metal scrap_ The screened scrap will be
conveyed directly to containers being provided by Franza Universal of Farmingdale, New York. The
containerized metal scrap will be transported off site for recycling by Frariza Universal. The resulting
screened soil will be used to cover the excavation at the end of each day.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or require additional information,please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher,PE
Vice President
TFM/DSG/bl
cc_ Jean Cochran, Supervisor,Town of Southold
Alice Hussie,Town of Southold
James Bunchuck,Town.of Southold
David Glass,Dvirka and Bartilucci
0 1314n7M9"1.1U(R01)
..IAN-26-99 09:05 FROM: • ID: 5 049045 PACE 3/15
REGIONAL.OFFICES
TEC
T®N/� ENGINEERING Latham.New York 518.783.1930
® CONSULTANTS PC. AuDueA,Massachusetts 508.832.7146
'.Ves1 CheVar,Ohio 513-759-9900
P.O.Sox 447,615 Rovto 32 Fax Na 914.928-9211
Highland Mills, New York 10930 914-928-6531
Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
Vice President
Dvirka and Bartilucci Consulting Engineers
330 Crossways Park Drive
Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
January 19, 1999
RE: W.O. #2142.04
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL CLOSURE
LANDFILL COVER SYSTEM MATERIAL
FIELD AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Dear Mr. Maher:
In accordance with our proposal dated October 23, 1998, Tectonic Engineering has
performed field and laboratory testing of the glass sand material. As we understand it,
the glass sand will be used as a bulk fill to raise the existing landfill waste mass grades
to the final subgrade elevations of the landfill cap. The following presents our
investigation, findings, and recommendations for use of the glass sand material for this
purpose.
1.0 LABORATORY TESTING AND FINDINGS
During our December 29, 1998 field visit, one bulk sample was obtained from the glass
sand material stockpile to perform one test for grain size, moisture content and
moisture-density relations. The maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture
content (OMC) was determined from the moisture density relations test commonly
referred to as the Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557). The tests were reported on
January 6, 1999 (attached). Also attached are the results of previous testing reported
on June 17 and 22, 1998, which were performed for grain size, moisture content and
MDD and OMC using the Standard Proctor (ASTM D 698) method. The change In
testing methodology from ASTM D 698 to ASTM D 1557 was made to: 1) obtain a MDD
and OMC that is more representative of the level of compactive effort provided by
modem construction equipment; and 2) provide a reference that is consistent with
general landfill engineering practice at this time.
CIVIL -CEOTECHNiCAL-STRVCTURAL ENGINEERS _
'JAN-26-99 09:06 FROM: • ID: `3649045 PAGE 4/15
TECTONIC `:�:'"EF`''
Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E. 2 January 19, 1999
The recent material grain size gradation reported on January 6, 1999 was found to be
very similar to the gradation from previous testing reported on June 17, 1998. The
material is equivalent to a coarse to fine sand and is very angular to sharp. The
moisture content of the recent and previous grain size tests were found to vary. This
can be expected due to weather conditions, seasonal changes, length of time the
material was stockpiled, and where the sample was taken from within the stockpile. In
addition, during the in-place field testing, bag samples were collected to test for
laboratory moisture contents to verify field moisture contents obtained by the nuclear
gauge. The comparison found that the actual laboratory moisture Is about 2% higher
than the field moisture. As a result, field values should be adjusted upwards about 2%
to obtain the actual moisture. This should be noted fvr adjustments during the CQA
testing of construction earthwork.
According to ASTM D 1557, the laboratory testing found that the glass sand has a MDD
of 115.5 pcf at an OMC of 9.0%. Note that previous testing according to ASTM D 698
found a MDD of 112.0 pcf at 12.0%. The difference in MDD is typical (within about 5 pcf
or 5%), which reflects the higher energy level used to compact soil in the lab using the
methodology of ASTM D 1557. These MDD's and OMC's are within a typical range for
sand.
1.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND FINDINGS
On December 29, 1998, a representative of Tectonic Engineering visited the Southold
Landfill site and directed the Town's forces for the construction of a test pad to
determine the compaction characteristics of the glass sand material. Two wedge
shaped lifts of the material were constructed. The first was roughly 30' by 20' and
ranged in thickness from about 2" to W. The second lift was roughly 25' by 20' and
varied from 6"to over 24" in thickness. Each pad was constructed by using a front-end
loader to dump glass sand piles that were shaped and compacted into lifts using an
Fiat-Alice FD30B bulldozer. The bulldozer compacted the glass sand by tracking over
the material in two passes.
A nuclear density gauge was then used to test the in-place density of the material In
locations where the lift thickness was found to be 6. 8, 10, 12, 18, and 24 inches. Two
tests were taken In each location by rotating the nuclear gauge 180 degrees. In
addition, two sets of tests were performed at different water contents for the 12" lift
thickness to evaluate the compaction for a water content closer to the OMC.
The June 22, 1998 standard proctor test was used to guide and evaluate whether
acceptable compaction was being achieved during the field testing. The actual In-place
density values obtained were then compared to both the standard proctor and modified
JAN-26-99 09: 06 FROM: • ID: &649045 PACE 5/15
TECTONIC ^,ccFFR
:.S:c raarS P,.
Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E. 3 January 19, 1999
proctor MDD as shown in the attached ""Field Testing In-Place Density Report"
summary sheet. Note that the compaction values achieved in the field are calculated by
dividing the measured in—place dry density by the MDD.
The testing indicates that the material readily compacts using standard construction
equipment, such as the bulldozer provided by the town. It also indicated that the
material is capable of being compacted to the required degree even when the moisture
content is low, in the adjusted (2% upwards) range of 5% to 7%, which is 2% to 4%
below the ASTM D 1557 OMC of 9.0%. Normally, material specifications require
material to be within about 2% of OMC to achieve the required compaction and increase
the relative ease of material placement. The field testing shows the glass sand can
achieve a minimum in-place density of about 90% relative to ASTM D 1557 for lifts In
the range of 8 to 18 inches at below optimum moisture contents. In summary, the glass
sand achieved an acceptable level of compaction with a reasonable level of effort.
It should be noted that when working in close proximity to the glass sand material at a
low moisture content, the dust from the glass was found to be an eye irritant.
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the preceding findings, we recommend that the following criteria be followed
for placement and use of the glass sand:
Glass S nd as Bulk Fill Material Below Landfill Ca
The following recommendations are for general use of the glass sand as a bulk fill:
• The material should have a minimum specified In-place density of 90% of the
maximum dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM 171557.
• The material should be placed with a moisture content within 2% of the optimum
moisture content.
• The material should be placed in maximum compacted lifts of 9 inches.
• The glass sand should be separated from geomembrane liners by a minimum of
6 inches of suitable soil or protective fabric to prevent puncturing as a result of
contact with the sharp edges of the glass particles.
• We recommend that a dust control plan be prepared that anticipates the potential
need for low-level eye and respiratory protection should the dust not be
JAN-26-99 09:07 FROM: • ID*3649046 PAGE 6/Is
TECTONIC .
P.
Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E. 4 January 19, 1999
suppressed through moisture control measures. Moisture control would likely be
achieved by maintaining the material within 2% of the optimum moisture content,
but the criteria for implementing personnel protection should be based on field
conditions at the time of construction.
Glass Sand as Bulk Fill Material in Lagoons
The following additional recommendations address the placement of glass sand
In the lagoons only by the Town's municipal forces:
• The soil should be placed in maximum compacted lifts of 9 inches.
• Providing the moisture content remains very close to the moisture contents
found for the stockpiled material we tested, the soil can be placed with no
adjustment of moisture.
• The compaction effort must be greater than or equal to two tracking passes
over the complete lift surface of the glass sand using equipment that exerts a
ground pressure greater than or equal to the Town's Fiat-Alice FD30B
bulldozer.
Please call me if you have questions regarding this report.
Sincerely,
TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, P.C.
Peter T. Sutherland, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
Attach.
PTS/c:1projectsisouthoid\2142.04GIassrep.doc
JAN-213-99 09 : 07 FROM: , ID: 064904S PACE 7/1S
rRor>rcr No.2142.01_ OA1> ; I/6/99 GRMN SIZE ANALYSIS
TE'CTOATC PROrrrcr: Southold Landfill
F,NG[NEETtl1VG CONSULI'AN'1•S P,C. �
t ocAMN: Southold, N.Y. SOURCE:Glass Mat. From Wage Mamgemer
U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES ! U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROb1I3'I'ER
1C* 12 6 4 3 2 1.3 1 3 4 1 2 318 3 4 6 8 10 1416 20 30 40 50 701001200
I I I ►1j 1 1 I til ' � i i ' 1 I ' '
I I ilI II; I I I ` ,II i I
90
l i I 111 � ►'ii I I I '1111 I ' i ' ll i
80
i I
i III II III I � I II
I !
III il , ► ii i'. ! ! i
E I
R 70 ( I
t
E it
T I I I I i ii I
6o I
I I I I l I i t I i) I I Ili
E w l l I I I' I 1111 I I I i ( j
R Ili I I l i III , I 'I ' I II III I
Y 40 ! �
I
w I I I I I i it I I I i!1 F.
CEJ 30
7
zo
� ! l ( ( ! I I I I it i 11 -1 --F
10 I l i I i i ; I i I i I
. I I HIM 1 1I
1 �
it
i I i i I I 1 I01 1 i i ,
100 II
0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIIAirTMS
COBBLES I GRAVEL ! SAND I SILT OR CLAY
coarse fwe coarse I medium fine
Specimen Identification I Classifieuion 1 MC% LL PL j PZ I Cc I Cu
• BS MCl j Gy c-f GLASS,trace Sat i 6 I I I i 1.14 L; 10-3
i
Specimen Identification I D100 I D60 D30 i DI0 %Gravel I %Sand j °Silt ; clay
• MMC1 _ 19.00 1.45 i 0_.480 0.1400 ; 9.0 85.5 5.5
JAN-2S-99 09:08 FROM ID:103S4904S PACE 8/1S
�'►��.���:�.. t4c.vI Ifni::-_1/6/ - COMPACTION TEST
TECTONIC i PROJECT: Southold Landfill
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS P.C. •
i LOCAT10N: Southold, N.Y. SOURCE:Glass Mat. From W99e Hanagemei
150 i
+
I
145 I i '
+ I I Specimen Identification BS-MCI
140 i ! I Description of Material Gy c-f GLASS_,trace Slit
I I I
I i Test Method _ASTM D1S57/A
135 ! I
I i
i i I
D ! i j ! ,
R I I I TEST RESULTS
Y
D130 I I I I I \ I'. Maximum Dry Density 115.5 PCF
NOptimum Nater Content 9.0
T s !
Y 125 I I ; I I I I AT ERBERG LIMITS
P ! ( !
o I I Ii LL PL PI
u I f I I % %
x120 I ! !
I
s + i ! I CURVES OF 100% SATURATION
Nt FORSPECIFIC GRAVITY EQUAL TO:
2.80
C ...-----u , rl i i I I I 2.70
b 1 i I 1 I
2.60
c110 I I I I l i I I
I `. I
I I { ! I I l I
` i I i i 1 `
105
' I j I t J
104
I ! ! !
+
! I
95
90
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
WATER CONT'EN'T(hroetu Dry Weight)
MOISTURR-DR.NCITY RRI.ATIONCUW
PRojEcT No-2142-01 DATE; 6/1 GRAIN SIZE ANALYS
PROJECT: Southold Landfill
INS,
�i■i�n�n�u w■ iii n�imm=�
INSu
Ii���umi■inmmiiiii���i�iniiiiwiiii�i
II..�I II INiII1Nu11�111111��9II�I�N��111111��
��m�nnm�i .�ionm�mmn■
INS mmn�im� ■iiiu 1
II�IIOIIII�;IIIIIN���1�1111�1��11810���1111�11��
�� IeIR��■IIIIIII�■II�� u IIIIIIIHIIIIIII��
��Allll IYI��IAf�Y��119111v NI'11�
HOW loin
@IIRIIIB�III111N
�m
�- o
LOCAMON- Southold,N.Y.
iIMM WIE�
ii■■iii
■i■wwl�wr.
'' iiiii■►�®�
■t■iiw��i1■1
Aim■iii®i
■wi�i■ii�@!r
�■iiiiii►iii.
t■■■iii■r'lii\
i■ilii■iil�ii, ., ,. . . . � .
�■ii■r�■iii��rw►
�iiiiriiiir�ii►
■iiiiiiiii�%iir
wi■ii■iwii■��ii\
i■■wiiiiiiiir�i■�
■iii■iiiiiiwi►�®�
. ' iiiiiiiiiri■iiia!►
■i■iiiiiii■rii�®r. • ,� . •
iiiiiiiiiiii■ir�wi► • • •
■iiiiiiiiiii■wi�ir :,
1i/MIiiiiimoiii.rii\
■■■ii■■■iiri■■w�rir ,
■iiia■iiia■wiirr►�t�■w.
■ii■iiiir■wiiii■■wra�r
�iiiii■iiiirn�wiii►\ii► .'
iii■wiiiii/dill■�iiii�
' iiiiiiiii/%iiili�iil�ii►
r■iiiiiiiiiiii■iiiii0�
■iiwiiii�i�wiir�ii■\\iii►
■wiiii/_%iiiiiiiiiwii�8r
i�.ris.t�iiriiiiiw��`ii►.
' ■ii■iii■■■■ii■■■■■�i�►'�ii.
MOO NO ON WI■wIMi■won WIN WOMEN=
r
■wiiiWIN MPiir■iiiON■wiiiMi■.
iiiiwiiiiriiiiiiiiii■iii0r
■iii■iiwiiwiii■■wiiiiiwiii\
„ ■iii■■■ ■�wi��■■iiii■■iil�ii.
■iiwii■■iwiiiAriirii■iiiii►
iiiiwiWIN■ir■iwi■iiii■i■i■wii.
■riiiii■wiiiiiiii■w■■i■■■■iii.
ii=MrOni ■iiiiniii���r
■■ WMImIM ■AIio■ ■■■ ■ww■�.
rim oilwi■iirM+■r■iiw�riiiii
iii■■i0i■iiO■■iiiiiiiiiiiii�r
ii�iiii�iiiii�iitiiiiwiiiiiii�i►
■■=iiC41&I It if■w�■w ow�r�■■wiwr►v��
•
JAN-26-99 09110 FROM: • ID: S10E4904S PACE 11/1s
TECTONIC ENGINEERING P.C.
DETERMINATION OF WATER (MOISTURE) CONTENT OF SOIL
ASTM D4959
TEC W_O. 'i:s:�--1*o '
9Y'n
r
PROJECT: �.. �• .t�f #...,:: ,;�3.:r��Yx::>Y:...}}• .....::.: . ... :� TESTED BY �;;:..-•: ,: ',_
+ySa}, u.,y: •sn ..x �h?i':;FYb>»}>;.:oYY •:r'.iis•.',{,'''�'r:
•xan:'. .wWS>:•'
p53"i}�•ifii'•` '�tf:: ':,:. a.«:i::;:<::Y.}.SY::.'.::.:
DATE SAMPLEd: r,.s.s:.•.: :,. .< a,>Y�{.>,>nwy......,,,.,,.::.:..,.. CHECKED BY: :1n
; ... ,.yZ>E2's::>
DATE TESTED: <>� Y� : * bk'G 11919*3' ";ir .ik>i :<.is:fFfF"r.Pofl;'r S:.'a,::et.sr's'•
Sam !e I.D.Container#
.}rsiii•.•>�7'p•e"'3S .iii i\ +>j N�+f:..•A°a $ L'n:' ••::
.a 3K:.:w:<�f'^^'�::}+�aw bNX iu ,e;•v., <tr oa s. :aaa'•ax.k>:a:
t � :.<•<+•a•rt b.:b. •sfifrtviti iMfrf:„:!:< �.Y„ <•t«'•
:;GS:: ::i'•' '{�fe' l:b$ ��s` av}x«r.w<„<:.a.:, .}wY «+l i ..�,...i.. ,}a}f•a,�
Wt. of Container
:\�. r.a:a: n�Y.YA 'f►l.?iM. 'S��'� ..tr%•'i'a.'M<Hf•:«.«•'•Y.
+�{<J. 's �'.y�••::Y��i:?$w•'::i,a:Y:y4 �%95•"•>'.,^'• :n..gri �:'u•• :fiH}»;�::YCk:`t!�f.�ry'.
b..•.
Wt. of Container+Wet Soil '..,
.........
... .. sktbcaa; <;
.';Yf}f::t79. . ... .:«:.>....:.....Ri•.•{ik{<{«x{<•w.n•+.^�W�«.$A>. ffY'F:<:Ak:f� a;.:<,'<a:a:.\h.«<v.••,a
'+r,,:v', ;:ar.'/•rSii},f:o>>%'.
�Y S:S:3 .:S::i :.b.: }ik:::}3 ;(: •i3it.>'iii. 'stt:r!.�.
Wt. of Container Dry Soil •�
. xY;, •:ia>i3s`F>bf}z' a'as;�
Wt, of Water 8 11.9 5.21 6.31 9.4
Wt. of Dry Soil 135 236.81 121.3 111.2 187.2
Water Content 5.93% 5.03%1 4.29%1 5.67%1 5.02%
Sample I.D.1 VISUAL DESCRITPION
MS-1 ND, LOC. 1/1 A BWN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace slit
'Tar 2•S3Siw
MS-2 ND, LOC.2 BWN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace silt
a:a>}Y :Yl.Y}: i:'Y"/i •.w:• sr"'r•f.,.,..
n
r}:
is i�o rii�•'�ie�ih Kik
�'v w3oxr�reS,'rf$55^••�fi^w.s'Fr#"t�^r.'•f. .`5..:7.Y :Yie w. �:7.. .''3i��':` 23+Si
MS-3 BWN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace silt
!Y'if,:} r}x•Y :Yr.'fv. :ahw}•:Y}}»»•+b; xlax•:•} �q
'.q:;{.ik 1.+14 K�ny.: �iY}:<:Y� }I:};:>i"•}ii::n'•SR{:}df?::.l ii�:::7�%::t
CNFi:•
r:�Y.'o'S>bf::fl's y 2+•,^::R, x 'ti:es<: .ekb:•.'•'yr,a9:a" mxm:a>3io>i:a:ai}b>y}Sifi
x{.•w:v.<?a«x•�r%+.Ba:«..•w}exo7fi:�'S:FSa?,.:fS<;;q:%6n w:C:,•;sF2�L^`,. v.?i'fi^';"+. r.: .<:eSiR:t.t;r,:,k.,w,.:,+.4^:t4R!gvfr,'S.a:a::.:.<Y.s.e.:.:,...:
MS-4 ND, LOC. 3A 13WN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace silt
.f.:•:rt
;'>(i:':•nx::.,o:::'ii,�:•ii.•::«vii::i•:•:«:.;.;:.'•:v.n.�
..ti.i•>i::
isftk nis::i75":
:F:•rye? :Lti
•tea a••:,} .::::...... .'..�.�•i'• :;}i,.':n:;:n
MS-8 ND, LOC. 11 A BWN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace silt
v:e'{..:,v.,� v\•'i:T:fin,.
.... ::::..:::.:::::v/.Y}}:v,,.....:4 i:aY::S:.<...... ....... ....... .•..�'.:•%aY:t+.S.,v,•.;!'i!:.>: :.: ..;.,<.:•::::«}r:.;•.un{:....,
.:,:..v:,.r::::..:•:..::.::.::.:..:':{:•::,.,...:..,,••:•..,..:",..:.:�:...;...:,.•Y.::....:.•:•.Y:••:•:rv,::.;:.,::.;.:•if.i.::..,.:,.,.�.,:•1.4:•:11.;.;.;«;•::::::.,. . .... .
u^} ,.I<+i{::..Y:.:tiin♦ .•:.. }{9Y+f'y-"•Ff. } 1 :: ....4:. } •.b.,..
JAN—X26-99 09: 11 FROM: • IDSO364904S PAGE 12/15
a
TECTONIC ENGINEERING P.C.
DETERMINATION OF WATER (MOISTURE) CONTENT OF SOIL
ASTM x4959
TEC W.O. :-20 k :
<tAi
;:.,t
,..i.
PROJECT:
�i.iif..
�.�i.�: . .El�i�:aa'? TE
PSTED B
Y-
...
'i' ...
.: !.•w:«w:xe:e}L:3ra.'>}d:;>3�>.•:'i:`�.�;::^��,•::;,;.ys.
DATEP tt: ,4:E:;:fr<,;.3: `:t:>w:xx:S;:,Y,.f•y::: e,d...w �,y'
SAM LED: >xiH.ti4x+:a.w.t:..,1,..r•i. iii<1:v:o.N f>•t::3tf b:+:J vYS;•+""/.R...,{t:;:ti:fl:.R' CW K <•.w, ne:
ai,ilj}5{'•:'�•GSSieii�'Eiirii::oi�i�iii:i;:i �i{f';•�'ti;�;:•%.C::.!«:+:,k.}!:;b7F}:«k.s}Y:a ux•'�'`Y`i.�kYel:ii.
DATE TESTED: .' s5:: �f
.�..�.. ..:.s!SGa['•.ea`:i'•rii�fl?':^:!"::?,;S q�!'i�::'`:f;.••�+•i to ax4i•i+tsA+a:
:. .. ..'3•'.. .t•:::t•^i•'i...•^moi. <.%.<..•: .v..,a..
Sample I.D. E:Yr +t. :: : >i3}:+<ri ;a:,.}%i.
...,:...:...::.,.:•...:.is .....Te:.:::Y.:t.r:q}%''.<.:.Y...O:}S:i::::i..Y<Ctt' •.:.,.}...<.•.:;:n:::�ti:��t.:i}�.:..;}.;:
:i:W r..ih::::.r%i1t Sii:'i7' }Y>Yi•14C:+: :Jt.:t 1}'}'v v.3•••,,•:
..7i�:'"4.' �»:Y}r�i.:J.si3Y:�>:..fa JR4itf}L.:f}t}l:�S::•'afhi.
Container�! ..a�H�:�.. xr...:: � � t,+.... ^r ..M.,::,;.::. "#s a;>;>::•
•SSN•il'.'�:4}IS• >{ b4N91GA„}' �f,:H,tN:?K 4.:!S{;: d4}r%}w. '!n:S:�}! W:J:::}!••
i~ m ..•.tom'�:�":°:h�:' .;,:c;r,. .w.
.:%or '.b�vhw4<ww�•if,:4>,f if.'.?.°n'" }:4:E:.'L ^..:...;.,:
},,• ..}r i!aiµ:+i%++x:a i•xaxz.::,:i:a:,.a:•:;wi:; .Yss•a+r.}t.e s}r. }}Ys:4�>w��'r,p:^,�
y7 :ax4}::•:}:u::EiE4r>:r}:•`•>:e�:a:4��t}ttrt:•M%s .:,}r...t,
Wt. of 4���;
Container! %3.:«Y•.^•.:•
r.;54' x•>Swat4A'+.:i i:3}t'fP.N�'i.4'•y.'+Yw•b
?iy iii±r•k}x.:
:?'�i3, �.
.•:bw:�::Y.}.:tn:.}:}r:«'Y'":S:'�'i�r.','b� 'b•kY frt%.d
ftq!S?ft:f r.:Y:<' 5w`'�'is•�Rtr.A7?h+<},•..�:r:y.+ :E.%a:..:S.r:j' :Gi>}>r.,Y.,:
W.of Container+ :..:>:; ~::;:<:g��;�.::.
Wet Soil »�;<:;n�:� �' �.-� �€:� ',' eu+w.4.w::Eo.er }; a:ji;:ai+r%Ei.:.w:tuo+ua
^':•
:Si55td:l•SYh•iJFY: R:}3:::4Gft:'
ie:Si<%':,':iFF:'. ,t':a`i ::i'2�is>•'G:iida•:i:ri .,:<i.x•.
+ Y.w'Y:
Wt of
Container D Soil
•'�4�': ..7c.�'. .YS:! :f::.5:': »:>.�Sh:titRYXS �.:MStShv>.Y;r;tr. %•a•'j!
..: :�.. '�• ..rax::.%.. •:t }r:E•
M. of Water 5.8 5.8
M. of Dry Soill 91.5 101.4
Water Content 1 6.34%1 5.72%
Sample I.D. VISUAL DESCRITPION
MS-5 ND, LOC.6 BWN/GN SAND,trace gravel,trace silt
w:it•ti•awa:4:bw:•:+,n:4%::brYS:4:•Y.•r:Y;i•i 7,}ijY
9 rrii 014.'+.
:M.
MS-7 ND, LOC, 14 A BWN/GN SAND, trace gravel,trace silty
Y'.+:nie}}%ti.>•, :F'iti'i; n•A•aYY :}wi'rYY}:{+r};.,.w'
.;•a
w.%•:
t:4
Yr:
.u.• .:�>:•ie�i:4awx...:4:EF:b..}:TS•.F's.'SR:'i^•,t7'�. `:v:'::i"•":•ri•" '•::'o<""x xti�v.. K<:iisio>i>ii�iiiia
si�tir"• :'�•iiti'L�•
n:FJ: r%.:•r
'!�was:s�iibfyei�u3•»SrowY'i>zx:i:}a�:•::::°e +:o+i..:.:.i±`:r t. `�}S`o>.�'":sai';'i>•
.. .. ....: .. ..::�,.:..::•r....i•..•wi.,,.Yrri.,.::ieui.:<t.:.......+:.sw.>:.if}'shtYr'wi40".
},
..,... •:....:.:t... Y.r.r,..;.n.:::.::....E .3 4Y'3't.fit•:•.:.: } ...
.;}.............
..3'. .«..nr*n n. ..,,.......:.:.....a. x:....r.......... .s,`.`'t Ft
'JAN-26-99 09: 11 FROM: ID: 464904S PACE 13/1S
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL
W.O.#2142.04
FIELD TESTING IN-PLACE DENSITY REPORT
Sample ID MD_D OMC Prepared by: PTS
BS-4 112.0 12.0% Date: 1111/99
BS-MCI 115.5 9.0%
Adjusted BS-4 BS-MC1
Depth Field Field Adjusted %.MOD %MOD
Test Lift Source Soil Moisture") Moisture Test Test Standard Modified
No. Lift# Depth Rod ID pcf %. DD OD( Proctor Proctor
1 1 10 8 BS-4/BS-MCI 2.9 2.7% 4.9 107.0 105.0 93.7% 90.9%
1A 1 10 8 BS-4/8S-MCI 2.9 2.8% 4.9 105.4 103.4 92.3% 89.5%
2 1 10 8 SS-4/BS-MCI 3.7 3.6% 5.7 106.8 104.8 93.6% 90.7%
2A 1 10 8 BS-41BS-MCI 3.7 3.4% 5.7 108.3 106.3 94.9% 92.0%
3 1 8 6 BS-4/BS-MCI 3.7 3.5% 5.7 104.5 102.5 91.5%e 88.8%
3A 1 8 6 BS-4/BS-MCI 2.6 2.4% 4.6 106.6 104.6 93.4% 90.5%
4 1 8 6 SS-44 LS-MCI 4.2 3.9% 6.2 106.6 104.6 93.4% 90.6%
4A 1 8 6 M4/8S-MCI 3.4 3.2% 5.4 105.8 103.8 92.7% 89.9%
6 1 6 3 BS-4/BS-MCI 3.4 3.2% 5.4 106.3 104.3 93.1% 90.3%
5A 1 6 3 SS-4/8S-MCI 4.0 3.8% 6.0 105.5 103.5 92.4% 89.6%
6 1 6 3 BS-4BS-MC1 5.3 5.1% 7.3 103.3 101.4 90.5% $7.8%
6A 1 6 3 BS-41BS-MCI 4.2 4.0% 6.2 104.7 102.7 91.7% 88.9%
7 1 12 10 BS-4/BS-MC1 4.0 3.8% 6.0 105.9 103.9 92.8% 90.0%
7A 1 12 10 SS-4/B$-MCI 2.9 2.7% 4.9 107.3 105.3 94.0% 91.1%
8 1 12 10 BS-4/BS-MCI 3.7 3.4% 5.7 107.7 105.7 94.3% 91.5%
8A 1 12 10 BS-4/BS-MCI 4.5 4.2% 6.5 107.8 105.8 94.4% 91.6%
9 2 14 12 BS-MBS-MCI 9.0 8.6% 11.0 106.1 104.2 93.0% 90.2%
9A 2 14 12 BS 4/BS-MCI 8.7 8.1% 10.7 108.0 106.0 94.7% 91.8%
10 2 12 12 BS-44BS-MC1 4.8 4.3% 6.8 111.8 109.7 98.0% 95.0%
10A 2 12 12 BS-4/BS-MCI 6.1 5.5% 8.1 111.6 109.5 97.8% 94.8%
11 2 18 12 BS4/BS-MCI 3.2 2.9% 5.2 109.3 107.2 95.79/6 92.8°
11A 2 18 12 BS-4/B$-MC1 2.9 2.7% 4.9 107.0 105.0 93.7% 90.9%
12 2 18 12 SS-41BS-MC1 3.4 3.1% 5.4 111.0 108.9 97.2% 94.3%
12A 2 18 12 BS4/BS-MCI 3.7 3.4% 5.7 109.0 106.9 95.5% 92.6%
13 2 24 12 BS-4165-MCI 5.8 6.4% 7.8 107.3 105.3 94.0% 91.2%
13A 2 24 12 BS-4/BS-MC1 4.2 4.0% 6.2 105.7 103.7 92.6% 89.8%
14 2 24 12 8S-41BS-MCI 5.0 4.8% 7.0 103.5 101.6 90.7% 8T.9%
14A 2 24 12 BS-4/BS-MCI 5.6 5.4% 7.6 104.1 102.2 91.2% 88.5%
Note:(1)Field moisture contents should be adjusted upwards approximately 2%to obtain true moisture contents.
' JAN-215-99 09 : 12 FROM: is
ID3649045 PACE 14/15
REGIONAL OFFICES
IA r` *;"` ENGINEERING Latham,Now York 513-783.1630
CONSULTANTS PC, Aubum,mas*wMusetts 308-932-7146
Wont Chester,Ohio SQ-759.9500
PO.Box 447,615 Route 32 Fax N0.814-928-9211
Highlenct Mitis. New Ycr* 10930 914.9286537
Dvirka and Bartilucci Consulting Engineers
330 Crossways Park Drive
Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
Attention: Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
January 22, 1999
RE: W.O. #2142.04
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL CLOSURE
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS
LAGOON FILL
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Dear Mr. Maher:
As requested, Tectonic Engineering has reviewed in concept the proposed use of
residential construction and demolition debris (C&D) as bulk fill for the landfill lagoon.
The lagoon is located In the northwest comer of the landfill along the landfill "footprint"
edge. The lagoon is about 400 feet long, an average of about 120 feet wide, and about
25 feet deep.
The use of the C&D for lagoon fill is based on the following technical assumptions:
1. The C&D is of a mixed character, i.e., composed of various materials
resulting from residential yard work, earthwork, and building demolition
and construction.
2. The total volume of C&D stockpiled on site is about 1,000 CY.
3. Based on our review of the preliminary grading pians for the Southold
Landfill closure provided to our office by Dvirka and Bartiluccl, the
proposed maximum fill over the top of the lagoon surface is about 10 feet.
The recommendations for use of the C&D in the lagoon are as follows:
• The material should be mixed before being placed to the greatest degree
practicable.
• The C&D should be placed in 8-Inch compacted lifts.
• Compaction of each lift should be performed with at least four passes over
the complete lift surface using the Town's Fiat-Alice FD30B bulldozer or
compaction equipment with an equivalent or greater ground pressure.
'JAN'-26-99 09: 12 FROM: is ID: '3649045 PACE IS/Is
Mr. Thomas F. Maher, P.E. 2 January 22, 1999
• The C$D should be placed in alternating lifts with the glass sand or other
acceptable bulk fill material. As discussed in our letter dated January 19,
1999, the glass sand should be placed in compacted lifts of 9 inches and
compaction of the glass sand should be performed with at least two passes of
the bulldozer.
• No significant quantities of materials that create hydrogen sulfide, such as
gypsum board, should be landfilled.
• The C&D should only be deposited at an elevation that is at least 5 feet above
the seasonal high groundwater level.
In summary, If the above assumptions and recommendations are followed, the C&D
should be acceptable for use as fill in the lagoons.
Please call me if you have questions.
Sincerely,
TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, P.C.
Peter T. Sutherland, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
PTS/c:iprojectstsoutho1d12142.04 C&D rep.doc
v •
Dvirka
d1b and
Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive Woo(.nury, N'i v York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 ■ 718-460-333,' i'i-364-9045
e-mail: db-eng@worldnet.Et.r:t
January 26, 1999
Gregory F. Yakaboski, Esq.
Town Attorney
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 117.9
Southold,NY 11971
Re: Southold Landfill Closure
Engineering Design and
Construction Inspection Contract
D&B No. 1314
Dear Greg:
At your request, we have reviewed ycniir suggested changes to the above referenced contract and
have spoken with Mr. John Stype of Val Son, :dons, Inc., and have the following responses:
1. Section I —Basic Services of u., l;n>lineer
The words "and any and all additional pertinent regulations and/or laws" will be added
following the 1 st sentence in paragraph 1.1.
2. Section IV - Insurance
Owners Protective Liability policy in the amount of $1 million will be added. It is my
understanding that this amount was agreed to between Mr. John Stype and our insurance broker,
Mr. Paul Cowell of Hubbinette and Cowell, Inc. It also is my understanding that all of the other
matters in the memorandum from John Stype to you, dated December 4, 1998, have been
addressed satisfactorily between Mr. Stype and Mr. Cowell.
With regard to the request that we -)sump, liability beyond our insurance coverage, or if
no insurance coverage exists, beyond comf;nsavon received under this contract, on the advice of
our insurance broker and counsel, we i ssume :he added liability. The amount of
coverage we are providing the Tov n :�f South )1d under the contract is well above that typically
requested.
A DIVISION OF W!.,.IAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
v '
DVIRKA AND BARTIL CI •
Gregory F. Yakaboski, Esq. Page Two
Town Attorney
Town of Southold
January 26, 1999
Our coverage includes the following:
• Professional Liability - $5,000,000 ($1,000,000 typically requested);
• General Liability/Automobiis Liability - $6,000,000 ($1,000,000 typically requested);
• Workers Compensation— Stalutory Requirements;
in addition to Owners Protective U,bility of$1,000,000 which typically is not required.
3. Section V —Indemnifica+io!,
The word "negligence" wiii be adde•.i w paragraph 5.1.
We hope that this addresses your comments. If you have any questions or require additional
information, please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
Vice President
TFM/tam
cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor
tice Hussie, Councilwoman
ames Bunchuck, Solid Waste Coor::lnator
O 1314/rFM99-03.Ltr(R01)
r,
`i rrr1. 01 -99 08. 59 FPOM- • ID: 3649045 PAGE 1/2
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this fax is intended for the named
recipients only. it may contain privileged and confidential
matter. if you have received this fax in error,please notify
Dvirka us immediately by
ahe collect
telephone
to the sender to mail
and , 364.9890 and return original
;K We will reimburse you for postage. Do not disclose the
O Bartilucci contents to anyone. Thank•you.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 9 Fax:516-364.9045
��.
D&B FAX NO: (516) 364-9045 DATE:
E COMPANY NAME :--
ATTENTION,
AME :_ATTENTION,
FAX NO.:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
I'� Yo{uta JOB#:
�1
NO. OF PAGES:
` (including cover sheet)
MESSAGE:
l r,� 1 et AVSri c
1!iue e1, e,
ca 4LA
THANK YOU. W`I'
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
h
f,
,f
Southold Landfill Closure •
Preliminary Estimate of Required Soil Volumes
Former scaympr Wasw Lagoons
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx. In-Place
II'lats�rial Arca(Acres) Thidss(in=) Yolum W%Ytls,) t
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 36,000 b,
Material
Gas Venting Layer 1 12 1,600
Barrier Protection Layer '
@ 12"'nock 1 12 1;600 y
@ 24"'Thick 1 24 3,200
Topsoil 500
Sand(67%) 1 6
Compost(33%) 1 6 300
East Siolsr at�14_�raoloa
t.
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Pince a.
Material Arca(Acres) Thi&Mcss(in.) Volume(CI._Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 9,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 18 12 29,000
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12"'Thick 18 12 29,000
@ 24"Thiek 18 24 58,000
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 18 6 9,700
Compost(33%) 18 6 4,800 `
Feat Sislc_at rA Grade(w10 upping Lagoon)
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Mat4rial Ar"tAm-4 Thk:kaLm(in.) Yolumc-(Cu.Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 59,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 14 12 22,600
4
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12"Thick 14 12 22,600
@ 24"Vick 14 24 45,200
Topsoil 7,600
Sand(67%) 14 6
Compost(33%) 14 6 3,700
W€st_iiikat2%Grade(wLo-Capping Lagoon)
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material Aro a 1Acresl TWckno ss(in.l Yolumc 0%X111.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- ---
33,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 14 12 22,600
Barrier Protection Layer
12"Thick 14 12 22,600 n
@ 24"Thick 14 24 45,200
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 14 6 7,600
Compost(33%) 14 6 3,700
1314\Sl.C6 lU.WK4\dsg 1 06/11/98
• Southold Landfill Closure•
Preliminary Estimate of Required Soil Volumes
Former Scavenger Waste Lagoons
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material Area(Acres) Thicknesson.) Volume(Cu.Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 36,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 1 12 1,600
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12"Thick 1 12 1,600
@ 24"Thick 1 24 3,200
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 1 6 500
Compost(33%) 1 6 300
East Side at 4%Grade
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material Area(Acres) Thickness(in.) Volume(Cu.Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 9,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 18 12 29,000
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12"Thick 18 12 29,000
@ 24"Thick 18 24 58,000
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 18 6 9,700
Compost(33%) 18 6 4,800
West Side at 4%Grade(w/o Capping Lagoon)
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material Area(Acres) Thickness n.) Volume(Cu.Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 59,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 14 12 22,600
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12-Thick 14 12 22,600
@ 24"Thick 14 24 45,200
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 14 6 7,600
Compost(331/6) 14 6 3,700
West Side at 2%Grade(w/o Capping LagQoW
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material Area(Acres) Thickness 0W Volume(Cu.Yds.)
General Fill/Contour Grading --- --- 33,000
Material
Gas Venting Layer 14 12 22,600
Barrier Protection Layer
@ 12"Thick 14 12 22,600
@ 24"Thick 14 24 45,200
Topsoil
Sand(67%) 14 6 7,600
Compost(33%) 14 6 3,700
1314\SLC610.WK4\dsg 1 06/11/98
A
I1II.-01 -98 09: 00 FROM: ID: 649045 PAGE 2/2
Southold Landfill Closure
Preliminary Estimate of Required Soil Volumes
Former Searengel Waste Lagoons
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
Material AreafAczes)! Th�ss_(In.) Volume!(tip 1 4s.)
General Fill-Comour Grading
T,laterial.
w'40�Slope on West •-- --- 36,000
w;'2°-i,Slope on West 35.000
Gas Venting Layer 1 12 1.600
Barrier Protection Laver
la 12"Thick 1 12 1.600
(�24"Thick 1 24 3,200
'Topsoil:
Sand(67%) 1 6 500
f Compost(33")) 1 6 300
EadSide.at_4%Slope
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.in-Place
1latetLrl ArralAct'ea) Thiclmess WO Vnluaur:(Cn.1ds.)
General Fill%Contour Grading --• ... 9,000
?Material
'i Gas Venting Layer 18 12 29.000
Barrier Protection Lav_er:
Q 12"Thick 18 12 29,000
(d%24"'thick 18 24 58,000
Topsoil:
Sand(670-5) 18 6 9,700
Compost(.131h) 18 6 4,800
West_Sideat4%Slope(w/o Capping Lagoon)
Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In-Place
s 111atecial Area(Acres) Thiclmess(in,) Volume(Cu.Yds.)
Grocral FilFContour Grading
M ate i al.
Fill Reqd to Achieve Slope --- 57,400
4 Fill Available from NW Basin ... --- 3,3003
Fill Available from SCV Basin --- 10.800
Total Net Fill Req'd(Not Incl. --- --- 43,300
); Fill Req'd to Cap Lagoons)
Gas Venting Iayer
14 12 22.600
Barrier Protection Layer:
!d 12"Thick 14 12 22,600
q�24"Thick 14 24 45,200
ropsoii
Sand(6703,) 14 6 7,600
Compost(3Y,)) 14 6 3,700
;t
West Side at 2%Slope(w/o CAppingl,altoon)
=t Approx.Surface Approximate Approx.In Place
51merw Area(Acres) Thiclawm(in.) Volume(Cm-Yda-)
General Fill/Contour Grading
Material:
Fill Req'd to Achieve Slnpr --- ... 32.800
Fill Available from NW Basin ••• --- 3.300
Fill Available from SW Basin --• 10 900
Total Net Fill Req'd(Not Incl. -•- ... 18,700
Fill Req'd to Cap lagoons)
Gas Venting Layer 14 12 22,600
Barrier Protection Layer:
12"Thick 14 12 22.600
Its 24"Thick 14 24 45,200
Topsoil:
Sand(670'*) 14 6 7,600
Compost(33%) 14 6 3,700
s
s
1314 SI CVOLS I R'K4'dsg 1 0710 F98
AUG-IB-9B 09:33 FROM: ID:5163649045 rnun t/:s
DRAFT
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF HYDROCAD ANALYSIS
(Assuming Proposed Transfer Station is Constructed)
25-Year 24-Hour Storm 6#/�
Freeboard at
Bottom Maldmum(High Estimated Peak Estimated Peak
Elevation Water Elevation Water Elevation Water Elevation
Basin Location (feet ams]) (feet amsl) (feet amsl) (feet)
Southwest(Wout
adjacent residential area) 26.0 42.0 37.4 4.6
Southwest(w/adjacent
residential area) 26.0 42.0 38.9 3.1
Northwest 40.0 48.0 44.6 3.4
Northeast 12.0 20.0 17.2 2.8
Southeast 30.0 40.0 36.4 3.6
100-Year 24-Hour Storm y
Freeboard at
Bottom Maximum(High Estimated Peak Estimated Peak
Elevation Water Elevation Water Elevation Water Elevation
Basin Location (feet amyl) (feet amsl) (feet amsl) (feet)
Southwest(w/out
adjacent residential area) 26.0 42.0 41.5 0.5
Southwest(w/adjacent
residential area) 26.0 42.0 43.9 -1.9
Northwest 40.0 48.0 46.2 1.8
Northeast 12.0 20.0 19.1 0.9
Southeast 30.0 40.0 38.4 1.6
•13141W8118051)OC(R02)
b
fff111 r
W
Town of Southold Landfill``
Surnrnary of HydroCAD Analyses Results Y6�-.----
Proposed Recharge Basin Capacities and Peak Contents I
Peak Contents Peak Contents o
Capacity 25-Year Storm 100-Year Storm 3
injojatiot. Asap-ids, Gwkns Aie-:-ss-t moons Asa-v--EW G94903 �
Southwest* 6.32 2,059,238 4.49 1,462,971 6A 1 1,990,814
Northwest 1.84 599,525 1.05 342,120 1.42 462.677
Northeast 4.96 1,616,11 i 3.22 1,049,169 4.40 1,433,647
Southeast 2.32 755,923 1.48 482,227 1.93 628,850
r
*Nate: Includes drainage from proposed transfer station. �
t I
Past•Ft'Fax Mote 7871 $ - in
/y`' gages � r
ico-
Phone N ase,✓ m Oti
J' o Pea
FAX
'Q '0
D m
n ,
M
i
M,3I8.WK4fdsg 08/!8/9805: 6 PN,
i;
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL
ESTIMATED MATERIAL VOLUMES REQUIRED TO
ACHIEVE PLANNED SUBGRADES
(Cubic Yards)
West Side at 4%
-Net Quantities-
Area Cut Fill Fill Req'd Fill Available
East Side 41,600 59,400 17,800 --
West Side
Fill for Lagoons 0 36,900 36,900
To Achieve Subgrades 9,800 71,200 61,400 --
Southwest Basin 10,400 0 -- 10,400
Northwest Basin 4,000 300 -- 3,700
Southeast Basin 800 900 100 --
Northeast Basin 800 2,900 2,100 --
Total 67,400 171,600 118,300 14,100
Total Fill Required= 104,200
West Side at 2%
-Net Quantities-
Area Cut Fill Fill Req'd Fill Available
East Side 41,600 59,400 17,800 --
West Side
Fill for Lagoons 0 36,600 36,600
To Achieve Subgrades 11,100 51,000 39,900 --
Southwest Basin 10,400 0 -- 10,400
Northwest Basin 4,000 300 -- 3,700
Southeast Basin 800 900 100 --
Northeast Basin 800 2,900 2,100 --
Total 68,700 151,100 96,500 14,100
Total Fill Required = 82,400
♦1314\GO817805.DOC(ROl)
I I j , I ' U v\L_j
FORMER MINING _ I
I� AREA
I �
J� MW-2D
MW-6D_/ 1
ACTIVE MW-3D B�
/ I I,\LAAREEA L
COMPOST
AREA
MW.-7D 1
/ 1 / OVERHEAD
ELECTRIC
LINES
FORMER LAND CLEARING
DEB
CENTER STORAGE
RIS AND AUTOMOBILE �r U
I DISPOSAL AREA \ 11
—COLLECTION
"---WASTE
L
STORAGE �� I I t SCh WEIGHING
GARAGE C El /I�� STATION
� � / ❑ � lJ
Al / RaAD 4e)
I
(COUNTY
MW-1D "f
ROAD
NORTM -_
II LEGEND
DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION
AUG-05-98 16: 12 FROM: 1D:5183849045 PAGE 2/2
Y .
APPRCXIMA7 LIMITS f'
OF PROPOSED
'1f RECHARGE BASIN49
,
! ` TP--NWRB 2
el
' �5 48
'W42/ KIW-6D
EL 52.37
TP-NWRB-3
J _ ,
; ;3,s
�
V, 1 :�
IN
TP N WRB �-- --{ 'M - -
;c----- - - - • - - TP N VVR
1/ 49,4X
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
N JUNE 1998 TES?
N '
�� pvirka and Bartilucci TEST TRENCH
Co!jsultinq Engineers
��;;�•� A Division of Wiitiam f. Goauiich Associates, P.C.
� 1
� Ooc' r
DEC—.17-98 09.47 FROM: • IDs 0648675 PAGE 1/8
U trka
and Uy
Q Bartlluccl AM
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury, New York, 11797.2015
516.384.9890 9 718.460.3634 • Fax: 516.364-9045
e-mall: db-enp®worldnet.att.net
June 10, 1998
Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road Post4r Fax Note 7671 Dm r2. �� ► g
P.O. Box 1179 To 7161 01tACWU c K "'01M 74/n fnA tel.
Southold, NY 11971 o'0jD*P,50U 7-LI,4 Lk) Co. -4 ,
Re: Southold Landfill Closure Pn • `7 3 V- 76 94ho V4 -34 y- 9009uD&B No. 1314EFaxM 3V- 71760416, 3b 90 f,S'
Dear Supervisor Cochran:
In response to the NYSDEC's comments on the preliminary landfill closure grading plan, in which
they requested a minimum 4% surface slope and capping of the former scavenger waste lagoons, the
grading plan was revised. The revisions, however, resulted in a substantial Increase in the quantities
of fill and contour grading material which would be required, on the order of approximately
36,000 yd' and 26,000 yd' to fill the former lagoons and achieve a 4% slope on the western portion
of the landfill, respectively (for a combined total of approximatelty 62,000 yd' of required fill
material). At an estimated unit cost for general fill material of$12/yd' (installed)62,000 ye" equates
to approximately $750,000 which is a substantial cost.
As a result of this cost, D&B contacted the NYSDEC to determine whether in light of these findings
the concepts put forth in the initial grading plan (i.e., 2% slopes and not filling in the lagoons)could
be reconsidered. NYSDEC has indicated that this is a possibility, but that additional information is
required to assess this request including further characterization of the former lagoons, and drainage
and settling evaluations to support the use of 2% slopes.
As a result, we have prepared the following description of suggested activities to obtain the
information required by NYSDEC.
1. In order to determine whether solid waste has been buried in the former lagoons, test pit
excavation is required. We have assumed that the Town will provide the labor and
equipment for test pit excavation and D&B will provide for oversight, visual
characterization and logging of test pit excavations. The estimated time to complete this
work is one(1)day and the cost for D&B's labor and expenses is$900.
2. In order to characterize the approximately 33,000 ydi of soil which has been stockpiled
at the landfill and evaluate it for future use in connection with closure construction, in
particular for suitability with respect to drainage on 2% slopes, geotechnical analyses are
required. D&B will collect up to four(4) samples of the stockpiled material for analysis
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
'DEC-?7-98 09:48 FROM: • ID, 5*649675 PAGE 2/9
CV'IAKA AND EAATILUCCI
Jean Cochran, Supervisor Page Two
Town of Southold
June 10, 1998
for the following parameters: grain size (ASTM D422), constant head permeability
(ASTM D2434), modified proctor (ASTM D1557) and direct shear strength (ASTM
133080). The estimated cost for the geotechnical analysis of four (4) samples is $2,840
and the cost for D&B's labor and expenses is $800.
3. In order to perform the settlement analysis requested by NYSDEC to support the use of
2% slopes, a proposal has been obtained from our geotechnical subeonsultant, Tectonic
Engineering Consultants, which is presented as Attachment A. As indicated, Tectonic's
cost to complete the proposed scope of services is $2,000.
4. In addition, as part of this effort, test pit excavation is recommended in the northwest
corner of the site since the extent of buried waste has not been completely characterized
in this area. The cost for this effort is included in Item l above.
5. In order to evaluate the drainage properties of subsurface soils in the area of the former
waste lagoons, being considered for use as a possible recharge basin, as well as in the
northwest corner of the landfill where construction of a recharge basin is also being
considered, advancement of two (2) soil borings with continuous split spoon sampling
from ground surface to the water table is required. Again we have assumed that the
Town will provide the labor and equipment for soil boring construction and D&B will
provide for oversight and visually characterizing and logging the samples. The estimated
time to complete this work is one (1) day and the cost for D&B's labor and expense% is
$800.
The total cost for this work, including labor, expenses and geotechnical laboratory analyses is
$7,200. The results of this work will be incorporated into the Landfill Closure Plan.
Since the results of this work are necessary to continue preparation of the Closure Plan, we
recommend completing it as soon as possible. We are prepared to undertake this work during the
week of June 15, 1998 with your approval.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(516) 364-9890.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher,P.E.
TFM/DSG/ld Vice President
cc: A. Hussie(Town of Southold)
D.Glass(D&B)
•1914%TFM98-09.LTR(RO4)
' DEC—X17-99 09:49 FROM: • I10: 101649675 PAGE 3/9
REGIONAL OFFICES
LathaY �C-r0 V 1 C ENGINEERING Auburn,
sere x 518.832 7146
J 6„/r/tl j+(� Auourn,Mreeaenuune soe•eaz�7ae
CONSULTANTS P.C. west Chester.Ohio 5+3.759.9500
PO.Sox 447,815 Route 32 Fax No.914.926.9211
Highland MIlle, New vbrk 10930 914.928.8831
Wm. F. Cosulich Associates, P.C.
330 Crossways Park'Drive
Woodbury, New York 11797-2015
Attention: Mr. Thomas Maher, P.E.
June 3, 1998
RE: PN-198.279
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS
SOUTHOLD LANDFILL
SOUTHOLO, LONG ISLAND, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Maher:
In accordance with your request we are providing you with this proposal to
provide geotechnical engineering services for the above referenced project. The
Scope of Services includes performing a settlement analysis. Our proposal is
presented as follows.
1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
1.1 Review the landfill closure design drawings and all available design
data and existing subsurface information.
1.2 Using up to 2 cross sections and areal estimates of the waste
subject to settlement, determine the volumetric dimensions and
estimate densitites of the waste subject to settlement.
1.3 Perform a settlement analysis of primary and secondary
(consolidation) settlement Identifying the maximum short term and
potential long term settlement which might occur.
1.4 Prepare a letter report describing the parameters used and results
of the settlement analysis,
2.0 LIMITATIONS OF SERVICES
2.1 Client shall provide the following:
a. The plan area of the waste subject to settlement.
b. The nature and composition of wastes In the area of
potential settlement.
C. Boring, test pit, and other subsurface data of soil, rock and
groundwater conditions.
CIVIL -GECTECHMIC,11- - :iTFIJC'TIJRAL ENGINEERS
DEC-17-99 09: 50 FROM• 14636496'75 PAGE 4/8
TECTONIC
Mr. Thomas Maher 2 June 3, 1998
d. Site grading plans showing existing and proposed
conditions.
e.
All related investigation and design reports.
2.2 No fieldwork or testing is assumed as part of our services.
3.0 FEE
Our fee for performing the above-described Scope of Services shall be $2,000.00
Additional Services, if requested, shall be charged in accordance with the
following unit rates:
Managing Principal $ 120.00/hr
Chief Engineer 110.00/hr
Senior Engineer Ill 85.00/hr
Senior Engineer Il 75.00/hr
Staff Engineer III 52.60/hr
Staff Engineer II 47.50/hr
Staff Engineer I 40.00/hr
Please return a signed copy of this Agreement and an Initialed copy of the
General Terms and Conditions of Agreement indicating your acceptance as
authorization to proceed with the work.
We look forward to assisting you and should you have any further questions,
please call me.
Sincerely,
TECTONIC EN NEERING CONSULTANTS, P.C.
Thomas J. Critelli, P.E.
Chief Goetechnicai Engineer
PTs/File 81PN198-279(c)
ACCEPTANCE: DATE:
TITLE:
DEC-17-98 09 s 51 FROM t� ID 03648675 PAGE 5/8
d1Dvirka
and
0 Bartiiucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797-2015
516-384-9890 9 715-460-3634 • Fax:518-364.9045
e-mail: cib-enq®woridnet.att.net
October 29, 1998
Jean W. Cochran, Supervisor
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold,NY 11971
Re: Southold Landfill Closure
D&B No. 1314
Dear Supervisor Cochran:
The purpose of this letter is to provide a scope of work and budget to perform testing of the glass
sand material being delivered to the landfill by Waste Management. This work will be
conducted by our geotechnical subconsultant,Tectonic Engineering.
The purpose of the testing is to determine the effort required by construction equipment to
compact the glass sand to be used for general fill and contour grading material for landfill
closure. The equipment used will be that expected during construction, such as bulldozers. The
parameters that will be evaluated in the field include lift thickness, density and possibly moisture
content if it varies too much from optimum moisture content. The optimum moisture content
and maximum dry density have already been determined by the Standard Proctor test method
(ASTM D 698). This testing data will be the basis for measurements of dry density, moisture
content and percent compaction achieved during the proposed field tests. Therefore, the material
delivered and used for the test must be the same. One grain size sample will be obtained to
verify the material is the same. In addition, one Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) will be
performed to provide data on percent compaction relative to the maximum dry density
determined by this method, since it is more representative of the level of effort provided by
modern construction equipment.
The proposed scope of work is as follows:
Engineering,
• Review background data and define field test parameters
• Direct field personnel
• Review field test results and prepare brief letter report appending field data and
summarizing findings
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
DEC'17-98 09: 52 FROM: 0 ID 03648675 PAGE 6/8
OVIAKA AND MAATILUCCI
Jean W. Cochran, Supervisor Page 2
Town of Southold
October 29, 1998
Field Observation Testing
• Perform one day of construction observation and field testing
• Provide in-place nuclear density and moisture content tests
Prepare field logs of test results
• Perform one(1)grain size,one (1) moisture content, and one(1) modified proctor test
The budget to perform the scope of work described above is $2,000.00 based on the following
breakdown of costs:
Engineering
The fee to provide services for oversight based on one (1) day of field testing and report
.preparation is $1,170.00.
Field Observation ani Testing
The fee to provide field observation and testing based on one 12-hour day is as follows:
1. Field Observation $540.00
2. Use of Nuclear Gauge 35.00
3. Grain Sire(1) 50.00
4. Moisture Content(1) 5.00
5. Modified Proctor(1) 100.00
6. Out-of-Pocket Expenses 100.00
Subtotal $830.00
Additional Services
During the last few months, D&B has provided additional landfill closure related services to the
Town in connection with securing alternate contour grading material and developing an optimal
compost blend for growth of landfill cap vegetative cover. Pursuing and securing the use of
alternate contour grading material, represents a significant cost benefit for the Town since
purchase of thousands of cubic yards of general fill material required for landfill closure is
avoided. Additionally, the development of a compost blend for vegetative growth medium using
the Town's yard waste compost will result in avoiding the cost of purchasing topsoil for the
landfill cap. A description of the services provided is presented below.
Securing alternate contour grading material has included:
DEC-+17-96 09, 53 FROM. � IDs•3646675 PAGE 7/8
OVIAKA AND®AATILUCCI
Jean W. Cochran,Supervisor Page 3
Town of Southold
October 29, 1998
• Obtaining, reviewing and evaluating chemical and geotechnical test results from three
potential sources: NYCDEP Flushing Bay Retention Facility Project, Waste
Management glass sand, and NYCDEP City Island Subaqueous Force Main Project
(Eastchester Bay).
• Preparing applicafigin for NY$DHC apppoval of t#te Rv*ift Sty inewlal, Glans
Sand and Finacheater Bay mourkl). Approval has been successfully received for all
three materials for the specific use (i.e., contour grading material for closure of the
Southold Landfill).
• Preparing provisions for agreements between the Town and the material suppliers for
the delivery of glass sand and the Eastchester Bay material. An agreement has been
reached with Waste Management for delivery of glass sand to the landfill.
Developing a compost blend and seed mixture for growth of 1 iii"tovar 'vegetation has
included:
• Obtaining nutrient analyses (performed by the Cornell Nutrient Analysis
Laboratories) for two (2) compost soil blends to determine recommended fertilizer
and pH adjustment requirements.
• Developing specifications for a seed mixture suitable for growth on the compost
blend and as a landfill cover, based on the results of the nutrient analysis.
• Preparing a letter providing recommendations to the Town for two (2) test plots to
verify the nutrient and seed mixture recommendations.
• Obtaining seed mixture for the test plot program and providing technical support for
implementation of the program.
The total cost associated with the additional services required to secure alternate contour grading
material and developing an optimal compost blend and seed mixture is approximately $10,000.
We suggest the addition of$5,000 for a total of$15,000 for this task in order to continue pursuit
of additional sources of material which will reduce the Town's cost for closure of the landfill.
As a result of our efforts, if the alternate materials are obtained at no cost to the Town, based on
a typical price of$5/cy for general fill, the Town could realize a cost savings of up to $400,000
for contour grading material, and more if topsoil is considered.
In summary, the total additional fee being requested for the above engineering services is as
follows:
• Glass sand compaction testing-$2,000
" DEt-*17-96 09: 54 FROM: . ID: 0648675 PAGE 8/8
OVIRKA ANO BARTILUCCI
Jean W. Cochran, Supervisor Page 4
Town of Southold
October 29, 1998
• Securing alternate contour grading material and developing compost blend and grass seed
mix -$15,000
If you have any questions with regard to this letter, or would like to meet to discuss these items,
please do not hesitate to call me. Since the landfill is presently receiving the glass sand which
can be used in the near future to fill the former scavenger waste lagoons, expeditious approval of
this work is important.
Very truly yours,
00-1
IV P fwoge�
Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
Vice President
TFM/scs
cc: A. Hussie (Town of Southold)
J. Bunchuck (Town of Southold)
•1314rW10298.1WC(R03)
AMG-05-98 16: 14 FROM: ID: 5&49045 PAGE 1/2
PRIVILEGE ANO CONI IDENTIALIT Y NOTICE
The information in this fax is intended for the named -
recipients only. it may contaln privileged and confidential
virka matter. If you have received this fax In error,please notify
us Immediately by a collect telephone call to (516)
and 3649890 and return the original to the sender by mail.
O Bart��uCCi We will reimburse you for postage. Do not disclose the
contents to anyone. Thank-you.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797-2015
516-3649890 9 Fax:516-3649045
D&B FAX NO: (516) 364-9045 DATE: g" �'• '9'°��
COMPANY NAME :_Mr/LOU
ATTENTION: kir MAM �
FAX NO.: 7�Or�.'•�j�T'''f ,
FROM: [Al °i
SUBJECT-
NO.
UBJECTNO. OF PAGES:
(Including cover sheet)
MESSAGE: M Ay�
r, Hrc
fi�vuYft
u
THANK YOU:
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
AtJG-05-98 16 : 14 FROM: ID: 5W49045 PAGE 2/2 ,
150
A �
\j S
�r
— APPROXIMATE LIMITS
fj OF PROPOSED
4,� RECHARGE BASIN
X + NWRB 1
TP--NWRB-,2
MW-6S
y -EL.52.66
'"�`(G4si� ; N •.D 48.8
,. '�----� MW-6D - zc. 1
' _ --
1 TP-NWRB-3 -
` 49,8cz
TP-NWRB 4 V.
_ T_P--NWR - 5 _--
49.8
N
N
YY\
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD -
S
Dvirka and Barfilucci JUNE 1998 TEST TF
Cib
Consulting Engineers TEST TRENCH L
oLL� A Division of Wiiliom F. Cosulich Associates, P.C.
0 0
McDONALL)
GEOSCIENCE
Box tpoo • Southold.Now York 11911 • 15161 165�3677
TEST HOLE DATA SHEET
Name: Town of Southold Dump B1
Surveyor:
Location: Catchogue
Tax Map Nuft&r: 1000-96-1-17.3
Project Deficription: Eng
Date: 3/27/98
Pale brown fine to coarse sand with 10% gravel SW
_.�
2,41
Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand with 106 gravel. SW
Water in greyish brown and brown sandy clay CL
Water in brown fine to coarse sand., some layers SW
with 5% grave
60'
tYt1lwtltll: Water encountered 2.4' below surface.
Hcritt loatted in a trench approx. 6' below grade.
1 V C
Id Wdr.0:06 9661 0£ 11-9£ S9L 9TS : '014 140Hd °au aow : tmi
McDONALD 0
GEOSCLENCE
Box 1000 ❑ Southold, New York 11971
516-765-3677
August 7, 1998
James Bunchuck
Town of Southold
Box 96?
Cutchogue, NY
Dear Jim:
Enclosed are your boring results in the northwest corner
on the dump.
Test hole boring. . . . . . . . . . . . No charge
Yours,
Mark S. McDonald
M:r., uksW"�`4�"P' r� C'�AT�r"i"!r"`• .
0
MCDONALD
GEOSCMNCE
Box 1000 • Southold,New York 11971 • (516)765-3677
TEST HOLE DATA SHEET
Name: Town of Southold NW-B1
Surveyor:
Location: Cutchogue
Tax Map Number: 1000-96-1-17.3
Project Description: Eng
Date: 8/6/98
Mixed debris, sand, and fines
-------- 4'
Pale Grey clayey sand Sc
--------- 7'
Pale brown fine to coarse sand with trace gravel SW
-------- 41'
Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand with trace gravel SW
48'
Comments: Water encountered 411 below surface
MCDONALD
GEOSCIENCE
Box 1000 • Southold,New York 11971 • (516)765-3677
TEST HOLE DATA SHEET
Name: Town of Southold NW-B2
Surveyor:
Location: Cutchogue
Tax Map Number: 1000-96-1-17.3
Project Description: Eng
Date: 8/6/98
Brown loamy sand with 10% gravel SM
31
Interbedded greyish brown clayey sand and grey clay SC & CH
81
Pale brown fine to coarse sand with trace gravel SW
------- 33'
Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW
--------- 40'
Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW
48'
Comments: Water encountered 40' below surface
I
HSOUTHOLD :NY 765 9675 P. 01
FROM McD Sao PFiO1dE NO. : 516 765 3677 Nov. 05 1997 01:37PM Pi
GBQSCI-NCE
Bo:t00D • Southold.Now York 11971 • (St8176S3677 "
TEST HOLE DATA SHEET
Name: Town of Southold Highway Dept. Proposed Sump
Surveyor.
Loc tIon' cutchogue n
Tax Map Number: 1000-96-1-17.3
P"ftt C)saC060n: rng ~�
Date' 11/5/97LL
--- -- ' bark broad sandy loam Ot, 1°
Brown loamy sand SM
Pale brown fine to coarse sand with 10% gravel SW
mostly medium to coarset
--------- 6'
Pale brown fine to coarse sand with trace gravel SW
41 Mostly madiva to coarse sand
Brown fine to coarse sand with 10% gravel SW
19' metly medium to coarse sand
Brown medium to coarse saM with traces gravel SW
23'
COM M"ts: No crater encountered
No charge
G 1PNUG
i
i
1
1r
v
G � AVL,
r
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40 - SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356 -
Phone: (516) 444-0375 FAX: (516) 444-0231
John P. Cahill
Commissioner
January 11. 1999
The Honorable Jean W. Cocliran
Supervisor Town of Southold
Town Hall
59095 Main Road
Southold,New York 11971
Subject: Final Closure Plan Southold Landfill(December 1998)
Dear Supervisor Cochran:
The New York State Department of Environmental ConservaLi;.,(Department)has completed review
of the Town of Southold's revised Final Closure Plan for the Southold Landfill dated December 1998
submitted by Dvirka and Bartilucci. This plan has been revised based on Department comments provided
in an October 15, 1998 letter.
Three comments remain to be satisfied.
1). The Final Closure Plan on page 8-4 was modified to add that
condensate from wells outside the limits of waste would-be collected for
proper disposal.This implies that condensate from wells inside the limits
of waste would not be collected(ie drained back down the well as specified
in the Draft Closure Plan). The Plan must have the condensate from all the
wells collected.
2). On page 3-6, the Final Closure Plan states that at the end of the work
day,exposed waste would be covered by six inches of daily cover(general
fill). The November 18 D&B response to Department comments stated that
six inches of soil would be used to cover any exposed waste at day's end.
3). This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill
Closure State Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to
provide documentation relating to all revenues received from any alternate
grade material utilized. The Town must add to the closure plan an
appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and
maintained and the frequency with which it is to be submitted.
With the resolution of the three comments mentioned above, the Final Closure Plan satisfies all
requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 360 and is approved.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 516-444-0388.
Sincerely,
/14 24
Ernest Lampro Jr.
Em-ironmzntal Engineer I
cc: A. Cava. NYSDEC Resion 1
A. Hussie. Town of Southold
G. Yakaboski, Town of Southold
J. Bunchuck,Town of Southold
M. Treers, Central Office
J. Vana, Central Office
T. Maher,D&B
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40 - SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356 _
Phone: (516) 444-0375 FAX: (516) 444-0231
John P. Cahill
Commissioner
Dec 11. 1998
Ms. Jean W. Cochran
Supervisor Town of Southold
Town Hall
59095 Main Road
Southold,New York 11971
Subject: Final Closure Plan Comment Response
Dear Ms Cochran:
Mr.Thomas Maher of Dvirka and Bartilucci met with members of the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation (Department) on November 12, 1998 to discuss comments made by the
Department on the draft Southold Landfill Closure Plan. Mr.Maher summarized the results of this meeting
in a letter dated November 18, 1998.
One item mentioned during the meeting was inadvertently not included in Mr. Maher's letter. The
Department has a concern about the determination of the limit of waste around the landfill. Mr. Maher
agreed to include a statement in the final closure plan stating that when the anchor trenches for the
geomembrane are constructed,there would be no waste outside the geomembrane limit. In the event waste
is found, the waste will be brought within the boundary of the cap. Also a statement must be included in
the certification report that there is no waste outside the limits of the cap. This was communicated to Mr.
Maher on November 30 by telephone.
If there are any questions,please contact the undersigned at 516-444-0388.
Sincerely,
�
rnesm �
'Et Lampro Jr.
Environmental Engineer I
cc: A. Cava,NYSDEC Region 1
A. Hussie,Town of Southold
G. Yakaboski, Town of Southold
J. Bunchuck,Town of Southold
M.Treers, Central Office
J. Vana, Central Office
T.Maher,D&B
file: 52S 17
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid°�& Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40 - SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356 _
Phone: (5 16) 444-0375 FAX: (5 16) 444-0231
John P. Cahill
Commissioner
October 15, 1998
Ms.Jean W. Cochran
Supervisor Town of Southold
Town Hall
59095 Main Road
Southold,New York 11971
Subject: Comments on Town of Southold Final Closure Plan issued August 1998
Dear Ms. Cochran:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation(Department) has completed its
review of the subject document submitted by Dvirka and Bartilucci. The following comments are provided:
1.) The Closure Plan makes reference to efforts in 1997 to remediate the migration
of gas from the landfill. However, it does not make reference to any subsequent gas migration
monitoring after these controls were implemented. The Department recommends that the applicant
conduct a round of gas migration monitoring,prior to approval of the closure plan,in order to fully
assess the impacts of gas migration, and to develop a baseline for future monitoring events.
2.) Gas monitoring wells are being proposed with a screened interval beginning ten
feet below the ground surface.The applicant should provide additional discussion to explain why
there is no potential for gas migration within the first ten feet of soils surrounding the landfill, or
discuss how the monitoring wells as proposed will detect such gas migration.
3.)The Closure Plan makes reference to the possibility of utilizing the proposed gas
monitoring wells(which are located outside the foot print of the landfill)as gas collection wells, if
the need arises. It continues by stating that gas condensate will be managed by sloping gas headers
back to the wells,allowing the condensate to simply be disposed of within the well.The Department
will not allow gas condensate to be managed in such a manner, if the wells are located outside the
limits of the waste mass. The Closure Plan should be revised to reflect an alternate method to
manage gas condensate,should the monitoring wells be converted to gas collection wells.
4.) The Closure Plan states that there are no structures within 1000 feet of the
northern boundary of the property. Cox Lane which runs north of the landfill is within this distance
and there are approximately six residences, a five unit apartment complex and three or four
commercial establishments along the roadway.
5.) Based on information provided within the Closure Plan,the Department does
not feel comfortable with the limits of waste defined along the south, northeast, and northwest.
These locations either do not show any test pits in the vicinity of the waste limit, or show test pits
which include significant amounts of waste.The applicant should provide additional test pits in these
areas. or further discuss the rational for delineating the waste limit as shown.
6.) The closure plan fails to discuss why more waste excavation and
reconsolidation, can not be conducted to achieve the desired 4 percent final cover grades. The
Department feels that consideration should be given to this concept. since it has the potential to
increase the distance from landfilled waste to the property line, decrease the footprint of the waste
mass.increase final cover grades(thereby decreasing water head build up and subsequent leakage),
and provide more room for perimeter features such as access roads. drainage channels, etc.. In
addition,the cost estimate presented within the closure plan shows it to be more cost effective than
the proposed concept.
7.) The applicant should provide a revised grading plan that depicts maximum
slopes of 3:1 (including the northeast corner), or provide additional discussion explaining why the
steeper slopes are necessary. The regulatory citation referenced within the Closure Plan is for
existing slopes in excess of 33 percent.Based on a review of the grading shown on Drawing No. 3,
extensive regrading is being proposed in the northeast corner of the.site, hence the proposed 40
percent grades are not considered existing.
8.) The Department concurs with the proposal,on page 3-9 of the Closure Plan,to
close the landfill with minimum slopes of 4 percent.Based on the information provided within the
Closure Plan,we do not feel that the use of 2 percent grades in any portion of the final closure to be
a viable alternative.
9.) The stormwater management plan depicted within the Closure Plan, utilizes
culvert pipes within the landfill cover system to route stormwater under access roads. The
Department is concerned with the use of culverts on the waste mass, since the Closure Plan
acknowledges the potential for significant amounts of settlement.The applicant should revise the
configuration of landfill access roads to avoid the use of culverts,or provide additional information
to ensure that the culverts will not be prone to failure during a worst case settlement scenario.
10.) Based on a site visit made by Department staff, the applicant is currently
placing Construction and Demolition (C&D) material on the landfill, for use as contour grading
material.In addition the Closure Plan makes reference to other alternate contour grading materials
being considered, such as dredge material,and reprocessed or recycled soils. Since C&D material
is currently being utilized for contour grading material, and there is potential for the use of other
alternate materials,the Department feels the stability and settlement analysis should consider the use
of these materials. The current analysis utilizes strength properties of a sandy soil for the contour
grading material,even though all of the fill material is not expected to be a clean sandy soil.
11)_Any fill material which is placed outside the limits of the closed landfill, such
as fill required for recharge basins, shall be clean soil. The Department will not approve the use of
alternate fill materials such as C&D debris,glass sand,or dredge in areas which are not capped.The
Department is particularly concerned that fill used to construct recharge basins be free of .
contaminants, since these basins provide a direct path to the groundwater.
12) The applicant should discuss procedures for waste excavation and
reconsolidation activities. These procedures should ensure that this operation will have no adverse
effects on the public, construction personnel. and the environment.
13.) The soil/material strength properties utilized in the stability design should be
incorporated into the Technical Specifications, and/or Quality Assurance/Quality Control Report.
14.) In addition to the finalization of the Closure Plan, the applicant is required to
submit a Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual that complies with the provisions of
paragraph 360-2.15(i)(7), and outlines how groundwater monitoring requirements included in
subdivision 360-2.11(c)are being complied with.The applicant is also required to submit a Quality
Assurance/Quality Control Plan that meets the requirements of section 360-2.8.
15.) The Closure Plan discussion of the construction of the Gas Venting Layer is
confusing. Regulation 360-2.13(p)(2)(i)requires the gas venting layer to be a minimum of twelve
(12)inches thick. This depth is acknowledged in the plan however reference is made to confirming
the in place thickness of the gas venting layer as six inches.
16.) The Department would like to see additional information placed in the
drawings indicating where the geocomposite drainage layer is to be placed.
17.) This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill Closure State
Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation relating to all
revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The applicant must add to the closure
plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and maintained and the
frequency with which it is to be submitted.
These comments are based on the material provided to date, and do not preclude additional
Department comments once the concepts presented evolve further. If you have any questions,please do not
hesitate to call the undersigned at 516-444-0388.
Sincerely,
n ,
ro VW
Environmental Engineer I
cc: A. Cava, NYSDEC Region 1
A. Hussie,Town of Southold
G. Yakaboski,Town of Southold
J. Bunchuck,Town of Southold
M. Treers, Central Office
J. Vana, Central Office
T.Maher,D&B
i
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials
50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-7250
Phone: 518-457-6934 Fax: 518-457-0629
Michael D. Zapata
Commissioner
MAR - 4199E �. _
Ms. Jean W. Cochran --`:_ .�_..t'.
Supervisor 'w�
Town Hall L W . 8
53095 Main Road - -
P.O. Box 1179 s
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Ms. Cochran:
Re: Town of Southold Comprehensive
Solid Waste Management Plan
On January 25, 1996, the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (Department) received for review and approval the Town of Southold
integrated solid waste management plan entitled: 'Town of Southold, Suffolk County
New York Solid Waste Management Plan," dated August 1995. This plan was prepared
by Dvirka and Bartilucci Consulting Engineers and adopted on December 13, 1995
by a Resolution of the Town of Southold Town Board.
The Town of Southold determined that an Environmental Impact Statement was
not necessary for the adoption of this plan and, in this regard, issued a State
Environmental Quality Review Negative Declaration in accordance with
6 NYCRR Section 617.10.
We have determined that this Final Town of Southold Comprehensive Solid
Waste Management Plan contains a substantive consideration of the elements set
forth in Section 27-0107.1 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law
(ECL).
Accordingly, the said Town of Southold Final Comprehensive Solid Waste
Management Plan is hereby approved with respect to those elements in the ECL.
Please note that any modifications to this approved local solid waste management
plan must be submitted to this Department for prior approval, pursuant to 6 NYCRR
Section 360-15.11.
Ms. Jean W. Cochran 2.
Furthermore, compliance reports must be submitted to this Department pursuant
to 6 NYCRR Section 360-15.12 which requires planning units with approved solid
waste management plans to submit reports displaying compliance with the action
items and schedules contained in the plan no later than March 1, 1997 and no later
than March 1 every two years thereafter. In reviewing these compliance reports, we
will pay particular attention to the Town of Southold's efforts to intensify its
recycling programs. Since the Town of Southold has decided to export its residual
waste out of Town, capacity for disposal or treatment-of this residual solid waste must
be addressed in the March 1, 1997 Town of Southold compliance report.
The key to effective solid waste management is proper planning. Planning and
priorities must be carefully considered to assure limited resources are spent wisely on
projects that establish rational, lasting foundations for environmentally-sound solid
waste management at the local level.
We are particularly pleased that the Town of Southold will implement those
programs, projects and plans identified in the Town of Southold Final Comprehensive
Solid Waste Management Plan.
Please call Mr. James A. Sanford (518-457-3273), of our Bureau of Program
Management, if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Norman H. Nosenchuck, P.E.
Director
Division of Solid &_Hazardous Materials
02:081199 MON W:36 FAX 5 5 1366 Southold Town Ar ting zool
TOWN COMPTROLLER z zis�: ACCOUNTING & FINANCE DEPT.
John A.Cushman %%)IFF04 Telephone(516)765.4333
E-mail:accountingCo.southold.org
CENTRAL DATA PROCESSING 3 ��
John Sepenoski CENTRAL DATA PROCESSING
d Telephone(516)765-1891
53095 Main Road O�� Email:dataprocessing@southold.org
P.O.Box 1179 ®d ��
Southold,New York 11971-0959 Fax(516)765-1366
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
To: Jim Bunchuck
From: John Cushman
Date: February 8, 1999
Re. Suggested Response to Comment No. 3
After speaking with Ernie Lampro of the NYS DEC, below is a suggested response to
NYSDEC Comment No. 3:
All financial activities for Landfill closure, including receipts for alternate grade materials, are
recorded in a Capital Fund maintained in accordance with standards promulgated by GASB
and the Office of the State Comptroller. Reports detailing financial activities relating to Landfill
closure, Including receipts for alternate grade materials, can be submitted to the DEC as
required.
0_1:1714FI ITHI"ILLS T01411 HALL 5
F. 1
JEAN W. COCHRaN �pSUFFOI�.c
SUPERVISOR �� Town Hall, 58096 Main Road
R0, Box 1179
ua Southold, New York 11971
Fax(516) 765-1823
y'd►OI �QQ�' Telephone(5 18) yea.1889
OFFICE. OF THE SUPERVISOR,
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax Transmittal gbM
T0: Jim Bunchuck
FROM: Supervisor Cochran
DATE: November 6, 1996
Can you attend following? Let me know (and Tom Maher, if yea).
Pages, including cover 2�_
Phone no.: 516-765-1889
Fax no : 516-765-1823
• I f-':•' I]r ''qI:D n4:n4F'H 0111-CF, T(1111 NAIL X16 ?F� 1�;-'? � P.c'
Dvirka
and
0 Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEFRR
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797.2015
516.364-9890 v 718.460.3634 • Fax: 516-364.9045
e-mail: db-engGworldnet.att.net
November 3, 1998
Jean W. Cochran, Supervisor
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Southold Landfill Closure
D&B No. 1314
Dear Supervisor Cochran:
We have completed a preliminary review of the NYSDEC's October 15, 1998 comments on the
Draft Final Closure Plan for the landfill. Based on our review, we concluded that a meeting with
the NYSDEC is advisable prior to responding to the comments and revising the Final Closure
Plan. As a result, we contacted the NYSDEC and a meeting has been scheduled at their offices
in Stony Brook at 1 p.m. on Thursday, November 12, 998.
We believe it would be informative for the Town to be represented at the meeting, if you so
choose. Please contact me if you plan to send a.representative.
In the meantime, if you have any questions or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher. P.E.
Vice President
TFM/l)SG/cmc,ld
•1314\TFM99-34.LTR(R01) ------��.�_
0 � R0 �1 �
NOV 5 00
SUPERViSUR$OFFICE
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F COSULICII ASSOCIATES, .C. TOIAIN f S UTHpL
SOUTHOLD :WY S�t6'.f' g67s ice. 01
J/3► qV
1. the area draining to the We, approximates 25 acres Including the
4 plus acres of the recycling area. the remainder Is directed to the north if it is
p ►sibl+s to Intercept the easterly plateau slope and direct it north. If this is true,
t4 ill`s have eufti616hi:capacity for a 14 inch rainfall at 10066 run-off. Since
tttfl`i'timidmum recorded rainfall on Long Island was 13.5 Inchon± In three days
the 1916 hurrlcAho, and no site, including paved sites, over ploduced
J66W-Wri-off, it appUtt that piping system to the north would be redundant.
thla Alid lghdres the loathing that takes place In the R81, if the geology 19 sand
and"' ` I. There Is ne dead to design for greater than a 9 inch rainfall with an
a 'lg'litit6 d+sSigh Mutt-off factor. (DBC says design for a 25 year, 24 hour
dutatldtl storm 6 Inches of rain.)
Open jolt eXcavations must be made in RB locations and only then
bi : #bled if$ultiblO thaterlal is available. (Access for maintenance equipment
i�Idgd tb i ISS bottomig.) if suitable materiel is avAliablg, additional
iiy etcn eted to provide additional storage cepadIty is well as
ill+ I116 filter iasrt+erial for use below the liner.
S. Since this is a landfill subject to differentiation settlement, any
piolho system or dralrlage structure locations must be adequately Investigated to
JUet"YL design of prbpot support for the system.
4. Drainage design must avoid drainage to adjacent areas (See "S")
6. Special design considerations are required to avoid severe erosi0h
PrPWallis. ("A"y tTop to bottom of plateau.]
'5-"
5 S: Bruited bn past experience, the possibility of intercepting the slope
WoO it"C" with a Swale Is suspect.
1. The westetnmost LILCO tower base shows a proposed fill of 6
1`eet .
This has to be checked with LILCO.
6. Since iWals grades in the easterly plateau area ere as low as
� r;fliel`+s i gbift pbe ponding in those areas r+esultittg Inti sulystantially 11e1119
►eltt�ultt tun F lri these areas as well as increased drainage
atitA tunes. Will DEC accept grades that fowl 4% is the Minimum DEC
fhla from tib► of meeting December 9.)
�i
$INA.tt line( gradot form the basis for the drainage design, it is
�l Jible t6 0jeTOlohf surfaces above tl"l#M tot tM "ices.
666t%bal�g meeting, reference was trade to U1161:61614 etlttacee
its r4
I
JHZOUTHOLD :NY 76 0675
r
ftwi saturated soils, but, also referred to all the water draining off-which is it? It
Cani bo both ways.
10. The Ates immediately north of the transfer station must be made
comoatibie with the Odrisfar station site.
11. the composting area shows grades of 1.7°x6. Tony Conetta (when
platihing the 11 acre site) indicated the DEC would accept 2%.
NOAS.000
�?,..,�,� Cc�q
'---1
P .
{
.. , A
0 IY /02
March 17, 1998
For Discussion
Report from DEC re D&B Landfill Cover- per Councilwoman Hussie.
1. Albany is not opposed to "washboard" system, although it is unique.
2. They liked the idea of run-off to borrow pit.
3. Albany does not want recharge basin in NW comer.
4. Have to have a slope-stabilizing plan.
S. We cannot put piping to borrow pit under liner.
6. "Washboard" system will use far less "imported" cover material.
7. Altogether D&B did a good job.
8. Consultants (D&B?) should send plans to Tony Cava at each stage to
avoid going too far in case there needs to be adjusting.
9. We (Town) need a contract with consultant for our protection and,
also, to apply for state bond money.
10. We don't have to put composting system where planned, but it could go
in borrow pit. But we should wait to do that pending outcome of Grim
situation.
11. Town must be more proactive with DEC and consultants.
OUTHOLD :NY 15105 96-r!.' P. 03
4
March 13, 1998
For Discussion
Report from DEC rs big Landfill Cover- per Councilwoman Fiussie
1, Albany Is n2j opposed to "washboard" yst&n, sithot Ijh It is unlque.
2. Thrty iik#d the Idea of run-off to borrow pit.
3. Albany does not want RB In NW corner.
4. 14sve to have a slope-stabilizing plan.
S. WIeamt put piping to borrow pit under liner.
8. "Washboard" system will use far less "imported" cover mat6dal.
y� I Ultarwts (OW) should send plans to Tony CAVA of lett W80 at
i ttsgi W� ld going too far in ease thel'S Meads W bi Adjusting
ga s(tovi) n66di u;fit, with eotisultaht for our pr testlon end,
elepi to apply ftlf Mats bored honey.
14 , Witjor1ot bW to put composting system where plartried, but could go .
lid Boft fw pit, OW vre should Walt to do that Oandino outcoft of Otirh
r.
� ��tthttion.
10a AhV Waste frust bb removed from sump area In SE corner.
tuslly, We'll need permit where composting system goes. Must
6 960 foot tot back from Grim property If we use borrow pit.
k6oulations now allow us 3,000 cubic yards without parrmit. Soon
Ohtlltging to 10,000 cubic yards.
r= y�c Town Hall, 53095' yin Road
THOMAS H. WICKHAM o P. O. Box 11:.1
SUPERVISOR ? ,_ Southold, New Yolk: 11971
Telephone (516) 765 - 1800
Fax(516) 765 - 1823
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Board
FROM: Tom Wickham
DATE: 5/11/94
RE: Landfill Closure
At the last Town Board meeting I outlined briefly to you
the results of my discussion with the East End Supervisors
Association regarding proposals to gain flexibility in how we
close our landfills .
In short, I feel that Towns in the shallow recharge aquafer
areas that can show that their landfill is not contaminating the
groundwater, and that are prepared to take reasonable steps in
the unlikely event of contamination in the future, and that have
relatively few homes close to the landfill--those Towns should
be able to avail of more flexibility than the current rules on
closure currently imply.
I have scheduled Tom Twomey and his associates to spend 30
minutes with us at our May 16th meeting on the subject.
East Hampton and Southampton are proceeding along the same
lines as us.
�-
O�11�6g0FF01IrcoG
JAMES BUNCHUCK �� y1 P.O. Box 962
SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR y Z Cutchogue, New York 11935
Tel: (516) 734-7685
Fax: (516) 734-7976
SOUTHOLD TOWN
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
December 17, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Board Members
FROM: -�m Bunchuck
SUBJECT: Proposed Resolution Authorizing Additional Dvirka&Bartilucci Services
Dvirka&Bartilucci has been performing engineering services for the closure of the Town landfill
under a scope of work approved last year by the Town Board. Some of the work to be done,
however, was not anticipated at the time the scope of work was written, and has required
additional Board resolutions authorizing its completion. These include development of another
topographical map, logging test pits in certain areas as per DEC requirements, and testing of sand
to be used in the landfill cap, all of which were authorized by separate Town Board resolutions.
Some work is still to be done and may need new resolutions. D&B has written the Town concerning
some additional tasks,but has not yet had a response. These currently include:
;acro° yl) providing services for compaction testing of glass sand currently being accepted;
S fi 2) helping to secure additional sources of cover materials, and
3) developing and testing compost blend and grass seed mix,using Town-produced
compost, for use as final, topsoil cover.
Task 1 is ready to begin, and is estimated t cost $2,000. Task 2 has been ongoing periodically, and
Task 3 was completed some time ago as it4o be done before the end of the growing season. D&B
estimates it will cost $15,000 to fully complete Tasks 2 and 3.
The Board should consider a resolution to authorize D&B to perform
the above services, Tasks 1, 2, and 3.
In the future, I propose that I be the Board's contact with regard to additional services or
contractual needs identified by D&B.
01
Ira
G
.JAMES BUNCHUCK t5=� y� P.O. Box 962
SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR CCz 40� i Cutchogue, New York 11935
i Tel: (516) 734-7685
'yN �QlS4� Fax: (516) 734-7976
June 2.6, 1998
SOUTHOLD TOWN
MEMORANDUM SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
TO: Town Board Members
FROM: 43im Bunchuck
SUBJECT: summary of 6/23 Meeting at Landfill with DEB, DEC
On Tuesday, June 23, of representatives of the DEC met at the landfill with
Tom Maher of D&B and myself to review plans for landfill closure/capping, and
to view the site. My summary of this meeting follows:
SUMMARY OF MEETING ON LANDFILL CLOSURE/CAPPING
Pate: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 @ 1:30 pm
Location: Cutchogue Landfill
Attendees: Myself_
Tom Maher, D&B
Melissa M. Treers, Environmental Engineer, DEC Albany
John M. Vana, Environmental Engineer, DEC Albany
Ernie E. Lampro, Environmental Monitor, DEC Stony Brook
Meeting began in the landfill office with review of current closure plans and
continued with a tour around the property. Issues discussed were:
1) 2% VS. 4% SLOPE. Scenario for closure of west side of the landfill,
specifically the 2% vs. 4Q slope options. Part 360 regs. require a 4%
slope, however the Town has proposed a slope of 2% to save on the cost
of importing fill to meet the proper grade on this flat, low portion of
the property. The DEC will listen to arguments for a 2% grade, but said
concerns about proper drainage with such a small. slope would have to be
carefully addressed.
2.) FORMER SCAVENGER WASTE LAGOONS. The excavated lagoons have been
regarded as possible re-charge basins for the northwest portion of the
site, however additional test-pits must be dug and boring logs made
there to make sure no waste is still buried there. if waste in the area
precludes using the lagoons, a re-charge basin must be dug in the far
northwest corner. Some pits and boring must take place there as well.
Based on work done so far, it is possible that only one of the lagoons
(southern portion) would be suitable. If so, it is possible it could be
used to receive the majority of run-off, with the remainder being
diverted to the borrow pit. In this case, no new re-charge basin would
have to be dug. The DEC basically concurred with this scenario.
Memo to TB: Summary of Meeting at Landfill with DEC re: closure
6/26/98
p. 2
If the lagoons cannot be used for re-charge, they must be capped along
with the rest of the dump. This would require filling them with contour
grading material. Approx. 39, 000 cubic yards of: fill would be needed
for this purpose.
3) ALTERNATE COVER MATERIALS. The use of alternate materials for contour
grading under the cap was also discussed. Currently, as per agreement
with the DEC, the Town is using its C&D for this purpose (after crushing
it with the landfill compactor) but not nearly enough C&D is generated
locally to complete the job plus, if relied upon solely, it would still
present settlement problems. A source of dredge material from
Eastchester Bay has been identified which the DEC has already approved
for similar purposes. Crushed glass (glass sand) is also available.
Processed C&D (fines) is also a possibility for contour grading, but is
not the preferable option due to concerns about contamination.
The use of such `alternate' materials would likely generate considerable
income as the Town could charge a tip fee for its disposal. This would
relieve the cost of filling the lagoons (if necessary) . Depending on
the nature of the material and the income potential, the Town might even
prefer to go with a 4R slope on the west side.
The `bank run' sand the Town recently purchased appears to be well-
suited for the gas venting layer in the cap, which rests on top of the
contour grading layer. Based on observation (but without test results) ,
the DEC also said it appears to be so. The gas venting material must
meet very specific standards. (More sand will or a similar material
will need to be aqui-red for this purpose) .
4) FORCE ACCOUNT. The Town should establish a force account so as to
include any labor_ and equipment costs associated with the closure. This
will. ensure that such costs are counted toward the total capping price,
and could be paid for with the loan and grant monies.
5) LILCO WIRES. The LILC:O power lines running through the property cross
directly over the western area to be capped. The lines `droop' between
the towers and may present a clearance problem for machinery during the
capping process. I have contacted LILCO/LIPA and was asked to send a
letter outlining the issue, which I have done. They will get back to me
to arrange a meeting to discuss the matter.
6) COMPOST IN TOPSOIL LAYER. The plan will call for using Town-produced
compost mixed with sand to form the topsoil layer. It appears we will
need about 9, 000 cu. Yards of compost to manufacture the soil. We have
a substantial amount of leaves, mulch, and woodchips on the property now
in windrows. I will measure the piles and have a figure for the Board
on Tuesday, June 30.
0 •
Likely Fill Requirements for Landfill Cap(as per D&B 6/12/98)
Cubic Yards
• General Fill/Contour Grading (can
be alternate material such as glass
sand or C&D fines): 42,000 a 7, 7,"'0
• Gas Venting(bank run sand- approx.
33,000 yards currently in stockpile): 51,600
Barrier Protection Layer(must be clean
• material such as sand or soil- goes on
TOP ofp lastic barrier): 51,600
• Topsoil(to be manufactured by Town
using compost and sand): 25,800 (17,300 yds sand, 8,500 yds
mulch/compo st)
TOTAL: 171,000
/5 7crJ
NOTE: 1) These figures would be in addition to fill generated from excavating on-site
re-charge basins.
2) Above figures based on getting approval of 2% slope on West Side, and
NOT capping former scavenger waste lagoons. If NOT approved by DEC
add the following:
4% Grade Capping
on West Side Lagoons
• General Fill/Contour Grading: 26,000 yds 36,000 yds
• Gas Venting Layer: - 1,600 yds
• Barrier Protection Layer: - 1,600 yds
• Topsoil: - 800 yds
l��' r►�' I z a I
r
33)
q ti, '
FFO
JAMES BUNCHUCK y
P.O. Box 962
SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR � Cutchogue, New York 11935
p • Tel: (516) 734-7685
'y
Fax: (516) 734-7976
sol ,� Sao
SOUTHOLD TOWN
May 27, 19 97 SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Board Members
FROM: *im Bunchuck
SUBJECT: DEC Comments on Landfill Closure Investigation Report,
Permitting of New Transfer Station
At the May 13 Town Board meeting I told the Board that I had spoken with
Matthew Eapen of the DEC' s Solid Waste Division in Stony Brook concerning
the status of the DEC' s comments on our Closure Investigation Report. Mr.
Eapen had indicated the comments would be forthcoming. (Until they are
received and responded to by the Town, closure plans cannot move forward. )
Having not yet received them, I called him again today to find out when
they might be sent. He said they would be sent before the end of this
week.
In our earlier conversation, Mr. Eapen said that -- with one exception --
the DEC did not have any great concerns over the closure plan. That
exception though had to do with the plan to rely on "evapotranspiration" --
i.e. , the use of natural cover materials and special vegetation to minimize
infiltration of water into the landfill thereby avoiding the use of a
geosynthetic membrane, or cover, in the cap as is normally required under
Part 360 Regulations. (As you recall, the "evapotranspiration" method is
the preferred Town option for capping the dump. ) He did not say the
Department was unlikely to approve it however, just that it would need
"more discussion" among the DEC and the Town. He indicated that the
Department was open to "pilot projects" that could assess the viability of
new technologies.
I also asked him about procedures for getting a permit for the new transfer
station. Specifically, I asked if the final conceptual design as completed
by Dvirka and Bartilucci could be the basis for a permit granted in advance
of completion of the engineering specifications (assuming the design is
approved by the Town Board) . He said the Department could approve the
station based on the design, with the understanding that the specifications
and construction ultimately conform to it. This would allow the Town to
move ahead with DEC permitting of the transfer station prior to the
expiration of our current operating permit. He said the Town should
forward the final conceptual design to Tony Cava with a cover letter
announcing the Town' s intention to seek a permit. Upon their review, the
DEC will issue a building permit for the new station and at the same time
extend the current (temporary) operating permit until completion of the new
station.
70S 51 Ile
L05/A-4C;117;7 s
0S e rl(9
Proposed Answer to Question #5 of September 1 letter to
Supervisor from DEC's Robert N. Thurber:
The Town has yet to formulate a proposal for closing and/or
capping the "old area" portion of the landfill . Under the terms
of the stipulated agreement signed by the Town and DEC, effective
October 5, 1994, development of a closure plan for the landfill ,
including the "old area, " is scheduled for mid-1995. The
potential impact of proposed composting activities on closure
will be addressed in the closure plan.
1
0 �FFo� 0
James Bunchuck ��� P.O. Box 962
Solid Waste Coordinator Cutchogue, New York 11935
Tei.: (516) 734-7685
Oyu O! Fax: (516) 734-7976
SOUTHOLD TOWN
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
July 31, 1996
MEMORANDUM
TO: Town Board Members
FROM: #Jim Bunchuck
SUBJECT: Update on Landfill Closure Investigation
This memo is to update you on the status of the Closure
Investigation work currently underway.
Dvirka & Bartilucci has virtually completed the field work for
the investigation, and some test results are now beginning to
arrive from the laboratory.
The completed field work includes 3 rounds of soil gas surveys, 1
round of groundwater sampling (of the 14 monitoring wells drilled
several years ago, as well as several county wells off the '
landfill property) , tap water samples from 14 private homes
and/or businesses surrounding the landfill, a vector study
(rodents) , and a leachate survey (sampling of water running out
of the dump after rain) .
A couple of County monitoring wells must be re-sampled due to
questions about the County' s initial measurement of distance to
groundwater.
All sampling results are expected back from the lab by mid-
August, with review and analysis by D&B to be completed by the
end of September. There will be a meeting scheduled with the
Board sometime thereafter to review the findings of the
Investigation, and what they imply for the ultimate closure plan.
The Board-approved Closure Investigation Report will then be
drafted and submitted to the DEC for review. It is this report
that will explain how the Town actually proposes to implement a
closure plan consistent with the October, 1994 Stipulated
Agreement.
James Bunchuck �� iy P.O. Box 962
Solid Waste Coordinator Cutchogue, New York 11935
Go : Tel.: (516) 734-7685
Qy !� Fax: (516) 734-7976
�►Ol � dao
SOUTHOLD TOWN
SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
March 24, 1995
SIM
Tot Supervisor Wickham
FRMI Jim BunchucOl
SUBJ1 Visit To Landfill by DEC
This memo is to inform you of a recent visit to the landfill by the DEC and to
summarize an impromptu meeting that occurred.
On Friday, March 17, 1995 three DEC officials who have recently been assigned
by the Department to work with the East End Towns -- Stanley Farkas, Senior
Sanitary Engineer, Division of Solid Waste; Mathew Eapen, Environmental
Engineer I; and a third person named Scott (last name forgotten) responsible
for compost sites -- made an unannounced stop at the landfill to introduce
themselves and to take a brief tour around the property.
I met with them for about a half-hour. Using a site map they had with them, I
gave them an orientation of existing site conditions and uses. According to
Mr. Farkas, they wished to learn more about the site before making a
determination on the Town's pending application for an expanded yard waste
composting permit, which, he said, the Department planned to complete soon.
Regarding the application, Mr. Farkas said the Department would be concerned
about the potential impact of compost activity on top of the capped landfill,
especially insofar as the proposed compost facility would use a crushed stone
base as opposed to an asphalt or cement pad. Mr. Farkas said it was unlikely
that the Town would receive a variance from capping requirements for that part
of the landfill, as Department policy is to require capping in accordance with
Part 360 reqs for all areas where waste has been buried. He suggested the
Town consider proposing an asphalt or cement pad, instead of crushed stone,
for the compost site. The pad could then be considered an adequate cap for
that portion of the site upon which compost activities could take place.
Little else was discussed regarding the capping project or the Town's plans
for solid waste management. Mr. Farkas said that he and his colleagues would
from now on be the DEC contacts on the landfill, with each person responsible
for different aspects of the site, Mr. Farkas for capping; Mr. Eapen for
transfer activities; and Scott (?) for the yard waste compost facility.
cc, Laury Dowd, Town Attorney
Tom Maher, Dvirka & Bartilucci
Fromds Melissa Treers
To: REG10.StonyBrk.mxeapen
a
Date: 3/27/98 3:09pm
Subject: Soutthold Closure
Matthew-
I recieved your fax and the plans, that were sent to me today. Bob and I looked at them-- they are the same
plans that we already had. We reviewed the comments that the Town prepared. I will address some of their
comments here.
Comment 1- Part 360 requires design of drainage systems for a 25 year, 24 hour duration storm, which is
approximately 6 inches of rainfall, as stated in their comments. There is no need to design for greater
precipitation event than this. If the designer is able to downsize the retention basins to meet this
requirement, that would be allowable to the DEC.
Comment B- The DEC will not accept grades as low as .34%. 4% is the minimum grade according to the
regulations- if they want anything lower they will need a variance- ( and I don't believe we would accept
anything less than 2% anyway) .
Comment 9- The Town is correct in stating that plane surfaces may be created above the geomembrane grades
which are flatter than the geomembrane grades. I think the comment that they mention at the December 9
meeting was in regard to sideslope areas-- saturated conditions on sideslopes raise veneer stability issues.
obviously, we do not want saturated conditions on top of the final cover on the flat portions of the
landfill either- that could lead to ponding. Basically, were looking for 4% minimum grades for proper
drainage.
Comment 11- Regarding the compost area-- Do they mean Tony Candella told them that 2% would be alright?
They are required to have the 4% grade on the geomembrane but maybe they mean they want the surface grade
above that to be 2% to be able to work equipment on more easily.
Please call me to discuss these comments in more detail.
Thanks, Melissa
�oguFFot,r�oG
JAMES BUNCHUCK y� P.O. Box 962
SOLID WASTE COORDINATOR y Z Cutchogue,New York 11935
W
Tel: (516)734-7685
Fax:(516)734-7976
SOUTHOLD TOWN
February 9, 1999 SOLID WASTE DISTRICT
Ernest Lampro,Jr.
Division of Solid&Hazardous Materials
New York State DEC,Region I
Building 40—SUNY
Stony Brook,NY 11790
Dear Mr.Lampro:
I am writing to provide the Town of Southold's response to NYSDEC Comment No. 3,as
contained in your letter to the Town of January 11,concerning our Final Closure Plan for the
Cutchogue landfill.
Comment No.3
This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill Closure State Assistance Program.
The Town is therefore regM to provide documentation relating to all revenues received from any
alternate grate material utilized. The Town must add to the closure plan an appendix which
addresses how the information is to be collected and maintained and the frequency with which it is
to be submitted.
Response to Comment No.3
All financial activities for Landfill closure,including receipts for alternate grade materials,are
recorded in a Capital Fund maintained in accordance with standards promulgated by GASB and
the Office of the State Comptroller. Reports detailing financial activities relating to Landfill
closure,including receipts for alternate grade materials,can be submitted to the DEC as required.
Please let me know if this information is sufficient or if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
am�Bunchuck
cc: Supervisor Cochran
Councilwoman Alice Hussie
Thomas Maher,Dvirka and Bartilucci
David Glass,Dvirka and Bartilucci
FEB-05-99 12: 37 FROM: 10 ID: 5f649045 PAGE 5/31
-DRAFT-
February 5, 1999
Ernest Lampro, Jr.
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid &Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40—SUNY
Stony Brook, New York 11971
Re: Southold Landfill
Final Closure Plan
D&B No. 1314-F1
Dear Mr. Lampro:
On behalf of the Town of Southold we are responding to your letter dated January 11, 1999
regarding the Final Closure Plan. Your comments and corresponding responses are presented
below.
NYSDEC Comment No. 1: The Final Closure Plan on page 8-4 was modified to add that
condensate from wells outside the limits of waste would be collected for proper disposal. This
implies that condensate from wells inside the limits of waste would not be collected (ie., drained
back down the well as specified in the Draft Closure Plan). The Plan must have the condensate
from all the wells collected.
Response to Comment No. 1: Condensate from gas collection wells, if installed, will be
collected for proper off-site transport and disposal, regardless of the location of the wells from
which condensate is collected.
NYSDEC Comment No. 2: On page 3-6, the Final Closure Plan states that at the end of the
work day, exposed waste would be covered by six-inches of daily cover (general fill). The
November 18 D&B response to Department comments stated that six-inches of soil would be
used to cover any exposed waste at day's end.
Response to Comment No. 2: General fill, which may consist of soil and/or alternate materials
approved by the NYSDEC such as glass sand, will be used to cover exposed waste at the end of
each day.
FEB-0S-99 12: 37 FROM:
ID: 519045 PAGE 6/31
Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page Two
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid &Hazardous Materials, Region One _
February 5, 1999La� �tx �t �
NYSDEC Comment No. 3: This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill
Closure State Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation
relating to all revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The Town must add
to the closure plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and
maintained and the frequency with which it is to be submitted.
Response to Comment No.
The Town will be submitting a separate response to this comment. (�
As we understand your letter of January 11, 1999, with the submittal of this letter and the 4
forthcoming response to Comment 3 above, the Final Closure Plan will be deemed approved. As
a result, in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation Agreement between the Town and the
NYSDEC dated October 15, 1994, we are now proceeding with preparation of the construction
plans and specifications for the landfill closure.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, PE
Vice President
TFM/DSG/bl
Cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor, Town of Southold
Alice Hussie, Town of Southold
James Bunchuck, Town of Southold
David Glass,Dvirka and Bartilucci
♦1314lrFM"-05.LTR(R0l)
Y"1I_
,\ f
dIDvirka
and
O Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury,New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 • 718-460.3634 • Fax 516-3649045
e-mail: db-eng0worldnet.att.net
February 8, 1999
Ernest Lampro,Jr.
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid&Hazardous Materials,Region One
Building 40—SUNY
Stony Brook, New York 11971
Re: Southold Landfill
Final Closure Plan
D&B No. 1314-Fl
Dear Mr.Lampro:
On behalf of the Town of Southold we are responding to your letter dated January 11, 1999
regarding the Final Closure Plan. Your comments and corresponding responses are presented
below.
NYSDEC Comment No. 1: The Final Closure Plan on page 8-4 was modified to add that
condensate from wells outside the limits of waste would be collected for proper disposal. This
implies that condensate from wells inside the limits of waste would not be collected(ie., drained
back down the well as specified in the Draft Closure Plan). The Plan must have the condensate
from all the wells collected.
Response to Comment No. 1: Condensate from gas collection wells, if installed, will be
collected for proper-off-site transport and disposal, regardless of the location of the wellafrom
which condensate is collected.
NYSDEC Comment No. 2s On page 3-6, the Final Closure Plan states that at the.end:of,the
work day, exposed waste would be covered`by six-inches of daily cover (general fill). The
November 18 D&B response to Department comments stated that six-inches of soil would be
used to cover any exposed waste at day's end.
Response to Comment No. 2: General fill, which may consist of soil and/or alternate materials
approved by the NYSDEC such as glass sand, will be used to cover exposed waste at the end of
each day.
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSUUCH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
DVIAKA AND BART L
ucI
Ernest Lampro,Jr. Page Two
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Division of Solid&Hazardous Materials, Region One
February 8, 1999
NYSDEC Comment No. 3: This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill
Closure State Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation
relating to all revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The Town must add
to the closure plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and
maintained and the frequency with which it is to be submitted.
Response to Comment No.3:
The Town will be submitting a separate response to this comment.
As we understand your letter of January 11, 1999, with the submittal of this letter and the
forthcoming response to Comment 3 above,the Final Closure Plan will be deemed approved. As
a result, as of the date of this letter, and in accordance with the terms of the Stipulation
Agreement between the Town and the NYSDEC dated October 15, 1994, we will proceed with
preparation of the construction plans and specifications for the landfill closure.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or require additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F.Maher,PE
Vice President
TFM/DSG/bl,tam
Cc: Jean Cochran,Supervisor,Town of Southold
Alice Hussie,Town of Southold
James Bunchuck,Town of Southold
David Glass,Dvirka and Bartilucci
♦1314rrFM99-05.LTR(R02) {
ll� FEB I I
SUFE' F
TOV4`iv ;
t
Mirka
d[
and
O Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
516-3649890 • 718-460-3634 • Fax:516-364-9045
e-mail: db-eng®woddnet.att.net
December 14, 1998
Anthony J. Cava, P.E.
Regional Solid Waste Engineer
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
SUNY- Building 40
Stony Brook, NY 11794
Re: Southold Landfill Final Closure Plan
D&B 1314
Dear Mr. Cava:
On behalf of the Town of Southold, please find enclosed two (2) copies of the revised Final
Closure Plan for the Southold Landfill. The Closure Plan has been revised in response to the
Department's comments dated October 15, 1998 and in accordance with my letter of
November 18, 1998 to Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. (see Attachment A).
If you have any questions with regard to the Final Closure Plan or require additional information,
please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
TFM/DSG/cmc,ld Vice President
Enclosures
cc encl.: Jean Cochran, Supervisor,Town of Southold
Alice Hussie, Councilwoman, Town of Southold
Jmms Bunchuck, Solid Waste Coordinator,Town of Southold
Melissa Treers, NYSDEC—Albany
David Glass, D&B
cc: William Moore, Councilman, Town of Southold
Louisa Evans, Councilwoman,Town of Southold
John Romanelli, Councilman,Town of Southold
Brian Murphy, Councilman,Town of Southold
Gregory Yakaboski, Esq.,Town Attorney,Town of Southold
Ernie Lampro, NYSDEC - Region 1
♦1314 rFM98-36.LTR(R02)
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
ATTACHMENT A
NYSDEC COMMENTS OF OCTOBER 15, 1998
ON DRAFT FINAL CLOSURE PLAN
♦1314\ATTACHMENT.doc
Mirka
and
O Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive, Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 • 718-460-3634 ■ Fax: 516-364-9045
e-mail: db-eng®worldnet.att.net
November 18, 1998
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr.
Environmental Engineer I
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
Bldg. 40— SUNY
Stony Brook,NY 11790-2356
Re: Responses to Comments on Draft
Southold Landfill Final Closure Plan
D&B No. 1314
Dear Mr. Lampro: ,
Provided below are responses to comments on the above referenced document which were
contained in your letter dated October 15, 1998, (attached) and discussed at our meeting on
November 12, 1998. The responses are referenced to your letter by comment number.
Comment No. 1 Response
Methane gas monitoring (% Lower Explosive Level) will be conducted in those areas where
monitoring conducted as part of the Closure Investigation indicated elevated levels of methane
gas beyond the gas venting trench and boundary of the landfill in two isolated areas. As
explained at the meeting, subsequent monitoring did not show elevated levels in those areas.
However, at your request, confirmatory monitoring will be performed in those areas and the
results will be provided in the revised Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 2 Response
The gas monitoring wells will be screened to within 3 feet of ground surface. If there is a need
to convert these monitoring wells to gas extraction wells, a solid sleeve will be installed in the
upper 10 feet to mitigate short-circuiting of air flow from the surface. This change will be
incorporated into the revised Plan.
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
OVIRKA AND BARTILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 2
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
Comment No. 3 Response
If the gas monitoring wells are converted to extraction wells, condensate traps will be installed
and the condensate will be collected and properly disposed. This change will be incorporated
into the revised Plan.
Comment No. 4 Response
The reference to north of the landfill boundary is toward Oregon Road. Since this
reference/orientation has been included in all previous documents regarding the Southold
Landfill, this orientation description will be retained in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 5 and No. 6 Response
As presented in the Test Pit Program Report, because the depth of waste increases rapidly at the
limits of waste, there is little opportunity for waste consolidation. Therefore, the capping plan
will remain as contained in the draft Final Closure Plan; however, the Test Pit Program Report
will be referenced in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 7 Response
The only area of the grading plan that exceeds a slope of 33% (40%) is in the northeast comer of
the landfill immediately adjacent to the borrow pit as a result of the existing grades in the area.
The slope stability analysis performed as part of the Final Closure Plan indicates that these
slopes are stable, and the slopes comply with requirements of Part 360 for a maximum slope not
greater than 50% for a 20-foot vertical rise (360-2.15(i)(1) — effective December 31, 1988).
Therefore, the grading plan will remain as contained in the draft Final Closure Plan; however,
reference will be made regarding the area of the 40% slope as described above.
Comment No. 8 Response
Only the 4% grading plan will be included in the revised Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 9 Response
There is no other way to convey storm water to the recharge basins other than in culverts under
the access and maintenance roadways. For the most part, the areas of the roadways where the
culverts are located are in the older areas of waste disposal and have been fairly heavily
OVIAKA ANO BAATILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 3
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
trafficked, therefore, there should not be too much future settlement in these areas. If settlement
does occur and storm water is not properly conveyed, the culverts will need to be reset. This
provision will be included in the Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual.
Comment No. 10 Response
Strength properties for soils/alternate materials utilized in the stability analysis will be made part
of the Technical Specifications and any on-site processed C&D material will be compacted in
lifts of no greater than approximately 6 inches overlain by a minimum of 6 inches of compacted
soil. This change will be included in the Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 11 Response
Any fill placed outside of the limits of the cap will be clean soil. References to "clean fill,"
which could imply C&D material as defined in the Long Island Landfill Law, will be removed
from the revised Final Closure Plan and replaced with "clean soil."
Comment No. 12 Response
Any areas where waste is exposed as a result of consolidation or grading will have 6 inches of
soil cover placed over these areas at the end of each work day. This provision is included in the
Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 13 Response
See response to Comment No. 10 above.
Comment No. 14 Response
The Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual will be prepared at the completion of
design.
Comment No. 15 Response
The 6 inches refers to the placement and compaction of the gas venting lifts. This will be
clarified in the revised Plan.
A
OVIAKA AND BAATILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 4
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
Comment No. 16 Response
The area where the geocomposite drainage layer is to be placed will be shown as a shaded area
on the drawings in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 17 Response
This will be addressed by the Town of Southold under separate cover, including provision for a
Force Account regarding use of Town personnel to perform some of the closure construction
activities.
If you have any questions with regard to this letter, or if my understanding of the results of our
meeting is not correct, please call me as soon as possible since we are in the process of
incorporating revisions into the Final Closure Plan.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
Vice President
TFM/tam
Enclosure
cc/encl:
Jean Cochran, Supervisor, Town of Southold
Alice Hussie, Town of Southold
Gregory Yakaboski, Town of Southold
James Bunchuck, Town of Southold
Anthony Cava,NYSDEC, Region 1
Melissa Treers, NYSDEC, Albany
John Vana,NYSDEC, Albany
0 l 3 l4n FM i t 188.EL
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation AM
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, Region One
Buiicling 40 - SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356
_
Phone: 516) 444-0375 FAX: 1516) 444-0231 John P. Cahill
mmissioner
October'-;. 1998
Ms. Jean W. Cochran
Supervisor Town of Southold
Town Hall
59095 Main Road
Southold. New York 11971
Subject: Comments on Town of Southold Final Closure Plan issued august 1998
Dear Ms. Cochran:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (Department) has completed its
review of the subject document submitted by Dvirka and Bartilucci. The following comments are provided:
1.) The Closure Plan makes reference to efforts in 1997 to remediate the migration
of las from the landfill. However, it does not make reference to any subsequent gas migration
monitoring after these controls were implemented.The Department recommends that the applicant
conduct a round of gas migration monitoring,prior to approval of the closure plan, in order to fully
assess the impacts of gas migration,and to develop a baseline for future monitoring events.
2.) Gas monitoring wells are being proposed with a screened interval beginning ten
feet below the ground surface.The applicant should provide additional discussion to explain why
there is no potential for gas migration within the first ten feet of soils surrounding the landfill, or
discuss how the monitoring wells as proposed will detect such gas migration.
3.)The Closure Plan makes reference to the possibility of utilizing the proposed gas
monitoring wells(which are located outside the foot print of the landfill)as gas collection wells, if
the need arises. It continues by stating that gas condensate will be managed by sloping gas headers
back to the wells,allowing the condensate to simply be disposed of within the weU.The Depattrrlent
will not allow gas condensate to be managed in such a manner, if the wells are located outside the
limits of the waste mass. The Closure Plan should be revised to reflect an alternate method to
manage gas condensate, should the monitoring wells be converted to gas collection wells.
4.) The Closure Plan states that there are no structures within 1000 feet of the
northern boundary of the property. Cox Lane which rums north of the landfill is within this distance
and there are approximately six residences, a five unit apartment complex and three or four
commercial establishments along the roadway.
5.) Based on information provided within the Closure Plan,the Department does
not feel comfortable with the limits of waste defined along the south, northeast, and northwest.
These locations either do not show any test pits in the vicinity of the waste limit . or show test PIES
which include significant amounts of waste.The applicant should provide additional test pits in these
:areas. or further discuss the rational for delineating the waste limit as shown.
6.) The closure pian fails to discuss why more waste excavation and
reconsolidation. can not be conducted :o achieve the desired 4 percent final cover grades. The
Department feels that consideration should be given to this concept. since it has the potential to
increase the distance from landfilled �,aste to the property line. decrease the footprint of the waste
mass. increase final cover grades)thereby decreasing water head build up and subsequent leakage).
;and provide more room for perimeter features such as access roads, drainage channels. etc.. In
addition. the cost estimate presented %within the closure plan shows it to be more cost effective than
the proposed concept.
7.) The applicant should provide a revised grading plan that depicts maximum
slopes of 3:1 (including the northeast corner), or provide additional discussion explaining why the
steeper slopes are necessary. The regulatory citation referenced within the Closure Plan is for
existing slopes in excess of 33 percent. Based on a review of the grading shown on Drawing No. 3,
extensive regrading is beim proposed in the northeast corner of the site, hence the proposed 40
percent grades are not considered existing.
8.) The Department concurs with the proposal,on page 3-9 of the Closure Plan. to
close the landfill with minimum slopes of 4 percent. Based on the information provided within the
Closure Plan, we do not feel that the use of?percent grades in any portion of the final closure to be
a viable alternative.
9.) The stormwater management plan depicted within the Closure Plan, utilizes
culvert pipes within the landfill cover system to route stormwater under access roads. The
Department is concerned with the use of culverts on the waste mass, since the Closure Plan
acknowledges the potential for significant amounts of settlement.The applicant should revise the
configuration of landfill access roads to avoid the use of culverts,or provide additional information
to ensure that the culverts will not be prone to failure during a worst case settlement scenario.
10.) Based on a site visit made by Department staff. the applicant is currently
placing Construction and Demolition (C&D) material on the landfill, for use as contour grading
material. In addition the Closure Plan makes reference to other alternate contour grading materials
being considered,.v h asddredge materiaL.and reprocessed or recycled soils. Since C&D material
is currently bei utilized for contour grading material:and there is potential for the use of other
alternate materials,the Department feels the stability and settlement analysis should consider the use
of these materials.The current analysis utilizes strength properties of a sandy soil for the contour
grading material,even though all of the fill material is not expected to be a clean sandy soil.
11)_Any fill material which is placed outside the limits of the closed landfill.such
as fill required for recharge basins, shall be clean soil.The Department will not approve the use of
alternate fill materials such as C&D debris,glass sand,or dredge in areas which are not capped The
Department is particularly concerned that fill used to construct recharge basins be free of
contaminants, since these basins provide a direct path to the groundwater.
A
12) The applicant should discuss procedures for waste excavation and
reconsohdation activities. These procedures should ensure that this operation will have no adverse
;tfects on the public. construction personnel, and the environment.
13.) The soil/material strength properties utilized in the stability design should be
incorporated into the Tec-tunical Specifications. and/or Quality AssuranceiQualicy Control Report.
14.) In addition to the finalization of the Closure Plan. the applicant is required to
submit a Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual that complies with the provisions of
paragraph 360-2.15(i)(7), and outlines how groundwater monitoring requirements included in
subdivision 360-11l(c) are being complied with. The applicant is also required to submit a Quality
assurance;Quaiity Control Plan that meets the requirements of section 360-2.3.
15.) The Closure Plan discussion of the construction of the Gas Venting Layer is
confusing. Regulation 360-2.13(p)(2)(i) requires the gas venting laver to be a minimum of twelve
(12) inches thick. This depth is acknowledged in the plan however reference is made to confirming
the in place thickness of the gas venting layer as six inches.
16.) The Department would like to see additional information placed in the
drawings indicating where the geocomposite drainage layer is to be placed.
17.) This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill Closure State
Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation relating to all
revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The applicant must add to the closure
plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and maintained and the
frequency with which it is to be submitted.
These comments are based on the material provided to date, and do not preclude additional
Department comments once the concepts presented evolve further. If you have any questions,please do not
nesitate to call the undersigned at 516-444-0388.
Sincerely,
rnest role
Environmental Engineer I
cc: A. Cava, NYSDEC.Region 1
A. Hussie,Town of Southold
G. Yakaboski,Town of Southold
J. Bunchuck,Town of Southold
M. Treers,Central Office
J. Vana,Central Office
T. Maher, D&B
Dvirka
and
O Bartilucci
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
330 Crossways Park Drive,Woodbury, New York, 11797-2015
516-364-9890 ■ 718-460-3634 • Fax:516-364-9045
e-mail: db-eng0worldnet.att.net
November 18, 1998
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr.
Environmental Engineer I
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
Bldg. 40—SUNY
Stony Brook,NY 11790-2356
Re: Responses to Comments on Draft
Southold Landfill Final Closure Plan
D&B No. 1314
Dear Mr. Lampro:
Provided below are responses to comments on the above referenced document which were
contained in your letter dated October 15, 1998, (attached) and discussed at our meeting on
November 12, 1998. The responses are referenced to your letter by comment number.
Comment No. 1 Response
Methane gas monitoring (% Lower Explosive Level) will be conducted in those areas where
monitoring conducted as part of the Closure Investigation indicated elevated levels of methane
gas beyond the gas venting trench and boundary of the landfill in two isolated areas. As
explained at the meeting, subsequent monitoring did not show elevated levels in those areas.
However, at your request, confirmatory monitoring will be performed in those areas and the
results will be provided in the revised Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 2 Response
The gas monitoring wells will be screened to within 3 feet of ground surface. If there is a need
to convert these monitoring wells to gas extraction wells, a solid sleeve will be installed in the
upper 10 feet to mitigate short-circuiting of air flow from the surface. This change will be
incorporated into the revised Plan.
A DIVISION OF WILLIAM F.COSULICH ASSOCIATES,P.C.
• • •
OVIRKA AND BAATILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 2
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
Comment No.3 Response
If the gas monitoring wells are converted to extraction wells, condensate traps will be installed
and the condensate will be collected and properly disposed. This change will be incorporated
into the revised Plan.
Comment No. 4 Response
The reference to north of the landfill boundary is toward Oregon Road. Since this
reference/orientation has been included in all previous documents regarding the Southold
Landfill, this orientation description will be retained in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 5 and No. 6 Response
As presented in the Test Pit Program Report, because the depth of waste increases rapidly at the
limits of waste, there is little opportunity for waste consolidation. Therefore, the capping plan
will remain as contained in the draft Final Closure Plan; however, the Test Pit Program Report
will be referenced in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 7 Response
The only area of the grading plan that exceeds a slope of 33% (40%) is in the northeast corner of
the landfill immediately adjacent to the borrow pit as a result of the existing grades in the area.
The slope stability analysis performed as part of the Final Closure Plan indicates that these
slopes are stable, and the slopes comply with requirements of Part 360 for a maximum slope not
greater than 50% for a 20-foot vertical rise (360-2.15(i)(1) — effective December 31, 1988).
Therefore, the grading plan will remain as contained in the draft Final Closure Plan; however,
reference will be made regarding the area of the 40% slope as described above.
Comment No. 8 Response
Only the 4% grading plan will be included in the revised Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 9 Response
There is no other way to convey storm water to the recharge basins other than in culverts under
the access and maintenance roadways. For the most part, the areas of the roadways where the
culverts are located are in the older areas of waste disposal and have been fairly heavily
•
OVIRKA AND BARTILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 3
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
trafficked, therefore, there should not be too much future settlement in these areas. If settlement
does occur and storm water is not properly conveyed, the culverts will need to be reset. This
provision will be included in the Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual.
Comment No. 10 Response
Strength properties for soils/alternate materials utilized in the stability analysis will be made part
of the Technical Specifications and any on-site processed C&D material will be compacted in
lifts of no greater than approximately 6 inches overlain by a minimum of 6 inches of compacted
soil. This change will be included in the Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 11 Response
Any fill placed outside of the limits of the cap will be clean soil. References to "clean fill,"
which could imply C&D material as defined in the Long Island Landfill Law, will be removed
from the revised Final Closure Plan and replaced with "clean soil."
Comment No. 12 Response
Any areas where waste is exposed as a result of consolidation or grading will have 6 inches of
soil cover placed over these areas at the end of each work day. This provision is included in the
Final Closure Plan.
Comment No. 13 Response
See response to Comment No. 10 above.
Comment No. 14 Response
The Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual will be prepared at the completion of
design.
Comment No. 15 Response
The 6 inches refers to the placement and compaction of the gas venting lifts. This will be
clarified in the revised Plan.
•
OVIAKA AND BAATILUCCI
Mr. Ernest Lampro, Jr. Page 4
Environmental Engineer I
NYSDEC Region I
Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials
November 18, 1998
Comment No. 16 Response
The area where the geocomposite drainage layer is to be placed will be shown as a shaded area
on the drawings in the revised Plan.
Comment No. 17 Response
This will be addressed by the Town of Southold under separate cover, including provision for a
Force Account regarding use of Town personnel to perform some of the closure construction
activities.
If you have any questions with regard to this letter, or if my understanding of the results of our
meeting is not correct, please call me as soon as possible since we are in the process of
incorporating revisions into the Final Closure Plan.
Very truly yours,
Thomas F. Maher, P.E.
` Vice President
TFM/tam
Enclosure
cc/encl:
Jean Cochran, Supervisor, Town of Southold
Alice Hussie, Town of Southold
Gregory Yakaboski,Town of Southold
Wines Bunchuck,Town of Southold
Anthony Cava, NYSDEC, Region 1
Melissa Treers, NYSDEC, Albany
John Vana, NYSDEC, Albany
Q 1314rrFM11188.EL
• •
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation AM
Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, Region One
Building 40 - SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356 _
Phone: 15161 444-0375 FAX: (516) 444-0231 John P. Cahill
Commissioner
October 15. 1998
Ms. Jean W. Cochran
Supervisor Town of Southold
Town Hall
59095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Subject: Comments on Town of Southold Final Closure Plan issued august 1998
Dear FIs. Cochran:
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (Department) has completed its
review of the subject document submitted by Dvirka and Bartilucci. The following comments are provided:
1.) The Closure Plan makes reference to efforts in 1997 to remediate the migration
of eas from the landfill. However, it does not make reference to any subsequent gas migration
monitoring after these controls were implemented.The Department recommends that the applicant
conduct a round of gas migration monitoring,prior to approval of the closure plan, in order to fully
assess the impacts of gas migration,and to develop a baseline for future monitoring events.
2.) Gas monitoring wells are being proposed with a screened interval beginning ten
feet below the ground surface. The applicant should provide additional discussion to explain why
there is no potential for gas migration within the first ten feet of soils surrounding the landfill, or
discuss how the monitoring wells as proposed will detect such gas migration.
3.)The Closure Plan makes reference to the possibility of utilizing the proposed gas
monitoring wells (which are located outside the foot print of the landfill)as gas collection wells,if
the need arises. It continues by stating that gas condensate will be managed by sloping gas headers
back to the wells,allowing the condensate to simply be disposed of within the well.The Department
will not allow gas condensate to be managed in such a manner, if the wells are located outside the
limits of the waste mass. The Closure Plan should be revised to reflect an alternate method to
manage gas condensate, should the monitoring wells be converted to gas collection wells.
4.) The Closure Plan states that there are no structures within 1000 feet of the
northern boundary of the property. Cox Lane which runs north of the landfill is within this distance
and there are approximately six residences, a five unit apartment complex and three or four
commercial establishments along the roadway.
5.) Based on information provided within the Closure Plan, the Department does
not feel comfortable with the limits of waste defined along the south, northeast, and northwest.
These locations either do not show any test pits in the vicinity of the waste limit , or show test pits
which include significant amounts of waste.The applicant should provide additional test pits in these
areas, or further discuss the rational for delineating the waste limit as shown.
6.) The closure plan fails to discuss why more waste excavation and
reconsolidation, can not be conducted to achieve the desired 4 percent final cover grades. The
Department feels that consideration should be given to this concept, since it has the potential to
increase the distance from landfilled waste to the property line. decrease the footprint of the waste
mass, increase final cover grades(thereby decreasing water head build up and subsequent leakage),
and provide more room for perimeter features such as access roads, drainage channels. etc.. In
addition, the cost estimate presented within the closure plan shows it to be more cost effective than
the proposed concept.
7.) The applicant should provide a revised grading plan that depicts maximum
slopes of 3:1 (including the northeast corner), or provide additional discussion explaining why the
steeper slopes are necessary. The regulatory citation referenced within the Closure Plan is for
existing slopes in excess of 33 percent. Based on a review of the grading shown on Drawing No. 3,
extensive regrading is being proposed in the northeast corner of the site, hence the proposed 40
percent grades are not considered existing.
8.) The Department concurs with the proposal,on page 3-9 of the Closure Plan, to
close the landfill with minimum slopes of 4 percent. Based on the information provided within the
Closure Plan, we do not feel that the use of 3 percent grades in any portion of the final closure to be
a viable alternative.
9.) The stormwater management plan depicted within the Closure Plan, utilizes
culvert pipes within the landfill cover system to route stormwater under access roads. The
Department is concerned with the use of culverts on the waste mass, since the Closure Plan
acknowledges the potential for significant amounts of settlement. The applicant should revise the
configuration of landfill access roads to avoid the use of culverts,or provide additional information
to ensure that the culverts will not be prone to failure during a worst case settlement scenario.
10.) Based on a site visit made by Department staff, the applicant is currently
placing Construction and Demolition (C&D) material on the landfill, for use as contour grading
material. In addition the Closure Plan makes reference to other alternate contour grading materials
being considered,.sucha�dredge material-and reprocessed or recycled soils. Since C&D material
is currently bei , utilized for contour grading material„and there is potential for the use of other
alternate materials,the Department feels the stability and settlement analysis should consider the use
of these materials. The current analysis utilizes strength properties of a sandy soil for the contour
grading material,even though all of the fill material is not expected to be a clean sandy soil.
11).Any fill material which is placed outside the limits of the closed landfill, such
as fill required for recharge basins, shall be clean soil.The Department will not approve the use of
alternate fill materials such as C&D debris,glass sand,or dredge in areas which are not capped.The
Department is particularly concerned that fill used to construct recharge basins be free of
contaminants, since these basins provide a direct path to the groundwater.
12) The applicant should discuss procedures for waste excavation and
reconsoUdation activities.These procedures should ensure that this operation will have no adverse
effects on the public. construction personnel. and the environment.
13.) The soil/material strength properties utilized in the stability design should be
incorporated into the Technical Specifications, and/or Quality assurance/Quality Control Report.
14.) In addition to the finalization of the Closure Plan. the applicant is required to
submit a Post Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Manual that complies with the provisions of
paragraph 360-2.15(i)(7), and outlines how groundwater monitoring requirements included in
subdivision 360-2.11(c)are being complied with.The applicant is also required to submit a Quality
Assurance/Quality Control Plan that meets the requirements of section 360-2.8.
15.) The Closure Plan discussion of the construction of the Gas Venting Layer is
confusing. Regulation 360-2.13(p)(2)(i) requires the gas venting laver to be a minimum of twelve
(12) inches thick. This depth is acknowledged in the plan however reference is made to confirming
the in place thickness of the gas venting layer as six inches.
16.) The Department would like to see additional information placed in the
drawings indicating where the geocomposite drainage layer is to be placed.
17.) This project is receiving financial assistance through the Landfill Closure State
Assistance Program. The Town is therefore required to provide documentation relating to all
revenues received from any alternate grade material utilized. The applicant must add to the closure
plan an appendix which addresses how the information is to be collected and maintained and the
frequency with which it is to be submitted.
These comments are based on the material provided to date, and do not preclude additional
Department comments once the concepts presented evolve further. If you have any questions,please do not
nesitate to call the undersigned at 516 -444-0388.
Sincerely,
,,�L� %
�rnest prfd.
Environmental Engineer I
cc: A. Cava, NYSDEC.Region 1
A. Hussie,Town of Southold
G. Yakaboski,Town of Southold
J. Bunchuck,Town of Southold
M.Treers, Central Office
J. Vana,Central Office
T. Maher,D&B
* DRAFT * * *
July 22, 1996
Robert Galli
Mine Land Reclamation Specialist
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation
Building 40
SUNY at Stony Brook
Stony Brook,NY 11790-23 5 6
Dear Mr.Galli:
I am writing to formally request variances to the Department's set-back and sloping requirements,as applied to the sand
borrow pit located to the northwest of the Southold Town Landfill in Cutchogue,NY. This request is pursuant to the
Stipulation of Settlement signed by the Town and the DEC in October, 1994 as well as the understanding reached at the
meeting between the DEC and the Southold Town Board this past April . This understanding was subsequently
detailed by you at your review of the borrow pit with Jim Bunchuck on May 2.
Specifically,this request is based on the following affirmations made by the Town of Southold:
1) The Town will repair slopes in the borrow pit to a rough one on three grade,as indicated on the enclosed
"Partial Site Plan Proposed Re-grading"(drawing#1).
2* Upon completion of the re-grading,the Town will place cover material over the slopes capable of sustaining
,growth of native grasses. The Town further agrees to plant and maintain such grass.
The timetable for accomplishing these tasks is uncertain. In order to minimize the use of unbudgeted funds, the Town
intends to use its existing labor force to do the work. These resources,however,will not be fully available until after
Labor Day,as our busy summer season as well as leave schedules preclude taking on a project of this magnitude until
that time. In addition,the Town will need to rent the equipment necessary to accomplish the work. Funds do not
currently exist to cover these rental costs in full this year. Funds will need to be budgeted in FY97 to complete the task.
This means that work will not be completed,and may not commence,until after January 1 st. Finally, since the Town
plans to use wood chips and mulch generated through on-site processing of yard waste to cover the slopes once they are
brought to grade,final covering will depend on the available supply of such material and the rate at which it is produced.
Once work is started,Mr.Bunchuck estimates it will take approximately 2 months to complete.
I look forward to receiving the Department's approval of Southold's borrow pit variance(s)soon,conditioned upon
completing the above steps. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Jean W.Cochran
Supervisor
ENCL/diagrams(2):Partial Site Plan Proposed Re-Grading
Partial Site Plan Existing Conditions
cc: Jim Bunchuck
Tom Maher,Dvirka&Bartilucci
Coo 1
Cod
� I ,
45
35
126
IS Gp
COO i5 -
5� 25
35
5- -
55
50
PARTIAL SITE PLAN
PROPOSED RE-GRADING
SCALE: 1"=200.0'
PROPOSED:
�g11FF0[,t� SOUTHOLD TOWN SAND PIT RE-GRADING
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
SHD "Wl COLLECTION CENTER
a„ CUTCHOGUE, NEW YORK
Oy �� PECONIC LANE, PECONIC, NEW YORK 11958 SCAL AS NOTED DRAWING#:
DRAWN: JAMES A.RICHTER SCTM 0: 1000-96-01 -t7.3 DATE: 7/19196
SHEET 1 of 2
1
b _ ".
fill
1,
I
• , •
1 1 1
PROPOSED:
IIIA '—_
SIMSOUTHOLD TOWN SAND PIT RE-GRADING
d TOWN COMMON CEMR
CUTCHOGUE, NEW . -
,1
11)
PECONIC LANE, PECONIC, YORK
cp '
1 f
� 1
45
35 45 65
2
15 C0
(00 15
25 ---__
35 �%it
,
55
50
PARTIAL SITE PLAN
PROPOSED RE-GRADING
SCALE: 1"=200.0'
PROPOSED:
�g11FFOIt1-4 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN SAND PIT RE-GRADING
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COLLECTION CENTER
- CUTCHOGUE, NEW YORK
�y PECONIC LANE, PECONIC, NEW YORK 11958 SCALE: DRAWING#:
AS NOTED
DRAWN: JAMES A.RICHTER SCTM #: 1000-96-01 -tt.3 DATE: 7119196
SHEET 1 of 2
A
I y;
I '
Eel
SOUTHOLD ISAND PIT GRADING
InEl
CLITCHOGUE, NEW YORK
DRAWING#:
AS�'� • • • - NOTED
P I 1
507.89 /9--
i
HF/DTMAN `
-
k�
S.51-Oe E
SAND P�T
�u +
P * _
4"E 1 -
r L
BO TOM W
w
IT
IL
-��
t